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

ecobhoyPosted on11:12 pm - Dec 23, 2013


Carntyne says: (100)
December 23, 2013 at 10:30 pm
ecobhoy says: (2093)
December 23, 2013 at 4:14 pm

This particular spat has nothing to do with flags and banners but the work of a few morons who will eventually end up seriously maiming or possibly killing someone unless their antics are brought to a halt and I would think every responsible Scottish football fan would support that position.
_______________________________________________________________________
I do support that position, but my point is that fans of all clubs must be treated the same for this kind of behaviour.

Further your remark that it is ‘disingenuous’ to think the media would give Celtic fans the same treatment as fans of other clubs seems to suggest we should just suffer such treatment without complaint. In other words just lie down to it. That’s certainly not for me.
========================================================
I didn’t suggest for a moment that anyone or group of people being wrongly victimised should ‘just lie down to anything’.

I certainly never have personally and have done a lot of fighting for truth and justice in my lifetime.

But to win battles you have to be a helluva lot cleverer than the opposition andkeep a cool head and not fall into the trap of making knee-jerk reactions or comments without fully thinking them through and thereby handing a ‘gift’ to those out to do you or your beliefs down.

Media bias is a fact of life and recognition of it doesn’t mean acceptance but rather the first stage in actually beginning to confront the culture involved so that we can build and live in an inclusive society with fairness and equality at its core.

View Comment

Lord WobblyPosted on11:34 pm - Dec 23, 2013


This Christmas, I will mostly be drinking Chateau Musar 2005 and Luckie Ales 1841 XXXP Porter. Merry Christmas to one and all.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on11:34 pm - Dec 23, 2013


neepheid says: (953)

December 23, 2013 at 8:31 pm

There will be no shareholder votes on any actions the board decide on. It would take a large block of votes to even call an EGM, and what would be the point? The board would turn up for any egm with 65% of the votes in their pockets, just like the AGM. The board will clear any major action with the real people in charge, those who really own that 65%. In reality, the small shareholder is utterly powerless.

——————————————

Many thanks for your reply Neepheid – what you say makes perfect sense to me and as always an education on here. The reason I have also quoted the above from your reply is that on reading it I have realised something else – the notion that buying the shares that TRFC fans did gave them any say in the running of the “club” is baloney – as we saw at the AGM and as you say above, all they can do is trust the folks who they never voted for to do the right thing. The brogues in charge needed their money but not their opinion on what to do with it.

I thought the TRFC fans were up a certain creek without a paddle – now I realise they have no boat either!

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:40 pm - Dec 23, 2013


I never got around to updating the business case based on the IPO figures and earlier accounts because whilst the detail changed, the end result was pretty much the same predicting RIFC go into the red before the end of this season.

However for fun, and to maybe help Mr Wallace, I reduced the player weekly wage to a point were if all else were much the same, the business model would be sustainable.

So an individual weekly wage for this and next season of £935 should do it and, if they get into the SPFL top division the season after next and raise ticket prices and get extra TV income etc they could pay £2550 a week.

Still better than most SPFL clubs I suppose but not enough to qualify for Europe – Europa or CL.

View Comment

gunnerbPosted on12:54 am - Dec 24, 2013


Exiled Celt says: (876)
December 23, 2013 at 11:34 pm

“I thought the TRFC fans were up a certain creek without a paddle – now I realise they have no boat either!”
———————————————————————————————————————————————
They remind me of an oft repeated scene from the classic Warner Bros cartoon series Road Runner. Where Wile E. Coyote runs off the end of a cliff and hangs there suspended in mid air defying all known physics and accepted truths, until he looks dow…….

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:11 am - Dec 24, 2013


PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (200)
December 23, 2013 at 10:03 pm

Phil

A more apt metaphor casting TRFC as the Titantic, would see RIFC as the Californian, and Mr “I need 120 days to figure out what’s going on” Wallace, in the role of her Captain, Stanley Lord. Captain Lord saw the distress rockets from the Titanic, and steamed on, doing feck all while the ship sunk. Though he did come back to recover the bodies the next day….

Edit

Walter Lord wrote a crap book about the sinking, which became a memorable film, with Kenneth More.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on1:22 am - Dec 24, 2013


scapaflow says: (1257)
December 24, 2013 at 1:11 am
Was that the Whaler?

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on1:47 am - Dec 24, 2013


The event I increasingly fear is the one that will finally finish any interest I have in Scottish football; in fact at the risk of umpteen thumbs down I will go further. If Sevco undergo a quite deliberately planned first/second (delete as appropriate) insolvency event but still ‘win promotion’ then not only will I give up my interest in Scottish football, but I will actively want our national team and club sides (including my own) in European competitions to be hammered by any opponent. It will be the final slap in the face for me.

We can all look forward now to our esteemed MSM portraying Sevco’s bid for promotion with ‘the handicap’ of a points deduction as being somehow ‘against all odds’ rather than recognising it as the latest shameless deliberate act of cheating from the clumpany with unsurpassed dignity.

View Comment

FisianiPosted on3:17 am - Dec 24, 2013


Bryce you are not alone. The SFA is just The Rangers at Hampden. Rules will be bent, broken or ignored when The Rangers are finally asset stripped to just the bones in February.
I have given up on Scottish football. I live in a country with just one professional football team. Despite that we were the ONLY unbeaten country at the World Cup in 2010 in South Africa.
As a Celtic supporter I pray for Celtic to one day play in a far bigger and better league. Do FIFA and UEFA rules over-ride the laws of free trade in the UK and EU? Football is a business. Why can a British business be forced to restrict were it can trade within the UK or EU?
I can understand English, Italian, Spanish and German clubs wishing to restrict their leagues but is it legal?
Imagine two leagues with Celtic, Dundee United. Porto,. Olympic Lyonnais, Shaktar Donetsk, Paris St Germain,Zenit, Olympic Marseilles, Rubin Kazan, CSKA Moscow, Basel , Olympiakos, Eindhoven , Ajax, Sporting,Dynamo Kiev,Galatasary, Braga, Girodins, Twente, Anderlecht,Alkmaar, Metalist Kharkov, Copenhagen,Lille, Fenerbahce, FC Salzburg, Steaua Bucureşti, Apoel, PAOK, Genk, Standard Liege, all of whom are ranked higher than Celtic who are No 61, Dundee United probably the second best team in Scotland are 232.

View Comment

causaludendiPosted on3:32 am - Dec 24, 2013


jimlarkin says: (713)
December 23, 2013 at 8:48 pm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Notice the site makes no distinction as to which board the appointees belong,

i.e. “17/09/2013 New Board Member Mr A. Easdale appointed “

View Comment

thepinkpantherPosted on4:19 am - Dec 24, 2013


Selfassessor
Following on from your beautiful description of the damp squib.
I’m sure the The Rangers support have been successfully pissed upon from a great hight for quite a while now!

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:47 am - Dec 24, 2013


As it is almost Christmas…
and I have had a few refreshments in my local here, [a Man City bar – don’t ask]…
Some fellow Bampots may relate to the following observation.

When I where a lad, all I needed was a football.
Come sun, rain, snow, hail, etc – as long as it was not too dark I would be out playing football either with my friends – or by myself practising kicking the ball against a wall.
When we played ‘organised’ kickabouts, I would never argue the toss about a thrown-in or corner kick – I would just encourage my team mates that we would simply win by scoring more goals.
Without being conscious of this at the time, I didn’t want to win a game by cheating – or by being perceived to have won by cheating.

That simplistic – and honest – approach sticks with me c.30+ years later.

And that is why I absolutely abhor everything connected to TRFC, and its continued ‘dark presence’ over Scottish football. [The SFA is another story… 🙁 ].

From a wee kiddie to an adult, the message is deeply ingrained – and unchanged: nobody likes cheats.

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on7:55 am - Dec 24, 2013


And so the Sevconian ”milk round” continues

. . .
By Hugh Keevins
Rangers manager Ally McCoist: We need supporters to be thinking about season tickets and not boycotts

24 Dec 2013 07:22
McCOIST said there is “no appetite for boycotts” despite some fans threatening to starve the club of cash in order to bring about change at boardroom level.

. . . The beggars are on their knees

. . . For every fiver Celtic borrow . . . Oh, wait a minute !

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on8:10 am - Dec 24, 2013


Sugar Daddy says: (159)
December 23, 2013 at 11:01 pm
===================================
For much of Ally’s time at Ibrox, both as player, assistant manager, and manager, where money came from was never a problem – it was just always there. Thinking more and more of this type of attitude, which is also the view of Walter Smith and much of their support, makes me wonder who or what they really believe should be funding the club from Ibrox. It seems clear the concept of earning money, then spending it along with a sustainable debt level is totally lost on them.

I can only conclude they believe they should be given access to credit (presumably from one of the state owned banks), then when it can’t be repaid they should be allowed to have an insolvency event with no loss of status or history as a consequence. They appear to think the club from Ibrox should be enshrined as a national treasure. If that’s not the case how else do Ally, Walter, and much of the support believe the type of spending they regard as the norm can be sustained? It really puzzles me.

View Comment

coatbrigbhoyPosted on8:38 am - Dec 24, 2013


jimlarkin says: (714)
December 24, 2013 at 7:55 am

1

0

Rate This

And so the Sevconian ”milk round” continues

. . .
By Hugh Keevins
Rangers manager Ally McCoist: We need supporters to be thinking about season tickets and not boycotts

24 Dec 2013 07:22
McCOIST said there is “no appetite for boycotts” despite some fans threatening to starve the club of cash in order to bring about change at boardroom level.

. . . The beggars are on their knees

. . . For every fiver Celtic borrow . . . Oh, wait a minute !
==============================================

7 days into the announced 120 day review, Mc Coist steps up to do his bit,
he tells the fans THEY have no appetite for a boycott and that they NEED, in fact MUST continue to buy season tickets, before finishing with his usual, …………“But I won’t tell the fans what to do”.

View Comment

coatbrigbhoyPosted on8:46 am - Dec 24, 2013


upthehoops says: (754)
December 24, 2013 at 8:10 am

8

0

Rate This

Sugar Daddy says: (159)
December 23, 2013 at 11:01 pm
===================================
For much of Ally’s time at Ibrox, both as player, assistant manager, and manager, where money came from was never a problem – it was just always there. Thinking more and more of this type of attitude, which is also the view of Walter Smith and much of their support, makes me wonder who or what they really believe should be funding the club from Ibrox. It seems clear the concept of earning money, then spending it along with a sustainable debt level is totally lost on them.

I can only conclude they believe they should be given access to credit (presumably from one of the state owned banks), then when it can’t be repaid they should be allowed to have an insolvency event with no loss of status or history as a consequence. They appear to think the club from Ibrox should be enshrined as a national treasure. If that’s not the case how else do Ally, Walter, and much of the support believe the type of spending they regard as the norm can be sustained? It really puzzles me.

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

it comes across as if in the absence of a sugar daddy,that they expect this new club to be funded by the tax payer to the tune of about £15m a year ,more or less the same way as the old ,dead club was run, the fans don’t have a problem with Schools, hospitals,ect being deprived of money as long as they can cheat their way to the next title or cup victory.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:00 am - Dec 24, 2013


McCoists ramblings in the DR and Scotsman are just incredible.

Words fail me so all I can say is a Merry Christmas to all the Bampots out there and I hope Santa is good to you.

View Comment

ChristyboyPosted on9:20 am - Dec 24, 2013


Can i take this oppertunity to wish you all a Happy Christmas and a prosperous New Year, and thank you again TSFM for all your hard work and enthusiasm. 😎

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:32 am - Dec 24, 2013


Exiled Celt says: (876)
December 23, 2013 at 11:34 pm

I thought the TRFC fans were up a certain creek without a paddle – now I realise they have no boat either!
————————-
Oh, they have a boat. A huge leaky boat with lots of history. Its just its mortgaged to the hilt this time having incredibly escaped the creditors axe the last time.

But, in the interests of balance, I will also come to their defence this morning. Someone mentioned disgust at an imminent ‘assisted promotion’ or words to that effect. Sorry, don’t have the facility to scroll back just now. If the good shipRFC wins promotion, even taking a points deduction under its wing then that’s fair enough. It sucks, but its fair according to current rules. I have no issue with that, as long as the rule about the SFA stepping in where financial sustainability is also questioned is also adhered to.

Same rules, without fear or favour.

(why are we all maritime this morning btw, you realise that’s just one step from fish and that’s a plaice I don’t want to go just now)

View Comment

tomtomPosted on9:53 am - Dec 24, 2013


Sugar Daddy says: (159)
December 23, 2013 at 11:01 pm
50 0 Rate This

So Ally and evidently a few others at Ibrox were surprised that the new CEO said the cost base was too high? Does Ally not read the accounts of the company in which he holds 1m shares?
Has he been living in a parallel universe for the past year?

For someone who professes to love Rangers he shows scant regard for it’s well being if all he wants to do is bring players in.

I imagine he is slightly miffed that his Rangerness & cheeky chappie routine isn’t going to work on this CEO.

Don’t worry Ally there will be another one along in 120 days or less.
=================================

Read the accounts ❓ This is a man that doesn’t even read his contract 😈

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on9:57 am - Dec 24, 2013


Norman Crighton buys 60,000 Rangers shares
IBROX non-executive director Norman Crighton has bought 60,000 shares
in Rangers International Football Club plc.
…………………………………………………….

Is this part of the ”strategy” to keep the share price up
(Wages paid as shares keeps his tax down on his ”earnings” maybe)
Also good for P.R and good for the parent club – sorry – company.?

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on10:06 am - Dec 24, 2013


Kirk O’Rourke/Rangers FC/Press Association Images
ALLY McCOIST last night vowed Rangers will never settle for second best as he sounded a warning over budget cuts.

The Ibrox boss is trying to build a squad to compete with Celtic when the Old Firm are reunited in the top flight.

But chief executive Graham Wallace announced his intention at last week’s agm to slash costs – including the playing pool – with the club currently running at a loss in League One.

Rangers are seeking fresh investment to raise millions of pounds quickly and McCoist will meet Wallace shortly to be briefed on what the immediate future holds as off-field matters become intertwined with the development of the team on the park.

SMSM headline – [Sevco]Rangers looking to sign Gavin Gunning from the Arabs !

Go’n yersel Ally you go for it boy

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on10:33 am - Dec 24, 2013


upthehoops says: (754) December 24, 2013 at 8:10 am
For much of Ally’s time at Ibrox, both as player, assistant manager, and manager, where money came from was never a problem – it was just always there.

Sorry to pick you up on this UTP, but I think you’ll find money was never there… it waqs actually on the “never, never” that OldGers run and I am disappointed, but not surprised, that McCoist would once again “rally the troops” to put pressure on the new board to relax the purse strings and let him expand his playing staff further. Seriously did I read they were looking to add or even upgrade players in the New Year transfer window? At a time when they haven’t dropped a point in the league, when they are still losing c.800k a month, he wants to add players? Wait until the end of the season Ally and find out if you have enough money for players then.

BTW – why did he think there was pressure on him to lower his salary if he didn’t realise that there needed to be cost-savings at Ibrox? What a numpty.

View Comment

coatbrigbhoyPosted on10:44 am - Dec 24, 2013


ALLY McCOIST last night insisted Rangers fans need to continue buying season tickets, and forget boycotts, if the club is to “survive, improve and progress.”
==================

Survive !!!! now, why would he be worried about the immortal “Rangers” ability to survive, obviously he meant the company, owned and controlled by the spivs

View Comment

theoldshedPosted on10:45 am - Dec 24, 2013


Bryce Curdy says: (12)
December 24, 2013 at 1:47 am
48 2 Rate This

If Sevco undergo a quite deliberately planned first/second (delete as appropriate) insolvency event but still ‘win promotion’ then not only will I give up my interest in Scottish football, but I will actively want our national team and club sides (including my own) in European competitions to be hammered by any opponent. It will be the final slap in the face for me.
—————————————-
Well said. At that point in time I would sadly be forced to cancel my monthly payment to Foundation of Hearts. I may be emotionally attached to Hearts, and still cling on to my memories of great moments in the Old Shed (the Mark Walters banana throwing incident not being one of them for avoidance of doubt!) in the hope that Scottish football cleans itself up (and they re-introduce standing sections at football grounds), but there comes a point when enough’s enough. Enough should have been enough when CO was re-elected to be honest.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on10:46 am - Dec 24, 2013


gunnerb says: (12)
December 24, 2013 at 12:54 am

Where Wile E. Coyote runs off the end of a cliff and hangs there suspended in mid air defying all known physics and accepted truths, until he looks dow…….
——

An excellent analogy. 🙂 TRFC do appear to have mastered the trick of never looking down, but rather ploughing ahead in mid-air with nothing to base their gravity-defying motion on.

The worrying thing is that I fully suspect that they’ll make it across the canyon in a fashion which defies all common sense and reality.

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on10:46 am - Dec 24, 2013


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-25497508

Craig whyte’s employees convicted of ”stealing” from his Castle ( or is it Chateau) ?

View Comment

FisianiPosted on11:00 am - Dec 24, 2013


Well Santa has arrived in New Zealand and brought lots of toys but told me he has no money for the Rangers.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on11:02 am - Dec 24, 2013


jockybhoy says: (295)
December 24, 2013 at 10:33 am
upthehoops says: (754) December 24, 2013 at 8:10 am
For much of Ally’s time at Ibrox, both as player, assistant manager, and manager, where money came from was never a problem – it was just always there.

Sorry to pick you up on this UTP, but I think you’ll find money was never there… it was actually on the “never, never” that OldGers run
============================================
I am well aware of that, but my point is when they needed to buy players they could do it, and Smith, McCoist, the fans and indeed the media never thought for a moment it was for any other reason than Rangers being a super rich club. That is why it is such an alien concept to McCoist to even consider they will have to live within their means.

View Comment

andygraham.66Posted on11:20 am - Dec 24, 2013


But McCoist added: “The fans are the most important part of our club. We wouldn’t be here today if it hadn’t been for them buying 72,000 season tickets over the last couple of years that have followed administration.

The first rule of liquidation is not to talk about liquidation

From the top down to support they have been programmed to think that administration can happen to a club but liquidation can only happen to a company, totally against all known fact prior to Charles Green’s eureka moment.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on11:44 am - Dec 24, 2013


Does McCoist not think his squad with a salary budget of around £7m (the second highest in Scottish football) is good enough to win the 1st division (third tier in SCottish football) with an already large lead and he has to spend money in January.

Or can he wait till the summer to spend more to win the Championship.

How bad a manager does he think he is.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on11:46 am - Dec 24, 2013


theoldshed says: (55)
December 24, 2013 at 10:45 am

Enough should have been enough when CO was re-elected to be honest.
======================
That did it for me, I’m afraid. Any senior club in Scotland could have had my loyal support (and money) just by standing up against that utter travesty. I had high hopes that Clyde, Raith, or Stranraer might step up to the plate, but not one single club was prepared to break ranks. And to this day, I still can’t understand why. Tragic, really, because walking away from Scottish football was certainly not part of my retirement plans. However I am not prepared to be taken for a mug- well that’s how I see it anyway. A personal thing, of course, and I entirely respect the views of the many who disagree.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on11:59 am - Dec 24, 2013


So, it’s Christmas Eve. I started posting on this site earlier this year after a period as an observer and I have to say it has been an illuminating and enjoyable experience. I do hope that all the regular posters stick with it, especially those who bring informed insight from the worlds of law and accountancy, which adds so much to the ongoing debate. Perhaps some of the resident newspaper hacks may break cover as well! 😀

A very merry Christmas and a happy and prosperous 2014 to you all.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on12:07 pm - Dec 24, 2013


neepheid accidental thumb down from me sorry, bloody laptop.

In other news, I always watch “its a wonderful life” on xmas eve. Must have watched it 20/30 times.

For the first time i know what Malfeasance is.

Malfeasance is the willful and intentional action that injures a party.

Thanks to all on TSFM for the education long may it continue!

Buddy

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on12:11 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Just scroll past this one please. It is about how Rangernewco got SFA Membership for benefit of a Twitter conversation that I’ve set out as a matter of reference.

The SFA granted RangersNewco full SFA membership using the complete power of discretion under Article 14 of SFA Articles which are reproduced as they were in 2011/12 and as they are now following reconstruction.

In summary had RangersOldco not applied under Article 14 (and that is the rule basis for the 5 way agreement that preserved the commercial value to Scottish football of not losing a large swathe of its support, which would be a major, if not total, part of SFA thinking and got football debts paid) then they would have AUTOMATICALLY become REGISTERED SFA MEMBERS by dint of entering the SFL .

From there they would have had 14 days to apply to the SFA for SFA Associate membership and if they failed to do so or it was refused their SFL Associate membership would also lapse. It would of course not have been refused, so RangersNewco would have become an Associate member of the SFA and SFL.

After 5 years as an Associate Member of the SFA they could have applied for Full Membership of the SFA

(It is unlikely they would not have been in SPL after 5 years and so subject to whatever SPL membership rules were before reconstruction, but the matter is about SFA membership not league membership so SPL/SPFL rules are not relevant in terms of how SFA went about their business).

After League reconstruction Associate Memberships of SFA were dropped, but as Rangers membership was transferred under the SFA’s discretionary powers (for commercial , financial and social fear reasons) they already were and are full SFA members anyway, but would have become so after reconstruction had the SFA insisted RangersOldco apply as a new club joining the SFL and rejected an application from Charles Green (or D&P )under Article 14.

The relevant rules for 2011/12 and the Updated Version following Reconstruction on which the foregoing is based now follow.

SFA Handbook Articles 2011/12

4.2 Members shall be of three classes: full members: associate members: registered members.

Article 6.2 A club or association shall be admitted as a registered member automatically by reason of its being admitted as a member of an Affiliated Association or an Affiliated National Association, or , in the case of a club in membership of or participation in an association. League or other combination of clubs formed in terms of Article 18 and in the case of an association by being formed in terms of Article 18 , provided it is not already an associate or full member . A registered member shall not be a member of more than one Affiliated Association or more than one Affiliated National Association. A registered member may apply at any time to become an associate member.

Article 6.3 A club or association desiring to qualify for full membership of the Scottish FA must first be admitted as an associate member . A club cannot be admitted as an associate member unless it meets and commits to continuing compliance with the Membership Criteria and amendments thereto as shall be promulgated by the Board from Time to time in connection with the membership of the Scottish FA.

Definitions.SFA Membership Criteria means the criteria promulgated by the Board from time to time in connection with qualifying for associate membership of the Scottish FA in terms of article 6.3

14. Prohibition on Transfer of Membership

14.1 It is not permissible for a member to transfer directly or indirectly its membership of the Scottish FA to another member or to any other entity, and any such transfer or attempt to effect such a transfer is prohibited, save as otherwise provided in this Article
14. Any member desirous of transferring its membership to another entity within its own administrative group for the purpose of internal solvent reconstruction must apply to the Board for permission to effect such transfer, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any other application for transfer of membership will be reviewed by the Board, which will have complete discretion to reject or to grant such application on such terms and conditions as the Board may think fit.

SFA Handbook as Updated to 2 Aug 2013.

4.2 Members shall be of two classes:- full members and registered members

6.2 A club or association shall be admitted as a registered member automatically by reason of its being admitted as a member of an Affiliated Association or an Affiliated National Association, or in the case of a club through membership of or participation in an association, league or other combination of clubs formed in terms of Article 18 and in the case of an association by being formed in terms of Article 18, provided it is not already a full member. A registered member shall not be a member of more than one Affiliated Association or more than one Affiliated National Association. A registered member may apply at any time to become a full member.

6.3 A club or association desiring to qualify for full membership of the Scottish FA must meet, and commit to continuous compliance with, the Membership Criteria and amendments thereto as shall be promulgated by the Board from time to time in connection with the membership of the Scottish FA.

“Membership Criteria” means the criteria promulgated by the Board from time to time in connection with qualifying for full membership of the Scottish FA in terms of Article 6;

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on12:12 pm - Dec 24, 2013


http://www.perthstjohnstonefc.co.uk/newsitemsdetail.php?param=2806

St Johnstone club statement

View Comment

Tic 6709Posted on12:21 pm - Dec 24, 2013


PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (202)

December 24, 2013 at 12:12 pm

http://www.perthstjohnstonefc.co.uk/newsitemsdetail.php?param=2806

St Johnstone club statement
============================
Well done to all concerned,some common sense at last. Now boys and girls bloody behave.
On a lighter note ,Best Wishes to all in this holiday period and I hope Sevco get what we all deserve.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on12:26 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Rangers have submitted an updated AR01 for TRFC Ltd (Sevco Scotland) to Companies House. There is no smoking gun that I can see as it only lists the “known” shareholders up to the share swap with RIFC on 18/12/2012.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/193487014/2013-12-23-CH-AR01-Updated

View Comment

CarntynePosted on12:55 pm - Dec 24, 2013


jimlarkin says: (717)
December 24, 2013 at 10:06 am

ALLY McCOIST last night vowed Rangers will never settle for second best as he sounded a warning over budget cuts.

The Ibrox boss is trying to build a squad to compete with Celtic when the Old Firm are reunited in the top flight.
________________________________________________________

And therein lies the problem.

McCoist knows the bears won’t put up with second best, a weakened team which has little if any chance of winning trophies.

The constant cries of ‘we must get back to where we belong’ is a reminder to the Ibrox board that they must cut back on costs and still manage to put a winning team on the park.

They may somehow achieve this in division one and in the Championship next season, but the real problem is when/if they get back to premiership.

Someone with plenty of money to burn could do the trick, but there’s only been imaginary ‘billionaires’ who have come forward in the hours of need during the last three or more years.

What to do.

View Comment

casper999Posted on1:18 pm - Dec 24, 2013


slightly off topic but on xmas eve a wee present in the stocking. Have a look at the official “the rangers” website , I did and try click on the page that shows their honours !!!!!!

Yep, Me too. Couldnt find it. It isnt there.

Not a peep, not a title, trophy ,nada . seems a bit strange for all those titles , cups etc not a single mention. Showed it to my sevco supporting friend, he wasnt happy.

Merry Xmas ….

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on1:42 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Fisiani says: (53)
December 24, 2013 at 3:17 am
As a Celtic supporter I pray for Celtic to one day play in a far bigger and better league. Do FIFA and UEFA rules over-ride the laws of free trade in the UK and EU? Football is a business. Why can a British business be forced to restrict were it can trade within the UK or EU?
____________________________

TIn hat time…

FIsiani,
Celtic are more than welcome to form a league with anyone they want in any country they want, but by the same token FIFA and UEFA are entitled not to trade with any club wanting to play in competitions organised outside their remit. They are also entitled to demand exclusivity from the clubs, companies and clumpany currently playing in their competitions.
FIFA’s reticence to allow clubs to cross borders is the only realistic approach. Any other approach is open to too many variables and will through a process of many lawyers getting rich lead to some form of franchise system which will have everything to do with money and nothing to do with sport. Every team that doesn’t get a franchise straight away will atrophy and fade and their Sporting performance will never allow them a shot at the big boys or a chance at glory.

Next time the Sevco get a blatantly biased judgement in their favour and you’re tempted into thinking how unfair it is that the principles of Sporting Integrity are being set aside. Please remember the consequences of what you’re actually asking for above.

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on1:44 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Casper- you got a link ?

Merry christmas to all on TSFM
(And I do mean all – you too EKbhoy)

View Comment

Hoopy 7Posted on1:46 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Good Afternoon,
Wishing everyone a Merry Christmas.
Just heard news on Clyde 2 (yes I am Old).
Still peddling the guff that the “club” had an AGM.
No they did not. It is a holding company who just happen to own a football team which had it.

Let us hope that next year will bring much needed changes at the SFA but don’t hold you breath.

My money is still on CW still having an interest in the ownwership of the debt dome.

On a more serious note it is very sad to see two young lifes snatched from us, particularly at this time of the year. My sympathy and condolences go to the families of the kids from Hearts and Hibs who have been dealt a terrible blow.It puts everything in perspective.

After a few incidents I had hoped that clubs would screen their players for signs of illness such as heart disease etc. This should also be extended to all young players.

Clubs are quick to organise a scan when a star has a ligament strain how about scanning all players, young or old. I for one would gladly pay an extra few pounds on a season book if that’s what it took to look after the people who give us so much enjoyment at whatever level we watch.

Merry Christmas once again and hoping you have a good New Year.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on1:53 pm - Dec 24, 2013


It seems some Rangers fan saw CW in Tesco (Inverness) and chastised the chap somewhat.

So much so said fan was invited to leave the store.

He took a couple of pics of our hero

http://i43.tinypic.com/2jfab2s.jpg

http://i43.tinypic.com/2pqtdtk.jpg

View Comment

TartanwulverPosted on2:01 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Sorry if this has been well covered before, but if anyone could give a short clarification to me, I would be very grateful.

A (non Rangers supporting) relative said to me that McCoist did well to give away his shares to a supporters group, and I said that my understanding was that he had only given them his vote, but still owns the shares, and that the MSM may have just spun it as being his shares that were given to the group. Relative then said he didn’t think that it was possible to vote if you weren’t a shareholder, to which I didn’t know the answer. Can anyone give me a very short resume of what McCoist actually did so I can enlighten myself and my family?

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on2:15 pm - Dec 24, 2013


He gave his voting rights to two fans (not named).

However he did not give them his shares which he still owns.

It’s similar to the Easdales having roughly 25% of the voting rights while only owning about 4.5% of the shares. The voting rights were proxied to them.

The figures have probably changed since then but the principle is explained below.

http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/share-information

As announced on 22 November 2013, Alexander Easdale, in addition to the 2,942,957 Ordinary Shares held directly by him, has voting rights over 12,352,666 Ordinary Share (representing 18.98% of the issued share capital of the Company) pursuant to the terms of proxy agreements entered into with other shareholders, including Blue Pitch and Margarita, which remain in place until further notice. As a result, including the Ordinary Shares held directly by Mr Easdale, being 2,942,957 Ordinary Shares representing 4.52% of the issued share capital of the Company, Mr Easdale has voting rights over, in aggregate, 15,295,623 Ordinary Shares representing 23.50% of the issued share capital of the Company. As announced on 20 September 2013, while Blue Pitch and Margarita hold directly 4,000,000 Ordinary Shares and 2,600,000 Ordinary Shares respectively, they have disposed of the voting rights over such Ordinary Shares to Alexander Easdale pursuant to the terms of the proxy agreements.

View Comment

BigGavPosted on2:22 pm - Dec 24, 2013


It’s also relevant that the supporters group were already shareholders and so entitled to vote.
McCoist couldn’t have given his proxy rights to just anybody.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on2:29 pm - Dec 24, 2013


I think it was actually individuals he gave them to, as opposed to a supporters group. I believe they were also members of the supporters club McCoist’s Father was a member of.

However you have possibly explained why the Easdale’s have to be shareholders. They couldn’t be proxies for the real power if they weren’t, and if it was too small an amount it would be even more obvious that they were just a front. So they hold enough to make it look plausible.

Oh and Laxey now have the shares Green promised them so their holding is over 12%, officially notified on AIM.

View Comment

TartanwulverPosted on2:33 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Many thanks Tif Finn and BigGav

View Comment

neepheidPosted on2:36 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Tartanwulver says: (475)
December 24, 2013 at 2:01 pm

Relative then said he didn’t think that it was possible to vote if you weren’t a shareholder, to which I didn’t know the answer. Can anyone give me a very short resume of what McCoist actually did so I can enlighten myself and my family?
===================
Anyone who owns shares can sign a proxy form which allows someone else to exercise their voting rights in those shares. That is how the board managed to acquire over 65% of the votes at last week’s AGM. None of the institutions or mysterious offshore entities actually turned up, they just signed proxies in favour of the board and sent them in. Your relative can rest easy, Ally still owns every single share that he got for a penny a piece.

View Comment

casper999Posted on2:46 pm - Dec 24, 2013


jim larkin,

just go to rangers fc , official site and search till your hearts content. Only one outcome . 🙂

Merry Xmas to all.

View Comment

fara1968Posted on2:48 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Hello and a merry Christmas to all.

I was thinking of our compliant media with regards to the spending activities, (or lack) of Celtic FC following their recent good run of financial success. Our media sources to a man are all of the opinion that Lawell should have broke the bank to achieve European success.
These people are either very stupid or very sinister.
Firstly the case for them being very stupid. Having just witnessed RFC liquidated through chasing the European dream and bad corporate governance do they now want CFC to do the same? Just pure daft.
Secondly the sinister motive. Would it just be too much to stomach for our compliant media to watch TRFC make it to our premiership only to be dominated for the foreseeable future by a Celtic side and others who have money in the bank and spend only what they need to maintain their achievable success.
I am reminded of the treatment that Fergus McCann received off these guys for only spending what his club could afford. His treatment from the media was a disgrace. An even bigger disgrace was that by far and large most of the fans fell for it and Fergus was booed by his own support. Well as it turned out wee Fergus was correct all along.
Celtic in my opinion have achieved what is possible in the market that they operate in. Sadly at present the vast sums of TV money paid in other countries is not available here. Success in my opinion for Celtic at the moment is to win the league and make it to the league stages of the champions league. Both these have been successfully completed two seasons running. To aim for anything past that would require spending beyond their means. We have to be realistic.
Only my personal opinion but I would love to see not only Celtic but other clubs in our top league have success by living within their means and showing the lamb munchers how wrong they are. Hopefully they will get the message that we don’t listen to their propaganda either.
The future looks a lot brighter for several clubs in our top league at the moment and long may it continue.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on3:37 pm - Dec 24, 2013


fara1968 says: (145)
December 24, 2013 at 2:48 pm
Having just witnessed RFC liquidated through chasing the European dream and bad corporate governance do they now want CFC to do the same?
=========================================
I imagine there is nothing more the media would love than to see Celtic suffering the same fate. There HAS to be evening up, especially when the negativity surrounds Ibrox. It must really get their back up the financial carnage Rangers self destructed in has not happened to Celtic.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on3:37 pm - Dec 24, 2013


easyJambo says: (618)
December 24, 2013 at 12:26 pm
15 0 Rate This

Rangers have submitted an updated AR01 for TRFC Ltd (Sevco Scotland) to Companies House. There is no smoking gun that I can see as it only lists the “known” shareholders up to the share swap with RIFC on 18/12/2012.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/193487014/2013-12-23-CH-AR01-Updated

so my questions asked at December 23, 2013 at 7:20 pm are still valid, thanks to ecoboy for his beautiful answer. I now know who is supposed to prosecute the criminal offences that have been committed.

So is that 2 criminal offences that have been committed, once with the original submission AR01, once with the second submission AR01?

I notice the presenter are Captia, though i guess the board of directors of TRFC are responsible based on the Brian Stockbridge signature.

I am sure it is no coincidence this is submitted on Christmas eve.

What also occurs to me is … TRFC have claimed through the pinsent Mason report lots of things but are still incapable of submitting the correct AR01.

Also the SFA must not give a licence to any “club” whose ownership is so deliberately hidden and obfuscated. Part of the licence ensures the integrity of the competitions (for example, no single person controls more than 1 SFA club!)

Merry Xmas to all (and I do mean all) and hope Santa brings you what you desire.

So though it may sound stupid, a proper AR01 for TRFC would be a pleasant surprise for me. I also believe in the Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy and Magic Pixies too!

Buddy

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on4:02 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Smugas at 9:32 (how do you do quotes on an iPad?)

I’m a relative newbie as a poster on this site and genuinely hugely enjoy your contributions but on this occasion we will need to agree to differ. Promotion and any administration event should be mutually exclusive. If the rules don’t state that then the rules are unfit for purpose. I genuinely don’t know whether the rules don’t state that because nobody could imagine a scenario where a club without cash could possibly enjoy sufficient on the field success to win their league by 15 or 25 points or whether the authorities knew this was the Sevco strategy all along. If the plan all along has been to buy success by 15 or 25 points knowing that an administration event was inevitable it will (for me) dwarf anything that has already happened. I do have some limited sympathy for the other clubs that have suffered an administration event. I believe they were all mismanaged,,but I never had a sense that they were knowingly taking the p1ss.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on4:08 pm - Dec 24, 2013


fara1968 says: (145)
December 24, 2013 at 2:48 pm

I was thinking of our compliant media with regards to the spending activities, (or lack) of Celtic FC following their recent good run of financial success. Our media sources to a man are all of the opinion that Lawell should have broke the bank to achieve European success. These people are either very stupid or very sinister.
=========================================================================
Oh my bet is on the sinister and I’m sure as the full realities of the Rangers financial situation becomes clearer then there will be increasing pressure from the SMSM on Celtic to spend money and the lever will be trying to create dissatisfaction in Celtic fans to in turn put pressure on the Board to loosen the purse strings.

The media campaign will claim it’s for the good of Celtic and Scotland that NL should be given a warchest to get beyond the group stages. The fans will be told they deserve this money being spent to reward their support for the club.

And it doesn’t matter whether Celtic ‘fail’ at the qualifiers or the group stage the SMSM will use that as proof that the Celtic Board have no vision and no real ambition for the club.

That’s when the older and wiser heads within the Celtic support will need to expose the corruption at the core of the SMSM coverage and make sure more volatile and easily led supporters have the full facts explained to them.

I expect there will be an onslaught of press coverage on this issue from the beginning of the year and it will be intensified if there are no ‘star’ signings in the January window. Sowing the seeds of discontent among the Celtic support is going to be the plan and the press will talk-down winning the league or cups and attempt to create a ‘need’ in Celtic supporters to only value the chimera of European success.

Obviously the financial fate of Rangers will influence the media campaign which will also be turned on clubs, other than Celtic, who are also deemed to be a threat to Rangers supremacy.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on4:17 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Bryce,,

buying leagues when one has limited resources is morally reprehensible yes, but it is not against the rules. I am a firm believer that you cannot change the rules halfway through a season so secco, and everyone else, can only ‘play the hand they’re dealt.’

Two things. Firstly, yes you are correct. If the infamous and unseen business plan forwarded by sevco said we’re going to blow the 3rd and 4th opposition out of the water and then see what happens then questions should be asked. Equally, if they forwarded a fictional plan that is clearly off beam then questions should be asked. The SFA won’t provide the answers you seek if no-one asks the friggin’ question.

Secondly, just to save on your disappointment later I am increasingly expecting a situation where a 26+pt gap is established whereby an undisclosed ‘relevant’ points penalty is applied to get it out of the way in time for next year. Why undisclosed? See barking new club thread for details.

EDIT: Oops, meant to add – why are the rules unfit for purpose? Because no-one ever expect either the spanish inquisition, the paul murray requisition or even a liquidated team still being around to have a second one.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on4:22 pm - Dec 24, 2013


ecobhoy says: (2095)
December 24, 2013 at 4:08 pm

fara1968 says: (145)
December 24, 2013 at 2:48 pm
=============================
To say the same thing but different, or at least from a different perspective, that of a diddy team.

The only team that’s going to beat Celtic to the league just now is Celtic.

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on4:40 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Smugas

If our authorities had a spine, tooth or testicle between them, then in the scenario we are discussing Sevco would be charged with bringing the game into disrepute (or face some other charges) and penalised accordingly excluding the possibility of promotion. When CW withheld PAYE & NIC it was recognised that this was an offence that went beyond ‘mere’ administration. The initial penalty reflected that, even if it has since effectively been nullified by delaying the start of the registration embargo and the trialists loophole. There is less than a snowbell in hell’s chance that either the SFA or the SPFL will do the right thing in the event of Sevco leading the league by more than any potential points deduction in the event of insolvency.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on4:46 pm - Dec 24, 2013


I am confident that the Celtic board, populated by Lawyers, Accountants and successful businessmen will take their own counsel, rather than being dictated to by Scottish sports hacks who delight in saying they know nothing about business.

Taunts in the papers about a “biscuit tin mentality” may have worked in the past, but that was when that was the only source of information and opinion people had, outwith their personal groups who were subject to the same manipulation. With the ubiquitousness of the interweb and social media most supporters are too sophisticated to fall for that propaganda nowadays. Information is, as they say, power. They have lost control of the information available and have lost their power.

If the Rangers owner were to say what Murray did about fivers and tenners most people nowadays would probably say “Fair enough, I’ll just sit back and watch your club die”.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on4:50 pm - Dec 24, 2013


buddy_holly says: (120)
December 24, 2013 at 3:37 pm
easyJambo says: (618)
December 24, 2013 at 12:26 pm

re: TRFCL Annual Return

I have previously published all of the names and shareholdings given in the updated Annual Return and what jumps out at me is why an incomplete return was submitted in the first place because all the info involved was contained in the TRFCL board minute of 31 October 2012 published courtesy of CF.

Of course the updated return isn’t actually complete as it doesn’t show actual transfers of shares throughout the period from Incorporation of Sevco Scotland.

However it is nice to see that Rangers have finally publicly afdmitted that Margarita isn’t a shareholder as their shares were transferred to ATP Investments Ltd in the summer of 2012. I have repeatedly pointed this out and yet the SMSM and Rangers figures still refer to Margarita and its proxy votres being given to the Easdales. Of course Maragrita was a mystery and so is ATP so some things never change it seems down Ibrox way 😛

Of course the latest Annual Return is still incomplete as it doesn’t list Margarita’s shareholding. It must be remembered that an Annual Return has to show all shareholding transactions including those where all the shares held by an entity have been transferred to another entity. So why does Margarita have to be ‘disappeared’.

There are various other ‘transfers’ which aren’t noted because the return only shows a ‘snapshot’ of the shareholdings as at 18 December 2012 when they were swapped for RIFC shares. But the Annual Return wrt shareholding shouldn’t just be a ‘snapshot’ but should be a record of all the share transactions from Incorporation of Sevco Scotland in May 2012 until the end of May 2013.

And as I have pointed out for months if all the TRFCL shares were transferred to RIFC in December 2012 how can TRFCL exist without at least a £1 share? That share should be shown in the TRFCL Annual Return and it isn’t. There are a host of anomalies in the latest return.

And always remember that the amended document has only been filed because of pressure by bampots and clatterers and some very lukewarm support from a couple of journos who allowed Companies House to palm them off without an actual answer as to why the information was not only missing but caused wrong information to be included in the public register for TRFCL.

The RP04 form is only used to correct inaccuracies contained in a previously submitted document and the RP04 must only be filed to coirrect inaccuracies which appear on the public register at Companies House.

The tangled web continues to be woven 😈

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on4:59 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Smugas says: (655)
December 24, 2013 at 4:22 pm
ecobhoy says: (2095)
December 24, 2013 at 4:08 pm
fara1968 says: (145)
December 24, 2013 at 2:48 pm
=============================
To say the same thing but different, or at least from a different perspective, that of a diddy team. The only team that’s going to beat Celtic to the league just now is Celtic.
==================================
This season isn’t important to the media/PR campaign I have sketched out which is designed over a longer timescale covering the next two seasons when it will be of more benefit to Rangers. But you are quite correct that the present danger to Celtic is more likely to come from elements of its own support and watching the knee-jerk reaction against the Celtic Board over the St Johnstone flags, banners and flares issue by some Celtic fans – before the club had even issued a statement on its position – showed some worrying signs IMO.

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on5:01 pm - Dec 24, 2013


ecobhoy says: (2095)
December 24, 2013 at 4:08 pm
2 0 Rate This

It is an accepted fact that for whatever combination of reasons corruption/commercial/rangersness/agenda/tradition/laziness, the SMSM refused to cover the financials of RFC(NIL) in their descent to chaos.

Then no one in the SMSM is correctly critically asking the appropriate question re SEVCO/TRFC through the Green Bullshit and IPO and now RIFC.

Suddenly the SMSM have became involved in financial matters related to CFC in order to push the same corruption/commercial/rangersness/agenda/tradition/laziness with a damascus like moment where the SMSM understand the UEFA funding model for CL/EL and the complexities of how to run a football club at approximately break even.

SMSM has broken cover in order to run the ridiculous line that CFC need a £6million pound striker to compete at CL level (against Barcelona apparently). While being so blind that Barcelona, a club with an approximate 400 million GBP (483 million EURO) revenue is comparable to a Celtic a club with revenue of approximately £70 million.

Soon there will be a new squirrel for the SMSM to attempt to use as a distraction.

Buddy

View Comment

buddy_hollyPosted on5:15 pm - Dec 24, 2013


ecobhoy says: (2097)
December 24, 2013 at 4:50 pm
4 0 Rate This

buddy_holly says: (120)
December 24, 2013 at 3:37 pm
easyJambo says: (618)
December 24, 2013 at 12:26 pm

re: TRFCL Annual Return

As you say a web is continually woven in more intricate ways.

Is it all an elaborate work to move the RFC(NIL) assets through as many hands as possible and as far away as possible from the RFC(NIL) creditors.

OR is just spiverry in order to facilitate the best outcome for the SPIVS?

Without the TRFCL board minute of 31 October 2012 published courtesy of CF, we would be n a far poorer position in this discussion.

Now some of the CF material has dubious authenticity, but the actual return seem on first glance to match quiet closely with the TRFCL board minute of 31 October 2012.

Buddy

View Comment

EKBhoyPosted on5:25 pm - Dec 24, 2013


jimlarkin says: (718)
December 24, 2013 at 1:44 pm
6 0 Rate This

Casper- you got a link ?

Merry christmas to all on TSFM
(And I do mean all – you too EKbhoy)
——————
Cheers and a happy New Year

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on5:28 pm - Dec 24, 2013


TRFCL corrected Annual Return details

As I have stated above the correction to the previously submitted incomplete and apparently incorrect Annual Return for TRFCL doesn’t mention Margarita but only ATP Investments whom Margarita’s 2.6 million shares were transferred to in the summer of 2012. The former Margarita shareholding in TRFCL was held by ATP until 18 December 2012 when it was swapped on a 1-for-1 basis for RIFC shares.

The important question which arises is whether ATP still owns these 2.6 million shares. If it does how was it possible for Sandy Easdale to be given a voting proxy for the AGM for 2.6 million shares in the name of Margarita Funds Holding Trust.

Were these 2.6 million shares transferred back from ATP to Margarita after 18 December 2012 or do ATP still have their 2.6 million shares? This could mean that Margarita has bought another 2.6 million shares at the IPO or from AIM but on the assumption they bought their original shares at 1p then they would have to have coughed-up 70p a share on flotation ro replace their 2.6 million share stake. And, if replaced on AIM, the cost would have been higher as share price peaked around 95p and the real collapse in price didn’t happen from memory until June.

Doesn’t make sense to me and just another one of the little mysteries surrounding Rangers and its flotation.

http://www.rangersinternationalfootballclub.com/share-information

View Comment

BigGavPosted on5:43 pm - Dec 24, 2013


ecobhoy says:
December 24, 2013 at 4:50 pm

And as I have pointed out for months if all the TRFCL shares were transferred to RIFC in December 2012 how can TRFCL exist without at least a £1 share? That share should be shown in the TRFCL Annual Return and it isn’t. There are a host of anomalies in the latest return.
——–

I may be misunderstanding you, but I don’t see the problem here.
TRFCL still has 33,415,200 shares (as shown in Part 3 of the return).
It’s just that now they are all owned by RIFC plc, whereas previously they were owned by various holders – who swapped them for shares in RIFC.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on6:18 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Indeed

THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB LIMITED
SC425159
Registered Address: Ibrox Stadium,
150 Edmiston Drive,
Glasgow,
G51 2XD

Issued Share Capital – £334,152

RANGERS INTERNATIONAL FOOTBALL CLUB PLC – 33,415,200 (at £0.01) 100.00%

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on6:22 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Which is also why they paid substantially less then the 70p and above that later “investors” paid.

If I remember correctly Shares in the ltd company were swapped for shares in the PLC. One share in the PLC for two in the Ltd Company. However shares in the Ltd Company then traded at 70p, rising to about 90p before dropping dramatically.

Well Charles did say anyone who invested in the Ltd Co would get their money doubled in jig time.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on7:49 pm - Dec 24, 2013


As I recently posted it came as a surprise to me to learn that Rangers on entering admin only only a few thousand in back rates to Glasgow and East Dunbartonshire Councils which seemed to suggest that CW had made an exception and paid his rates – Strange as it might seem

So was just looking at the Scottish Assessors Association rating website for Ibrox and Murray Park – honestly I’m not a saddo but I am sitting loaded with the cold and just not able to go to the pub 🙁

The latter comes under East Dunbartonshire Council and shows the proprietor as: Sevco Scotland Ltd at Edmiston Drive and shows the rateable value at £598,500 effective from 1 April 2010. Curiously it also shows that this figure is under appeal but apparently not from the revaluation which I think probably refers to the general revaluation of 2010.

What I don’t know is whether when an appeal is lodged that payments are frozen or not and perhaps someone with knowledge in this field might be able to assist.

Looking at Ibrox Stadium then it isn’t a former company name that is given as the proprietor but the non-existant company: ‘Rangers Football Club Ltd’. I’m not saying that this is an intentional error but considering that the rates valuation work for Ibrox is handled by an external rating company – Les Ewan Associates – I would have thought that the error would have been corrected. I assume the proprietor is meant to be ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’ but of course perhaps I am wrong in that assumption.

Rateable value for Ibrox is £1.1 million effective from 1 April 2013 and there is no appeal against the figure set. The Ibrox Valuation has fallen in line with Rangers’ league status. In 2005 the valuation figure was £1.76 million and at the 2010 general revaluation this increased to £1.916 million which was appealed.

It appears that the appeal settlement was set at £1 million with the valuation notice issued on 8 February 2013 but effective from 14 June 2012. So again I am left with the question as to whether the rates need to be paid when the valuation is under appeal. And if the revised valuation notice wasn’t issued until 8 February this year does that mean that no rates were paid from 14 June by the new owners? I just don’t know the answer to that.

But the question is also raised in my mind that the same could apply to the 2010 Valuation wrt the period 1 April 2010 to 13 June 2012. Did CW or D&P pay any rates during that period or is there a get-out because an appeal is in which wasn’t decided until February 2013 which could mean it wouldn’t have been on the list of creditors?

I could be way off-beam but still if you don’t ask the questions then you don’t get the laughs.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on7:59 pm - Dec 24, 2013


BigGav says: (91)
December 24, 2013 at 5:43 pm
ecobhoy says:
December 24, 2013 at 4:50 pm

And as I have pointed out for months if all the TRFCL shares were transferred to RIFC in December 2012 how can TRFCL exist without at least a £1 share? That share should be shown in the TRFCL Annual Return and it isn’t. There are a host of anomalies in the latest return.
——–
I may be misunderstanding you, but I don’t see the problem here. TRFCL still has 33,415,200 shares (as shown in Part 3 of the return). It’s just that now they are all owned by RIFC plc, whereas previously they were owned by various holders – who swapped them for shares in RIFC.
=====================================================
My brain is obviously addled with hot toddies 😳

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on8:27 pm - Dec 24, 2013


ecobhoy says: (2100)
December 24, 2013 at 7:49 pm
‘….What I don’t know is whether when an appeal is lodged that payments are frozen or not…’
——–
This link might be of some help,ecobhoy:
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Government/local-government/17999/11199/brief-guide/valuationappeal
I note this sentence:

“.You must continue to pay your rates bill until your appeal is decided or you may be liable to recovery action by the council. If you succeed in your appeal and your rates bill is reduced, you will receive back any overpayment and may receive interest on the amount you have overpaid….”

Have another toddie, and happy Christmas!

View Comment

billyj1Posted on8:33 pm - Dec 24, 2013


Ecobhoy
As far as payment of rates is concerned, any rateable occupier is required to pay rates based on the value shown in the valuation roll. Should the property valuation as shown be reduced under appeal the ratepayer is entitled to a refund of overpaid rates, plus interest. Payments are not frozen when a subject is under appeal.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on8:53 pm - Dec 24, 2013


And indeed, happy Christmas to all, and may the new year bring us as much fun and games as the ‘saga’, possibly including the merry jingle of handcuffs for some! 🙂

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:24 pm - Dec 24, 2013


I wish every one of you a peaceful and joyous Christmas.

View Comment

Comments are closed.