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

SmugasPosted on4:56 pm - Aug 22, 2014


I understand what your getting at Eco and as I said above, I don’t want to particularly personalise it to SR himself. I do however wonder how he would have approached it, had he found out on Monday morning that any of the legitimate RFC/SFA agreements had been amended after he left?

Your interpretation would also fit with SR doing the ‘right thing’ if such a thing exists in this ongoing farce and someone like, for instance, possibly, David Longmuir, taking one at complete random, trying to highlight it as something it simply was not.

But you’re right. We only have the VB’s version to go on, plus a deafening silence on the other side. Oh and not one, NOT ONE effective punishment or resignation since the events took place.

EDIT: I’m off home now to get my cake. I’m hoping to also eat it later, but nothing is guaranteed – apart from in the VB’s world and the 6th floor at Hampden apparently.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on5:10 pm - Aug 22, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:32 pm

Your post giving the possible reason for Regan to leave the meeting makes a lot of sense, and it would be perfectly reasonable for Regan to leave under these circumstances, perhaps even proper. I can only think, if this is the case, or something similar to it, that the only reason he doesn’t come out and quash this slur would be because it would put pressure on all those within Hampden to answer similar calls.

There have been so many questions for the football authorities that have gone unanswered, I doubt we’ll ever hear Regan’s answer to this one.

Regardless of the truth of the matter, I still can’t see what the VB hope to achieve by divulging this. We’ve all made remarks suggesting that Scottish football is run for the benefit of Rangers (IL). The VB (at least) seem to believe it really is.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on5:14 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Smugas says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:56 pm

I understand what your getting at Eco and as I said above, I don’t want to particularly personalise it to SR himself. I do however wonder how he would have approached it, had he found out on Monday morning that any of the legitimate RFC/SFA agreements had been amended after he left?
===================================================
Ah but that couldn’t have happened even if he didn’t leave a deputy.

Because – thanks to the VB – we know that the meeting was held in the SFA solicitors’ offices so they would have been providing the secretarial input to type-up the agreement and no doubt with a supervising legal eye from Levy & McRae having a ringside seat as well.

I see Sons of Struth are commenting on facebook that Peter Watson is no longer with Levy & McRae although I am unable to actually work-out why he has gone from their wording.

However I am certain that nothing negative should be attached to the event – if indeed SoS are correct that he has moved on – as Wee Peter is a very professional lawyer IMO. Or to give him his Sunday Title: ‘Solicitor Advocate’ ❗

View Comment

scottcPosted on5:17 pm - Aug 22, 2014


TBK says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:04 pm

“six months ended 31 December 2013″……. having traded for 13months, the next 6months accounts ended 31st June 2014 with the Annual accounts being (over) due as of 31/06/2014

Wonder what the delay could be?

Not fair to describe them as overdue (even in brackets), TBK. The next accounts will be for the period up until 30 June 2014. You can’t expect accountants to magically produce the accounts the next day. I think they have until the end of December to actually issue them. Last year, the annual accounts were published on 1st October, I believe. 🙂 They will be worth waiting for, I’m sure.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on5:17 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Smugas says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:44 pm

And before you all turn up for a TSFM ‘empty’ I was being facetious
—————————

Damn! Was just phoning the taxi 😥

View Comment

TrisidiumPosted on5:18 pm - Aug 22, 2014


TSFM as a community has been hostile to Stewart Reagan and his chums at the SFA.

We are confirmed in our belief that they have been complicit on bending their own rules in order to accommodate the new club. We are persuaded that they sat on their hands and did nothing despite their own heavily conflicted President being deeply involved in the controversy that surrounded the game over EBTs – and we are of the belief that they deliberately spiked the disciplinary process of the LNS inquiry, by providing a spurious, tenuous, and completely new interpretation of the rules on eligibility.

In the light of those facts, it hardly seems plausible that we could ask Regan abut his dinner engagement dilemma on the basis that we were giving him the opportunity to refute allegations from the VBs.

There is absolutely no evidence (other than anecdotal) in the public domain that these events ever took place. In fact anyone could have created that wee narrative to shore up conclusions already arrived at with respect to Reagan.

The claims may well be true of course – although I am not sure what relevance they hold for the integrity of the SFA. More a character thing for Reagan as an individual.

I really don’t think Reagan has any case to answer here – yet. If an individual who was present at the meeting was to make those claims, then that would be the time for him to break silence.

I certainly wouldn’t want to jump on any bandwagon driven by those without the little credibility we have.

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on5:52 pm - Aug 22, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:12 pm
————————–
Your explanation of what may have transpired at the meeting is perfectly plausible, Eco, perhaps even likely. It’s your reluctance to have him questioned on the matter that I find disconcerting,

We have an allegation that, on the face of it, suggests dereliction of duty on the part of the chief executive. If he were to be asked, and he subsequently provided an explanation along your lines (or, indeed, another equally valid rebuttal), it would demolish the VBs’ claims of an “anti-Rangers” conspiracy — no small harm in itself.

There has been a consistent refusal by all parties involved to enter any public discussion of the meeting that led to the Five-way Agreement, as far as I can recall. We now have a specific claim. We should ask the question, in my view. Whether admitted, denied or ignored, it gives us a further “in” on the most corrupt deal that was ever foisted on the game in Scotland.

It’s only by chipping away with Andy Dufresne’s rock hammer, which is what TSFM is doing, that we will bring the whole rotten edifice down. The irony that it might have been smuggled in by the Vanguard Bears is just too delicious to contemplate. 😀

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on5:58 pm - Aug 22, 2014


McLeish saying it will be bad for Rangers if celtic get into CL groups… Probably one of the stupidest statements from an ex manager / pundit ever… I would suggest that progress there is good for Scottish football in general. But just my opinion. I wonder what McLeish would have said with his Dons hat on regards that progress. He was a legend at Aberdeen and used to love spanking the Glasgow teams..

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on6:02 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Most of the youth leagues in Scotland start this weekend, soooooo looking forward to that. All the leagues have websites so if you have some spare time on a saturday or sunday check that out and go see the young talent Scotland is producing..

Scotland needs grassroots football and it’s promotion..

View Comment

nawlitePosted on6:12 pm - Aug 22, 2014


If I was accused of leaving an important work meeting by someone who was not even at that meeting, would I expect my boss to take it seriously and investigate? No, I would not and would be bloody annoyed if he gave any credence to such a claim when there is no evidence whatsoever.

Even if my job was in a public position, would I expect my boss to insist that I responded to such a rumour? No, I would not and would be bloody annoyed if he gave any credence to such a rumour when there is no evidence whatsoever.

If I did, I’d be making statements every day to refute the latest thing that someone had made up.

I don’t know if Regan did this or not, but until there is firmer evidence, I don’t see how anyone can ask any questions or expect any answers.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on6:39 pm - Aug 22, 2014


“The claims may well be true of course – although I am not sure what relevance they hold for the integrity of the SFA. More a character thing for Reagan as an individual.”

If true then I would suggest that as Regan was acting on behalf of the SFA then it is very relevant, as any reflection of Regan while carrying out the duties of the SFA as holder of a senior office most definitely also reflects on the SFA.

With regards to the allegations themselves I have nothing to add as I know nothing more about it than I have read here.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on6:51 pm - Aug 22, 2014


I agree.

So does that make it the four-and-a-half-way agreement?

Shameful, but disturbingly not shocking IF TRUE so the next step would need to be from the VBs.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on7:27 pm - Aug 22, 2014


What’s the betting that Malky Mackay sues, [or threatens to sue], Tan and/or Cardiff City F.C. ?

There is damage in the millions: alleged withdrawal of Crystal Palace manager’s position on a 3 year contract.

He is probably b*ggered at the very least in the short-term for any EPL/Championship level managerial vacancies.

An ‘unfair’ restriction on trade, [although he has admitted the content queried, so bears x% responsibility.]

And then there is the question of the timing – and motivation – behind the disclosure of the dossier of dodgy comments to the FA, and the simultaneous disclosure to the MSM.

This could rumble on for some time yet…

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on7:33 pm - Aug 22, 2014


StevieBC says:
August 22, 2014 at 7:27 pm

Quite possibly, but, surely the best he can hope for is a Bernie Ecclestone result?

I shall certainly not be looking at Mr MacKay in the same way ever again

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on7:37 pm - Aug 22, 2014


tl.gd/n_1s5c8ij

A reply from HMRC to a TRFC fan. He is not a happy Bear.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:43 pm - Aug 22, 2014


scapaflow says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:16 pm
7 1 Rate This

Danish Pastry says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:09 pm

The trouble is once an investigation starts, it may well throw up all sorts of other behaviours, the Rangers tax case is an excellent illustration of this.

Finally on this topic, Mr MacKay has admitted saying the things he did, why else appologise? Is it OK for someone in Mr MacKay’s position to say these sort of things, whether its a private conversation or not? My view is no it bloody isn’t.
———-

Of course it isn’t. Let’s see what MM and chum say. This trial by blog and media is absurd. Righteous indignation from The Mail? I dare say if you trawl through anyone’s past 10,000 text messages you’ll find some dubious/risqué stuff.

Dislike of Stasi methods isn’t condoning what MM may or may not have written.

PS Well done Legia yesterday, I saw GoosyG also mentioned them. Your heart goes out to the team and supporters after their club’s mega goof.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on7:57 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Re the Malky MacKay situation…

Whilst I have little time for Mr Tan, company access to emails and other electronic transmissions by staff is becoming the norm in many sectors.

I have seen Contracts of Employment seek to protect companies from, amongst other things, third party litigation by incorporating Clauses similar to this one :

“Information Technology
The Company reserves the right to access and monitor all messages, created, sent, received or stored on the Company’s systems. Email and the Internet should not be used to create, send, receive or store any material which is offensive, discriminatory, disruptive or infringes copyright. Full details of the Information Technology Policy can be found in the Employee handbook. Any breach of the Information Technology Policy contained in the Employee Handbook may lead to disciplinary action being taken against you up to and including summary dismissal.”

The “Company’s systems” definition would almost certainly include Company-issued mobile phones thus bringing texts into the general ambit of the Clause.

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on8:15 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Carfins Finest says:
August 22, 2014 at 7:37 pm
tl.gd/n_1s5c8ij
A reply from HMRC to a TRFC fan. He is not a happy Bear.
——————————————————————————-
HMRC : “I think it would also be helpful to clarify that the recent tax case is categorically not the reason why the club was put into liquidation. It is a matter of public record that Rangers was placed in administration by its principal shareholder and director because it was unable to pay its creditors, including HMRC. At the time of liquidation, published court papers showed that the undisputed tax that was owed by the company was approximately £21 million. This is an entirely separate issue from the amount in dispute due to the former owner of the club’s use of the EBT scheme.”

Straight for the jugular, dismissing the EBT red herring and even using the magic words “the club was put into liquidation”! 🙂

Is this the definitive statement for the hard of thinking Bear?

Scottish Football needs a strong HMRC.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on8:33 pm - Aug 22, 2014


“This trial by blog and media is absurd. ” I’m confident that that is a sentiment certain Football Execs share with respect to this blog. :mrgreen:

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on9:06 pm - Aug 22, 2014


redlichtie says:

August 22, 2014 at 8:15 pm

Carfins Finest says:
August 22, 2014 at 7:37 pm
tl.gd/n_1s5c8ij
A reply from HMRC to a TRFC fan. He is not a happy Bear

TRFC Fan not impressed with the answer. Maybe not what he expected eh?

‘I wrote to David Cameron asking why there was to be yet a further appeal against a company that basically no longer exists, and why was there private information leaked to certain individuals amongst other things, and this was the bolox reply I got;

View Comment

smartie1947Posted on9:32 pm - Aug 22, 2014


redlichtie says:

August 22, 2014 at 8:15 pm

11

0

Rate This

Carfins Finest says:
August 22, 2014 at 7:37 pm
tl.gd/n_1s5c8ij
A reply from HMRC to a TRFC fan. He is not a happy Bear.
——————————————————————————-
HMRC : “I think it would also be helpful to clarify that the recent tax case is categorically not the reason why the club was put into liquidation. It is a matter of public record that Rangers was placed in administration by its principal shareholder and director because it was unable to pay its creditors, including HMRC. At the time of liquidation, published court papers showed that the undisputed tax that was owed by the company was approximately £21 million. This is an entirely separate issue from the amount in dispute due to the former owner of the club’s use of the EBT scheme.”

================================================
In comparison to what HMRC have spent to date on UTT/FTT legal costs, it would be small beer to take out advertising space in all SMSM outlets to give the statement above maximum exposure and lay another urban myth to bed once and for all.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on9:56 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Torquemada says:
August 22, 2014 at 5:52 pm
ecobhoy says:
August 22, 2014 at 4:12 pm
————————–
Your explanation of what may have transpired at the meeting is perfectly plausible, Eco, perhaps even likely. It’s your reluctance to have him questioned on the matter that I find disconcerting,
=========================================
I have no reluctance to seeing Regan or anyone else questioned if a smidgeon of actual evidence has been advanced.

But no evidence has been presented that Regan has been guilty of any wrongdoing or lack of professionalism even if he did leave the meeting before it ended especially if the SFA portion of the business had been concluded.

I simply don’t accept that because an anonymous individual makes an allegation against another party – without providing any proof – that it is then OK to demand that the person identified clears his name.

Regan isn’t daft – whatever else he may be – and he knows fine well that these people aren’t interested in the truth but simply in advancing their agenda. No matter what he says it will be dismissed or twisted.

I also believe that his employer will have instructed him to make no public statement on the issue – standard procedure in something like this.

The media know that if they run the story then they’ll probably be sued because they’ve got money to take and more importanty it’s merely an allegation without evidence. An interesting thing about defamation is that the defamed person doesn’t need to prove innocence. It’s up to the defamer to prove they got it right.

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on9:59 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Partly inspired by the discussion above I knocked this out.

http://www.thedrum.com/news/2014/08/22/top-10-ways-get-arrested-using-social-media

View Comment

bailemeanachPosted on10:17 pm - Aug 22, 2014


ecobhoy

great work on your responses to the 5 way agreement debate today. I wasn’t with you at first but as always you pursue the facts and present a convincing argument. You are a most valuable contributor to this great site

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on10:32 pm - Aug 22, 2014


ecobhoy says:

August 22, 2014 at 9:56 pm

Correctomundo.Its important that we stick to what is provable (which is why I felt it OK to throw in my two penny worth on other issues.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on11:10 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Smugas says:

August 22, 2014 at 2:55 pm

Yes we do seem reluctant to learn from our experiences and think “next time I’ll win” rather than think “why not change next time so we all win.”

What we have is folk (journos) who make a living out of promoting the former afraid to contemplate attempting the latter.

The reality of the former is it failed because it never was real – a competition based on tribal hate, financial doping and tax evasion/avoidance to give appearance of competition..

We need to turn Scottish football into every Saturday is the possibility of a St Johnstone v Dundee United Cup Final day, win lose or draw.

Only that pesky Celtic get in the way because of this.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2152534-how-uefa-prize-money-is-destroying-smaller-national-leagues

View Comment

TartanwulverPosted on11:41 pm - Aug 22, 2014


Much better from Malky Mackay tonight, getting to the point and not hiding, offering a proper apology.

I heard Clark Carlisle, until very recently head of the English PFA, talking tonight in Edinburgh. He said he has a lot of time for Mackay, that he will have to face the consequences, but that, like anyone, he should then be judged on how he responds over time. I’d agree with that

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on11:46 pm - Aug 22, 2014


I had been looking at refereeing decisions and particularly red cards using some data ScottC put me in touch with. There didn’t seem to be anything remarkable going on with the numbers and the analysis was a bit indigestible so I haven’t hotly pursued it. However it may be worth having a look at some snapshots.

The following link is for a file that looks solely at Rangers V Celtic games. It would be logical to suspect that any overt refereeing bias would be accentuated during these ties. The analysis indicates there may be some bias but that it may be within the realms of natural variability.

I’ve used a very rough measure of what natural variability might be. Standard deviation is a measure of spread of a list of numbers. Taking the average (arithmetic mean) of a list of numbers and adding and subtracting two standard deviations of the same list of numbers gives you a variation that should encompass 95% of values. In the tables this translates as a red coloured ‘high’ figure and a blue coloured ‘low’ figure. Anything outwith these boundaries might be considered unusual but not extraordinary.

There are two tabs of concern; one labelled Rangers vs Celtic and the other Celtic vs Rangers. In the ten year period considered there were a total of 40 league games; each team having 20 home games. The column headings are for fouls, yellows and reds home and away e.g AF – away foul. Everything should be fairly self explanatory. I’ve ‘hidden’ anything that is not pertinent.

There is nothing particularly stand out that I can see. the HR:AR count when Rangers are at home at 1:5 is a bit more favourable than Celtic at home which is 3:7.

I think you may have to download this file to view it. I’ve had to radically simplify the data to get it to upload to dropbox so only the summary results appear here. I don’t have the best security software on my machine but I tend to keep it fairly clean as a matter of course.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/sp78gn78iwfmrio/Rangers%20v%20Celtic%20values.xls?dl=0

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:46 am - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 22, 2014 at 9:56 pm
‘..I simply don’t accept that because an anonymous individual makes an allegation against another party – without providing any proof – that it is then OK to demand that the person identified clears his name. ‘
——-
A huge swathe of Scottish football sentiment, from club chairmen down to ordinary fans, believes that the SFA got things badly wrong, in the way that they handled the monumental cheating of one club’s majority shareholder.
And that they got it wrong because they were intimidated, like a weak referee,into abandoning any notion of applying the rules, by fear of the consequences if they did so: those consequences being ,in the fevered imagination of their CEO, ‘Armageddon’ and ‘civic unrest’.

That CEO has a case to answer on that account.

It has now been alleged that he was derelict in his directorial duties, in his duties to the very essence of proper governance of the sport, by resiling from any involvement in ensuring that the Rules were properly and fairly applied.He is alleged to have gone off on private business, while putting his signature blindly to decisions that would be made in his absence by parties who represented the club, now in liquidation (through the deliberate cheating of its major shareholder) and parties who represented a spurious new, brow-beating, blustering creation which in no way ought to have been accorded any kind of status whatsoever.

Against that background, some of us believe that that CEO should be asked whether the allegations are well founded.
He has not so far convinced us of the integrity of the SFA’s actions.We are therefore ,with good reason, suspicious.
It is not, was not, the SPL or the SFL, ( or the SPFL) that are the ultimate guardians of the integrity of Scottish Football.
That was, is, the function of the SFA- and in particular of its CEO.
Caesar’s wife must be seen to be beyond suspicion.

View Comment

causaludendiPosted on3:35 am - Aug 23, 2014


My Tuppence worth on MM…

Whether you find the messages distasteful, unbecoming, grossly offensive… I think there is a very important issue being missed here. The UK is currently a signatory of European Convention of Human Rights. This act bestows upon every living member of our society certain rights. With rights come responsibilities – the bit the
screaming banshees forget!

I would like to make reference to i) Article 9 – “Freedom of Conscience. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion;”. Just because you believe someone’s views are wrong, utterly reprehensible, morally repugnant, whatever, it does not change the fact that they are entitled to hold that view.
ii) Article 10 – Freedom of Expression. “Everyone has the right of freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without inference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.”
iii) Article 8 – Right to Privacy – “(1) Everyone has the right for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

(2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

As alluded to earlier by DP (I think), I wonder how many of those preening on the moral high ground whilst conducting this frenzied witch-hunt have forwarded a risque e-mail or text?

I’m not trying to defend either man nor am I attempting to excuse them. I do take umbrage with the level of exposure this has been given though. At the end of the day these were private communications. At no time (from what I’ve seen or heard) were these communications intended to cause fear or alarm. At no time did they become personally abusive (i.e. A speaking to B about C, C unaware therefore no personal abuse).

I reiterate the point that these were private messages never intended to be in the public domain. And yet we have preachers of hate within the confines of this country propagating dangerous, wild ideologies with not much being seen to be done. We have a serious, apparently escalating, crisis in various parts of the Middle East. We have Russia and Ukraine posturing. We have the prospect of worldwide Ebola epidemic breaking out and MM finds himself top of the news agenda?? Really? Exasperated doesn’t come close.

Strike another point up to the ‘I want to be offended brigade’. Before I run out of steam, one final point :- wasn’t Mr Tan the panto villain not that long ago? What has happened to opposition to him wanting to change the name, crest, colours (that’s right, Cardiff Blues now play in red…). Why is this story taking such prominence now? Squirrels aren’t restricted to our soap-opera it would seem.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:09 am - Aug 23, 2014


scapaflow says: August 22, 2014at 8:33 pm

“This trial by blog and media is absurd. ” I’m confident that that is a sentiment certain Football Execs share with respect to this blog.
_________

Fortunately, this blog stays mostly focused on the issues at hand and does not degrade itself by dirt digging into Individuals’ private lives.

Cardiff’s and Tan’s issues are, ostensibly, regarding an overspend in certain transfer dealings. I do not see the relevance of a few tasteless texts in relation with that.

Any football execs mentioned on here are being openly questioned by bloggers about issues relating to football governance that fly in the face of logic.

Of course, we could just starting dirt digging and try to find something, anything in their private lives to discredit them, and then by some twisted logic, attempt prove we were right about them all along regarding football matters.

Will the evidence of a few dubious texts, among thousands, prove that MM is a habitual, dyed-in-the-wool racist? Probably not. Do they prove that he was involved in dodgy transfer dealings? I don’t see it. What do they tell us? Quite probably something about MM and his state of mind in the autumn of 2013.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on8:02 am - Aug 23, 2014


Could be one less onerous contract to burden rangers if this happens…..but somehow I doubt it…. 😀

http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/crystal-palace/sack-race/news/report-palace-interested-in-mccoist_172487.html

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:10 am - Aug 23, 2014


parttimearab says:
August 23, 2014 at 8:02 am
1 0 Rate This

Could be one less onerous contract to burden rangers if this happens…..but somehow I doubt it….

http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/crystal-palace/sack-race/news/report-palace-interested-in-mccoist_172487.html
———-

That seems a very long shot. Sounds more like a rumour started in the hope of off-loading him.

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on8:29 am - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 22, 2014 at 9:56 pm
——————-
I thought this issue had been put to bed by TSFM in his post which immediately preceded my last offering and which I wish I had seen before continuing to rattle on. It’s now a moot point as far as I am concerned since, if TSFM doesn’t ask the question, no other media outlet is likely to. A chance missed, in my view.

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on9:16 am - Aug 23, 2014


Torquemada says:

August 23, 2014 at 8:29 am

I thought this issue had been put to bed by TSFM in his post which immediately preceded my last offering and which I wish I had seen before continuing to rattle on. It’s now a moot point as far as I am concerned since, if TSFM doesn’t ask the question, no other media outlet is likely to. A chance missed, in my view.

————————–

I had the same opinion as you when I first heard that, thought it would be a good idea if someone asked the question. Then I ran it past someone, his response changed my perspective:

ME: Have you heard the latest regarding SR and the 5-Way agreeement meeting? Apparently he signed a blank sheet and left the meeting early, hopefully the media jump on this one.

HIM: Well I hope they also ask him about his offshore account setup by Celtic.

ME: Where did you hear that? I have never seen any evidence of this before.

HIM: Why let that technicality get in the way of asking questions……

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on9:35 am - Aug 23, 2014


Seems we have a straw man building contest underway. I must have missed all the stories about the Five-way Agreement on offshore accounts. 🙁

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on9:37 am - Aug 23, 2014


BBC article on finances at Govan

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/729849170?-11344:801

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on10:00 am - Aug 23, 2014


Castofthousands says:
August 22, 2014 at 11:46 pm

I had been looking at refereeing decisions and particularly red cards using some data ScottC put me in touch with…
=========================================
Well done CoT.

Is it fair to summarise your hypothesis as: statistically, there is no evidence of any significant refereeing bias over the period reviewed ?

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on10:08 am - Aug 23, 2014


That’s a pretty glum assessment of the state of The Rangers by the Beeb. This, however, caught my eye:

Dave King remains committed to investing in Rangers, via a larger share issue,

Really?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:08 am - Aug 23, 2014


Good effort by Richard Wilson with a surprising level of detail in distinguishing club, company, TRFC and RIFC and why that might be slightly more important detail than previously noted, or indeed reported on at all. I’m surprised no-one on here thought to mention it!

Good effort, right up to the point where he steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the operation is losing money hand over fist and no one is prepared to do anything about it. Not investment. Not investor uncertainty. Not “lack of strategic services expected of a club of this size” (thon’s a cracker) but losses, pure and simple!

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:11 am - Aug 23, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
August 23, 2014 at 7:09 am

‘Any football execs mentioned on here are being openly questioned by bloggers about issues relating to football governance that fly in the face of logic.’

‘Will the evidence of a few dubious texts, among thousands, prove that MM is a habitual, dyed-in-the-wool racist? Probably not. Do they prove that he was involved in dodgy transfer dealings?’

———————————————————
I have no problem about Regan being questioned on pertinent issues regarding football governance although I would rather see his organ grinder employer being in the hot-spot rather than the very well-paid monkey.

But many football supporters would rather concentrate on Regan as an easy target and scapegoat because to shift attention to his employers would inevitably lead to them having to examine the behaviour and role of their own clubs wrt SFA decisions.

However Regan leaving a meeting before it concludes for personal reasons has nothing whatsoever to do with football governance IMO especially if he left after the SFA business was concluded and the meeting went on to discuss specific issues involving the SPL and SFL. And it is highly likely that an SFA ‘watching brief’ remained as the meeting was held if the offices of the SFA solicitors.

As to MM I have always quite-liked him but I cannot quite get my head round his apology where he states he is not racist, not sexist, not homophobic, not an anti-semite.

I simply ask myself if that is the case why did he make the comments? Apologising after you have been caught-out, especially if your future career prospects might hang in the balance, isn’t just the easy option but probably the only one.

It may well be however that MM is simply a dinosaur who has managed to maintain a ‘front’ in public but privately holds very corrosive, illegal and outmoded views which he is happy to share with some other individuals. Only he really knows the answer to that.

As to alleged ‘dodgy transfers’ I obviously don’t have a clue as to what evidence the emails provided or not and will therefore await the results of the investigation or court proceedings on that one before making-up my mind.

However I’m sure that after a ‘suitable’ period MM will be back in the game. Of course we don’t know what lesson he may have learnt.

Whether to keep his inner thoughts to himself in future? Or more positively that he receives assistance to fully understand that non racists, non sexists, non homophobes and non anti semites don’t make the remarks he made even in so-called jest.

However MM is only a tiny nit of the problem as football is riddled with ‘isms’ and needs to be dragged into the reality of a multi-cultural society where sexual preference need’t be kept secret and women arent treated in the way that MM texted.

I wonder how he would have reacted if one of his male friends had made the same crude comments about his wife or partner as he made wrt a female who has been splattered all over the media and become an innocent victim in the affair.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on10:12 am - Aug 23, 2014


Edge Torquemadasays: August 23, 2014at 9:35 am 1

Seems we have a straw man building contest underway. I must have missed all thestoriesabout the Five-wayAgreement on offshore accounts.
________

Next thing we know, it’ll be rumoured that his real name is Declan O’Regan, changed by deed poll before arriving in Glasgow!

VBs must be quite chuffed that they’ve got TSFM discussing this, so far, unsubstantiated rumour.

View Comment

oddjobPosted on10:14 am - Aug 23, 2014


I see Hibs fans are to be canvassed regarding a possible “community buy out”.Supporters direct Scotland will conduct an on line survey to gauge opinion.

Does this mean that the David Low led BID is now dead?

View Comment

mcfcPosted on10:16 am - Aug 23, 2014


valentinesclown says:
August 23, 2014 at 9:37 am

BBC article on finances at Govan

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/729849170?-11344:801
=======================================

If only Richard Wilson had the balls to join some of the dots he sketches out, he’d have himself an exclusive to rock Govan to its core.

“Scottish Football Association rules no individual can hold stakes of more than 10% in two clubs.”

“the £4m will be used to fund the club and pay off the £1.5m in loans still owing to the shareholders George Letham and Sandy Easdale,”

“seek a solution to their immediate financial issues first.”

“additional costs incurred by the club for policing and stewarding ‘walk-up’ supporters.”

“accounts are due to be published next month,”

“the level of funding it takes – he estimated £20m to £30m

“little prospect of the rebuilding process being fully completed.”

Editor: “Richard we need a better headline – somehting punchy”

Richard “What about ‘ Feck, Rangers are Fecking Fecked” “

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on10:18 am - Aug 23, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
August 23, 2014 at 7:09 am

We’ll have to agree to disagree on this one.

As others have noted, Mr MacKay’s statement last night was much better. I can only hope that this is the result of genuine reflection on his behaviour, rather than simply the result of much better PR advice than he received from the LMA.

As for the argument, put forward by someone, that its OK to disparage a third party on the basis of their religion, sexuality or race, as long as the third party didn’t know about it, what utter tosh!

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on10:28 am - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says: August 23, 2014at 10:11am 1 0 RateThis
_______

Fair post ecobhoy. I was not referring specifically to this VB Regan rumour, just football governance in general.

I was also questioning what relevance the specific offending quotes from the texts had to do with Cardiff’s (Tan’s) issue with transfers. My estimate is, zero. If it turns out there is no case then this will all be viewed as a crude fishing expedition in order to collect anything defamatory on two former employees.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:34 am - Aug 23, 2014


What especially interests me about Richard Wilson’s Beeb article is:

In the meantime, the annual accounts are due to be published next month, once audited, then the board intends to hold the annual general meeting – probably in October – and seek permission from shareholders to offer new shares to non-shareholders in a fresh issue.

I had always assumed the next agm would be December followed by the Big share issue in January/February if the pre-emption vote was carried.

But RW’s comment that the agm will come in October with accounts published in September is interesting. I think it shows time is running out fast and I wonder if moving a share launch from just after Xmas to November might be to attract as much dosh as possible from ordinary Bears in view of the seeming reluctance in getting major new and quite possibly existing shareholders to stump-up.

I really don’t believe that the fans will invest heavily especially as the offer price of a new issue could be 20p or less which means fans who bought-in at the 2012 flotation price of 70p have lost a lot of dosh.

Of course if they don’t get the interim £4 million to actually get their hands on the proceeds of the later Big Share Issue then it’s hard to see how they can financially survive.

I know their financial demise has been repeatedly forecast as imminent but as a non-financial expert I find it hard to see how they can continue unless the property assets are ‘mortgaged’ away and if that happens who in hell would invest in a new share issue?

As usual little makes sense to me other than believing they are flying on one wing and an empty tank and there’s not enough time for the required prayer to be uttered.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on10:35 am - Aug 23, 2014


scapaflow says: August 23, 2014at 10:18am 1 0 RateThis

_______

I don’t disagree with any of the above.

I think we’re discussing separate issues, or the same issue from very different perspectives.

View Comment

TartanwulverPosted on10:40 am - Aug 23, 2014


causaludendi says:
August 23, 2014 at 3:35 am

As alluded to earlier by DP (I think), I wonder how many of those preening on the moral high ground whilst conducting this frenzied witch-hunt have forwarded a risque e-mail or text?
—————————————–
Two very different things. Malky Mackay does not stand accused of sending something that might be excused as being a bit cheekily risque, a little bit ‘off’, but of racism and anti-semitism. Yes, people have the right to their views, but equally, those who find such views repugnant have the right to express that too. Football in the UK is a multi-cultural sport, and should fight those within the game who consider some of its participants to be of a lower order because of their differences. And, as I wrote earlier, MM made a strongly worded apology yesterday, and that was the right thing to do as a starting point.

As to the situation in the Ukraine, or Gaza or Ferguson for that matter, of course they are more important and more newsworthy. However, football coverage draws large readerships, and is given an unbalanced degree of coverage. Also, the above conflicts appear to derive to a large extent from bigotry and prejudice, all the more reason to address such sentiments when they are found to exist within something as ingrained in the national psyche as football.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:43 am - Aug 23, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
August 23, 2014 at 10:28 am

That’s always the problem with all fishing expeditions – you’re more likely to catch a cold than a succulent meal 😆

But it also proves that if you take a very forceful, determined and rich opponent to court that you must ensure there’s nothing in your background that can be dragged out – which probably has nothing to do with the court action – to not only destroy your credibility but decimates your employability prospects thus making funding a high-cost legal action very iffy.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:50 am - Aug 23, 2014


Torquemada says:
August 23, 2014 at 9:35 am

Seems we have a straw man building contest underway. I must have missed all the stories about the Five-way Agreement on offshore accounts. 🙁
=====================================================
I have it on the highest authority that the next VB expose will deal with that very subject.

Or perhaps not as its amazing how the more strident Bears seem to have an aversion wrt discussing offshore accounts, tax havens and mystery investors in their club 🙄

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:09 am - Aug 23, 2014


oddjob says: August 23, 2014at 10:14am 2 0 RateThis

I see Hibs fans are to becanvassed regarding a possible “community buyout”.SupportersdirectScotland will conduct an on line survey to gauge opinion.

Does this mean that the David Low led BID is now dead?
_________

Heard a piece on this last night. Was driving home late at the time so was not 100% focused on the podcast but I don’t think I heard Low.’s name mentioned once, just talk of ‘some people prepared to invest’.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on11:15 am - Aug 23, 2014


Smugas says:
August 23, 2014 at 10:08 am

Good effort by Richard Wilson with a surprising level of detail in distinguishing club, company, TRFC and RIFC and why that might be slightly more important detail than previously noted, or indeed reported on at all. I’m surprised no-one on here thought to mention it!
===========================================

Richard Wilson gets stick on here at times but in my view he is a talented writer who would really go places if he could get away from the confines of the Scottish football environment, or at least the editorial controls he will be working under. He is a known bluenose but that’s no crime. I have to say on Sportsound the other night Kenny McIntyre and Jim Spence (surprisingly IMO)seemed to be going out their way to create negative issues re Celtic, and it was left to Richard Wilson to bring some sanity to the debate.

View Comment

mcfcPosted on11:21 am - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 23, 2014 at 10:34 am

What especially interests me about Richard Wilson’s Beeb article is:
==============================================

Richard’s describes the business plan as:
· £4m share option to get to the end of the year.
· Publish the accounts in Oct – ouch
· AGM in Oct (isn’t that an EGM)
· Share Issue before Xmas as the money runs out
· Hope to see out the season with PAYG gate money

I think he is pretty close to the truth – but has avoided the obvious conclusion that the chances of this high-wire, chainsaw-juggling, unicycle act ending well are slimmer than slim. If I were cynical, I’d say he’s socializing some very scary ideas on behalf of friends at Ibrox to soften the truth for the hard of thinking.

We must remember that the real decisions are made by two sets of spivs who seem at logger heads: The Asset Strippers who bought in close to market price and are in the red and want some kind of property deal versus The Onerous Contractors who bought in at 1p and are well in the black and probably don’t mind if it all going tits up – but another ST harvest next year would be a bonus.

Wallace, Nash and Somers are just this year’s hired front men.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:25 am - Aug 23, 2014


From Richard Wilson’s piece:

‘Rangers remain a club that lacks long-term stability’

It’s their short term stability that’s the problem, and until that fact is acknowledged by the MSM, the required panic amongst the bears will remain absent as they still appear to believe there’s time for a sugar daddy to come in. This constant mention of King remaining in the background helps feed the belief that a saviour is just around the corner, whether he is or not doesn’t help because what TRFC need now is the supporters to dig deep and buy STs, though, even that, will only be enough to keep them going until they either gain some other funding, or hit the rocks.

Although the article had a sprinkling of reality about it, Wilson still comes across as someone afraid to go the whole hog and risk being labelled as a ‘Celtic Blogger’.

PS did he get the idea of ‘120 days since the 120 day review’ from mcfc who mentioned that fact yesterday (don’t know who’s counted correctly 😉 ).

View Comment

mcfcPosted on11:53 am - Aug 23, 2014


parttimearab says:
August 23, 2014 at 8:02 am
Could be one less onerous contract to burden rangers if this happens…..but somehow I doubt it…. 😀

http://www.sportsmole.co.uk/football/crystal-palace/sack-race/news/report-palace-interested-in-mccoist_172487.html
==============================================
And it would cost The Rangers £1mil to get rid of him – his contract requires 12 months notice – do they have that kind of money ?

I think Palace may be looking at Lennon and someone English (journo, editor, club official) has thought we’d better look at the other Old Firm manager too. Compare the CVs and as a nuetral I can honestly say McCoist hasn’t a chance against Lennon in the EPL.

Having said that, It would be great fun to see McCoist face journalists every week who ask real questions and are not partial to lamb. He’d be a laughing stock within a month and out on his arse after three max.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:56 am - Aug 23, 2014


Ah well Richard Wilson’s fairly benign observations on Rangers financial position has removed him from the blue pantheon of SMSM poster boys and instantly cast him as yet another Rangers Hater on the Darkside. His fall from grace is attributed to his now taking the BBC shilling 😆

Gary Ralston – previously viewed as a blue bulwark has also been cast into the darkness for his piece the other day which I can’t remember a word of.

I’m beginning to wonder if they have any acceptable succulent lamb eaters left who aren’t former players of the old liquidised club that used to play at Ibrox.

The laager has been well and truly drawn and the warnings ring-out:

I can’t wait for the day we rise up and put them all (SPFL/ SFA/ news hacks) properly in their place, and make them regret and rue the day they ever thought they could treat us like dogs.

What fascinates me about a lot of Darkside comment on Wilson’s piece is it’s dismissed as irrelevant because Bears are already well aware of the points he makes so there was no need to print it 😡

No I can’t work that one out either

View Comment

oddjobPosted on12:04 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Tony Pullis left Crystal Palace because he was not being given funds to buy the players he wanted. Why would Neil Lennon want to go there, when he supposedly left his last job for similar reasons?
I suppose the “dream” of managing in the EPL outweighs all other considerations.

Good luck to him, whatever way it turns out.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:09 pm - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 23, 2014 at 11:56 am

Ah well Richard Wilson’s fairly benign observations on Rangers financial position has removed him from the blue pantheon of SMSM poster boys and instantly cast him as yet another Rangers Hater on the Darkside. His fall from grace is attributed his now taking the BBC shilling 😆
________________________

Talk about heads in the sand. I wrote earlier that I though RW’s piece didn’t go the whole hog with reality so he didn’t get labelled a ‘Celtic Blogger’, and despite the fact they are ‘already well aware of the points he makes’ they label him a ‘Rangers Hater’. So, even while acknowledging he speaks the truth, a reporter becomes an enemy just because that truth is unpalatable. No hope, at least for a large section of their support.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on1:19 pm - Aug 23, 2014


All this talk of McCoist being in contention for Chrystal Palace. For ANY news outlet to even mention this has to be the biggest insult imaginable to peoples intelligence.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on1:35 pm - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 23, 2014 at 10:43 am
8 1 Rate This

That’s always the problem with all fishing expeditions – you’re more likely to catch a cold than a succulent meal.
——–

I was going to mention that they could both end up in a cold plaice but thought batter of it.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on1:41 pm - Aug 23, 2014


upthehoops says:
August 23, 2014 at 1:19 pm

All this talk of McCoist being in contention for Chrystal Palace. For ANY news outlet to even mention this has to be the biggest insult imaginable to peoples intelligence.
_________________

Is that the ‘We Are The’ People’s intelligence? And is it possible to insult the intelligence of any group of people who would believe they are ‘The People’?

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on2:06 pm - Aug 23, 2014


StevieBC says:
August 23, 2014 at 10:00 am

“Is it fair to summarise your hypothesis as: statistically, there is no evidence of any significant refereeing bias over the period reviewed ?”
—————————-
I’ve not really used serious statistical methods to analyse the numbers, more simple arithmetic. Given a decent cohort of data I’d have thought that anything blatant would show up. So my conclusion is that there is no immediate evidence of blatant bias in refereeing decisions over the ten year period (2000 to 2010) considered.

There will certainly be bias in refereeing decisions. The numbers indicate that of 2280 games in that period, a home team will get a red card in just under one in every ten games (0.08) whereas for an away team this figure is slightly more than one in ten (0.13). Perhaps away teams are pressured into conceding red cards or perhaps referees are influenced by the home crowd. It would be difficult to disentangle the effects to this level. There is a distinct difference however that over that number of games can be viewed as significant. Total home red cards in the period is 178 whereas away red cards amount to 305. Discerning why this difference exists is not so easy however.

Usually data is interrogated by firing hypothesis at it. So one might postulate that ‘if a big team was in danger of drawing or losing an important game, is there an increased likelihood of a late red card for the wee team opponent’? Unfortunately I couldn’t test for that level of detail at the moment as the data set would need to be expanded to include the timing of goals and cards. It is a potential future project however and I have already given it some thought.

Even with the data easily available, real statistical techniques might yield ‘significant’ findings since they tend to be a bit more subtle than my crude arithmetic sifting. As I become more familiar with the data I am likely to set suchlike tests. It is tempting just to apply the approach of identifying where Rangers have received unfair assistance. However this would not be a scientific approach and would have no real value. If the subject is to be assisted then the analyst’s own bias needs be avoided.

I’ve got a couple of tables that pitch Celtic and Rangers against the other top division teams that might be of interest to ‘wee’ team fans. Big teams do appear to be less likely to receive red cards. Again this may be due to crowd intimidation, managerial intimidation, asymmetric attacking ability or the penchant of a referee for a big team. It might be possible to distill these effects over time but jumping in with a predefined agenda might just lead to the ‘answers we all wanted’. A bit of patience might accrue the data we all need.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on4:35 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Castofthousands says:
August 23, 2014 at 2:06 pm
=================================
I’m always intrigued at the widely held notion a Referee is affected by the crowd at only two grounds. For example, Tynecastle is very atmospheric with the vast majority supporting Hearts. Why is it never considered that a Referee could be influenced there? I’m not having a go at Hearts, simply making a point. As you say, people will always look for what they already suspect to be the case in any sort of statistical analysis. I think it is admirable people take the time to put all of this together, but the old adage of lies, damned lies, and statistics will always rear its head.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on5:01 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Sorry to raise the issue of the BBC again but why the massive interest all of a sudden in Crystal Palace today? Neil Lennon has been linked with the vacancy since it became available, and Malky McKay was getting it until the intervention of his alleged text message scandal. At no time did BBC Scotland see the need to go live to an English reporter to discuss the issue. Yet as soon as McCoist is mentioned it suddenly becomes important. He is the least suitably qualified and experienced person to be linked with the post yet suddenly it HAS to become high profile issue for discussion. Of course, I fully expect McCoist to be asked about it and to reiterate he doesn’t do walking away from Ibrox. It’s not really been set up for this, has it? Look, Ally can get a big job but he prefers to stay with the mighty Rangers! Anyway, imagine leaving a £800K per year job with massive share bonuses and the full protection of the media behind you. He’d have to be daft.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on5:28 pm - Aug 23, 2014


ecobhoy says:
August 23, 2014 at 11:56 am
19 1 Rate This

Ah well Richard Wilson’s fairly benign observations on Rangers financial position has removed him from the blue pantheon of SMSM poster boys and instantly cast him as yet another Rangers Hater on the Darkside. His fall from grace is attributed to his now taking the BBC shilling.
—————————————————————————-

Fairly benign indeed.
Very hesitant and understated too IMO…

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on5:29 pm - Aug 23, 2014


upthehoops says:
August 23, 2014 at 5:01 pm
6 1 Rate This
———-

SSB isn’t blocked in my region (Sportsound is on Saturday afternoon). I can tell you that this afternoon the idea of McCoist being linked with CP was openly mocked as being a story put about by one of Ally’s pals in the press.

So even SSB think it’s bollocks.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on5:32 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Crowd at Ibrox apparently just over 31,000. Biggest crowd of the day, obviously, but is it enough? (Can’t confirm the crowd figure, just read it elsewhere)

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on5:44 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Allyjambo says:
August 23, 2014 at 5:32 pm
2 0 Rate This

Crowd at Ibrox apparently just over 31,000. Biggest crowd of the day, obviously, but is it enough? (Can’t confirm the crowd figure, just read it elsewhere)
————

Aren’t they just adding walk-ups to the total sold STs? Perhaps 30,000+ also has a beneficial side effect for certain investors?

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on5:53 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Allyjambo says:
August 23, 2014 at 5:32 pm
————————————————————–
I am told that 30,000 is a break even point for the costs of running an event at a stadium of that size.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on6:01 pm - Aug 23, 2014


However the figures work, total STs sold plus walk-ups, or the actual people in attendance, the income from walk-ups must surely fall below what is required. Maybe, though, we shouldn’t debate this figure until we have confirmation. I maybe shouldn’t have posted it until I knew more about it’s source.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on6:04 pm - Aug 23, 2014


PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
August 23, 2014 at 5:53 pm

Is break-even enough for TRFC on a weekly basis? Asked Ally, tongue in cheek 😉

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on6:29 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Allyjambo says:
August 23, 2014 at 6:04 pm
————————————————————
Indeed.

An extra 20,000 Season Tickets would help.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on6:32 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Allyjambo says:
August 23, 2014 at 6:01 pm
1 0 Rate This

However the figures work, total STs sold plus walk-ups, or the actual people in attendance, the income from walk-ups must surely fall below what is required. Maybe, though, we shouldn’t debate this figure until we have confirmation. I maybe shouldn’t have posted it until I knew more about it’s source.
———-

SSB quoted the same figure, so it’s come from some official source. If there were 31,000, how badly run is a club that can’t make crowds like that work? I watched ICT today and they were very impressive, size and support taken into account. Also refused what looked like a stonewall. There’s one for the statisticians 🙂

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on6:48 pm - Aug 23, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
August 23, 2014 at 5:44 pm

DP, I’m sure I read (Phil’s blog?) that the figure was 40,000 after which certain people benefitted. Which might turn out to be one of the less onerous contracts 😉

View Comment

Comments are closed.