Our First podcast features a general discussion involving our own Big Pink and Auldheid.
Since it is the first podcast there is no particular agenda save for a general chat about TSFM, the state of Scottish Football, and some few reminiscences. The chat covers a lot of ground, but establishes the ethos of the blog pretty well.
Topics discussed include FPP, Leadership, Interdependence, Scotland’s self-regard, Coaching and Nurturing of Talent, Redistribution of Income, Rangers, Forgiveness, domestic strife 🙂
The interview was conducted a couple of days before the latest round of Armageddon, when Big Pink and Auldheid felt safe and well 🙂
The link below is to the iTunes store page for our Podcasts. If you go there, you can subscribe to the podcast (on your PC or iPhone) and new episodes will automatically be sent to you.
Since we have just been approved for a spot on iTunes, the iTunes search side of things may not work properly for a day or so.
redlichtie says:
February 19, 2014 at 11:07 am
22 0
Rate This
“Dear Mr….
Thank you for your further mail; I have been asked to respond in my capacity as a
Customer Services Officer”…
—————
Infrequent poster here – catching up phew!… on the last few days.
The similarities between Companies House modus operandi and the SFA’s Mission Statement might lead one to believe they were both copied from the same draft document and the contexts changed to suit. 🙄
john clarke says:
February 19, 2014 at 11:32 am
redlichtie says:
February 19, 2014 at 11:07 am
‘….I have now received my reply from Companies House..’
————-
And well done on drawing forth such an (to me, anyway) illuminating reply, which totally re-inforces the belief that Companies House is little more than a useless excrescence on the landscape.
“..We do not have the statutory power or capability to verify the accuracy of the
information that companies send to us. ”
What is the point of it, if it cannot in some way validate/refuse to validate the events reported to it, but merely refers the enquirer to the source of the information , which may -heaven forfend- be crooked!
lord, it would gar ye greet!
============================================================================
JC…whilst I cannot and would not think of speaking for the other beancounters on here, I can assure you that collectively, we have been “greetin’ for mony a wheen o’years”…!
As you say, the information is not only inaccurate, but usually out of date by anything up to twelve months.
Frustrating as it is, I do not vent my spleen on the public servants who staff Companies House offices, but on the politicians who lack the drive to reform it and make it not only useful and transparent, but accountable to us as taxpayers…!
PS Forgive my rant, but I believe it justified based on my experience of filing useless forms and data returns purely for the sake of it!
Castofthousands says: at 5:32 pm
futbol says: at 3:05 pm
“…Sevco 5088 Limited entered into agreements for no consideration to legally reassign its beneficial interest in funding placing letters held and to novate the trade and assets purchase agreement…”
—————————–
That was a good spot futbol. I’ve never felt entirely comfortable that this statement sits happily alongside Craig Whyte’s Letter Before Claim (Action). It depends on whether this is a real dispute or just smoke and mirrors. Ticketus (Octopus) pursuit of CW could similarly just be a method of providing legal basis to claim whatever assets CW might possess that would satisfy their damages.
I’m not even sure we should be doing the Royal Courts and SMSM work for them but it is a strangely fascinating pursuit.
Campbellsmoney, thanks for keeping me right
.——-
.
After `Transparency Calls` …………………………………………………
Didn`t an `Independent` Inquiry settle all this?
[stop laughing at the back there]
& the `Proof of the Pudding` is – says a taxpayer funded `independent` organisation;
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/22714334
.
So there you go – sorted
.
.
[Blimey 😉 ]
barcabuster says:
February 19, 2014 at 12:54 pm
The liquidation sale, was a two part affair, and conditional on the failure of a CVA bid.
If memory serves, 5088 provided the £8.5m funding letter, and paid the security fee, which guaranteed their bidding status.
I was thinking that the deed of release, may have been used to relieve 5088 of that status.
This would free D&P to sell to CG, as they then had no obligation to 5088.
—–
My interpretation of the conversation is that the ‘deed of release’ relates to CW delivering his (or more accurately, Wavetower’s) Oldco shares to Sevco (5088) and releasing his ‘debenture’ (the floating charge) over the company’s assets. I do not see this as authorising a transfer from Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland (which did not even exist at that time, prior to the CVA being rejected). Indeed, there is talk on the tape about the release being specific to Sevco only (meaning Sevco 5088).
Remember that the Sevco CVA offer was conditional on them acquiring the controlling interest in Oldco.
Of course, the CVA failed to materialise and CW was no longer needed, allowing CG to make the switcheroo to Sevco Scotland behind his back.
Allyjambo, Campbellsmoney
Judging by the pitiful TU/TD ratio my post is probably a load of jobby, but at the risk of digging myself in deeper let me try and explain better. To quote Phil verbatim:
‘As of Monday 10th February I understand that the last of the IPO money was gone.
Moreover I have been informed that the credit facility of £2.5 million provided probably by some directors has been used up.’
Apologies to Phil if I’ve misinterpreted him, but it reminded me of earlier in the season when BS (I think) caused a huge stooshie when a Sevco supporters group asked him how much of the IPO money was left and he could not answer. Let me use an anology.
I am a doctor. My main income is my basic NHS salary, but I have other income in the form of:
1 NHS contractual extra sessions
2 An availability supplement
3 Ad hoc extra NHS work
4 A managerial responsibility payment
5 Fees for reports, certificates etc generated by my NHS work
6 Speaker fees from pharmaceutical companies for presentations to GPs
7 I have a very small private practice which generates income from several private health insurers and directly from uninsured patients
8 Interest from banks and building societies
9 A monthly direct debit from Mrs C as her contribution to the household bills
In this way I am like Sevco with several different sources of income, but when I buy a pint of Stella it isn’t paid for specifically from any of 1-9, it simply comes from my bank account, and equally I could not tell you on December 26th whether all of my private practice income was spent on Xmas. I either have cash or I don’t. Hope that makes sense.
bad capt madman says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:17 pm
31 1 Rate This
Tom Nairn in 1970, adapted from Diderot said “Scotland will be reborn the day the last minister is strangled with the last copy of the Sunday Post.”
Maybe Scottish football will be reborn the day the last SFA president is strangled with the last copy of the five way agreement.
Just a thought.
——————————————————————————————————
Or maybe choke on trying to swallow a shredder
Haven’t seen these posted and they make for interesting and amusing reading.
Essentially the first two articles are about how well the youth set up is doing and a big part of it is Ally keeping up morale as the under 20s stoosh the Cup and that the kids will get a chance once the league is won (this is probably the most factual part as it may avoid paying appearance/win bonuses if the high earners are still there and if not…).
The third is by Aidan Smith, apparently a Celtic fan who is pining for the return of the OF so he can take his boy to enjoy his Govan rite of passage. The most telling thing to me in the article is the last paragraph (pasted below) and especially the final quote from Willie Mathieson:
“Can’t live with them? Can’t live without them. We can discuss the kind of Rangers we’d like to see at a later date – August 2015 looks like the opportune moment – but their return to meaningful hostilities is inevitable. They will give credence to a club going the whole season unbeaten, to everything. The Old Firm derby will once again be fanfared, by a man from Sky who sounds like as he’s about to spontaneously combust, as the greatest, anywhere. Like it or not, this is how Scottish football works. As Willie Mathieson almost said: “Life as it was, life as it will be again.””
Strange that the Club is still issuing PR statements about the youth set up yet there is nothing to challenge the more recent news around finances and court cases…
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/gordon-durie-credits-mccoist-for-rangers-morale-1-3309954
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/rangers-kids-will-get-chance-after-title-win-1-3309963
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/aidan-smith-old-firm-clubs-are-like-bossy-parents-1-3308234?WT.mc_id=Outbrain_text&obref=obinsite
I won’t add the link talking about the possible Cup run. Would hate to spoil anyone’s dinner, claret and/or cigars.
Bryce – understand your point – however its not the same comparison
Both IPO and the LOC are 2 distinct one-off separate events -not as in your example multiple reoccurring events so they should be able to differentiate the sums.
As an example
If I won the lottery of 1 million (IPO) and also had an amount left to me from an aunt (300K) (LOC), after a year of holidays and parties, I had 200K left, would know that I had spent the lottery money and was now living off the money left from my aunt.
Or am I missing something?
Para Handy says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:12 pm
… Strange that the Club is still issuing PR statements about the youth set up yet there is nothing to challenge the more recent news around finances and court cases…
————
Perhaps the youth squad is what the fans will have to get behind next season? Certainly, they would be financially sustainable. I read Durie was not planning on full-time management again for health reasons, but there are others who would jump at the chance for a fraction of the McCoist stipend.
Exiled Celt
Agreed up to a point, but it would depend how you treated the one off incomes. If you put them into separate accounts you might be able to say whether a particular source had run out, but only if you used the one off incomes for one off expenditures. Interestingly Mrs C and I have inherited money this year. The money I inherited just went into my current account and I could not tell you how much of it I have spent, but in the case of the money Mrs C inherited we put it into a separate account and are using some of it for a special 10th wedding anniversary holiday in the Seychelles. At the same time, my wife could equally have simply put it into her current account and paid for the holiday from that account. All very arbitrary and more than a little pedantic, but I hope you get my point.
Edit – if you received £1.3 million in two separate amount of £1 million and £300,000, and spent £1.1 million I’m not sure I agree that you have spent all of the £1 million but only a third of the £300,000, even if the £1 million was received earlier than the smaller sum. Apologies to all for utter pedantry, but I have never had more than 5 TDs before so feeling a bit fragile lol!
Allyjambo says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:09 am
ianagain says:
February 18, 2014 at 10:59 pm
ianagain (what were you called in between? 😉 ),
Another example of just how useful it is to this blog that we have people like yourself who are prepared to make the effort to attend these legal proceedings. Anyone still wonder why we are so dismissive of the SMSM?
Was it actually made clear that all CF’s material can be used, and not just the tapes?
=======================================================================
Ally J
It was crystal clear not just tapes allowed, several Emails from Charlottes stuff read out discussed etc.
One thing I did forget to mention was Phillips seemed ultra keen on distancing David Grier in particular from any sense of naughtiness. Multiple reasons given why he was not party to various “dodgy” conversations.
PS for all of you have a look over at the Drum coverage and you can see James working on his real job at the NOW/Brooks case.
Bryce – no I don’t get the point – unless the point is to denigrate Phil. No matter how many accounts you have a good accountant knows the total of all incomings, outgoings and money on hand – at any given point in time ready to report to the CFO. If they don’t and say its to complicated its time to find a new job.
No need to reply – I think I know your point – and it is nothing to do with accounting 🙂
Bryce, I kind of get your point, but the unchalleged message is that the well is dry. If, however, there is a wee bit left in the well, does it really matter which bucket(s) it’s stored in?
Interesting chat with a Sevco fan tonight. He agrees that a club suffering an insolvency event should not be allowed promotion. In fact he went further and said they should be sent to the very bottom. I didn’t clarify whether this was the 4th tier or something lower, but refreshing nevertheless. Sadly he acknowledged that his view was not that of the average fan, and without any prompting from me essentially referred to the astonishing sense of entitlement of the average Sevco fan.
Exiled Celt – in the friendliest manner possible, I think I should be allowed to decide whether or not to reply to your post specifically addressed to me, regardless of whether you think you know my point
I will confess; I do often find Phil’s style grating. At the same time, as I have already mentioned, I had the same reaction when the question of how much of the IPO money was left was put to BS. At the end of the day a club/company/clumpany has income and it has expenditure. How expenditure is treated in relation to income is completely arbitrary and there are no relevant rules of accountancy.
I honestly don’t want to start an argument.
bailemeanach says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:46 pm
Bryce, I kind of get your point, but the unchalleged message is that the well is dry. If, however, there is a wee bit left in the well, does it really matter which bucket(s) it’s stored in?
To stretch the analogy further – as I read it from Phil’s blog – the well’s run dry, and they’ve had to top it up again from the £2.5m guaranteed credit line. So in that respect, if true, the IPO money,and any other cash they’ve had is now gone.
On other more important news…………seems ICT are ok now…and a sensible agreement completed for the ticket allocation
http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/26235239
Scottish League Cup final ticket plan agreed
The seating plan for next month’s League Cup final at Celtic Park has been agreed after further consultation with Aberdeen and Inverness CT.
Fans of the Highlanders will be housed in the lower tier of the Lisbon Lions Stand and an adjacent corner of the Main Stand.
Dons followers are to take up the rest of the 60,000-capacity stadium, while the upper section of the Lisbon Lions has been left unallocated.
A crowd of around 40,000 is expected.
Inverness were upset by the publication of a seating arrangement on Aberdeen’s official website, describing the lay-out, which had their fans split between the Main Stand and Lisbon Lions as “unacceptable”.
But the Scottish Professional Football League were quick to say the Dons had been premature in announcing details and both teams are now satisfied with the outcome.
Aberdeen negotiated an initial allocation of more than 30,000 tickets for the Sunday, 16 March showpiece.
Their Scottish Premiership rivals have been given under 8,000 tickets to sell.
“We believe the agreement reached represents the best possible and fairest result for fans of both clubs and will also help us create a spectacular final for those watching on television across the breadth of Scotland and beyond,” said SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster.
Inverness chairman Kenny Cameron added: “We are very happy with the allocation agreed, which provides exactly what our fan base was looking for, and thank both the SPFL and Aberdeen for accommodating our wishes.”
And the cordial tone continued with an Aberdeen spokesman saying: “The Scottish League Cup run to the final has really captured the imagination of our support and the city. We are absolutely delighted with the allocation agreed with the SPFL and our friends at Inverness Caledonian Thistle and look forward to enjoying the backing of a big and noisy Red Army on 16 March.”
toadinthehole – agreed. If they have no money just say so. If the IPO money has ran out, do they still have season ticket money for example?
Bryce Curdy says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:31 pm
===================================
I hope you don’t take this personally as it isn’t me to be.
However if Rangers are being run on the same level of financial organisation and forward planning as most household budgets that might perhaps explain why it has recurring financial problems.
Any accountant who doesn’t know when £18 million of IPO money has gone or when the £2.5 million survival fund is exhausted should be fired – oh that’s happened already 😆
Exiled Celt says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:12 pm
1
0
Rate This
________________________________________________
They got there. Difficult to see how SPFL could have come up with anything stupider than the initial suggestion. (How much are these guys paid???)
But a sensible arrangement that works for everyone has been arrived at.
Bring it on.
(Expect Caley to make it over 10K. There are upper stands that can be opened)
@BigGav.
“Remember that the Sevco CVA offer was conditional on them acquiring the controlling interest in Oldco.
Of course, the CVA failed to materialise and CW was no longer needed, allowing CG to make the switcheroo to Sevco Scotland behind his back.”
Gav, I don’t see that after the CVA failure the shares became irrelevant.
The liquidation sale was tied to the CVA. The shares were needed for the CVA attempt, yes, but the CVA attempt was part of he liquidation sale agreement. The fact that the shares were not needed for the liquidation sale, is negated by the fact they were needed for the attempted CVA. Without one, there was no other.
After the CVA failure, the liquidation was not an open auction. It was bound to 5088.
I am speculating the exact nature and form of the two Deeds of Release documents, as I don’t have the expertise.
As long as the bind between the CVA and liquidation sale is broken is the important part. which I believe the Deed of Release could achieve.
ecobhoy – I beg to differ, and equally hope you don’t take this personally.
If ‘Rangers’, as you call them, were being run on the same level of financial organisation and forward planning as most household budgets then they would NOT be having recurrent financial problems. Their problems are clearly as a result of expenses >>> income just like every household with the same problem.
Here’s a challenge. Make up some numbers for the various sources of income for Sevco, put your accountant’s hat on, and allocate them to their expenses. Any answer to this is completely arbitrary.
Bryce Curdy says:
February 19, 2014 at 6:37 pm
Bryce,
That post makes sense, but doesn’t explain what you meant in your previous one. I still can’t find the bit in Phil’s blog that makes reference to money from the IPO being used for one thing, and the money from the loan mentioned, being used for something else. He merely says that the money from both has been spent. In your doctor’s scenario, what he says equates to the doctor spending all his money regardless of where he got it from. Just like most of us, I suppose 🙁
Thank you for replying, and for the avoidance of doubt, I didn’t TD your post as my question was genuine and I was only concerned that I didn’t get your meaning. Sadly, welcome though your response was, I still don’t get what you meant.
ianagain says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:40 pm
Thanks for your reply, Ian, it’s good to know that all the CF stuff is included. But you missed out your answer to the most important question: what were you called after you were called Ian, but before you were called Ian, again?
barcabuster says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:30 pm
————
What you say about the CVA and liquidation sale being linked is quite correct, and Sevco 5088 were given exclusive rights to both options together.
We also know that somehow or another, in a way never clearly explained, the right was later transferred to Sevco Scotland after the CVA proposal was rejected.
However, I don’t see the ‘deed of release’ mentioned in the taped conversation as being relevant to that, as it seems to me that this is to do with CW delivering his part of the bargain (the shares and debenture) that was required for the CVA.
Why would CW sign something authorising a transfer to Sevco Scotland (which did not even exist at the time)?
Isn’t his legal case based on the fact that the transfer was done without his consent?
Or are you perhaps suggesting he was duped into signing something which wasn’t what he thought it was?
Allyjambo – so why don’t just state that Sevco have no money, rather than the IPO money? I recognise that the £2.5 million credit facility was/is exceptional, but in my mind everything else should be treated similarly.
There’s a very familiar pattern emerging.
Yawn,
Bryce
You are of course correct in one respect. Continuing the £1m lottery win and auntie’s inheritance model. The £1m money ‘wasted’ on wine women and song is different from that expenditure made on the strength of Auntie’s inheritance (the LOC) simply because, unusually for an inheritance, if its a LOC, then Aunties expecting it back! Phil’s point was correct but I agree the grammar was poor. They had cash. They no longer have cash, in fact they now have a debt, soft loan or not.
Campbellsmoney – Thanks re article 36. So membership transfer and point of entry appear to be two mutually exclusive items at the board’s discretion. And right before season ticket time too. Oops!
Resin_lab_dog says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:29 pm
4 0 Rate This
Exiled Celt says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:12 pm
1
0
Rate This
________________________________________________
They got there. Difficult to see how SPFL could have come up with anything stupider than the initial suggestion. (How much are these guys paid???)
But a sensible arrangement that works for everyone has been arrived at.
Bring it on.
(Expect Caley to make it over 10K. There are upper stands that can be opened)
================================================================
Glad to hear the plan has been improved somewhat, it should really go without saying that both teams in a final should be treated equally and fairly.
I’m a actually a bit surprised at the numbers discussed. I suspect ICT have more chance of selling out their 8K (and more) than AFC do of selling 30k. And I am a dons fan myself….
Still, it would be fantastic if both clubs could sell more than expected and really put on a show.
Roll on a great atmosphere, an entertaining game and a real showpiece final.
Allyjambo says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:52 pm
ianagain says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:40 pm
Thanks for your reply, Ian, it’s good to know that all the CF stuff is included. But you missed out your answer to the most important question: what were you called after you were called Ian, but before you were called Ian, again
======================================================
AllyJ
I seriously tried Ianc (Oops it was me from RTC disallowed) B D 0 1 etc etc and frustratingly typed again, (BEFORE going *this thankfully) So here I am AGAIN. 😆
Danish Pastry says:
Danish Pastry says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:15 pm
4 0 Rate This
There’s a very familiar pattern emerging.
Yawn,
Funny, I was just thinking exactly the same thing…..
The issue for me is, are HMRC checking their money is not in the meter, as there has been some confusion in the past as to what can be included as income. IPO/ST/Wonga/pies etc aside.
Bryce Curdy says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:31 pm
3 13 Rate This
ecobhoy – I beg to differ, and equally hope you don’t take this personally.
If ‘Rangers’, as you call them, were being run on the same level of financial organisation and forward planning as most household budgets then they would NOT be having recurrent financial problems. Their problems are clearly as a result of expenses >>> income just like every household with the same problem.
Here’s a challenge. Make up some numbers for the various sources of income for Sevco, put your accountant’s hat on, and allocate them to their expenses. Any answer to this is completely arbitrary.
==========================================================================
Bryce, if we work on the assumption that the IPO was all spent BEFORE the £2.5m loan was called in does this not explain Phil’s turn of phrase?
ie what if
They had x amount from the IPO.
They spent that.
They THEN borrowed a further sum y.
Further sum was then spent.
Campbellsmoney says:
February 19, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Castofthousands says:
February 19, 2014 at 3:02 pm
Another slant on the separate 5088 and Scotland documents is that for a contract to be valid, consideration (payment) would have to be made.
————————————————————————————————————————————-
That is not correct. There does not always have to be consideration. Scots law and English law are different on this (Scots law does not require consideration and English law does not always require it
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The use of a Deed overcomes the requirement for a contract to have consideration passing to make it a recognised legal agreement.
Re Deed of Novation V Deed of Waiver are these actually the same thing being talked about by CW and RIFC but they are just using different terms. Is the use of the DofW a more commonly used English legal term whereas the DofN is more of a Scottish term?
FFS.
I recognise I a not a regular poster (although am absolutely a regular reader) on this site.
If TSFM is able then he will be able to post my previous comments (10x as many TU as TD) that I am not a troll!
I confess, I find Phil wearisome.
One sentence paragraphs remind me of the Daily Record.
Gratuitous Latin is horribly pretentious. ‘What a propos me?’
Matty Roth says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:22 pm
1
0
Rate This
Resin_lab_dog says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:29 pm
4 0 Rate This
Exiled Celt says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:12 pm
1
0
Rate This
================================================================
Glad to hear the plan has been improved somewhat, it should really go without saying that both teams in a final should be treated equally and fairly.
I’m a actually a bit surprised at the numbers discussed. I suspect ICT have more chance of selling out their 8K (and more) than AFC do of selling 30k. And I am a dons fan myself….
Still, it would be fantastic if both clubs could sell more than expected and really put on a show.
Roll on a great atmosphere, an entertaining game and a real showpiece final.
____________________________________________
I think everyone who wants to go will get to go. There will be additional allocations offered. Will give you a wave “-)
Just phoned sky cancelled the whole shebang.Sevco scottish cup game to be shown live I totally give up I’m out 🙁 🙁 🙁 🙁
Matty Roth says,
I’m a actually a bit surprised at the numbers discussed. I suspect ICT have more chance of selling out their 8K (and more) than AFC do of selling 30k. And I am a dons fan myself….
Still, it would be fantastic if both clubs could sell more than expected and really put on a show.
Roll on a great atmosphere, an entertaining game and a real showpiece final.
———————————-
Aye people seem to forget the distance the fans have to travel on a Sunday.
I’m hopeful of their being a crowd of around 40k
I’m looking forward to it anyway 😎
Bryce Curdy says:
February 19, 2014 at 8:31 pm
ecobhoy – I beg to differ, and equally hope you don’t take this personally.
If ‘Rangers’, as you call them, were being run on the same level of financial organisation and forward planning as most household budgets then they would NOT be having recurrent financial problems. Their problems are clearly as a result of expenses >>> income just like every household with the same problem.
Here’s a challenge. Make up some numbers for the various sources of income for Sevco, put your accountant’s hat on, and allocate them to their expenses. Any answer to this is completely arbitrary.
———————————————————————————————————————–
I don’t make-up numbers and leave that to those in charge of the Ministry of Disinformation at Ibrox. However I would observe that the now departed FD seems to have boobed with his made-up projection of £1 million being left by April if current rumblings are to be believed.
However time will tell as it usually does. Btw I would have thought that you might have kept a separate track of your various income streams to simplify completion of your tax returns.
Para Handy says:
February 19, 2014 at 7:12 pm
===========================
Aidan Smith is a Hibs fan, not a Celtic fan.
Sorry all Had to laugh. 😛
From Rangers Rumours (The “finance page”)
At least the Ed’s not so daft.
==============================================================================
19 Feb 2014 20:16:14
I was talking to a guy at work I said we can’t go into administration as we don’t owe any bank, or company any major money. We are debt free, I said so how can we go into administration?- He said it was a different company that raised the IPO money (RIFC) and loaned the money to Rangers, and it’s in our accounts. Anyone got any info on this?
mullad
{Ed039’s Note – Bloody hell)
BigGav@9.02pm
“Or are you perhaps suggesting that he was duped into signing something which was not what he thought it was”
Gav, that’s exactly it mate. The CVA was required for the administrators to pursue the going concern route. Otherwise it would have been a simple, straight-forward asset strip via liquidation.
The need for a CVA empowered CW, because of the shares. The administrators were under pressure to deliver, and insisted on the two part deal. CG needed a mechanism to break the tie.
CW, although he could not be seen to be officially linked to 5088, he had the tapes, texts, cheque stubs, and Imran’s maw’s account.
He also knew he was still a player in the two part bid. I think enough for him to feel comfortable that he had a wee earner on the way.
Having authority to eradicae, the tied deal was crucial to CG’s thinking to shaft CW. So was the need for an unconnected company to ward off any future threats from CW and his 5088 connection. (CG knew CW had the goods on 5088)
I might add that although CW may have thought he had a deal brokered which was breached. He had attempted to broker an illegal, “under the radar” deal. It may well have been, that CG simply informed D&P of his involvement, and they decided or were influenced to deconstruct the twinned deal.
I think they may have announced that though.
sickofitall says:
February 19, 2014 at 10:07 pm
8 2 Rate This
Just phoned sky cancelled the whole shebang.Sevco scottish cup game to be shown live I totally give up I’m out
————
It was predictable from Sky but I do resent the BBC broadcasting a club that boycotts them. Let the boycott be mutual. At least Albion Rovers make some decent money. On the day it’ll be 11 v 11 (cliche time) and reckon I do that the force strong it will be with AR.
Don’t really see what the big deal is with Sky showing the Rangers game. They’re a commercial operator showing the game that will get them the biggest audience. As Kevin Bacon would say in an extremely annoying fashion, it’s a no brainer.
I have had a number of emails , tweets and DM’s on the topic of barcabusters comments. Just to set the record straight, i’m not barcabuster, however i can understand the confusion when a new poster uses a moniker very similar to that of a long term poster.
Interesting information , but the moniker is going to cause some confusion on here.
fergussingstheblues says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:41 pm
‘… the talk around Grantown is that CW offered his ex-wife Grant Castle for the princely sum of £1.’
——–
Who he? and did she buy him? 😀
John Clark @11.05
Didn’t he use to do Record Breakers on BBC? 😕
And with that, to bed!
Hope you’ve got the horlicks made John.
The Wanderer @funatthetop 11m
Tomorrow’s Daily Mail back page regarding Laxey and Easdale’s ‘loans’ https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bg3983dCcAE2Dn2.jpg
@Barcabhoy.
Sorry mate, I didn’t mean to cause you any grief,
It’s a long term name I used to post on Paul McConvilles site, but I agree, It has obviously caused some confusion.
Dur to your length of “service” I think it would be appropriate to alter my moniker to avoid any repeats. It’s not as if it is my real name. Lol.
I will contact the deedpoll mods and sort it out.
BTW. I hope you never got to much flak that should have been aimed in my direction.
barcabuster says:
February 19, 2014 at 10:23 pm
“Or are you perhaps suggesting that he was duped into signing something which was not what he thought it was”
Gav, that’s exactly it mate. The CVA was required for the administrators to pursue the going concern route. Otherwise it would have been a simple, straight-forward asset strip via liquidation.
The need for a CVA empowered CW, because of the shares. The administrators were under pressure to deliver, and insisted on the two part deal. CG needed a mechanism to break the tie.
CW, although he could not be seen to be officially linked to 5088, he had the tapes, texts, cheque stubs, and Imran’s maw’s account.
He also knew he was still a player in the two part bid. I think enough for him to feel comfortable that he had a wee earner on the way.
Having authority to eradicae, the tied deal was crucial to CG’s thinking to shaft CW. So was the need for an unconnected company to ward off any future threats from CW and his 5088 connection. (CG knew CW had the goods on 5088)
I might add that although CW may have thought he had a deal brokered which was breached. He had attempted to broker an illegal, “under the radar” deal. It may well have been, that CG simply informed D&P of his involvement, and they decided or were influenced to deconstruct the twinned deal.
I think they may have announced that though.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Maybe the SFA/SPL got wind of CW involvement in 5088 (from Charles?) and insisted on a new non CW company.
Big Gav/Barcabuster
I’m enjoying the exchange and it is elucidating to see potential scenarios went through.
The Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) Charlotte published is in the name of Sevco 5088. The agreement clearly envisages an asset sale in the event of the failure of a CVA. Paul Clark had signed the covering letter agreement and dated it 12.05.12. He has also signed and dated the draft SPA that is entrained.
If CW was clever enough to concoct Charlotte would he really be so stupid to have signed documents that he did not know the contents of. The fact that he taped everything does indicate that he didn’t trust any of the characters involved. Could it work the other way round that CW let CG think he was duping him, knowing that he held all the cards?
GeronimosCadillac says:
February 20, 2014 at 12:01 am
“Maybe the SFA/SPL got wind of CW involvement in 5088 (from Charles?) and insisted on a new non CW company.”
————————–
There is a Charlotte document called ‘SFA-1’ which was deleted from Scribd due to legal objections at an early stage. It is an e:mail from the SFA lawyers (?) Biggart Baillie and it highlights the concern about CW involvement in the newly emerged Rangers. It goes on to ask 20 questions about ownership structure et al of the club/company. It is addressed to Brian Stockbridge and is dated 25 June 2012.
How does this date tie in with the other parts of the transaction (Gav/barcabuster)?
I can understand that Duff & Phelps would not want a deal jeopardised but if they had already signed off on the 5088 offer, could they renege? The draft 5-way agreement that has Sevco Scotland in situ is not dated so I cannot piece together the chronology.
Castofthousands says:
February 19, 2014 at 5:19 pm
I have a well developed sense of paranoia. Your spliced and cleaned up version is far more palatable than the original fragments. Don’t suppose you have any more of a similar fine vintage?
_________________________________________________________________________________
Would anyone be interested in the conversations between Cragie, Imran and Brain from 2012-05-31?
Cant see TRFC going into Admin
Not if Wallace decides to ask the fans for financial support at every home game
What if
Ally and Wallace walked round the park at half time so the fans could throw their money into a big sheet.
Maybe to some appropriate music like the CL anthem
They could have a raffle to see how much was raised with the winner helping to carry the sheet at the next home game
The beauty of this idea is that it could go on for ever, helps the cash flow and wouldn`t cost anything
Castofthousands says:
February 20, 2014 at 12:19 am
GeronimosCadillac says:
February 20, 2014 at 12:01 am
“Maybe the SFA/SPL got wind of CW involvement in 5088 (from Charles?) and insisted on a new non CW company.”
————————–
There is a Charlotte document called ‘SFA-1′ which was deleted from Scribd due to legal objections at an early stage. It is an e:mail from the SFA lawyers (?) Biggart Baillie and it highlights the concern about CW involvement in the newly emerged Rangers. It goes on to ask 20 questions about ownership structure et al of the club/company. It is addressed to Brian Stockbridge and is dated 25 June 2012.
How does this date tie in with the other parts of the transaction (Gav/barcabuster)?
I can understand that Duff & Phelps would not want a deal jeopardised but if they had already signed off on the 5088 offer, could they renege? The draft 5-way agreement that has Sevco Scotland in situ is not dated so I cannot piece together the chronology.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sevco Scotland on 14 June 2012, when the Deed of Novation was signed, had already become the new Rangers. The SFA write to Sevco Scotland on 25 June 2012 to ask if Whyte is involved.
We know CW was 5088 because he says so on the tape and from all of the pre admin planning for a “pre pack” with D&P he was involved in. 5088 signed over the benefit of an agreement that we know now was worth at least £40m for no consideration. CW got sued for £17m by Ticketus. He’s down £57m and yet he’s not involved in Sevco Scotland?
Castofthousands says: February 20, 2014 at 12:19 am
I can understand that Duff & Phelps would not want a deal jeopardised but if they had already signed off on the 5088 offer, could they renege? The draft 5-way agreement that has Sevco Scotland in situ is not dated so I cannot piece together the chronology.
=======================
The “External Draft 6” of the 5-way agreement that CF issued makes reference to an SFL resolution dated 13th July 2012 to admit “Sevco as an associate member of the SFL”, so the document must date between 14/07/12 and 29/07/12, the date of the Ramsden’s cup tie that Sevco played against Brechin.
@Geronimo.
I think its a pretty safe bet that CW has no involvement with Sevco Scot. From the Pinsent Mason report, its about the only thing they were prepared to put their name to.
They may have known or suspected he was involved in 5088, which would explain their readiness to accept a clean bill of health re Sevco Scotland. (From PM)
I think CW, has the goods to put up a solid case in court, but his problem is MAD. Mutually assured destruction. If he wins in court, he loses a team playing in Ibrokes. A different scenario opens up though if sale and leaseback emerges,….and he is merely an estate agent.unonnected to football. !
He may make his move then and proceed with his asset ownership claim. Lol.
I think the plan, of both CW,&CG was always to change the name to TRFC (is that the right one?) because it stiffed Ticketus, But CG got two birds with one, by changing Sevco Scot to TRFC,,,, and not 5088 as planned, thus cutting CW from the deal.
CW could not see the sting coming, because he thought HE was the bee.
He then gave Patrick the nod. .
Well well well…………….seems TRFC are about to get a Wonga loan…………
https://twitter.com/scotDMsport/status/436282925915467776/photo/1
Easdales and key investor line up £1.5m bailout for Rangers
Richard Wilson
Sports writer
Thursday 20 February 2014
The Easdale brothers and Rangers’ biggest single shareholder are prepared to loan the Scottish League One club up to £1.5 million.
The move by Sandy Easdale, chair of the football board, James Easdale, a director of the plc board, and Laxey Partners would be part of chief executive Graham Wallace’s attempts to rebalance the business.
City sources revealed yesterday that agreement has yet to be finalised on the proposal as talks continue.
However, it has been established the money would be repaid in the form of shares rather than cash at some point in the next 12 months.
Rangers’ cash reserves are understood to be diminishing, and the next significant income stream is not due until Rangers fans renew their season tickets in the summer.
Mr Wallace, who is in the midst of a 120-day review of every aspect of Rangers’ business, has already admitted that cost-cutting is required because outgoings are greater than revenues.
Despite continuing rumours over an imminent cash-flow problem at Ibrox, the former Manchester City chief executive is adamant that there are enough funds to continue trading.
However, significant savings have yet to be made with no players having left during last month’s transfer window.
Some Rangers directors were in London yesterday meeting shareholders and any lending of funds would be seen as a vote of confidence in Mr Wallace.
Dave King, the former director who previously invested £20m in the club, has made it clear that he wishes to re-invest and lead the funding round of a new share issue.
This would, though, dilute the holdings of the current shareholders unless they also put in more money.
Mr King has also expressed his concern that if costs are cut to meet Rangers’ current income levels, then the club will take years to return to its former status, and he would prefer fresh funding to be sought now to allow investment to strengthen the team and the infrastructure.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/easdales-and-key-investor-line-up-15m-bailout-for-rangers.23486451
barcabuster
I got no grief , just a lot of congratulations on posting some new and relevant info. Given i was a day or so behind the curve on here , this was news to me.
You will find on here that if you linger long enough , then relationships build up and DM’s and emails become commonplace when sometimes people want an offline discussion
So if you find yourself the recipient of advice or comment meant for me, cut them some slack. They are by and large a good bunch , with a lot to offer the debate
Exiled Celt says:
February 20, 2014 at 4:58 am
==========================
I see that Herald article is saying ‘Mr’ Wallace. Off hand I can’t think of any Director of any other club who is deferred to in this way. It was the same with ‘Mr’ Green and ‘Mr’ Whyte. When will they ever learn? Looking at who wrote the article I’d say never!
Well done to Peter A Smith of STV…one of the very, very few journos in the Rangers saga to just ask one or two of the straightforward questions that demanded to be asked, and so one of the very few to get answers that illuminated the debate. A nice tweet from Tom English summed it up
@TomEnglishSport: Great achievement as @PeterAdamSmith wins RTS awards tonight. Charles Green unavailable for comment. Too busy finalising that deal in Dallas
Exiled Celt says:
February 20, 2014 at 4:18 am
1 0 Rate This
Well well well…………….seems TRFC are about to get a Wonga loan…………
https://twitter.com/scotDMsport/status/436282925915467776/photo/1
————
So they might get that advance after all? Didn’t know the Brothers were so flushed.
Still no solution to the long-term issues of massive overspending. If nothing changes before next season how will they see 2014-15 out?
Can one of you lovely learned people remind us what significance the 22 February has with the ‘survival of sevco’ ???? It’s all been very quiet down ibrox way ……… Ally go on give us your thoughts 😆
Danish Pastry says:
February 20, 2014 at 7:06 am
Still no solution to the long-term issues of massive overspending. If nothing changes before next season how will they see 2014-15 out?
==========================
They will struggle to control their spending while the rabble rousing dog whistler remains in charge of team affairs.
You would think the media might put a more desperate slant on the emergency loan that appears to be happening down Ibrox way. Isn’t this the equivalent of the guy who has maxed out his credit cards, has several loans, with a busted credit rating, borrowing a grand from his best mate to pay the mortgage and feed the family. The best mate would try and guide his friend towards some professional help to get his finances in order. Rangers best mates in the media however, appear happy just to report ‘we’re getting £1.5M, so GIRUY to all those who thought we were going bust!’
I know it’s very early but and the discussion is moving forward at pace (think they will be employing an industrial carpet cleaner at hampden right now to get rid of the bodies underneath it) but can anyone tell me who won the Charlie Green crossbar challenge? And On a more serious note, I see from the Edinburgh marathon website that the rangers charity foundation are on the official list of charities that can benefit from someone wishing to run on their behalf. Needless to say, I won’t be choosing them after their AC Milan etc shennanigans and bail out of the former debt ridden club. Some information on all of this will be submitted to the EMF organisers, if only someone had this detailed and ready to post. Sorry for going OT.
When are the SMSM going to realise that Rangers don’t do loans and never borrow money 😆
The cash allegedly coming from Easdale Land and Laxeys isn’t a loan. It’s merely an advance payment for shares to be issued later in the year after the necessary tidying-up is carried out to the likes of Res 10 which fell at the agm.
And anyone who states that Laxeys has demanded a charge on Ibrox or Murray Park to cover the advance share purchase dosh is totally deluded 🙄
Would have been helpful of course if the SMSM had thought a bit beyond the press release and asked how many shares and at what price would be issued to recognise this magnificent selfless gesture of true Rangers Men. What was it Imran got for a short term loan of a much smaller amount – ah yes 2.2 million shares as did Richard Hughes of Zeus. I have never been sure whether they got them for 1p a time or whether they were free right enough.
No doubt the meeting in London IMO would also have addressed other shareholders’ fears over dilution of their holdings – so now they know the score – either make similar advance payments and get shares, presumably on a preferential basis, or just get diluted with no gain.
Decisions ❗ Decisions ❗
Eco
And for the absence of doubt nor does any loan help “balance the books”. it just fills in the imbalance whilst the interest and repayment ( I know, I know) worsens it!
Bryce Curdy says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:11 pm
Allyjambo – so why don’t just state that Sevco have no money, rather than the IPO money? I recognise that the £2.5 million credit facility was/is exceptional, but in my mind everything else should be treated similarly.
_________________________________________________-
Right, I get it now, you’re not saying PMGB said the money from the IPO was spent on one thing and on another from the loan, you are merely questioning why he mentioned the IPO money. Firstly, it makes not one jot of difference that he has, but secondly, he is a journalist, and a pretty good writer of a story, it’s only natural for him to include such things by way of dramatic effect, if nothing else 🙂 it makes his writing much more enjoyable.
ianagain says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:23 pm
Ian,
Well that’s that sorted 😀 I won’t ask you why again? again 😳
Castofthousands says:
February 20, 2014 at 12:01 am
Big Gav/Barcabuster
I’m enjoying the exchange and it is elucidating to see potential scenarios went through. The Sale and Purchase Agreement (SPA) Charlotte published is in the name of Sevco 5088. The agreement clearly envisages an asset sale in the event of the failure of a CVA. Paul Clark had signed the covering letter agreement and dated it 12.05.12. He has also signed and dated the draft SPA that is entrained.
If CW was clever enough to concoct Charlotte would he really be so stupid to have signed documents that he did not know the contents of. The fact that he taped everything does indicate that he didn’t trust any of the characters involved. Could it work the other way round that CW let CG think he was duping him, knowing that he held all the cards?
————————————————————————————————–
I haven’t seen anyone mention a key element in what was taking place prior to the switcheroo and was vital to its success whether CW was aware of what was going on or not.
The minute of the TRFCL board meeting on 31 October 2012 states that the ‘Original Placees’ had advanced cash for the allotment of placing shares in Sevco 5088 and those cash advances were conditional on the purchasing entity for Rangers assets and business being Sevco 5088.
The minute notes that a few days before the signature of the APA on 14 June 2012 the directors of Sevco 5088 decided to set-up Sevco Scotland to acquire Rangers.
The minute further noted that prior to the completion of the APA the ‘Original Placees’ gave their ‘verbal’ consent to the transfer of their cash – which was used to pay D&P for Rangers – and their placing letters to Sevco Scotland from Sevco 5088.
Those original placees were: Blue Pitch; Norne Anstalte; Putney Holdings Ltd; Margarita Holdings (Subsequently transferred to ATP Investments Ltd but a transfer which everyone ignores especially when it comes to proxy votes); Elias Kaisar; Mr Jean T Haddad; Glenmuir Ltd; and Ian Hart. An interesting collection of names 🙄
What I have always found dfiicult to understand or believe is that among that bunch there was no one who blew the whistle to Wee Craigie as to what was afoot. I just refuse to believe that he wasn’t aware of the planned switcheroo and didn’t fully realise all of the consequences.
However this is why Sevco 5088 sits at the centre of the Spider’s Web and all lines of communication and trip wires go right to the heart of that company. CW will never walk away from Sevco 5088 or allow Green to have it wound-up.
Unless . . . And there’s always an ‘unless’ in this story ❗ For me it would be if CW is paid-off to go away so that there is no blight on the property assets of TRFCL which means they could be safely transferred as ‘clean’ to RIFC Plc. So the litmus test is whether Craigie walks or continues his fight.
Laxeys will presumably be fighting tooth and nail to clean-up the smell hanging over the assets because that’s a major impediment to them releasing locked-up value to the shareholders which is, after all, their game which most certainly isn’t football and probably not cricket either 😉
I would expect a side benefit of injecting a few bob just now would be more directors on the RIFC Board and possible a bit more oversight of the TRFCL Board in what could be a very sensitive time.
GeronimosCadillac says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:36 pm
Re Deed of Novation V Deed of Waiver are these actually the same thing being talked about by CW and RIFC but they are just using different terms. Is the use of the DofW a more commonly used English legal term whereas the DofN is more of a Scottish term?
—————————————————————————————————————————————
No
Allyjambo says:
February 20, 2014 at 8:34 am
Bryce Curdy says:
February 19, 2014 at 9:11 pm
Allyjambo – so why don’t just state that Sevco have no money, rather than the IPO money? I recognise that the £2.5 million credit facility was/is exceptional, but in my mind everything else should be treated similarly.
======================================================================
Far be it for me to interpret the workings of Allyjambo’s brain as I seldom understand my own 😥
I also have no intention of attempting to understand your mind when you state: ‘Everything else should be treated similarly’. A fine sentiment but real life is full of inequalities and nard, unfair knocks and that’s the world I inhabit along with most other people.’
However it might well be that AJ draws a distinction between money raised in secret with who knows what conditions attached and money raised in an IPO on the basis of an AIM Admission Prospectus.
In my book they are chalk and cheese and fully deserve to be differentiated and particularly because there is £5.5 million of ordinary Bears’ money in the IPO cash or was. Their effort to save and support their club deserves to be recognised and not lumped-in with some of the mystery tawdry characters shifting offshore money about to make a fast buck off the back of Rangers.
You are entitled to equate Bear money with that bunch of spivs – I don’t but then I’m just an ordinary football fan who can fully identify with the passion that drove Bears to invest in their club. Like them I have no interest in making money off-the-back of my club like all the spivs and speculators not just circling Ibrox but who have already made it up the marble staircase and had a few good bites of the financial goodies on offer to those feigning Rangeritis.
Smugas says:
February 20, 2014 at 8:26 am
Eco
And for the absence of doubt nor does any loan help “balance the books”. it just fills in the imbalance whilst the interest and repayment ( I know, I know) worsens it!
—————————————————————————————————————————————
Agreed. When a company is in financial distress and is struggling to pay its debts (e.g. its wage bill) short term borrowing can assist. It gets the company over (or through) the immediate hurdle. But that new borrowing needs to be repaid (although it seems to be being claimed that it may subsequently be capitalised into shares – but no journo writing about this story has any idea what that actually means or how it would be effected in an AIM-listed PLC.
So the new borrowing needs to be repaid at some point. (If anyone knows anything about AIM (I know very little) maybe they can explain whether a loan such as this (from directors/prominent shareholders) needs to be disclosed to/on AIM. It certainly seems to me to be the kind of thing that should be disclosed.)
Borrowing more money only defers a problem. In this case, it may well defer the problem until after a new source of cash arrives (STs for example). But unless the massively loss-making business model is radically altered, this is going nowhere.
In fact of course it would be possible to continue to borrow in this fashion every time a cashflow crisis arises. The balance sheet would just get worse and worse (or if capitalisation is possible – the existing shareholders’ shareholdings just get more and more diluted (I first typed get diluteder and diluteder – but that sounds like an accountancy firm)). And eventually even these types of short term loans cease to be available.
In many ways that is a bit of what happened last time round as well (although back then there were bigger and scarier problems than needing a couple of million to tide them through to a few more million which will tide them over until they need a few more million)
In any case, I wonder how the various fans’ entities who have been going round buying up shares feel about any such capitalisation. Wonder what effect it has on their shareholding percentage. Wonder if anyone has asked them for their view.
Frankly who cares? At some point it will have to stop.