Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

Avatar By

Wottpi says: May 3, 2014 at 12:00 pm As the Vlad debacle …

Comment on Podcast Episode 3 – David Low by Allyjambo.

wottpi says:
May 3, 2014 at 12:00 pm

As the Vlad debacle was unforeseen, I doubt any Hearts supporter could honestly say they’d have preferred to sell Tynecastle, with hindsight, of course, that might well be different.

Viewing it, however, from where we are now, that’s always going to be a difficult one to answer, unless the refusal to move away from our traditional home might/would lead to the end of the club. I know that, for myself, past plans to move to a new, bigger, more modern stadium, have left me with a mixture of excitement and regret, and on occasion, I’ve felt that my latest visit to Tynecastle (sadly few and far between now) might be my last as the prospect of moving has, from time to time, raised it’s head.

Heart of Midlothian Football Club is Heart of Midlothian Football Club wherever it plays, it is not, however, Heart of Midlothian Football Club if it doesn’t achieve a CVA. If a CVA was only achievable without Tynecastle, then I would gladly settle for that, and I’m sure the vast majority of Hearts supporters would share that view if the prospect had become a reality. If time shows that the club has to move to survive, even after we come out of administration, then so be it. As long as the club lives on.

Ibrox appears to be seen by the majority of Rangers supporters as a monument to what they see themselves as and hold dear, and so they fear/will not countenance losing it. Tynecastle is our home, but should we ever lose it, we have two monuments to hold dear, one is in Contalmaison, France, the other is at Haymarket, Edinburgh. It is what a club does and represents, wherever it’s spiritual home might be, that matters in the end.

I doubt I’ve given you an answer, wottpi, but Arsenal are still Arsenal, Man City are still Man City, and I’m sure they were as attached to their old grounds as we are to our grounds in Scotland. I live and work amongst many a City season ticket holder, and none of them have ever mentioned regret at leaving their spiritual home, though they all hold it dear.

I have often wondered if Rangers could have achieved a CVA if only they’d been prepared to give up Ibrox etc, leaving it and MP to provide the creditors with a larger, fairer, pot. With all respect to you, Ryan, how do you view this scenario? Would you have been happier losing Ibrox, and kicking the OC/NC debate into touch, or do you feel the stadium is too big a part of what Rangers were/stood for for them to be Rangers without it?

Allyjambo Also Commented

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
easyJambo says:
May 4, 2014 at 8:13 pm

Thanks for posting that excellent explanation of the Hearts’ liquidation. I have to admit to being shocked when first reading, on here, of Hearts liquidation, but felt certain there would be something similar to what you wrote in the background. I expected that, with ‘limited clubs’ being in their relative infancy no-one would have thought to block any loop-holes to stop clubs overspending, then they would be free to use liquidation and restarting as the same club to get around the problem. You have shown that Hearts not only took advantage of the law as it was at the time (a section of the law that actually appears to have been put in place for such a purpose), but honoured the law to the full. The fact that they, very quickly (as I recall from reading a report about it previously), repaid all creditors in full, suggests that if the route had not been open to them they’d have found another way to get round their problems, which included the need to change the company constitution as this was causing them problems in their efforts to raise money to clear their debt. A complete contrast, in fact, to the situation we find ourselves in at present.

Your efforts to research and post your findings are very much appreciated by this lazy blogger who merely comments on the fine work done by others.


Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
burghbhoy says:
May 4, 2014 at 4:49 pm

Thank you for you reply. I still think your argument was a nonsense and proved absolutely nothing, but you have a perfect right to put it, here or anywhere else. But your excuse for coming on disguised as a Celtic supporter is pitiful. If you care to answer, could you tell me, and the rest of the blog, why, if you are so convinced of the continuation of your club (RFC), you feel the need to convince us too? Your continued attempts, at a two year old chestnut, suggest to me that you aren’t all that convinced yourself, and are continually looking for new arguments, or proof, to put forward. Time, I think, you realised that, when you have to search for something for two years or more, it probably doesn’t exist.

In the meantime, can you point to Rangers Football Club, if it’s not, that is, The Rangers Football Club Ltd?


Podcast Episode 3 – David Low
Castofthousands says:
May 3, 2014 at 7:19 pm

A very polite response to burghbhoy, but I wonder if you read his response to TSFM’s post outing him! It is noted below; please pay particular attention to the second paragraph, where he clearly indicates that he deliberately came on pretending to be a Celtic supporter, or bhoy. He called this an experiment. I’d suggest he was more intent on creating a situation where he’d be accepted as a respectable poster, of the Celtic persuasion, before deflecting the blog in a more successful way than he has done in his previous guises. I’ll leave it to you to decide if he deserves your very polite defence of the blog.

From TSFM’s post I am of the understanding that burghbhoy was posting from the same IP address as oldgold and others of a similar bent. Just another in a long list of trolls trying to up their game. The nice gentleman even managed to throw an insult in the way of an honest Rangers man, Ryan Gosling, on his way out the door. Pity he stuck his nose back in 🙄

“burghbhoy says:
May 3, 2014 at 8:29 am

Anyway, I’ll leave you chaps to it.

I’ve enjoyed the wee experiment of expressing some ideas, not just the TUPE legislation, over the last couple of months, with a celtic moniker and throwing a few “sevcos” and “old Rangers” in, and seeing the thumbs-up roll in.

Genuine thanks to those willing to engage in the actual discussion, which I always enjoy, as long as it lasts that is, before TSFM rolls in to shut it down (maybe if I’d hung around he’d have start a whole new thread to house my offerings again? Will never forget that compliment “


Recent Comments by Allyjambo

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Big PinkJanuary 2, 2018 at 13:54 
AJI suspect the TDs are not from SFM folk (remember the ratings are available to all manner of trolls). It is a disgusting world-view if made in earnest. A shocking way to score a point if not.
_________________-

I didn’t, for a moment, suspect they were from anyone who posts here, even the more prolific troll posters are better than that, I am sure. 

For some time now I have had the feeling that there is someone, or some people, coming on here and just TDing a number of posts without bothering to read their content, either out of malice or as some sort of concerted effort on behalf of people with reason to dislike our message. It really is quite strange how, suddenly, a number of posts receive one, two or occasionally three thumbs down in very short order, and often posts like uth’s, that could offend no one, receive these petty TDs as a result. 

I can honestly say that I have never read anything from our regular, or occasional, posters that might suggest they would TD anything relating to that terrible day. I include, of course, all supporters of Celtic and RFC/TRFC who have, over the years, made their arguments on SFM. My experience of Celtic supporters talking of that day is one that leaves me certain in the knowledge that only the basest of their support (and we all have them) were not badly effected by the disaster and in full sympathy with the deceased, their families and the wider Rangers support. 

I can still remember that night, sitting in the Queens Arms in Edinburgh, watching the death count rising on the TV, waiting for one of our mates we knew was at the game, getting more and more nervous until he appeared. It had a lasting effect on me.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
upthehoopsJanuary 2, 2018 at 08:52 29 2
Rate This
On this day in 1971, the Ibrox disaster happened during a Rangers v Celtic game at Ibrox. 66 fans died in a crush. Some of us remember that day, some of us may even have been there, while some of us would not even be on this earth at the time. We are all football fans. Nobody should go to a football match and never return home. Rest in Peace.
_____________

Wow! I know we are not meant to put much store on the thumbs up or down, but two people have given thumbs down to this post! Who on earth could find fault with a post respecting the dead from the Ibrox disaster?

It kind of confirms my belief that there are people coming onto this site who don’t read the posts, but are assigned with the task of creating the appearance that there is some disagreement with posts that mostly criticise Rangers(IL) and TRFC and hit the TD button without thought.

Alternatively, of course, it could just be that others, like myself, have difficulty hitting the correct symbol on tablets or mobile phones, I certainly hope that is the case here.

Thanks to Upthehoops for reminding us of that sad day, something we should do every year as a mark of respect for those who died on Scottish football’s worst day.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
DarkbeforedawnJanuary 2, 2018 at 03:48 
Stevie BC, the issue with declaring himself bankrupt is it stops him holding any director role in a company in the UK and possibly South Africa. I can’t see him doing that “for the sake of the club”. I think like Murray before him he likes the limelight. He knows very well the best option for the club would be resign as any acting party in the club and still provide the soft loans. It would take all scrutiny away from the club and could leave the chairman role to someone more respected such as Alistair Johnston. That would stop the risk of the TOP ruling having such a huge impact on the club. It’s the selfless and obvious choice to make and he could still be seen as the saviour from abroad saving the club through loans, but he wouldn’t get the same exposure he so much craves. His defiance is what will lead to his downfall and his selfishness could lead lead to the downfall of the club.
_______________________

DBD, though I used your above post to highlight the impossibility of separating club from company, I have to agree, to some extent, with the thrust of the post. While I am not sure that by declaring himself bankrupt that King could escape the wrath of the TOP and CoS, he isn’t going to do anything for the benefit of your club if it doesn’t benefit him, or save him, at the same time.

That said, however, King’s ‘ownership’ of the NOAL Trust was established in court to the judge’s satisfaction, and I doubt that he would get away with making further loans to RIFC plc through it or any other hidden avenue, once declared bankrupt. Indeed, despite my limited knowledge of bankruptcy laws, I am certain that King (or anyone else) can’t just announce bankruptcy and clear themselves of all fiscal responsibilities, they have to prove they have no money to meet their debts, and as far as we know, King doesn’t have any – and if he had, the court would make sure the funds in his NOAL Trust would be used to meet them, as far as possible, with, I am sure, an investigation into what other (disguised)investments he holds. One thing’s for sure, he would not be allowed to ‘lend’ any money to RIFC/TRFC, and, if he does, indeed, have substantial debts, his creditors might well force the return of his existing RIFC loans to meet his debts.

One thing’s for sure, the law will not allow someone to avoid the consequences of breaking the laws and regulations of the land by availing one’s self of the laws of bankruptcy! While a little tax cheating scrote like Barry Ferguson might get away with transferring his assets to his wife, just prior to receiving his tax bill, King and his money are already on the court’s radar and I doubt that even his Masonic connections would be enough to let him get away with further fraudulent behaviour.

Something I am sure of, and has to be considered before wondering if bankruptcy is a way out for both/either King or RIFC, and that is – you have to have debts that you demonstrably can’t meet before you can petition for bankruptcy. Unless King has very substantial debts, that outweigh, at least, the funds held in the NOAL Trust, then he has no grounds to declare himself bankrupt.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
DarkbeforedawnJanuary 2, 2018 at 03:48 
Stevie BC, the issue with declaring himself bankrupt is it stops him holding any director role in a company in the UK and possibly South Africa. I can’t see him doing that “for the sake of the club”. I think like Murray before him he likes the limelight. He knows very well the best option for the club would be resign as any acting party in the club and still provide the soft loans. It would take all scrutiny away from the club and could leave the chairman role to someone more respected such as Alistair Johnston. That would stop the risk of the TOP ruling having such a huge impact on the club. It’s the selfless and obvious choice to make and he could still be seen as the saviour from abroad saving the club through loans, but he wouldn’t get the same exposure he so much craves. His defiance is what will lead to his downfall and his selfishness could lead lead to the downfall of the club.
_________________

Hi, DBD, and a Happy New Year to you.

While your recent posts have been pretty good, showing a realistic approach to what’s happening at your club, might I ask how it could be that the chairman of RIFC’s selfishness, and I presume you include his dishonesty in that, could lead to your club’s downfall, if, as you’ve previously claimed, the club is separate from the company? Surely, in your belief structure, it would only be the company, TRFC Ltd, that would ‘fall down’, and the club would just sit around, responsible for none of the inherent financial chicanery of the ‘overspend our way to success’ ethos that permeates at Ibrox, until some new ‘football company’ is set up to carry the can again!

I know it’s a bit early in the year to reintroduce the OC/NC debate, but I am wondering if you’ve, perhaps, come to realise that the idea that a football club can, for some skewed reason, escape the consequences of it’s own greed, is pretty ludicrous?


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
ODDJOBJANUARY 1, 2018 at 13:42
Allyjambo,Thanks.I also suspect that the assignation of ” ra deeds” would provoke an angry response in some quarters
___________

And I suspect that the assignation of ‘ra deeds’, should it ever come to pass, might well be the last throw of the dice! What’s more, once any assets are used as security, it reduces the amount the current lenders are likely to get in the event of liquidation. It may well be that the directors, who are now refusing to give more loans, have, rather than reached the end of their free funds, decided that the lending has reached a level greater than, or close to, the total value of the group’s assets.

It’s one thing lending without security when in a position to ensure there is enough in the pot to, more or less, cover the amount of the loans, it’s an altogether different thing once someone else gets that security!

Whatever the accounts give as a value for the fixed and current assets, the directors will all have a very good idea of the realisable value of those assets (particularly the heritable asset value), and should total creditors begin to outstrip that value, they may well begin to wonder if it’s time to call in the administrators. Granting security over some of the heritable assets would only hasten the moment for unpleasant decisions.

If PMGB is correct in saying King is looking out for loans secured on the club’s heritable assets, then I am certain that the rest of the directors would carry out proper due diligence on the potential lenders before granting any security. Not that they have any dodgy characters in their midst, or anything, just that they are canny businessmen.


About the author

Avatar