Past the Event Horizon

ByBig Pink

Past the Event Horizon

On the Old Club vs New Club (OCNC) debate, the SFA’s silence has been arguably the most damaging factor with respect to the future of the game. Of course people get frustrated when there is a deliberate policy of silence on the part of the SFA which results in the endless cycle of arguments being trotted out again and again with no resolution or closure possible.

The irony (it’s only irony if you assume that the SFA have gone to great lengths to create the conditions for the unbroken history status of the new club) is that the mealy-mouthed attitude they have adopted has actually polarised opinion in a far more serious and irreconcilable way than had they just made a clear statement when Sevco were handed SFA membership. A bit of leadership, with a decision either way at that time would have spiked a lot of OCNC guns very early on, but as history shows, they were afraid of a backlash from wherever it came.

I am now convinced that Scottish Football has passed the Event Horizon and is broken beyond the possibility of any repair that might have taken it back to its pre-2010 condition. Rangers fans will never – no matter what any eventual pronouncement from Hampden may be – accept that their next trophy will be their first. The trouble is that no-one else – again despite anything from Hampden – will cast them as anything else other than a new club who were given a free passage into the higher echelons of the game. Furthermore, they will forever force that down the throats of Rangers fans whenever and wherever they play. A recipe for discord, threats of violence, actual violence, and a general ramping up of the sectarian gas that we had all hoped, only a year or so ago, was to be set to an all-time low peep.

There is a saying in politics that we get the government we deserve. It works both ways though, and the SFA will get the audience it deserves. In actual fact it is the one it has actively sought over the last couple of years, for they have tacitly (and even perhaps explicitly) admitted that Scottish Football is a dish best served garnished with sectarianism. They have effectively told us that without it, the game cannot flourish, and they stick to that fallacy even although the empirical evidence of the past year indicates otherwise.

That belief is an intellectual black-hole they have now thrust the game into. They have effectively said that only two clubs actually matter in Scottish football. The crazy thing is that to put their plans into action they have successfully persuaded enough of the other clubs to jump into the chasm and hence vote themselves into irrelevance and permanent semi-obscurity.

That belief is also shared by the majority in the MSM, who despite their lofty, self-righteous and ostensibly anti-sectarian stance, have done everything they can to stir the hornet’s nest in the interests of greater sales.
Act as an unpaid wing of a PR company, check nothing, ask nothing, help to create unrest, and then tut-tut away indignantly like Monty Python Pepperpots when people take them to task.

Consequently the victims of all the wrongdoing (creditors and clubs) walk away without any redress or compensation for the loss of income and opportunity (and history) – stripped of any pride and dignity since they do so in the full knowledge of what has happened. But even as they wipe away the sand kicked in their faces, those clubs still insist on the loyalty of their own fanbases, the same fans whose trust they have betrayed with their meek acceptance of the new, old order.

The kinder interpretation of the impotence of the clubs is that they want to avoid the hassle and move on, the more cynical view that they are interested only in money, not people. In either case, sporting integrity, in the words of Lord Traynor of Winhall (Airdrie, not Vermont), is “crap”.

The question is; which constituency of 21st century Scotland subscribes to that 17th century paradigm?
Sadly, this massive hoax, this gigantic insult to our collective intelligence, is working. Many will leave the game – many already have in view of the spineless absence of intervention from their own clubs – but many, many more will stay and support the charade.

If you doubt my prediction, ask yourself how many tickets will be unsold the first time the New Rangers play Celtic at Parkhead? That my friends will be final imprimatur of authenticity on just exactly who New Rangers are, no matter the proclamations of both sides of the OCNC argument.

About the author

Big Pink administrator

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

3,926 Comments so far

CarlisleCeltPosted on3:04 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Like a lot of you I listened to that guff on SSB last night! Selective with their observations as per usual. Do they think we are all stupid!

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on3:05 pm - Dec 6, 2013


I don’t normally recommend Mr Leggatt for anything other than laughs, however, he has once again been fed an interesting story, this time on the possible motives for Mike Ashley’s support for the current board. Sweetheart deals seem to be the topic de jour :mrgreen:

For years non-Ranger’s fans having been urging the bears to “Follow Follow the Money” its taken a while, but the message seems to be finally getting through.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on3:10 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere 4 weeks ago yesterday, I had never heard of Charles Green, Imran Ahmad, Craig Whyte, or any of the other characters in Rangers’ history. To my knowledge, I have never met them, nor had business dealings with them. Nor would I recognise them if I passed them on a street.
££££%%%%£££££
Just the kinda guy you want involved in your struggling company, someone who has no knowledge or interest in it!

View Comment

CarlisleCeltPosted on3:10 pm - Dec 6, 2013


MoreCelticParanoia says: (86)

December 6, 2013 at 10:08 am

As with the above, yes we all miss competition, none of us miss The Rangers. Have to admit to being slightly disappointed with Aberdeen, Hibs, Dundee Utd etc “I have not mentioned Hearts, as a result of their situation”, this is/has been a great opportunity for them! Still time though!

View Comment

andyPosted on3:24 pm - Dec 6, 2013


CarlisleCelt says: (86)
December 6, 2013 at 3:04 pm
7 0 Rate This

Like a lot of you I listened to that guff on SSB last night! Selective with their observations as per usual. Do they think we are all stupid!
_____________
yes they do think that

View Comment

EKBhoyPosted on3:27 pm - Dec 6, 2013


The ramblings of Mr Somers are embarrassing, however I suspect it says just as much about the intended audience as well as the provider of the aforementioned tablets of wisdom. Some response was required to, was it, the 8 commandments handed down from Mount Florida by the Murray and McColl crew. I guess it will now descent even further into a vicious downward spiral of name calling, providing warm words about the supporters, and describing a journey to the pinnacle of Scottish football.

We know the following:
– Rangers are at the top of the bottom half of Scottish football (copyright Only An Excuse circa 1988)
– To get Rangers near to the top of the top half of Scottish football is going to require an injection of plenty of cash and a change in mentality (from pure mental to business-like) to get costs on a sensible basis.

With that in mind, it would be a good idea, purely in the interests of transparency, for the current Board of Directors to publish an up-to-date Cash Flow projection, to quash once and for all the claims that they are running out of cash. Frankly amazed , this has not already been leaked; Walter and Martin Bain had their uses.

The problem for the SMSM is hilarious, normally there is only one Rangers (OK OC / NC debate to one-side for now), now that there are effectively TWO groups attempting to get hold of Rangers which group do the SMSM suck-up to. Faced with this problem, first tactic would be trash the opposition , i.e. Celtic at every given opportunity to keep circulation up and secondly, just keep printing stuff from both sides, hedge your bets strategy and then provide your blessing (albeit without crossing oneself) to the winner.

The end game needs to involve the Easdales …….From a normal business practice perspective, the role of the Easdales is indeed perplexing, however once lateral thought is engaged, it becomes easier to see the bigger picture………. all that lovely bus fare money buying shares , selling and leasing the ground to get beyond the top of top half of Scottish football, the pinnacle is the objective and onward to Europe ……. fresh, clean money (you can just smell it) , marching onwards to European glory …….

Delusional is an inadequate term but the only one I can think of which explains the state of mind of the participants, perhaps an Ogilvism would be more appropriate.

Anyway, looking forward to a good game this evening, if we go with a diamond with Chas at the pivot, I expect Motherwell’s most competitive (artistic license deployed!) midfielder , step forward Mr. Lasley if he is indeed not suspended or injured to harass Chas. Still umpteen ways to get round that with good rotation in the team …..

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on3:28 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Sorry if this has been covered before but, Question – If Celtic win the league and cup double, do the Scottish Cup finalists qualify for Europe?

A wee opportunity for Conflicted Campbell and the Honest Mistake Brigade?

View Comment

MoreCelticParanoiaPosted on3:32 pm - Dec 6, 2013


No1 Bob says: (64)
December 6, 2013 at 2:17 pm
8 0 i
Rate This

A Question.

Are all the Rangers Men now Bogey Men?

Or are only some of the Rangers Men now Bogey Men?

Or is it just Murray and his gang who are now Bogey Men?

Or are they all just Bogey’s?

_________________________________

And don’t forget….. Everbody knows what colour Bogeymen are!

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on4:02 pm - Dec 6, 2013


iceman63 says: (311)

December 6, 2013 at 2:54 pm
The fundamental problem for Rangers fans is that with the apparent survival of liquidation which killed all other Scottish clubs – and the absence of any clarity on the issue from any of the relevant authorities , they have come to believe in the immortality of the club regardless of actions.
they simply do not believe that the consequence of any subsequent action can be the death of the club.
The SFA has foolishly allowed this perception to continue unchallenged, thus Rangers fans blithely talk of a second insolvency event as though such events were a natural part of the life cycle of the club. The failure to bring Rangers to heel, to hold them to account, to explain the true nature of the present club and the blind eye turning to any wrong-doing by anybody at Ibrox, be they player, official or fan has lent them a sense of invincibility akin to that of Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”

I am still expecting to see the head on a stick – not via justice, nor Football regulation, nor the moral judgement and indignation of an outraged media – but via cold, hard economic reality!.

*******************

The other side of the coin is that the SFA have lost any credibility with the rest of Scottish football in that if or when TRFC Mk2 comes along, screams of Armageddon and Social Unrest will be laughed at more than before due to the fact despite our own SPFL exec telling the world we don’t have a good enough product to market, we have actually managed to survive nicely.

So next time the SPFL clubs are told – we need to bend the rules here otherwise the stars will fall out of the skies, no one will bat an eye.

The biggest danger currently for TRFC is the acceptance of the theory of eternal life for their clumpany coupled with complete non-interest from the rest of the Scottish clubs.

And as you say, for that precarious situation we have to thank Laurel and Hardy – aka Stu and Neil – for getting us into another fine mess!

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on4:16 pm - Dec 6, 2013


MoreCelticParanoia says: (88)

December 6, 2013 at 11:04 am

Exiled Celt says: (845)
December 5, 2013 at 9:23 pm

Excellent summation, however a wee question about CO having to testify under oath bit – I was under the impression that the whole LNS judgement/debacle, in legal terms amounted to no more than a client asking for a legal interpretation from a QC/judge. Therefore there was no testimony under oath in the traditional courtroom sense and the judgement/opinion does not carry the weight of legal precedent or of the outcome of a formal legal proceeding. Is that correct? If so, it still in no way diminishes the central point of the post and in face adds to the sense of chicanery surrounding it all.

***********

Thanks for the feedback – the testimony under oath is mentioned here by Alastair Johnston accusing the other SPL chairmen ironically enough of not being truthful. Hope that helps.

However even if no oath, I assume being on the record in front of legal big wigs means you should at least be truthful – even if you are an untouchable SFA official 🙂

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/19708535

On this, he adds: “I suspect that the commission will not pursue this avenue of investigation, but it would be interesting whether or not ‘selective amnesia’ would be exhibited by those executives/directors called to testify under oath about their ongoing familiarity with the Rangers scheme.

View Comment

auchinstarryPosted on4:28 pm - Dec 6, 2013


God its getting difficult keeping track……We have The Rangers supporters Assembly……Rangers Supporters trust……..Rangers Supporters Association…….Union Bears….The Blue Order……The Club deck Loyal……Rangers Worldwide Alliance……Blue Ultras…….Blue Heaven…….Rangers fans Fighting fund…….The Club Deck loyal………The Blue Knights……The Sons of Struth…..The Vanguard Bears…..The Requisitioners…….

Ever heard the old saying …Divide and Conquer?

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:49 pm - Dec 6, 2013


JLeeHooker says: (76)
December 6, 2013 at 1:47 pm

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5759-an-open-letter-from-the-chairman

Friday, 06 December 2013 13:30
An Open Letter From The Chairman

Another bogey man relates to the club’s finances. We have said publicly a number of times that any talk of the club going into administration is completely untrue. Yes, we will need to make decisions to improve cash flows and strengthen the business, but these will be the right decisions at the right time…
=============================
So, IIRC that is now both the FD and Chairman who have stated publicly – in a robust manner – that ‘the club’ is not at risk of an insolvency event.

So, I would interpret that as TRFC having positive cash flow projections for a reasonable period, e.g. another 12 months.
We are led to believe that there is an unspecified credit facility of GBP 2M [?] available to TRFC.
Stockbridge had mentioned April as being a crunch month for cash flow.
Activities / payoffs since the accounts to June would suggest that a cash flow crisis could be sooner than April.

Are we missing something ?
Or have both Somers & Stockbridge just told whoppers ?

Or is the AIM statement showing;
Rangers International Football Club plc, [‘Rangers’, ‘RIFC’, or ‘the company’]
enough to create confusion ? What about ‘The club’ ?

I am getting confused.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on4:50 pm - Dec 6, 2013


auchinstarry
How could you ,how absolutely could you ,forget the most recent branch ,The Bogey Men.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on5:02 pm - Dec 6, 2013


A ‘bogeyman’ was someone who was employed, during the plague of 1665, to collect dead, or nearly dead, people.
As this job was paid on results, unscrupulous bogeymen would apply a very wide range of criteria in their diagnosis. Once a house was identified, a red cross would be painted on the door and the inhabitants would be locked inside for 40 days and nights, effectively condemning them to death.
Mr Somers should be careful not to upset the bogeyman!
Incidentally, does this make Green & Whyte ‘Burke & Hare’?

View Comment

Sugar DaddyPosted on5:09 pm - Dec 6, 2013


So let me get this straight. The chairman of Rangers knows nothing of the history, all the bogeymen have gone away, the recent poster boys Murdoch McColl & Murray are now the bogeymen, Dave King has gone missing, everything will be fine except no more cash has been raised and no-one knows who the shareholders really are yet.

Can I just remind everyone that the board of directors must act in the interest of its shareholders.

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on5:25 pm - Dec 6, 2013


http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=RFC

1 – how much is Ally’s 1p shares worth today (minus CGT)
2- how much would a blue knight need to buy every share in circulation @ 39p ?

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on5:38 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Are bogeymen related to zombies.
Who scares you the most.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on5:57 pm - Dec 6, 2013


McCoist’s opinion on the “lenient punishment handed out to Nadir Ciftci for manhandling a linesman”.
===============================================================

“…Asked about the issue, McCoist said: “I think they should have protection whether they come out and say anything after games or not.

“Referees should be absolutely guaranteed protection to be honest with you…”

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/ally-mccoist-refs-need-protection-whether-they-explain-themselves-or-not.1386349998
===============================================================
So in McCoist’s opinion, referees absolutely deserve protection…

…but volunteers on an SFA tribunal panel – and their families – do not deserve any protection from irresponsible, dog-whistling football managers ?

Wish McCoist would just take a long walk – and take Ogilvie with him… 🙄

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on6:14 pm - Dec 6, 2013


jimlarkin says: (681)
December 6, 2013 at 5:25 pm
5 1 Rate This

http://www.lse.co.uk/SharePrice.asp?shareprice=RFC

1 – how much is Ally’s 1p shares worth today (minus CGT)
2- how much would a blue knight need to buy every share in circulation @ 39p ?
———-

A closing sale at 36p.

Maybe all that bogeyman stuff has given folk the willies?

View Comment

bartokPosted on6:16 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Apologies in advance – first time poster on TSFM – this may have been highlighted by others and I may have missed it, but in the context of SFA decisions, their interpretations, reinventing or just plain disregarding of their own rules and regulations, the current referee furore over the lack of severity of the punishment handed out to Dundee Utd’s Ciftci Referees unhappy with ‘leniency’ of Nadir Ciftci’s suspension http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25213318

reminded me of this –
Rangers trio escape without bans http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/13040832
I don’t remember any threat of industrial action from our refereeing fraternity over these rulings.

Particularly interesting is the video clip of the late QC Paul McBride’s reaction to these events…what an insightful portent of decisions to come re the Ibrox entity.

View Comment

auchinstarryPosted on6:37 pm - Dec 6, 2013


FIFA @4-50pm………..

Or the Sons of the Bogeymen……… :mrgreen:

Stevie BC @5-57pm

Ally as we all know is a shrewd cookie. Playing it to the “Establishment Gallery”. But time will eventually catch up. The day he trades in the penny shares and walks away gets ever nearer.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on6:43 pm - Dec 6, 2013


There was the bogey men stuff today, and tonight on Radio Scotland we have ‘Institutional Investors’ and ‘Requisitioners’ coming out our ears.

I’m off to the pub to watch my team play Motherwell. I’ll try not to think how both clubs manage to survive without all these grand groups of people around them, unlike the grandest club of the grand.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on6:51 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Danish Pastry says: (1771)

December 6, 2013 at 11:37 am

One thing that did puzzle me was why they asked the press to leave at the start of the meeting yet proceeded to broadcast to the rest of the planet live on youtube.
_____________________________________________

Could it be, DP, because they are nowhere near as smart as they think they are?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on7:04 pm - Dec 6, 2013


On somer’s statement

Can’t believe no-one’s commenting on the “reinvention if you shout Loud enough” stuff, or is that on the other bonkers string!

Seriously, there’s more holes in it than a Gorgonzola. Firstly he’s clearly referring to murray’s previous involvement, then saying so don’t vote him and his pals on thus leaving the guys I later describe as incompetent!

My honest feeling? The closest thing I can recall to this statement is a cva appeal I saw recently. It basically read as 20 reasons why this cva shouldn’t stand a chance, but please sign it anyway. Sorry, May be becoming overly sensitive but this has got continuing switcheroo written all over it. It’s just too, well, artificial!

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on7:12 pm - Dec 6, 2013


bartok says: (2)
December 6, 2013 at 6:16 pm
========================
With regard to that incident, I think it puts the poll on “old firm” games into perspective.

This link at the bottom is worth reading (if nothing else for the one time Young speaks some sense) and is a perfect example of why most non CFC and TRFC Glaswegians (and admittedly, some who are fans of those clubs/companies/teams) despised such occasions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-12631956

View Comment

gunnerbPosted on7:14 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Been musing on the AGM and which way Ally McCoist will vote.Fans wouldn`t be too happy if the legend voted to support the current board and his employers would be equally disgruntled if he were to vote against them.The ideal, for him ,would be if it were possible to dispose of his shareholding prior to the AGM . He can claim he was in an impossible situation and much as though he would like to keep his shares felt it best for all concerned to dispose of them.The windfall profit of course would not be a driving factor in any of this it would be the noble thing to do. Not being familiar with these shareholder shindigs can anyone tell me if the votes are made public.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on7:44 pm - Dec 6, 2013


BartinMain says: (108)
December 6, 2013 at 12:28 pm

Rangers International was admitted to the LSE on the 19th December 2012.
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11433739

The lock-in period, as everyone knows, lasts for 12 months and thus ceases on the 19th December 2013. That just happens to be the date of the Ibrox club’s AGM. Smart move by the Spivs. Whilst they’re being confronted by hundreds of Bears, they’ll be quietly selling all of their shares. 😆
===================================================================
There were actually various lock-in periods and I’m saying this from memory but the Institutional investors was 6 months which came off in the summer this year,

Directors such as Green had a 12 month lock-in but afaik his lock lifts tomorrow 7 December so he can sell from then on and indeed a sizable chunk will be pransferred to Laxey Partners. Not sure that there are that many substantial packages of shares still locked-in although I assume Ally’s i million will be, as a key employee, but not sure when his lock-in lifts. Ahmad, also as a key employee, was locked-in but with his departure earlier this year his lock-in may have lifted then but I don’t know for sure.

It may also be the case that some of the pre-IPO mystery investors are locked-in and that might be why the likes of Margarita and Blue Pitch and some of the others are still having to hold-on. If they are still locked-in then it would be interesting to know the date they are able to sell.

Perhaps Green was cute enough to make sure he was the first of the initial group of those rewarded by penny shares to be able to sell them so that he is more or less guaranteed to get the best possible price before the last bulhead finally cracks on HMS Dignity.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on7:54 pm - Dec 6, 2013


“… we need a Board selected from the best available people. Not just from fanatics who put their own personal interest ahead of the greater good of the club.”
——
Not just from such fanatics? So the selection of some money-grubbing dafties will be OK, then?

(Someone should perhaps remind this fellow that there’s a commonly used abbreviation for the word “fanatic” in relation to football, by the way.)

View Comment

Flocculent ApoideaPosted on8:14 pm - Dec 6, 2013


If I were a Rangers fan, I’d be concerned that my club’s holding company’s chairman gives the impression he wouldn’t recognise Ibrox if it passed him in the street. That statement was as tragic and ironic as it was hilarious. Agree with Smugas – it’s all a bit obvious and public isn’t it? On the Ibrox sale denial, would Ibrox be “sold” to RIFC plc or is it just an inter-group asset transfer? (That sounds like I know what I’m talking about).

View Comment

SquigglePosted on8:38 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Outrage on Sportsound commentary of Motherwell v Celtic. Celtic fans have launched flares onto the pitch. Idiots! There will be repercussions we are told.
How will the SFA deal with this we must wonder ‘cos this has never happened before… 😯

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on8:46 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Squiggle says: (122)
December 6, 2013 at 8:38 pm
2 1 Rate This

Outrage on Sportsound commentary of Motherwell v Celtic. Celtic fans have launched flares onto the pitch. Idiots! There will be repercussions we are told.
How will the SFA deal with this we must wonder ‘cos this has never happened before…

——————————

i understand there have been a few political banners too

looks like Celtic will be kicked out of the league

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on8:54 pm - Dec 6, 2013


I see we have had the return of St Atement Of Govan today…..fantastic stuff, i was beginning to worry for them all down there. I guess this is what happens when the director of communications is sacked….your statements dont get out quite as quickly

Frankly I’m amazed….I’m going to have to say that in David Somers they have a chairman who is beautifully and completely out of his depth. So much for a blue chip, big hitter on the board.

1st of all, shouldn’t that statement, from the Chairman of RIFC PLC in relation to boardroom challenges and the AGM of RIFC PLC which was announced via the LSE/AIM not have been made through the RIFC plc page? rather than the TRFC ltd page

Why is he publishing an RIFC plc statemnt on TRFC ltd page? Haven’t these guys got the hang of this corporate governance lark yet?

2nd…….how the HELL has he read 2 years of board minutes for a PLC that isn’t even 1 year old and a wholly owned subsidiary that is only 18 months old?

Most beautifully of all…..and this is the real “rock and a hard place” or ” damned if you do, damned if you don’t” moment

He absolutely states the boards handling of financial matters since the clumpanies inception – clearing aiming at Malcolm Murray, but also dragging Stockbridge down with him.

It actually no longer matters who wins the AGM – it’s clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right. Keep Stockbridge – involved in the terrible management and still likely to be there, or get rid of him and bring in the rebels – with malcolm murray involved in the terrible management back on board.

View Comment

tobyPosted on9:44 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Finloch says: (236)
December 6, 2013 at 9:42 am
95 0 Rate This

wottpi says: (1308)
December 6, 2013 at 9:37 am

……………..
They’ve all seen it.
They are simply turning a blind eye and keeping on message.
————-

I agree, Finloch, but there is also a real journalistic cowardice in tackling the new Rangers issue. Events like Jim Spence’s brush with the wrath of the Ibrox support and McCoist’s dog whistling tactics serve as a warning to anyone in the media that you raise the thorny issue of a new club at your peril. The result is the truth and facts of the matter become the unspoken victims, and the general message, mostly peddled by idiots like Guidi is ‘Can we not just get on with it, you’re just another obsessed Celtic fan kicking Rangers when they’re down’. This way they don’t need to grapple with the ugliest of thorny issues – with liquidation, Rangers as were, died. The gnashing and bearing of teeth otherwise, would be inconceivable and certainly not something most of our fine sports journalists would be ‘ready’ or willing to contemplate. The unedifying beast that currently bares the Rangers name, currently serves to make a mockery of our game and its authorities, though they themselves need no additional help. Along with a clear out at the SFA offices, some genuine searching questions need to be asked of our media. It of course serves their united purpose to perpetrate the continuation of the Old Firm bullshit- it sells papers in a dying industry but it also helps to ferment a poisonous boil that should be long lanced. I wonder how much journalistic endeavour will follow a successful conclusion for HMRC in the EBT case sitting in February. What chance serious questions are pointed in the direction of SDM, Ogilvie & all at Ibrox re. financial doping, titles cheated etc ? Yep, my guess is. …absolutely nil to S.F.A.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on9:45 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Not The Huddle Malcontent says: (1053)
December 6, 2013 at 8:54 pm
He absolutely states the boards handling of financial matters since the clumpanies inception – clearing aiming at Malcolm Murray, but also dragging Stockbridge down with him.
———————————————————————————————————————————————-
Yes….poor Brian…..opposing all these terrible financial decisions but powerless to act….railing against them in a Lear like manner no doubt…..but hanging in there for the good of the club having caught the Rangers bug..
Quite heart rending really and you almost feel sorry for him…for 10 milliseconds until you wonder just who they expect to believe this utter b******t

View Comment

SquigglePosted on9:49 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Not The Huddle Malcontent on December 6, 2013 at 8:54 pm

I see we have had the return of St Atement Of Govan today…..

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

I wonder how the fans of the Ibrox team feel about that performance.
Ditto the SFA, who is this man, who is he speaking on behalf of. Scottish Football has survived SDM, Ogilvie, Whyte, porn stars and tax dodgers, Administrators, Green ( & co. ), Interpol, Liquidators and Requisitioners and hired trolls. But now, now we have bogeymen! Fecking bogeymen!
Utterly bizarre.
Long live Sevco, it just doesn’t ever let you down.
Meantime, I understand that the whole of the SMSM are grateful for flares and smokebombs on the pitch tonight. Stopped them falling asleep during another decent Celtic performance.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:03 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Was today’s ludicrous statement the work of Media House? If so, it looks as if Mr Irvine has completely lost the plot. Is he really being paid for this sort of guff? Allegedly so, well whoever is paying him needs to stop the cheques right now, unless this statement is a move of supreme subtlety in a game of 4-D chess that is beyond my limited comprehension. Or Irvine has cracked.

What are the bears supposed to make of it all? They must be even more confused than usual after reading that statement. On reflection, this can’t be simply a crap PR job, it’s just too bad on too many levels. So what’s going on? Any 4-D chess experts out there?

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on10:07 pm - Dec 6, 2013


neepheid says: (918)
December 6, 2013 at 10:03 pm

there was a twitter exchange between Chris Graham and Jack Irvine today – Jack denies anything to do with the Statement today – all the chairmans own work.

hardly surprising Jack wanted to distance himself from such amateur guff!

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on10:09 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Let’s remind ourselves of David Somers background
http://www.allenbridgeis.com/people/senior-advisers/david-somers
.

David Somers

David has extensive knowledge of the investment business, having held senior positions in the industry for over 30 years.

David began his career with the ICI Pension Fund. In the 1980s he was Managing Director of Manufacturers Hanover Investment Management Ltd and in the 1990s Managing Director of Nikko Capital Management UK Ltd. In 2000 he joined Clerical Medical Investments Group to head up their institutional pension fund business. This company re-branded to become Insight Investment.

David is Chairman of the Investment Sub-Committee for the Fujitsu Technologies International Pension Fund. In addition, he is an independent non-executive director and non-executive Chairman for Rangers International Football Club plc, a non-executive director of ACE Europe Life plc, a non-executive director and Chairman of the Audit & Risk Committee for Europe Arab Bank plc, and Chairman of the Investment Committee at TCF Investment Managers Ltd.

He was previously Chairman of Trustees for the Doosan Babcock Energy Pension Scheme.

David has an Honours degree in Economic Studies, is a qualified accountant (FCCA) and is a CFA (ASIP) member.

Insight Investment? Sounds familiar!

Insight Investment Management (Global) Ltd holder of 1,900,000 shares in RIFC. Parent company Insight Investment Management which was formerly known as Clerical Medical Investment Management Limited.

…………… and he knows nothing about Green Ahmad and co.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:11 pm - Dec 6, 2013


The Bogeyman: go to Paisley museum. They have an actual bogey, as used by the police, to collect drunks from the gutter and bring them to the Paisley Gaol. The Gaol was demolished and replaced with the Piazza, a place of untold misery, ill-fitting clothes, unpredictable behaviour, belligerent staff and dodgy food. The prison wasn’t bad.

Mr Somers writes as he thinks.

Ally’s 1p is worth 39p, the supporters 70p is worth 39p. Ally’s pay cut will result in him having slightly less of a chuckle than when he was copping £750 000 p.a….if he actually takes a pay cut.

View Comment

SquigglePosted on10:26 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Amongst all the violent revulsion on RM at the idea of paying respect, such as 1 minute of applause, to the life of Nelson Mandela this post stands out;

“Never seen Mandela mentioned on here, can someone tell me how I should react to this please.”

Bogeyman.

View Comment

bailemeanachPosted on10:35 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Squiggle says: (124)

December 6, 2013 at 10:26 pm

Seriously? They seek guidance on the appropriate level of affrontery to display?

Dear God, I’m lost for words

View Comment

ekt1mPosted on10:40 pm - Dec 6, 2013


BB. @10.19pm. Yes, this is not the proper forum, but we are all chasing our tails on here going over and over old squirrels ad infinitum. Roll on the 19th Dec. to get our teeth into something worth discussing. :lol edit. My 9.30 post has been removed. Funny that.

View Comment

SquigglePosted on10:48 pm - Dec 6, 2013


bailemeanach on December 6, 2013 at 10:35 pm
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Its worth seeing exactly what is being said. Set it alongside Malcolm Murray’s comments about scots/ Irish and the remembrance day/ armed forces day farrago, their acceptance of Dave King and SDM before. Look into the Penny Arcade. Ogilvie, Dallas, Green and Whyte.

But its the Bogeyman I’m feart of.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:49 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Craig Whyte: ‘The Bogey Wogey Wogey Man From Clumpany B’

View Comment

scottcPosted on11:04 pm - Dec 6, 2013


bailemeanach says: (130)
December 6, 2013 at 10:35 pm

Squiggle says: (124)

Seriously? They seek guidance on the appropriate level of affrontery to display?
Dear God, I’m lost for words

It’s just another manifestation of the “Tell us what you want us to do, and we’ll do it!” statement at the PM/MM fan meeting.

View Comment

bailemeanachPosted on11:10 pm - Dec 6, 2013


It truely is what Phil refers to as “the hard of thinking”

Can they not hold their own opinions over anything, without having to have them “proofread” by the big bears?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:15 pm - Dec 6, 2013


The Bogeymen FC… No One Likes Us, We Don’t Care…

It’s enough to give you the Willies, or is it the Billies?

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on11:29 pm - Dec 6, 2013


In 1953 the football authorities and the betting companies discovered that matches were being fixed by one player. He would place bets on,at that time, the three possible outcomes: win lose or draw. Depending on the outcome, he would place a bet on the longest odds outcome. He prospered for three seasons before being identified by the governing authorities, his name? Ragemza Bogey.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:34 pm - Dec 6, 2013


Just noticed a late sale of RIFC plc shares today with 55,000 sold for 36.18p each. That’s the lowest price yet and the way the slagging match is going never mind the bogeymen nightmares that seem to be affecting the latest chairman I’m beginning to wonder if they’ll stay above 20p for the AGM.

Reading the new chairman’s strange utterings it would seem that RIFC Plc would have been delisted from AIM if it hadn’t been for the sterling work by Stockbridge. Now what could have been so bad that AIM was going to throw RIFC Plc out ❓

And what exactly did Stockbridge do to alter the situation ❓

Curioser and curioser ❗

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:51 pm - Dec 6, 2013


ecobhoy says: (2075)

December 6, 2013 at 11:34 pm

That bit of his statement, letting the world know that, in his opinion, RIFC could have been de-listed from AIM is mind blowing in at least two ways. One; it seems very careless to let everyone know that something many on here and probably elsewhere have been suggesting for months, might actually happen, and, two; surely it’s breaking AIM rules to let such price sensitive information out into the public domain. Especially after saying how he/the board have to be careful in their utterances. Could Somers’ job actually be (on behalf of others) to create a price crash so someone, King?, can jump in and get the company at a knock down price?

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on12:07 am - Dec 7, 2013


Can I ask the following question….
I can determine the current board of RIFC from
http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/board-management/board-of-directors

How do I determine the actual board of TRFC?

Cannot find it anywhere on here …
http://www.rangers.co.uk/

I guess appointments to TRFC, as a non listed company do not need release apart from annually?

Help appreciated.

Buddy

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on12:38 am - Dec 7, 2013


I thought “walking away” wasnt going to happen?
Tomorrow’s DR back page
http://i1192.photobucket.com/albums/aa327/bullster1888/f864bb89afc2bccfea347e9912c054f0.jpg

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:51 am - Dec 7, 2013


buddy_holly says: (81)
December 7, 2013 at 12:07 am
‘..How do I determine the actual board of TRFC?..’
——
TRFC is company number SC425129
This link
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/miscellaneous/nameAvailability.shtml
will let you get webcheck on the company by inputting the company number.
On the right hand side, you will see ‘order information’
Click on that ( for free) and you’ll get info on the current directors….
Who appear to be Norman Wrighton ( appointed 6/12/13, Iain Wallace ( 25/11/13) Alex Easdale (13/09/130 and James Easdale ( 11/09/13)

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:26 am - Dec 7, 2013


sorry. Just back.
Indulge me!

Been out of loop 1 week +.
Englandhsire. work etc.
saw :slamb: on Tv today.
5 line catch up would be appreciated.

Are pretendgeres still solvent?
Did RIFC AGM and profumo stuff resonate on the blog? (serioulsy haven’t logged on for 1 week plus) and if not… why not?
Are the decent bears stirring from hibernation yet?
Beeb reporting (‘Rangers longest unbeaten run since war’ did make me puke fromn Preston, and caused a certain amount of reflection of the nature of news management and propoganda) but apart from that I am completely in the dark as to developments – press, blogs etc.

Will take me a week or 2 to catch upo
5 line summary would be good!

Any takers!

View Comment

martin cPosted on1:51 am - Dec 7, 2013


Resin_lab_dog says: (268)
December 7, 2013 at 1:26 am
0 0 Rate This

sorry. Just back.
Indulge me!

Been out of loop 1 week +.
Englandhsire. work etc.
saw :slamb: on Tv today.
5 line catch up would be appreciated.

Are pretendgeres still solvent?
Did RIFC AGM and profumo stuff resonate on the blog? (serioulsy haven’t logged on for 1 week plus) and if not… why not?
Are the decent bears stirring from hibernation yet?
Beeb reporting (‘Rangers longest unbeaten run since war’ did make me puke fromn Preston, and caused a certain amount of reflection of the nature of news management and propoganda) but apart from that I am completely in the dark as to developments – press, blogs etc.

Will take me a week or 2 to catch upo
5 line summary would be good!

Any takers!

==============================================================================

The upstarts held a meeting with fans (triumphilsm, anochronisms, paedophile joke, we can sell a million shirts etc) video of said meeting on you tube. SMSM make no comment on joke in comparison with Celtic CEO’s one liner. Also state that they do not know of this video (sports hack on radio show).

The share price is approaching half of IPO.

The OCNC debate has been copyrighted by boots (new insomnia cure) Separate thread created on TSF

Spivco Chairman has denied everything and states the answer is 42 now what is the Question.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on2:08 am - Dec 7, 2013


john clarke says: (1413)
December 7, 2013 at 12:51 am
3 0 Rate This

buddy_holly says: (81)
December 7, 2013 at 12:07 am
‘..How do I determine the actual board of TRFC?..’
——
TRFC is company number SC425129
This link
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/miscellaneous/nameAvailability.shtml
will let you get webcheck on the company by inputting the company number.
On the right hand side, you will see ‘order information’
Click on that ( for free) and you’ll get info on the current directors….
Who appear to be Norman Wrighton ( appointed 6/12/13, Iain Wallace ( 25/11/13) Alex Easdale (13/09/130 and James Easdale ( 11/09/13)-one of whom is a convicted jailbird.

Many thanks again john clarke.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on2:30 am - Dec 7, 2013


Original Press release here…
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5759-an-open-letter-from-the-chairman

So in the style of Paul McConville I will have a bash at a long useful post, but probably fail.

First, RIFC chairman David Somers make a statement announced to the stock exchange
and at the top we have

Rangers International
Football Club plc
(“Rangers”, “RIFC” or
the “Company”)

At the risk of starting the old club new club debate, club==company stuff, no wonder everyone who does not have a grasp of the fine minutiae gets confused when RIFC call themselves “Rangers” and
the “company”.

Next RIFC make a statement which then goes to the http://www.rangers.co.uk website. Even the http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/

points you to rangers.co.uk, the website of the wholly owned subsidiary TRFC!!
(I feel another letter to AIM coming on!)

So, onto the actual statement, paragraph 1.

AS a listed company, the members of the Rangers Board have to be very careful and professional in the way in which we communicate information.

So what does “the members of the Rangers Board” mean is it:
A. The members of the RIFC board
B. The members of the TRFC board.
Answer obviously A, as
it is the only one listed on AIM.

So, onto paragraph 2.

This is clearly not the case for the requisitioners, who can make all sorts of wild and spurious allegations.

Hold on that would be the requisitioners who are all directors of other companies and are in some cases cleared by your NOMAD to go on the board of RIFC. Meanwhile we have the Easdales on the board??

Any comment on that?

So, onto paragraph 3.

My concern is that these unprofessional, wild allegations are being used just like bogey men
were used when I was a child. But in this case, they are being used to frighten our supporters
and shareholders. So, within the bounds of what I can say, I would like to put some of these bogey men to rest.

Seriously the chairman of an AIM listed company invokes a discussion about “bogeymen” in an
official press release, things are bad.

So, onto paragraph 3.

Firstly, I read wild accusations that I may not be independent. This is usually accompanied by a list of names from the club’s past. Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere 4 weeks ago
yesterday, I had never heard of Charles Green, Imran Ahmad, Craig Whyte, or any of the other characters in Rangers’ history. To my knowledge, I have never met them, nor had business dealings with them. Nor would I recognise them if I passed them on a street.

So David Somers had never heard of the man who took rangers into administration, never heard of the man who bought the assets from D & P, or any other characters in rangers (which rangers?) history
(whose history, RFC (IL, TRFC, RIFC or Cambuslang Rangers?). Mr Somers will not be able to spot the bogey man if he does not know who CG, IA or CW are… ?
Interestingly for me, somers does not claim to be a rangers supporter, the nearest i have found is this ““I know from my visits to Ibrox Stadium – including a number of Champions League games I attended in the past – that the Club has a tremendous fan base.”
Was he attending as a Man U fan??

So, onto paragraph 4.

When I was approached to join the Board, the Company had only two directors and the immediate priority was to preserve the AIM Listing. Surely it is naïve to think that there is any way the Nominated Adviser could have allowed anyone not totally independent to take on this position at that time?

Which Board? Which Company ? Ah.. obviously RIFC as they have a NOMAD. Immediate priority to preserve their listing, well how could those people i do not know, CG, IA, CW sell their shares if RIFC was delisted. The NOMAD and RIFC can appoint who it wishes as chairman, i.e. Walter Smith.

So, onto paragraph 5.

I have now read over two years of board minutes and they make very depressing reading in terms of the scale of their lack of professionalism and worse. The minutes make it clear, in my mind, that the boards of recent years have been totally unfit to run this club.

So what part of time dilation does mr. somers not understand? And again which board??RIFC have less than 1 years’ worth of minutes, TRFC have 18 months’ worth of minutes. I doubt you have read the minutes of RFC(IL) but if you have can we have a chat about them, especially how the wee tax case was dealt with and discussions with the SFA about a possible administration event?? But lack of Professionalism by whom, does this include Brian Stockbridge.. but also “boards of recent years have been totally unfit to run this club.” how confused is this RIFC are a company and what club is he referring to??

So, onto paragraph 6.

The mystery to me is why people should now be considering that members of these boards, which
presided over the problems we face today, should be considered for re-election. Although I have learned one lesson, which is that if you shout long enough and loud enough in the media, you may be able to reinvent yourself.

Now suddenly there are 2 boards, thank god he knows the structure of RIFC/TRFC now, why now at paragraph 6. Obviously only RIFC are up for election, suddenly those on the board previously should
not be considered, i.e. against Malcolm Murray while Brian Stockbridge is to be voted back on. And the lesson, is this david somers attempt at the new club answer of the old club/new club debate. That the media can make anything true, oh well, that media must not be working for you any more then.. they
must be supporting the requisitioners.

So, onto paragraph 7.

Recent inaccurate and, in fact, completely untrue allegations have included a new bogey man about Jack Irvine’s contract. I have looked at this and can say that he has a normal contract, with no bonuses attached and the figures quoted by Mr Scott Murdoch are utter nonsense. Let me also say that Graham Wallace and I are beginning a complete review of every contract that is in place. You can imagine
that this is going to take weeks and then more time where contracts need to be changed. I have been on board four weeks yesterday and Graham less than that, but we have already begun this critical
process.

Ah completely untrue allegations when we have not started litigation, why is that? ! Are they true? litigation cost money? Getting Jack Irvine and the actions of media house into a court of law where the
services rendered may be scrutinised could be very interesting. All contracts under review and changed if needed, oh well you will soon find out who CG, IA, CW are as they are involved in various contracts. And it is critical, oh well wonder why? Is it cash flow?

So, onto paragraph 8.

One area, where we are conscious that we need to focus, is in improving our communication and engagement with all Rangers supporters. We have already commenced work to identify what is
required to fully engage with our fan base and we will be bringing forward some significant
proposals in the near future. The Board is fully behind improving the communication and engagement with the fans.

The least controversial paragraph so far, though for an AIM company, RIFC make announcements way
above the average rate, that NOMAD contract better be fixed price. So, onto paragraph 9.

Another bogey man relates to the club’s finances. We have said publicly a number of times that any talk of the club going into administration is completely untrue. Yes, we will need to make decisions to improve cash flows and strengthen the business, but these will be the right decisions at the right time.

Now I am scared, i always that there was only one bogeyman, now there are multiple bogeymen, we had better call in the authorities.”We have said publicly a number of times that any talk of the club going
into administration is completely untrue.”… ah which club RIFC nope that is the company. TRFC well many people said RFC(IL) would not go into administration never mind liquidation. And fair enough to Mr. Somers, he recognises cash flow is king, to strengthen the business ? (Why not the club, the
company, rangers?) In poker this would be a bit of a tell of what you are planning.

So, onto paragraph 10.

Another new bogey man thrown about by the Gang of Four is the suggestion that we might be thinking of selling Ibrox. We are not thinking about this. Where do the requisitioners get these ideas from? I promise you we have no intention of a sale.

Another bogey man i will not sleep tonight. What have Jiang Qing, Zhang Chunqiao, Yao Wenyuan, and Wang Hongwen. Chinese Cultural Revolution leaders ousted in 1976 after Mao Tse-Tung’s death got to do with RIFC. Or is it the SDP founders , Roy Jenkins, David Owen, Bill Rodgers and Shirley
Williams? If the gang of four are Malcolm Murray, Paul Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson.

So, if TRFC is out of money in April what are you going to do? Earlier you ruled out administration.. Hmmmm?
Entertainingly, “I promise” is a bit weak coming from the chairman of an AIM listed company. Surely
something like TRFC will act in the interests of its shareholders, i.e RIFC and RIFC shall not
sell Ibrox without an EGM would be firm and fair…?

So, onto paragraph 11.

Brian Stockbridge suffers most from the lies thrown around by the people in the process of reinventing
themselves. Even the requisitoners must understand that finance directors are members of
boards and their actions are largely dictated by the board.

Ah, so the board is responsible, that would be the board acting in the interests of its shareholders, the main ones you have never heard of, met or had any dealings with. Brian Stockbridge as being involved in every major shenanigan of the 18 month old TRFC has the most answers, most answers he is not going to tell anyone.
So, onto paragraph 12.

Reading the minutes of the last two years or more, I see that Mr Murray was involved at board level for long periods covering contract and financial negotiations. It is not that Finance Directors make mistakes, rather that boards make mistakes, or worse.

Ok so which board?? Boards have a collective responsibility then, OK I accept that, but somehow this piece is all about the “bogey men” and the good guys. Both of whom were on the boards of RIFC.TRFC at the same time? Why the differentiation? Please Explain?

So, onto paragraph 13.

Without Brian, the club would, in my opinion, have been de-listed months ago and ironically the club should owe him a debt of gratitude for holding things together. Going forward, his new CEO, Graham Wallace, needs time to evaluate the whole structure within the business and the people within it. This
will be true for Brian as for everyone else.

Ah the explanation is that Brian is working for the good of the sharehlders who need to keep RIFC as a going concern long enough to sell their shares. And oh the business again, is that RIFC or TRFC??
And look Brian no matter how good he is may well be evaluated out of it under review.
So, onto paragraph 14.

For the good of the club, for the good of the supporters and for the good of the shareholders, I sincerely hope that the shareholders will get behind the existing board and vote for us.

For the good of which club? RIFC or TRFC? Surprise, Surprise the supporters are next most important. Then suddenly the shareholders make an appearance, there is an interesting group, what have they got to do with all this… oh i see “VOTE FOR US”. As a non executive independent chairman of an AIM listed company in strife, who exactly is “US”? Further if “US” lose will that make you position untenable?

So, onto paragraph 15.

In addition, I encourage shareholders to vote against the four requisitioners. Firstly, because some of them were members or chairman of boards which failed this club in the past. Secondly, we need a
Board selected from the best available people. Not just from fanatics who put their own personal interest ahead of the greater good of the club.

and do not vote for “THEM”. Again, which boards, RIFC, RFC(IL)? Take the first first, that statement covers Paul Murray and Malcolm Murray, but why no equal dig at Brian Stockbridge, Easdales
(remember them??). Secondly, we need the board from the best available people. Who is the “WE”? Supporters? Shareholders? Which board? RIFC? TRFC? And again which club? whose greater good? This paragraph is an absolute minefield of cross purposes.

So, onto paragraph 16 and last paragraph.

If these people were to join the board they would be taking up positions which should be held in future by the best, professional people with Rangers true best interests at heart and not having their involvement driven by their own personal self interest.

Again which board TRFC? RIFC? If there are better people appoint them. What are Rangers true best interests, is that in a mission statement somewhere? Is that the same as TRFC business objectives?
what about RIFC business objectives? At heart??? What sound chairman of an AIM listed company
brings hearts into CAPITALISM and the best interests of the shareholders. Personal self-interest is an intriguing barb as it shows the earlier point that the involvement of the chairmen is not at all related to personal self interest. He is just there for the money or as a favour to a pal.

So, that takes a fair bit of effort, cathartic though to do it, took me two hours. Shows how hard some of the esteemed bloggers here work to deliver such impressive works.

As stated as soon as I read it at 3 pm, this is one of the most bizarre press releases yet by RIFC (or is it TRFC!!)

Wished I could have done some pictures would have been nice, but TSFM would have blocked it.

Again hats off to the late paul mcconville for his long posts which brought so much light and fun to the world.

Buddy

PS: A million typos i am sure

View Comment

twopandaPosted on9:01 am - Dec 7, 2013


Blimey

• “When I was approached to join the Board, the Company had only two directors and the immediate priority was to preserve the AIM Listing.”
• “I have now read over two years of board minutes and they make very depressing reading in terms of the scale of their lack of professionalism and worse.”
• “Reading the minutes of the last two years or more, I see that Mr Murray was involved at board level for long periods covering contract and financial negotiations.”
• “Without Brian, the club would, in my opinion, have been de-listed months ago and ironically the club should owe him a debt of gratitude for holding things together.”

Questions

• Minutes from pre December 2011?
• AIM listing preservation?
etc …………………….
.
Odd Stuff Indeed – & at this juncture ❓
Is an AGM in doubt now?

View Comment

FinlochPosted on9:26 am - Dec 7, 2013


buddy_holly says: December 7, 2013 at 2:30 am

Great insight – the kind of thing that our quality titles should have been straight on to.
One obvious question not being asked remains.

“When I was approached to join the Board”…… Who approached you to join the board Mr Somers? (piper and tune and stuff like that)

The next couple of weeks are crucial to the spivs and that is why I think they are trying to get folks to look at the longer term future of all things Rangers rather than what is on the immediate horizon for the bits that matter to them.
A planned variant of confusion and blindsighting.

View Comment

TommyBPosted on9:53 am - Dec 7, 2013


If only the people who think they are, would go back in time and listen to the lyrics of the great John Lennon, the lyrics in the song” Gimme some Truth” are so relevant to us all. I know they probably don’t really want the truth but everyone else does.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:05 am - Dec 7, 2013


Decisions to improve cash flows……..but we’re definitely not selling off Ibrox.

Add into the mix, and we expect to move up into a professional league.

Surplus players?
Murray park?

Certainly doesn’t sound like a war chest to me. Has anyone told Ally?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:09 am - Dec 7, 2013


Sorry thought this was worth another post. It just struck me going over the review of the statement. There’s nothing litigious at all there. No 140 year history, no titles, clarity about the company being the club and even a passing nod to the unfounded merits of recreation. Mr somer’s maybe is smarter than the average bear after all.

View Comment

Jake CantonaPosted on10:14 am - Dec 7, 2013


buddy_holly says: (83)
December 7, 2013 at 2:30 am

—————–

I very rarely comment, but thank you for that and for the effort that went into it.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on10:19 am - Dec 7, 2013


twopanda says: (450)
December 7, 2013 at 9:01 am
10 0 Rate This

Blimey

• “When I was approached to join the Board, the Company had only two directors and the immediate priority was to preserve the AIM Listing.”
….

Good question. Does the NOMAD do this? Or the existing RIFC board? Or a consultant? Or the major shareholders? A professional agency?

I have no idea.

As posted earlier yesterday, david somers was involved with one of the investors, so sure he met CG, IA otherwise they were making investments without correct due diligence.

Budddy

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:32 am - Dec 7, 2013


neepheid says: (918)
December 6, 2013 at 10:03 pm
&&&&&
I doubt very much if jack’s slimy hand scrawled the ramblings of Somers. He certainly wouldn’t have allowed him to criticise SDM or say ‘I have two years of minutes’. Jack is probably having a quiet coronary somewhere.
Like the msm, Mr Somers had never hear of Whyte & Green. Maybe he doesn’t do t’internet.

View Comment

billyj1Posted on10:35 am - Dec 7, 2013


Buddy-holly
Excellent post. Much appreciated by most, if not all on here.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on10:38 am - Dec 7, 2013


If they were to be de-listed would they revert to a private limited company, taking them away from the glare of being publicly traded and allowing more shenanigans behind the scenes.

Things like transferring assets, private sales of shares with no publicity, people holding large quantities without having to be named etc, borrowing against assets, pre sale of season tickets etc.

Or would there be a different result of the de-listing.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:43 am - Dec 7, 2013


Smugas says: (611)
December 7, 2013 at 10:09 am
1 0 Rate This

Sorry thought this was worth another post. It just struck me going over the review of the statement. There’s nothing litigious at all there. No 140 year history, no titles, clarity about the company being the club and even a passing nod to the unfounded merits of recreation. Mr somer’s maybe is smarter than the average bear after all.
%%%%%%%%
Maybe Soapy Somers had never heard of oldco, after all he hadn’t heard of Green, Whyte, Ahmad ‘or any other character in Rangers’ history’. Mind you he’s not concerned about jack’s contract but..
.Let me also say that Graham Wallace and I are beginning a complete review of every contract that is in place. You can imagine
that this is going to take weeks and then more time where contracts need to be changed.
Is Ally’s pay cut coming after the AGM?
Will Mr Somers be there after the AGM?
Who was Mr Somers not planning to sell Ibrox to?

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on10:55 am - Dec 7, 2013


I think Mr Sommers point about not selling Ibrox stadium is an interesting one. Bearing in mind he is Chairman of the PLC, not the Ltd Company.

The PLC he chairs could easily sell the club without selling Ibrox stadium.

The end result would be that TRFC would not own the stadium, but Mr Sommers would still have told the truth. TRFC would presumably then have to rent the stadium if it wanted to use it.

His statement looks as if Rangers are not selling Ibrox, it makes no comment on whether the PLC intend selling Rangers and just being a property company. Classic use of words to appear to say one thing whilst leaving an entirely different option open.

View Comment

tomtomPosted on11:08 am - Dec 7, 2013


Tif Finn says: (954)
December 7, 2013 at 10:55 am
0 0 Rate This

I think Mr Sommers point about not selling Ibrox stadium is an interesting one. Bearing in mind he is Chairman of the PLC, not the Ltd Company.

The PLC he chairs could easily sell the club without selling Ibrox stadium.

The end result would be that TRFC would not own the stadium, but Mr Sommers would still have told the truth. TRFC would presumably then have to rent the stadium if it wanted to use it.

His statement looks as if Rangers are not selling Ibrox, it makes no comment on whether the PLC intend selling Rangers and just being a property company. Classic use of words to appear to say one thing whilst leaving an entirely different option open.
=============================

Exactly. Ibrox is the jewel in the crown. Dispose of the loss-making part of the business for £1. Part of the deal is that they have to take a long term lease on the ground. If there are no takers then they can quite legitimately sell the ground as it has no further use as a stadium. After all without a club there are no fans to worry about.

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on11:10 am - Dec 7, 2013


Good question Tif Finn

What would happen if the company was 1. Suspended 2. De-listed?

thanks

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on11:15 am - Dec 7, 2013


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25274432

With this being the second time that CFC “fans” have trashed seats in a stadium within the last two seasons, I would hope that the book will be thrown at them, regardless of any outraged statements from the Club (as it should be for ANY multiple offender).

The ONLY thing which will stop this from occurring, in my opinion, is draconian measures against the Club. Fines, while damaging the business bottom line, have no real impact on the fans who commit the offences (and from a footballing perspective, precious little on the Club either) so, what can be done?

Closed door matches also penalise the opposition unless you only allow away fans in but then how can you really police that?

Points deductions might work, perhaps three for a first offence but then any more and it starts to ramp up. Again might be hard to police as people could try to manipulate but there has to be an element of self-policing to this.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:25 am - Dec 7, 2013


Tif Finn says: (954)

December 7, 2013 at 10:38 am

I don’t know the answer to that but suspect it might make another IPO for RIFC difficult, if not impossible. It would also incur the wrath of the institutional investors as they would be unable to sell their shares on the open market and have nothing to judge their value against. It might create a situation where the sum of the assets is worth a lot more than the sum of the shares. Whatever, it wouldn’t be good for RIFC, and consequently not good for TRFC either!

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:28 am - Dec 7, 2013


buddy_holly says: (84)

December 7, 2013 at 2:30 am

Sterling work that apart from raising the questions that you have, also supports Einstein’s thinking that a problem cannot be solved by the thinking that created it.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on11:42 am - Dec 7, 2013


Now that Charles is ,unlocked,Monday might be an interesting day on AIM,this might even frighten the bogeymen

View Comment

Comments are closed.