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

John ClarkPosted on10:19 pm - Apr 27, 2014


While we’re talking football as football, the reference in a post the other day to the non-existence of a scouting operation at Ibrox made me draw up short. I realised that it’s an aspect of football club ‘management’ about which I know about as much as certain football Boards know about Truth.
Anybody got any actual knowledge of what would be the scouting arrangements and budgets of, say, an SPFL mid-table team? And what’s in it for ‘scouts’?

View Comment

Palacio67Posted on10:53 pm - Apr 27, 2014


http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/disgrace-mockery-rangers-union-fans-3467122

Daily Record Latest.

View Comment

occamPosted on11:15 pm - Apr 27, 2014


Over the past few years TSFM and its predecessor RTC have shown that there is now no hiding place for the spivs, old club types who thought they could steamroller with impunity. The impetus towards the crash barrier now seems to be too great to be stopped by the frantic pressing on the brake pedal by GW or whoever.
The other constant throughout this farce has been the pathetic quality of writing (veracity and grammar) in the press (not to be dignified by ‘journalism’).
When will the 4th estate realise that we are no longer fooled by their drivel and that unless they seek the truth their institutions will wither on the vine in the face of …the TRUTH. No hiding place.

View Comment

BigGavPosted on11:19 pm - Apr 27, 2014


‘Union of Fans’:

“Sandy Easdale became a de facto member of the previous board in September last year and has clearly had unprecedented and unjustifiable access to the PLC’s financial details since. His public statements just prior to the review showed that he has access to information he should not …”

Sandy Easdale is a member of the TRFCL board, so he would be expected to have access to all its financial details, which are effectively also those of the PLC.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on11:33 pm - Apr 27, 2014


I suspect there may some underestimation on Rangers cash flows , and their ability to have circa £3 million at todays date

We know they had £3.5 million on Dec 31. We know they received 2 SFA cup semi final rentals,( guess at £400k) we know they received a 25% share of the combined receipts , after costs, of these semi finals. ( guess at £300k)

We know they received a 40% share of the Ramsdens Cup final gate. ( guess at £130k) We also know they have received £1.5 million in working cap loans . Over and above this they will have received TV receipts for the Dunfermline & Albion Rovers Cup games ( guess at £250k) as well as their share of gate receipts for these games ( guess at £450k) and the TV monies for the Ramsdens.( guess £80k)

In addition they will have received pay at the gate income for 6 home league games since Jan 1 ( guess £350k) They will also have received match day catering income from the 9 games played at Ibrox since Jan 1 ( guess at £350k) We also don’t know the timing of payments from commercial contracts. We also know RIFC were owed £4.6 million in trade receivables at 31/12/13

The total of cash including the initial £3.5 million, could easily be £7.3 million plus any commercial contract payments & cash received on their trade receivables

Against this they had current trade liabilities of £6.7 million plus 3 months wage bill, incl Tax & NI as well as a Vat payment. In addition they will have had normal operating expenses such as rates, police , utilities and the rest .

So the math supports the cash position Wallace claims is theoretically possible . They have probably slowed down on paying some outstanding invoices, normal practice for business’ in trouble . I doubt in any event that Wallace would be less than generally accurate in his answer of having a little less than £3.5 million.

The main issue though is that this is a business which results indicate is a £25 million a year turnover business with costs of £33 million ( possibly £31 million if Wallace has managed to save £2 million). Given the costs are “real” as opposed to depreciation or amortisation , then the business plan doesn’t pencil.

Stretching supplier payments only gets you so far, and as Wallace has confirmed a fairly major investment for working capital purposes will be required. Investors won’t pitch in , if the fans are boycotting season book sales.

Unlike back in Fergus’ day, there is no bank for King to try and do a deal with to force out existing shareholders. King is gambling that shareholders will cave and allow him control in a new share issue, or he is really hoping for an insolvency event to allow wage and contract costs to be slashed as long as he gets preferred bidder status.

History demonstrates that there are no gimme’s at all in predicting an outcome where Rangers are concerned.

On balance i suspect Rangers best chance is to give Wallace a fighting chance at restructuring the business. However the mindset of the lunatic fringe ( basically Chris Graham and the Sons of Struth) automatically reject any viewpoint if it doesn’t come from within their blinkered community. The voice of reasonable Rangers fans is screamed down and any comment from “them” (i.e. Us) is automatically labeled as a trap, and by definition the wrong way to go.

The irony is the people least able to provide a solution are shouting loudest that they know best. Their track record proves they have called it wrong at every turn but they just shout all the louder , convinced they are right , against the evidence and their own complete lack of business credibility

The best thing they could do for their club is to shut up and pay up. The worst is what they are doing.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on11:38 pm - Apr 27, 2014


Wow! The UoF are getting played like a violin here. Someone who wants to pick up the assets for a song has convinced them to turn on the only game in town and they’re doing it, even though they have absolutely no influence. The best they can do is get more fans to not buy Season Tickets.
I like the accusations though. It takes approximately 3 seconds to see why they’ll get nowhere, but it’s instructive that they’re getting press coverage.
For the avoidance of doubt…
Wallace’s claim that they had the funds to get to the end of the season is okay if he assumed he could use the £2 million loan that other directors apparently lied about making available to Deloitte.
S Easdale’s pre report utterances seem fine to me. His position on the board of TRFC and existing info gave him all the info there. Certainly there seems nothing that he couldn’t have already had that was proprietary and can only have come from an RIFC director.
One more thing. While pleading for the chairman to take action. Calling him “absent” in an insulting manner might not help.
The UoF are picking the wrong fight. If they’re too successful, there might not be a fan base to make conniving a way into the league for Third Rangers worth the bother for the SFA.

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on11:43 pm - Apr 27, 2014


Q: Is it very likely that TRFC will go into Admin because of the ST fiasco?
Yep
Q: Whats the best date for Admin in terms of points deduction?
A: Not later than this Friday If Admin hasnt happened by1 May then 2014 – 2015 will start with a points deduction. This will finally kill any hope of avoiding liquidation never mind administration
Q: Have SSB figured this out.?
A: Of course they have.But they need to avoid being first to say so
Q Can TRFC announce Admin the day after the CEO resigns?
A: That would be ideal.The Spivs need a scapegoat
Q:Whats the likely PR plan?
A;Could be along the lines of
Mon/Tue
More mournful noises from Ibrox and dire MSM warnings about ST impact of GW report . Plus rumours of action by the Aim Market. Share price drops below 20p
Wed/Thur
Penny drops on SSB and the MSM
Clamour for a Friday Admin announcement grows exponentially
Friday
Interim CEO announces Admin
……………]
All speculation of course
But
You heard it here first

View Comment

oldbhoy99Posted on11:51 pm - Apr 27, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm
______________________

Barca, this does not factor much into your calculations, but…

Around semi final time, many Aberdeen and Dundee Utd fans were discussing a boycott of the Ibrox catering facilities. The ‘comeback’ from TRFC fans on Twitter and Rangersmedia was the boast that the catering contract had been sold off, so in fact the boycott wouldn’t hit TRFC in the pocket. Irony is not their strong point I guess, but I reckon you can scratch that £350k from your workings.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:54 pm - Apr 27, 2014


John Clark 3.39

This went to FIFA about 3 weeks ago. No reply so far but quite a lot for them to digest.
Last March 2013 FIFA investigated a complaint raised by contributors to the Scottish Football Monitor. The complaint can be found in full at 

http://scottishfootballmonitor.wordpress.com/2013/03/12/fair-play-at-fifa/comment-page-48/#comments. 

After investigation FIFA closed the ticket but said ” The Chairman of the Investigatory Chamber of the FIFA Ethics Committee has decided not to initiate further proceedings at this time. Please note that the Chairman is open to revisiting his decision upon review of any additional material that you believe substantiates your allegations, including your belief that the alleged conduct violated the FIFA Code of Ethics.” 

Since then additional material has emerged that suggests that those preparing the commissioning were misled by the administrators of the club under investigation withholding key evidence that would have shown that irregular payments were indeed made in the case of two players (with the nature of many other payments still to be decided by a Upper Tier Tribunal). 
The evidence also suggests that the now President of the SFA (and a potential British FIFA Vice President) Campbell Ogilvie was party to the instigation of the tax scheme subsequently deemed irregular, but failed to make any distinction in his testimony to the Independent Enquiry that would have corrected the assumptions on which the judge based his decisions. Full details can be found in the letter sent to the lawyers of the Scottish Professional Football league at 

http://www.tsfm.net/an-honest-game-convince-us/#comments and the evidence sent to SPFL lawyers is attached. 

The original complaint was that the decision reached by The Enquiry in terms of sporting advantage and player eligibility on incomplete registration was perverse and still requires FIFA clarification of the intent of the registration process and eligibility consequences of failure to comply. It affects all professional football globally in our opinion and the additional evidence now supplied suggests it was only possible because of the withholding of said evidence. 

We believe based on the evidence that the following General Rules of Conduct were broken. 

1. Persons bound by this Code are expected to be aware of the importance of their duties and concomitant obligations and responsibilities. 

2. Persons bound by this Code are obliged to respect all applicable laws and regulations as well as FIFA’s regulatory framework to the extent applicable to them. 

3. N/A 

4. Persons bound by this Code may not abuse their position in any way, especially to take advantage of their position for private aims or gains. 

Given the possible nomination to the post of British FIFA Vice President which has an international aspect we believe Mr Ogilvie should be granted the opportunity to clarify his position on this matter. 

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on1:30 am - Apr 28, 2014


Auldheid says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:54 pm
—–
‘.This went to FIFA about 3 weeks ago…’
———–
Apart from anything else,Auldheid, what you say is further evidence of the complete and utter uselessness of the SMSM.
Andrew Smith doing his wee puff piece for yer man is indicative either of the sheer not-with-it mentality of our sports hacks( who, of course, don’t read TSFM ), OR their perverse partisanship and their inability to function as anything other than propagandists .

View Comment

YerevanPosted on1:36 am - Apr 28, 2014


May I suggest that if Campbell Ogilvie is to be promoted or nominated as a candidate for any position in UEFA that we, the SFM, oppose it vehemently and pre-empt any such proposal by organising some form of petition/on-line poll that opposes any such nomination.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on1:52 am - Apr 28, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm
‘…So the math’
————–
Barcabhoy, please, please tell me and the rest of my generation either that you are an American or that you accidentally did not put an ‘s’ at the end of ‘math’.
We ( by which I mean ‘I’) who metaphorically ( and in some cases, literally) fought with the Polaris submariners when they came up of a Friday and Saturday to the Locarno Ballroom on Sauchiehall St in the 1960s, still fight against American cultural imperialism!
Our word is ‘maths’! 🙂
Good post, nevertheless.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on2:40 am - Apr 28, 2014


wottpi says:
April 27, 2014 at 9:17 am
The late January/early February was the period when Wallace was close to walking several times.
I think he has persuaded by certain financial arrangements at the time-all above board-but generous.

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on6:55 am - Apr 28, 2014


John Clark at 1:52am
John,Polaris submariners+Locarno+jealous Scotsmen+alcohol=A right good punch up.Ah,I remember it well.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:00 am - Apr 28, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm

Against this they had current trade liabilities of £6.7 million plus 3 months wage bill, incl Tax & NI as well as a Vat payment. In addition they will have had normal operating expenses such as rates, police , utilities and the rest .
=========================================
I am merely speculating at the current state of affairs but there is previous evidence that a club from Ibrox had the option on Tax, N.I, Police, Ambulance bills etc.

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on7:22 am - Apr 28, 2014


Barcabhoy says:

April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm

They will also have received match day catering income from the 9 games played at Ibrox since Jan 1 ( guess at £350k)

Did Craig Whyte not sell that off?
Or did they get it back by liquidation?. Ijust seem to remember sothething about him selling the catering.

View Comment

fara1968Posted on7:26 am - Apr 28, 2014


From the UoF statement, “This board is a disgrace to Rangers Football Club”.
Are they really?

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on7:29 am - Apr 28, 2014


Just saw this from oldbhoy99 says:

April 27, 2014 at 11:51 pm and could not edit my post 😳

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on7:51 am - Apr 28, 2014


John Clark says:

Barcabhoy says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm
‘…So the math’
————–
We ( by which I mean ‘I’) who metaphorically ( and in some cases, literally) fought with the Polaris submariners when they came up of a Friday and Saturday to the Locarno Ballroom on Sauchiehall St in the 1960s, still fight against American cultural imperialism!
==============================================================
JC(e)…I am (fortunately) just old enough to remember the American sailors in Sauchiehall St…Friday and Saturday nights at the Locarno.
Best memories are of the Shore Patrol (SP) guys, whilst not carrying sidearms, carried great long nightsticks.
As Wellington said…”I don’t know about the enemy, but they frighten the **it out of me…!”

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:20 am - Apr 28, 2014


John Clark says:
April 28, 2014 at 1:52 am
16 3 Rate This

… still fight against American cultural imperialism!
Our word is ‘maths’!
Good post, nevertheless.
———-

John, glad to see you get your foot on the linguistic gas and touch base grammatically; the point you raise suggests we’re in a whole new ball game that could go down to the wire. Wow, awesome, you old Monday-morning quarterback. :mrgreen:

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on8:36 am - Apr 28, 2014


Given that Dave King has responded to every other board pronouncement with a knee-jerk statement, it is somewhat surprising that he has yet to comment on the 120-day review.

Perhaps he can’t find a pen.

View Comment

erniePosted on8:58 am - Apr 28, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm
===================
Good post Barca. We can argue the finer points of your math (sic) but it is obvious that this Rangers could survive at a level above the vast majority of SPFL clubs. The fact that they will eat themselves because they’re nae as big as Celtic, won’t win 10 in a row and generally won’t be able to thrash everybody on a weekly basis is fun to watch but sad all the same. It’s all been said before but if they had hunkered down after admin or even liquidation and got on with survival/revival they would be much further along the road to being a decent Premiership team by now. It’s still theoretically doable but it looks like their support (including the SMSM) won’t live with that. That’s their choice: crazy.

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on9:00 am - Apr 28, 2014


I would just like to wish Ally all the best at his ‘summit’ meeting with Graham Wallace this morning when he is due to discuss his playing budget for next season.

If there is any justice then the size of his war chest will be commensurate with both his abilities as a manager and Walter Smith’s understanding of Rangers Economics.

As Wallace said in The Herald over the weekend “He’s (Ally) been extremely supportive in terms of understanding that some of the tools you’d expect him to have, he hasn’t had.”

Just what Ally needs. The green light to sign a lot more tools on money they cannot afford.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:08 am - Apr 28, 2014


No1 Bob says:
April 28, 2014 at 9:00 am
1 0 Rate This

I would just like to wish Ally all the best at his ‘summit’ meeting with Graham Wallace this morning when he is due to discuss his playing budget for next season.
———–

Perhaps Wallace has finally found Charles Green’s promised £10m fund? He’s certainly sounding like a man struck down with Rangersitis, the symtoms of which seem to be a swollen bank account.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:09 am - Apr 28, 2014


PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
April 28, 2014 at 2:40 am
18 2 i
Rate This

wottpi says:
April 27, 2014 at 9:17 am
The late January/early February was the period when Wallace was close to walking several times.
I think he has persuaded by certain financial arrangements at the time-all above board-but generous.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If it is found that Wallace is on an attractive package that the club probably can’t afford what then for his reputation?

It is no wonder guys like Jim McColl and Frank Blin exited stage left when they had the chance.

View Comment

tykebhoyPosted on9:27 am - Apr 28, 2014


wottpi says:
April 28, 2014 at 9:09 am
——————-
I don’t think he has a reputation to worry about anymore. He’s already been caught out with one big lie in the 120 day review regarding the credit/debit cards. It remains to be seen how much truth any of the rest of the review has.

Then he either lied or was incompetent in making assumptions that didn’t hold water in the accounts of RIFC and at the AGM most notably on the £2m loan facility believed to be the only thing that didn’t make the “going concern” a full qualification instead of just an emphasis of matter.

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on9:31 am - Apr 28, 2014


An article from the DR which, surprisingly, makes some sense and could have been lifted (indeed perhaps was :-)) from here.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/gordon-waddell-rangers-regime-done-3464980

Gordon Waddell

IN the end it’ll come down to the one commodity you don’t need cash or a credit card
for. Trust.

We already know the loud minority have long since lost it. Now it’s about whether the silent majority join them.

The minute they do? This Rangers 
regime is done. More than that, though, their club as they know it is done. Again.

That fear is what Graham Wallace is relying on, playing on – because that fear is the only thing that’ll keep him in a job and his paymasters in the boardroom.

The idea that if the fans don’t support the club in the way they have for the past two years, if 35,000 of them don’t keep pitching up week in week out, regardless, they’ll have pushed their club over the precipice. That if a “significant” number of them fail the club in their hour of need, their position will become precarious.

It’s emotional blackmail, a ludicrous affront to a support whose loyalty has 
been the only commodity keeping the 
club alive. God knows it hasn’t been 
Wallace or anyone else’s management.

What’s “significant”? He wouldn’t say. He was asked five different ways from five different angles on Friday afternoon and he wouldn’t put a number on it. Five
thousand? Ten? Half?

The bottom line is this, though. If 
even ONE floating Rangers supporter bought his ‘big boy did it and ran away but we’re the good guys, honest guv’ 
charter on Friday, they’re bigger mugs than I thought they were.

I wrote four months ago that unless 
the results of his 120-day review were 
something special, it would be seen 
as little more than an exercise in 
procrastination.

What he produced? The review aspect of it was an exercise in the bleedin’ obvious. That outrageous, stupid sums of money were blown, that pockets were lined on the back of that profligacy and that
mismanagement had left them on the 
edge. No s***, Sherlock.

And the strategy? Pie in the sky planning predicated on little more than going to the same well they’ve already run dry in the hope of squeezing a few last drops from it.

Bad enough, then. But the fact he then tried to blame their lack of a credit facility for fans on the fans themselves, rather than their own lack of credibility as a going concern with First Data, should have 
been the final deception for your average right-thinking punter.

As I mentioned at the top, the loud minority have already made their feelings clear. They’re out there on social media, on forums, taking it to the board. The Union of Fans may not be complete, but they’re substantial.

The silent majority though? They’re the ones who just want to pay their money and watch the football on a Saturday. Who have no interests in the politics of the game as long as their rituals aren’t interrupted.

And there are plenty of them. Thousands who’ll not give a toss who’s in control, just that they have a team to watch.

If I was one of them, though? If it was my £400? Would I be handing it over right now – in cash, mind, in hard cash – to a group of people who aren’t prepared to offer you the kind of facility your local corner shop can? Not a hope.

Having read and re-read their review, having sat through an hour of Wallace talking to the dailies and the Sundays on Friday, having then gone over the 7000 words-worth of quotes he offered, I struggled to find a shred of solace to offer your rank-and-file fan.

He looked uncomfortable 
dodging questions about bonuses. He was disingenuous dealing with the credit card issue.

Remarkably, despite 
acknowledging the ludicrous nature of their football spending over the past two years, he’s still indulging his manager with claims the budget will get bigger next season.

He steadfastly refused to accept the rates he ‘negotiated’ on the Wonga-esque Laxey loan should be a source of regret and still peddled the line about it being market rates.

And he did it all sitting in the shadow of the latest six-figure spin doctor they’ve employed, while acknowledging that 
good people down the stairs would be 
losing their jobs as a consequence of their
inability to control the money.

That’s not a foundation for trust.

The problem lies in the options. If the support baulks en masse, if the numbers are significantly down? He’s said they won’t indulge in a rights issue. He’s said they want to wait six months for an equity issue so they can prove their stability. No sniggering at the back, there…

So do they get themselves in an increasingly vicious circle of 
short-term debt to keep them going until then?

These are the consequences the support have to live with. Maybe trust does have a price. Ultimately, though, it has to be worth paying.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:33 am - Apr 28, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
April 27, 2014 at 11:33 pm

We know they received 2 SFA cup semi final rentals,( guess at £400k) we know they received a 25% share of the combined receipts , after costs, of these semi finals. ( guess at £300k)
================
Is it really the case that the stadium provider receives both a sizeable fixed rental AND a 25% slice of the gate after deducting their own costs? That seems outrageously generous to me.

View Comment

BigGavPosted on10:44 am - Apr 28, 2014


neepheid says:
April 28, 2014 at 10:33 am

Is it really the case that the stadium provider receives both a sizeable fixed rental AND a 25% slice of the gate after deducting their own costs?
———-

The 25% of the gate comes from TRFC being a semi-finalist.

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on10:45 am - Apr 28, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
April 28, 2014 at 9:08 am

Perhaps Wallace has finally found Charles Green’s promised £10m fund? He’s certainly sounding like a man struck down with Rangersitis, the symtoms of which seem to be a swollen bank account.

A mere £10m? Pffft…

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11788/8342844/Rangers-boss-Ally-McCoist-set-to-be-handed-up-to-30m-for-new-players-by-chief-executive-Charles-Green-once-transfer-embargo-lifted

To be fair, Monsieur Vert doesn’t actually mention 30m there: that appears to have been plucked out of the air by the clown who wrote it.

I must say for all the ordure shovelled by the Scottish MSM there is surely no greater purveyor of drivel than Sky Sports when it comes to all things Rangers.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on10:46 am - Apr 28, 2014


Para Handy says:
April 28, 2014 at 9:31 am

Now that’s a strange piece of writing by a member of the SMSM, it actually borders on proper journalism. I mean, it’s not just a list of quotes, but actually describes the demeanour of the man issuing the PR as opposed to just publishing the PR as his own work, together with a number of insightful comments. Pity, though, it only comes as a result of Wallace’s outing over the weekend and not upfront with the original story.

When was the last time we read this about the way a (TRFC) PR message was put:

“He looked uncomfortable dodging questions about bonuses. He was disingenuous dealing with the credit card issue.”

That is journalism (in my mind, anyway) and tells the reader a lot more about what we need to know than just the PR message. The following, too, make me wonder why we have rarely, if ever, seen this effort put into the reporting of events:

“He steadfastly refused to accept the rates he ‘negotiated’ on the Wonga-esque Laxey loan should be a source of regret and still peddled the line about it being market rates.”

So awkward questions are asked, and go unanswered, at these PR bashes, but just go unreported.

“Remarkably, despite acknowledging the ludicrous nature of their football spending over the past two years, he’s still indulging his manager with claims the budget will get bigger next season.”

A right good dose of reality there, from Gordon (Waddell), for the supporters, but why wait until 3 days after the report to say it, and, of course, after the CEO’s credibility rating plunged to new depths? Why not read this with the first reports of the event? Is it because he (and the rest) don’t want to be the first to pour cold water on the positive nature of the ‘presser’ and risk the wrath of both the club and it’s supporters? Is it too hard for them to do such proper journalism in the time allotted to them before printing? Or, as seems so very likely, is it that they need to read it here first, because they don’t have the ability to work it all out for themselves?

Still, Gordon Waddell has shown what is possible. Would be nice, though, if he managed to keep the red, white and blue specs off for long enough to do similar, as, and when, he reports on the next piece of TRFC PR.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:52 am - Apr 28, 2014


Para Handy says:
April 28, 2014 at 9:31 am

An article from the DR which, surprisingly, makes some sense and could have been lifted (indeed perhaps was :-)) from here.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/gordon-waddell-rangers-regime-done-3464980
=====================================
At the end of the day I was prepared to wait until Wallace had completed and published the full review to make my mind up about him and where his interests lay.

I accepted that a 120 day period was a joke but rationalised that by realising they were playing for time and, in a sense, it doesn’t matter whether that time was for the good of Rangers or of the spivs.

However we have been handed a precis of the actual report and not the full version which doesn’t really explain where the money has gone nor identify the seemingly disastrous contracts that the company has entered into seemingly without legal advice and which presumably will continue to leach money from Ibrox.

Then the other major question is the ‘new’ money. I hear what they say about how they might raise it but that seems all very iffy to me and there’s always the ‘trust’ issue on that one. Will it actually go into the club or like the last lot will is basically be disappeared.

And I haven’t even touched on the ST shambles in the making.

So I have come to the opinion that Mr Wallace is a ‘dud’ as far as Rangers is concerned but that doesn’t mean he isn’t satisfying the agenda of the mystery overseas shareholders at Ibrox and that’s what will guarantee his bonus and golden cheerio ❗

View Comment

occamPosted on10:54 am - Apr 28, 2014


Blind faith …… Trust …. in what exactly? Spivs, hustlers, medicine men use trust as their greatest weapon – especially in the kingdom of the blind! Then along comes the one eyed man to keep things ticking along – with the collusion of our wonderful, insightful hacks who are not interested in seeking the TRUTH.

No hiding place!

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on10:57 am - Apr 28, 2014


Seems bizarre that the first CEO of the Ibrox Club to get a hard time from the press and support before presiding over a fiscal mishap is the one who seems to have a clue how to run a business.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:01 am - Apr 28, 2014


Allyjambo says:
April 28, 2014 at 10:46 am
Para Handy says:
April 28, 2014 at 9:31 am

WRT Wallace:

“He steadfastly refused to accept the rates he ‘negotiated’ on the Wonga-esque Laxey loan should be a source of regret and still peddled the line about it being market rates.”

To be honest I actually think that the Laxey loan rates probably were the ‘market rates’.

But to actually defend them Wallace would need to list all the other sources of finance approached who put the phone down on the begging call with the comment: ‘It will cost you more tomorrow’.

The only way for Wallace to defend the Laxey loan is to actually state what a financial basket-case that Rangers is and if he did that then it’s game over.

So he’s left looking like a lemon or even a lemming about to jump 😯

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:04 am - Apr 28, 2014


In his usual teasing way, PMGB hinting at some serious/amusing developments down Govan way, but I find this tweet particularly amusing:

Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain · 1h
Some harsh words for the Legned from Graham Wallace in the Blue Room at the week end.
“Most of this happened on your watch!”
#TheCardigan

View Comment

beanosPosted on11:07 am - Apr 28, 2014


Night Terror says:
April 28, 2014 at 10:57 am
0 0 i
Rate This

Seems bizarre that the first CEO of the Ibrox Club to get a hard time from the press and support before presiding over a fiscal mishap is the one who seems to have a clue how to run a business.

————————————————————————————————————————————————

maybe………..but the devil is in the detail.

what has been released would have taken 120 minutes to conclude nevermind 120 days. what detail of the bad contracts and financiall management exists in the full report?

some of the stuff is so obvious (income nowhere near outgoings) that any decent executive would have already been taking steps to sort out whether the 120 day review is ongoing or not. The timing of it to end around season ticket renewal time is highly suspicious.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on11:07 am - Apr 28, 2014


BigGav says:
April 28, 2014 at 10:44 am

The 25% of the gate comes from TRFC being a semi-finalist.
===============
Thanks, BG. So each semifinalist gets 25% of the total net receipts over both games? I always imagined they got half the gate for the game they played in, but you live and learn. I have to say that the 25% rule is fairer to the smaller clubs.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:21 am - Apr 28, 2014


Ally Jambo

The period 2007/2008 to be more exact. The time when a bit of belt tightening would have saved Rangers buy no spend £11M and don’t save another £14M.

Push debt up from £6M to £31M then get Chic Young and cohorts to talk of bringing it down to £18M!

View Comment

normanbatesmumfcPosted on11:22 am - Apr 28, 2014


From the Gordon Waddell piece;
“The minute they do? This Rangers 
regime is done. More than that, though, their club as they know it is done. Again.”
Come on Gordon, stick to the script. By all means have a go at the company and the incompetence of the board, but please do not drag the club into this.
How dare he?????

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:23 am - Apr 28, 2014


Night Terror says:
April 28, 2014 at 10:57 am

Seems bizarre that the first CEO of the Ibrox Club to get a hard time from the press and support before presiding over a fiscal mishap is the one who seems to have a clue how to run a business.
===========================================
I was going to say that anyone who fiddles for 4 months while Ibrox burns money hasn’t got a scoobie about how to run the business but that might be misconstrued and should only be taken in a Nero context.

He couldn’t even get the players to accept a tiny cut in their vastly over-inflated wages and he’s going to give McCoist at least the same money this year and indeed possibly more in the football budget. I could go on and on but he’s defo turning into a busted flush IMO.

In any case no matter how clever anyone is meant to be it means nothing if there is a question mark over what they are saying.

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on11:31 am - Apr 28, 2014


Today’s attacks on Graham Wallace from the loyal Rangers supporting members of the sporting section of the Scottish press corps are certainly coordinated. I wonder if a becardiganed Blue Knight had a quite word in their collective earhole after the game on Saturday?

Keith Jacksons’ “if Wallace is genuinely a man a honour, then surely now he would do the decent thing and resign from his position before any more damage is done to his own reputation” is laughable.

GW’s low reputation amongst a few backwater sports churnalists and the mad football fans that believe the drivel printed in their papers matters not one jot.

GW was put in place by the shareholders who own RIFC plc. Those shareholders would have signed off on the 120 day review report. GW is doing exactly what is being asked of him.

His reputation may be low with the churnalists, but with those that matter – the people who own the company – he is doing ok and earning every penny of his substantial bonus.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:38 am - Apr 28, 2014


To those who brought back memories of the American SP and the Locarno in Sauchiehall Street as the battles raged with the ‘yank’ sailors – ah those were the days.

Most might not realise that the bulk of the SP were just ordinary sailors and had a rota to beat their mates with those very long white night-sticks wearing their while helmets and webbing.

My memories go back a bit earlier when our gang of raggity urchins would trek up from the Gorbals to Charing Cross with the heart-rending plea: ‘Any gum chum?’. I must say the Yankie sailors were great especially for kids in the time of rationing.

Obviously older males were more worried about the ‘Yanks’ getting off with their ‘burds’ and battles ensued. I fought them as well by that stage but in YCND and many were the marches and demos back then against Polaris and Lannon – Oh ra Cooncil o’ Dunoon it wants fur hauf -a-croon, wants fur hauf-a-croon, bit we dinnae want Polaris’.

Thanks for bringing back those old memories.

View Comment

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on11:41 am - Apr 28, 2014


Might be a silly questions, but here goes.

By already announcing TRFC as league winners and presenting them with the winners trophy and medals, are the SFA now tied to no punishment if TRFC go into administration before the end of the week/season?

Does it show that the SFA have no concern over the current state of the finances at TRFC or are they simply ignoring it? (i can guess the answer to that one)

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:44 am - Apr 28, 2014


ecobhoy says:
April 28, 2014 at 11:23 am

The players have valid contracts, if they don’y want to move, its not that easy to force them. Breaking the contracts would incur costs. When you are running this sort of business transformation programme, you need a budget to cover the short term costs, while you book the long term savings. Most of the time there is low hanging fruit, that you can harvest, which will book immediate savings, it’s usually fairly small beer, but the symbolic effect shouldn’t be underestimated – it shows you are serious. This has not been done.

Like everything else about Rangers this has been an abnormal exercise. the only explanation that makes any sense to me is that Wallace has received significant opposition from board members. I still think, for all his manifest faults, Wallace is probably Rangers best chance . For all that we are only seeing a summary of the full report, it is still the most honest document to have come out of Ibrox in decades.

Incidentally Grant Russel was reporting this morning that Rangers would have to go into admin by this Friday to incur the points loss this season, and exit admin before August, to avoid incurring a further points deduction next season.

Someone has been impersonating Nero, just not sure its Wallace

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:48 am - Apr 28, 2014


Para Handy

Whatever way they slice and dice it whoever is in charge has to cut spending.

Anybody suggesting anything else is not the man for the job.

And what is it they fear from wielding the scalpel? That the 38,000 will dwindle to 25,000 and will have to depend on the quality of football to bring success and that is not where TRFC belong?

Welcome to Scottish football where all clubs including Celtic have to play the game and accept the results within their means.

They might even learn to enjoy being a part of it all rather than apart from it all. The ones who stay of course.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:54 am - Apr 28, 2014


No1 Bob says:
April 28, 2014 at 11:31 am

Today’s attacks on Graham Wallace from the loyal Rangers supporting members of the sporting section of the Scottish press corps are certainly coordinated. I wonder if a becardiganed Blue Knight had a quite word in their collective earhole after the game on Saturday?
=============================
I am amazed at the quality of the fan response and must conclude that it has been written by an expert. That doesn’t necessarily decry the fans because the ‘expert’ may be from their ranks.

But just the style and cohesiveness marks this out not as a committee ‘camel’ but someone who knows what they are doing.

It would normally be too long for a tabloid but doesn’t appear to have been ‘cut’ although the current circumstances of Rangers and support interest well justifies the column inches allowed for what, to me, is an interesting read.

I also believe that the professionalsim of the fan piece is way beyond Cardigan’s ability as a wordsmith. Not a lot going for him as it looks as though Wallace doesn’t think much about his financial ability either.

Probably guarantees his return to the new Rangers Board 😆

View Comment

Shyster Flywheel ShysterPosted on12:04 pm - Apr 28, 2014


I got a little flummoxed with the new SPFL Rules regarding insolvency (Section E). Clause E4 states the following:

“Where an Insolvency Event or in the event that such Insolvency Event is part of an Insolvency Process that process, continues and/or is subsisting during a second or later Season then, for each such second or later Season, during the whole or part of which such Insolvency Event or Insolvency Process is continuing and/or subsisting, the Club concerned shall be deducted 15 points and shall start each such second or later Season in the relevant Division on minus 15 points.”

I believe this clause was written to stop clubs rushing into Admin (and points deduction) at the end of Season 1 so to be free of a points penalty in Season 2. As I read it, if a club is still in Admin at the start of a season then it starts that season on -15 pts Clarification please ❓

Flywheel

View Comment

Para HandyPosted on12:06 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Allyjambo says:
April 28, 2014 at 10:46 am

A right good dose of reality there, from Gordon (Waddell), for the supporters, but why wait until 3 days after the report to say it
==========================
AllyJambo, the story came out on Saturday but I didn’t get a chance to post it until today.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on12:09 pm - Apr 28, 2014


scapaflow says:
April 28, 2014 at 11:44 am
ecobhoy says:
April 28, 2014 at 11:23 am
============================
I hear what you say and as I said in an earlier post I was prepared to stay my judgement on Wallace till I had seen the unexpurgated report – which I have yet to see.

However my impression is that Wallace is no longer in control of his destiny and is just marking time to make his ‘escape’. If he had known anything about Rangers I doubt if he would have taken the job and he would have known that virtually all who walk-away from Ibrox pay for it in reputational damage even though their pockets might be stuffed with wonga.

How can anyone take the man seriously on just reading the peaks of the journey he has outlined on the Rangers road back to where they belong.

They read like the wish-list that a 7-year-old Rangers supporter might send up the lum to Santa. The guy would be better turning his hand to writing fiction than supposedly serious financial reports 😆

Rangeritis is a condition which creates deep-seated delusions and Wallace appears to have a serious dose of the malady. Even staunch Bears on the Darkside are questioning his timetable.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on12:09 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Shyster Flywheel Shyster says:
April 28, 2014 at 12:04 pm

Correct, apparantly.

Ecobhoy

The cardigan was just as far out of his depth in the boardroom as John Greig was. The difference is that Greig was smart enough to realise it. The cardigan on the other hand :mrgreen:

View Comment

wottpiPosted on12:15 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Allyjambo says:
April 28, 2014 at 11:04 am
10 0 i
Rate This

In his usual teasing way, PMGB hinting at some serious/amusing developments down Govan way, but I find this tweet particularly amusing:

Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain · 1h
Some harsh words for the Legned from Graham Wallace in the Blue Room at the week end.
“Most of this happened on your watch!”
#TheCardigan

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Funnily enough was going to make a similar point earlier in that it would be interesting to see if fans and MSM would go after Sir Cradigan if Wallace’s allegations of financial mismanagement during his and others tenure are agreed by all. The main thing being if Police Scotland say Wallace has nothing to answer for and his statements re financial mismanagement are correct then they must agree the previous board were all duffers.

I didn’t bother posting because really poor Walter was just (and perhaps still is) a patsy and while he should have known better the old guy is more to be pitied than scorned.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on12:16 pm - Apr 28, 2014


I reckon Ally’s warchest meet with a cuppa might get postponed today as Waldo sits with the remuneration committee discussing his pay off around for around a Wed/Thurs departure this week. Whilst there is still some cash available, signing the usual confidentiality agreements as he must know of all the nasty stuff that has gone on. Then off to a meet with the new PR man to discuss how to spin the departure and the admin event. Looks like all the press have been told to put out anti-Waldo stories in a concerted effort to discredit the man.

Waldo is trying to keep the club afloat and being heavily criticised although he has probably told the most truth since he started than any other board member, something that is not liked amongst the delusional rangers fans, they turn on him when the old chairman sits in the stand a hero. A man who was put in place by spivs so they could do what they want to symphon the money out of rangers in a range of fashions, knowing he was not qualified for the position. ALL uncovered by Waldo who explains what the previous incumbents did but he is now public enemy #1 to the rangers mob.
Still silence from the SFA..
I wonder if Mr Green will re-emerge in this sorry tale..If there is a way for him to come back a hero, get his ego massaged and make a buck he will be there..And it all goes full circle.

The rangers fans call for transparency and truth but they do not really want that, they just want the moonbeams and dreams and pledges of jillions flowing into the club from men who do not even pay their basic dues.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:17 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Para Handy says:
April 28, 2014 at 12:06 pm

Cheers, Para. Maybe it was a proper piece of journalism after all. He, at least, must be learning from what he reads on here 🙂

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on12:21 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Alternatively Waldo is the latest in a line of patsy’s and has timed his tenure at rangers to a tee, he even got a loan to make sure there was money to pay him and pals off.. Interesting week ahead. What they need is a RFFF2 as the first one seems to have been lost.

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on12:24 pm - Apr 28, 2014


We have an opportunity in the coming months to change to a more favourable mortgage rate, switch to another lender or use our past payments in some other options involving savings and pensions, all boring but important stuff as kids get older and time for tending the garden comes a little closer.

So starts a conversation about putting a little more aside for the pension pot and if this is something we can afford.

Mrs Madbhoy decides that she would like to do some number crunching, looking at what we currently have in other pots, what we might have in the future based on current trends, current interest rates or offers, how much she could sell my motorbike for (WTF)….

“Stop! Forget that,” I said, there are only two things you need to look at when making a decision on reducing spending through necessity or if you would just like to save something for the future:

1. Input
2. Output

Are you taking in more than you spend?

Yes? Then take the extra and spend it or save it!
No? Then look at spend and establish waste or luxury that you can do without!

Economics really are that simple!

She quickly informs me that she already knows that it is a “yes” to which I responded “then why are we talking about motorbikes and football subscriptions?

Crazy Economics!

If you want to increase the pot even more than the amount of free cash that you have available every month then you can start to look at the low hanging fruit (motorbikes excluded), the priority at the start however is to ensure the incoming monies exceed the outgoing liabilities.

Got me thinking again about the situation (only with a “no” answer) with Rangers, if the money is so scarce down Ibrox way, why are they talking about bringing in Miller and Boyd for next season?

Crazy Economics!

View Comment

Sugar DaddyPosted on12:31 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Where is DK? As the clichè goes – its quiet, too quiet.

I was a little surprised (actually I wasnt) at the bears initial acceptance of the 120 day review as they digested the PR spin of £30m fund raising.

It all seems to be kicking off now though. SoS & WS via the MSM laying in to GW. Calls for police investigations. How many is that now? Seems the police have investigated just about everyone but not a single pair of handcuffs has been clasped in anger.

Sevco, I believe, is finished. Little cash, a ST boycott, a CEO under pressure (for doing the right thing!) & a massive fixed cost base. It might limp along for a few months yet, but this is no vehicle for anyone, in their right mind, to plough £30m into.

DK must be planning something.

I stopped watching TV soaps during my uni days but I tell you Craigy Whyte has a blockbuster of a TV series on his hands.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:47 pm - Apr 28, 2014


On the lambasting Graham Wallace is taking from the MSM and the bears over his 120 day report. Could it be that he produced a more grown up version, but had difficulty getting it passed by the board/his paymasters, so had to publish the child friendly one instead? Not suggesting this might excuse him, but it might explain why a man in his position could produce such a poor effort.

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on1:03 pm - Apr 28, 2014


beanos says:

the devil is in the detail.

what has been released would have taken 120 minutes to conclude nevermind 120 days. what detail of the bad contracts and financiall management exists in the full report?

some of the stuff is so obvious (income nowhere near outgoings) that any decent executive would have already been taking steps to sort out whether the 120 day review is ongoing or not. The timing of it to end around season ticket renewal time is highly suspicious.

I think it’s quite understandable that all the gruesome detail is left out of the report available for public consumption. The headline numbers are bad enough, and then the denial of card payments. These are very clear indicators of how badly the company is being run.

The statement that a cash injection via further issue of shares is necessary for the company to continue trading is also hardly a surprise but alarming all the same, as are the warnings of the severe consequences of fans withholding money.

As other posters have pointed out, there is a restriction on how much cost can be cut when you’re committed to contracts, and looking into using third party and outsourcing for parts of the business is ominous for current employees at Ibrox.

All of this is plausible and credible in my view, if, and it’s a big if, enough can be raised through a share issue. There is no pretence that such cash would be used for anything other than running costs until revenue streams increase in the top division.

Not being party to what goes on behind the scenes I don’t really see how so many are quick to jump all over Wallace for perceived failings. These sort of reviews in any business tend to the wafty list of dreams and wishes the further from the current financial year they venture, so I don’t really have any problem with the best case scenario envisioned of winning the league in 3 years. Fair enough – of course that’s what a club that size would be aiming for.

Timing of such a forced optimism in a report is part of the CEO’s job. If makes statements or does things at times less than optimal for his business he is not doing as good a job as he should.

PMGB seems to have a good source on how things are going inside Ibrox and from those glimpses it sounds like Wallace is having a terrible time getting stuff past the rest of the board. One could argue he should be better at doing so, but we’re venturing very far from known detail here.

I’m very surprised at how tough a time he’s getting for doing what appears to be the right stuff in difficult circumstances, particularly when thinking how those who have gone before were regarded by the Ibrox club’s fans and the press.

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on1:09 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Allyjambo says:
April 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm

On the lambasting Graham Wallace is taking from the MSM and the bears over his 120 day report. Could it be that he produced a more grown up version, but had difficulty getting it passed by the board/his paymasters, so had to publish the child friendly one instead? Not suggesting this might excuse him, but it might explain why a man in his position could produce such a poor effort.

Was it really such a poor effort? What exactly was poor?

It may not have had the detail that some would have liked to see, but as the CEO of the business, divulging detail that made running the business even more difficult would not seem wise.

I’m just not getting the hostility he is attracting, and the UoF accusations seem quite spurious when Wallace has already mentioned that in the course of the review he discovered funding was missing. He’s been a bit crafty in his reasoning for the withdrawal of card payments which may not be the whole truth, but understandable that he should try and influence the one aspect of income that he can at the moment.

View Comment

Shyster Flywheel ShysterPosted on1:16 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Hearts were deducted -15 pts at the beginning of the season (and rightly so) for going into Administration.

As well as the points deduction Hearts were not given the opportunity, unlike TRFC, to sign players before the signing embargo came into effect. As a result of this, Hearts have played the season with a team made up mostly youth players from its U20s. This was in contrast to TRFC who started in Div 3 with the SFA’s assistance to sign the likes of Wallace, Black, Templeton, etc. before the transfer embargo came into being.

My question is: while I am happy with the penalties being applied for a club going into Admin, there are no incentives to reward a club for leaving Admin prior to the end of the same season. Say a 5 pts or 10 pts addition.

This points addition would unlikely affect Hearts as they look like not coming out of Admin until after the season’s end. But let’s hypothetically assume that Hearts left Admin this week and were awarded 10 pts for doing so – that would make the remaining 3 rounds for the bottom 6 very interesting.

Flywheel

View Comment

SmugasPosted on1:18 pm - Apr 28, 2014


If it goes to liquidation, and I’m now struggling to see any way around that IF Sevco choose to fight for the property assets and King fights for t’history, the longer term prospective RFC office bearers will need three things;

1/ SFA complicity once again to give them literally the chance of continuation, plus a whole slice more of ‘in our opinions’ by Regan and Co to maintain the myth of club continuation. OK so this ones a given!

2/ Cash. Lots of cash. RFC as was, is, and therefore is likely to be (witness union of fans criticising Wallace’s financial acumen to the nth degree, but apparently competing for the top division in two years is unquestionable) likes cash. Lots of cash. Donations on a postcard please. No plastic though! Anyone expecting a return on their investment need not apply (actually scratch that, just send us your cash anyway) .

3/ As if 2 wasn’t bad enough someone also gets the job of managing expectations. A ‘successful’ RFC will still not be a profitable RFC. As long as robbing peter (future success) to pay paul (Letham’s loan) is considered financial prudence they will remain in the mire as their capital base is on the floor . Maybe a higher publicity, cash central mire, but a mire none the less.

If they last the week, then something’s afoot. But that something may not be in RFC’s interests – hence the publicity storm being leashed today. I think they might actually now get it!

View Comment

tomtomPosted on1:21 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Allyjambo says:
April 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm
0 0 Rate This

On the lambasting Graham Wallace is taking from the MSM and the bears over his 120 day report. Could it be that he produced a more grown up version, but had difficulty getting it passed by the board/his paymasters, so had to publish the child friendly one instead? Not suggesting this might excuse him, but it might explain why a man in his position could produce such a poor effort.
==========================
If that is/was the case then he truly is a patsy for the board. If a CEO is tasked with producing a report and then lets it be sanitised he is either useless or corrupt. From where I sit Wallace was well aware of the situation at Ibrox before he took the job. It’s not as if he was plucked out of some third world country. His remit was to get them along to the end of the season and then they could take stock of the situation and make their next move. Like everything else in this saga it is constant firefighting whilst refusing to admit the building is on fire. The board hold all the aces and, as long as they can see the pot has money in it, they’ll continue to keep them close to their chest. As soon as there is no possibility of any more cash being put into the pot they’ll end the game. The with-holding of ST money could well be that point. The bus boys will have already had their initial money repaid in the guise of directors remuneration/expenses, most of the other “investors” will have had their feed from the carcass and the rest will just have to take the hit. Wallace will be well aware of this – if he isn’t then he’s stupider than I think, and I don’t think he’s stupid.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:26 pm - Apr 28, 2014


I don’t think DK has to come out and say anything right now, the rangers fans and MSM are doing a good job of hanging Waldo and the board out to dry.. Maybe he is waiting on things developing before he chooses his moment to be crowned…

View Comment

SmugasPosted on1:33 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Jeez, he doesn’t want to go saying anything just now. They might sell him the damned thing!

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:40 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Smugas says:
April 28, 2014 at 1:33 pm

Ah, when the Gods wish to punish us they give us what we want :mrgreen:

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on1:59 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Night Terror says:
April 28, 2014 at 1:09 pm

Was it really such a poor effort? What exactly was poor?

It may not have had the detail that some would have liked to see, but as the CEO of the business, divulging detail that made running the business even more difficult would not seem wise.

I’m just not getting the hostility he is attracting.
=======================================
I certainly have no personal hostility towards Wallace or Rangers but happen to think he has presented a joke of a report and it would still have been a joke even if it had only taken 10 days to prepare.

What was poor? Well where does one start? I will keep it simple and not raise the subject as to whether the contents can be trusted or not in view of subsequent comments 😆

However he has IMO presented a totally unrealistic ‘plan’ to the Bears based on a fantasy of future performance and fails to address the consequences by having a Plan ‘B’ if the journey to the ‘Rightful Place’ stalls or is never achieved.

I’m not saying his plan can’t be achieved but it will take far more money than he appears to be budgetting for.

And at the end of the day the crux of the issue is money. Some appear to think that the fans were responsible for voting down the issue of the unissued shares to third parties or new investors.

That is obvious nonsense as they don’t hold enough shares to do so. The vote was lost because it didn’t suit the agenda or financial interest of existing large shareholders. However they are entitled to make that decision as they are involved in Rangers to make money and that isn’t necessarily achieved by footballing success.

So just how is that vote going to be reversed and, if not, what happens?

Then if shares actually do get offered in a new release where does any money raised go? Does it ‘disappear’ like large chunks of the flotation money? And who of a sane mind is goinf to invest in a financial basket case.

All I have seen in this mickey-mouse report is fantasy land and at the very least I would have expected firm investment commitments from the existing major shareholders including the institutional ones.

If they can’t guarantee their investment I doubt if anyone else will buy a share.

However as I have said gawd knows how many times on here: It’s up to the Bears to decide what kind of club they end-up with although there are certainly positive signs that many have an increasing financial awareness of the perilous situation their club is in and have serious doubts over Board members and shareholders and particularly the anonymous, overseas-based ones whose ultimate plans for Rangers remain shrouded in mystery.

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on2:10 pm - Apr 28, 2014


@ecobhoy

he has IMO presented a totally unrealistic ‘plan’ to the Bears based on a fantasy of future performance and fails to address the consequences by having a Plan ‘B’ if the journey to the ‘Rightful Place’ stalls or is never achieved.

Is a strategic plan the place to itemise a plan B should your plan fail?

I remain sceptical that the money required to be raised is realistic, but the absolute need to raise money cannot be denied.

I thought the consequences of not raising such money, and of not collecting expected season ticket revenues in the short term, are implicitly clear if not spelled out in alarming I-N-S-O-L-V-E-N-C-Y lettering.

I read the report as Wallace itemising what needs to happen, giving him a reasonable out if such things fail to pass where he can say – “Well, I told you what we needed to do, if we can’t do that there’s nothing more I can contribute here. I’ve done my best. Goodbye.”

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:22 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Night Terror says:
April 28, 2014 at 1:03 pm

These sort of reviews in any business tend to the wafty list of dreams and wishes the further from the current financial year they venture, so I don’t really have any problem with the best case scenario envisioned of winning the league in 3 years. Fair enough – of course that’s what a club that size would be aiming for.

Timing of such a forced optimism in a report is part of the CEO’s job.
=======================================
Here was me thinking this was to be a warts an all investigation into what had gone so horribly wrong with tens of million of quid being flushed down the pan.

And more importantly that there should be a clear and honest blueprint as to how the club could be saved financially.

And what do we get? More moonbeams and snake oil which the Bears have had in plenty for years. Or, as you put it a: ‘Wafty list of dreams’.

I could have dreamt that up overnight and not spent 120 days on it. I really think the ordinary Bears who support their club for footballing reasons really deserve better than a Chief Exec peddling ‘wafty dreams’ especially in view of the charlatans at Ibrox who have ripped them off in recent years who were expert in manufacturing ‘wafty dreams’.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on2:24 pm - Apr 28, 2014


All I can say in Wallace’s defence is that the full report (which will probably never see the light of day) might be a thorough, detailed and professional piece of work, whereas what we have seen is simply a PR exercise. However as a PR exercise it is a total failure. I hope that what we have seen isn’t the work of the new “6 figure” PR guru, because if it is, maybe it’s time to bring back Jack.

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on2:25 pm - Apr 28, 2014


ecobhoy – if that’s what you wanted from a company report issued to the public I fear you are looking in the wrong place.

View Comment

Night TerrorPosted on2:29 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Neepheid – let’s hope we see the full report at some point. However, if I were Mr Wallace and did not want it to be made public, I would at least give every copy of the report some distinguishing characteristic so that I could trace who had leaked it. That would at least be some consolation.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:30 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Just a wee reminder what Bill Miller’s man Jon Pritchett said a wee while back.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/sportsmoney/2012/10/08/what-can-we-learn-from-the-financial-meltdown-of-glasgow-rangers-fc/

Lots of little gems in the article now that time has passed.

Being that a lot of CEO Wallace’s review contains some of Pritchetts musings maybe he will also find comfort in the following.

“The right leader will be comfortable being unpopular. Any new owner who is unwilling to stand up to what will be a powerful hue and cry from Rangers fans and supporters is not going to be successful. Rangers, like an undisciplined child, needs tough love. Rangers needs a strong hand now. There will be plenty of time for love and respect when the child grows into a mature and responsible adult.”

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:46 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Night Terror says:
April 28, 2014 at 2:10 pm

Is a strategic plan the place to itemise a plan B should your plan fail?
=============================================
Nope but then I wouldn’t expect a strategic plan to be based on ‘dreams’ either which you appear to accept as par for the course from a CEO.

The problem with the Rangers’ financial set-up IMO isn’t to do with the nuts and bolts of income v outgoings. It’s more to do with what those controlling shareholders intend to do with Rangers and its assets – that to me is the big imponderable but I am more or less certain that football is not high on their priority agenda.

If I am right then that makes a mockery of the 120 Day Review because it means nothing other than buying a bit of time to get more cash in and I have serious doubt how much, if any, of that cash will be used to cover the operating losses of a club playing out of Ibrox. Why would any serious investor, other than a fan, want to do that?

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on2:48 pm - Apr 28, 2014


Investors,Sevco have made it to end season, cheers GW here is your pay off. Now you need to go. Ok I will get my PR to tell the SMSM to sack me. Ok says DR you have got to go, you have to be sacked. Ibrox sing sack the board. Everyone happy.
Sevco have enough money to see out season so admin not likely just now (just under 3.5 million pounds in coffers). So ST may not be enough to keep Sevco afloat but may be ok for a few months into next season. Admin may happen into next season, so can sevco take a 15 points reduction and still win the Championship??

Bit of a gamble I would say. If admin happens now it would just seem a bit dodgy to me. But then again…..it is the Govan club that CO used to work at.

View Comment

Comments are closed.