Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

ByTrisidium

Podcast Episode 3 – David Low

davidLowDavid Low

represents a highly significant component of the history of Celtic FC and consequently a highly significant component of how Scottish Football has panned out in the last 20 years.

As Fergus McCann’s Aide-de-Camp, Low was instrumental in helping him formulate and implement the plans which ultimately allowed control of the club to be wrested from the Kelly and White families. Low also helped McCann to rebuild and regenerate Celtic as a modern football club.

His views are unsurprisingly Celtic-centred, and this interview reveals his ambition for the club to ultimately leave Scottish Football behind. That may or may not be at odds with many of our readers, but the stark analysis of the realities facing football in this country may resonate.

Podcast LogoHe provides a window on the pragmatism of the likes of McCann, Celtic and many other clubs in respect of the demise of Rangers. He pours scorn on Dave King’s vision of a cash-rich Rangers future, and provides little comfort for those who seek succour for our failing national sport, believing that Scotland will find it impossible to emerge from the football backwater in an increasingly global industry.

Agree or not with Low’s prognosis, it is difficult to deny his compelling analysis of our place in the football world.

rss podcast feed   Subscribe to RSS Feed

iTunes podcast Feed  Subscribe to iTunes Feed

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,066 Comments so far

andygraham.66Posted on1:24 pm - Apr 25, 2014


http://t.co/HEnt1gj3jL TOMOBLOG

View Comment

Sugar DaddyPosted on1:25 pm - Apr 25, 2014


The media can spin this for all they like. The fans are going to look at one thing and one thing only. No credit or debit card facility and conclude TRFC are well and truly fecked. They’ve had enough jam tomorrow stories from Ibrox. I think this is the pretty much the end for dear old Sevco.

Fans are not going to pony up the cash and all DK has to do is ride that wave of dissatisfaction up the marble staircase to be met by Laxey with a rental agreement and a pen.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:27 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Resin_lab_dog says:
April 25, 2014 at 1:21 pm

“If the share price falls far enough, that could be GWs trigger for the admin he needs.
Having outlined a recovery plan based on x shares at yp, if y is suddenly unrealisable, and x cannot readily be increased due to shareholder resistance, recovery plan becomes unworkable.
Big red button time… ‘The market has spoken, sadly etc… etc… ‘)”

Good point, which would also check any forces who may have been resisting an Admin

Ecobhoy

DK does seem to be one of the few winners here, wonder where he got his info?

View Comment

bobferrisPosted on1:31 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Valntinesclown – BBC “misleading”, as if you are surprised. You’ve not been following their independence coverage then?

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on1:38 pm - Apr 25, 2014


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
April 25, 2014 at 12:09 pm
13 0 Rate This

Alzipratu ‏@corsica1968 1h

@FrPaulStone Told rumour in City is “Enron-like”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Enron, you say? A little something I did a couple of years ago……

http://i57.tinypic.com/xcrya8.jpg

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on1:43 pm - Apr 25, 2014


easyJambo says:
April 25, 2014 at 1:21 pm
ecobhoy says:
April 25, 2014 at 1:11 pm

In the talk of the 1p shares let’s not forget that as well as the nominal 1p share situation that some/most of the original consortium of investors in Sevco 5088 whose dosh paid D&P for the purchase of the Rangers assets and business only actually paid 1p a share.

This included Blue Pitch, Margarita and other anonymous offshore investors and, of course, Ally was another beneficiary of the 1p a share possibly for his services to ST sales. He might have been better accepting a knighthood but then that didn’t work-out for Fred the Shred although DM is steadfastly holding onto his gong 😎
============================
Only Green, Ahmad and McCoist got substantial shareholdings at £1p.

BPH, Margarita, Ashley & co all got half their shares at 99p and were given a bonus of the same number of shares at 1p, hence the average price paid was 50p.

The big losers were Laxey and a few others who paid £1, although some were paid off in cash or additional shares to make up the difference to the 70p IPO price
====================================================
I believe there were more at 1p and I don’t have the figures in front oif me at the moment but I seem to remember there were 19 million 1p shares issued. There weren’t many £1 shares and these came mainly just before flotation when the original flotation price was being pitched at £1.50 but no one was interested in the City.

Obviously Ashleys got the transfer of some of Green’s 1p shares to reduce their £1 share price to the 70p flotation price and others were also looking for a refund but this raises the point as to whether this was legit under AIM rules and it’s difficult to get the full details on it.

McCoist got his 1p shares much later than the other because he wasn’t a member of the original consortium. I have a breakdown of the shares issued at different prices and I’ll try and dig it out over the weekend but from memory it doesn’t match what you are saying.

A lot of confusion has always existed on this issue down to basic secrecy but also the production of the investment marketing document prepared which I don’t think was ever actually enacted which pitched the buy one get one free or almost free. But I really don’t think they ever accounted for many shares sales.

Always remember that the original consortium were expecting to be paid back in cash after a relatively short period and Green apparently changed the rules of the game by issuing shares. I also don’t believe for a minute that Hughes of Zeus paid more than 1p for all of his shares.

It’s probably no longer that important in the grand scheme of things now but I honestly don’t think it’s clear-cut although however it was done the small group of original Sevco 5088 investors put the money together to buy Rangers and we still don’t have a clue who a lot of them are.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on1:47 pm - Apr 25, 2014


bobferris says:
April 25, 2014 at 1:31 pm
1 0 Rate This

Valntinesclown – BBC “misleading”, as if you are surprised. You’ve not been following their independence coverage then?
——————————————————————————————————————–
I have been following their coverage on independence, but this is a football forum and let us keep it that way.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on1:55 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Resin_lab_dog says:

April 25, 2014 at 1:00 pm

2 words:
Insolvent trading.

(=fraud)!
——————————————————
I have said this many times – there is no legal concept of “insolvent trading” that is layman’s language (like “ringfencing”). Legal terms matter in these contexts because people can know exactly what the use of a term actually means if it is used correctly. The bits of the Insolvency Act 1986 that matter are s213 (fraudulent trading) and s214 (wrongful trading).

Wrongful trading is not fraud at law. So if by “insolvent trading” you mean “wrongful trading” then its not fraud. If by “insolvent trading” you mean “fraudulent trading”, then obviously (by definition) that is fraud. But there is a big difference.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on1:56 pm - Apr 25, 2014


ecobhoy says: April 25, 2014 at 1:43 pm

Just checked my list. It was just the three I mentioned plus Richard Hughes (Zeus) who got all their shares at 1p

Here is an extract from my info taken from the RFC Board minutes and CF docs with the average price paid for their shares. (min 200,000 shares)
Charles Green Option 5,071,629 7.79% £0.01
Hargreave Hale Limited 5,022,000 7.71% £0.70
Artemis Investment Management LLP 4,286,000 6.58% £0.70
Blue Pitch Holdings 4,000,000 6.14% £0.50
Mike Ashley 3,000,000 4.61% £0.50
ATP Investments 2,600,000 3.99% £0.50
Cazenove Capital Management Limited 2,450,000 3.76% £0.70
Imran Ahmad (lieu of loan) 2,200,000 3.38% £0.01
Richard Hughes (Zeus) 2,200,000 3.38% £0.01
Legal & General Investment Management Limited 2,000,000 3.07% £0.70
Insight Investment Management (Global) Limited 1,900,000 2.92% £0.70
Craig Mather 1,800,000 2.77% £0.50
Gorbon Limited 1,550,000 2.38% £0.68
Norne Anstalt (BC Abela) 1,200,000 1.84% £0.50
Glenmuir Limited 1,000,000 1.54% £0.50
Ally McCoist 1,000,000 1.54% £0.01
David Gowans 1,000,000 1.54% £0.50
Laxey and Partners 1,000,000 1.54% £1.00
Andy Hosie 900,000 1.38% £0.50
Putney Holdings (SG Corr) 700,000 1.08% £0.50
Eurovestech 600,000 0.92% £1.00
Alan Mackenzie 500,000 0.77% £1.00
Ian Hart (Dir) 490,000 0.75% £0.80
Asia Credit Corporation (Chris Morgan) 400,000 0.61% £0.50
Graham Herring 400,000 0.61% £0.50
Richard Bernstein 400,000 0.61% £1.00
Mr Jean T Haddad 250,000 0.38% £0.50
Patrick Oddie 200,000 0.31% £0.50
Malcolm Murray 200,000 0.31% £0.50
John McClure (Unicorn Asset Mgt) 200,000 0.31% £0.50
Colin Howell (Unicorn Asset Mgt) 200,000 0.31% £0.50

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:59 pm - Apr 25, 2014


12.45 Sky Sports 2 Saturday 26th April… Gonna be the best program on the telly thru the weekend…Can you imagine if Stranraer win… 😳

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:00 pm - Apr 25, 2014


John Clark says:
April 25, 2014 at 1:16 pm
‘I have just listened to the noon news ..’
———–
I know I canny type fast, but it doesn’t take me over an hour to post! It was the one ‘ clock news bulletin I was listening to. Valentinesclown must be touch-typist!

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on2:08 pm - Apr 25, 2014


from rangers web site

“Season Tickets
Season Ticket 2014/15

It’s not just your seat…

You are keeping it warm for the generations to come.

Because Rangers Football Club is bigger than any individual.

We are a team with over 50 thousand players.

Never giving up, even when the odds are stacked against us.

This is a place where legends never die, they grow

Where even the players are lifelong fans.

Together we can make sure there’s always a Rangers.

Renew your ticket for the coming season

No Season tickets are available”

Some fans are claiming that Zebra is still available, Ranger’s is not on the list on the Zebra website and as you can see above, no season tickets are available direct from Ranger’s website. Are the fans supposed to turn up in person?

View Comment

nawlitePosted on2:08 pm - Apr 25, 2014


The withdrawal of the card facility must hurt (in addition to the embarrassment!). Had it continued, they’d probably still have benefitted from many auto renewals, simply down to the law of inertia if nothing else. You’d have to be actively pro-Dave King to cancel an auto renewal, I reckon.

Now they don’t even get income from those. Even with the pleas and the guilt trips, I can’t see many paying cash for a full season ticket – much easier just to pay as you go.

With no income then, is the only way to limp along that the existing shareholders take up the allowed share issue? Is there benefit for them in doing so? Surely now is the time to throw TRFC to the wolves and take the rental money.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on2:09 pm - Apr 25, 2014


http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/120-days-of-sod-em/

From James Forrest

View Comment

Flocculent ApoideaPosted on2:13 pm - Apr 25, 2014


“The club’s financial position was precarious as it had mismanaged almost all of its cash reserves following administration.”

The period following administration is being examined by BDO, is it not, and relates to RFC2012 (IL)? This is, quite literally, none of RIFC’s business. Or did Mr Wallace mean the period following liquidation of RFC, asset sale and raising of funds by the new RFC Ltd? If he can’t get that right…

View Comment

LurkPakPosted on2:14 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Good afternoon all o/

Am I reading this correctly?

“The club recognises that this will inconvenience a significant number of supporters, however in the board’s opinion, the demands placed upon the club by the merchant acquirer are not in the best interests of Rangers.”

So….. do Rangers expect the ‘Merchant Acquirer’ to provide demands which would be in Rangers best interests? Surely they would (and have) requested demands which are in their own best interests, as one would expect from an impartial business looking after its shareholders?

Have I missed something here?

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on2:17 pm - Apr 25, 2014


5 days to Swing the Bears
From anger to despair to depression to acceptance of reality and realisation that Admin must be announced not later than Friday 1May to avoid carrying a massive points penalty into next season
How?
Big Spiv enters from stage left to orchestrate the PR campaign with the full support of the MSM

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:18 pm - Apr 25, 2014


I am sure the SFA will be ‘monitoring’ the situation at rangers..

— As rangers future relies on SB sales and as stated if there is a fall in the uptake their immediate future is at risk.The club have no other access to cash (other than a shares dilution of sorts that will cost to set up and may be voted against by the current shareholders). They have a dramatically restricted SB renewal process which in these times of recession will have an impact on who can pay upfront no doubt. When does the SFA start to have doubts over whether rangers will be fit to play football next season?

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on2:19 pm - Apr 25, 2014


120+day review.The longest suicide note in history.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:22 pm - Apr 25, 2014


@GoosyGoosy
Is 1st May definitely season end date or can this be adjusted to suit?

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on2:23 pm - Apr 25, 2014


From the Daily Record

RANGERS chief executive Graham Wallace has not denied that he and his fellow board members will be taking a bonus from the club – despite the fact that redundancies are threatened in the wake of his 120-day review.

The revelation emerged during a media conference at Ibrox this afternoon which coincided with the publication of Wallace’s investigation into club affairs.

The review revealed the true extent of the financial crisis that is threatening to drag the club into administration for a second time, with almost £70million frittered away over the course of two years.

Just £3.5m remains in the bank. How much of that will be paid to Wallace and his fellow board members remains to be seen.

The Rangers share price has also plummeted 13.46% in the past 24 hours, going from 26p to 22.5p.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:28 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Night Terror says:
April 25, 2014 at 1:09 pm

I can see plotting the dropping share price minute by minute is giving some people tremendous joy, but is it really useful?
====================================
I would think the plummeting Rangers share price will not be bringing joy to a lot of people but a lot of grief especially to institutional investors who might have sold Rangers shares to their clients as a good investment opportunity.

The comments made by Phil the other day about professionals getting it in the neck certainly makes sense now and leads me to believe that this could be another case of a City firm knowing what was going to be in the review and what it would do to the Rangers share price.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:47 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Posted on Phil Mac twitter feed.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/rangers-aim-for-100m-turnover.20455502

Like the deja vu at the end of the article
He (Stockbridge) admits to being “horrified” at some commercial contracts into which the club had previously been tied, but is delighted with where it now stands.

All a bit of a laugh but how many in the SMSM actually challenged all this nonsense.
I note the defense from the reporters such as Guidi and Hannah is that they often ask the questions but never get the answers.
I can understand the frustration of being faced with a brick wall. However the problem is that they never pass comment on not getting the answers or what guff the press release/opportunity by the club is.
They don’t even take time to read between the lines or look at the back story.
Therefore the PR folk think they can get away with sending out more and more guff.

Unless you are really taking an interest in what is going on you can easily see how some fans who read the back pages and are just wanting to turn up and have a good shout for 90mins are somewhat confused.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on2:57 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Scapaflow

If the SFA issue a licence without setting conditions then they are telling their other member clubs AND the TRFC supporters that the SFA re content that there is no risk TRFC not fulfilling their fixtures.

Even the SFA that we have come to know and love to criticise are not that stupid.

View Comment

iceman63Posted on3:03 pm - Apr 25, 2014


This statement proves categorically that Rangers simply cannot survive for the duration of the next season without massive external inputs of cash ( investment as it is euphemistically called in Wallace’s statement). It offers no specific source for that investment (presumably because there is none), and the withdrawal of card payment facilities ensures, I think, that very few ST renewals will take place – thereby aggravating the already crippled cash flow position.

Given this very public statement , and the need to ensure fixture lists are completed in season 2014-15 , should the SPFL not be demanding a securitised bond from Rangers guaranteeing their ability to fulfil fixtures (a la Livingston), and failing the appearance of such a guarantee should they not then immediately place Rangers into the lowest division of the SPFL so that should any highly probable collapse take place in the next twelve months, then the disruption to the fixtures, and to the integrity of the league will be kept to a minimum.

Precedent has, after all, been set – but somehow I suspect the silent monkeys running the shows at Hampden will continue their dynamic do-nothing policy until the lights finally go out over Ibrox – then appear shocked, dumbstruck and grief-stricken as they seek to cobble some more nonsensical creations to dress in Royal Blue, to capture the pennies from the Ibrox faithful – once more!

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on3:03 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 25, 2014 at 2:57 pm

Sorry Auldheid, I fear we will find they are exactly that stupid

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on3:05 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Interesting wording… “the contracts handed to the Ibrox squad are “generous and poorly structured”. Sounds to me like the player’s wage bill might actually be on the rise..There could be significant bonuses at season end based on the league win.. The manager has been complicit in this clusterf* maybe why he is getting a new boss. I wouldn’t be surprised if new boss took over the football management before start of next season. Looking fwd to seeing who they recruit (if it happens)..

Regards ST renews, I would estimate the following:
8000 will go with DK (the trustee)
5000 will not be in a financial state to pay all up front in cash
10000 will pay at the gate
5000 will just have had enough

Even of those guesstimates are halved it would probably mean the end. I think now it’s all about timing..

View Comment

ZilchPosted on3:05 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 25, 2014 at 2:57 pm

If the SFA issue a licence without setting conditions then they are telling their other member clubs AND the TRFC supporters that the SFA re content that there is no risk TRFC not fulfilling their fixtures.

Even the SFA that we have come to know and love to criticise are not that stupid.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————–

With the greatest of respect to your opinion, which I greatly value, I think this very much remains to be seen.

There are always new depths to explore….

View Comment

SmugasPosted on3:06 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Would it be churlish of me to point out to the Daily Record that £3.5m does not remain in the account, that was at 31st December and whilst partially replenished, those funds came, eventually, from that nice Mr Letham with a small caveat attached. Something about a car park…….

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on3:07 pm - Apr 25, 2014


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

Now down 15.38% (typed in a joyful manner).

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on3:15 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Scapaflow
Zilch

So all member clubs with a vote are part of the stupid gang?

Especially the club’s with a chance of promotion

This has gone way beyond the SFA,s incompetence powers to contain.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on3:16 pm - Apr 25, 2014


http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/272842-rangers-to-launch-fresh-share-issue-as-review-findings-are-published/

View Comment

neepheidPosted on3:22 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Can the directors of RIFC legally continue to take cash up front for season tickets? It seems fairly obvious that there is a very good chance that the goods and services being paid for will not be fully delivered.

Without a credit/debit card facility, and with automatic renewals being terminated, ST sales are bound to plummet, even disregarding King’s boycott call. They have already said that they need to increase ST sales to allow trading to continue. That increase is clearly now not going to happen. This must be the end game, surely?

View Comment

wottpiPosted on3:22 pm - Apr 25, 2014


iceman63 says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:03 pm

Was going to raise the ‘bond’ issue earlier but glad you raised it so eloquently.

Hard to see how the footballing authorities can ignore this.

Would be interesting to know for Easy and Ally Jambo what type of cash was needed to keep Hearts going this last wee while and what pro rata amounts may be required to keep Sevco afloat if admin happened midway through next season.

If redundancies are going to be announced today and cost cutting is required, I still can’t see why putting the club into admin now is not considered as a way forward especially in clearing out McCoist and others.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on3:24 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Smugas says: April 25, 2014 at 3:06 pm
————————————————
STV have the videoed interview with Graham Wallace.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/272842-rangers-to-launch-fresh-share-issue-as-review-findings-are-published/

A specific question on the £3.5M cash position is asked at 17 minutes in.

He says that today there is a little less than £3.5M in the bank.

I guess you could assume that the £1.5M in loans has been used and the account has been replenished to some extent with early ST renewals. How they pay back the loans and survive past the early part of next season is anyone’s guess.

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on3:24 pm - Apr 25, 2014


JimBhoy says:

April 25, 2014 at 2:22 pm
@GoosyGoosy
Is 1st May definitely season end date or can this be adjusted to suit?
JB
I understand they need to be in Admin before the last game of the season for the points hit to be taken in 2013 2014

View Comment

SmugasPosted on3:27 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Just when you think you’ve got your head around all the issues along comes someone (WOTTPI in this case) and shatters your understanding/ confidence once more!

I thought the one thing administration didn’t break was staff contracts like Ally’s if the intention is to restart the engine after a cosmetic paint job? TUPE and all that?

I need a lie down!

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on3:27 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:15 pm

Come on Auldheid, it won’t be the clubs that make the decision, but the boards. For all the protestations that things are different, it is still pretty much the same bums, all be it on slightly different seats.

I do believe that there is an appetite for change as demonstrated by the resolutions, but its proponents are likely to take an Augustinian view, “Give me change Lord, but not quite yet” when it comes to things Rangers

View Comment

erniePosted on3:29 pm - Apr 25, 2014


The SFA have no obligation or duty to speculate on whether this version of Rangers will or will not live within their means next season. They (this Rangers) are entirely capable of cutting their cloth to suit and complete the next and many more seasons. Not to mention that, given the amount of ST’s they sell and crowds they get, would be better off than 40 of the other SPFL clubs who live day to day on free transfers, youths and a wage bill and running costs marginally within their income at best. With the odd exception they strive to get through each season without increasing their debt and cost of maintaining same. The fact that we (totally justifiably) cannot see this Rangers doing anything other than business as usual is neither here nor there, that’s entirely their choice and if they go titsup during the season they will have to live with the consequences. The SFA can not speculate any more than they can if they heard that Stewarty Milne will throw a wobbler and sign up a bunch of mediocre SPL tradesman at 7k a week and appoint a favourite ex striker (Joey?) on 800k a year with a business strategy that had little chance of an outcome other than going bust. Not their fault or their place to speculate. It’s up to the clubs to manage themselves properly.

View Comment

ZilchPosted on3:30 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:15 pm

So all member clubs with a vote are part of the stupid gang?
Especially the club’s with a chance of promotion
This has gone way beyond the SFA,s incompetence powers to contain.
——————————————————————————————————————————————————

Auldheid

I would be delighted to be wrong.

However track record to date does not provide much evidence of individual clubs, chairmen etc standing up and saying enough is enough. Those that have have had threats to their person and their stadia to contend with.

We are talking about clubs that unanimously returned CO for another two years unopposed.

Clubs with a chance of promotion will face the same dilema Celtic did when they had a chance of European qualification etc

So perhaps I am being carried away by my own cynicism. Perhaps the wheels of change are slowly grinding into motion. Certainly the recent moves by the SPFL point in that direction.

However, who amongst the so-called leaders of Scottish football wants to be the guy that ‘kicks them when they are down’ etc etc.

Again, I would be delighted to be wrong. That would mean that someone in a position of influence in Scottish Football had found the strength of character to face down the threat of social disorder and personal threat (this would take real bravery and frankly I am not sure it would be me) and declared the omnishambles at Ibrox for what it clearly is.

Not holding my breath, but will gladly give you the credit for being right if I am wrong.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on3:41 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Smugas says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:27 pm

Sorry for the confusion.
I wouldn’t trust a word I say but is it not the case that when you go into admin the administrator can let folk go on the basis there is no money in the pot. Like Hearts you get rid of the high earners first, keep the youngsters and a lowly paid manager but boot out some of the backroom staff.
Now you need a manager but at Sevco it doesn’t need to be McCoist, Durrant etc
The administrator could keep someone like Durie who is doing a good job with the youngsters and tell the rest (along with high earners like McCulloch etc) to sling their hooks.

TUPE only applied last time round because the ‘assets’ were taken over and the contracts of those who wanted to transfer to Sevco were honoured by the newco.
The Duff and Duff version of being administrators of a failing football club was not the norm!!

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on3:43 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Scapaflow

So the Boards of other clubs are stupid?

Last time they tried to act stupidly the supporters let them know.

The balance of Self Interest has swung from it being in other clubs best interests to accommodate an unsustainable business model in their midst to not accommodating it.

What is in it for other clubs to ignore what is happening? How does it benefit Raith, Dunfermline, Hearts, Hamilton, Falkirk etc not to seek guarantees that if they are running on a sustainable basis so must their competitors?

The “blue tendency” will meet its match when it faces self interest.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on3:47 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Sorry, yes, senior moment! I remember now. The admin you describe is entity A itself pulling up the shutters, pressing reset (ie shredding contracts) and starting again a la Hearts. My recollection was ‘the assets of entity A’ being sold out of the administration entity in which case the assets (the players complete with freshly signed contracts under their arms) had the right to go to.

As you were…

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on3:50 pm - Apr 25, 2014


wottpi says: April 25, 2014 at 3:22 pm

Would be interesting to know for Easy and Ally Jambo what type of cash was needed to keep Hearts going this last wee while and what pro rata amounts may be required to keep Sevco afloat if admin happened midway through next season.
========================
Hearts lost two thirds of their ST income for this season (£1.6M or 20% of our income) prior to going into administration on 19th June last season (Rangers look as if they could do likewise). Outgoings were cut to the bone. Contracts were allowed to run down over the summer. 13 staff and 5 players were also made redundant. A number of higher paid players and execs have also taken pay cuts.

Total wage bill (football and non football staff) for June to December was £1.24M so the annual bill should be around £2.5M.
The last comparable and available figure was for season 2011/12 and amounted to £8.2M (was probably around £5M last season) so that shows the extent of the cost cutting.

Other income streams have been good. Attendances have be up around 10%. Money from the SFA and SPFL will be in line with the previous season. We have also collected around £250K in transfer / compensation fees.

In the middle of December BDO had a surplus of £720K. They have been able to eke out that amount plus ongoing gate receipts, TV revenues, advertising and sponsorship money to get us through to the end of the season.

STs have not yet gone on sale (a good sign – it was mid March last season). Shirt sales will be high for the coming season with their 1914/15 remembrance kit (no Wonga logo). However the club will still need funding during the close season. That should come from FoH who have already collected over £1M in pledges over the last 8 months.

It shows what can be done if there is a will to do it.

View Comment

oldbhoy99Posted on3:51 pm - Apr 25, 2014


I can’t name the company, but once upon a time I worked for a high street retailer. As store manager, for a matter of months I heard grapevine rumours that the company was in financial bother. Upper management persistently told us everything was fine. Right up to the point we received the memo that due to ‘issues outwith our control’ we would no longer be able to process credit/debit card transactions. We soldiered on as a cash business for all of two weeks before the call came to lock the doors. Creditors were stiffed, staff were stiffed, Hector was stiffed, and I later discovered that all cash had somehow made it out of the country into our overseas directors pockets.

Just sayin’ like…

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on3:53 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:43 pm

Cone on again Auldheid, by boards, I meant the boards at the SFA and the SPFL, which I rather suspect you know.

I was not singling Celtic out, but, all the way through this we have been told Celtic can’t lead on this issue, because of the way it would be portrayed, has that attitude changed?

The fans may well rise up in fury, although I’m not sure that the technical issues around granting a licence, are as easy for non-bampots to get their heads around as the prospect of of a club being parachuted into a league.

Still time will tell, hopefully you will be correct, but I fear you’re in for a disappointment

View Comment

iceman63Posted on3:54 pm - Apr 25, 2014


ernie says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:29 pm
0 0 i
Rate Up

The SFA have no obligation or duty to speculate on whether this version of Rangers will or will not live within their means next season. They (this Rangers) are entirely capable of cutting their cloth to suit and complete the next and many more seasons. Not to mention that, given the amount of ST’s they sell and crowds they get, would be better off than 40 of the other SPFL clubs who live day to day on free transfers, youths and a wage bill and running costs marginally within their income at best. With the odd exception they strive to get through each season without increasing their debt and cost of maintaining same. The fact that we (totally justifiably) cannot see this Rangers doing anything other than business as usual is neither here nor there, that’s entirely their choice and if they go titsup during the season they will have to live with the consequences. The SFA can not speculate any more than they can if they heard that Stewarty Milne will throw a wobbler and sign up a bunch of mediocre SPL tradesman at 7k a week and appoint a favourite ex striker (Joey?) on 800k a year with a business strategy that had little chance of an outcome other than going bust. Not their fault or their place to speculate. It’s up to the clubs to manage themselves properly
__________________________

They very much do have such an obligation.
Rangers status as a “going concern” was modelled on an uptake in ST income – this seems utterly unfeasible given today’s announcements of a withdrawal of card payment services ( just how serious that is should be mulled over by all – it is somewhere between utterly grim and terminal imho).
Their overheads are such that even with an administration event , there is no guarantee that sufficient funds could be found to run the club legally ( admittedly D and P managed to add 4 million of debt whilst running it ) the cash reserves are all but gone, the pay at the gate cash may not be sufficient to maintain the club even on a day to day existence basis. There is every prospect of failure at some point next season.

Both the SPFL and SFA have clear duties to their respective stakeholders and to the tournaments and competitions that they oversee. They do not need to speculate or make assumptions about Rangers financial status – it has been revealed in black and white. Any other club issuing such a statement would by now be in receipt of demands for guarantees that they can complete next season (and rightly). Responsible governance of the game can demand no less. ( I know!)

View Comment

PW1874Posted on3:59 pm - Apr 25, 2014


The shareholders of RIFC PLC control and own the assets of the group. RIFC PLC have few overheads. What they do have though is a loss-making, debt-heavy, cash-poor subsidiary in the name of TRFC Ltd that has dozens of highly-paid employees. This subsidiary has massive overheads and very limited income. If RIFC PLC decided to place their subsidiary into administration by calling in their debt, I’m pretty sure every employee contracted to TRFC Ltd would be made redundant and all contracted sums due would have to file with the other ordinary creditors for payment. They’d get hee-haw

RIFC PLC would have no obligation to step in and use their property assets to alleviate the plight of all those creditors.

The only thing really troubling for the PLC at the moment is a downward share price, it’s TRFC Ltd that have the really serious problems.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on4:00 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Zilch

Two things.

Nobody was prepared to stand for the job of President, certainly no one with 4 years experience in the SFA.

The second point which is part of self interest is that TRFC supporters would be looking for targets if no conditions are put in place and fixtures are not fulfilled.

So out of self interest the SFA will wish to argue they got it right.
Ye cannnae wack human nature. 🙂

View Comment

wottpiPosted on4:01 pm - Apr 25, 2014


easyJambo says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:50 pm

Thanks for the prompt and detailed response.

As you say it can be done but at what cost. We all know what had happened on the pitch down Tynie way.
Certainly if the same were to happen at Ibrox there would be no CL football on the horizon.
Similarly can’t see where the money is going to come from to meet Wallace’s three year plan.

Perhaps its like that old joke with the punch line “if you are heading for Galway I wouldn’t be starting from here”.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on4:03 pm - Apr 25, 2014


JimBhoy says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:05 pm

5

0

Rate This

Interesting wording… “the contracts handed to the Ibrox squad are “generous and poorly structured”. Sounds to me like the player’s wage bill might actually be on the rise.

________________________________________

I had heard rumours of ridiculous escalations. Someone said to me that Black’s money goes up by 50% every time they get promoted through a league, finishing on £15Kpw. That could have been made up nonsense, but it would align with GW statement.
I distinctly remember saying ‘Yeh, right, As if!. Who in their right mind would pay Ian Black £15K a week?’
But then I listended to myself, and decided that, on refelection, it was entirely believable.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:08 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Would tend to agree that TRFC is ‘goosed’ and will be in admin within the week.

The lack of credit/debit card facilities is terminal, [pardon the pun].

So, will it be ‘Club 10’ in the Championship fixture list – just to indicate that someone at the SFA is actually awake and aware that something is happening down Govan way ?

Will Regan and Doncaster soon get wheeled out again promising plague on every Scottish house if TRFC/TRFC 2.0 is not allowed to ‘continue its journey’ ?

Get your supersize bags of popcorn this weekend – before they sell out… 🙄

View Comment

MartinPosted on4:09 pm - Apr 25, 2014


There is a great line in one of Mark Twain’s letters (I can’t remember to whom it’s addressed) in which he says “I’m sorry this letter is so long, I didn’t have time to write a shorter one”.

It seems like such a counter intuitive thing to say but I guess what he meant was that boiling everything you want to say down to the salient points takes time.

The eagerly awaited Graham Wallace review of company finances and prospects surprised most observers at the outset by having a less than onerous deadline of 120 days. I’m unable to say for sure but I suspect it’s a time frame in excess of what Mr Twain had in mind for achieving clarity.

As it happens the document produced seems a little thin on substantive detail on how the year on year plan to ultimately place Rangers at the top of Scottish football and reap the rewards of European competition is to be paid for.

Possible sources of income are suggested but immediately undermined by the reality of voting at the companies AGM.

“ In order to achieve the strategy identified below, the Company will need to raise capital. The Board has determined that over the next three years it expects to raise between £20 million and £30 million to be invested in the Club. The Board will consider the most appropriate source of finance which may be available to the Club including equity and other sources in order to obtain the necessary funding whilst also seeking to ensure the Club’s financial stability is protected.
The Directors consider that the issue of equity is important and likely to be an appropriate method of achieving a strong balance sheet. The Board acknowledges the importance of supporters as shareholders as well as its institutional investors.
At the current time the Company is not in a position to carry out a significant equity fundraising as the required shareholder authority that was requested at the AGM to enable the Board to allot shares on a non pre-emptive basis was not granted. “

If day one of the 120 day review began at the AGM then clearly the most significant bar to future to future sources of funds was well understood and required little explanation.

As it is plans for new positions to provide structural support to the football side of the business remain attractive but without detailed means of funding.

The big surprise for Rangers fans season ticket aspirants is that securing their seat for the coming season has become more complex and doubtful.

When you spend time refining the points of your missive to the wider world sometimes 120 days is just not long enough particularly if it’s bad news.

View Comment

whispererPosted on4:10 pm - Apr 25, 2014


just watched the stv interview … and as an old guy in ma 50s with a fair bit o life experience
I have to say the man lied …. repeatedly …. only my opinion

and i have asked a few times on here what happened to poster m.c.f.c.
as I wanted to know his/her thoughts as to why GW is not still at MCFC
surely the pay must be higher and the stress lower ?

Aye / Naw ?

View Comment

FinlochPosted on4:17 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Spiv Stepping Stones towards a clean exit for the inner sanctum

Somers was one..
Wallace was another..
!20 days was the next wheeze..
King making it all complex helps too..

Whatever happens now is the fans fault – they’ll have had their chance to demonstrate their loyalty.

View Comment

LurkPakPosted on4:17 pm - Apr 25, 2014


A buddy of mine said he found a link on a Celtic forum which led to a page on the London Stock exchange speculating that if the share price hits 19p then it’s officially game over.

Can anyone advise on the truth/accuracy of this rumour?

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on4:19 pm - Apr 25, 2014


There is a great line in one of Mark Twain’s letters (I can’t remember to whom it’s addressed) in which he says “I’m sorry this letter is so long, I didn’t have time to write a shorter one”.

If Mark Twain did write that then he stole it from Blaise Pascal 🙂 :

“I have only made this letter longer because I have not had the time to make it shorter.”

Anyway, here are my targets for the next few years:

2014/2015: Win an Oscar for best Actor.

2015/2016: Win the Nobel Prize for Physics

2016/2017: Become an Astronaut.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on4:22 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Scapaflow

No I thought we were on the same board. 🙂

The SPFL Board are answerable to the member clubs and I see no benefit to them of staying silent on the licensing.

Indeed given that they have now got a say it makes no sense to stay silent if a licence for TRFC is granted with no conditions. Clubs will want guarantees because what was hidden in the past is now in the open and supporters are more informed.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on4:25 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Well, it all seems to be all down to the fault of others –doesn’t it? – Oh yes
It wisnae the Board – You see
Oh no – couldn`t be them
Or – the major shareholders – seems they didn`t have clue what was going on – You see

That`s why they really needed a `Review`
And bonuses – cheap at half the price – and 120 days – to `tidy up`
And PolPot PR [just to be sure]

So they can all now [try 😉 to] cover their collective backsides – is the real story MSM pointedly ignoring

View Comment

erniePosted on4:25 pm - Apr 25, 2014


iceman63 says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:54 pm
2 0 Rate This
===================
On the assumption that Rangers need to continue as a “big team” you are right although there are still ifs and buts in your argument i.e. speculation. The SFA did not close down and should not have closed down Dundee, Dunfermline or Hearts just because they were broke and entered admin, the only requirement was to be able to complete their fixtures. A lot of the 41 other teams are as broke as Rangers, they just have to deal with it rather than the SFA pulling the plug.

View Comment

McCaig`s TowerPosted on4:27 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Apologies if this is answered elsewhere, but as the 120 day report includes two close seasons, does the Match Day income figure of £26.3m include 2 lots of season tickets in full? (Or is there a notional pile of income not yet booked?).

A back of the fag calculation suggests “normal” income is running at about £1.8m per month, and “normal” operating expenditure is running at about £2.1m p/m. That suggests a burn rate of £300k p/m which is substantially lower then I was expecting, and, on the face of it, not immediately beyond hope (increase revenues by 10% and cuts costs by the same more or less covers it).

Of course, there is a cash-flow issue. Making some broad brush assumptions, say the season tickets are paid in May to August. Income would be roughly £4m per month for those 4 months, and £1m p/m for the other 8 months, totalling £24m p.a. If we were to assume regular outgoings of £2m per month, then essentially the break-even business model is to pile up the cash in the summer, then spend it all over the rest of the year. However, with only £3.5m in the bank at the end of the year, then the company would run out of money about mid-April. (Which would tie up with the need for the Laxey facility).

Of course, life is never that simple – there are often (un)expected one off costs (such as stadium repairs, “investment” in new playing staff and “restructuring” costs) that may need to be funded, and although there may be compensatory one-off windfalls – selling a star, TV money etc – a business needs to have access to reserves or to be able to borrow, or it is at risk.

Even if my figures are accurate (and I suspect they are not – if so, please advise) as it is currently structured, this appears to be a business with huge risks, and little prospect of immediate rewards. (Mind you, I would have said that 2 years ago, and there appeared no shortage of people willing to invest then…)

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on4:34 pm - Apr 25, 2014


The lack of a facility to accept credit or debit cards is unbelievable.
They really are in a mess.
WATP We are the PayPal maybe* 😳

(*pinched from another forum)

View Comment

andyPosted on4:35 pm - Apr 25, 2014


April 25, 2014 by billmcmurdo
REVIEWING THE REVIEW

Ok, I have read the review and it makes for grim reading in some places, no doubt about it.

But there are two things I have to say about it and both give me encouragement.

Firstly, it addresses what I consider to be the most important matter and passes that criterion with flying colours. What I mean is it is an honest account of what is wrong and has a clear map of how to get where Rangers needs to go. That was what we needed from the review and we have it.

Secondly, it authenticates what I have been saying on this blog for a long time – there has been a culture of over’spend at Ibrox and it has to be addressed. Brian Stockbridge took a cleaver to much of it but costs were so excessively high that it has taken the two years to properly get to the heart of things. Now we have no choice – we must slash costs or die. Thankfully, Graham Wallace has been working on this behind the scenes.

I said when James and Sandy Easdale first got involved that they would cut costs and finally a new prudent fiscal culture is being inculcated at Ibrox.

Like a big wieldy ship that takes a fair amount of time and space to change direction, Rangers FC has taken time to turn from the extravagance of the SDM years but it is happening.

The review clearly shows that unnecessary expenditure has still happened with things like the jumbo screens etc. As regards the purchase of Edmiston House, this is something that coulkd be a moneyspinner but significant further investment in the property is required. Was it wrong to buy it at the time? Fans will have their own views.

All in all I found the review positive in tone if upsetting to read in parts. It is more than a wake-up call – it is the final warning that Rangers must be run along different lines than the “tenner for a fiver” years of David Murray. Rangers’ problems on and off the pitch will not be resolved by getting out the chequebook and spending borrowed money.

Another encouraging thing is that fans demamnded transparency and this review deliveers a brutal honesty in admitting mismanagement. Yes, it is easy for the present board to blame previous boards but at least they haven’t shirked the issue. Like Sandy Easdale’s frank assessment of the state of play yesterday, the review pulls no punches in stating that without fans stepping up to pay, the club could be seriously damaged. That is a stark business fact for every business and certainly for every football club.

I have had fans contact me in a rage about one aspect of the report which was distressing to read. That is the inability to pay for season tickets by credit or debit card – directly attributable to the activities of the agitators with their phantom season ticket funds.

Loyal fans who want to support the Gers are now being hindered by these people.

As one supporter who has been going to Ibrox for decades and who took me to my first game as a toddler said: “Shocking.” That sums up the activities of these rebel fans.

There is much to ponder in the review. It wasn’t pleasant to read but now we know where we are.

The club needs the support to rise to the occasion.

Step forward, the loyal and true.
______________
I have had fans contact me in a rage about one aspect of the report which was distressing to read. That is the inability to pay for season tickets by credit or debit card – directly attributable to the activities of the agitators with their phantom season ticket funds.

Loyal fans who want to support the Gers are now being hindered by these people.

nothing to do with the company being a basket case it was all those pesky rebels fault :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on4:43 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 25, 2014 at 4:22 pm

Ding Ding Round Three :mrgreen:

“The SPFL Board are answerable to the member clubs” True, as was the SPL board, so presumably the attempts to coerce the SFL clubs into putting Rangers into the top SFL flight were done with the support of the SPL clubs?

A licence with guarantees, sounds like a fig leaf to me. I have never believed that Rangers would just disappear, there is a business there, and in a funny way, Mr Wallace’s review might actually reset the clock and provide an opportunity to do what should have been done two years ago. It really depends on who ends up buying the football, as opposed to the property business.

Time will tell

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on4:45 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Jings, the Q&A with Wallace posted on STV is incredible. He’s surely nose-diving in folk’s opinions now.

Still stonewalling, “We’re selling a vision” (almost as funny as buying history), “Building for the future”, “When the club exited administration”. One of those political Q&As you expect from politicians or a TV evangelist, and pure Charles Green-speak by other means.

He almost paraphrased Walter Smith’s “We’re Rangers, we have to spend.” And no one among the press corps had the heart to tell him RFC are being liquidated.

He might be a smooth talker in a smart suit but that is bollocks, if you’ll pardon my French.

Now we know why he spent all that money on his Tyrell 😀

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on4:47 pm - Apr 25, 2014


ernie says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:29 pm
‘…the SFA have no obligation or duty to speculate on whether this version of Rangers will or will not live within their means..’
iceman63 says:
April 25, 2014 at 3:54 pm
‘….They very much do have such an obligation..’
————-
They do indeed.
And they need to get the preliminary planning done for the necessary 4 ( or will it be 5?) -way meeting to set up a Dave King ( or other cheapskate purchaser/renter of the assets) new phoenix! 👿

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on4:56 pm - Apr 25, 2014


“Vroom, vroom!”

“Who’s there?”

“Tyrell!”

“Tyrell who?”

“I’ll be here Tyr’ell the money’s gone!’

(Apologies for the lameness of that joke, but it did win the ‘Monsieur Vert Big Hands Award’ in 2013)

View Comment

wottpiPosted on5:07 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Having just watched CEO Wallace’s performance on STV it struck me (and I have to agree with Phil Mac’s recent tweet) that for him to say that administration of the company or its loss making subsidiary wasn’t even considered does not strike me as doing a thorough job.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on5:12 pm - Apr 25, 2014


wottpi says:
April 25, 2014 at 5:07 pm

First rule about fight club, is not to talk about fight club. The late Alan Clarke’s dictum applies 😉

View Comment

rabtdogPosted on5:12 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Businesses go into admin because of debt. The Rangers’ problem isn’t debt, it’s cashflow. So why bother with admin?

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on5:14 pm - Apr 25, 2014


rabtdog says:
April 25, 2014 at 5:12 pm

Don’t The Rangers FC ltd owe something around £16 million to Rangers International?

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on5:19 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Danish Pastry at 4:45
He almost paraphrased Walter Smith’s “We’re Rangers, we have to spend.” And no one among the press corps had the heart to tell him RFC are being liquidated.
………………
No one among the press corps had THE GUTS to tell him RFC are being
liquidated.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on5:23 pm - Apr 25, 2014


rabtdog says:
April 25, 2014 at 5:12 pm

0

0

Rate This

Businesses go into admin because of debt. The Rangers’ problem isn’t debt, it’s cashflow. So why bother with admin?

_________________________________________________

Businesses go into insolvency when they don’t pay their bills as they fall due, irrespective of debt, losses or profits for that matter.
Paying bills requires cash or cash equivalents.

The old maxim: Sales is vanity. Profit is Sanity. CASH is reality.
No cash = no business.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on5:26 pm - Apr 25, 2014


rabtdog says:

April 25, 2014 at 5:12 pm

Businesses go into admin because of debt.
——————————————————–
Businesses don’t go into admin – companies go into admin.

Companies often go into admin because of cashflow issues.

Companies often don’t go into admin even though they have massive debts. But if they have cashflow issues as well, they should be placed into admin (or liquidation).

View Comment

LurkPakPosted on5:29 pm - Apr 25, 2014


Sigh. Watched the Wallace interview.

I don’t know where to start. I’ll stick to my favorite key words and phrases.

Mythical
Inherited
Vision
Respect and Understanding
Inherited
After the Club came out of administration (excellent journalism SMSM)
Post-Administration
Inherited
We have to make people redundant but we’ll give Ally more money to waste for sure.
Inherited
Inherited
Inherited

Rangers (of whichever guise) – Pointing the finger for 140 years.

View Comment

Comments are closed.