Of Assets and Liabilities

Avatar By

Johnboy5088 says: Friday, November 2, 2012 at 15:26 (S)DM, what a sneaky …

Comment on Of Assets and Liabilities by Long Time Lurker.

johnboy5088 says:

Friday, November 2, 2012 at 15:26

(S)DM, what a sneaky person of questionable parentage.

That makes total sense: [try to] delay public publication of the FTTT decision until after the SPL enquiry into dual contracts has concluded.

If the FTTT published decision has [additional] smoking gun information that the SPL enquiry could consider which would support the stripping of titles, then (S)DM’s arse is likely to be on the line with many of the supports who will not forgive title stripping.

For any journalists looking in there is an exemption in the Data Protection Act 1998 at section 32 of the said Act that would allow for personal data to be placed into the public domain where this is in the public interest.

I would argue that such a public interest exists where the information proves relevant to supporting a process of justice i.e. did RFC play players who were incorrectly registered?

Long Time Lurker Also Commented

Of Assets and Liabilities
I think the following joke was published on the TSFM, apologies to the original poster:

Q. How many Rangers fans does it take to change a light bulb?

A. A world record.

Who was pushing all of this world record attendance cr@p? Did this come from fans of Rangers or is this a line that has been pushed / repeated in the MSM, perhaps at the request of the Club?

If the world record attendances was a PR line spun in some of the MSM on behalf of Mr Green et al. then it does beg the question, why would TRFC/Sevco seek to have the media push world record attendances?

Would such stories make the authorities less likely to question the monies coming in from the gate and the corresponding attendances?

History often repeats itself.

Have any other football clubs in the UK (in recent history) given away free tickets to inflate attendance figures? And, are there any similarities between the persons running and/or investing in those clubs with those persons currently involved with TRFC/Sevco.

I am not saying that this is the case – it may be an interesting line of investigation for the internet bampots.

Of Assets and Liabilities
Long Time Lurker says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 07:22


Apologies, just downloaded the Your Call episode from yesterday. At 56 mins 28 seconds Jim Traynor does mention by name Richard Hughes, thus he must be aware that Stewart Cosgrove was talking about a criminal tax investigation effecting a majority shareholder in Rangers.

Of Assets and Liabilities
Did anyone else notice Jim Traynor deflecting the line of argument made by Stewart Cosgrove yesterday on Your Call, towards the end of the show?

Stewart introduced the latest tax investigation concerning Richard Hughes of Zeus Capital as reported in the Times on Friday (although he did not name M Hughes, noting that the taxation issue affected a significant shareholder in the Club.)

Jim attempted to downplay the potential seriousness of that tax investigation, apologies for paraphrasing his [Traynor’s] argument was: most people have problems with the tax man who then goes onto pull people up for those errors, ergo it is likely that this tax matter is not serious.

I could accept that as an argument if Jim was not aware of the issue as reported in the Times. However, given that Charles Green was referred to in the article as were other matters on Rangers, I think that it is unlikely that (a) Jim was not aware of the article in the Times and (b) in any event, if there was/is background chatter on that story before publication it is more likely than not that Mr Traynor would have been aware of the investigation into Richard Hughes, and importantly the nature of that investigation.

Where Jim is aware of the investigation, then his rebuttal of Stewart’s comments on a public broadcast are difficult to defend. The tax investigation in question is a criminal inquiry, where an attempt to defraud the exchequer is being alleged. Such criminal investigations are at the opposite end of the spectrum, when compared to the every day errors made in a tax return to HMRC, which Jim offered as a rebuttal.

Criminal taxation matters it could be argued have no place within Your Call. However, the issue is who owns the Club and are they fit and proper persons to do so. Jim cannot argue that that is not a matter worthy of discussion, given the MSM’s probity of Craig Whyte as to whether he was/is fit and proper to hold office in Scottish football.

Stewart, if you are looking in – could you raise the above with Mr Traynor?

Recent Comments by Long Time Lurker

Peace – Not War
Have Rangers met the UEFA criteria to play in Europe re established sets of audited accounts etc.?

Peace – Not War
Just a theory.
What if HMRC have sent demands to EBT recipients. Presumably the holders of side letters will be looking to the [ahem] club to make good any taxes due.
Now, if the club does not have the means to honour the side letters – could we be about to see confirmation from EBT holders and/or the Club, that the Club has died?

Peace – Not War
An interesting tweet from @Barcabhoy this afternoon.

Barcabhoy ‏@Barcabhoy1 4h4 hours ago Barcabhoy Retweeted Barcabhoy
Now been seen by 130,000 people. The reason why the @Record_Sport rushed out an old non event story will be evident soon.

Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
Overdue VAT from Q1 and Q2.
Stadia roof issues appear have reached critical point, where fan safety an issue.
Possibility that Celtic FC will not sell tickets to protect safety of their fans, then others will also follow.
Gate receipts appear to be keeping the club/company alive. If there is a drop in sales due to stadia safety issues where seats cannot be sold, then ash flow will, in my view, more likely than not become a terminal issue.
Only other option would be to attract investment – who is going to invest, if tens of millions required to keep a roof in place?
If club play games from another stadia – where will the rental income require come from?
Allowing VAT to become overdue and the stadia to fall into a critical state of disrepair suggests that there is no effective governance and management in place at the club.

Accountability, Transparency, & Brave Sir Robin
I believe that the SC will hear the BDO appeal in the first quarter of 2017.

Lots of interesting chatter in the last 24 hours – something is brewing. A least one suggestion that HMRC have served a VAT demand on Rangers.

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)October 12, 2016 at 10:15

Morning all, Can you help me with this,Having a wee debate with a TRFC supporting pal wrt EBTs.I know BDO have been granted leave to appeal to the Supreme Court but have they actually done so?. If not is there a time limit they must adhere to.?.I understand that if no appeal is forthcoming then COS decision stands.

About the author