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

neepheidPosted on7:15 pm - Dec 8, 2013


GoosyGoosy says: (484)
December 8, 2013 at 6:32 pm

Recent comments by Somers fall easily into the same basket as those made by Green and Whyte etc
i.e. Barefaced halftruths made in the knowledge that they are only here for short term gain
_________________________

Well here’s a direct quote from Somers, that I believe will come back to haunt him-

“Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere four 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.”

Now that’s not a half truth by any stretch. It’s either a blatant lie, or the unvarnished truth. I will only say, without expressing a view, that I have yet to find a single person who believes it to be the unvarnished truth.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on7:15 pm - Dec 8, 2013


With all the recent talk of how inappropriate it is to make observations on freedom fighters, terrorists and politics at football grounds, it was interesting to see a minute’s silence observed at games yesterday for a (albeit highly praiseworthy) chap who, at one time or another, has been described as being active on all three of these fronts!

View Comment

erniePosted on7:18 pm - Dec 8, 2013


tomtom says: (516)

December 8, 2013 at 8:01 am

Exiled,

Ernie is also dead.
===================
I dinna post much but I’m still around.

View Comment

killiemadPosted on7:22 pm - Dec 8, 2013


I’ve been a sent a link to this http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/critics-blast-kilmarnock-debt-write-off-plans-1.162896
For the qualified experts here, is this possible?

My first reaction is confliction. As a Kilmarnock supporter it sounds like the answer to all our prayers. OK, it means Michael Johnston will stay and have a right to demand a pay-out if he is still required to leave. It feels like it would mean Killie can stop living day to day and plan for a future.

But, how can this be justified as a tax-payer? How many more clubs can just see their bank debts wiped out without consequence? It feels morally wrong.

It feels like it’s too good to be true, but kudos to Sunday Post for being the ones with the story.

If it’s nonsense and a joke, then well done, I’ve been done good and proper!

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on7:24 pm - Dec 8, 2013


neepheid says: (919)
December 8, 2013 at 7:15 pm
1 0 Rate This

GoosyGoosy says: (484)
December 8, 2013 at 6:32 pm

Recent comments by Somers fall easily into the same basket as those made by Green and Whyte etc
i.e. Barefaced halftruths made in the knowledge that they are only here for short term gain
_________________________

Well here’s a direct quote from Somers, that I believe will come back to haunt him-

“Let me say categorically, that until I joined the Board a mere four 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.”

Now that’s not a half truth by any stretch. It’s either a blatant lie, or the unvarnished truth. I will only say, without expressing a view, that I have yet to find a single person who believes it to be the unvarnished truth.

When I read the press release that is one of the statements which i most felt could not go unchallenged.

It is blatantly astonishing.

I doubt David Somers did not know what he was getting himself into.

Taking somers at his word, he was appointed with/without interview and did not do any due diligence on the company he was joining, before accepting a board position.

The cash must be good in this line of work!

Buddy

PS: edit messed up the quoting…

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on7:39 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Just an observation – one of the highlights of the Scottish Cup Final in 1988 was the showing of red cards to Maggie Thatcher to show her our opinion on many things – but primarily for her cuts on NHS.

MSM at the time applauded us all for doing this. No one said “hang on, should politics be mixed up with sport?”. Or did it suit everyone’s agenda at the time to have Celtic and Dundee Utd fans show our contempt for the elected PM at the time?

As I said before, my dad was a miner and I have little sympathy for her – and I don’t agree with the Green Brigade – however there seems a larger question of the lack of consistency here from SFA and MSM as usual as to when football stadia can be used for political gestures!

I’ll get my banner………….

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on7:54 pm - Dec 8, 2013


killiemad says: (58)
December 8, 2013 at 7:22 pm
0 0 Rate This

I’ve been a sent a link to this http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/critics-blast-kilmarnock-debt-write-off-plans-1.162896
For the qualified experts here, is this possible?

My first reaction is confliction. As a Kilmarnock supporter it sounds like the answer to all our prayers. OK, it means Michael Johnston will stay and have a right to demand a pay-out if he is still required to leave. It feels like it would mean Killie can stop living day to day and plan for a future.

But, how can this be justified as a tax-payer? How many more clubs can just see their bank debts wiped out without consequence? It feels morally wrong.

It feels like it’s too good to be true, but kudos to Sunday Post for being the ones with the story.

If it’s nonsense and a joke, then well done, I’ve been done good and proper!

Sorry if this seems churlish, but Kilmarnock FC would seem to be the most financially distressed club in the top division at present.

The bank offered the loans to KFC, they set the interest, they manage the ongoing position. Remember the Bank makes money off those interest payments servicing the debts.

The bank can always ask for the debts to be paid, however that would probably take kilmarnock FC into administration.

The bank can do a debt for equity swap and gain control of the Kilmarnock FC if it so wishes.

Th bank could sell the debt on to a third party who could do either of the above.

The fact that the banks shareholders may write some debt off is actually immaterial.

That does not mean i agree with it debt write downs, but the bank is probably writing down debt across many sectors, the value of that debt is staggering. Just look at the debt write down on MIH.

Buddy

PS: A classic MSM piece, no quotes from Kilmarnock FC or The Bank, only quotes from a taxpayer campaign group.

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on8:16 pm - Dec 8, 2013


ernie says: (21)
December 8, 2013 at 7:18 pm
17 0 Rate This
tomtom says: (516)
December 8, 2013 at 8:01 am
Exiled,
Ernie is also dead.
===================
I dinna post much but I’m still around.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Do you have short, fat hairy legs, a wig and a penchant for bad play writing?

View Comment

FinlochPosted on8:17 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Mr Somers is no innocent abroad.

He is no innocent at home either.

View Comment

killiemadPosted on8:25 pm - Dec 8, 2013


buddy_holly says: (92)

December 8, 2013 at 7:54 pm

That’s my point, Buddy. The debt was at a ridiculous level. But this deal sorts that. It can only be good for the club, surely?

It’s a tax campaigner that’s gone to the paper. It’s a bank decision, and KFC are the beneficiary of that decision. As a Kilmarnock share holder and supporter, I see it as a way out, but a dis-honourable way out.
If this is a new mentality from the banks and we are the first to benefit, then great, I’m sure there are others who will benefit too.
I was all set to write a bit about how Killie and Rangers show the dangers of clubs being owned by one individual, but that seems moot now that Michael Johnston has silenced his critics by pulling this off. How can I not support it. He and his new director Billy Bowie have taken on personal debt to secure the future of the club (and securing a high price to force him out)
As a tax payer and a football supporter, I think I would be angry if I was a Dundee United fan for example,it was happening to another club.
Personally, if this means that Killie will still be here in 3 years, then I’ll be delighted. Johnston needs to reach out to the wider community now though.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on8:31 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Have we got our KFC’s mixed up here

View Comment

iamacantPosted on8:34 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Tif Finn says: (976)
December 8, 2013 at 6:37 pm
8 0 Rate This
————————————————————————————-
I see Mrs Gourlay is also a director of Vicast while she is also listed as a trustee for the Rangers charity foundation. I thought the name rung a bell.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on8:45 pm - Dec 8, 2013


killiemad says: (59)
December 8, 2013 at 8:25 pm
2 0 Rate This

buddy_holly says: (92)

December 8, 2013 at 7:54 pm

That’s my point, Buddy. The debt was at a ridiculous level. But this deal sorts that. It can only be good for the club, surely?

It’s a tax campaigner that’s gone to the paper. It’s a bank decision, and KFC are the beneficiary of that decision. As a Kilmarnock share holder and supporter, I see it as a way out, but a dis-honourable way out.
If this is a new mentality from the banks and we are the first to benefit, then great, I’m sure there are others who will benefit too.
I was all set to write a bit about how Killie and Rangers show the dangers of clubs being owned by one individual, but that seems moot now that Michael Johnston has silenced his critics by pulling this off. How can I not support it. He and his new director Billy Bowie have taken on personal debt to secure the future of the club (and securing a high price to force him out)
As a tax payer and a football supporter, I think I would be angry if I was a Dundee United fan for example,it was happening to another club.
Personally, if this means that Killie will still be here in 3 years, then I’ll be delighted. Johnston needs to reach out to the wider community now though.

Firstly, you are obvious financially and emotionally attached to your club, Kilmarnock, feels like for a few years.

Occasionally, everybody deserves a good bit of luck.

RFC(IL) could have gone this way, in theory. It is one of the most bizarre acts of the SDM/Whyte /D & P pantomine that SDM/Whyte/D & P deliberately played out a situation involving stiffing HMRC who would not accept a CVA.

Be careful though, without full disclosure, it is not impossible that somep art of KFC as currently constituted perhaps is kept by the Bank or spun out. (Park Hotel perhaps, cannot remember its exact ownership details!)

Buddy

View Comment

killiemadPosted on9:15 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Buddy, you seem have a deeper understanding than my entry level knowledge of corporate finance.

Maybe you can shape these pieces of info into something meaningful. Michael Johnston has been the only director at Rugby Park for some years. A group of fans tried, with justification, to address that by first asking, then demanding for fan representation on the board. Johnston resisted, understandably in my personal opinion, as the groups making the demands had no financial strength behind them. Recently, however, a successful local businessman (I know, but really!) Billy Bowie invested a reported £250k and earned a seat on the board. MJ recently announced another deal with Bowie adding £1m in some form or other that to the balance sheet. At this time, a new company was born which had the Park Hotel in the name which has never been explained.
The report today states that MJ has taken on a £1m “soft” loan and Bowie £2m which satisfies the bank. Now we know that MJ does not have the wherewithal to secure a £3m loan on his own to do this deal, so the team-up with BB makes sense now.
My dilemma is, should they be lauded for taking on personal debt to help the club, or have the assets of the club been signed over to two individuals? Could that happen without an EGM if one of the parties has over 80% of the shares?

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on9:27 pm - Dec 8, 2013


killiemad says: (59) December 8, 2013 at 8:25 pm

It’s a tax campaigner that’s gone to the paper. It’s a bank decision, and KFC are the beneficiary of that decision. As a Kilmarnock share holder and supporter, I see it as a way out, but a dis-honourable way out.
————————————–
You make a fair point and good luck to you if it can be made to work for you. My own team would probably benefit most should Killie go into admin, but I wouldn’t wish it on anyone.

As the saying goes, if I owe the bank £100, then it’s my problem, but if I owe the bank £1,000,000, then it’s the bank’s problem.

Seriously though, this is something that needs to be looked at by the SPFL/SFA. FFP and the integrity of the game should demand that such shedding of debt should be subject to some sanctions. Whether that is a points deduction, transfer embargo or anything else is up for debate. You can’t really rule it out completely as clubs do come to compromise agreements from time to time re outstanding debts but I would guess that a an annual limit could be set for write offs that would be in proportion to turnover, e.g. 10%.

(I say that with the knowledge that Hearts benefited from debt write offs of £18M and debt for equity swaps of £22M during the Vlad years so we were always a basket case)

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:33 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Not entirely convinced that Graham Wallace is loving every minute in his new job:

http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/071213-Rangers-v-Ayr-Utd/G0000eGr7RUwUy6M/I0000cdnA5kijwbk/C0000YZvm4wM00Zs

http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/071213-Rangers-v-Ayr-Utd/G0000eGr7RUwUy6M/I0000sgaUDXRVjgE/C0000YZvm4wM00Zs

View Comment

neepheidPosted on9:35 pm - Dec 8, 2013


killiemad says: (60)
December 8, 2013 at 9:15 pm

My dilemma is, should they be lauded for taking on personal debt to help the club, or have the assets of the club been signed over to two individuals? Could that happen without an EGM if one of the parties has over 80% of the shares?
_____________
As a private company, there is not a lot of protection for minority shareholders. In any case, the holders of an 80% shareholding can obviously win any vote, so an EGM would be a bit of a waste of time.

On the deal itself, it is surely better from the club’s point of view to have the overall debt burden substantially reduced. As for the SP’s ravings about a “taxpayer owned bank”, I don’t remember the outrage from that particular quarter when Rangers were simply not paying tax at all. Maybe I blinked and missed it.

If the bank reckon that they get more from this deal than they would get by putting Killie into administration, then that is obviously a commercial decision in the best interests of taxpayers, so far as they have an interest. And finally, haven’t the Government recently reprivatised their stake in Llloyds/HBOS? Or did I dream that one up?

View Comment

killiemadPosted on9:36 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Agreed AJ.

If Killie get away with this, then half of me will be congratulating MJ for finding this loophole, and the other half will be raging at the SFA for still having such half-arsed rules that this can happen.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on9:55 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Good article from Angela Haggerty on Fri night events

http://angelahaggerty.com/zero-tolerance/

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on10:09 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Bill McMurdo’s blog has a rather interesting analysis of who Paul Murray etc are, from a business viewpoint.

Quite a lot of information here. Including the link to Bain and McLelland / Vicast.

http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2013/12/07/the-tall-weeds/

There is a scene in Wall Street where, after a bit of horse trading in stock with the much wealthier Lawrence Wildman, Gordon Gekko tells Bud Fox: “The key to the game is capital reserves. If you don’t have enough, you can’t piss in the tall weeds with the big dogs.”

I am reminded a little of that in the present Ibrox boardroom conflict.

A poster on Rangers Media has done a very thorough job as well as a great service to Rangers fans by compiling the relative track records of the Rangers Board members in contrast with the Requisitioners’ situations.

The records reveal a massive gulf between the two in favour of the Board side and present compelling reasons for Gers fans with a sense of fiscal responsibility to vote FOR the incumbent board at the AGM.

Here is the info from the poster on Rangers Media:-

I recently posted about the Murray myths around debt reduction and break even domestic policy however I see today he is still claiming he helped reduce debt. His fans appear to believe him as well, despite the facts disputing what he says.

Anyway, I thought I would take things a little further and look at the facts and figures of the people we are being asked to vote for. I know this type of thing normally bores people but I would urge you to read through Murray’s CV.

First an in-depth look at Paul Murray’s Directorships – past and present.

Source : http://companycheck.co.uk/director/907102823

Let’s start with his current active Directorships:

Delamore Holdings (2007 to present) ( -£5m Net worth) – A flower and plant wholesaler – Assets of £1.68m and Liabilities of £1.78m. Cash in bank depleted from £652k in 2008 to £184k in 2012 year end accounts. Points to note. 2012 was a £973k loss following on from a £733k loss in 2011 and a long term loan was taken out to repay short term commitments.

R. Delamore Limited (2007 to present) (£1.4m Net Worth) – A flower and plant wholesaler – Assets of £1.5m and Liabilities of £1.45m. Cash in bank depleted from £652k in 2008 to £0.8k in 2012 year end accounts. – Points to note. Due to cash depletion and a Going Concern issue, the company took out a new £2.25m loan to repay other loans and made a £628k loss last year.

MGI Investments Limited (2004 to present) ( -£64k Net Worth) – A Management Consultancy firm – Assets of £23k and liabilities of £90k. Cash in bank depleted from £91k in 2008 to £3.6k in 2012 year end accounts.

Vicast Limited (2013 to present) – A Business and Domestic Software Company – No information as no accounts filed but should be noted that fellow Directors are Martin Bain, John McLelland and Jacqueline Gourlay.

St Marys School, Melrose (2009 to present) – (£2.85m net worth) – Education – Assets of £99.6k and Liabilities of £91.2k. Cash in bank depleted from £85k in 2008 to £6.7k in 2012 year end accounts.

In summary, he holds 5 active directorships(there is a duplicate listing for MGI on the website) with a total Net Worth of Minus £814,000. Assets of £3.3m and liabilities of £3.4m. Total Cash of £189k.

Now let’s look at Past Directorships.

Urban Life Properties Limited (2003 to 2009) – Dissolved in 2009

RFC 2012 PLC (2007 to 2011) – In Liquidation

Wireless Systems International (2000 – 2002 ) – Dissolved in 2004

Martin Currie European Partners and Martin Currie Investment Management Limited (2003 – 2004) – Dissolved in 2007. Paul Murray was brought on board as MD of this business to launch a new £200m private equity fund. He only managed to raise 10% of target and left the business in 2004 after Currie suspended the launch of the fund.

3i PLC (September 1999 to April 2000) – Still active and a huge business with a £80m deficit of Liabilities v Assets

Scientia Ferovia Limited + Scientifics Group Service Limited + Harwell Scientifics + Atesta Trustees Limited + Atesta Holding Limited + Scientifics Limited (all 2005 to 2006) – All non trading.

It isn’t rocket science but looking at the above list, his Executive Directorships have been an absolute failure. 3 Dissolved, 1 liquidated, 6 non trading and the only 1 of any note, he only lasted less than 7 months in, and that was 13 years ago. Add that to his current directorships and we really need to ask…… WHY PAUL MURRAY ??

Anyway, lets now look at the total current directorships of Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson from the above source.

10 COMPANIES

NET WORTH = Minus £27.3m

ASSETS = £29.4m

LIABILITES = £86.3m

CASH in bank = £2.23 million

Now lets look at the other half which is principally Somers and Easdale.

13 COMPANIES

NET WORTH = £294.9m

ASSETS = £3.5 billion

LIABILITIES = £3.4 billion

CASH in bank = £1.3 billion

SUMMARY

The current record of Paul Murray, Malcolm Murray and Scott Murdoch is dreadful. Liabilities running at 300% to assets, dissolved companies, liquidations, cash only going one way over last 5 years in all of their companies yet we are expected to believe they are the team to take us forward.

Contrast that with Somers’ companies whose cash has multiplied by millions and hundreds of millions in his companies. Huge assets, huge network, just huge all round.

Why can’t the Sons of Struth, the RST, other supporters of these guys see this? I just don’t get it.

Here is Malcolm Murray’s and (William) Scott Murdoch’s information.

MALCOLM MURRAY

Current Directorships

MWB Business Exchange Limited (2011 to present) – ( -£3.2m Net worth) – Various holding companies – Assets of £23.6m and Liabilities of £47.3m. Cash in back depleted from £23.3m in 2008 to £850k in 2012 end of 2012 accounts.

Aye Ready Limited (2012 to present) – No accounts filed and no information but it’s a new company with himself and a Mrs Murray as directors. Why using Aye Ready ??

Past Directorships

GLG Partners UK Holdings (2002 to 2008) – Net worth of minus £8.2m with liabilities of £45m and assets of £295,000

Union Bank of Switzerland (Pensions) Limited – Non trading

SCOTT MURDOCH

Current Directorships.

CWM Partners and Limited – (2007 to present) – (£257k net worth) – Assets of £494k and liabilities of £246k. Cash in bank depleted from £1.2m in 2008 to £305k in 2012 accounts.

Loch Lomond Golf Limited – (2011 to present) – ( -£23.5m net worth) – Assets of £1.7m and liabilities of £34.3m. Cash in bank £843k as at 2012. No previous record of cash balances.

Jojam Coffee Limited – ( -£103k net worth) – Assets of £264k and liabilities of £1.07m. Cash in bank £100k – Company currently being liquidated.

Summary is net worth of MINUS £23.3m, Assets of £2.5m and liabilities of £35.6m. Total cash £1.19m

Past Directorships.

Morley Trading Limited (2008 to 2010) – Dissolved 2012

Carter Wassell Murdoch Limited (2002 to 2012) – Dissolved 2012

Eagle Buyer Limited (2010 to 2012) – Dissolved 2012

Frostfrench (Holdings) Limited (2007 to 2010) – Dissolved 2010

Frostfrench (Projects) Limited (2007 to 2009) – Dissolved 2009

Hoodlane Limited (1993 to 1998) – Dissolved 2004

Frostfrench Limited (2007 to 2011) – Dissolved 2011

Green Dust Limited (2008 to 2010) – Still active with net worth of £119k

Hope and Glory UK Limited (2008 to 2009) – Still active with net worth of minus £46k

Miller Harris Limited (2008 to 2009) – Still active with net worth of £1.6m

Brand Empire Limited + Brand Empire SPV1 Limited + DVD Box Limited (all 2009 to 2010) and all are non trading.

It is important for Rangers fans who are shareholders to have such information prior to any vote at the AGM.

The point is very simple – by any measuring system the track records of the present board members at Ibrox stack up very favourably against those seeking to oppose or remove them. This is a compelling business reason to back the board.

A couple of other issues need addressed.

Much has been made of David Somers having no knowledge of the major players at Ibrox over the past couple of years. It may come as a surprise and even be a little bit hurtful to bluenoses but for millions of people the goings-on at RFC have zero interest.

Seeing as how Scott Murdoch questioned the independence of the new Rangers Chairman, it would be safe to say that his having no conscious knowledge of the recent events and people involved up until recently is very convincing evidence of his independence.

Furthermore, independence is maybe something Murdoch would be best not mentioning as this extract from the Financial reporting Council Corporate Governance Code could pose a problem for the Murrays in terms of independence:-

Code Provisions

B.1.1. The board should identify in the annual report each non-executive director it considers to be

independent

. The board should determine whether the director is independent in character and

judgement and whether there are relationships or circumstances which are likely to affect, or could

appear to affect, the director’s judgement. The board should state its reasons if it determines that a

director is independent notwithstanding the existence of relationships or circumstances which may

appear relevant to its determination, including if the director:

 has been an employee of the company or group within the last five years;

 has, or has had within the last three years, a material business relationship with the

company either directly, or as a partner, shareholder, director or senior employee of a

body that has such a relationship with the company;

Rangers fans can have confidence in the board going by track record alone. The fact that Rangers FC is run by a PLC brings accountability in itself.

As David Somers said the other day, bluenoses should not be scared of bogey men and their lurid tales of destruction and doom.

It could be reasonably argued that the biggest problem Rangers have at present is not the traditional external enemies but those “within” whose irrational hatred of the board surpasses any love for the club.

That hatred is now reaching dangerous levels and it is the opinion of several seasoned Ibrox observers of my acquaintance that it is only a matter of time before it erupts into violence.

NB The information and figures quoted here are taken from reliable sources. Any inaccuracy is unintentional. Opinions of others quoted on this blog are not necessarily my own.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on10:10 pm - Dec 8, 2013


killiemad says: (61)
December 8, 2013 at 9:15 pm
4 0 Rate This

Buddy, you seem have a deeper understanding than my entry level knowledge of corporate finance.

Maybe you can shape these pieces of info into something meaningful. Michael Johnston has been the only director at Rugby Park for some years. A group of fans tried, with justification, to address that by first asking, then demanding for fan representation on the board. Johnston resisted, understandably in my personal opinion, as the groups making the demands had no financial strength behind them. Recently, however, a successful local businessman (I know, but really!) Billy Bowie invested a reported £250k and earned a seat on the board. MJ recently announced another deal with Bowie adding £1m in some form or other that to the balance sheet. At this time, a new company was born which had the Park Hotel in the name which has never been explained.
The report today states that MJ has taken on a £1m “soft” loan and Bowie £2m which satisfies the bank. Now we know that MJ does not have the wherewithal to secure a £3m loan on his own to do this deal, so the team-up with BB makes sense now.
My dilemma is, should they be lauded for taking on personal debt to help the club, or have the assets of the club been signed over to two individuals? Could that happen without an EGM if one of the parties has over 80% of the shares?

Thank you for the personal compliment.

I am not qualified in the financial direction apart from being able to understand capitalism and the financial instruments i have to handle personally, savings, debt, mortgage, cash flow and cost benefit analysis. I volunteer and as a volunteer I am a serial treasurer, I have had some strange dealings with the banks.

As an employee, through a number of employers I have had to become acquainted with the details of capitalism and how various business operate. PLCs, private companies, balance sheets, etc,.,.

I have always had a thirst for knowledge, it is to the great credit of a number of individuals and blogs that my curiosity has led me to understanding that allows me to fit many parts together.

Obviously as often stated by paul mcconville, the RFC(IL)/TRFC joined to administration/liquidation/phoenixism has taught me lots about the mechanics of business, commerce and the pursuit of filthy lucre!

The park hotel thing was a hunch as a tradeable asset, that i believe is profit making.

Beyond that would require a reasonably serious amount of effort.

But every marathon begins with one step so checking on companies house
THE KILMARNOCK FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED
RUGBY PARK
KILMARNOCK
AYRSHIRE
KA1 2DP
Company No. SC006219

I laughed out loud at the “THE”….. oh the hilarity!

AS a private company it is even harder to dig through the detail.

As a shareholder ( i believe in the private company ) you should be in possession of more easily accessible information.

John clarke friday evening (and others previously) have shown how to maximise the information on the actions of a company as declared at companies house)

as follows:

john clarke says: (1418)
December 7, 2013 at 12:51 am
12 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)

I thank you for the compliment which is to many beyond myself ( quite a few are one here!).

I thank you for engaging and engaging openly and genuinely with your views, worries, hopes and fears.

Scottish fooball needs a strong kilmarnock (with appropriate copyright to redlichtie!)

Buddy

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on10:17 pm - Dec 8, 2013


killiemad says: (61)

December 8, 2013 at 9:36 pm

the other half will be raging at the SFA for still having such half-arsed rules that this can happen.
*******************

That last part is the part that has me upset.

We had apparently no rules in place to deal with a liquidation of a major team in the top division – even after Gretna and Airdrie, no rules were put in place. Now that the new SPFL has come up, next time the event will be governed entirely at the SPFL boards discretion. Now consider that!

After LNS ruling, he made specific mention about lack of clarity in SFA rules – so that after allowing for Bryson’s unique perspective that even if a registration was done erroneously, it according to Bryson could not be undone once done, LNS noted there were no rules and regulations there to ensure how it could be undone. Still nothing.

Which makes you wonder if they are waiting for the UTT to come along before doing any changes since changes made now may be enforceable once UTT rules that the loans were indeed payments. Especially if you factor in the WTC which already determined and was accepted by RFC-NIL in their terms of settlement, that these were payments outside of the contracts registered with SFA. Also, HMRC noted PAYE was paid on the exact amount registered with SFA contract but not on the extra payments to Flo/De Boer – which along with the repeated denial by RFC-NIL of the existence of the side letters and any extra payments ever being made, made HMRC come to the obvious conclusion that RFC-NIL knew full well what they were doing was illegal. It was all done outside of player registration rules governing all payments to be disclosed at time of registration with full knowledge of RFC-NIL in order to cover up the illegal tax scheme. And yes MSM – please note that the WTC was determined to be an illegal tax scheme since RFC-NIL admitted to it – in much the same manner Dave King’s troubles were also criminal offences!

However LNS never got to agree with HMRC’s conclusions because it was moved swiftly outside of his remit all of a sudden without much fanfare – and so Bryson’s arguments would not need to be applied to registrations that were erroneous due to the payments not being correctly disclosed at the time of registration – knowingly – by RFC-NIL.

There has not been any changes to any of the rules for some reason.

So either SFA think LNS decided their rules were watertight

OR

we are waiting for the UTT before we do any changes………

Since LNS made it very clear he thought their rules were far from watertight, in the name of the old street anthem, “Oh Why Are We Waiting…….”

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on10:26 pm - Dec 8, 2013


If KIlmarnock can come to some sort of arrangement between themselves and a major creditor then that is a matter between Kilmarnock and that creditor.

So long as there are no underhand dealing like there were with David Murray / Gavin Masterton / MIH / BOS.

If it is a straightforward business decision for both parties and mutually beneficial then so be it.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on10:35 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Buddy
” Scottish fooball needs a strong kilmarnock (with appropriate copyright to redlichtie!)”
=========================================

Nae problem fae me, Buddy. Totally with you on that one.

Tif Finn also sums it up well.

RL

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on10:43 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Tif Finn says: (978)
December 8, 2013 at 10:09 pm
3 0 Rate This

Bill McMurdo’s blog has a rather interesting analysis of who Paul Murray etc are, from a business viewpoint.

Quite a lot of information here. Including the link to Bain and McLelland / Vicast.

Tif Finn,

That would seem to be a lot of research which mcmurdo is not validating only passing on.

Does seem to reflect an agenda of forms, because it suitably forgets the current board have spent the IPO money and burned through the season book money.

Missing is the current RIFC board incumbents plan to stem the losses.

The losses at circa £1m GBP per month, (£38,000 per day} in a company with no overdraft cannot go on for more than a few moths from here.

This would put RIFC in a problem with its subsidiary TRFC.

It would leave TRFC/RIFC as a hostage to events if season books are boycotted,l if we get to the season books being on sale.

Buddy

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on10:50 pm - Dec 8, 2013


To be fair the current board, or at least a lot of it, are fairly new and were nowhere near Rangers PLC when it was hemorrhaging money. I realise it probably still is, but that doesn’t change the point that most of them were nowhere near the holding company for most of it’s existence.

The point with regard how that hemorrhaging is going to be stopped has not really been covered by anyone involved. The current fight seems to be about who will be in control and is ignoring how they will solve the fundamental problems.

In all honesty I think it really has got to the stage where the only decision is who will be in charge when the PLC (or club) has an insolvency event.

View Comment

Rufus Otis and HugoPosted on11:06 pm - Dec 8, 2013


I apologise if, in the manner of Paul McCartney waking up one morning and thinking someone else had written Yesterday, someone else has stated this before. Isn’t Paul Murray’s boast that he was a member of a board who reduced Rangers FC (IL)’s debt to £18m a bit like a bank robber returning some of the loot and expecting a pat on the back for not keeping all the cash?

The laughable Paul Murray is one of my pet topics and, as I’ve had a few drinks tonight , I apologise if this post appears a bit senseless. No doubt I’ll be appalled in the morning when I read it back. All TUs appreciated.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on11:20 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Rufus Otis and Hugo says: (11)
December 8, 2013 at 11:06 pm
3 1 Rate This

I apologise if, in the manner of Paul McCartney waking up one morning and thinking someone else had written Yesterday, someone else has stated this before. Isn’t Paul Murray’s boast that he was a member of a board who reduced Rangers FC (IL)’s debt to £18m a bit like a bank robber returning some of the loot and expecting a pat on the back for not keeping all the cash?

The laughable Paul Murray is one of my pet topics and, as I’ve had a few drinks tonight , I apologise if this post appears a bit senseless. No doubt I’ll be appalled in the morning when I read it back. All TUs appreciated.

Yes, the continuing rewriting of history continues.

The RFC(IL) manager and board at the time were outspoken about “the bank” and especially donald muir i think running the club, and curtailing costs.

Paul Murray at the time a non-executive at the time s job was to scrutinise the executive directors acts in the best of the shareholders.

So, a company which goes into administration within 1 year after he left the board, is not much of an endorsement.

As a (professional) accountant and non exec director should he have been speaking out about the tax avoidance/evasion and the non provision of money to cover the WTC and BTC?

Buddy

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:38 pm - Dec 8, 2013


First of all a good piece by Gordon Waddell. 3 years too late but better late than never. Basically the DR is aligning itself behind the fans whilst sitting on the fence at the same time. Interestingly the bears have the chance now for a dry run. Pick a game, boycott it and show the board how many fans you speak for. Won’t hurt the team with the lead they’ve got and its not as though an insolvency event is coming now is it! Trouble is there’s a pesky world record winning run on the go and that will inevitably mean more to them,until the money runs out.

Final comment before turning in. You can berate the commercialism and ridiculous finances of the EPL all you want. Damn that Arsenal Everton game was good.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on11:42 pm - Dec 8, 2013


Buddy, you’re forgetting the ‘get out clause’ that such professional accountants and NEDs have been able to use :

“A big boy did it an ran away…”

As to who I would like to see in control of placing RIFC and/or TRFC in administration Tif then it surely has to be CW for fun on so many levels.

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on12:42 am - Dec 9, 2013


Tif Finn says: (979)

December 8, 2013 at 10:50 pm
The point with regard how that hemorrhaging is going to be stopped has not really been covered by anyone involved. The current fight seems to be about who will be in control and is ignoring how they will solve the fundamental problems.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Heres an alternative view
The Spivs aim is a long term lease of the assets to Real Rangers Men using some offshore entity which can then sell on the assets to a legitimate property business when the heat dies down
This aim is more quickly and more easily achieved by paying lip service to TRFC fans not by listening to them
The idea that proper businessmen will be charged with turning around RIFC has no justification in recent behaviour of those in control. These are Spivs not honest men.
Sadly for our decent Bear friends
The company they give their ST money to is infested with Spivs. People who are half way through milking it to the maximum. The future can be deduced from past behaviour
The simplest way to forecast events is to assume the worst.
i.e.
Expect lots of spin and believe the opposite
Because
The Spivs goal is diametrically opposed to the wishes of TRFC fans

View Comment

GeronimosCadillacPosted on12:52 am - Dec 9, 2013


ianagain says: (49)
December 7, 2013 at 7:46 pm
As a ‘well supporter I can say nothing about the damage at FP as our own little bunch of neds did the self same thing at NDP earlier in the week.
I agree with Cosgrove. These groups enliven the grounds but when they think they are bigger than the club it all implodes.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Not condoning The Neds but if we had safe standing areas there would be no seats to wreck. Also, young boys get a bit boisterous and stuff gets broken. Is it really any worse than that? I don’t see organised “Firms” battling it out near the ground or in Stations etc these days. so it could be worse.

View Comment

GeronimosCadillacPosted on1:08 am - Dec 9, 2013


GoosyGoosy says: (485)
December 8, 2013 at 4:21 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I’m not a lawyer (thank Allah for that) but the contract does not need to be cancelled. It can be varied by mutual consent.

View Comment

GeronimosCadillacPosted on1:20 am - Dec 9, 2013


killiemad says: (61)
December 8, 2013 at 7:22 pm

I’ve been a sent a link to this http://www.sundaypost.com/news-views/scotland/critics-blast-kilmarnock-debt-write-off-plans-1.162896
For the qualified experts here, is this possible?

My first reaction is confliction. As a Kilmarnock supporter it sounds like the answer to all our prayers. OK, it means Michael Johnston will stay and have a right to demand a pay-out if he is still required to leave. It feels like it would mean Killie can stop living day to day and plan for a future.

But, how can this be justified as a tax-payer? How many more clubs can just see their bank debts wiped out without consequence? It feels morally wrong.

It feels like it’s too good to be true, but kudos to Sunday Post for being the ones with the story.

If it’s nonsense and a joke, then well done, I’ve been done good and proper!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For one thing I never even knew the Sunday Post still existed. Surely their readership can only be counted in 100’s these days. Anyway as to the debt write off suggestion. I quote a former Radio Clyde Call in Supremo and can only say “Utter Bunkum”. They have a lot of land and a hotel. So why write off debt in exchange for nothing?

View Comment

GeronimosCadillacPosted on1:35 am - Dec 9, 2013


Smugas says: (615)
December 8, 2013 at 11:38 pm

First of all a good piece by Gordon Waddell. 3 years too late but better late than never. Basically the DR is aligning itself behind the fans whilst sitting on the fence at the same time. Interestingly the bears have the chance now for a dry run. Pick a game, boycott it and show the board how many fans you speak for. Won’t hurt the team with the lead they’ve got and its not as though an insolvency event is coming now is it! Trouble is there’s a pesky world record winning run on the go and that will inevitably mean more to them,until the money runs out.

Final comment before turning in. You can berate the commercialism and ridiculous finances of the EPL all you want. Damn that Arsenal Everton game was good.
=+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Can’t agree with your DR analysis. They pinned their hopes on McColl et al and are sorely disappointed that he didn’t come through. Wonder why?

Now, without Real Rangers Leaders they have activated the aroused Fan option – even calling for them to UNITE. More pantomime to come and as for Sommers – mental statement on Friday.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on2:03 am - Dec 9, 2013


The dangers of stepping away from a blog to do an honest months work!
Only just heard about the passing of Paul McConville.
Shocked.
I am no Celtic fan. But… as with corsica… I felt I knew the mans mind from reading his work. And it was a friendly place full of education and thoughtfulness.
Paul… I am all the dumber for your passing… grrrrrr! 😳
Sincere condolences to all priveleged enough to know him on a personal level.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on2:54 am - Dec 9, 2013


GoosyGoosy says: (485)
December 9, 2013 at 12:42 am

The future can be deduced from past behaviour
The simplest way to forecast events is to assume the worst.
i.e.
Expect lots of spin and believe the opposite
Because
The Spivs goal is diametrically opposed to the wishes of TRFC fans
_____
Goosy – fine summation
Looking at the Supporters red-card protest – let’s say enough withdraw finance for spivs
What then – administration – is that so bad?
Well – if no Duffers types involved – & all straight and above board [That’s a big ask btw]

Lord Cardigan [+ Others] get their club back [lessons learned one would hope] & debt free
Spivs financially shafted [liked typing that]
Spiv `deals` all toast [liked typing that too]

AND – the big Bonus – Admins & Liquidators report on recent behaviour of Directors Spivery
& hopefully, jail time for the lot of them
& would bring up the SFAs nonsense[s] (plural)
& expose the “independent inquiries” lark[s] (plural)
& expose the PR Slug[s] (plural)
& expose the S[Shameful]MSM (yes plural again)
.
But
20-30 points deduction – well – but a Fresh Start for everyone
&
Spivs are out – Rids Scottish Football of financial scourge & rotten characters

& mrstwopanda will be happy 😉
.
Not seeing any downsides on this

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on7:13 am - Dec 9, 2013


I wonder if any of the smsm will condemn this ?

http://www.scotzine.com/2013/12/sick-rangers-yobs-post-death-list-on-twitter/?

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:22 am - Dec 9, 2013


Re the story about Lloyds allegedly coming to an arrangement with Kilmarnock to reduce the debt levels. It is inevitable where this is going to go, and bank / customer relationship rules will prevent any outright clarity on the matter. We will be at the mercy of our all singing, all dancing sports hacks on this one, and we all know the rubbish that will be written and spoken, and what the subject matter will be.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:43 am - Dec 9, 2013


jimlarkin says: (678)
December 9, 2013 at 7:13 am
0 0 Rate This

I wonder if any of the smsm will condemn this ?

http://www.scotzine.com/2013/12/sick-rangers-yobs-post-death-list-on-twitter/?
———–

Bravo Scotzine for highlighting this.

Journos are catching up with some aspects of the Ibrox story:

http://www.scotsman.com/news/stuart-bathgate-fans-of-clubs-ought-to-mobilise-1-3225380

Problem with above article is: What if it’s the VBs who are the ones vying for control?

Not a group I know much about so I had a wee gander at their site. Celtic obsessives, apparently:

http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on8:17 am - Dec 9, 2013


GeronimosCadillac says: (118) December 9, 2013 at 12:52 am

Not condoning The Neds but if we had safe standing areas there would be no seats to wreck. Also, young boys get a bit boisterous and stuff gets broken. Is it really any worse than that? I don’t see organised “Firms” battling it out near the ground or in Stations etc these days. so it could be worse.
——————————————————————
You are wrong on both counts. Vandalism is vandalism wherever it happens.

I think there are signs of increasing trouble with fans of a number of clubs once again, certainly nowhere near as bad as the 70s or 80s, but the undercurrent is still there.
………and an example from this weekend………
http://news.stv.tv/stirling-central/252131-ten-arrests-over-disorder-before-falkirk-vs-raith-rovers-match/

Ten people were arrested in connection with football-related disorder ahead of a match between Falkirk and Raith Rovers.

The alleged incident occurred prior to the league game at Falkirk’s Westfield Stadium on Saturday.

A Police Scotland spokesman said: “Ten persons were arrested in Camelon, Falkirk, further to football-related disorder preceding the Falkirk v Raith Rovers league fixture at Westfield Stadium.

“All those involved will appear at Falkirk Sheriff Court from police custody.”

The match saw Falkirk triumph over Raith Rovers with a score of 3-1.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on8:47 am - Dec 9, 2013


easyJambo says: (603)
December 9, 2013 at 8:17 am

I think there are signs of increasing trouble with fans of a number of clubs once again, certainly nowhere near as bad as the 70s or 80s, but the undercurrent is still there.
——
I think you’re right. It’s unfortunate that there are currently plenty of headlines concerning fans of the big Glasgow teams. I’m sure there is some kind of self-inflicted psychological pressure on the average small-team ned to emulate these people.

Certainly it doesn’t encourage a chap to take his young sons to the fitba – a fact of which I’m sure clubs are quite aware. It seems to me that we’re at one of those generation shifts again, whereby clubs need to attract a new cohort of young fans. As said many times, there are plenty of Saturday afternoon entertainment options where you don’t run the risk of ending up in an ambulance.

At least the Broch and Deveronvale are friendly places to go! 🙂

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on9:02 am - Dec 9, 2013


Can we look through the round window today (from ibrox)

. . . Today’s word is

. . . Liquidation

[Liquidation. ~ The means by which the business activities of a company are brought to an end. The process is similar to the administration of a deceased estate, however a company may not be declared bankrupt under the Bankruptcy Act but must be wound up in accordance with the Corporations Law. Liquidation is sometimes synonymous with winding up].

n.Bust

Lest we (like the smsm hacks) forget !

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on9:16 am - Dec 9, 2013


easyJambo says: (603)
December 9, 2013 at 8:17 am

Vandalism is vandalism wherever it happens.
—————————————————————

I have never been one for excuses although I do believe there are certain factors that have to be taken into consideration when a crime has been committed, I am also an advocate of the wait and see tribe as it is easy to jump in when anything in life goes against the norm.

But I agree with you about this: “Vandalism is vandalism wherever it happens”. I would also add that violence is violence no matter the person(s).

Anti-social behaviour is not limited to louts and neds, just look at some of the casual groups of the 80’s, some of those were well educated and financially sound groups of people.

I don’t know if The GB were responsible for this act but I don’t really care, all I know is that it was a group of fans representing the club I support and it makes me cringe when I see it. This has nothing to do with football; it is about a group of people who think they are above the law, who have no respect for the club, no respect for the authorities, no respect for fellow fans and most worrying, no respect for themselves!

I buy direct from the club in the hope that the few Euros I might have saved buying elsewhere would actually go to the club; it angers me that these guys are wasting that money with their ongoing stupidity.

View Comment

TommyBPosted on9:24 am - Dec 9, 2013


Please don’t think for a minute that I’m on here attempting in any way to defend or condone the mindless idiots who actually damaged the seating at Fir Park. However, the media coverage has been totally disproportionate and every day we see the number of damaged seats grow; this morning a figure of 200 has been talked about. Maybe these figures are being uncovered by the hard work of our tireless investigative journalists who never leave a stone unturned in pursuit of the truth. They must have been too busy with their abacus over the last couple of days, as they appear to have completely missed the Death List being carried by the people who think they are. Surely the smsm are not running scared of this story, or are our illustrious pressmen worried that their own names would be added to the list for bringing it up at all?

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:00 am - Dec 9, 2013


twopanda says: (451)
December 9, 2013 at 2:54 am

Looking at the Supporters red-card protest – let’s say enough withdraw finance for spivs
What then – administration – is that so bad?
Well – if no Duffers types involved – & all straight and above board [That’s a big ask btw]

Lord Cardigan [+ Others] get their club back [lessons learned one would hope] & debt free
Spivs financially shafted [liked typing that]
Spiv `deals` all toast [liked typing that too]
============

If the fans withdraw support, then administration is inevitable, but that will not hurt the spivs one little bit. It will be TRFC that goes into admin, and it will go into admin owing over £20m to its parent company, RIFC PLC. Ibrox and Murray Park will be transferred to RIFC to satisfy the debt, and the spivs will be left owning a majority stake in a listed property company with no money pit football team sucking out over £15m per annum. I think the share price would go up, in that scenario.

TRFC would be cut loose, and no doubt some consortium of real Rangers men will ride to the rescue at that point, when a rescue costs them nothing up front. Then the real Rangers men will appeal to the loyal fans for the cash needed to run the club, maybe through an issue of shares in TRFC. Although whether TRFC can ever be viable while paying rent for Ibrox is extremely doubtful in my view. Cost cutting on a massive scale would be required, and clearly that just isn’t the Rangers way.

View Comment

normanbatesmumfcPosted on10:47 am - Dec 9, 2013


Like many on here I cannot believe the “rationale” for the delay in the dog whistler’s pay cut, especially given the rate the clubs coffers are emptying. My take on it is this;

Despite the Serial Liar/Yorkshire Kipper (Green’s) statement that he would happily sign the super one on a 25 year contract, I believe a 1 year rolling deal, or possibly 2 year initial deal was agreed. I would guess that the “to be honest” one’s offer to reduce his salary, will be linked to an extension of his contract for possibly another 2 or 3 years until they reach the top half of the SPFL like the previous club.

The fact the wage cut was not immediately seized on by the money men suggests there is something in the offer they don’t like. The quiz show captain can then declare with integrity that he has offered to take a pay cut, conveniently leaving out any other terms and conditions that may be linked to the offer.

No facts to back this up, purely speculation given what has gone on before.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:24 am - Dec 9, 2013


GeronimosCadillac says: (118)
December 9, 2013 at 1:35 am

Can’t agree with your DR analysis. They pinned their hopes on McColl et al and are sorely disappointed that he didn’t come through. Wonder why?
=======================
I’ll disagree with you back! They did not pin their hopes on McColl. They were told (specifically by whom we know not) to pin their hopes on McColl by the blazers as the RFC sans debt re-emerged into (insert division as appropriate). Two problems. Firstly RFC sans debt means jack when they’re still losing 14m per annum (a fact not lost on Kevin Kyle on Saturday but by everyone else apparently) . Secondly, Green saw the amateur spivs coming a mile off and double bluffed (in fact triple bluffed – since in doing so he convinced the mob that they bluffing CW at the time). As a result RFC will re-emerge (yay for you Bryce) as Waddell describes, but they run a very real risk of doing it sans debt, but sans assets too.

Finally, someone mentioned the hilarlty value in Craig Whyte controlling an admin situation. I make no apologies for repeating this. CW will not be controlling anything. He has the small matter of a 20m personal guarantee to Ticketus to deal with. And I don’t think them ticketus lads are too chuffed about the fact.

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on11:26 am - Dec 9, 2013


normanbatesmumfc says: (45)
December 9, 2013 at 10:47 am
7 2 Rate This

Like many on here I cannot believe the “rationale” for the delay in the dog whistler’s pay cut, especially given the rate the clubs coffers are emptying. My take on it is this;

Despite the Serial Liar/Yorkshire Kipper (Green’s) statement that he would happily sign the super one on a 25 year contract, I believe a 1 year rolling deal, or possibly 2 year initial deal was agreed. I would guess that the “to be honest” one’s offer to reduce his salary, will be linked to an extension of his contract for possibly another 2 or 3 years until they reach the top half of the SPFL like the previous club.

The fact the wage cut was not immediately seized on by the money men suggests there is something in the offer they don’t like. The quiz show captain can then declare with integrity that he has offered to take a pay cut, conveniently leaving out any other terms and conditions that may be linked to the offer.

No facts to back this up, purely speculation given what has gone on before.
============================================================

Very good point norman (was it your mum who asked you to post)

Maybe Alistair’s advisers had a clause inserted whereby he would be compensated in some manner, if
(a) he needed to reduce his yearly salary
(b) the share price was below the IPO price on the date of the lock-in ending ?

? ? ? ? ? ?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:36 am - Dec 9, 2013


Just on the crowd trouble thing. Firstly well done to the GB lads for bringing it to my attention on here that it wasn’t them (although I know there’s been some statements since). Unfortunately if you create smoke (no pun intended) with provocative banners (and Bobby Sands at Parkhead will always be so whether you like it or not) then don’t be surprised if you get blamed when there’s a fire.

I agree with Angus, which is not a common theme on this board. 😆 I sense a growing trend in the nastiness – nothing like the organised buffoonery of the 70’s 80’s but an uptrend none the less. Time to stamp it out now, or at the very least make sure it is never in the name, and certainly not the premises, of any of the clubs. They are much better resourced with CCTV these days to deal with it.

I would say in their defence (which is still no excuse btw) its one of the risks you run as an authority if rules are clearly abandoned and exploited.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on11:40 am - Dec 9, 2013


Why dont they just put a new contract down in front of Ally and as per history he will just sign it,after all he doesnt do walking away.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:48 am - Dec 9, 2013


twopanda says: (451)
December 9, 2013 at 2:54 am

Looking at the Supporters red-card protest – let’s say enough withdraw finance for spivs
What then – administration – is that so bad?
Well – if no Duffers types involved – & all straight and above board [That’s a big ask btw]

Lord Cardigan [+ Others] get their club back [lessons learned one would hope] & debt free
Spivs financially shafted [liked typing that]
Spiv `deals` all toast [liked typing that too]

AND – the big Bonus – Admins & Liquidators report on recent behaviour of Directors Spivery
& hopefully, jail time for the lot of them
& would bring up the SFAs nonsense[s] (plural)
& expose the “independent inquiries” lark[s] (plural)
& expose the PR Slug[s] (plural)
& expose the S[Shameful]MSM (yes plural again)
.
But
20-30 points deduction – well – but a Fresh Start for everyone
&
Spivs are out – Rids Scottish Football of financial scourge & rotten characters

& mrstwopanda will be happy
=============================================
the more I read your post the more a strategy seems to emerge. Firstly admin 1 which was never going to be anything other than liquidation because of the principle creditor. Then, the shenanigans phase where deals are done and myth kites are flown. Then a nice cleansing admin where the cardigans of this world get their cherished baby back (pretending desperately that the bolt through the neck and other zombie fixtures haven’t changed the nature of the babe at all). And if they can do it with an ineffectual pioints deduction because, in fairness to their efforts to create a points margin, then as you say what is not to like.

Ah. The stadium bit. Bolcox.

View Comment

theoldcoursePosted on12:02 pm - Dec 9, 2013


I always have a chuckle at the word “requisitioners” trotted out in the broadcast and print media. A word I had never actually used, nor seen, in normal daily conversation. Its almost as if the word “rebels” is somehow forbidden language down Govan way 🙂

View Comment

ForresDeePosted on12:04 pm - Dec 9, 2013


theoldcourse says: (43)
December 9, 2013 at 12:02 pm
1 1 Rate This

I always have a chuckle at the word “requisitioners” trotted out in the broadcast and print media. A word I had never actually used, nor seen, in normal daily conversation. Its almost as if the word “rebels” is somehow forbidden language down Govan way 🙂

————————–

Skint scroungers is probably more apt.

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on12:09 pm - Dec 9, 2013


On Friday, although you will not have read it in the papers, a ‘Rangers Blogger’ was convicted of the charge of committing a religiously aggravated breach of the peace against the journalist Angela Haggerty.

David Limond, brother of BBC Scotland funny man Brian, will be sentenced in January and was told by the Sheriff that he was considering a custodial sentence.

The offence occurred in Mr Limond’s internet radio show in which Ms Haggerty was featured in ‘the Taig of the Day’ slot.

Can I just sat that David Limond is a scum bag, an utter, utter scum bag!

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/david-limond/

View Comment

whispererPosted on12:33 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Danish Pastry says: (1774)
December 9, 2013 at 7:43 am
14 0 Rate This

http://www.vanguardbears.co.uk

DP had a wee gander at the VB site … read the whole page you linked to …
and interestingly … agreed wholeheartly with the very last sentence !!!

>>> The actions of the Scottish media have created an animosity between the clubs, the likes I have never seen in forty years, and should the two clubs meet, the blood will be on their hands! <<<

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on12:41 pm - Dec 9, 2013


No1 Bob says: (66)
December 9, 2013 at 12:09 pm
9 0 Rate This

On Friday, although you will not have read it in the papers, a ‘Rangers Blogger’ was convicted of the charge of committing a religiously aggravated breach of the peace against the journalist Angela Haggerty.

David Limond, brother of BBC Scotland funny man Brian, will be sentenced in January and was told by the Sheriff that he was considering a custodial sentence.

The offence occurred in Mr Limond’s internet radio show in which Ms Haggerty was featured in ‘the Taig of the Day’ slot.

Can I just sat that David Limond is a scum bag, an utter, utter scum bag!

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/david-limond/

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

well done to phil

a real journalist at work

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:50 pm - Dec 9, 2013


You are an SPL lawyer looking at commisioning an investigation into Rangers use of ebts

What would think if you saw evidence that showed when Rangers embarked on them ( in1999), who was part of the remuneration policy group who actually set up the first one and that the two that followed had the words fraudulent, neglect and deliberate all used in the one sentence by HMRC?

What if you knew that this evidence showed that not only were side letters concealed from the SFA but were concealed deliberately from HMRC?

Finally what if you knew by 2012 that the payments revealed with this evidence were irregular and equivalent of tax evasion?

What would you have done had the information you requested been supplied? How would it have affected the terms of the Commision?

Perhaps they and the SPFL should be asked as it appears witholding evidence of guilt came naturally to those running Rangers, some of whom are still in positions at the SFA.

Ask your club to reopen the LNS enquiry to see if we are really dealing here with the extreme case LNS was led to believe ( because of witheld information) he was not being asked to look at.

Does Bryson’s testimony excuse extreme behaviour simply because rule makers did not contemplate that a member club would indulge in it to the far reaching extent that Ranges did?

fraud.neglect. deliberate.

http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/?p=12648442&t=8837773

What is more important here? Covering up lies with more lies to save the reputation of two failed organisations joined at the hip , or cleaning up Scottish football?
Is their no journo in Scotland prepared to address this issue? Are there no clubs in the SPFL ready to pick up the collective broom and start sweeping?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:55 pm - Dec 9, 2013


neepheid says: (921)
December 9, 2013 at 10:00 am

If the fans withdraw support, then administration is inevitable, but that will not hurt the spivs one little bit. It will be TRFC that goes into admin, and it will go into admin owing over £20m to its parent company, RIFC PLC. Ibrox and Murray Park will be transferred to RIFC to satisfy the debt, and the spivs will be left owning a majority stake in a listed property company with no money pit football team sucking out over £15m per annum. I think the share price would go up, in that scenario.

TRFC would be cut loose, and no doubt some consortium of real Rangers men will ride to the rescue at that point, when a rescue costs them nothing up front. Then the real Rangers men will appeal to the loyal fans for the cash needed to run the club, maybe through an issue of shares in TRFC. Although whether TRFC can ever be viable while paying rent for Ibrox is extremely doubtful in my view. Cost cutting on a massive scale would be required, and clearly that just isn’t the Rangers way.
========================

A couple of points on this if I may.

When the real Rangers men do eventually turn up with their £1 in hand and keen expressions, and then inevitably, when they realise Ibrox and MP aren’t included instantly turn to a dispairing “But, but, but you promised” I will be willing to cut them some slack on one condition. I want to know who “you” are.

Secondly, you highlight the dilemma for TRFC (as opposed to RIFC) at the moment. I fully concur incidentally that paying a rent aint going to do them any favours and that, one would assume, a proper administration will see the squad depleted somewhat. That assumes of course that an administration is required to complete the asset transfer. No, in the absence of a McColl/King type sugar daddy the dilemma is, I believe, the Requisitioners have 1 more dip to the pockets planned as you say. They can either do it on the basis of its pay up or close up which would no doubt raise a few bob. OR, they can do it on the basis of raising a challenge to THEM. It is too early to do that. I can’t help thinking the master plan was to in gather the season books for 13/14, get to an advanced stage of the first div and then make the share offer complete with a back where we belong fanfare. That they weren’t subsequently competitive wouldn’t actually matter since the money would be in by then and allow another dip later on -sold on a ‘nearly there’ ticket. But for now, they’re too far away from fans making that link (one would have thought) so they’re ultra dependent on the season book income come May time.

Firstly that places control into the hands of the fans which goes back to, of all people, Tam Cowan’s point on Saturday night about getting themselves organised. Secondly, it confuses the position if a second insolvency event is required by the spivs to cash out since you assume it would need to be before the end of the season to get rid of the points deduction, but who will buy a season book if there’s an administration floating about?

Interesting times.

Jeez, just as I proof read my own post there yet another thought comes to me. I mention that there’s too much distance between TRFC and CFC to realistically make a share offer on a “challenging THEM” basis. Unless that is, a cup final happened to come along of course. Instant connection, even if they get beat. Surely not. Shirley? (ps I’ve got to stop reading Grisham…)

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on1:48 pm - Dec 9, 2013


A Rangers fans’ group says it will write to the club’s top 50 investors and plead with them to back supporter calls for boardroom change.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/rangers-fans-issue-plea-to-clubs-investors-to-back-supporters-calls-for-boardroom-cha.1386593588

That’s an interesting one.

The question I would ask is, how do they know who the top 50 investors actually are. If you look at the webpage it lists the very top investors. The ones with 3% or more. There are nine names there.

Laxey Partners Ltd 7,578,672 11.64%
Artemis Investment Management LLP 5,479,000 8.42%
Hargreave Hale Limited 4,601,688 7.07%
Blue Pitch Holding* 4,000,000 6.14%
Miton Capital Partners 3,143,857 4.83%
Mike Ashley 3,000,000 4.61%
Alexander Easdale* 2,942,957 4.52%
Margarita Funds Holding Trust* 2,600,000 3.99%
Richard Hughes 2,200,000 3.38%

I think it is reasonable to assume that Sandy Easdale will not vote for his own removal (or that of the people he helped put in place), neither will he use the proxy votes he has to vote against himself (or the people he helped employ). I also doubt that Richard Hughes will vote against the current board. So that leaves 5 names who will potentially vote against the current board, but Laxey have already said they will vote with the board. Meaning of the top 9 you are really only potentially looking at 4.

Anyway, where did they get the names of the other 41 top investors. If they hold less than 3% then there is no reason for their names to be made public, indeed some people only take 2.9% of a business to preserve that anonymity.

This writing to the investors thing seems like a wizard wheese. In practical terms though, how is it actually going to work.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on2:28 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Well – good news is I finally got a response from BBC (albeit well outside the timeline they are supposed to answer! ) regarding my complaint that Chick Young had no place in being on a public funded show spouting views that came straight from MH – specifically his thoughts on Dave King that he was not a criminal.

Bad news – yep – they found no substance in my complaint! So the message I get is to continue to pay the license fees those of you in the UK in order to subsidise MH!

Thank you for contacting us regarding ‘Sportsound’ broadcast on 16th October 2013. I apologise for the delay in response.
You refer to one of the talking points that evening concerning Rangers and the resignation of former Chief Executive Craig Mather.
Dave King was discussed as a possible successor and Chick Young suggested that most Rangers fans would like to see him back.
Billy Dodds firstly challenged Chick on this asking if it was time to go forward with someone who would bring a “new freshness”. Tom English then stated that he didn’t think Dave King should be allowed back onto the board as he had admitted to “being non-compliant” with his tax affairs. Chick answered this by saying “it had been settled” which is true.
Tom clearly disagreed with Chick on this issue and both gave their own opinions on this. Billy Dodds and Jim Spence also added their thoughts.
Sportsound is a discussion show with opinion from broadcasters, journalists and former players. Listeners won’t necessarily agree with all the points made but that’s what makes it a debate.

Thank you, once again, for taking the time to contact us.

Kind Regards
Richard Carey
BBC Complaints
http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on2:41 pm - Dec 9, 2013


10,500 – shares in the “new club’s” parent “club” dumped today

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

was that you Alistair ?

View Comment

EstebanPosted on2:42 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Dear Richard Carey

Aye. You can broadcast a debate in which people with a loose grasp of reality argue vehemently that Monday is really Thursday. But Monday would still not be Thursday and listeners would be entitled to conclude quite quickly that anyone arguing otherwise was talking through a hole in their heid.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on2:49 pm - Dec 9, 2013


http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/12/09/rangers-podcaster-david-limond-convicted-religious-hate-crime-after-targeting
When folks on here complain (justifiably) about the lack of decent coverage on matters Ibrox by the SMSM then the fear factor should never be left out of any explanation.

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on3:11 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Esteban says: (48)
December 9, 2013 at 2:42 pm
5 0 Rate This

Dear Richard Carey

Aye. You can broadcast a debate in which people with a loose grasp of reality argue vehemently that Monday is really Thursday. But Monday would still not be Thursday and listeners would be entitled to conclude quite quickly that anyone arguing otherwise was talking through a hole in their heid.

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

indeed, but unfortunately these fckuers are being paid [unfortunately by us]
to peddle such sh1te as fact and they are getting away with it and now
– justifying why they are getting away with it.

the bbc copying clyde for the blue [majority] listener ??

View Comment

billyj1Posted on3:13 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Celtic have suspended 128 fans, and relocated another 250. Well done .

View Comment

sickofitallPosted on3:25 pm - Dec 9, 2013


billyj1 says: (106)
December 9, 2013 at 3:13 pm
5 0 Rate This

Celtic have suspended 128 fans, and relocated another 250. Well done . We’ll done Celtic great news

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on3:28 pm - Dec 9, 2013


http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/252333-celtic-ban-128-fans-and-announce-closure-of-green-brigade-section/

View Comment

smartie1947Posted on3:52 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Well done PL and the Celtic Board.
As for the 250 dispersed throughout the rest of Celtic Park, I hope the regulars leave them in no doubt that any repeat of last week’s behaviour will not be tolerated. Nothing like a bit of reverse peer pressure to bring it home to these neds.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on4:12 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Loving the irony. After almost 18 months of Spivs, fans and journalists claiming “Rangers” lives on as a club, that TRFC is the company that runs the club and that RIFC is nothing more than the company which owns them both. It looks like Sevco and it’s entirely fictional immortal soul is going to get thrown to the wolves so that RIFC can survive.
Some holding company…

When this happens, will any “Rangers men” bother trying to save TRFC from liquidation? If they want to pick up the pieces it’ll be cheaper to let it die again surely….
They wont lose anything they claim to value that way.

View Comment

ParanoidWellFanPosted on4:21 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Well done to Celtic. Prompt and decisive action, hopefully my Club will follow suit re the same thing happening at NDP last week.
Such a shame they take it too far, as I commented on Friday that the atmosphere was the best I had experienced at a match post Taylor Report. Our wee bunch of dafties were competing with Celtic’s much larger bunch of dafties to make the most noise, and had they all kept it to that, they would have been widely applauded. However, all they have achieved now is put Scottish Football back 20 years, and the much clamoured for Safe Standing areas are further away than ever, as recent events will just be trotted out by its opponents.
One other thing PL may want to look at is Celtic’s subsidiary, Prtotectevent Ltd, who provide the stewarding, as I noticed the yellow jackets who stood by and watched the events had ‘Celtic Travel Steward’ on their backs. Not exactly providing value for money.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on4:27 pm - Dec 9, 2013


ptd1978 says: (107)
December 9, 2013 at 4:12 pm
1 0 Rate This

Loving the irony. After almost 18 months of Spivs, fans and journalists claiming “Rangers” lives on as a club, that TRFC is the company that runs the club and that RIFC is nothing more than the company which owns them both. It looks like Sevco and it’s entirely fictional immortal soul is going to get thrown to the wolves so that RIFC can survive.
Some holding company…

When this happens, will any “Rangers men” bother trying to save TRFC from liquidation? If they want to pick up the pieces it’ll be cheaper to let it die again surely….
They wont lose anything they claim to value that way.
——–

It might go something like this:

“I feel very sorry for Airdrie and their supporters but we’re running a business. We have given them repeated warnings and felt they were playing on our good nature.”

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on4:33 pm - Dec 9, 2013


As shares continued to be shipped faster than sh1t off a hot, shiny shovel, the various groups are starting to sense an apocalypse. Too late in the day, they have decided to flex their financial muscle. This gives the spivs the ideal excuse to bail whilst blaming the supporters for crashing the bus.
Had the supporters not been blindsided by DM’s media jockeys they would have threatened a boycott before the sale to CW. Unfortunately the board never saw fit to release the report on CW’s business history (prepared by a reputable Seamus).
Had the supporters not been comforted by media tales of ‘billionaire’ & ‘war chest’, they would have withheld their hard earned per admin.
Had the supporters not listened to Walt & Ally, they wouldn’t have sunk their savings into an IPO which was then used to pay ‘extraordinary’ fees.
If the supporters had listened and read RTC, Paul McConville & TSFM, they would have, at the very least, adopted a sceptical view of the War chests & 500 million fans.
It’s too late…the horse has bolted, been caught and is now the basis of some ‘meat based products’.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on5:03 pm - Dec 9, 2013


Should the AGM be avoided ?
=======================
If the AGM happens on the 19th, will that only serve to galvanise and energise TRFC fans against the Board ?
There will be a few hundred TRFC minority shareholders at the AGM – and quite possibly a lot more outside Ibrox. If / when the TRFC fans don’t get what they want during the AGM, will it all kick off ?

There could be a risk of ‘civil unrest’ at the AGM, and / or afterwards outside ?
The Board members could be individually targeted after the AGM for personal abuse / harassment.
The TRFC brand could be dragged through the mud – yet again !

So why have the AGM at all ?
Shirley it would be better for the spivs to keep the TRFC fans as divided as possible – yet one outcome of the AGM could be a united fans’ opposition – and reaction.

Would a TRFC insolvency event not be preferable before the 19th ?

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on5:39 pm - Dec 9, 2013


In the annual RFC-NIL accounts, the wages paid to playing staff and non playing staff were differentiated so that someone could total up the contractual obligations and reconcile with the contracts registered with SFA for the playing staff. This should have been and probably is an easy audit.

However for the monies going to Jersey, it was not so simple. The often repeated stance that these were always included in the accounts and were therefore all above board is a stretch. The payments were always included in a non specific manner regarding exactly what it was and for whom.

From 2009 accounts on page 20:

The Murray Group Management Ltd. Remuneration Trust was established to provide incentives to certain employees and other service providers. Payments to the Trust are charged to the Group Profit and Loss Account in the year incurred.

Directors’ remuneration:
Emoluments
Pension contributions to money purchase pension schemes
Equity – Settled share based payments

http://www.isdx.com/infostore/Company-Accounts/RangersFootball/rangers2009.pdf

In 2010 on page 20, it was changed to

The Murray Group Management Ltd. Remuneration Trust was established to provide incentives to certain employees and other service providers. Payments to the Trust are charged to the Group Profit and Loss Account in the year incurred. On the basis of expert tax advice, the Club is defending a query raised by HMRC into this Trust, which is part of an on-going tax enquiry scheduled to be heard by a tax tribunal before the end of the year

Directors’ remuneration:
Emoluments
Pension contributions to money purchase pension schemes

http://www.isdx.com/infostore/Company-Accounts/RangersFootball/rangers2010.pdf

Now how could anyone reconcile that to any “playing staff” and “non playing staff” costs in order for anyone at SFA wanting to audit to ensure all the contracts total up?

So why did no one at SFA question this? There is no point in self regulation when no one audits to ensure the self regulation is working.

Now given that according to the BBC inquiry by Mark Daly:

“Between 2001 and 2010, Rangers paid a total of £47.65m in to their Employee Benefit Trust. Details of the amounts paid in to the trust were declared in the club’s annual accounts. Rangers also operated another tax avoidance scheme for two former players, Tore Andre Flo and Ronald De Boer, between 2000-01 and 2002-03 known as a ‘Discounted Options Scheme’ – commonly referred to as the “Wee Tax Case”. HMRC issued Rangers with a bill of about £4m for outstanding amounts owed from the discounted options tax scheme, which was settled, but has not been paid.
BBC Scotland understands the Murray Group paid at least £10m to the trust. A total of 111 sub-trusts were set up between 2001-2010 for Rangers directors, players and other staff – along with employees of Murray International Holdings and its subsidiary companies. A total of 53 Rangers players and staff received side contracts giving undertakings to fund their sub-trusts with cash, according to documents seen by BBC Scotland.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18169502

Given that there are regulations against payments not only outside of the contract registered with SFA, there are also regulations concerning payments from 3rd parties. Since MIH was a separate company from RFC-NIL, would this also not construe the possibility of payments to players from 3rd parties?

Given the reluctance of MIH, RFC-NIL and particularly D&P in being unable and unwilling to help on providing evidence on anything related to the EBT scheme for both the WTC and BTC – surely someone has asked RFC-NIL to prove all the MIH money was only used by the MIH employees and the RFC-NIL money was only used specifically by RFC-NIL. If not, then I am struggling to know how Stuart and his mentor Campbell have assured themselves that there was no 3rd party payments to add to the mix.

The often trotted excuse “but they were in the accounts every year” is in effect another fallacy because as anyone can see, it truly proved worthless in order for anyone to do a proper audit of money coming in/out of Ibrokes for RFC-NIL players, which is what the SFA had to be able to determine to provide governance.

As we have seen with the Pinsett report – when a club investigates/audits itself that is all well and good to placate themselves that all is ok for their particular agenda – however someone should be overseeing the self regulation to ensure it is done properly. That according to UEFA is the job of the SFA.

This is quite a difficult task when there is a placeholder at SFA specifically positioned, in my humble opinion,to ensure no rules were changed, no questions asked and nothing released to the press. As we saw from CF, a nice dinner with CO and Stuart was requested instead of the transparency of a press statement regarding the UEFA licence being granted erroneously. Thanks to CF and others, we have the proof to see clearly the corruption within our midst!

View Comment

Comments are closed.