Podcast Episode 5 – Hibs Takeover ?

ByBig Pink

Podcast Episode 5 – Hibs Takeover ?

A consortium led by David Low has been in talks with Sir Tom Farmer seeking to purchase Hibernian Football Club. The story has been embargoed for a few weeks, but David agreed to speak to TSFM to give us an exclusive interview and provide us with information about his intentions for the Edinburgh club.

Highlights of the interview include the similarities and differences between the Hibs situation and the one he found at Celtic Pak in 1994; how Scottish Football’s “new level playing field” as Low calls it has created an opportunity for a club like Hibs to be the main challenger to Celtic for honours; the contrast of his consortium’s approach to that of the recent debacle at Ibrox; the role of the fans at every level of the club; the future of Allan Stubbs and Leanne Dempster; and the journey back to the Premiership.

Low is frank about his reputation as a well-known Celtic fan, but highlights his Hibbee credentials and his affection for the club, eschewing the “I was always a Hibbee” line taken by so many people seeking to ingratiate themselves with the locals at various clubs.

Certainly, the experience and finance rolling around Low’s consortium is something that any club could do with, but the fans are crucial to their involvement and interest.

He says he won’t go ahead with the purchase unless the fans are behind them.

“Fans have never been so powerful as they are today, especially with the advent of social media like TSFM”

“We have seen in recent years what a body of fans are capable of when they re together”

“We want to have that togetherness at Hibs, because the only way forward is to have trust between the boardroom and the fans, you only have to look at the levels of distrust between board and fans at Rangers to see that it is a recipe for disaster”

powered by podcast garden

Podcast Download Link

ITunes Link


About the author

Big Pink administrator

Big Pink is John Cole; a former schoolteacher based in the West of Scotland, He is also a print and broadcast journalist who is engaged in the running of SFM . Former gigs include Newstalk 106, the Celtic View, and Channel67. A Celtic fan, he is also the voice of our podcast initiative.

2,528 Comments so far

Danish PastryPosted on8:09 am - Aug 20, 2014

MercDoc says:
August 20, 2014 at 12:02 am
7 0 Rate This

What would a paltry 12 M do and the Rangers fans know it. Chris Graham recently, was decidedly distraught about the the recent going ons at Ibrox .If I didn’t know, I would think he is a well informed individual and grounded. Then I remember, Craig Whyte, Charles Green and how he was a big sook! Just wanting a place on the Rangers board.

Paul, had his number


PMC, Still Great!

Great piece that.

Very relevant to the club bias discussion, too.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:00 am - Aug 20, 2014

Danish Pastry says:
August 20, 2014 at 8:09 am
2 0 Rate This

MercDoc says:
August 20, 2014 at 12:02 am


Great piece that.

Very relevant to the club bias discussion, too.


Rangers fans think the BBC is biased.
Celtic fans think the BBC is biased.

Albion Rovers fans tell it how it is. Fact! 🙂

View Comment

andygraham.66Posted on9:01 am - Aug 20, 2014

Graham Spiers latest


Spiers on Sport: the sums still don’t add up at Rangers, as Graham Wallace knows
heraldscotland.comAugust 19

Ask others, and they tell you Wallace dares to be an independent thinker, a man not shackled to Rangers for the rest of his life, who is capable of telling the truth as he sees it, without fear for his job.

In truth, Wallace is first and foremost an apparatchik, whose loyalty is to his pay-masters. But this embattled Rangers executive is also an intelligent man, capable of seeing a wider vista, where the long-term security and good health of Rangers are to be found.

Wallace is a fascinating figure in this endless Ibrox trauma, because he will know, being on the inside, what is best for Rangers. And if “what is best for Rangers” is not represented by the current set-up at the club, will he come out and say so in time?

Here is the blunt truth of it. If the current board/principal shareholders can make Rangers thrive, then all well and good.

But if they can’t, then they should publicly acknowledge that failing – no shame in it – and make way for others who can.

The evidence of recent times is that the best this Rangers board can do is pass round an old rusted tin with the hope of catching some pennies in it. It is a hopeless state of affairs. It seems an affront to this football club, not an aid to it.

The recent, vague announcement via the Stock Exchange of “the possibility” – but with “no certainty” – of a fresh £4 million equity-issue with existing shareholders looked like one such sticking-plaster measure.

What is this, if not the Rangers FC equivalent of busking on a cold winter’s evening on Sauchiehall Street in the hope of scraping some cash? It smacks, almost literally, of a meter at Ibrox about to run out.

If I were Wallace I would find much of this pretty embarrassing. Notwithstanding its painful recent past, this is hardly the way for a modern football club of Rangers’ stature to be doing business. And Wallace must know it.

The question is, how bold will he be in fathoming the truth of Rangers? Will he remain sworn and in cahoots with those who currently guarantee his pay-cheque? Or will Wallace come out and say: “Enough is enough. Rangers isn’t working. This club needs an entirely fresh approach to things.”

To a degree Wallace has already broken rank over the Dave King question. The South African-based Scot, whatever you think of him, has money, and Rangers need it. And Wallace seems more disposed to King than many other power-holders at Ibrox.

Three months have now passed since Wallace openly stated that, to his way of thinking, King should be able to get some power at Rangers via a fresh rights-issue – open to both existing and new equity takers – which the club plans for later this year.

I’m not sure if, behind the scenes, Wallace would be slapped down for expressing such a view. Nor – as yet – do Rangers have shareholder approval for such a rights-issue, and it might never be granted.

But Wallace has a habit of offering glimpses of “the truth” about the long-term viability of Rangers. And it seems to me he doesn’t truly believe the current regime at the club can offer a road ahead.

All of these things are complicated, of course they are. The Rangers directors, make of them what you will, could with a grain of truth turn round and say that declining season-ticket sales and rebelling fans were essentially hurting the club.

Wallace himself might say that, were Rangers income-streams holding up as normal at the turnstiles, he could credibly turn the club around in three years. In fact, I believe he could.

But it is a rule of thumb in football – “the club is the fans” – and Rangers are suffering the brunt of that truth right now. There is dislike, distrust, even contempt for those running the club. Many fans are withholding their support – and thus their money.

Those in control of Rangers cannot undo the world – they have to live in it. And if they can’t make things work at Ibrox, then others should get their chance.

Admit it, Graham Wallace.

View Comment

scottcPosted on9:17 am - Aug 20, 2014

On the reduction of numbers for away fans, as reported by Queen of the South.

I’ve just been on RM and had to laugh, as one wag there has declared that it is a deliberate ploy by Police Scotland to starve Rangers of much needed cash. The paranoia is tangible amongst the victimised ones

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:20 am - Aug 20, 2014

High fibre,

Technically correct.

But a quick John Brownism on the marble staircase to rouse the masses and there’s not a soul on the open market going to touch it with a bargepole, except of course, the chosen one.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:23 am - Aug 20, 2014

Ah Graham, you were doing so well too..

“Those in control of Rangers cannot undo the world – they have to live in it. And if they can’t make things work at Ibrox, then others should get their chance.”

If those in control at Ibrox cannot make the world stop then they should step aside and let others try to make it stop instead!!!

This world aint for stoppin’ mate!

View Comment

Kilgore TroutPosted on9:24 am - Aug 20, 2014

What a pitiful vacuous piece of writing from Graham Spiers.
And he’s supposed to be amongst the best of them.
The sooner this whole raft of irrelevant ink-wasters disappear along with their miserable publications the better.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on9:29 am - Aug 20, 2014

It was me that characterised your use if the Celtic vs Morton game as unfair. Sorry if you meant something different, but seeing it as an example of bias seemed the least harsh interpretation of the point you were making.
I can’t believe you expect wall to wall Celtic coverage at the expense of every other club. That would display of attitude of superiority that you regularly identify and criticise in Sevco fans.
I also don’t want to believe your yardstick for the level of Celtic coverage must be linked to the level of Sevco coverage. That would be the kind of Old Firm thinking that suggests you haven’t moved on from the dead rivalry and hold every other club to basically be insignificant.
I think we can both agree that Sevco get far more media coverage than they merit and that this is in many ways deliberately done to ensure that as many as possible former Rangers supporters transfer to Sevco. This has nothing to do with sporting integrity, but then nothing about the TV coverage in particular does. Everything about the SPL TV coverage is designed to ensure Celtic are not financially disadvantaged by having their home games moved from Saturday at 3pm too often and to ensure that Celtic’s armchair support is maintained through almost blanket coverage if away games. While Sevco have far too much coverage given their history and current level, they still have much less coverage than Rangers did and no team has benefitted more from that that Celtic. You are at the top of the domestic game and the system is designed to keep you there. Even the most blatant SFA cheating would see you move down to second and still be challenging for the title. Any comments suggesting Celtic have had any disadvantages while Rangers have been coming through are both baffling to me and disrespectful to the clubs who lose out from the preferential treatment given to both cheeks.

View Comment

scottcPosted on9:30 am - Aug 20, 2014

highfibre says:
August 20, 2014 at 7:31 am
11 0 Rate This

I would just like to clarify a point of law regarding property and secured creditors. If there is a default on any loan secured on Ibrox and/or Murray Park, then that does not mean that the creditor can take ownership of the properties.

Firstly, they have the right to sell the property on the open market. Maintenance and insurance of the property remains the debtor’s responsibility.

Of course, if it is the stadium they want, then presumably they themselves would be in a position to ‘buy’ the thing. The question for me would be, ‘how much would they pay?’ ie. Would they write off all of the £12m in ‘buying’ the distressed property or only a portion and, if the latter, would RIFC/TRFC still be on the hook for the remainder of the loan?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on9:34 am - Aug 20, 2014

andygraham.66 says:
August 20, 2014 at 9:01 am

Does Spiers get paid for writing that level of article? It reads like something he wrote during his tea-break – nothing new, just a bit of wishful thinking.

Wallace is a clever man – we knew that.

Wallace’s loyalty is to his paymasters – we knew that.

TRFC/RIFC are struggling to raise money – we knew that.

King is a rich man – we knew that, but we also know, and there was no mention of it from Spiers, that King has great difficulty moving his wealth for reasons we all know about.

Wallace has offered ‘glimpses of the truth’ about the ‘long term viability of Rangers.’ – These ‘glimpses’ aren’t required as the Balance Sheet made it clear, as does the common sense of any mildly clued up observer; and the ‘long term viability’ is only a problem if they manage to sort out the short term viability first.

With no new information he throws in a little comfort for the bears by suggesting Wallace is ‘disposed’ towards King. From what we can gather, Wallace is ‘disposed’ towards anyone who has money, he’s trawled the City and anywhere else that money resides, without success. There’s ben no sign that he’s had any more success with King.

He’s not even managed, if he attempted, to pull the facts together for the supporters of TRFC and give them a glimpse of the reality of their club’s financial position. It’s a truly insipid piece of writing.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:36 am - Aug 20, 2014


Indeed, and how sad AR fans didn’t get that deserved victory last season.

Still puzzled, though, that every TRFC game so far appears to have been televised by one channel or another. It can’t be for the entertainment value. I can only imagine that TV companies, if they have a choice, prefer to broadcast from big stadia with substantial crowds. Personally (armchair fan that I am) would love to see more BBC Alba style lower league coverage. Their presentation of the various clubs, their history and place in the community has been some of the best stuff I’ve seen in the past few years — and that with half of it in Gaelic!

Btw, apropos perceived bias, I particularly liked this passage from PMC’s piece.

A pal with a sense of humour commented that phone in radio debates require to exhibit balance between sense and non-sense! If Airdrie United Football Club is mentioned on the BBC, should I ring in demanding that Albion Rovers be covered too?

If one looks at Lanarkshire football, then the coverage given to Motherwell FC dwarves the time spent on Hamilton, Airdrie and the Rovers put together. Maybe that means the BBC are Motherwell sympathisers and “Rovers haters”? Or maybe the BBC devotes resources it considers appropriate to each task and, except in an election campaign, does not have producers sitting with stop watches to ensure each party has precisely the same coverage.

View Comment

ptd1978Posted on9:37 am - Aug 20, 2014

Re the 12 million loan.
If it’s taken and Sevco then need more cash next year, they could end up having the similar levels of debt to the old club if they’re lucky enough to get promoted this year.
Couple that to a much poorer playing staff and the famed onerous contracts and they’ll be looking for another Craig Whyte figure soon enough.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on10:01 am - Aug 20, 2014

Spiers article

First – Wallace has a duty to the shareholders of the Plc who happen to run the football club. As a Chief Executive he needs to take decisions that are in the interest of those shareholders.

Second – Who are these ‘others’ of which you speak that could take up the mantle!!!!!!!

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:25 am - Aug 20, 2014

Wottpi continued,

and third – King is not a man you go to and say “we’ve exhausted every other avenue and no-one is willing to give us a thin dime. Please now give us yours, we’re desperate.” Very few billionaires (however visible on the radar) would respond generously to such a request.

Scottc – don’t get hung up on the stadium and the valuation thereof. Graham’s “others”, whoever that may be, wants a controlling interest. The £12m quoted is either a bid price to exit, or an offer price to elicit such a response. The stadium needs to be kept close at hand, within the confines of the deal as it were and a security would achieve this. As Fletch said to the assorted wags at the HMP breakfast table “Gentlemen, I am sorry to say to you that I suspect someone here is a thief.”

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on10:38 am - Aug 20, 2014

Galling fiver says:
August 19, 2014 at 11:22 pm
£12M guy was probably at the game last night i’ll look up yon Mr Vass he must have all the mugshots, back in a min.
If this £12m loan is indeed the final move that separates the assets from the club it would be wise for the Spivs to describe the Lender in terms that make it very difficult for anybody to be identified
So I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if it turns out to be yet another vaguely named entity with a labyrinth of connected companies

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on10:50 am - Aug 20, 2014

That piece by Spiers reads like an essay from a first-year student at the University of the Bleedin’ Obvious. He poses as a hard-hitting critic of the goings on at Ibrox but as often as not wimps out of following the reality of his observations to their logical conclusion.

He says what is happening is unbefitting of a great club, refusing to admit that everything that has happened is quite in keeping with the teething troubles of a badly run two-year-old company whose reach far outstrips its grasp.

Sevco is toast, Graham, much as you and your SMSM colleagues might find it inedible.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on11:15 am - Aug 20, 2014

Torquemada says:
August 20, 2014 at 10:50 am

I must say that I found that piece by Mr Spiers to be, ahem, rather familiar…

I think I may have read something similar quite recently…


View Comment

BrendaPosted on11:21 am - Aug 20, 2014

Could the away fans allocation have been reduced because of repairs being made, repairs required ( the scaffolding reported last season) or maybe they just want lots of leg room for their own fans???? Or or or maybe we will never know????

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on11:32 am - Aug 20, 2014

Update on the Glasgow conference the media reported cancelled over the Palestinian flag. Guess what?


View Comment

Galling fiverPosted on11:53 am - Aug 20, 2014

Goosyx2, anno, but I had 5mins to spare so I checked every coupon.

View Comment

TincksPosted on12:18 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Both a bit Off topic and On Topic given recent events.

Barcelona loose their appeal and face a transfer embargo for the next two windows. Related to previous improper transfer dealings with under 18’s.

Whilst we all know that the mega bucks EPL, Liga and Champions League etc are set up to favour the existing wealthy elite at least there does seems to be some appearance at UEFA level that if a rule is found to have been broken then the appropriate punishment will be applied.


View Comment

TincksPosted on12:30 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Re the mystery £12m loan offer.

There is no clear indication as yet that either the board would recommend this or that a majority of shareholders would agree to it.

What I do believe is that if the TRFC/TRIFC are desperate enough to take such a loan then someone will be in a win win situation.

Either they make a small fortune when the loan is repaid or they gain a stadium that they can then lease back.

Even if you didn’t get a penny back on the loan and could only lease the stadium for £1m per annum that’s a lovely 8.25% return on capital.

Get half the loan back, then the stadium and rent it out for £2m per annum and you have the deal of the century.

The sums add up for the mystery money lender. Are Wallace and Nash in such a hole that they will do the deal?

View Comment

beanosPosted on12:45 pm - Aug 20, 2014

PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
August 20, 2014 at 11:15 am

funnily enough i thought the same.

on the 12m loan. this is no ‘chucking your money in a bonfire’ soft loan. it isn’t even akin to the loan Ann Budge’s consortium has provided to Hearts. This could end up as being more like a sale and leaseback disguised as a secured loan (with extremely punitive interest rates as a bonus)

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on12:56 pm - Aug 20, 2014

James Doleman says:
August 20, 2014 at 11:32 am

Update on the Glasgow conference the media reported cancelled over the Palestinian flag. Guess what?

I would like to think that Glasgow Council would make some sort of complaint on this one and demand an spology from the cut ‘n’ paste merchants who lifted the story.

Thank gawd there are some journos left like yourself who do the basic checks ❗

View Comment

AmFearLiathMòrPosted on1:02 pm - Aug 20, 2014

I think Spiers has missed the obvious conclusion with regards to the man who would be King – rather than being ‘disposed’ towards him when he stated that King should be allowed to buy in, perhaps he was just trying to smoke him out?

Dave King has made an awful lot of big statements, and hinted (or rather, has let other people run with conclusions) that he would invest 50 million pound. I think Wallace was just effectively saying ‘Alright then, prove it. Here’s your opportunity to show you’re not just all fart and no sh***.’

It’s interesting that King seems to have disappeared in the meantime…

Oh, and with regads to our showing at Ibrox the other night – I genuinely believe that it wasn’t down to an old pals act, it was almost certainly down to the fact that Bazza just isn’t a very good manager. I hope I’m proved wrong, but we just looked chaotic and unorganised. You can get away with that against other chaotic and unorganised sides, as per our league matches, but not when you’re up against a full time side. I also suspect there was an element of the ‘on the count of three lads, fill your pants. One, two…..’ pre-match team talk that used to figure so highly in the preparation of a lot of sides that went to Ibrox.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on1:03 pm - Aug 20, 2014

beanos says:
August 20, 2014 at 12:45 pm
Oh no, this wouldn’t be a ‘Soft (headed) investment’.

Not a bit of it…

View Comment

BawsmanPosted on1:08 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Why would they be turning away paying customers, there’s no way this will be a sell-out game?


View Comment

mcfcPosted on2:22 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Bawsman says:
August 20, 2014 at 1:08 pm
Why would they be turning away paying customers, there’s no way this will be a sell-out game?

Maybe because away fans are a net loss including policing costs and/or maybe the old bill are once bitten twice shy regarding credit at Ibrox. Expect the number of away fans to decrease further if bills become long overdue. Could the last ever The Rangers match be played behind closed doors ?

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on3:34 pm - Aug 20, 2014

ecobhoy says:
August 20, 2014 at 12:56 pm
12 0 Rate This

Thanks, but I’m lucky enough to have an editor who lets me take the time to research a story properly. Sadly too many other journalists don’t these days.

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on3:50 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Standard Securities

A standard security is what we all recognise as the mortgage on our houses.

What I am about to say applies to standard securities but not to floating charges.

A standard security benefits the creditor in a few ways.

The property cannot be sold unless either the loan is wholly repaid or the creditor agrees.

In the event that the borrower does not repay the sums that are due, the lender is entitled to “call up” the standard security. What that means is that the creditor eventually becomes able to sell the property that is subject to the security after having advertised it. The security does not allow the creditor to simply take the property itself. The proceeds of sale would be applied in discharge of the secured loan. If the proceeds exceeded the amount of the loan, the balance would be paid to the borrower.

However, there is another benefit to having a standard security. Imagine that the borrower goes into administration. Imagine that the administrator wishes to sell the business as a going concern. Imagine that the secured debt is £12m.

In order to carry on the business from the same location, the property which is subject to the standard security would also have to be sold. The holder of the standard security does not have to consent (subject to a technical provision in the Insolvency legislation) to a sale of the property at less than the amount of the secured loan. Given the importance of the property to the business, that may in fact have the effect of allowing the secured creditor to direct the sale process to a large extent. A secured creditor does not usually have to consent to a sale if it is only getting part of the secured loan repaid. The secured creditor may choose to consent to a sale to its preferred party (X) but not to a sale to another party (Y).

The administrator may consider that the best deal for all of the creditors is to sell to Y. Lets say that Y is prepared to offer £11m for everything (£9m of which is to be apportioned against the property). That would mean £2m for other creditors. Party X may only be prepared to offer £10m for everything (but with £9m apportioned to the property). Y’s deal is better for everyone.

The secured creditor may say “I am prepared (for my own reasons which are nothing to do with you Mr/Ms Administrator) to consent to a sale to party X but not to party Y. In this way, the standard security holder may significantly influence a subsequent sale.

As I say, there are technicalities around this and it is more complicated than I am making it seem but the important point is that having a standard security which secures a loan that is greater than the value of the property asset, is a big card to hold in any subsequent insolvency.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on4:28 pm - Aug 20, 2014

A Scandinavian Ronnie is at it again 😆 This one writes opinion columns for the Swedish tabloid Aftonbladet.

He created a bit of a stir by opening his short football piece by mentioning Jozef Fritzel, Adolph Hitler and Red Bull Salzburg in the same breath. Just as well this is in Swedish or the outcry would have been much worse.

Thing is, the point he was making about teams like RB Salzburg, was lost because of the mention of those two characters. But Ronnie was actually lamenting the advent of what he calls ‘robber capitalism’ in football and the way Red Bull ended Austria Salzburg some years ago to launch their big-spending all-dominating brand team in its place. He also mentioned the saga of the two Wmbledons and how the meeting of MK Dons and AFC was an event that captured the imagination as a duel between corporate, soulless fitba and the traditional club.

Just mention it because Ronnie’s column is being reported for the attempted shock intro sentence alone, and variously mistranslated. After James’ piece I thought this little Nordic stooshie was mildly relevant.

The editor has apologized for any offence caused. Next week’s return leg in Malmoe should be a bit tasty.

Here’s Ronnie’s original column:


View Comment

wottpiPosted on4:34 pm - Aug 20, 2014

I know I have been banging heads recently with some Celtic fans over the LW debacle and the BBC bias. However as someone who went along to Murrayfield to watch CL football with the hope of seeing a great Celtic comeback I wish them well this evening and hope, having been given a second chance, they don’t squander it and put on a performance that restores their pride and reflects well on Scottish football.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on4:57 pm - Aug 20, 2014


What’s your gut feel on this alleged proposal?

Is the alleged lender potentially acting in RFC’s future interests by packaging the stadium with the going concern business (what we’ll loosely call “the club”) via the standard security, or are they trying to split the two whether to create a sale and leaseback, a ransom strip or whatever? My money is still very much on the former in what I confess is nothing more than an ill informed gut feeling.

If it quacks like a duck, smells like a duck etc etc

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on5:10 pm - Aug 20, 2014


Sorry I don’t have a gut feeling really. I guess it depends on who the lender is.

I am pretty sure that what you are describing is a duck though.

Good luck to Celtic tonight (from a “diddy” club supporter).

View Comment

SmugasPosted on5:36 pm - Aug 20, 2014

I think there’s three options personally.

A King type – in which case try and get as large a controlling interest as your standard security will allow and your 12m will buy (that is, the physical 12m you put in) you will still have a £12m IOU regardless. Personally I think the bears should be praying for this option.

A Laxey type – ruthless asset stripper with a development mentality. Definite possibility, but the practicalities of carrying this plan through are probably even more difficult than they were before. The interim step for this plan would be to let the footballing activity wither and die – ok wither and get relegated – and there’s no sign of this yet. Sale and leaseback still a possibility here of course.

A Green Ashley type – probably the worst of both worlds as RFC will remain on the spit drip dripping away….But I would have thought the most succulent roast would be a winning one, or, short term, one that is challenged and challenging, just as long as it wins in the end. How long would the £12m sustain that before a further pump primer was needed. Put it this way, I wouldn’t like to be in their shoes when they hit the SPL and come up against in form SPL sides with the massed ranks still expecting to win and retain their rightful place. I’d want to be well away with the loot before that little piece of reality hits.

And yes, good luck to the European competitors tonight, especiually the squad form filler innerers 😆

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on6:23 pm - Aug 20, 2014

wottpi says:
August 20, 2014 at 4:34 pm
31 1 Rate This

I know I have been banging heads recently with some Celtic fans over the LW debacle and the BBC bias. However as someone who went along to Murrayfield to watch CL football with the hope of seeing a great Celtic comeback I wish them well this evening and hope, having been given a second chance, they don’t squander it and put on a performance that restores their pride and reflects well on Scottish football.

Shame on you getting all those TDs 😀

Well said. We’re all fans of the Scottish Champions tonight.

View Comment

scottcPosted on7:14 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Another point regarding the £12m secured loan. TRFC own Ibrox, rather than RIFC, so presumably the ‘loan’ has to go to TRFC. TRFC owes RIFC at least £16m which is NOT secured on anything. Is it possible that one of the larger investors is securing the assets ahead of an ‘event’ and ahead of the rest of the shareholders who put in the £16m?

View Comment

justshateredPosted on7:54 pm - Aug 20, 2014

I wonder what the issue is with the AIM and the Nomad?
Is this a ‘going concern’ issue?
If it turns out to be a problem it will certainly effect the entities ability to raise cash. It would be another bad story, in the long list of bad stories, to suffer ‘The Rangers’

scottc says:
August 20, 2014 at 7:14 pm

Perhaps you have hit the nail on the head.
The £12M comes in and is immediately paid out to RIFC to pay off part of the debt so the club still ends up penniless but now owes £12M to the mystery investor as well as the remaining £4M to RIFC.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on8:40 pm - Aug 20, 2014

On games that deserve to be covered heres one for tonight in the midnight sun:

Stjarnan (Them that beat us) at 23.00 V Internazionale (You know that lot from Milan)

Link anyone?

View Comment

scottcPosted on8:47 pm - Aug 20, 2014



View Comment

ianagainPosted on8:53 pm - Aug 20, 2014


Hero. I recommend expecting an upset here.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:55 pm - Aug 20, 2014

ianagain says:
August 20, 2014 at 8:40 pm
1 0 Rate This

On games that deserve to be covered heres one for tonight in the midnight sun:

Stjarnan (Them that beat us) at 23.00 V Internazionale (You know that lot from Milan)

Link anyone?

Not on any of the mainstream channels, although various streaming sites will have it. Not sure how legal they are though, be careful of a dodgy stream.

Some achievement though. Could be a volcanic tie.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on9:04 pm - Aug 20, 2014


And for interest they usually play about 5 ex Danish national guys.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:19 pm - Aug 20, 2014

ianagain says:
August 20, 2014 at 9:04 pm
1 0 Rate This


And for interest they usually play about 5 ex Danish national guys.

Old Danish colony. I believe it’s still part of the Nordic Council, a sort of mini EU — free movement of citizens, and so on. They learn Danish at school, or used to at least.

For a tiny nation it fair produces some football results. Very industrious people.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on9:37 pm - Aug 20, 2014

Well I do hope they pull this one off. They were very good to the ‘well guys who went over even to the extent of their staff picking lads up in town and taking them out to the ground to pick up tickets and taking them back again. Great wee club. The 15 or so who came to FP took part in the Well Bois wee parade from the Electric bar to the ground also.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on10:01 pm - Aug 20, 2014

ianagain says:
August 20, 2014 at 9:37 pm

Was it Panathanikos (forgive the spelling) that Motherwell played last year?
There was a few of their fans, from Edinburgh, at the Electric having a drink with a ‘Well friend and his mates and the Police came down and forced them up to the park a full hour before kick off. The fans were asking what the problem was and he was threatened with arrest.
It is this stereotyping of fans which will ensure we never return to the good old days of people mixing together.

Spoke to a ‘Well fan at a family doo a year or so ago and he was telling me about a trip to Poland a few years ago and said the people couldn’t do enough for them and that in the town square the fans were mixing together. That is the carnival that our sport should be particularly in Europe where you get to go to countries you would otherwise never visit, meet opposition fans, and ask if their FA is as corrupt as ours!!

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:18 pm - Aug 20, 2014


It was Panathanikos in 12/13. Hence the Bois Empty stands Heavy hands thing shared by others.

I think the one most were impressed with was Flamaturi in Albania 09/10 which was a first for them and us.

View Comment

ParanoidWellFanPosted on12:15 am - Aug 21, 2014

ianagain I think Nancy was a case in point. The local Police turned out in force, as the last visiting fans they had experienced were Feyenoord, who proceeded to wreck the town. They sussed out fairly quickly we were a different proposition entirely, and left us in peace to get drunk and sing 🙂 Unfortunately no-one employed by Police Scotland in in possession of that level of intelligence

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:53 am - Aug 21, 2014

Smugas says:
August 20, 2014 at 5:36 pm
‘…. The interim step for this plan would be to let the footballing activity wither and die – ok wither and get relegated – – and there’s no sign of this yet.’
I think Laxey Partners,true to form, are pushing the RIFC plc board very hard indeed.

So hard that the next move will be the forced resignation of ‘going concern directors’,and their replacement by others who will have zero interest in any kind of long, slow haul into some kind of profitability/ shareholder small- dividend return on investment via a remotely hopefully ‘successful’ football club in ‘x’ number of years,but who want to go for a quicker killing ( or ‘earliest possible strategic optimisation of returns on their ( Laxey’s) shrewd investment)
The signs are all there, I think.

With no credit, no sugar daddy, deeply suspected by the Stock market[ which also, allegedly, has suspicions about the very NOMAD], the business known as RIFC plc is teetering on the brink of collapse.
And its assets will constitute the welcome little dividend to be paid to the Laxey shareholders- and stuff anybody else.
There is, I fear, no hope for the continuation of the new TRFC as a footballing entity. The financial logic of the whole situation points in the direction of the SFA/SFL having backed a loser.The new club will die, as surely as the old one did.
Laxey Partners are the CWs of the finance jungle writ very large. The wee cheating tyke from Motherwell is as nothing when it comes to ‘financial acumen’ compared to the smoothy tough guys in the BIG boys’ world, in which making money out of the gullibility of other people is what life is all about.
I may, of course, be wrong.
But I do not think I am.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:22 am - Aug 21, 2014

justshatered says:
August 20, 2014 at 10:01 pm
‘… and said the people couldn’t do enough for them and that in the town square the fans were mixing together. That is the carnival that our sport should be..’
If only!
A chap I know very well,an inoffensive, respectful of other people, good-natured , tolerant, cat and dog loving, law abiding, and utterly boring kind of guy, told me of his experience of ‘fans mixing together’.

It seems he was in Sicily, on holiday, on that night, in 2001, of the most infamous refereeing that, according to him,made the biased efforts the ‘Tiny’ Whartons and Dallases and such like look like Celtic-minded favouritism: the night of the Juventus-Celtic game.

There he was,in a bar, watching the game, with no more than a handful of locals, watching in almost complete silence.

A thousand miles ,and a complete Sicilian, non-Italian cultural distance from Turin.

And yet when Juventus won by that most extraordinary penalty decision, here were these guys leaping and jumping about as if they had won the lottery.

This so puzzled my holiday-making acquaintance that he damned near got into a fight with those guys, and challenged them that they as Sicilians were not bloody Italians,and had historically resisted the idea that they were Italians, but were instead subjects of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. And why in the name of the wee man were they supporters of a club at the very north of Italy.

Happily, my acquaintance said, the guys in question-although annoyed a little at their Sicilian loyalties ( like ‘NO’ voters) being questioned- offered the explanation that lots of Sicilians had had to go to Turin to find work, and had more or less had to adopt Juventus as their football team.

My acquaintance was diplomatic enough to accept that feeble explanation. And got home without a stiletto in his back. 🙂
See stereotypes? They can be stereotypical!

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:18 am - Aug 21, 2014

justshatered says:
August 20, 2014 at 10:01 pm

That is the carnival that our sport should be particularly in Europe where you get to go to countries you would otherwise never visit, meet opposition fans, and ask if their FA is as corrupt as ours!!

I guess there are many FA’s not whiter than white, but it’s the media driven notion the Scottish FA is exactly that which is the most insulting view of them all.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on8:52 am - Aug 21, 2014

John Clark says:
August 21, 2014 at 12:53 am

John, I’ve been of the opinion for some time that there will come a point when, for the Laxeys and similar, any attempts to maintain TRFC as a ‘going concern’ will be seen as fruitless and they will decide it’s best for them to pull the plug. Only the most ardent bear will be prepared to lose money in a continued effort to keep this sinking ship afloat, and just how ardent such a bear might be will be tested to the full when we see how Letham deals with the repayment of his loan when the fateful day arrives. Will he allow them more time to pay, or will he insist on immediate repayment? If he insists on immediate repayment (and he is the only bear to put real money where his heart is ) how can anyone expect those with no emotional involvement to continue to lose money when they can liquidate and, no doubt, lose less than they will if they don’t. To these guys, forcing the liquidation of a company they’ve invested in is never the final resort, it’s just one of their strategies.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:33 am - Aug 21, 2014

John C.

In absolute full agreement. In fact it is so glaringly obvious, and has been from the start, that if someone turns up and appears to buck this trend – to pump another 12m into a money drain where charging to the hilt is pointless since they only use the 2nd 6m to repay the first in any case – excuse me for not accepting it at face value.

That said, it looks increasingly likely that RFC as we know it are going to increasingly rely on the sentiment that there’s only one thing worse than an ex-behemoth with ‘000s of expectant fans winning on the pitch – and that’s one that’s losing!

By the way, just on Sicily. Can you ask your pal, how come when nobody appears to work can they all afford stunning Ukrainian wives? Stereotypical, moi?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on10:32 am - Aug 21, 2014

Clyde Squirrel

Looking at the MSM headlines over the past few days you’d think beating Clyde had solved all of The Rangers’ financial problems – which are too many to list.

But one comes to mind. If I was Imran and I didn’t give a damn for the future of the clumpany, I’d be at court again asking for that £600K to be ring fenced – and quick.

Come on Mr Somers (who?), let’s see your assurances to the court that the finances are tickety boo, top hole and hunky dory.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:31 am - Aug 21, 2014

mcfc says:
August 21, 2014 at 10:32 am

I’d forgotten about Imran’s claim 🙄

If he should win, whether or not he has the funds arrested, then the eventual bill to TRFC will be much higher once the legal costs are added. It’s of no consequence to any decent person if he wins but finds there’s no money left to pay his dues, as he’s a spiv and clearly doesn’t deserve it, but that won’t help the club survive.

Hmm, £600,000, might that be one of the speculated about ways the ‘lender’ of £12m might get his money back? If, say, Green’s gang have raised (their own money 🙄 or some other mugs’) £12m to lend to TRFC knowing they have legitimate claims on large sums due to onerous contracts, that they won’t get out if they don’t provide this loan, then they suck more money out of the club/RIFC, then end up with the assets and probably some other claims against whatever else is left (the residue of the £12m?), having already collected some of the interest and repayments. Wow. All they would need to make sure this scam works is control of the board. No wonder Green is back on the scene! And, of course, if some, or all, of the £12m is other people’s money…Just spivtastic!

Note to the unsuspecting: the above is pure speculation on my part and should not be used as part of your plans for future investment.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:57 am - Aug 21, 2014

I see the latest VB ‘expose’ on the 5-way agreement has been posted:

So, on that day 27th of July 2012, the last possible day that agreement could be reached, the SFA’s lawyers Levy & Macrae hosted all senior stakeholders in the Rangers issue to their office in St Vincent Street, Glasgow.

By this stage, Rangers had forced the title stripping off the agenda, however, they were not to be meekly handed a punishment free passage in to the SFL. Other measures were being quickly discussed. The determination of some to punish the club as much as possible at a late stage where desperation saw them more likely to accept to get the licence and keep the club alive hadn’t waned.

The presence of Duff and Phelps could not help the Rangers cause; they were now bystanders only interested that the business entity they were representing wouldn’t have any financial liability thrown in its direction.

With a draft agreement on paper and separate signature pages at the back (to be signed upon all attendees reaching agreement on the conditions of Rangers re-entry in to the SFL and SFA), talks got underway. All in attendance agreed that a conclusion had to be reached and papers signed off that day, no matter what. The future of Scottish Football and that of its biggest member club was at stake.

Reaching agreement on any issue was difficult, and the meeting was interrupted several times as Stewart Regan answered his mobile phone and left the room. An expectant wife was calling from Yorkshire. Mr. Regan was reminded he had a dinner date that evening.

With no indication that middle ground could be found regards the many sticking points and Scottish football facing disaster the SFA Chief Executive took a remarkable and shocking decision that reinforced the belief of many that he is inept and has zero interest in the welfare of the beautiful game here.

At 5pm, with the document far from finalised and even further from being agreed, he took the SFA signature page from the table and signed it, informing all of those present that he would put his name to whatever was agreed, had a dinner engagement with his wife and friends in Leeds, and wasn’t going to cancel.

In essence, Regan signed a blank piece of paper.

The Chief Executive of the SFA, with overall responsibility for the game in Scotland, was more interested in having dinner, than leading the decision makers to reach an agreement to safeguard the future of both Rangers, and Scottish Football.

The meeting lasted approximately another four hours before a conclusion was reached. Rangers were forced to accept their second transfer embargo in 4 months, and various other financial penalties including the signing over of television rights, and the payment of football debts, on the agreement that they wouldn’t have rights to SPL prize money, or debts owed to the club.

There were a number of revisions to the draft document in Regan’s absence which already had his signature, as he travelled to Leeds and made his way out to dinner.

To the best of our knowledge Regan didn’t phone anyone in attendance after his departure for a progress update.

Regan’s signature page was simply inserted into the final document and issued as the Five-Way Agreement.

This absolute disdain for the future of Rangers and Scottish football has never left that room, until now.

When I see a signed copy of the 5-Way Agreement then I might give some credence to the story. I can’t be bothered checking-back but was Green actually at the meeting or was it just McCoist? And again did McCoist not storm out of at least one of the meetings?

Quite interesting to note that the SFA’s lawyers are Levy & McRae who apparently act for Rangers as well. VB had much to claim – wrongly of course – in an earlier post about an alleged conflict of interest involving SPL lawyers Harper Macleod because they also had Celtic as a client.

That claim was nonsense of course as would be any similar claim against Levy & McRae but the interesting point for me is that no such claim was made against Levy & McRae by the VB which neatly illustrates their biased agenda.

However the latest claim along with Topping’s Armageddon (aka Nuclear Winter) one seems to point to someone at the heart of proceedings in 2012 or with knowledge of them deciding it’s time to divert Bears from the current problems at the club by ‘proving’ all their woes are down to others.

I wonder who that could be? Perhaps it’s time for Mr McCoist to demand the names – after all having apparently been at the meeting – he knows the names but that hasn’t hindered him previously 😆

View Comment

wottpiPosted on11:58 am - Aug 21, 2014

Allyjambo says:
August 21, 2014 at 11:31 am

No wonder Green is back on the scene!


Never convinced that he actually left and all his shares were sold on as suggested.

Ask for the sales receipt and my guess it is in the same drawer as the Dallas Cowboys e-mail.

Would not be surprised if he still has a small enough personal stash to keep under the radar and an involvement and agreement with the numerous alleged shady shareholders.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on11:59 am - Aug 21, 2014

Allyjambo says:
August 21, 2014 at 11:31 am
Ally – and that’s their fundamental problem – any money invested or earned is doomed to be spivved out the back door leaving the clumpany in perpetual jeopardy of being pushed over the edge by the likes of Imran – unless they are welcomed onto the gravy train. As they say Mr Wallace, when you’re fighting off alligators on all sides, it’s hard to remember that you set out to drain the swamp.

btw – I always remember one of my lecturers saying that any problem is easy to solve if you forget about one or two major factors. It would seem that most have accepted that the £12m loan proposal has resolved the Whyte/Earley claim on the assets. Their claim may be weak, and may never be actioned, but Deloitte think it is worthy of mention so it is relevant until formal agreement takes it out of the account statements.

And finally, if PMG is correct and £600K is overdue to creditors – who are these mugs giving the clumpany credit?

View Comment

y4rmyPosted on12:14 pm - Aug 21, 2014

And finally, if PMG is correct and £600K is overdue to creditors – who are these mugs giving the clumpany credit?

The only ones who ever put their own money in: the fans.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on12:17 pm - Aug 21, 2014

Re the £12m loan

IIRC Phil Mac said such an offer was possibly on the table.

In this debacle it could all just be a posturing stance or trying to test the water get other folk to show their hand. My guess is that the offer could easily be pulled when positions have been ascertained.

If the smart men in the city aren’t up for new share issues etc it is hard to see who would be willing to pump in £12m unless there was some obvious return.

In my view there is no obvious signs of cost cutting and therefore no obvious sign of a return to anyone.

The football team is going to go down the grubber because the squad they have now is as good as it is going to get for the foreseeable future thus, with the current manager, their ability to be placed in the top two of the Championship never mind the Premiership is no certainty. Therefore future incomes based on success on the park is very high risk.

That then leaves the possibility of asset ownership and onerous contracts but that depends on the 40k crowds turning up and their patience is only going to last so long.

Still think a few dodgy results and simple cash flow problems will finally put this one to bed.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on12:17 pm - Aug 21, 2014

I see malky mackay has landed in deep hot water.


View Comment

mcfcPosted on12:31 pm - Aug 21, 2014

y4rmy says:
August 21, 2014 at 12:14 pm
The only ones who ever put their own money in: the fans.
That’s fine if it’s their own money – but not fine if they are acting on behalf of public bodies, listed companies, charities etc.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:56 pm - Aug 21, 2014

ecobhoy says:
August 21, 2014 at 11:57 am

Once again, what they are putting out is hardly ground breaking stuff, apart from suggesting that the SFA weren’t on their side and that Regan left the meeting early (if he did, that is disgraceful, but hardly a sign that any wrongdoing was done to TRFC as a result). I still haven’t read anything from them that, even if 100% true, suggests they were unfairly treated. It would be nice if they put up some argument for an unopposed entry, at any level, into the SFL, before arguing that they were unfairly treated. But they don’t do that, wonder why… Of course, it’s very difficult to argue that a new club should gain automatic entry when to admit you’re a new club would mean, well, admitting that you’re a new club!!! Therein lies one of the many problems of refusing to face up to the truth, as forming a viable argument becomes impossible, unless, of course, your target audience is only those who want to believe you, and deflecting them from the truth is all you are attempting to do.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on1:25 pm - Aug 21, 2014

Money’s Too Tight To Mention

Earlier I said that The Rangers’ financial problems were too many to list. Well I’m always up for a challenge. These are the ones I can list from memory – I’m sure you can add more. Think you have a busy, stressful life – well spare a thought for Graham.

1. Cash Flow: Structural £10m – £12m annual overspend

2. Cash Flow: Cash at Bank close to zero

3. Cash Flow: No credit line (overdraft facility) obtainable from an established bank

4. Cash Flow: No credit card facility for season ticket sales

5. Cash Flow: Letham £1,000,000 loan due with interest

6. Cash Flow: Easdale £500,000 loan due with interest

7. Cash Flow: ST strike reduces upfront cash by 50%

8. Cash Flow: Gate receipts vulnerable to poor football results, portents not good

9. Cash Flow: 120 days after the 120 day review no obvious cost cutting has occurred

10. Cash Flow: Players put up for sale remain unsold

11. Cash Flow: Player remuneration increases kick in for Championship

12. Cash Flow: Onerous contract 1 – McCoist £800,000+ salary plus benefits plus staff

13. Cash Flow: Onerous contract 2 – Sports Direct merchandise retail

14. Cash Flow: Onerous contract 3 – Murray Park facility management

15. Cash Flow: Onerous contracts – rumoured on catering, security, maintenance etc

16. Litigation: Imran Khan suing for unpaid bonuses

17. Litigation: Whyte & Earley Letter Before Action – switcheroo claim over all assets, also limits external investment

18. Investment: Secret share options (eg Stockbridge) limit external investment via share options and share issues

19. Investment: “Then she spat out her coffee” response to Wallace’s City pitch limits external investment

20. Investment: Major shareholders still unknown, some find this unnerving, limiting external investment

21. Regulatory: Deloitte have severe doubts about signing-off RIFC on a “going concern” basis

22. Regulatory: AIM reportedly very unhappy about something or other.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on1:50 pm - Aug 21, 2014

Re the VB’s latest

I’m intrigued. How much better do they think it would have been if the SFA rep had stayed?

I’m reminded of the sitcom friends where one flatmate has in error helped a burglar to ransack the apartment. When the second finds out and says he’s going for help the first asks well what should I do if they come back? Says the second “bend over?”

Info can only have come from DL or CG/AM.

It smacks of if we’re going down, you’re coming with us!

View Comment

TincksPosted on1:53 pm - Aug 21, 2014

mcfc says:
August 21, 2014 at 1:25 pm

23. Competency – Ally McCoist as manager

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on2:16 pm - Aug 21, 2014

mcfc says:
August 21, 2014 at 1:25 pm

You’ve listed a number of the known knowns and known unknowns…
But then there are the unknown unknowns. Not just unknown to us, or the bears, but also unknown to Wallace, Nash and the rest of the board. The last unknown unknown that came to light, BS’ share options, led to more unknown unknowns – and they appear to remain unknown, so your list might well be never ending.

With unknown unknowns remaining, who would lend £12m to RIFC/TRFC? Someone who knows the unknown unknowns, perhaps?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on2:36 pm - Aug 21, 2014

Allyjambo says:
August 21, 2014 at 2:16 pm

Ally – nicely put – but I’ll see your Rumsfeld and raise you Cicero; “I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know.” 🙂

View Comment

scottcPosted on3:41 pm - Aug 21, 2014

mcfc says:
August 21, 2014 at 1:25 pm

22. Regulatory: AIM reportedly very unhappy about something or other.

I understood that relates to certain ‘uses of IPO money’

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on3:43 pm - Aug 21, 2014

mcfc says:
August 21, 2014 at 2:36 pm

Somehow I think the incumbents of the Blue Room will be neither Rumsfelds, and admit there are things they don’t know, nor Ciceros and confess their ignorance of anything. They will continue to act as though they have everything under control, with sharp suits and confident smiles, while their only real concern is their reputation and career. Their careers will be better off if they save ‘the company'(RIFC) but sink ‘the club’ (TRFC) rather than the other way round. Even if RIFC plc should fold, as long as they are seen to have maximised the return (minimised the loss) for investors (this really means the big investors, like Laxeys) then their careers and reputation will remain; perhaps even, within the city, be enhanced.

And what if The £12m loan becomes a fact? What better time for Wallace and Nash to take their leave? They have secured the company’s immediate future, with cash to flow; a quick bonus payment, then it becomes someone else’s problem.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on3:48 pm - Aug 21, 2014

Funny Old Game

Has it occurred to the UoF that probably the one thing stopping the Board from hocking, selling or leasing Ibrox is the Letter Before Claim from no other than the Motherwell-born billionaire and his chums.

You’d think the UoF would be more grateful to him – wouldn’t you?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on3:57 pm - Aug 21, 2014

scottc says:
August 21, 2014 at 3:41 pm
I understood that relates to certain ‘uses of IPO money’
Say more if you can – perhaps you mean they did not spend much of the IPO money as stated to investors in the prospectus. That would be quite naughty – wouldn’t it?

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on4:06 pm - Aug 21, 2014

mcfc says: August 21, 2014 at 1:25 pm

Money’s Too Tight To Mention

Earlier I said that The Rangers’ financial problems were too many to list. Well I’m always up for a challenge. These are the ones I can list from memory – I’m sure you can add more. Think you have a busy, stressful life – well spare a thought for Graham.

1. Cash Flow: Structural £10m – £12m annual overspend
The interim accounts published in March suggested that the cash burn rate was down to approx. £600K a month or £7M-£7.5M per annum.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on4:06 pm - Aug 21, 2014

What Goes Around. . .

Will East Fife allow more than 1,000 bears to their ground for the quarter final of the Petrofac Training Cup. The hosts may find the policing costs prohibitive.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on4:21 pm - Aug 21, 2014

easyJambo says:
August 21, 2014 at 4:06 pm

1. Cash Flow: Structural £10m – £12m annual overspend
The interim accounts published in March suggested that the cash burn rate was down to approx. £600K a month or £7M-£7.5M per annum.
That includes £4m of property valuation jiggery pokery. Major things would have had to change to save £4m per year and cancel out known spending increases. What was done to save £4m per year ?

View Comment

Comments are closed.