Podcast Episode 4 – Turnbull Hutton

loamfeetPosted on9:43 am - May 11, 2014

ratethisthenyabampots says:
May 11, 2014 at 1:18 am

Whilst these playoffs are what we have all been crying out for, man alive they are flawed. As a Falkirk Bairn, we now face having played 210 minutes v QOS and battled through, we now face the possibility of another 120 mins v Accies who are rested and must be rubbing their hands in glee. All this before a shot at glory v a Premiership team in waiting [ .. ]

——————–

The playoff structure is a bit mystifying. I am sure everybody would be more satisfied with 11th vs 4th and 2nd vs 3rd semi-finals followed by a final. Still, though, doesn’t Hamilton get that extra break by dint of finishing second?

JackBauerPosted on10:03 am - May 11, 2014

ratethisthenyabampots says:
May 11, 2014 at 1:18 am

Whilst these playoffs are what we have all been crying out for, man alive they are flawed. As a Falkirk Bairn, we now face having played 210 minutes v QOS and battled through, we now face the possibility of another 120 mins v Accies who are rested and must be rubbing their hands in glee. All this before a shot at glory v a Premiership team in waiting [ .. ]

——————–
The playoff game between Falkirk and Hamilton is another 2 legs Tuesday 13th and Sunday 18th. With the winners playing Hibs again over 2 legs on Wed 21st and Sunday 25th. Not a single match as your post suggests. Home leg 1st for Falkirk.

penguin7Posted on10:13 am - May 11, 2014

upthehoops says:
May 11, 2014 at 9:33 am

He was also quoted as saying that he had no knowledge whatsoever of players contracts.

No bonus for winning the league does not necessarily mean no bonus for promotion.

ptd1978Posted on11:04 am - May 11, 2014

I doubt the playoff structure will change until Rangers are in the top division. If they do have a points deduction to overcome, or they simply aren’t good enough to live with Hearts and Hibs/Hamilton/Falkirk, we might see a one leg structure introduced to decrease the number of honest mistakes required to get them over the line. If they limp on into the top flight then I would imagine the play-offs will disappear pronto if they’re still a very poor footballing side.

JimBhoyPosted on11:35 am - May 11, 2014

http://www.insolventcompanies.co.uk/zebra-finance-limited-03065024/
Brown bag full of notes pay at the ticket centre…

BarcabhoyPosted on11:41 am - May 11, 2014

Ryan Gosling

You keep stating that public companies engaged in the same practices as Murray. That’s an easy claim to make , so let’s see you back it up. Can you give me a list of plc’s who tick all of the following boxes .

1 guilty of tax evasion ( not avoidance)

2 underfund staff pension plans by 50%

3 have hundreds of £millions of loans written off in return for utterly worthless shares

4 sell company assets to Chairman / CEO for vastly under book value / original price paid

5 destroy a Scottish sporting institution

6 where CEO/ Chairman take a £6 million EBT loan

There are lots more area’s of scrutiny ,however you should easily be able to list quite a few plc’s to justify your claim that Murray’s conduct was commonplace , as opposed to my claim that it was uniquely damaging

ratethisthenyabampotsPosted on12:13 pm - May 11, 2014

Jack Bauer, my bad. That was a slightly inebriated typo. Should have been 210 not 120. Just a fluke that it looked like 90 + 30 extra time.

yourhavingalaughPosted on1:08 pm - May 11, 2014

I am sure the 16 team premier league propegators will be turning up the heat shortly ,no relegation and 4 comming up next season,problems solved before they appear.

RyanGoslingPosted on1:40 pm - May 11, 2014

Barcabhoy,

My exact comments on the subject were:
“I don’t think he was doing anything out of the ordinary”
“Almost everybody pre 2008 was borrowing excessive amounts of money and claiming huge profits and wages, assuming the borrowing would be repaid with future profits which never materialised”
“There were many more during the same period who were doing much worse purely because they were better at milking the golden goose than Murray was”

I don’t think any of these statements would amount to me “keep stating that public companies engaged in the same practices as Murray”. I also think that your demand that I produce examples of companies engaged in a very specific list of exact actions of Murray is deliberately far fetched. While there are examples of many of the things on your list, it doesn’t mean that examples have to match the Murray Group deed for deed for my comments to be relevant. My comments as listed above were a general observation that Murray was not alone in questionable corporate behaviour which was immensely profitable to him and immensely damaging to others. This was not a defence of Murray, and I’m not sure why you seem to have been so affronted. None the less, I have attempted to provide some examples below as instructed.

1. Guilty of Tax Evasion – An investigation by BBC Panorama claims HMRC were pursuing Bernie Ecclestone for a tax bill of £2 billion, but allowed him to settle for £10 million, in what could be the “biggest ever personal tax dodge”.

Elsewhere in the world, Enron were also accused of dodging billions of dollars in taxes.

2. Underfund pension scheme by 50% – In August 2013 FTSE 100 companies had a combined deficit of £43bn. And that’s just the FTSE 100, I haven’t looked into deficits elsewhere but the equity crash caused by the financial crisis, millions lost through for example BP’s difficulties and widespread de risking by pension trustees, pension deficits are far from unique and unfortunately if the company funding the scheme goes bust, the scheme is in a lot of trouble if it is in deficit. For the single worst example of an underfunded pension scheme, look at the UK state and public pension obligations versus the capability of the state to meet these obligations.

Elsewhere in the world, Enron’s collapse wiped out $2billion in pension plans.

3. Hundreds of millions of loans written off in exchange for worthless shares – last September Lloyds took ownership of all of £760m worth of De Vere Limited preferred ordinary shares in issue, through Uberior Equity Limited, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Uberior Investments, which is the former HBOS private equity arm. As a result, Lloyds now effectively controls De Vere Group.

4. Sell company assets to chairman for vastly less than book value / original price – I haven’t found another example of this. Such deals can be complex and are always opaque. I highly doubt that the Murray case is the only instance of this.

5. Destroy a Scottish sporting institution – Brooks Mileson destroyed Gretna, Gavin Masterton and Vladimir Romanov very nearly destroyed Hearts and Dunfermline.

6. Chairman takes EBT loan – as at June 2013 HMRC has stated it has around 5,000 current enquiries into EBTs. The Murray Group was not unique in this.

ianagainPosted on2:08 pm - May 11, 2014

2nd Thanks very much Craig

TSFMPosted on2:18 pm - May 11, 2014

Doncaster. Ouch !! 😳

ecobhoyPosted on3:47 pm - May 11, 2014

RyanGosling says:
May 11, 2014 at 1:40 pm

Barcabhoy,

My exact comments on the subject were:
“I don’t think he was doing anything out of the ordinary”
””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
@Ryan – Perhaps he wasn’t doing anything out of the ordinary but generally Scots expect a higher moral standard than a lot of people and Murray failed it by a long chalk IMO ❗

TSFMPosted on4:10 pm - May 11, 2014

ecobhoy says:

May 11, 2014 at 3:42 pm And Big Sammy – what can I say – I have always blown hot & cold on him but he leaves and in his heart will be a Celt forever and he showed a personal side to his personality today with the yougster that I will always remember and respect.
________________________________________________

Not so sure Peter Lawwell will agree with you there! 😈

woodsteinPosted on4:31 pm - May 11, 2014

ecobhoy says:

May 11, 2014 at 3:47 pm

“Perhaps he wasn’t doing anything out of the ordinary but generally Scots expect a higher moral standard than a lot of people and Murray failed it by a long chalk IMO”
————————————————————————————————————————-
I totally agree with this.The phrase “Uberrima fides” Utmost Good Faith, which for anyone who wants to claim any integrity should be ingrained.

Murray failed so did these guys, which at the time shocked me.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/august/27/newsid_2536000/2536035.stm

Bill1903Posted on4:47 pm - May 11, 2014

ecobhoy says:
May 11, 2014 at 4:06 pm
6 0 Rate This

JimBhoy says:
May 11, 2014 at 11:40 am

My son is a Man City fan I have always followed Liverpool… All the best to both teams today.
========================
What is really important is that you supported your son’s freedom of choice and displayed your own confidence as a human being by having no need to indoctrinate him to adopt your choice in justificaion of your own position.

It really is that simple and highly laudable
————————————————-
Totally disagree
It’s part of a fathers duty to influence,pressurise,bribe whatever to get them to support ‘your’ team.
Freedom of choice doesn’t come into it!
I would’ve been gutted if my son hadn’t followed the Dons 😳

jean7brodiePosted on5:28 pm - May 11, 2014

woodstein says:
May 11, 2014 at 5:22 pm
———————————————————————–
No Woodstein but money helps 😉

ecobhoyPosted on5:52 pm - May 11, 2014

covethistlestolemypitch says:
May 11, 2014 at 4:18 pm
ecobhoy says:
May 11, 2014 at 3:47 pm

“generally Scots expect a higher moral standard than a lot of people”

Hmm. Scots are just as moral or immoral as any other nationality. I’m surprised to see such talk on here.
————————————————-
And I’m surprised to see that any poster on here would be ‘surprised’ at another poster having the temerity to express what appears to be a contrary opinion.

And in terms of whether Scots have a different kind of morality or not I would think our total rejection of Thatcher and her poll tax experiment does indeed display we have strong moral values.

GiovanniPosted on6:03 pm - May 11, 2014

jean7brodie says:
May 11, 2014 at 5:56 pm

I not only remember the trial but also the aftermath when we had the only recorded instance of someone “recovering” from alzheimers – Ernest Saunders.

BarcabhoyPosted on6:08 pm - May 11, 2014

Ryan Gosling

Your response very very clearly in my view shows a clear attempt to minimise criticism of Murray. What you are doing is a very well established PR strategy. Agree that a subject has transgressed and then spend much more time and effort in attempting to show that whilst guilt is established ( impossible to argue otherwise) the crime is nowhere near as bad as is generally claimed.

Let me attempt to put my interpretation of your actions to the blog.

1 You are suggesting that the list of six points i made regarding Murray’s behaviour is far fetched. Maybe you could explain why that is, as they all seem to me to be absolutely factual .

2 The actions were selected, because they impact directly on football and on Scotland, and this is the Scottish Football Monitor. Not the Enron/Goldman Sachs/ de Vere monitor

3 It’s telling that you cannot produce a single example of a company either public or private who engaged in all of the disgraceful practices that Murray did. Instead you’re argument is based on dead companies in Texas for one point , an English hotel group for another, you “highly doubt ” another but can’t provide any examples. You then elevate Gretna to the status of a Scottish football institution as another argument !! Finally you throw in a general number of EBT users without giving the example you were asked for .

Don’t you understand that Murray was guilty of each and every point made in my previous post,and your rebuttal has you referencing various organisations none of whom are relevant to Scottish football and none of whom you are able to show indulged in the all of the same practices as Murray. Your response actually confirms how outrageously Murray has behaved and contrary to your intentions it shows how uniquely he acted .

You are making exactly the same arguments that Murray’s acolytes are making. In essence don’t go after Dave as everyone was at it. It’s not a credible position to take. “Guilt is irrelevant where there are multiple offenders” ! That’s clearly the line Murray is pushing or having pushed on his behalf .

You made very loud public noises about Rangers supporters on here getting a tough time. That is true on occasion, but then this blog has had to deal with PR companies trying to hijack the mood of the blog , to protect guys like Murray and King. I am not saying you are doing this, however your responses in attempting to minimise criticism of Murray are familiar in that regard.

You accepted earlier that Murray had behaved disgracefully. Most people, outside of Murray’s paid PR or those who are in fear of what he can put into the public arena, agree he has been a disgrace. In terms of this blog, and Scottish life in general how Enron or any of the others you mentioned , conducted themselves is not relevant. Murray should be subject to a very wide ranging public enquiry.

He has been the most toxic individual in business in Scotland in my experience. I guess we differ in that you seem content to consign his behaviour to the past, where i believe dealing with him severely is necessary as a deterrent to anyone else inclined to cause the type of mayhem that he has.

ecobhoyPosted on6:34 pm - May 11, 2014

twopanda says:
May 11, 2014 at 6:06 pm

BDOs next missive – sort of `18 month review` – should appear [link] on, about or before 22 May – Is 18 months a fair timescale? – I don`t know.
=============================
I doubt if anyone outwith the actual investigation could give an informed answer to that one. I’m afraid we’ll just need to wait and see and, in the meantime, get on with our normal lives.

RyanGoslingPosted on7:58 pm - May 11, 2014

Barcabhoy that is now the second time you have accused me of employing PR tactics, when I am doing and have done nothing of the sort. With regards to spending much more time and effort in attempting to show the crime is not as bad as claimed, again, I have done nothing of the sort; I made an initial perfectly innocent comment with regards to Murray’s behaviour being not exactly out of kilter with wider behaviour in the pre financial crisis world, and that he was not the only one who should be held to account. I did not deny that he should be held to account, and my first words on the subject were that I wasn’t defending Murray. The only reason I have spent so much time and effort on the subject is because you told me to, so I find it bizarre that you are now criticising me for doing so.

I did not suggest that the actions you attributed to Murray were far fetched, I said it was far fetched to demand that another company had done absolutely everything Murray had. I stand by that.

I was clear in my initial comments that I was speaking with regard to a wider context beyond just Scotland and Scottish football. I was very clear on this. If you think nothing of a wider context should be mentioned here then you’ll be harrassing a lot of posters for their comments. I notice for example that people commenting on a Guiness case earlier were spared your wrath. You asked for examples of public companies (you did not suggest they had to be related to Scottish Football) demonstrating examples of the same behaviour as Murray, and then shot me down when I provided examples because they didn’t relate to Scottish Football. I did exactly what you asked and provided reasonable examples which demonstrated my original perfectly simple and reasonable point that Murray was not doing anything so far out of the ordinary. I stand by that as well; the examples I provided prove that in the wider context in which I was commenting, others had done similar things to Murray. That is all I said originally, and I have not changed my viewpoint.

Gretna, Hearts and Dunfermline were all damaged by the actions of individuals. If they are not big enough clubs for you to bother with or to satisfy the demands you made of me, there is nothing I can do about that.

I am not making any arguments the same as Murray acolytes, as I have never once said “Don’t go after Dave” and in fact have been quite clear in every post I have made on the matter that I am not defending him and I believe he should be held to account for his actions. I have never wavered in my view of this or in my public comments on the matter.

I have never made very loud public noises about anything on this blog. I must stress again that I strongly resent your repeated implication that I am following PR tactics or trying to hijack the mood of the blog. The only reason I have commented on this so much is because you have hounded me on the issue of what I consider to be a perfectly reasonable original comment.

I will now consider the matter closed as I no longer believe you are actually reading my comments with any degree of fairness or spirit of friendship in which they have all been intended, but seem more intent on shouting me down on anything you’re not happy with. Which again, I find bizarre, as over the last two days I have actually disagreed with very few if any of the factual comments you have made.

SquigglePosted on9:49 pm - May 11, 2014

RyanGosling says:
May 11, 2014 at 7:58 pm

Mr RyanGosling. For a long time I haven’t been sure if i see a glimpse of something you don’t mean to show when you post. But that doesn’t matter right now. Murray is seen by an awful lot of people as a very bad man. Odious in extreme.Not a ‘maverick’ or anything half as wholesome. Plain and very simply, very bad. Maybe they are wrong but, maybe care is also required when trying to contextualise him and his actions without making due reference to the evil so many seem to experience when talking about him. The effort required in constructing such a version of the man might cause other defences to slip.

easyJamboPosted on10:16 pm - May 11, 2014

Bill1903 says: May 11, 2014 at 4:47 pm
————————————–
This one humoured me from last night (you may substitute any club and apologies for using Hibs)

Father and 5 year old son having a chat.
Q. Why did I have to support Hibs?
A. It’s character building, now stop crying dad.

essexbeancounterPosted on11:52 pm - May 11, 2014

covethistlestolemypitch says:
May 11, 2014 at 4:18 pm
46 1 Rate This

ecobhoy says:
May 11, 2014 at 3:47 pm

“generally Scots expect a higher moral standard than a lot of people”

Hmm. Scots are just as moral or immoral as any other nationality. I’m surprised to see such talk on here.
=================================================================
If you were to read the ICAS “Ethical Guide” you may have second thoughts as to moral standards, higher, lower or whatever the case may be, expected in business affairs. I would be delighted to forward a copy to you.

But then again, ICAS members have been complicit in this omnishambles since (-S)DM acquired control of RFC(IL).

Please note that I said “acquired control” and not “purchased”, let alone with his own pocket money.

sannoffymesssoitizzPosted on3:33 am - May 12, 2014

ratethisthenyabampots says: May 11, 2014 at 1:18 am
‘.Whilst these playoffs are what we have all been crying out for, man alive they are flawed.’
——-
John Clark says: May 11, 2014 at 1:55 am
” I agree. And I think, to be fair, most of us feel that there ought to be a more equitable, realistic and workable arrangement. …… In the Scottish footballing world, however, the very concept of sporting fairness let alone any practical expression of the sporting ideal, was abandoned a couple of seasons ago.
One cannot now imagine that they will even understand your complaint, let alone act upon it.”

John,

The SPFL Board are aware of a fairer play-off format! 😕

Here’s the play-off format details on the SPFL website – http://spfl.co.uk/play-offs/ 😳

So for promotion from the lower divisions the team finishing second bottom of the higher division plays the team finishing 4th from top of the division below in one semi-final. Whilst 2nd play 3rd in the other semi-final.

From yesterday’s results the team from the higher division all won their games, (eventually)

Surprise, surprise there’s a different format for promotion to the SPFL Premiership. 😯

It’s a shame that Big Pink did not ask (or edited out) Turnbull Hutton why the 30 clubs in the 3 lower divisions of the SPFL accepted this when the SPL took over the SFL.

As we know there’s little chance of anyone in the SMSM getting Neil Doncaster to explain the sporting integrity of the current arrangements, and I doubt he’d be willing to acknowledge the unfairness of the current arrangements.

MartinPosted on6:54 pm - May 21, 2014

Has anyone considered showing Sandy Easdale just how easy it is to set up a block function on undesirable emails?