Podcast Episode 5 – Hibs Takeover ?

Avatar 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

Avatar

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

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on3:50 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Dearie me. Graham Spiers making a bit of a chump of himself on twitter regarding Phil’s blogs.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on3:56 pm - Sep 6, 2014


John Clark says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:17 pm
7 0 Rate This
———

‘Practical funds’ seems to suggest those available that can be dipped into. The ST money is surely still sitting there with a big fence around it?

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on3:57 pm - Sep 6, 2014


John Clark says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:17 pm

I don’t know if that is helpful, other than seeming to make clear that RIFC simply did not ‘budget’ for the possibility that Imran might win his case when it is heard in January/February, presumably because they think he has no case.
===============================================

This section is very interesting:

A little later on, Mr McB referred to previous affidavits in February and May in which phrases such as ” unbudgeted liability”, “non-budgeted”, and “irregular liability”, and Mr Wallace’s ” a liability not within budget”. NO provision was made [for the possibility Ahmad being successful in his claim].

@JC I wonder whether you got the impression that Ahmad’s claim was distinct and different from the ”unbudgeted liability”, “non-budgeted”, “irregular liability”, and ”a liability not within budget”.

Surely they can’t all refer to Imran’s claim so what other shockers are lying in wait beneath the surface?

Another thing I noticed from your transcript was the comment that the accounts won’t be presented till next month. Does that mean this share offer will go ahead without audited accounts being produced?

In the current circumstances I find it hard to understand how AIM can allow that. And, if so, why would anyone buy shares?

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on4:03 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:56 pm

‘Practical funds’ seems to suggest those available that can be dipped into. The ST money is surely still sitting there with a big fence around it?
=======================================
I really don’t think it is because if it was sitting there but not classed as ‘practical funds’ because it was ring-fenced it would still be relevant because it increases the source of income available to the club after each home game.

Appears there has been no mention of the income due to come in over the next few months to prove that Rangers is viable financially.

Maybe the projections are just too damning to release to the court although the figures might well be in the affidavits.

View Comment

Avatar

Hoopy 7Posted on4:12 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Good Afternoon
Still cannot fathom why no reference was made to any season ticket money.
TRFC have no money and owe RIFC upwards of £16 Million.

RIFC have only £1.2 Million in the bank and half of that will soon be ring fenced.

Even if a share issue is successful it will only pay outstanding liabilities and perhaps not all of them.

If the ST money has been used there will be a liability to HMRC.
I hope that HMRC are watching and are not stiffed again.

Now more than ever the SFA (don’t laugh)needs to ask serious questions of the directors and the company auditors to ascertain what the true position is.

Transparency is needed, the SFA should do their job and if the money is not there they should kick them out of the league.

The only way for a clean Rangers is to liquidate and come back into existence with proper people in charge who act with financial propriety.

The SFA cannot allow the spivs to keep running rounds them. It is not fair on the game and it is not fair on the many decent honest Rangers fans who just want to watch good footbal and for the past two years have been unable to do so.

If the present office bearers at the SFA are unable, unwilling or do not know what to do it is time for all of the clubs to get together and call an EGM to clear the incompetents out and get in people who can and are prepared to clean up the game.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on4:17 pm - Sep 6, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:57 pm

Another thing I noticed from your transcript was the comment that the accounts won’t be presented till next month. Does that mean this share offer will go ahead without audited accounts being produced?

In the current circumstances I find it hard to understand how AIM can allow that. And, if so, why would anyone buy shares?
=================
AIM aren’t interested because the share offer is confined to existing shareholders, no newcomers are involved.

Why would anyone buy the shares? Only to acquire voting rights, is my guess, with a view to ensuring that the pre-emption resolution goes ahead at the AGM. Presumably with a view to totally stiffing the minority shareholders (that’s the bears, by the way). Or am I getting too cynical in my old age?

View Comment

oddjob

oddjobPosted on4:27 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Hoopy7. Says

September 6. 2014 @4.12pm

HMRC should already be due the VAT, whether the season ticket money has been used or not.

The “tax point” is the date of sale. As soon as a season ticket is issued, the tax is due.

Years ago various clubs (including Celtic,under Wee Fergus),tried to have this system changed, arguing that the tax should not be remitted until each season voucher was used. Their approaches were rejected. Clubs collect the VAT and are required to remit that to HMRC in the appropriate accounting period. I would think that that time already be passed in TRFC`s case

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on4:56 pm - Sep 6, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 4:03 pm
0 0 Rate This

Danish Pastry says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:56 pm

‘Practical funds’ seems to suggest those available that can be dipped into. The ST money is surely still sitting there with a big fence around it?
=======================================
I really don’t think it is because if it was sitting there but not classed as ‘practical funds’ because it was ring-fenced it would still be relevant because it increases the source of income available to the club after each home game.

Appears there has been no mention of the income due to come in over the next few months to prove that Rangers is viable financially.

Maybe the projections are just too damning to release to the court although the figures might well be in the affidavits.
———-

Well, if Mr Nash was being completely candid it must almost be a first from newco and is to be applauded!

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on4:57 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Thanks to everyone who has posted valuable information and analysis over the last couple of days. I can honestly say I haven’t read the sports section of a scottish newspaper since I found this site.

On a side note, I would like to make the observation that there has been a growing recognition here of the suffering of Rangers fans, and a growing recognition that we are not all the unfortunate creatures who are unfortunately so prominent amongst our support. I’d like to thank the community for that and encourage it to continue.

View Comment

Avatar

mungoboyPosted on5:04 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Un chapeau bleu pour Ryan!

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on5:05 pm - Sep 6, 2014


And so matters apparently deteriorate at Ibrox.

I was trying to find some analogy to cover the silence from the SFA/SPFL on what has been announced formally by RIFC to AIM as part of the share issue and what transpired in Court on Friday.

It is like there is a bank robbery underway across the street from their offices with alarms going off, getaway cars screaming down the street and cop car sirens blaring.

At the same time the SFA/SPFL (and the MSM) sit in their cosy little offices seemingly oblivious to what is going on.

Where are the chief executives reassuring the footballing public that they have their fingers on the pulse and are ensuring fixtures are fulfilled? Guarantees are in place that ticket money owed will be paid? That the image of Scottish Football will not be tarnished further?

Are they really just sitting in their offices with their fingers in their ears and eyes closed?

Have they learned nothing from the failure of the previous club?

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Albert Einstein

Scottish Football needs a strong set of administrators doing the right things this time.

View Comment

Avatar

tilhotdogsbarkPosted on5:06 pm - Sep 6, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:57 pm

Another thing I noticed from your transcript was the comment that the accounts won’t be presented till next month.
——————-

Yes I noticed this as well. Completely at odds with Summers’ claim that the AGM (principally to endorse a further share issue) would proceed either this month or next month. I understand his remit is to paint a rosie picture but this and other comments like Rangers being the envy of a number of EPL clubs verges on lying to the court.

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on5:07 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Or alternatively, if the ST money is still there and distinct, Imran can arrest it as and when it falls due, no?

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on5:10 pm - Sep 6, 2014


neepheid says:
September 6, 2014 at 4:17 pm

ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:57 pm

Another thing I noticed from your transcript was the comment that the accounts won’t be presented till next month. Does that mean this share offer will go ahead without audited accounts being produced?

In the current circumstances I find it hard to understand how AIM can allow that. And, if so, why would anyone buy shares?
=================
AIM aren’t interested because the share offer is confined to existing shareholders, no newcomers are involved.

Why would anyone buy the shares? Only to acquire voting rights, is my guess, with a view to ensuring that the pre-emption resolution goes ahead at the AGM. Presumably with a view to totally stiffing the minority shareholders (that’s the bears, by the way). Or am I getting too cynical in my old age?
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Unless I’m getting even more cynical than ever, I would say you are spot on, and I made a very similar comment quite recently.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on5:44 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 4:57 pm
30 0 Rate This

Thanks to everyone who has posted valuable information and analysis over the last couple of days. I can honestly say I haven’t read the sports section of a scottish newspaper since I found this site.

On a side note, I would like to make the observation that there has been a growing recognition here of the suffering of Rangers fans, and a growing recognition that we are not all the unfortunate creatures who are unfortunately so prominent amongst our support. I’d like to thank the community for that and encourage it to continue.
———–

Well said Ryan.

View Comment

Avatar

Carfins FinestPosted on5:59 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 4:57 pm
30 0 Rate This

Ryan let me say firstly that I really do understand your pain having been through something similar in the 90’s with my Club.I, like you, and I suspect most of the contributors on this site have not lifted a copy of any daily paper for a very very long time. I feel a lot more informed since getting my information from sites such as this. Posters like your good self are the lifeblood of TSFM and I firmly believe that if we can get TRFC fans to buy into TSFM and its ethos then we may have a large enough fanbase to actually get the current seat warmers in the SFA to piss or get off the pot so to speak.

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on6:13 pm - Sep 6, 2014


So
Bears to buy shares to get through next month
Then more shares
To get to next season
Then more shares?

SHARES IN WHAT?

Assets unknown / Some `owners` secretive / Retail hived off / Naming rights for a quid / Onerous Contracts / and about the same again in unknowns we haven`t heard off yet.

On the bright side – fear no administration
Pesky inquiries and all that

Plus the CoS will likely throw the book at them after blowing nearly 70m [we`re told]

Fear no liquidation – as above

Spivs milking this as long as it lasts – then head for the tax free hills
Leaving taxpayer funded court cases for the next decade

Course the SFA could step in – but they`re useless
SMSM will wail and greet [pious insincere BS] – equally useless

Best tip is to end this fracas asap – Someone will step up to the plate

aka – not a cent more

Better sooner than later
This nonsense should have been nipped two years ago
mtp

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on6:23 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Hmmm. If the accounts are not going to be out until October they may struggle to have the AGM before November. Is it three weeks notice required, or four?

View Comment

Avatar

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on6:34 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:50 pm
4 0 Rate This

Dearie me. Graham Spiers making a bit of a chump of himself on twitter regarding Phil’s blogs.
———————————————————————————————–

Yes
That was brought to my attention.
Very unfortunate.
Graham is a nice guy.
If he read Downfall he would see that (I hope) I was very fair to him.

View Comment

Avatar

16 Sodium AtomsPosted on6:35 pm - Sep 6, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 1:22 pm

With regard to the arrestement. Is the money arrested in an account held by TRFC or one held by RIFC.

I am assuming Ahmad’s claim is against TRFC as that is the organisation he would have set up the contracts for, or is it. So it would be an account held by that company.

View Comment

scapaflow

scapaflowPosted on6:35 pm - Sep 6, 2014


scottc says:
September 6, 2014 at 6:23 pm

wouldn’t that push the share issue out to end of December at the earliest?

Hope the wee share issue takings are made of elastic!

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on6:44 pm - Sep 6, 2014


So TRFC lives to fight another day, or a few months ?

It seems inevitable that Admin. will happen, but the unknown is when.
TRFC seems to have outwitted most of us [?] by limping along this far already.

But for me, some of the more pertinent questions include;

– What planning has the SFA been doing – wrt TRFC’s expected demise -up to this point ?

– What will the SFA do in the event of a mid-season TRFC financial collapse ?

– When will the SFA drop the secrecy, and operate in a transparent and honest manner ?

– Does the SFA give a monkey’s about what the fans think ?
[rhetorical question of course].

– Do the other 41 SFA member clubs give a monkey’s about what the fans think ?
[with a few notable club exceptions, that is]

View Comment

Avatar

parttimearabPosted on6:47 pm - Sep 6, 2014


John Clark says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:17 pm
And
RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 4:57 pm
—————————–
Just catching up on the events of the last couple of days as on holiday 😀
Lots of good analysis as usual.
I’m not inclined to highlight posts unless I have something to add/disagree with but both of the above deserve plaudits.
Well done guys.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on7:29 pm - Sep 6, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 3:57 pm
‘..@JC I wonder whether you got the impression that Ahmad’s claim was distinct and different from the ”unbudgeted liability”, “non-budgeted”, “irregular liability”, and ”a liability not within budget”.’
——-
To be absolutely honest,in Court I was sure the judge simply wanted to know whther RIFC had thought” Ahmad might win his claim, so we’d better set his money aside.”
Reading yours and other posts last night, I began to wonder whether I might have missed part of the discussion which might have opened up into more general questions of ‘budgeting’ failure. But when I came to write my post I had become again convinced , because of the Judge’s earlier observation that it would have been helpful if Wallace’s plan had ‘included the £600 000’, that what Summers was finding out in the adjournment was whether RIFC’s budget planning had indeed made provision for Ahmad winning his claim.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on7:49 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Smugas says:
September 6, 2014 at 5:07 pm

Or alternatively, if the ST money is still there and distinct, Imran can arrest it as and when it falls due, no?
======================================
I very much doubt that the ST money would ever be legally ring-fenced and I think this whole concept is because it was something Deloittes said was advisable to protect the Board.

But the more I think about it I just don’t think it was done – how else has Rangers been surviving and don’t forget they sold the STs very early IIRC.

But I reckon if there’s any ST money in a Rangers bank account then Imran can arrest it although it would seem logical that he would serve his arrestment on the account disclosed to the court with the £1.2 or £1.5 million in it.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on7:51 pm - Sep 6, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 6, 2014 at 1:49 pm
“..If investigative, political and business journos had been involved from Day 1 it would have been much harder if not impossible to hide the brutal and dangerous (for some) facts emerging especially wrt the corruption destroying Scottish Football..”
———-
Is it too much, do you think, to hope that BDO are still ploughing away and may uncover some matters that need police or Stock exchange investigation into possible conspiracy to defraud? Or is that now as dead as a dead football club? Is there a journalist who would point-blank ask those authorities some questions which would elicit a response that categorically ruled out any possibility of criminal investigation into the whole sale, purchase, administration,new club switcheroo,apparently reckless ,but extremely favourable to the individual directors who offered them, contracts……etc etc?
Probably not, I suppose.
But we can live in hope.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on7:59 pm - Sep 6, 2014


PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
September 6, 2014 at 6:34 pm
13 0 Rate This

…Graham is a nice guy.
———

That’s my impression, and the reason why the comment was puzzling. Mind you, he probably reads more about gawf than fitba.

View Comment

Avatar

toadintheholePosted on8:12 pm - Sep 6, 2014


£1.5 million in the bank would suggest there’s not been any ring-fencing of the Season Ticket money. Or if there was, it’s since been de-ringed (un-ringed?) and spent. It may be that the VAT has been paid. Anyone know when it was due?

The auditor’s report in the accounts is going to be interesting – if this set of accounts are ever published that is.

View Comment

Avatar

16 Sodium AtomsPosted on8:44 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Does this “ring fencing” of the season ticket money actually mean anything.

What power does an auditor have to tell a business that it cannot spend money it has earned.

Surely the company employs the auditor. It’s a legal requirement for them to be audited but they can change the auditor if they want, so long as it is with someone licenced to do the job.

View Comment

Avatar

Paulmac2Posted on8:59 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Lets not forget..that when we believed there was only 200k left back in October 2011 and it looked like end game…Craigie kept then going until Feb 2012…nobody could work out how they were managing to carry on…we were not thinking like spivs…only then did we find out he had been using VAT and PAYE…

So in todays context…the auditors have advised them the season money cannot be used…forget it who will know?…until it has folded and only then made known…just a thought.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on9:16 pm - Sep 6, 2014


I suspect this may get me a few less thumbs up than my last post (!) but if I could just add my tuppence worth on the discussion previously brought on by Rhapsody In Blue’s comments regarding Phil Mac Giolla Bhain;

I’ll address this directly Phil as I know you are a member of this community which I value so dearly. There are Rangers fans, I’m sure, who ignore the message because of the messenger when it comes to you. I don’t. I think it is clear that you have direct sources within Rangers from who you get information, and when you get it wrong I do not believe you have made anything up, I think it is more likely that you have written based on information you have been given from trustworthy sources who have perhaps not known the full picture. However, I often read what you have to say while gritting my teeth; it is not the message you deliver which I have a problem with, it is your hatred of me and people like me which turns me off. I think you have talent as a journalist in getting stories which others have missed, but I think if you continue to be so partisan in your writing you will continue to turn people against you. I understand that it is a particular section of the Rangers support which you have issue with, understandably, but all I can tell you is how it comes across to me and I don’t feel comfortable reading some of your articles.

It’s just my view, you can counter, take it on board or disregard as you please of course.

View Comment

Avatar

16 Sodium AtomsPosted on9:18 pm - Sep 6, 2014


That’s my point Paul, it’s their money, surely they can spend it if they want.

Well other than the money which Ahmad arrests. That is still their money, they just can’t spend that. Even if they want to. The bank will have an arrestment order from the Court of Session and as I understand it will place that money into a suspense account until the order is lifted or Ahmad wins.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on9:30 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Ecobhoy

You misunderstand my point. It’s not to remove history. It is to recognise it as others see it and there bye open up the possibility that they will be as unhappy about it as others are.

That then means we are all on the same integrity song sheet.

As it is they say neether and we say neither.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:32 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:16 pm

Strange that you would put yourself through the anguish you describe by reading articles written by someone you allege hates you. Have you any actual proof that anyone hates you?

I can only speak for myself but I wouldn’t be in the least bit interested in reading anything written by someone who hates me just like I wouldn’t read anything I wasn’t comfortable with.

If you have such a personal beef with anyone why not use the PM facility – I have done so on several occasions to try and resolve issues that have arisen which I feel have been becoming too personalised on the open blog.

View Comment

Avatar

occamPosted on9:42 pm - Sep 6, 2014


One man’s schandenfreud is another man’s truth……

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on9:43 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Ecobhoy,

As was clear in my comment, I read Phil’s articles because I believe he has facts and is putting across information which is worthwhile knowing. For that reason, I am willing to temporarily suspend my unease at Phil’s dislike for people of my sympathies. And since you ask for evidence, I suggest your read Phil’s articles. He is not subtle on his dislike of Rangers and their fans, with the clear subtext that it is a particular section of Rangers fans he has issue with, and Phil I am sure if you read this you will agree with me. I am happy to be corrected if wrong, you are after all the only one who knows definitively what you mean when you write.

View Comment

Avatar

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on9:44 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:16 pm
———————————————————-
“it is your hatred of me and people like me…”
Ryan, I have no idea what you mean by that-some evidence might not be amiss at this point.
A strong allegation to make on a public forum.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on9:44 pm - Sep 6, 2014


16 Sodium Atoms says:
September 6, 2014 at 8:44 pm
2 0 Rate This

Does this “ring fencing” of the season ticket money actually mean anything.
===============
I don’t think it does. There is certainly no formal ring fencing, like an escrow account or client account, for instance. Deloittes may have indicated that ST money should not be used up front, or they might qualify the accounts, but we’ve already been there last year with the mysterious vanishing loan facility- now you see it, now you don’t, and you especially don’t see it when you actually need it.

The figure put to the court yesterday will be the actual bank balance in the TRFC account. Subject to Tuesday’s appeal, £650k of that is now ring fenced. With only £1.5m in the bank, before the ring fencing, the cash position is now terminal. Unless the directors know that some more cash is arriving before pay day, they should shut up shop tomorrow. I suspect there actually is some cash on the way-but at what price? It won’t be cheap.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on9:46 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Meant to include in my previous post ecobhoy, I did not use the private message facility on this occasion because I was commenting on a discussion which had taken place on the public blog. If I had an issue to raise directly with Phil then I would have done so, but I am not the one who raised the subject and I will not raise the subject privately with Phil, as he is perfectly free to write whatever he pleases.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:47 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Auldheid says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:30 pm

Ecobhoy

You misunderstand my point. It’s not to remove history. It is to recognise it as others see it and there bye open up the possibility that they will be as unhappy about it as others are.

That then means we are all on the same integrity song sheet.

As it is they say neether and we say neither.

==============================================
No I didn’t misunderstand you but perhaps I phrased my response badly. I was postulating on what I saw would be the ultimate sticking point and I wasn’t actually specifically meaning the issue of title stripping but more the old club history in general and whether the new club envisaged would keep that or not.

Obviously the bulk of the history would be non-controversial but obviously differences could arise over titles won during the DOS/EBT periods. But if they were to be excluded then it would take the setting-up of another LNS ‘style’ process and I just don’t see that happening.

That’s where I see the stumbling block arising and I genuinely can’t see how the impasse can be overcome in a way which is acceptable to both sides. Obviously that stage would be a good bit down the road and perhaps trust could be built in earlier stages. But it most certainly won’t be easy to achieve agreement IMO.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on9:52 pm - Sep 6, 2014


PhilMacGiollaBhain, I apologise if I was incorrect, and I realise it is a strong allegation to make. However I did not make it likely and do not consider it so much an allegation as an observation. I am fairly confident that you would not disagree with me if I say that you very much do not like Rangers, and that you have write regularly in disparaging tones about Rangers fans. Of which I am one. And this is where I get the evidence for the statement I made. If you think I am wrong then please do correct me, but given things you have written previously I would find it surprising if you did. Further, please bear in mind that I made my initial post to defend your journalism. I am not a Rangers fan having a dig at you because I am a Rangers fan. I think you do a good job of reporting facts as I said previously.

View Comment

Avatar

occamPosted on9:54 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Flippancy aside – it is hard to believe that any genuine fan of the beautiful game who also happened to frequent IP as a matter of choice can continue to give any credence to or attempt to justify the existence of the entity currently plying its nefarious intentions from the aforementioned venue. :mrgreen:

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on10:03 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Ecobhoy, one last thing (welcome back by the way!)

You said: “I can only speak for myself but I wouldn’t be in the least bit interested in reading anything written by someone who hates me just like I wouldn’t read anything I wasn’t comfortable with.”

Yet just yesterday and on many other occasions so many posters here have been saying how Rangers fans should just have come here or gone to Phil’s blog and they would have had all the information they needed about the coming crisis. And here you are today implying that you would not have visited similar sites under similar circumstances (I’m not suggesting that TSFM is anti Rangers, I have been quite clear on this subject many times previously).

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:09 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:43 pm
=======================================
I find this interlude very strange indeed and have no intention of being drawn into it. I just simply feel it’s totally OTT to accuse someone by name of hating you and not to provide any proof to back it up.

I’ll leave things there as I see the person you were accusing has also asked for proof which I think he has every right to do. Whether you provide it or not is up to you obviously.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on10:11 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Phil / Eco

Evidence as requested.

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the-incubator/

View Comment

Matty Roth

Matty RothPosted on10:24 pm - Sep 6, 2014


What galls me most of all, as we watch events unfold that just might be the end of a second Rangers club in a so many years, where are the SFA?

Not a peep from them on any of this?

No statements to say they have been on conversation with TRFC? No reassurances they will work to avoid another disaster?

We all know they played a huge part in allowing this mess to hit the fan, but now they add insult to injury by their complete silence on these astonishing, and rather sad goings on.

It really is shocking how they have closed their eyes to goings on at both Rangers of old and the new club. Rules are not applied. No control. Not even the merest expectation of financial sanity.

They are killing this club with their “kindness”.

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on10:32 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Ryan, I don’t hate anyone. I can say that with conviction. I may hate what they do and the consequences of these actions. I may hate their philosophies and proclamations. I do not hate the people who display these feelings.
I think hate is a really difficult, tiring emotion to sustain when it comes to most decent people.

“hate the sin and not the sinner” Mohandas Gandhi’s 1929 autobiography.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:42 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 10:03 pm

And here you are today implying that you would not have visited similar sites under similar circumstances
================================================================
I implied nothing of the sort Ryan. I clearly stated: ‘I wouldn’t be in the least bit interested in reading anything written by someone who hates me just like I wouldn’t read anything I wasn’t comfortable with’.

The sites I vist – no matter the circumstances – has nothing to do with the statement I made and I actually object to you putting words into my mouth which are incorrect.

I might visit a site where I profoundly disagree with some of the opinions expressed but that doesn’t make me think that the people expressing them hate me as an individual. They are entitled to their views as long as they aren’t breaking the law.

And that really is my last word on the subject unless you again misrepresent my position when I will respond to set the record straight.

View Comment

Avatar

16 Sodium AtomsPosted on10:47 pm - Sep 6, 2014


neepheid says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:44 pm

That makes sense to me.

The Court can “ring fence” money via an order. I don’t see how an auditor can, other than possibly via a threat of what they will put in their audit report should the client not agree. Mayhap an accountant can comment on that.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofthousandsPosted on10:49 pm - Sep 6, 2014


RyanGosling says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:52 pm

“…have write regularly in disparaging tones about Rangers fans.”
——————————
I’d agree that Phil’s terminology can sometimes be rather disparaging concerning Rangers fans and at other times downright incendiary but I’ll humbly try and add a bit of context that I hope will be helpful.

There are occasionally links from TSFM to Bill McMurdo’s site or Mark Dingwall’s. The articles referenced are not always the most measured so I have had the opportunity to read disparaging language that I think might have been aimed at me, a Celtic fan. I don’t actually think either of these two guys hate me. We could unwittingly bump into each other in the street, not knowing each other and act as respectfully as can be imagined; and I know this is obvious. What is in play is a mindset on behalf of both sides of the community that has led to an automatic reaction of distrust. We were not born with this, it has been taught to us.

When I was a youngster I didn’t have a real passion for football but was surrounded by people that did. You could not escape the Celtic-Rangers rivalry but you did not have to get caught up in it and I tried not to. It was only much later that I found that I was reacting in an automatic manner to be distrustful of Rangers fans. This was part of the society I lived in and completely illogical. Yet it existed and the rivalry is renowned for all manner of reasons.

As this is a football blog politics is generally off limits but in this case it is necessary to touch upon the topic.

Whether it be justified or not, the community from which Celtic draws the majority of its support feels that it is in some way an under dog. This is no different to the situation that exists between Real Madrid and Barcelona where Real are the establishment club and Barcelona the upstart Catalans, or Boca Juniors – River Plate in Argentina where I believe there is a similar class based rivalry. Of course these rivalries are largely artificial today since all these teams will have supporters from across the class spectrum but memory of the heritage persists. In the case of Barcelona there is that added element of Catalan self determination that might be viewed as mildly treacherous by Spaniards as a whole but which is tolerated since it has its own reasons for existing.

It is part of the colour and spectacle of football that it encompasses these complex rivalries and allows them to be vented in a sporting arena rather than elsewhere. However the rivalries are a symptom that some contention; real or imagined, ancient or modern, legitimate or synthetic, that actually exists.

I am not an apologist for Phil as he can hold his own corner. However when I read his cutting phrases I try to put them in context; just like if I were reading Mark Dingwall’s or Bill McMurdo’s articles. I don’t think Phil hates Rangers supporters. I think he is expressing revulsion for the characteristics of certain factions of the support that has attached itself to certain ideas.

I had hoped to be able to express a helpful resolution to your own consternation but I feel I will fall short. Maybe you should post on Phil’s site and take issue with him there.

View Comment

Avatar

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on10:55 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Castofthousands says:
September 6, 2014 at 10:49 pm
—————————————————————-
“I don’t think Phil hates Rangers supporters. I think he is expressing revulsion for the characteristics of certain factions of the support that has attached itself to certain ideas.”

Exactly right…

View Comment

Avatar

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on11:09 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Castofthousands says:
September 6, 2014 at 10:49 pm
————————————————————
“Maybe you should post on Phil’s site and take issue with him there.”
Ryan is more than welcome and-IMO-it would be the more appropriate space to raise his concerns.

Agreed. Now please let the matter be closed here.
TSFM

View Comment

Avatar

hectorPosted on11:41 pm - Sep 6, 2014


Post above was before I saw the TSFM post. treat as you think best. 😳 .

Thanks Hector 🙂
TSFM

View Comment

Avatar

essexbeancounterPosted on11:49 pm - Sep 6, 2014


16 Sodium Atoms says:

September 6, 2014 at 10:47 pm

neepheid says:
September 6, 2014 at 9:44 pm

That makes sense to me.

The Court can “ring fence” money via an order. I don’t see how an auditor can, other than possibly via a threat of what they will put in their audit report should the client not agree. Mayhap an accountant can comment on that.
=====================================================================
Whilst I cannot comment on the legal aspects of “ring fencing” sums of money”, but as regards the audit aspect my interpretation would be as follows:
1) Where an amount of money has been “ring fenced” by a court and is unpaid at the end of the accounting period, the directors would be duty bound to include this in the financial accounts. Failure to do so would provoke at least a mention in the audit report, if not, an outright qualified audit report, and certainly if the amount is deemed material. Needless to say, £620k or thereabouts is most certainly material in the accounts of TRFC
2) As posted by John Clark and others much earlier, no auditor can dictate how a client company spends its cash resources. The point in question wrt to the season ticket monies was probably an informal communication from Deloittes that they would expect that these funds, representing a full season’s income, should be spent in the course of that season, and not blown in the first week or month of the season, as appears to be mooted here. This may have initiated a conversation between TFC and Deloittes as to the perennial “going concern” aspect of the audit report and any likely qualification.

View Comment

Barcabhoy

BarcabhoyPosted on12:09 am - Sep 7, 2014


The conversation between the Sons of Struth and Radio Clyde got me thinking. The SOS guy is clearly a genuine passionate guy who only wants the best for his club. All clubs need guys like him.

However he exposed a serious contradiction in Kings claims. Here is what i said to him via twitter

…………..
@SonsofStruth Dave King. There’s a contradiction here. I heard the podcast of your call to Clyde. I have to give you credit for making your points well and cogently. I would though advise some caution on Dave Kings claims of investing £30 million .

The link below outlines the basis for a takeover of a plc , including AIM companies. There is no opportunity to conduct due diligence beyond what is already in the public domain.

http://us.practicallaw.com/1-561-9326

I’m sure Dave King knows that. Which raises the question of why he demanded to get access to non public information before considering investing in the£4 million issue. He would have known that there was no chance of getting that information.

Equally if he won’t invest a percentage of £4 million without access to non public data, why would he invest £30 million . He won’t get the information thats not in the public domain. Nobody will. King is conflicted here. He has made a fundamental error . He will have to invest £30 million based on the public data and nothing else. He’s already rejected that possibility.

I think you may have to consider the possibility he’s been duping the Rangers support

View Comment

The Cat NR1

The Cat NR1Posted on12:17 am - Sep 7, 2014


Regarding the “ring fencing” of the season ticket money, I suspect that it is purely a case of balance sheet matching, rather than any physical action that is being spoken about.

The balance sheet will contain an amount within current liabilities for deferred income that relates to the season ticket income received in advance. Current assets will contain a balance for cash at bank and in hand, which will be derived from various sources one of which will be the season ticket receipts.

I think that the point that the auditors are making is that the deferred income liability should not be seen to exceed the cash at bank and in hand asset that is matched to that liability, in order to demonstrate a viable going concern. Recent reports seem to suggest that they have gone way beyond that point.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on12:52 am - Sep 7, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
September 7, 2014 at 12:09 am

King is conflicted here. He has made a fundamental error . He will have to invest £30 million based on the public data and nothing else. He’s already rejected that possibility.

I think you may have to consider the possibility he’s been duping the Rangers support.
=====================================================
IMO, King is indeed a curious character.

And I fully believe he will have nothing to do with any ‘Rangers’ in future. I am convinced he is a publicity seeker, and perhaps likes the fans’ adulation and MSM portrayal of King as saviour/Sugar Daddy waiting in the wings.

IMO, King is a total bullsh*tter wrt TRFC. But I could of course be wrong. 😉

He got his fingers well and truly burned with the SA tax authorities, and regardless of his true net worth, it must have been painful for him to liquidate positions to generate GBP42 Million cash to pay his fines, [IIRC, and I’m assuming he has paid this amount.]

To then further liquidate GBP30M of positions to generate the cash to ‘invest’ in a loss making football club is a decision he would not make. And he has been clear in the past the it’s other people’s money he would be looking to raise to ‘invest’ in TRFC.

And then there is the question of King’s original investment in RFC and whether he did get his GBP10M back ? [can’t remember]

I honestly think that King just likes the attention, so is quite happy for the MSM to continually refer to him as almost the ‘saviour of last resort’. Never going to happen.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on1:09 am - Sep 7, 2014


Ecobhoy

It would take a while for sure but not once the first step was taken.

The delay is in taking that first step. Once that happens there will be no need for any LNS type event which was but a reinforcement of denial and justification.

That step would lead to a metanoia as night follows day, a total change of mood music.

As a collective that seems impossible but if you read Cygnus post there was agreement at an individual level.

It just needs that kind of gathering to repeat itself between friends who support Celtic or TRFC for momentum towards that first step to grow and that should be encouraged.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on1:15 am - Sep 7, 2014


Matty Roth says:
September 6, 2014 at 10:24 pm
‘.. where are the SFA? ‘
——-
In an absolute funk, I would imagine.

Paralysed by the inability of their President to come to grips with harsh reality. That man must EITHER stand down immediately to allow of the possibility of a real leader emerging, OR himself make a public statement about how the SFA will handle the football business of Scotland IF ( not yet necessarily ‘when’) the football club playing as TRFC cannot field a team to meet its fixture obligations.

It would be astonishing, incredible, if every chairman of a Championship league club has not already been squealing to the SFA board to tell them what exactly the contingency plans are to meet the possible scenarios that the (now very likely) ‘insolvency’ of RIFC plc/TRFC will present.
We on this broad-based blog are now ‘experienced’ enough in these matters to know, broadly, the range of possibilities that arises as soon as the club enters Administration. So is the SFA Board.

That Board should forthwith reassure us, their ultimate paymasters, that they have plans in place to eliminate risk of absolute chaos in the whole running of the league and cup set-up for the rest of the season, with the integrity of the game, rather than commercial considerations, the principle to be adhered to.
AND, most importantly,they should spell out what those plans are, so that we can keep them right as far as Sporting Integrity is concerned.

View Comment

Avatar

John ClarkPosted on2:09 am - Sep 7, 2014


StevieBC says:
September 7, 2014 at 12:52 am
‘..IMO, King is indeed a curious character.’
——–
I suspect that not a few of us are similarly ‘curious’ characters!
Who among us but has not secretly wished to wear the camel-hair coat and wave to our fans as we take our place at home games in our ‘majority shareholder’s’ box with our invited guests!
I, personally, can well understand how someone might blow his lottery winnings on that fantasy!

But guys who ‘make’ their money, for example,basic Castlemilk council house guys ( although in far better council housing than I ever was!) have savvy enough to know that there might be ways of indulging in their fantasy without spending any of their own money, or relatively little.

King will try to calculate precisely the right time to pick up the assets in an admin sale, fronting a consortium of people who will provide a lot of the cash, with King spending only just enough of his own dosh to become the majority shareholder.
He wants to be King Dave of Rangers-on the cheap. No doubt.
But he’s got to get round the ‘fit and proper’ test.And that must annoy the hell out of him.
I think he is still very much in the background, and I would love it if a Chick Young or some such would ask the SFA Board if they have been in communication with him in recent weeks.

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on2:56 am - Sep 7, 2014


If RCO and Stewart Regan had not finagled a “soft-landing”for the wreck of SDM’S club (with the expense of very high charging lawyers and other corporate advisers, Craigie, and Charlie and Imran and others could not have countenanced making so much money out of the dead and once again dying club.
As far as I know RCO and SR are still in post.

Unbelievable

Who is now protecting them?

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on7:38 am - Sep 7, 2014


What constitutes a Scottish football club being reported to be in ‘crisis?’

So far this year, indeed this season, I have read one newspaper (Daily Mail) claiming a Scottish football club is in ‘crisis’. It wasn’t the club from Ibrox.

So again I ask, What constitutes a Scottish football club being reported to be in ‘crisis?’

View Comment

Avatar

sickofitallPosted on8:49 am - Sep 7, 2014


THE beleaguered Rangers board was plunged into a fresh financial crisis on Friday when former director Imran Ahmad won a court order to freeze £620,000 of the club’s dwindling cash reserves.

8 Shares
Share
Tweet
+1
Email
SNS GroupA turbulent week at Ibrox has put the club’s future once again at risk.
RANGERS face an instant SPFL disciplinary investigation if they fail to pay their players and coaching staff at the end of the month, it was revealed last night.

Former director Imran Ahmad’s court victory on Friday, freezing £620,000 of the club’s dwindling £1.2million cash reserves, leaves the beleaguered Gers board struggling to make payroll.

Now, if they default, rules introduced two years ago on the back of Hearts’ problems leave them no wriggle room.

The potential punishments only apply to the club defaulting on its football wages, not an administrative salaries they have.

However with their staff due their cash in the bank on September 25, the last Thursday of the month, sources believe they could be cutting it neat with a monthly burden of around £700,000 to meet.

Regulations E17 and E19, introduced by the old SPL and carried into the new SPFL rulebook, cover any breaches of remuneration to players, coaches and management.

Any default will be hit by an instant registration embargo.

They will also then be subject to disciplinary procedures, which allow the governing body sanctions ranging from a slap on the wrist to docked points to exclusion from the league.

The Ibrox club’s hopes of avoiding that scenario now rest with the success of their forthcoming £4m share offer, although from that figure, they’ll have to deduct a six-figure sum for costs plus £1m to cover the loan given to them by businessman George Letham.

Director Sandy Easdale claimed in our sister paper the Daily Record in midweek that he wouldn’t be calling in the £500,000 he had lent.

However Mailsport understands Letham, who has already given the club one extension on the terms he agreed, which saw his loan fall due from season ticket money, is adamant he’ll now take what he is due because he would rather have his cash back than be left with the car park his money is secured against.

Rangers also no longer have any regular retail income following their decision to outsource that branch of their business to Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct, a move revealed earlier this week when 51 staff from their stores were TUPE’d acros to the the billionaire’s company payroll.

It’s believed that although SFA rules prevent the Newcastle United owner extending his shareholding in the club, he could yet bail them out with loan payments to tide them through the coming months. The potential cost of those, both financially and to the club’s powerbase, is still unclear.

View Comment

Avatar

16 Sodium AtomsPosted on8:57 am - Sep 7, 2014


John Clark says:
September 7, 2014 at 2:09 am

Perhaps he has already been told that the “fit and proper person” status is a non starter.

He was a director of Rangers for a protracted period in the run up to it’s sale to a charlatan who was banned from being a director of a company in the UK, but did it anyway. A man who subsequently failed to pay around £14m in social taxes leading to the company’s administration and liquidation. A man who has lost a court case relating to over £20m he conned out of Ticketus.

King himself was convicted of 41 counts of tax fraud involving tens of millions of pounds. He pled guilty to it in a deal where he has agreed to pay those tens of millions back, rather than face 82 years in a South African prison.

How in the name of goodness could this man be described as “fit and proper”. It beggars belief that it is even a discussion point.

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on9:03 am - Sep 7, 2014


sickofitall says:
September 7, 2014 at 8:49 am

“Rangers also no longer have any regular retail income following their decision to outsource that branch of their business to Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct, a move revealed earlier this week when 51 staff from their stores were TUPE’d acros to the the billionaire’s company payroll.”
——————————————-

Could Ashley have required RIFC to pass over a sum equivalent to the redundancy exposure he now has? Could that be the ‘unbudgeted liability’?

TUPE would still apply but Ashley would be cushioned from those costs hitting his bottom line if he or someone else pulled the plug on RIFC/TRFC.

He’s a smart operator, much sharper than those he’s had to deal with at Ibrox I suspect.

Getting concerned that this saga is turning us into spiv-like thinkers! 😯

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on9:03 am - Sep 7, 2014


It’s believed that although SFA rules prevent the Newcastle United owner extending his shareholding in the club, he could yet bail them out with loan payments to tide them through the coming months. The potential cost of those, both financially and to the club’s powerbase, is still unclear.

An extract from the Sunday Mail article posted above. Can someone translate for me, please? What is the club’s “powerbase”, and how can a loan cost it?

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on9:11 am - Sep 7, 2014


Neepheed – re your query…

My interpretation is Wonga-level loans and riding roughshod over the fans whilst milking them at the same time.

So what’s new? Meet the new boss, same as the old boss….

But they do get fooled, time and time again.

Scottish Football needs financial education classes for the Bears. They are in something akin to a Bear market but don’t seem to realise that is not a good thing!

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on9:16 am - Sep 7, 2014


redlichtie says:
September 7, 2014 at 9:03 am

Not sure Ashley or anyone needs to be that smart.

The problem is that for a number of years the situation down Govan Way has been so desperate that anyone with half a brain and a bit of spare cash could work a deal and dictate conditions in their favour.

View Comment

neepheid

neepheidPosted on9:23 am - Sep 7, 2014


What I believe is likely to happen on Tuesday is that Rangers QC will turn up in court with an affidavit from a prominent shareholder to the effect that he has applied for all available unsold shares in the current offer, so in effect underwriting the issue. That will guarantee £4m in the bank within a week.

That is really the only way the share offer can succeed, in my opinion. And the only way the circus can continue, other than selling what remains of the the assets to Ashley next week at knockdown prices and subject to onerous leases.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:51 am - Sep 7, 2014


Auldheid says:
September 7, 2014 at 1:09 am

@Auldheid

At the end of the day it really isn’t something that should happen – it is essential for it to happen IMO for the wider good of Scotland which is far more important than even football.

The parallel I look to is the progress made in NI which I never thought I would see in my lifetime. It isn’t perfect by any means and there is a long way to go but the long march to progress has begun.

If that can be achieved in NI then surely people of good intent can do the same here but firstly we need to clear-out the corrupt within the governance of Scottish Football and elect politicians who have the courage to actually eradicate the old tribalism that exists and blights our country to its eternal shame.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:56 am - Sep 7, 2014


neepheid says:
September 7, 2014 at 9:03 am

Can someone translate for me, please? What is the club’s “powerbase”
===========================================
The ‘powerbase’ is the company that cuts off the leccie when you’ve been put on a pre-payment meter and have no £1 coins left to feed it ❗

View Comment

Avatar

davythelotionPosted on10:01 am - Sep 7, 2014


neepheid says:
September 7, 2014 at 9:23 am
>>>>>>>
If TRIFC turn up with an underwriter on Tuesday, surely someone will ask where have you been up ’til now?

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:06 am - Sep 7, 2014


Barcabhoy says:
September 7, 2014 at 12:09 am

The conversation between the Sons of Struth and Radio Clyde got me thinking. The SOS guy is clearly a genuine passionate guy who only wants the best for his club. All clubs need guys like him.

However he exposed a serious contradiction in Kings claims. Here is what i said to him via twitter.
==========================================
I would agree with you on technical terms. But if journalists can be shown/given such information all the time as are people that a company desires to entice on board as major shareholders.

We are looking at a company which is in desperate financial straits and it might be thought by some cynics 😆 that a lot of rule bending has previously been undertaken so I’m not so sure that this little deviation which would probably ‘save’ the company wouldn’t be taken.

And then my even more cynical mind thinks – if spivs were to be getting their hands on a £30 million bonanza – would they be caring about AIM rules & regs especially if it was a golden cheerio moment?

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on10:11 am - Sep 7, 2014


ecobhoy says:
September 7, 2014 at 9:51 am

but firstly we need to clear-out the corrupt within the governance of Scottish Football and elect politicians who have the courage to actually eradicate the old tribalism that exists and blights our country to its eternal shame.
______________________________________________________________
Yes indeed ecobhoy. But that would require integrity, humility, fairness and decency, all of which seems to be lacking in those in power.

View Comment

Avatar

fara1968Posted on10:28 am - Sep 7, 2014


neepheid says:
September 7, 2014 at 9:23 am
4 0 Rate This

What I believe is likely to happen on Tuesday is that Rangers QC will turn up in court with an affidavit from a prominent shareholder to the effect that he has applied for all available unsold shares in the current offer, so in effect underwriting the issue. That will guarantee £4m in the bank within a week.
/////////////////////////////////////////
I’m not to sure but could this happen? They are appealing on the basis of “an error in law” I’m not sure new evidence would be allowed or prove any error in the original judgement. Friday was there chance to provide such evidence and they failed in that respect.

View Comment

Comments are closed.