Much has been written on this blog, and previously on RangersTaxCase.com regarding the assets and liabilities of the former Rangers football club – however little has been done to look at the rest of the SPL and Scottish Football as a whole. Was it just Rangers making ridiculous ‘asset’ valuations or is there other clubs in real danger of following RFC to the grave?
Before we get started a quick explanation on the figures. They were all taken from the latest accounts as appearing on Duedil.com, so some are from 2010’s figures. I have also ‘tidied’ them up a little so that they are easily understandable, removing things such as minor stock holdings.
The big story in the Rangers case was how over valued their ‘assets’ were, and especially the freehold property. To remind you Rangers Balance sheet in 2010 was as below:
While on paper the net assets look very healthy, we all now know that the 130m of Fixed assets was in fact worth just 5.5m in the real world. If we change that 130m to the real life figure their balance sheet would have looked like this…
So, how do the rest of the SPL compare? This is a list of ‘fixed assets’ for each club as noted in their last accounts.
Predictably, Celtic lead the way, but a quick scout through the notes reveals the freehold properties are valued at 45m. Dundee prop up the table, but with no freehold properties to their name, this is not so surprising. One thing to note is the difference in value of the assets held by Aberdeen and Kilmarnock compared to clubs like Dundee Utd and St.Johnstone – this is important when we look at their balance sheets.
As you can see above, I have broken the balance sheet down into a few categories. We have the fixed assets we just discussed, followed by the cash in bank. Next is the debtors (money owed to the club within the next year) and then the creditors (money the club owes to others within the next year). A crude calculation gives us the Net Current assets or liabilities. A red number means that club owes more money in the next 12 months than they have in the bank, or are owed.
We then move on to long term creditors (money that is owed but not immediately – more than 1 year away) which will constitute loans from banks, or from shareholders. In the case of Hearts, who have the highest amount of long term debt in the SPL, 98% of this debt is owed to the parent company UAB, controlled by Romanov. This debt attracts a further 4.5% interest a year, while UAB also hold a floating charge over the clubs assets.
The final column gives us the Net assets or liabilities, taking into account the fixed assets of the company. As we saw earlier, Rangers had posted Net assets of 70m, only achieved by their ridiculous freehold property valuation. Are Hearts and Aberdeen doing the same? In the case of Hearts they include in their fixed assets 159,000 worth of ‘Memorabilia’… in addition to 15m of freehold property, while Aberdeen state in their accounts that the valuation of Pittodrie is a ‘rebuild’ value rather than a likely realistic sale price.
By declaring such high values on their balance sheets though, it produces a net asset figure, rather than a large liability that, in reality, is the case. Kilmarnock and Hibs to a lesser extent would also see their figures turn red with asset valuations downgraded.
What is heartening to see though, is two clubs with net current assets, in St.Johnstone and Motherwell. Saints were rescued from near bankruptcy in the 80’s by Geoff Brown and have lived within their means ever since. Motherwell likewise have been in financial trouble in recent times, but the club appears to have stabilized and is now living within their means on and off the park.
If another insolvency event hits an SPL club, the MSM will blame it on the demise of Rangers. What can be clearly seen here though is the damage was done years ago to clubs like Hearts, Dundee Utd and Aberdeen – it will be a battle to get back to the kind of financial position that clubs such as St.Johnstone currently enjoy. However, the message that Saints are currently sending out is that its possible to have a competitive team without breaking the bank, as long as others aren’t artificially inflating wage demands.
The accounts I used to get the above figures are downloadable here: I was unable to find for Inverness – if anyone can find please let me know and I can add them to the table. When time permits I will extend this to include SFL clubs as well.
Aberdeen | Celtic | Dundee Utd | Hearts | Hibs | Kilmarnock | Ross County | St.Mirren | St.Johnstone
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 18:36
If you had a racket going on turn-up ticket sales, Ie. Let in three but say only count two, you certainly wouldn’t want the authorities to know. If you thought that they might be suspicious, and were going to check, how could you fog the issue. You would simply issue lots of free tickets. When the question was asked, you would answer that the difference in money taken for paying bears, and the actual attendance, were the free tickets. Presumably the turnstiles are computerised. The paying punter being “missed” in the “paying” total will be allocated a seat number. All that needs to be done is ensure a “free” ticket stub replaces the “paid” ticket stub for that seat in the stadium records. Simples. You would effectively hide the switcheroo in a myriad of free tickets.
Not that I am suggesting that such a situation is, or has, occurred at Rangers. This is a purely hypothetical, totally unrealistic scenario.
abcott says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 18:52
——————————————-
Similar problem as with the money laundering scenario, do you also manipulate the computerised ticketing system. How many people need to be in on that for it to work.
16 – He is considering taking legal action against the SPL and SFA over the
agreement to allow us a Liscense to continue playing football.
Decision was taken under duress he says at 9.30pm before Brechin
game
————————
This one has to be a wind up, shirley? Charles aka Jean-Baptiste Poquelin. Charles does have a penchant for all things French by eck. Pure farce.
scottyjimbo says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 19:10
============================
I don’t see how that gets rid of the basic problem. If there is an automated system for selling the tickets then that system must surely note what seats are sold and for how much. Like I said that would have to be manipulated to show more were sold than actually were. Again how many people would need to be involved in order to do that successfully.
Surely, for health and safety reasons, the police must have a record of the numbers in a football stadium. Recently someone lodged a FOI request to Strathclyde Police asking for the actual attendances of two home games at Ibrox in October. The police figures were 6,000 and 9,000 respectively below the published attendances for these two matches.
Last week Charles Green explained that the TRFC figures were correct and that the police had not taken account of the fans in the hospitality areas. The MSM seemed to accept this explanation all too readily.
I am still at a loss as to why Sir Charles would publish inflated crowds when the numbers can be quickly verified from police records. Could this be connected to RTC’s suspicions of money laundering?
I am trying to grasp from the previous posts how the scam would work.
Surely, for the money laundering scheme to work there would have to be some dishonest people running the club but I have been assured by the SFA that all are fit and proper just like the previous custodians.
CG did seem a bit quick to defend the attendance figures, didn’t he ? it’s not like the police figures were actually bad.
did keys even actually ask him about that ??
and the hospitality story cant be right – they still get a ticket (at least i think so) ??
Re discussion of placing illegal cash proceeds through ticket sales as a vehicle for money laundering. There is no doubt this could happen but it is unlikely, The ticketing sales/receipts process would have to be extremely weak with poor controls in pricing, distribution of tickets, entrance to stadium, non-automated ticket system.
Just say hypothetically this was happening, in what manner would the illegal sourced money come back legally (cleaned) to the beneficiaries of the scheme? Through payroll, expenses or suppliers?
The only situation where i could see Money laundering been used is where investors use trusts or shell companies where the source of money is not known together with identity of the beneficial owners.
justiceintegrity says:
==========================
You mean like a share issue where investors subsequently get a dividend, or even sell on their shares.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 19:44
Yes. But this method is becoming more difficult with Money laundering reulations. Proof and source of funds required.
RTC. If you are talking about the sorts of numbers of free tickets being given away (probably like you I read online circa 11,000 for one game) then I just don’t see it. If Chucky is giving away free tickets, I don’t see how it can be on that scale. If he was giving them away to schools and the like yes, but not as a clandestine operation.
Tommy says:
Surely, for health and safety reasons, the police must have a record of the numbers in a football stadium. Recently someone lodged a FOI request to Strathclyde Police asking for the actual attendances of two home games at Ibrox in October. The police figures were 6,000 and 9,000 respectively below the published attendances for these two matches.
Last week Charles Green explained that the TRFC figures were correct and that the police had not taken account of the fans in the hospitality areas. The MSM seemed to accept this explanation all too readily.
I am still at a loss as to why Sir Charles would publish inflated crowds when the numbers can be quickly verified from police records. Could this be connected to RTC’s suspicions of money laundering?
======================================================================
Tommy, may I please take your post, amongst others, as a starting point in this multi-faceted scenario?
Firstly CG must make some IPO or placement from the “Rangers family” or the financial institutions he says he is courting. To do so he must at least convince all concerned that he has a viable business in the future. In another era, an IPO would require five year profit forecasts and cash flow forecasts based on the existing business, adjusted for any anomalies or unusual items. Therefore, enter the “freebies”…so rather than 30k attendances, he gives away 10k – 15k free tickets, making this figure 45k attendances (ignore police figures here!)
On this basis, he has a base reporting figure of 45k attendances, indexed however he may see fit over the next five years (see what I have done there?)
He is trying to establish a pattern akin to what used to be called “future maintainable profits”.
Taking a short cut for the purposes of this post, these projections would normally have been reported upon by “Reporting Accountants to the Issue”…and no prizes for guessing in this case, which firm of reputable (?) accountantants would be willing to put their name to this fairytale?
So faced with the almost certain failure of any IPO or placement, CG can include any amount he chooses as income, real, plus any “introduced” sources of funds…for whatever reason, more than likely as a favour to his “backers”, foreign or otherwise.
I propose this as the only way I can see RTC’s money laundering scam…and in the knowledge that I am the designated MLRO (Money Laundering Responsible Official) in my practice.
I await the usual learned incomings…JC?
PS RTC… I sincerely hope my restricted intellect has not fallen short of your gathered “intelligence”…!
Money laundering
Stage1(2004)
You want to move £15m from say SA to the UK and are willing to pay £5m for the privilege
A Scottish football club offers shares at £1 each so you verbally underwrite £20m worth
i.e. If £20m worth of shares are not sold to the gullible you agree to buy them
You pay for these shares in SA Rand which you convert to £sterling
You now own £20m in a football club
You immediately sell £15m worth of your shares at £1 back to the club
The club pays you £15m in £ sterling and puts the 15m shares into Treasury at £1 each
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
You have successfully laundered £15m out of SA to the UK
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Stage2 (2012)
The club goes bust and you lose your £5m investment
A newco is formed and announces a fundraising
You go to the new owners and propose a similar money laundering scam for (say) another £20m with a £5m fee
You repeat the previous steps outlined above
………………………
Hey presto
You have successfully laundered another £15m out of SA to the UK
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.
Could someone unknown be paying rangers to give away free tickets?
justiceintegrity says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:05
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 19:44
Yes. But this method is becoming more difficult with Money laundering reulations. Proof and source of funds required.
=============================
So would “know your customer” apply in a share issue. Does the potential buyer have to show where their money is coming from.
If I remember right anyone who owns over about 3% of a PLC must specifically be identified. However what detail does that need to go into.
For example if Cave Ding Ltd based in BVI bought 10% of the shares would anyone know who was behind that business.
essexbeancounter says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:09
In relation to forthcoming IPO, this would be corporate fraud and not really money laundering. It would be interesting if RTC gave a little bit more flesh on his gathered intelligence.
I wonder if we’re over-complicating things. When I buy tickets for away games, the only difference between my son’s tickets and my own is that a stub is torn off to indicate a concession.
My thoughts re laundering run along the lines of:
Scenario 1)10,000 tickets sold at full price, say £20, but they say 3000 are concession at £10. Therefore £200k is taken in but £170k is declared, reducing accountable, taxable income.
Scenario 2) 45000 punters turn up, but 48,000 is declared, leaving 3000 “ghost seats” at £20 each unaccounted for. Hey presto, an opportunity is there for someone with equally unaccounted for cash (eg drug running, robbery, looting poppy tins etc) to lodge £60,000 every fortnight and recoup it later with an agreement from the boss of the football club.
It does make me question why Mr King received all that money from old, Rotten Rangers. Of course, they may be a perfectly legitimate explanation.
Robert Coyle says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:16
==========================
If that was happening and they weren’t declaring it then they would be committing tax fraud. They would be making a supply and being paid for it.
Welcome back RTC,
Money laundering was discussed.Obviously back on the menu(I’d look at DK,he’s involved somewhere).
Just read CGs Xmas list.
No1.
He met with Sky last week and refuses to sign up to the new sky deal which ends in two years !
What deal would he be asked to sign?.
TRFC will not be part of any deal unless the reach the SPL(and Charlie says he won’t play in it anyway).They cannot negotiate unilaterally anyway but only as part of the league.Anyone fancy asking Sky if they’ve spoken to Green?.
——————————————————————–
No6.
Rangers owed hearts the remainder of the Lee Wallace fee, Hearts were so desperate for the money eventually offering a 100k discount if we paid the cash two weeks ago.Thats why the couldn’t pay the wages.
CG states Rangers OWED Hearts the remainder of the Wallace fee.
I read this as CG claiming Hearts have been paid in full.I’m sure someone will confirm.
———————————————————————-
No9.
Over 20 pension fund groups have an intrest in the share issue.
Corporate roadshow to start this week re share issue Glasgow, Edinburgh
and then London for seven days.
Has anyone heard of these “Corporate Roadshows”?.
They’re starting in Glasgow this week,FFS.Surely someone in one of our financial institutions must have heard of this.
—————————————————————————
That’s just 3 examples of the crap CG is peddling.He also promises the IPO prospectus will be published within 2 weeks.IMO everytime he makes a “promise” he also moves nearer to the time when he must deliver.Apple,Adidas,Dallas cowboys etc,all bulls**t.
For what it’s worth,I think he’s getting ready to abandon ship,maybe using the FTT or the dual contract case as an excuse.
I also think that’s why he’s mentioned the “fit & proper” test.
“Sorry,I have to go.I don’t want to but those bast**ds at the SFA say i’m no good”.
In reality he’s only an employee with no shareholding(his words) so removing him should not affect the day to day running of the club.
The question is,when he goes,what happens next?.
Could someone please ask Mr Ralph Topping before his departure from the Magnificent Seven SFA Board if Craig Levein was offered a “Pay to Stay” bonus.
Lord Wobbly says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:08
_________________________________________
If I understand your point, I think we disagree,
I don’t see the scale as a barrier- in fact it is more of a facilitator.
They give away 11,000 tickets. Say 9,000 show up. They can claim that in fact 6,000 paid to get in. It becomes very difficult to prove how many tickets were given away, how many showed up, and how many paid with cash at the turnstyles.
The huge numbers of free tickets given out make this much easier as the TV footage will show packed stands. If this is what is happening, I am sure that their official photographer has lots of pics of the crowds each week showing clearly the number of empty seats.
That determines the maximum crowd they can claim.
I reckon this is for real, free ticket for ibrokes, https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A6eAyyoCMAAq0EV.jpg
goosygoosy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:12
Surely you could only repeat this process if, hypothetically speaking, your bank accounts had not been frozen by the SA authorities!
justiceintegrity says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:26
essexbeancounter says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:09
In relation to forthcoming IPO, this would be corporate fraud and not really money laundering. It would be interesting if RTC gave a little bit more flesh on his gathered intelligence.
=====================================================================
Justice…bearing in mind that the new Sevco has no financial track record, apart from a few less than auspicious football matches, any forecasts would be “speculative” and not addressed to the general public (i,e. the “Rangers family”) and therefore not a true “Public Issue”.
Consequently, any effort to prove criminality would verge on the impractical of not impossible.
However, I take your point re RTC’s “gathered “intelligence”….(my implied phrase!)
PS I think that waiting on the so called IPO will be the same as waiting on Santa Claus…!
Show me the Money !
timabhouy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:40
Rate This
Show me the Money !
========================================================================
Timabhouy….and thereby hangs more than a few tails/tales…!
In the case of CG’s Sevco, there may be some left but it is fast running out…!
Alloa FC…be afraid…be very afraid…!
Me bad?
killiemad says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:28
________________________________________
The whole point of money laundering is to increase your declared earnings not to reduce them for tax purposes. In fact, to live a life of open luxury, criminals must pay tax on income consistent with their lifestyle. (It is an odd fact of the money laundering business that after going to so much effort to create a legitimate origin for much of their wealth, the criminal instinct runs so deep than many will not pay income tax. They effectively undo all of the work done in laundering the cash.)
Oldco did not ever have to worry about paying corporation tax – even in years with huge profits due to the huge accumulated historical losses that RFC ran up. This served as a tax asset that would be offset against profits before corporation taxes would ever have to be paid.
Newco does not have this luxury. The Oldco tax asset died with Rangers. (Unlike history ;), the law does not allow the transfer of a tax asset from one legal entity to another). Therefore, any profits Sevco make will be subject to corporation tax at a basic rate of about 25%.
To avoid corporation tax while pumping up revenues, a new football club (hypothetically- and specifically nothing to do with Sevco / Newco TRFC) would also have to artificially inflate its costs. This can be done by making shareholders employees and syphoning out cash as wages. The wages would be taxed at an even higher personal rate, but the earnings would then be completely clean.
The alternative to this would be to pay corporation tax at 25% and then potentially see shareholders pay dividend tax at a rate of up to 42.5%. Unless the IFA out there see a better strategy, inflating costs by paying salaries to key shareholders (or other desired beneficiaries) would be the most tax efficient way to withdraw money.
Robert Coyle says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:16
Could someone unknown be paying rangers to give away free tickets?
…………………………….
There is a very simple explanation for giving away free tickets thats got nothing to do with money laundering
Suppose you invited ST renewals and got 25k out of an expected 36k
Undaunted you announce you got 36k ST renewals
Suppose you have TV crews attending most home games on a Sunday
Its kinda difficult to explain why 10k ST holders arent turning up every week
So you give away 10k tickets for free every week to cover it up
Turnover [income] noted; “Gate receipts and hospitality – [25m]” (STs about 50% of that?)
Admins had `Piegate` for some odd reason?
Attendance numbers / tickets sold could just be a part – secondary spend could factor in possibly
rangerstaxcase says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:34
Lord Wobbly says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:08
_________________________________________
If I understand your point, I think we disagree,
I don’t see the scale as a barrier- in fact it is more of a facilitator.
They give away 11,000 tickets. Say 9,000 show up. They can claim that in fact 6,000 paid to get in. It becomes very difficult to prove how many tickets were given away, how many showed up, and how many paid with cash at the turnstyles.
===================================
They don’t pay at the turnstiles though, they pay at the ticket office. As far as I am aware that sale is recoded on a computerised system. So how does one exaggerate the level of match day sales, unless the automated recording is also manipulated.
It would be much easier for smaller clubs with less sophisticated systems.
Robert Coyle says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:16
Could someone unknown be paying rangers to give away free tickets?
======================================================================
Robert…bearing in mind my previous post(s) this succinct question absolutely demands a very straightforward answer…!
Money laundering regulations…? Dont make me laugh!
Thanks RTC, every day is a school day!
So would it work if all concession tickets are accounted for at full price. I think there are quite a low percentage of kids at Ibrox, but quite a lot of pensioners. Say 10-12000? If they’ve paid a fiver when their ticket says £15?
Would be interesting if TRFC were distributing free tickets for the ICT match. I think that for league cup games, there is a minimum price that must be charged for tickets:
THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL LEAGUE CUP COMPETITION RULES
9. ADMISSION MONIES AND SHARE OF GATES
9.1 In all rounds of the Cup Competition, excluding the Semi-Finals and Final
Tie, the Board Minimum Recommended Prices of Ground Admission or the
actual minimum admission price, whichever is the greater for adults,
juveniles and senior citizens shall, after deducting 15% by the Home Club,
be divided equally between the two Clubs participating in each tie. Prior to
the commencement of the Cup Competition in each season, the Board
shall fix the Minimum Recommended Prices of Ground Admission in respect
of both the clubs in membership of The Scottish Premier League and each
division of The Scottish Football League. The share of admission money in
terms of this Rule must be paid to the Visiting Club within ten days of the
date of the match. Any Club failing to pay, detail or return as before
provided, or any Club failing immediately to report non-payments of receipts
due to it, shall be dealt with as the Board may think fit.
9.2 Any Club wishing to charge less than the Board Minimum Recommended
Prices of Ground Admission must obtain the consent of its opponents prior
to the match taking place and the agreed admission prices shall be divided
as hereinbefore mentioned.
Those wondering about Sevco hospitality, you can see the historical numbers for Rangers here.
(hope link works)
The numbers for hospitality are total visitors for the season.
Has Charlie been running his own version of Asda’s BOGOF deal as something is amiss if the police figures are anything to go on ,another thought on this is are the police being paid the correct amount or are they saying we only sent enough officers to police x amount of fans but we also gave Charlie a BOGOF deal on officers supplied ,therefore we can only report we policed x amount of fans,can we also look at the catering franchise as they must be laughing all the way to the laundry with the cash they will be taking in,I still go by that D.King owns the laundry.Oh and Charlie if you had another suit they would prob do you a BOGOF on your cleaning .Come on Whytey time for another appearance, as, if car parks are being shifted surely this affects your stake,can we listen to some of your tapes.
I will try again with the image
One more time 🙁
Oh well forget it. It’s on the RTC twitter feed.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:29
0 0 Rate This
Robert Coyle says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:16
==========================
If that was happening and they weren’t declaring it then they would be committing tax fraud. They would be making a supply and being paid for it.
——————————–
What if they do declare it though?,what they say in public could be a lot different to what they mark down in their accounts.
—————————————
goosygoosy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:53
Shooting from the hip here,
dirty money pays for free tickets,declared,this then goes through club accounts and comes out clean via expenses wages,contractors,basically helps maintain the running of a football club.
How do you prove the money is dirty in the first place?
Personally I believe the simplest explanation to be the right one.
If they are giving away free tickets it is simply to boost gates. There are several reasons for this.
1, For the supporters feel good factor and to help circle the wagons. Still the best supported club in Scotland, GIRUY everyone else.
2, To assist in the share issue, see 1 but also for predicted turnover.
3, If the gates were to have dropped then the atmosphere would have been lost and a snowball effect would have taken place. Less people = loss of atmosphere = less people etc.
He needs the ground to have as many in it as possible so he gives tickets away.
If it was part of a money laundering exercise then they would also be fabricating the records to show income which wasn’t actually earned, and it would have to involve more people than would be prudent. This is not like an ice cream man putting an extra £100 into every days takings then banking that.
Typical money laundering businesses are ice cream vans, taxis, tanning salons, car washes, and any business which is largely cash with “records” which can easily be manipulated. Some are used to do things like move drugs about which gives the criminal a double dunt benefit. They move their drugs through their own network, and use that network to launder the proceeds.
The share issue is much more likely to be used for money laundering. However that would be part of the layering process, not getting it into the system in the first place.
How many more ” one -off restructuring budget(s)* can Mr Regan & Co get away with
and still retain any credibility.
They will speak of integrity and values and …
Whoops
tweet it, RTC
OMG I’ve lost the place here or maybe I missed a chapter. What does all this cheating (on attendance!!) really mean?
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:59
____________________________________
You raise several good points.
If they do pay at the ticket office and this is processed electronically, then it would seem unlikely that a scam is involved- unless they have a crooked systems admin involved- which as you say starts to involve too many people for it to stay quiet.
goosygoosy says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:53
Robert Coyle says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:16
Could someone unknown be paying rangers to give away free tickets?
…………………………….
There is a very simple explanation for giving away free tickets thats got nothing to do with money laundering
Suppose you invited ST renewals and got 25k out of an expected 36k
Undaunted you announce you got 36k ST renewals
Suppose you have TV crews attending most home games on a Sunday
Its kinda difficult to explain why 10k ST holders arent turning up every week
So you give away 10k tickets for free every week to cover it up
=======================================================================
Goosey…you have a fair point which, without access to TRFC financial records, cannot be established.
However, even assuming that the magical/mythical ST figure did actually hit the “expected” 36k, why would CG, in all his current traits of dementia, not continue down the line of dishing out “freebies” to the tune of 5k -15k?
The Govan ground, I imagine, could accomodate + or – 5k to 10k of reported attendances quite easily.
As I know from experience, not all ST holders show up on cold wet nights and there is nothing to prove the realistic gate figures on any given match night…and please do not give me the “computer gate” or TV company footage…any in house IT tekkie can overcome such trivial obstacles.
I would like to think your logic is correct…but until….
Robert Coyle says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 21:11
Shooting from the hip here,
dirty money pays for free tickets,declared,this then goes through club accounts and comes out clean via expenses wages,contractors,basically helps maintain the running of a football club.
How do you prove the money is dirty in the first place?
===========================
Dirty money goes through businesses all the time. That’s the point of crime, buying stuff with the money you make from it. If the business is unaware of this then it isn’t money laundering, at last not on their part.
Strictly speaking it is an offence “converting the proceeds” but it’s not “money laundering” in the accepted sense of starting with dirty money and ending with “clean” money. It’s referred to as “own funds” laundering. So someone paying a mortgage every month from the proceeds of their crime is laundering. They are converting the proceeds into another asset, the house. Or someone buying a season ticket at a football club, same thing.
neepheid says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 10:00
‘.I agree that the transfer of the SFA membership was a shabby piece of work, not least because of the secrecy surrounding the final form of the five way agreement, but how can the exercise by the Board of a discretion enshrined in the rules be a breach of those rules?’
—–
You’re right, of course.Discretion is as discretion does.
Given that the SFL had (very shabbily) agreed to let Sevco join them and that Sevco had made application for membership to the SFA within the time specified, then the SFA Board had complete discretion on whether , and on what conditions, they should admit Sevco to membership.
(Conditions, we see today, that Charlie boy wants to renege on!)
I misdirected myself in my last night’s post.
The memory of the whole disgraceful ,frenzied panic resulting in an altogether unholy rescue mission for an undeserving new club was getting to me last night!
I accept your point entirely.
Is it possible the free seats are the property of Ticketus?
So then to get back to the point, how did CG buy the car park from Lloyds when he already owned it?
rangerstaxcase says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 21:17
0
0
Rate This
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:59
____________________________________
You raise several good points.
If they do pay at the ticket office and this is processed electronically, then it would seem unlikely that a scam is involved- unless they have a crooked systems admin involved- which as you say starts to involve too many people for it to stay quiet.
====================================
Obviously if they had the right people in the right places then it could be done and that may well be the case. All of the normal staff could be totally honest and doing their job, however if someone high up was then manipulating those numbers and the (exaggerated) cash sales were reflected in the record (post manipulation) then it is entirely possible.
Bottom line, the more people involved the more chance that someone will give the game away or will make a mistake.
rangerstaxcase says:
killiemad says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 20:28
________________________________________
Oldco did not ever have to worry about paying corporation tax – even in years with huge profits due to the huge accumulated historical losses that RFC ran up. This served as a tax asset that would be offset against profits before corporation taxes would ever have to be paid.
The alternative to this would be to pay corporation tax at 25% and then potentially see shareholders pay dividend tax at a rate of up to 42.5%. Unless the IFA out there see a better strategy, inflating costs by paying salaries to key shareholders (or other desired beneficiaries) would be the most tax efficient way to withdraw money.
=======================================================================
RTC….as you have just said so clearly, the tax loss position of RFC at that time , not in administration or liquidation, would have ensured that no Corporation Tax would have been paid for a considerable number of years.
In fact, based on the overstated valuation of the net assets of RFC at that time, the tax losses would probably have been the most valuable asset available to any potential buyer of RFC…”Nuff Said”…as portrayed by the Bud Neil character…my earlier posts refer…!
PS any references to an IFA would probably involve an “offshore scheme” of tax “planningavoidance/evasion”…and don’t we all know how that got us here in the first place…?
http://twitter.com/rangerstaxcase/status/265196799239811073/photo/1/large
Ok – Blimey – Vat and all that
BDO got their work cut out more than we could imagine – and then some
Any chance of discussion on the (de) selection of the next manager of the National Football Team….Speak Soon -Now off to the airport
So anyway, the inflated attendance figures released by TRFC versus Strathclyde Police’s figures, and how they tie into the various theories espoused on here over the course of today.
Can I note that a similar situation has been shown with regard to Celtic? Strathclyde Police figures being far below the declared attendance for at least one game, that is. I forget which game now but I did mention it recently, quoted from a CFC message board.
There must be a straightforward explanation for these discrepancies.
The Illusion of Success is often more important than success itself.
Papering is a long used trait, particularly with televised performances to make the club appear more successful than it actually is but, primarily, it had been used by wrestling companies to make it appear that they had a hot territory and that the product was in demand.
The thing is that they did it with massive companies behind them – WWE and WCW have at points been legitimate billion dollar companies. The fact is that they could afford to subsidise free tickets. They could afford to spend additional money on security, etc.
Rangers aren’t. But if them papering Ibrox is well known enough to cause attention to be brought and suspicions of potential misreporting of attendances perhaps legitimate, then the second question has to be of merchandising and in-stadium sales. 11,000 free tickets don’t all eat and drink but it would be very easy to say that a lot of them did that didn’t. If ticket revenue and attendances are misrepresented, then these could easily be as well…
e.g. Celtic v Aberdeen, August 2012 …
BBC website records attendance as 48251
FOI request to Strathclyde Police gives attendance as 41250
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19025781
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/audience_attendance_of_football_2
Also, from the same sources:
Celtic v Dundee, September 2012. BBC: 41073, FOI: 31749
angus1983 says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 21:51
0 0 Rate This
So anyway, the inflated attendance figures released by TRFC versus Strathclyde Police’s figures, and how they tie into the various theories espoused on here over the course of today.
=========
Over the years, I have been on many a demo and not once did I ever believe the police declared number for those protesting.
It might just be that the police are not very good at counting.
Anthony Barrett (@Finn_MacCunaill) says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 21:30
Is it possible the free seats are the property of Ticketus?
==============================
The deal with Ticketus was that they paid for their tickets in advance. They get those discounted from face value. That is where their profit comes from when the tickets are actually sold. They normally get something like a 25% discount, but I have it on very good authority that some of the Rangers deal was substantially more than that. The £27m was not the value of tickets they bought, it was more like £40m. The £27m was just them getting their money back as a creditor, but as someone pointed out they did not lodge a claim for even that.
The club then sells the tickets on behalf of Ticketus (and gets a commission for that).
In any case, Ticketus were buying season tickets.
Actually the Ticketus deal was another clear indication that there was no prospect of saving the club as it stood. A business which is not viable already cannot afford to get rid of over 25% of it’s main income stream for the next 4 years.
On the Albion car park issue
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18635527
“Certain individuals must ask some searching questions of themselves as to what their true motives have been over the last few months and as to whether they really have the best interests at heart of the club they claim to love and support.”
Murray sought to allay fears by stressing that Ibrox Stadium, the Murray Park training ground and the Albion car park were all the property of The Rangers Football Club, “which at present is registered as Sevco Scotland Ltd until a name change is given formal approval”.
It seems that according to the chairman they owned it in June. However according to the CEO they have agreed to pay £1.3m for it.
Maybe the two top men on Rangers’ board should have a wee talk about what the club actually owns. Paying £1.3m for something you already own really isn’t very good business.
celticfcblog
4 Nov 2012,
RTC mentioned a week or so ago that Hector was taking a keen interest in Chuckie Green.
I heard tonight from a previously impeccable source that this is indeed the case.
The SFA’s “Fit and Proper Person” case against this shyster will be based on a lot more than his manic rants. His past is about to come back and bite his bum.
macbrayne says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 21:49
‘Any chance of discussion on the (de) selection of the next manager of the National Football Team….Speak Soon -Now off to the airport’
—-
Going somewhere your ferries don’t go? 🙂
Yes, every chance indeed of getting some of us steamed up by yet another example of the unbelievable incompetence of the SFA board- and of the CEO in particular, who is primarily charged with the duty of appointing the national manager.
But you go first, please!
trust me, I know – if someone wanted to pull a scam, the ticketing software rangers are using would not pose any difficulties. The first thing I’d check would be if there were new box office appointments once the new regime took over.
angus1983 – maybe the descrepencies in attendance figures will be the difference between tickets sold – which is what Celtic quote (including all season ticket sales) and people that actually turn up (i.e. not the missing ST holders) – which is probably what the police care about and probably count?
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 22:25
Maybe the two top men on Rangers’ board should have a wee talk about what the club actually owns. Paying £1.3m for something you already own really isn’t very good business.
=========================
We are really getting to the heart of the matter now. What exactly does the company which is about to offer shares to the “Rangers Family”, actually own? There will be no prospectus, an IPO was never really on, so it’s back to a private sale, and any buyers must take Charles on trust. (stop that laughing at the back, please!)
If that same company has to buy back the car park to cut the rent, then just who owns Ibrox and Murray Park right now? (no, I’m not Bomber Broon, honest, but he did ask some good questions a few months ago). How did Lloyds acquire the car park? Part of Whyte’s agreement to pay them off as part of his acquisition? Does anyone know? So many questions!
I do know this- if I was a bear, I’d be thinking I’d been taken for a ride by some real wide boys. But then we all knew that anyway. The question is, how many bears are now starting to see the light? And if they turn on Charles, how fast is he, really? I think we might be about to find out. He won’t be hanging about, that’s for sure.
Malcolm Murray, explicitly claims in this article that Rangers own the abion car park http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18635527
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 22:25
On the Albion car park issue
————————————————————————————————–
My understanding on the Albion Car Park is that it was included as an asset bought by Sevco but there was some kind of lease through a Murray related company tying it up till something like 2023 before Sevco actual got control. The yearly rent on the ground is high so the buying-out of the lease from Lloyds Bank possibly might be sensible depending what Green is up to with the G51 development which may be more fantasy.
neepheid says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:02
but but but … Charles said the prospectus for the IPO would be out in about a week.
RTC
Around 2001/2 I had a late night conversation after a Parklands Footie night dinner with one DK in which he informed me he was now in control of the club. How would that be when check companies house it never was his?
ordinary fan @ 22:51
I really really hope so! Maybe he’ll shut up and give us all bit of peace and quiet and we might even get some truth lol imagine that? TRUTH!! From sevco nae chance 🙂
Nice to see Tom English this morning pick up on corsica’s work months ago on attendance numbers required to avoid armageddon, eh? Nice also to see the press pick up recently on corsica’s work about our hero’s residency in Monaco too.
Corsica was never convinced about the money laundering angle (in the sense of washing dirty money from, say, drugs or other such crime) but he became more and more convinced that Dave King was the absolute key in this whole project.
Corsica never fully established the links because there are lots of false trails leading off at all sorts of angles, but he was convinced that King was central because he is the only person who tied all the key players (and Ellis) together. He has flitted in and out at every key moment and he (if you ignore the RSA tax authorities) has the cash to play this game unlike Murray.
Hypothetically speaking, imagine I owned many millions of shares in a UK company which each cost me pennies…
Say also, that I am a disreputable type and have £10m – £20m stashed away offshore that I cannot properly account for (I’m not & I don’t!!! 🙂 ); but that I want to be “cleansed” for use in the UK.
Perhaps, in such circumstances, I would load up an anonymous off-shore company with my “dirty” money and use it to purchase my UK company shares at £2 each. Maybe I would use mug punters who are buying shares at the same price as legitimate cover for my own transaction.
Perhaps, in order to cover my tracks, I’d plan to later buy the same shares back at a much lower price and subsequently liquidate the offshore company.
Of course, the UK company would need to be a revenue-draining basket case to ensure the future fall in share price…
…and create the necessity to hive-off of the UK company’s heritable assets.
All purely hypothetical, of course,
HirsutePursuit says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 23:24
—-
Is it possible to use dirty money to buy shares? and surely he’d be losing an aweful lot by buying them back at a much lower price?
I’ll never be a cute hoor!
john clarke says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 15:43
tomtomaswell says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 13:53
Lobby Dossers
I’m afraid you are wrong in this – they weren’t chancers or con-men just guys who had been totally mentally beaten-down by life. There weren’t a lot of them and tended to move within a defined geographic area of tenements often whch they had a personal connection with in their earlier life. So they were known and not feared.
They were not quite of the community but still on the edge and hadn’t totally fallen-off the face of the earth. They were tolerated and often fed as long as they behaved. People went to bed helluva early at night back then as it was early rises and nothing to do at night so they didn’t create a problem kipping on the hall floor and as soon as the tenement stirred in the morning they moved on. It’s funny, I don’t know what they did during the day although quite a lot of the chalk pavements artists were old soldiers .
They also didnae nick pints in pubs because they weren’t allowed in as they smelt and guys didn’t drink pints as such – mainly screwtaps or nips chased doon wi ponies and in any case they widnae thank you for it as meth as I mentioned previously was their drink of choice. But another reason they were discouraged in pubs was the fear they brought to working class drinkers as to how close penury hovered.
Agrajag says:
Sunday, November 4, 2012 at 18:36
_________________________________
Missed this post earlier. I was only discussing how to disguise turnover. This discussion (theoretical that it is) does not have any connection to any kind of capital increase.