“Anyone read Michael Grant’s article in The Times? Only saw a pull-quote but the headline is about not everyone cheering for Celtic to European success since the financial windfall will put them too far ahead of the other clubs. It’s that old UEFA distribution thingy. Auldheid had a sensible alternative a while back.”
Thanks Danish Pastry for giving Big Pink the opportunity to nudge me (over a coffee I paid for – so how’s that for redistribution of income? 🙂 ) to blog again on the issue of redistribution of UEFA money whilst he was advocating gate sharing as an alternative.
I recall the redistribution debate being discussed on the first TSFM podcast Episode 1-01 of 9th Feb 2014 which can be found here:
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/scottish-football-monitor/id817766886?mt=2
Listening to it again (I used “View in I Tunes”) I heard many of the recent comments on the previous blog being made in that podcast at or around:
9.58: The interdependent nature of the business of football. Why it is different from normal business.
10.50: Celtic/Rangers leaving the Scottish League making it immediately more competitive.
11.30: Clubs as a community resource (like museums or libraries not run for profit, providing a community service and staying solvent).
12.48: People have to let go of the notions that they have held about the nature of football and recognise it is a totally interdependent business.
13.55: Changing the Champions League format to European and Regional Leagues and raising the standard of all, not dropping standards of one to bring about competiveness.
25.50: A rethink at the top level with NEW thinking about redistribution of income using Champions League money.
27.50: The human dilemma.
So rather than repeat what was said originally and very well developed in the comments on the Michael Grant article on the previous blog, I thought I would look at what I think is the greatest barrier to change which was the last item above – the human dilemma. *
Modern football reminds me of a description of a scene from hell where a visitor looks into one room and sees an emaciated group around a table on which is set a large pot full of stew. They cannot eat because their arms have been set straight at the elbow and elongated so that they cannot get a spoon in their mouths. It is a miserable place. Then the visitor goes upstairs and enters a similar room with occupants similarly handicapped, but where everyone is well fed and contented. “How can this be?” he asks his guide. “Well downstairs all their energies are spent in the nigh impossible task of feeding their insatiable hunger, whilst up here they simply feed each other.”
The analogy is bent a little but not broken in the sense that there are fat and emaciated folk in the football version of the lower room but it is not a healthy place as the fat can themselves become emaciated over time (see Liverpool and even Man Utd) but, generally speaking, self-interest or rather what is perceived as self-interest, holds sway.
Human nature that causes the human dilemma is well reflected in normal business where dog eats dog, then eats the food of the dog it ate if it comes out top dog. Football however cannot exist on a dog eat dog basis because it is interdependent as a business. Dog eating dog is bad for business because over a period of time even the top dog will die of starvation.
Now without abusing the dog metaphor any further and risk attracting dog’s abuse, why is it that something which should be as self-evident as looking after each other is good for business, be such a hard sell?
I said in the podcast around 12.48 that folk need to let go of the notions they have clung on to about football, but why is that so difficult?
Perhaps the resistance to that change can be found, at least in the case of Celtic, who at present are asked in the current debate to make a sacrifice for others, either in the form of gate sharing or giving up some Champion Leagues winnings (if/when they qualify) can be found in the genesis of the club and the memory of that genesis passed from generation to generation.
Everyone knows that the original purpose that Brother Walfrid had for Celtic was to feed the poor in the East End of Glasgow and many of that poor had come from Ireland to be strangers in a strange land.
As a Calton man born in the Gallowgate, as was my grandfather (my dad was found under a cabbage in Well St) I’ve never really identified much with the Irish context of Celtic’s history, although I do recognise its importance to many supporters with Irish family ties, but that dimension adds a further layer to the human dilemma.
Think of it, you form a football club to raise money to feed yourself because you live in an environment where welcome mats are in short supply. That money raised is YOUR money. Your life depends on it as does your family’s as well as your close neighbour (usually in the same close). How prepared are you to share what income you have had to raise yourself with others who you believe have been less than charitable towards you?
Add that folk memory to the human selfish trait of wanting what you spend on football spent on meeting your own desire, which is to make you happy watching an entertaining and successful team on the park and you get an idea of where the resistance to a more equitable sharing comes from and how deep it goes.
I use Celtic here because they are my club and part of my life experience and I have no idea if other clubs experience that added layer of resistance to sharing, if indeed they are in position to share. But if we are ever to be able to introduce gate sharing or what I see as the easier alternative of redistribution of UEFA geld because in not coming direct from supporters pockets it has less of the Celtic folk memory layer to overcome, then those who will be asked to make a sacrifice have to be given the confidence that the aim is not to impoverish them (and the Celtic community memory of poverty and fighting it is as strong today in the form of The Celtic Foundation, The Kano Foundation and the numerous charity events organised by supporters and prominent blogs) but to enrich their neighbours, but doing so in such a way that they enrich themselves. That is the challenge.
In the upper room in the earlier hellish description, the occupiers present the ultimate example of charity in that in feeding each other they feed themselves.
- PS the podcast covers other issues that some 18 months later might still be of interest.
UTH
Depends on the loan agreement. If something is repayable on demand and a breach of condition can be proven then the lack of money is not Ashley’s problem, indeed it’s the reason for the ring fencing action. But no-one has shown the exact repayment terms, albeit I find an absence of repayment terms unusual to say the least!
Put it this way. If there is not a repayment term it is not an oversight. There is a reason for it!
Now that charges have been laid regarding both the 2011 and 2012 transactions, I totally agree that we must be careful not to comment.
However I feel safe (I hope!) in simply pasting here what is in this morning’s Daily Record, which is a direct quote from Paul Kavanagh, Craig Whyte’s lawyer.
The article also mentions that it is understood that BBC journalist Mark Daly has been questioned by police as a witness.
Methilhill Stroller says:
Member: (105 comments)
September 1, 2015 at 11:40 pm
‘.. And something that keeps niggling me was [A]lly at the airport with herself from France. Connections tied to any of the above or something different.’
______________
On 7th August, when the picture first appeared of the ‘Gardener’ escorting Mr G’s adviser at the airport, I emailed said adviser, to ask whether the picture was genuine.
As expected, I received no reply.
Until 31st August at 2.31 pm.
That email simply said: “who are you?”
I didn’t see that reply until about 10.00 a.m on 1st September, by which time we knew that CG was to be questioned by the polis.
I replied at 10.10 am that day, as follows:
“Hallo,
I’m nobody important in the grand scheme of things.
Like thousands of other Scottish Football supporters, I was appalled when the Scottish Football Association failed to expel Rangers Football Club when the extent of the cheating by Sir David Murray became known, and was further enraged at the ‘5-way agreement’, under which Charles Green’s new club was allowed into Scottish Football and permitted to claim to be the dead Rangers!
I rejoice that 4 men are currently charged with fraudulent activity, and that, according to a BBC Scotland online news bulletin yesterday evening, M. Green is to be questioned by Police Scotland today, and may face criminal charges too.
Anyone and anything connected with that rotten football club has come under the microscope.
And I would like to see some former and current board members of the SFA coming under police investigation as well!
The fact that you were personally escorted to the airport by the highest paid ‘gardener’ in Europe ( as Mr McCoist is called- he being on ‘gardening leave’ while collecting his massive salary from RIFC!) makes us all speculate like mad about what may be happening in the murky corridors of Ibrox.
I thought, therefore, that I would just check with you that that photograph was genuine.
Thank you for going to the trouble of replying.
And do not worry-I am not a journalist, or a lawyer, and will not further trouble you.
Yours sincerely,
[real name]
I’m not sure I would be delighted at the prospect of trying to raise investment in a company whose asset base will be the subject of prolonged alleged fraudulent acquisition investigation and litigation.
neepheid says:
Member: (746 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 8:39 am
————
Good to see Mark Daly get a mention, especially in light of the newly acquired victim status going around the net. ‘If only journalists had done their job. We deserve an apology from everyone, everywhere. We did nothing wrong.’
Weren’t there protests against Mark Daly’s docu after it tried to expose issues at Ibrox? And the NUJ mentioned 26 journalists being threatened/intimidated for attemptng to state the facts?
A bit rich now blaming those forced into silence. And as for blogs like this, it’s just ‘Rangers haters making stuff up.’
Tom English got pelters yesterday for pointing out the revisionism now going on. Que more slurs and insults. You wonder if there’s any hope at all. Very much the reactions of spoiled children used to always getting their way — if they just throw a tantrum long enough and loud enough.
Bizarre backdrop to a potential new share issue. You don’t see many investors really biting this time. But fortunately, the fans have their chosen man of integrity in control, rubber stamped by the SFA annaw, and just itching to open his warchest.
Just back from CQN there, and someone is talking about Res12. I hear it mentioned on here a lot. What is it? Thanks.
jimbo says:
Member: (89 comments) September 2, 2015 at 9:25 am
Just back from CQN there, and someone is talking about Res12. I hear it mentioned on here a lot. What is it? Thanks.
====================================
In a nutshell, there is undeniable proof freely available that the old Rangers were granted a licence to enter UEFA competitions when the SFA new they had not complied with the entry criteria with respect to tax bills outstanding. By thus doing the old Rangers pocketed millions at the expense of all other Scottish clubs.
A few Celtic shareholders led by some very clever cookies put this to the Celtic AGM as a Resolution (12) to have Celtic question the SFA about this ‘oversight’. The questions raised by Resolution 12 have been put to the SFA, we await their response.
upthehoops says:
Member: (837 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 7:11 am
I think it is fair to surmise that Rangers were a bit short of the readies when HMRC arrested their bank account in December 2011 for unpaid debts of several million pounds.
I think the questions are basically, is there a legally enfoceable unpaid debt which the creditor has reasonable grounds to suspect will not be paid and is there actually money in the account to be arrested.
I don’t think “but we intended using that money for soemthing else” is considered a reasonable excuse for not paying an established and due debt.
There may be other solutions to the issue, however I suspect the tests would be pretty much the same.
upthehoops says:
Member: (837 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 7:11 am
‘…Could a Judge overrule Ashley’s attempt simply on the basis they would be short of money? .’
________
Judging by the Imran Ahmad claim for ringfencing of his claimed money, in which Lord Armstrong made great play of the fact that all three legs of the insolvency test would have to be satisfied, if the claim was based on the likelihood of the company becoming insolvent.
What the situation would be if the argument was that the company had no legal right to any of the assets it claimed to possess, never mind whether it could carry on trading even if it did own them, is quite another proposition.
It would be interesting to see how Ashley could frame his case: ‘ I want to be repaid the money I loaned to a company that could only pay that money with monies to which it was never entitled and which belong to some other party’.
I suspect that no Court could handle such a claim unless and until it had been established just who owned the assets! And if it was not RIFC, then Ashley would have no legal redress against RIFC, but would be in the position of having loaned money to a set of chancers, and have to go after them individually to get his money back.
The mind boggles.
Danish Pastry says:
September 2, 2015 at 9:19 am
neepheid says:
September 2, 2015 at 8:39 am
I think that is one of the joys of bampottery and social media is that all the history and nonsense can be dug out and thrown back in people’s faces when required.
For most people, when contradictions and hypocrisy is pointed out it is a case of ‘hands up’ or a reasoned justification for a change in position, where this can be in light of new information, experience or even being persuaded by a debate and argument.
While I am sure it is not everyone but it does seem that there is a large number of vocal Bears, including folks with a higher public profile like Chris Graham, who have no sense of shame or irony in changing their position depending on the direction of the wind and who the messenger is.
Prior to Whyte the club was struggling to find a buyer and the bank was getting edgy with regard to getting its money back. After years of not takers in terms of buying up the club it was surely going to be extreme austerity, administration or worse.
When Green came along the Bears, without any help from Irish Bloggers, the SMSM and bampots scared off the ‘Yank’ and were left with no other ‘Non-Green’ option apart from potless Paul Murray (who many dislike and still have no time for) and a stream of disappearing RRM with very deep pockets.
Yet the demise of the club and business is now everyone else’s fault for apparently not pointing out the blindingly obvious in huge capital letter, even though all the required information was out there if you chose to take the blinkers off.
As said by many at the time it would have been far better just to let the thing die than have such bile within our game.
As a wee aside from the ongoing Green and Whyte story (the irony of that one still makes me smile) did you know that since the EPL began Chelsea have spent £1,128,149,000 in transfer fees and they now have over 40 players out on loan outside their 1st team squad.
The English press will no doubt think that is something to be proud of. Meanwhile in Austria, Budapest, Calais…..
nawlite says:
Member: (183 comments)
September 1, 2015 at 10:50 pm
In the Bears Den, the arrests aren’t only fun for TRFC* fans because they now dislike CW and CG (fickle bunch!), they’re convincing themselves that they’ll get huge compensation from the arrested (e.g. CG’s chateau), the SFA who were wrong to let not one but two chancers take over their club (Never mind that they would have gone ballistic if anyone tried to stop them anointing them!), the Criminal Compensation board (!) etc. Some of them are even suggesting they should be compensated for losing out on 3 years’ European competition monies; Premiership gates etc; the loss of transfer fees for those who chose not to TUPE etc – it’s madness!
Oh, and just for John Clark, there’s even a suggestion that if both their stewardships are found to be illegal, then the record books must be re-written so that Celtic’s tainted titles are removed from the record books. Honest, this is said without any hint of irony, or indeed self-awareness. Hilarious stuff, which I am sure isn’t indicative of all fans’ mindset.
==========================================
Will Elvis be performing at Barrowlands too?
Probably best that he drops Suspicious Minds from the set if he does.
===========================================
So following their twisted logic, if Charles Green’s “acquisition” is illegal that means there is no newco and the only “Rangers” is the one currently being liquidated. Therefore the club currently in the Championship, is a non-existent one and all prize monies and TV monies that it has accrued need to be paid back, and it will just disappear into the ether as it doesn’t actually exist?
Bawsman, thanks for your answer. Why didn’t UEFA see through this?
Just on that TR.
Does the Chelsea situation (and without wishing to polarise it by club and obviously to a much lesser extent) the Christie situation with CFC/ICT not start to distort particularly the cup competitions where presumably the loan player has to sit in the stand?
wottpi says:
Member: (730 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:15 am
‘…As said by many at the time it would have been far better just to let the thing die.’
____________
Not so much ‘let the thing die’ as formally and officially to acknowledge its, at least for some people, regrettable death as an old, long established, high achieving sporting club.
AND ensure that no spurious, start-up club would be allowed to usurp the honours and proper sporting entitlements of the dead club.
Their failure to do so, and their readiness to do dirty wee secret deals, has landed them in a godalmighty mess which, in my view, will not be sorted without the resignation of any and all office-bearers still in post who had any part in the framing of those dirty wee agreements, and the seeking of an apology from any such officers no longer in post.
(And, of course, IF there were to be any hint that there was actual ‘corruption’ in their actions as officers of the respective boards,appropriate action would need to be taken)
scottc says:
Member: (221 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 5:09 am
Indeed
http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/current-business/court-notices/contempt-of-court-orders
==============================================
Looking at that list, another name jumped out at me (just below the 4 horsemen).
“Were you at the game? Were you?” Different times, indeed, when another Sanderson ruled the airwaves.
Smugas says:
Member: (933 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:37 am
Just on that TR.
Does the Chelsea situation (and without wishing to polarise it by club and obviously to a much lesser extent) the Christie situation with CFC/ICT not start to distort particularly the cup competitions where presumably the loan player has to sit in the stand?
_____________________________________________________________________________
It must do. Just increases the gap to the more “normal ” clubs.
It also means that the way things are going all the so called hot prospects will ultimately be signed up to a handful of teams. They then get farmed out, presumably with a hint of doing it as a favour, for the smaller club to develop and train. But, any transfer fee’s that subsequently come from the hard work of that small club will pass right back into the pocket of the likes of Chelsea.
So was it them that played Brechin? 😈 😈 😈
wottpi says:
Member: (730 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:15 am
Danish Pastry says:
September 2, 2015 at 9:19 am
neepheid says:
September 2, 2015 at 8:39 am
I think that is one of the joys of bampottery and social media is that all the history and nonsense can be dug out and thrown back in people’s faces when required.
____________________________________
Sublime…. :slamb: :slamb:
https://mobile.twitter.com/DarrellKing5/status/257888942936961026?p=v
Anyone in need of a good laugh? Then head across to SKYSPORTS online and read the musings of Paul Merson as he dissects the transfer dealings of all The EPL Clubs. Ok, I have Green tinted specs but this little note had me wondering if he had actually watched any games at all or if he was just another subscriber to ‘Rangers are not there so it must be crap’ mentality.
MERSE SAYS: I’m not sure about Virgil van Dijk at all because he’s been playing for Celtic and hasn’t had to head a ball.
He gives Liverpool an ‘A’ but then points out that they were terrible against The Hammers.
They have, in his mind, done the best business during the window. Forget the amount of Money they have spend over the last couple of years (and again during this window) and won nothing.
It’s not who you buy or how much they cost, it’s what the team needs and how they fit into that structure or if the player can adapt etc…
Comedy Gold!
Smugas says:
Member: (934 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:37 am
Just on that TR.
Does the Chelsea situation (and without wishing to polarise it by club and obviously to a much lesser extent) the Christie situation with CFC/ICT not start to distort particularly the cup competitions where presumably the loan player has to sit in the stand?
———————————–
Not sure I agree with that point, if Celtic did not loan out the player then he would not be playing for ICT anyway. This way he misses only The Celtic games and the Club get Money to spend on another player.
In saying that, I disagree with the principal of loan players not being able to play every against the team who own the registration. They are not the team he plays for so should be available for selection.
John Clark says:
Member: (1161 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 10:59 am
upthehoops says:
Member: (837 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 7:11 am
‘…Could a Judge overrule Ashley’s attempt simply on the basis they would be short of money? .’
________
Judging by the Imran Ahmad claim for ringfencing of his claimed money, in which Lord Armstrong made great play of the fact that all three legs of the insolvency test would have to be satisfied, if the claim was based on the likelihood of the company becoming insolvent.
What the situation would be if the argument was that the company had no legal right to any of the assets it claimed to possess, never mind whether it could carry on trading even if it did own them, is quite another proposition.
It would be interesting to see how Ashley could frame his case: ‘ I want to be repaid the money I loaned to a company that could only pay that money with monies to which it was never entitled and which belong to some other party’.
I suspect that no Court could handle such a claim unless and until it had been established just who owned the assets! And if it was not RIFC, then Ashley would have no legal redress against RIFC, but would be in the position of having loaned money to a set of chancers, and have to go after them individually to get his money back.
The mind boggles.
______________________
For once, John, I find I don’t agree with one of your posts 😯
I get your reasoning – that a court might find difficulty finding in favour of someone who has lent money to someone/some entity that has no chance of paying it back, but Ashley/SD made that loan at a time of relative stability at Ibrox, and had men in place to ensure that situation remained. The companies, both TRFC and RIFC, were both legally constituted companies, regardless of how the assets were acquired, and had raised money legally, though much of that money had been syphoned off (no comment here on how that was done). At the time the loan was made, none of us here, and we are the most suspicious observers of things TRFC, could have envisaged the turn of events we watched yesterday, even though many of us hoped it would happen, and even if Ashley had wind of it all those months ago, he’s hardly likely to let anyone, other than his inner circle, aware of that.
I’m sure Ashley’s lawyers will be able to produce documentary evidence that all due diligence was done and, that at the time, everything was as it should be within the workings of the company.
At the moment, TRFC is apparently awash with monies to which it is entitled, though the assets that form Ashley/SD’s security may well be deemed as belonging to some other party. This, I would imagine, would only strengthen Ashley’s case for the court to ring-fence and ultimately order the repayment of the £5m.
There will be, of course, other points of law, not least Ashley’s right to demand repayment at this time (we just don’t know if he genuinely can demand it at this time), and also whether the court will rule that to freeze these funds would condemn a business to insolvency it might otherwise avoid (though be able to repay the loan at a later date).
I’m sure, should they proceed as we think they might, that the lawyers will attempt to show that, not only might the security disappear, but that even without repaying the loan, TRFC will be unable to raise the finance they clearly require to see out the next year and repayment will then become impossible.
The court, of course, might decide that they cannot deny TRFC the funds purely on the possible outcome of a criminal case that they are not directly involved in (TRFC/RIFC are not being charged).
I have, however, adjusted my theory of what might happen in terms of Ashley’s plans. I am still of the opinion his ultimate aim is to gain total control of the ‘Rangers’ brands in perpetuity, and to do this he needs an insolvency event – before he gets his money back! So he may not take any action at this time.
From my understanding of all the complex contracts, should Ashley’s plans work out, he will be able to buy (very cheaply) all of TRFC’s shares in Rangers Retail. If the loan is not repaid in full, and the security is called upon (though there might be no tangible assets available), SD/RR will hold all the registered brands of RFC (and the lesser value TRFC). Then, no matter what form a ‘Rangers’ takes, SD will either produce, at a cost very much in their favour, the club’s merchandise, or receive an annual payment for the copyright (again at a fantastic return) for the use of badges and logos etc.
If Ibrox goes, and even if it doesn’t, the badges and logos are probably the most important link to old Rangers, owning them will be very profitable.
However it all pans out, the whole process will have cost Ashley/SD next to nothing once his RR profits are taken into account. He’ll own the ‘right to be Rangers’, a much safer proposition than actually ‘being Rangers’.
Madbhoy24941 says:
Member: (90 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 12:04 pm
Smugas says:
Member: (934 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:37 am
Not sure I agree with that point, if Celtic did not loan out the player then he would not be playing for ICT anyway. This way he misses only The Celtic games and the Club get Money to spend on another player.
____________________________________________________________________________
True, but if a player (who presumably is one of the stronger players) is loaned to a club ad plays week in week out but has to sit out one game, the club loses out twice. Firstly for not having that player obviously, but also because of that old pundit favourite the “settled team” is broken up, presumably in a big game where that is exactly what you need.
I’m with you, if you loan a player out, he needs to be free to play in all games.
MoreCelticParanoia says:
Member: (127 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:47 am
=============================
mcp, somewhat surprisingly, it’s a parody account.
Perhaps i missed it and I would be grateful if anyone can explain! I was under the impression that Campbell Ogilvie was re-elected (unopposed) for a further two years in 2014. His tenure appears to me ,at any rate, short-lived and his going remarkably unplanned and without fanfare. Am I missing something?
jimbo says:
Member: (90 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:37 am
==============
UEFA didn’t see through it because they didn’t look at it. The National FA’s aren’t policed by UEFA, UEFA just accepts that those national FA’s are honest and abide by the rules. The SFA also just rely on honesty and see where that has got them with both outfits that have played out of Govan. Even the administrators of the club now in liquidation withheld documentation requested by the SFA.
could someone please explain to me as simply as possible what ramifications the newest court case could have if, as they proclaim, Rangers are the same club ?
My understanding would be that it would maybe need to proven in court they were a brand new club to cut any links to the take over in order for there to be no fear of any repercussions ?
Big Pink, Hiya, Again I’m off topic, which is why I think there should be a couple of threads on here. I can’t really contribute to the heavy hitting stuff on here although I love reading it and it makes me more interesting (or boring) in the pub.
So, There used to be lots of great bands around the club circuit in the 70s & 80s. Care to say which band you were in?
Oh God, I hope I corrected that spelling mistake in time.
I noticed some posters enquiring about the nature of Dave King’s claim to be a creditor of Oldco, which is based on his being deceived by David Murray.
This video of a Dave King interview shows the clearest explanation I’ve seen off the basis of that claim… https://youtu.be/B_lRD_oSQRA?t=9m24s
Basically, Murray didn’t disclose that his own businesses were going under.
burghGer says:
Member: (46 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 12:57 pm (Edit)
I noticed some posters enquiring about the nature of Dave King’s claim to be a creditor of Oldco, which is based on his being deceived by David Murray.
This video of a Dave King interview shows the clearest explanation I’ve seen off the basis of that claim… https://youtu.be/B_lRD_oSQRA?t=9m24s
Basically, Murray didn’t disclose that his own businesses were going under.
____________________________________________
Thanks burghger,
Anybody watching this, please do so from a sitting position. Unbelievable – yet believed.
Just sitting watching it, there’s a dozen supplementary spring into mind.
Why spoil the fun though.
Well in that case all the football authorities are bonkers! Everything’s taken on trust? Honestly? Name me one other organisation which does that. The Benefits Agency, The Police, The Tax Man, The Council, Future Employers, oh I could go on.
But UEFA do and the SFA? Idiots.
Sorry, I missed out the press.
burghGer says:
Member: (46 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 12:57 pm
I noticed some posters enquiring about the nature of Dave King’s claim to be a creditor of Oldco, which is based on his being deceived by David Murray.
This video of a Dave King interview shows the clearest explanation I’ve seen off the basis of that claim… https://youtu.be/B_lRD_oSQRA?t=9m24s
Basically, Murray didn’t disclose that his own businesses were going under.
===========================
Thanks.
So do we still have knowledge in this sort of area with in the blog community? CampbellsMoney?
My first question would be why does that make King a creditor of Oldco? Shouldn’t he be taking legal action against David Murray instead?
sitcom says:
Member: (3 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 12:37 pm
Perhaps i missed it and I would be grateful if anyone can explain! I was under the impression that Campbell Ogilvie was re-elected (unopposed) for a further two years in 2014. His tenure appears to me ,at any rate, short-lived and his going remarkably unplanned and without fanfare. Am I missing something?
=================
Ogilvie’s second term expired in June. At the SFA AGM he was replaced by Alan MacRae, who remarkably has maintained the same low profile as his predecessor.
burghGer says:
Member: (46 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 12:57 pm
More or less what we mostly suspected. In his opinion, Murray cheated him, so it’s up to ‘other people’, the creditors, to reimburse him, rather than the man who did the cheating. Kind of fits in with the way all the other cheating around Rangers was dealt with! Perhaps he’s hoping that LNS will get involved…
To be serious, though, surely his beef is with Murray, and his claim is there just to add him to the ‘duped’ list of RRMs!
Talking of King, has anyone heard from him recently? Is he going to offer comfort to those bears who are aware of just how serious the ramifications of these arrests might be for the club he is chairman of? Regardless, surely the chairman of a company at the centre of a storm like this would make some sort of (non-committal) statement, even if just to distance the club from the proceedings! It’s almost as if he’s washed his hands of the responsibilities attached to his position.
Question for any Hibees here. Looks like 3 further additions to the squad yesterday (all forwards). I think I saw someone quote on here recently that Hibs have a huge squad of players now – any idea just how many and whats going on there?
wottpi says:
Member: (730 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:15 am
“After years of not takers in terms of buying up the club it was surely going to be extreme austerity, administration or worse.”
———————————–
It was a truth whose name could never be spoken.
The idea of the establishment club being in financial difficulty could not be countenanced. Standing behind that financial difficulty was Sir David Murray. He had a reputation to salvage and possibly an understanding of how the social mind worked. The nature of any social contract that might exist between establishment club supporters and its owner might have meant that SDM just couldn’t be seen to fall into default of this bargain. He wanted the kudos that came with club ownership but wasn’t happy with the sporting reality that underpinned this relationship.
I think blog communities can act like social immune systems and attach themselves to topics that appear intrusive. I’m not sure if this could be factored into a business calculation.
Many a cold night was passed sitting in front of the ‘telly’ reading anguished comments from contributors frustrated at our apparent lack of impact. This blog could easily have withered and died. However it is still here and unfortunately for those that thought they might take a skin off Scottish football their path has not been made easy. We are still here. We retain our collective memory.
Never relax until the final whistle however. Need to stay focussed, alert. Interesting times.
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1199 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Talking of King, has anyone heard from him recently? Is he going to offer comfort to those bears who are aware of just how serious the ramifications of these arrests might be for the club he is chairman of?
=====================
What Bears are those, then? There seems to be universal rejoicing in Bearland at events which pose an existential threat to their current setup. This will get very, very messy once realisation dawns. But I suppose they will find someone else to blame, as always.
Matty Roth says:
Member: (242 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 1:50 pm
Wiki had Hibs with 24 players at 29 August but that list seems to have Scott Allan on it. A few loan is and loans out and I’d guess they are around the same mark as T’Rangers in terms of numbers.
Just as an update I see that’s Paul Clark had his collar felt also.
And for the geographically challenged I see the Herald felt the need to include a map showing the precise location of the Livingston Polis station that was holding Green. And the need for that was….
As I predicted the other day the dawn raids continue with the Evening Times reporting Paul Clark of Duff & Duffer now being added to the list of those being detained.
neepheid says:
Member: (748 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 1:57 pm
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1199 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Talking of King, has anyone heard from him recently? Is he going to offer comfort to those bears who are aware of just how serious the ramifications of these arrests might be for the club he is chairman of?
=====================
What Bears are those, then? There seems to be universal rejoicing in Bearland at events which pose an existential threat to their current setup. This will get very, very messy once realisation dawns. But I suppose they will find someone else to blame, as always.
_______________________
I agree with you about the jollification on the internet, but there must be some with the nous to realise it’s not actually news to be celebrated. The club is being dragged through the rags for very bad reasons, and yet nothing is said by the chairman, not even his underlings. It’s made easier for him, of course, by the ludicrously compliant media, but you begin to wonder if King is paying any attention to events in and around Ibrox, or if it’s not really all that important to him when set beside his other businesses!
blu says:
Member: (216 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 12:36 pm
MoreCelticParanoia says:
Member: (127 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 11:47 am
=============================
wottpi says:
Member: (730 comments)
mcp, somewhat surprisingly, it’s a parody account.
__________________________________________
So it is. However the fact that it was found plausible by so many, including Tom English is informative in itself.
I invoke Poe’s Law*
*Poe’s law states that, without a clear indicator of the author’s intent, parodies of extreme views will, to some readers, be indistinguishable from sincere expressions of the parodied views :slamb:
I can’t believe it. This is from the BBC:
When an agreement with creditors could not be struck, allowing the club to exit administration, a sale of Rangers’ assets to a consortium led by Mr Green was concluded.
He was at the helm when Rangers were allowed to join the Third Division but stepped down in 2013 following allegations that he was working in conjunction with Mr Whyte
‘Were allowed to join the Third Division’ Is that not almost an admission that they were not ‘demoted’? Join? Sounds like a new club to me!
btw, I used to work in accountancy but at low level (bookeeper). I know that there is such a concept as ‘goodwill’. Can anyone more experienced tell me, can that in any shape or form include ‘history’?
I’m feeling invigorated today. After my (and others) challenge against the mail online this morning and now this from the BBC are Auldhied and JCs efforts finally beginning to bear fruit?
Grant Russell @STVGrant · 1m1 minute ago
Former Rangers chief Charles Green has been granted bail at Glasgow Sheriff Court in connection with alleged fraudulent acquisition in 2012.
I assume that the others will also be granted bail.
mattyroth, you were maybe thinking of Falkirk, who listed 32 players in their squad last week. At that time Hibs had 22. Rangers still list 18 first team players.
Anyway all this ‘detention’ nonsense is a great distraction from the fact that DCK doesn’t seem to have made much of a splash in terms of getting a team together to be up and running to challenge Celtic ASAP.
Of course, as seen with Hearts last year it doesn’t take a barrow load of cash to put together a team capable of winning the Championship and quite rightly Warburton is to be applauded for getting the best out of his current team and vastly improving the style of play and the morale on the pitch from last year.
However when comparing T’Rangers just now to Hearts this year and last are attacking full backs Tarvenier and Wallace any more outstanding than Paterson and Eckersley from last year and Oshinwa at left back this year. Is Kiernan partnering Wilson any better than Rossi or Augustyn partnering Osturk. Is the midfield more solid than Hearts with the likes of Bauben and Gomis and the injured Pallardo when it currently includes Holt who was excess to requirements at Tynecastle. (I also note that 35 year old Eustace is still getting mentions in dispatches as being a possible signing) Are ‘Fancy Dan’ loan guys and home grown youngsters like Mackie any better than Hearts ticksters Nicolson, Walker and King. Is Waghorn better than Juanma. How long will Kenny Miller’s legs last?
It should not be forgotten that while off to a good run Hearts lost to Hamilton and have big tests coming up soon v Aberdeen and Celtic, it could all go down hill pretty quickly.
At some point the quality of T’Rangers team to get to where DCK has said they should be is going to take money be it an early start in January or waiting until next summer should promotion be secured.
Given the ongoing debt/loans and the inevitable need more cash for day to day running costs come the end of this calendar year it is still hard to see where the money is going to come from. Even more so if assets are found to be tied up in legal red tape or still held in security by MA.
Still can’t see the dream of Euro glory and the associated & much needed cash being sniffed at anytime soon.
wottpi says:
Member: (733 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 3:23 pm
Anyway all this ‘detention’ nonsense is a great distraction from the fact that DCK doesn’t seem to have made much of a splash in terms of getting a team together to be up and running to challenge Celtic ASAP.
Of course, as seen with Hearts last year it doesn’t take a barrow load of cash to put together a team capable of winning the Championship and quite rightly Warburton is to be applauded for getting the best out of his current team and vastly improving the style of play and the morale on the pitch from last year.
_____________________________________
All I can say is, as a result of hammering some lower league sides and a couple of their rivals, the Bears I am acquainted with think their current side is second only to Celtic in terms of ability and would even give Celtic a good run for their money and a big pot of gold awaits them next year in the SPL. Things can only get better.
No concept of the need to replace loan players or those out of contract at the end of the season. Warburton has a magic hat seems to be the answer to that particular issue.
Sorry, I shouldn’t have singled out Auldheid & JC, there are so many. I just noticed Allyjambo for instance.
Wottpi and MCP, it’s not just that they’re close to Celtic, according to the Bears Den they’re “playing the best football in Britain right now” and all they have to do is hold onto Tavernier for a couple of years then sell him for millions. They don’t appear to realise they’re in the second division and that the likes of Tavernier, Holt, Waghorn etc have been struggling around the lower divisions for quite some time without them being spotted as superstars. Definite credit to Warburton so far, but man those are some expectations!!
jimbo says:
Member: (94 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 3:01 pm
I’ve always thought ‘goodwill’ to be nothing more than an accounting term to describe the difference between the price paid for a business and the net asset value of the company. It will be positive goodwill when more is paid for the business than the asset value, and negative (as Charlie claimed in the first accounts) if the assets are valued higher than the sum paid. It was pointed out, by many a bampot, that this clearly indicated that the assets were purchased well below their true value. But best not say any more than that!
For anyone interested, footage of Green leaving court after being bailed this afternoon. Pretty depressing stuff, really.
https://t.co/zRpPy2YiHe
The only bear who’s comments I’m following has the nail struck firmly on the head.
Seems very aware current events have potential bad consequences.
Try jjsitonfence he’s not alone neither.
Interesting quote from RSL site (McMurdo?) :
“Firstly, there was a time when Sir David Murray could do very little wrong in the eyes of the Ibrox support. To say during the SDM glory years that he would ruin the club was to invite derision and even the threat of violence from fellow fans.“
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1201 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 3:55 pm
I’ve always thought ‘goodwill’ to be nothing more than an accounting term to describe the difference between the price paid for a business and the net asset value of the company. It will be positive goodwill when more is paid for the business than the asset value, and negative (as Charlie claimed in the first accounts) if the assets are valued higher than the sum paid. It was pointed out, by many a bampot, that this clearly indicated that the assets were purchased well below their true value. But best not say any more than that!
=================================================================================
Re goodwill, yes, that’s right.
INVESTOPEDIA DEFINITION of ‘Negative Goodwill’ A gain occurring when the price paid for an acquisition is less than the fair value of its net tangible assets. NEGATIVE GOODWILL IMPLIES A BARGAIN PURCHASE. Negative goodwill may be listed as a separate line item on the acquiring company’s balance sheet and may be considered income.
HOWEVER
Goodwill is something that occurs on the acquisition of a business. This didn’t happen in Sevco who actually purchased a job lot of tangible and intangible fixed assets from the administrator of Rangers.
Rather than negative goodwill I think we are actually talking about a fair value adjustment to acquired assets which should have originally been accounted for at the lower of cost or NRV – i.e. £5.5 million. Actually given that the £5.5m included monetary assets (i.e. transfer fee receivable) then the booked amount should have been a bit less.
A revaluation in year 1 (in this case several times the underlying purchase price) is IMHO a pretty clear statement that the original purchase was not an arms length and that the administrator should be questioned on whether they have really discharged their duty to the creditors of RFC (IL).
MoreCelticParanoia says:
Member: (130 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 4:35 pm
Just read the latest posts over on RSL, and one thing struck me while reading. I wonder if King’s non-appearance has anything to do with the recent police activity. Someone pointed out how he’d been around during both Murray and Whyte’s reigns. Best not to speculate on who might have been interviewed in connection with the investigations, I suppose, but one might expect board members to provide the police with evidence in similar investigations.
I have to admit I really am bemused by his lack of announcements, particularly since the leak/gossip of an impending rights issue. Now this, and still silence! Must be playing an awful lot of golf!
neepheid says:
Member: (749 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 4:10 pm
It’s only going to get worse. I can see any trial which may result being moved
Edit
Scotsman is reporting (un-specified) fraud charge(s) laid against Green
http://www.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/charles-green-in-court-on-rangers-fraud-charge-1-3875907
Trying to catch up with last few days’ posts, and to digest the legal developments.
But in the meantime a couple of irreverent observations;
Big Pink says:
Moderator: (403 comments)
September 1, 2015 at 11:55 pm
jimbo says:
Member: (88 comments)
September 1, 2015 at 10:11 pm
Some of the new ads are OK but I keep getting one’s of birds with big boobies?…
===
.. and you do know the ads are tailored in varying degrees of accuracy for your own browsing customs? ?
===
I believe in the parlance of today’s youth, “Busted !” could mibbees be applied here. 😉
&
Re: the ‘Perth Monitor’ shindig.
Would love to attend BP: could you mibbees start another fund raiser for my flight tickets. Thanks in advance. 🙄
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1202 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 4:55 pm
MoreCelticParanoia says:
Member: (130 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 4:35 pm
Just read the latest posts over on RSL, and one thing struck me while reading. I wonder if King’s non-appearance has anything to do with the recent police activity…
==============================
Yes, that sounds plausible Aj.
It has been rather curious why King has gone so quiet recently, especially after his alleged ‘shares offer’ to Ashley.
I thought it was because he just didn’t have enough cash at his disposal, and had run out of options.
The police involvement now is certainly not going to improve TRFC’s options, or hopes of attracting new ‘investors / new cash’ – from respectable sources that is.
More negative PR for the Ibrox club.
I see that Mark Daly has been questioned as a witness. Presumably it’s all his fault, and part of the BBC conspiracy against RFC/TRFC ? :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
A thought, does the Scottish Government still have a lease on the court set up in Camp Zeist?
I’ll get my overjas
Is John James jjsitonfence not widely assumed to be our old friend Jack at Mediahouse? He does seem to be very well informed.
Oldies will remember the warning from Sheffield Wednesday fans way back in May 2012.
Yet still some put their faith (& £5m in hard cash) in Green. Regardless of the ultimate outcome, no one should be surprised that things appear to have gotten messy over the last few days.
“Charles Green is a much vilified figure at Bramall Lane. He may have just been a puppet for McDonald; he may have been the ultimate decision maker, guiding the investor. Either way the manner by which he went about his business won him few friends within the club, or with the fans.
Now, after a significant absence, Green is back in football with Rangers. The fans should treat his arrival with caution. What his role will be day-to-day remains to be seen. But the last thing Rangers need now is a man who takes risks, a man who panics when the risks don’t pay off and a man who fans doubt they can trust.”
Nice to see Sons of Struth’s Craig Houston has enough time on his plate to greet Green leaving court and pass on his regards in that world renowned T’Rangers dignified manner. 🙂
I’m copying this over from CQN. it is in response to one point raised by Paul B that it was not the SFA who approved Craig Whyte but RFC. I post here because I think it relevant to SFM.
Paul67
Re your point about the SFA not having Fit and Proper Person Rules.
What I have learned over the past three years is that the rules in Scottish football are based totally on trust.
Because football is a sport then the ethos in sport is that folk will obey the rules because if you don’t nothing won is of value.
But now its business and the money tempts clubs to break the rules and one of the biggest crimes for me is that Rangers just not broke the rules, they broke the trust table on which the rule book rests.
That is bad enough but when faced with the consequence of applying the rules and removing the value of what the rule breakers (aka cheats) “won” those at the SFA are as guilty of malpractice and trust breaking as Rangers were.
The dilemma for Scottish football is what to do about it? The rules based on trust are of no use, the rules “police” are of no use, so how can the game carry on without steps being taken to restore the trust Rangers AND the SFA have trodden all over?
TRFC are an untrustworthy organisation (and I avoided another word) and had it not been for the commercial concerns at play would have been suspended from football until they had demonstrated their trustworthiness during a period of probation where the SFA set conditions and DID check who was fit and proper.
This isn’t just about ebts or financial doping they are just symptoms of what happens when ethics are dumped for manna.
So whilst I take your point the SFA are not to blame under the rules for allowing the likes of CW and CG and perhaps DK into our game the rules have to change so that someone is made responsible and accountable for making Scottish football an honest game honestly governed.
Any sign this is being realised or is it rabbits in the headlights?
– See more at: http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/green-whyte-and-gaol-d/comment-page-2/#comment-2670480
When I’m at it this post on CQN will be of interest to those wondering where we are on Res12.
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/recruitment-planning/comment-page-4/#comment-2670365
I’m hoping something of a more widespread and formal update will come out within the week but if you read this and subsequent posts on the matter on the same and following page you will get a flavour of the issues.
Auldheid says:
Blog Writer: (528 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 5:31 pm
The rules and ramshackle bowling club governance structure has lasted this long, because that’s the way the professional clubs in particular, want it.
Farrygate should have been the point at which the rule book and the governance structures were overhauled, instead Scottish Football just got more of the same.
Until the clubs get it trough their self-obsessed heads that reform is in their interests, nothing will change
wottpi says:
Member: (736 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 2:05 pm
Matty Roth says:
Member: (242 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 1:50 pm
Wiki had Hibs with 24 players at 29 August but that list seems to have Scott Allan on it. A few loan is and loans out and I’d guess they are around the same mark as T’Rangers in terms of numbers.
=========================
Cheers Wottpi, the figure I saw was a lot higher, closer to 40 I think. Which is what had me concerned.
Mid twenties isn’t so bad particularly since quite a few are loans and others will be quite young lads on modest wages I’d think.
I get the feeling Hibs are very much going for it, while some others in the division (Falkirk) are perhaps playing their hand very carefully so as not to spend heavy when there are much better funded clubs up against them for that promotion spot.
Once TRFC and Hibs are up, I think Falkirk may feel it more worthwhile investing in a modestly stronger squad and going for promotion.
That’s simply an opinion, I’ve no information to this effect.
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1202 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 2:11 pm
……………..
The silence may revolve around fear…
If we all cast our minds back to a post sent into the old RTC site by our old friend Corsica…that alluded to a meeting in Switzerland that took place involving a group of individuals we all know…
Now with in mind…and with the events over the last 2 days still fresh in our minds…who might be filling up their under crackers with the thought of information being spilled that could lead back to them?
I wonder?
Matty Roth says:
September 2, 2015 at 5:39 pm
Agreed. While off to a poor start Hibs look like they may have their dander up now.
For Falkirk then far better to bide their time and be happy if they get a play-off berth this year but push on for the top spot next season or the one after.
Hope this link works ok.
From the main BBC news at lunchtime today. No surprise at the re-writing of history.
https://mobile.twitter.com/whooshman1967/status/639066603234140160/video/1
Paulmac2
Excuse my ignorance as my brain is slowing due to a day on the Mythos and raki in Crete but did Corsica not suggest that our old friend Dave King was at said meeting in Switzerland?
Once more we are living in exceptionally interesting times!
Douglas Fraser @BBCDouglasF 6m6 minutes ago
#Rangers charges, under Criminal Justice + Licensing (Scotland) Act, s28(1) on ‘serious organised crime’: max 10 yr jail sentence 1/2
#Rangers charges: ex-ceo Charles Green conspiracy + fraud, also conspiracy under Companies Act 2006: no plea or declaration, bailed 2/3
#Rangers: ex-owner Craig Whyte + administrator David Whitehouse charged with conspiracy. Neither gave plea or declaration. Both bailed 3/3
Interestingly I don’t see anything in Douglas fraser’s tweets that suggest a link back to the 2011 club purchase, just the 2012 asset purchase. What was the name of the third D&P amigo that brokered the club purchase again?
Smugas says:
Member: (936 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 7:36 pm
From memory David Grier.
I believe he was involved in the sale from Murray to Whyte.
Though on the face of it had no involvement in the sale of assets from the administrator to Green
scapaflow says:
Member: (1420 comments)
September 2, 2015 at 7:23 pm
Douglas Fraser @BBCDouglasF 6m6 minutes ago
#Rangers charges, under Criminal Justice + Licensing (Scotland) Act, s28(1) on ‘serious organised crime’: max 10 yr jail sentence 1/2
#Rangers charges: ex-ceo Charles Green conspiracy + fraud, also conspiracy under Companies Act 2006: no plea or declaration, bailed 2/3…
===========================
Why didn’t they lob in a ‘catch-all’ Money Laundering charge as well ?
Exhibit 1 : French Chateau with stables purchased recently by Charlie ?
[Just a scurrilous accusation on my part. 😉 ]
BBC reporting that the ‘investigation/charges’ against Green – is his ‘take over of the club’ !!
I thought the BBC had to be clear when reporting on
club-v-business for truth and accuracy?
Green did not buy ‘the club’, he bought the assets and the ‘titles and trophies’ ??