Reflections on Goalposts

A recent autumn storm caused the destruction of the metal goal fame in our garden. The small goal with the weather-beaten net had fallen into disuse. But I liked it seeing it there on the grass. I suppose I half-expected, half-hoped, it would be used again. Once, it was a father and son thing and had been constructed carefully from a nice set of plans. At the time, it impressed both son and daughter no end. But that was then, this was now.

One of our trees, blown over by the recent high winds, caused the goal frame’s final demise. As I unscrewed the twisted metal I thought of the hours of innocent fun it had given us. It had been the scene of many goals and not a few great saves. My son, who is soon off to uni, smiled thoughtfully as I mentioned that this was the end of the ‘goalposts of childhood’. Perhaps he knew what I meant.

My own childhood goalposts had been ‘doon the back’. Drawn with chalk on the red brick of the ‘sausage wall’ at one end, and on part of the ‘wash hoose’ at the other. Many a league, Cup and international match was played out between those goals on the Dennistoun dirt. We once put on a parallel version of a historic England v Scotland match while the real match was being played at Wembley. Jim Mone sitting on one of the dykes had a transister radio to his ear. As we played our match he chalked up live score updates on the wall — our Twitter and FaceBook anno 1967. What a day.

We did use a pile of jackets up on the old Dennistoun cricket pitch, but only rarely. Mostly, we played on the red gravel surface at the Finlay Drive entrance. That pitch was fitted with real goalposts — like the ones they had at Hampden. Or so we imagined.

These sentimental memories of receding years accompanied my removal of the ruined metal goal frame. But, as you can imagine, it seemed an almost symbolic act. For fans of Scottish football the ‘goalposts’ that once defined the game of our football childhoods — have not only been moved, they’ve been been twisted and mis-shapen out of all recognition.

The past decades have seen a fundamental change in the way our game is run and governed, at home and abroad. Money is now king and sporting consideration is a luxury we sometimes have to put to one side — or at least, so we’re told.

At the risk of stating the obvious, sport, if it is to mean anything at all, has to be based on clearly defined rules and principles. These rules must be applied equally to all the participants, they are certainly not optional extras. However, to misquote and paraphrase George Orwell, ‘all teams are equal, but some teams are more equal than others’ — at least, when it comes to Scottish football.

The efforts by the SFA to re-interpret rules to fit the unfortunate circumstances surrounding the demise of Rangers FC in 2012 have left most of us scratching our heads. Much of the Scottish media has backed up the SFA’s efforts, something which has added to the general confusion and chaos. In fact, it’s become clear that the death of Rangers, as we knew them, has been such a traumatic event that it must be denied. The authorities and media seem to have been so besotted with one club that its loss is out of the question. And so, it’s been gifted a bizarre kind of immunity from liquidation and death that implies its on-going existence, long after it drew it’s final breath.

This situation has opened the door to a legion of businessmen on the make. They have been allowed to perpetuate the myth, with SFA blessing, that they ‘saved’ Rangers. And their unwavering message is, that they can only succeed if fans keep giving them their hard-earned cash. To those outside the blue bubble it looks like a huge con trick. If the only source of real money in football is the fans, then the Ibrox faithful have been royally fleeced.

How different it could have been if the former club had been allowed a dignified end. A year out of the game would probably have allowed fans to restart a newco of their own. They could have applied for entry into the professional leagues along with the other clubs waiting in line. Chances are they would have been given special dispensation, and walked straight into the bottom tier. Of course, they would have claimed to be the continuation of the spirit of the previous entity — but would anyone have argued against that? How different it could have been if the rules governing the game had been respected. The SFA may even have kept their dignity intact and the press not felt obliged to print half-truths, falsehoods and lies.

You’ve got to wonder why Dunfermline and Hearts fought so desperately to avoid liquidation. After all, the Scottish football authorities now seem intent on convincing us that liquidation has little or no effect on a football club. Even past sins, such as wrongly-registered players are as naught — if, at the time, they were thought to have been registered correctly. By this logic, we have to ask: if a ‘company’ running a ‘club’ bribes a referee, will retrospective action will be taken against the ‘club’. The players and the club, after all, will have done nothing wrong. And since the referee was not known to have been bribed, and not struck off, he was qualified to referee the match in question, at the time. Using the SFA thought process, the result would probably be allowed to stand. Personally, I’m not sure I follow SFA logic. They’ve ‘moved the goalposts’, and (you saw it coming) bent them into an unrecognisable shape.

Which brings me back to our garden. The old metal goal frame is waiting to be driven down to the local re-cycling centre. The twisted metal and worn-out net are useless. Ruined by forces beyond our control. There is no interest in a replacement at present. Perhaps, if we have grandchildren, they will show an interest in football. If they do, I’ll build a new set of goalposts. They’ll be straight and true, the way the goalposts of childhood should be. The way goalposts should always be.

4,642 thoughts on “Reflections on Goalposts


  1. StevieBC says: (968)
    January 6, 2014 at 7:55 pm

    In their heart of hearts, the believe that a Sugar Daddy will appear over the horizon, and fill the coffers year after year, and put them at the forefront of European football
    Meanwhile, the rest of us get on with living in the real world


  2. seminal says: (14)
    January 6, 2014 at 3:18 pm
    ‘….The reason is that Octopus do not really expect the money back. In fact it suits them because it allows them to present to HMRC a case where a VCT has failed and is not a sham special investment vehicle …’
    ———–
    But ( and I’m sorry to still be so ignorant) what is the relationship between Octopus and any of the VCTs it ‘manages’?

    Wouldn’t it be the investors in,say, Ticketus LLP VCT that HMRC would be interested in, as being (or not) a sham ?
    Or is Octopus not just the ‘fund manager’ but an actual shareholder in the Ticketus VCT-able to write off its share of losses while collecting its managerial fees, and leaving its partner investors in the Ticketus LLP to lose, not just their income tax relief, but their whole investment?
    A wee tutorial would be helpful, if you had a minute. 😀


  3. m.c.f.c. says: (103)

    January 6, 2014 at 6:40 pm
    Wallace reveals secret of Alchemy

    Can you imaging if Wallace was able to turn TheRangers around and send them on their way to the Champions League. He would have hundreds of club chairmen from around the globe queuing at his door for the rest of his natural, willing to pay him with their right arms, virgin daughters and left testicles.

    But do TheRangers bear any resemblance to prima materia – I think not

    **************

    And by the same token, there were clubs apparently beating on Charles Green’s door for them to come “rescue” them in the same way as he had at RIFC/TRFC, according to him – and we know he is a bastion of the truth. However rather than take a well paid post at another giant in order to use his contacts and experience to make deals with the giants of the sporting world like adidas, Dallas Cowboys and other corporate sponsors like Microsoft, Apple and Orange, he chose to ignore all such lucrative job offers and feed his horses at his new chateaux.

    If he as he claimed did indeed manage to save a liquidated club, would the likes of Bolton etc all not be calling him to come rescue them? Or does the likes of Phil Gartside know full well what would happen to Bolton should Charles get his big hands on the club?

    I have a picture of Charles in his new stables, saving money by cleaning out the stables muttering to himself, “Where tha’s muck, there’s brass!”.

    He and his investors know full well the chances of being able to find an identical scenario where the Governing bodies will enable you to have such a cash rich scenario with unquestioning fans and media all ripe for the plucking are few and far between.


  4. HibeeHibernian says: (9)
    January 6, 2014 at 5:55 pm
    ===============================

    To be fair I don’t think the majority of Hearts fans take that attitude and are simply glad to see their club survive and will accept the result which is a weaker team in a lower division.


  5. campsiejoe says: (626)
    January 6, 2014 at 8:15 pm

    In their heart of hearts, the believe that a Sugar Daddy will appear over the horizon, and fill the coffers year after year, and put them at the forefront of European football
    Meanwhile, the rest of us get on with living in the real world
    ————————————————————————————-
    I notice from links posted earlier today to today’s Keith Jackson article that he refers to Dermot Desmond as Celtic’s ‘sugar daddy’. He must have missed the several occasions where D.D has explicitly stated Celtic must stand on its own two feet, and that he will not throw money at the club. He has invested in shares over the years, but not so long ago towards the end of 2013 his investment was worth more than he paid. Of course, if Jackson says D.D is a sugar daddy to Celtic often enough people who are unable to take a step back may start to believe it. Perhaps a better approach would be to continually state the actual truth that Rangers must stand on their own two feet, and that Celtic are doing just that very successfully.


  6. Danish Pastry says: (1872)
    January 6, 2014 at 7:48 pm
    ————————————–
    One of the aspects that I find interesting about the Rangers saga, is that given all of the events that have unfolded since the RTC blog began, there appears to be a continious expectation that there will be somthing else comming round the corner at any second.

    Since the FTTT and LNS, there also appears to be a desire for news of an event that will kill of Rangers completely, somthing that cannot be dodged, an event that will finally remove in everyones eyes Sevco from the history of RFC.

    Perhaps it is inevitable that rumours will frequently emerge to fill the void where there is no new news.


  7. nickmcguinness says: (158)
    January 6, 2014 at 2:52 pm
    —————————-
    Just been having a quick glance at the judgement on Whyte’s appeal.
    Unsurprisingly it shows that Octopus asked for and presumably received a net asset statement from Mr Whyte.
    If this statement had contained untruths I’d assume it would have been included in Ticketus claim against Mr Whyte in the same way that the directors questionnaire was.
    Can we therefore assume that the net asset statement gave ticketus some comfort that large sums (if not the full amount) might be recoverable if everything went horribly wrong?


  8. Exiled Celt says: (897)
    January 6, 2014 at 7:10 pm
    ———————–

    In a similar vein, I had bizarre conversation with a sevconian over the New Year. He stated with total conviction that when ‘Rangers’ win the big tax case….for a second and conclusive time, HMRC will be sued for a fortune in damages for their lax security regarding the scandalous leaks to RTC (and others, you know who you are! 😉 ) that left Rangers at the mercy of Craig Whyte and his nefarious plan to dupe SDM.

    Where do you start with such utter delusion? He seemed oblivious to even the most basic facts. He looked quizzical when I mentioned the wee tax case……….. anything Craig Whyte did is clearly the fault of HMRC……and the venerable old institution was a helpless victim being mercilessly plundered by Whyte and as if that was not enough they were savaged by the haters unleashed by HMRC’s poor security. I almost felt sorry for him….well for fleeting moment. 😀


  9. It really is incredible the way the Rangers support can talk about what Craig Whyte did to Rangers.

    Totally ignoring the fact the he (through Wavetower) actually was Rangers.

    It is further incredible that they think Whyte did things which hurt Rangers.

    Totally ignoring the fact that, because he was the controlling hand and mind, it was Rangers which was making these decisions and doing these things.

    From the ruling in the Falkirk Tribunal.

    http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2012/TC02262.html

    Arguments advanced by the Club

    19. The Club argued that they had a reasonable excuse for late payment on a number of grounds. Firstly, they believed that they had good corporate governance and by outsourcing the payroll to a firm with a good reputation they had implemented their responsibilities. Secondly, they had relied on the assurances from Mr Craig that everything was “OK” with HMRC and he had misled them: the first they had known of the problems was when HMRC took action. Thirdly, the impact of the relegation together with the change in the treatment of season ticket receipts, the reduction in income from the public purse and the inability to play home games for weeks had placed exceptional and unforeseeable pressure on cash flow. Lastly, they believed that they had tried to be fair to HMRC in the past and on realising the problems had settled their debts so the penalty was perhaps unfair and disproportionate.

    Reasons for Decision

    27. The situation is rather different in regard to Mr Craig. Firstly, since he was Managing Director, he was in fact “the Club” and his actions in that role were as the Club. Accordingly, the fact that he did not ensure timeous payment, knowing as he did the problems in the previous year and the availability of TTP would make it very difficult to argue that he was unaware of the potential problems caused by late payment of PAYE. The Tribunal finds no reasonable excuse in his actions.

    ==================================================

    That’s the important sentence “Firstly, since he was Managing Director, he was in fact “the Club” and his actions in that role were as the Club. “.

    Craig Whyte was not only the man in charge, he was also the man who owned the business. His actions were the actions of Rangers, not some separate rogue element doing them damage. That’s just another of the myths which have been created round the debacle which was Rangers decent into oblivion and ultimate demise.


  10. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (240)
    January 6, 2014 at 7:46 pm

    19

    0

    Rate This

    sickofitall says: (206)
    January 6, 2014 at 7:11 pm
    I haven’t seen that.
    However I do know that there are several meetings scheduled for this week with budget cuts on the agenda.
    Ideally GW would want the payroll bill-at the end of this month-to be smaller.
    Not easy-but doable
    ======
    Phil, several times now you have said that with severe cuts The Rangers can survive financially. Also you seem to think that Wallace will implement such cuts. I’m getting that you don’t share the opinion of some posters on here that The Rangers are heading for administration.
    Do you think The Rangers support will accept a future determined by austerity? I’m assuming that the cuts needed would be so severe as to affect their ability to gain promotion next year? And that season ticket prices will need to rise significantly.
    I’m just a bit puzzled as to why you think there is a way out for The Rangers, while many on here think that either the cuts wont be enough, or The Rangers support wont buy into the scenario, thus making the cuts irrelevant.


  11. Partizani Tirana says: (24)
    January 6, 2014 at 10:34 pm
    Hi, excellent questions.
    If I can take the last one first:
    “The Rangers support wont buy into the scenario, thus making the cuts irrelevant.”
    I think there is a core of supporters who will “buy into” the new reality.
    Let’s that is 25,000.
    If ST prices are put up at SPFL level next season AND GW can slash costs then I think they can-finally-match expenditure to income.


  12. If the season tickets are raised by 50% (to get them back up to previous levels) and they still sell 25,000 that’s the equivalent of them selling 37,000 at current prices.

    Is that not roughly the amount they are claiming just no. So there would be no real increase in turnover from their main income stream. That would be pretty much the same level, fewer tickets but a higher unit price.

    That means the £12m deficit has to come from additional income from elsewhere (it is unlikely merchandising and catering will increase if the fan base shrinks so much, the same is likely the case for sponsorship) or it will have to come from cuts.

    I do not believe cuts of £12m are achievable.


  13. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (241)
    January 6, 2014 at 10:41 pm
    =====
    Thanks for the answer.
    I just cant see it working out that way though. The support are definetely beginning to see through McCoist, in as much as he is a useless manager. They still don’t seem to realise how much he has made out of Rangers collapse and The Rangers since.
    They are moaning about how bad most of the performances are. Will 25,000 renew season tickets at SPFL prices if it’s plain that they can’t keep paying £5000 salaries for SPFL journeymen? I doubt it.


  14. Tif Finn says: (1186)
    January 6, 2014 at 10:48 pm
    Yes the 25,000 ST sales is revenue neutral and the saving would all have to come from cuts.
    However, I think that is rock bottom for Ibrox ST sales and they would get more IMO.
    The austerity will need to be brutal.
    It may well be a damn close run thing, but if GW takes no prisoners then it is possible.
    Murray Park seems to be the main issue here.


  15. TSFM Do I have to verify my email address on a weekly basis. I also see my post earlier today was a no-show am I doing something wrong, let me know plz. You have my email. Thanks, all the best JB

    Shouldn’t have to verify weekly JB, but the reason your post didn’t pass moderation was the name-calling aspect of it – and its OT nature.
    TSFM


  16. Even if 25,000 renew season tickets at full SPFL prices AND GW makes severe cuts, there are other questions, the answers to which are likely to make the support even less loyal.
    How are Laxeys etc going to make their money?
    What chance will austerity Rangers have of being mid-table SPFL any time soon?


  17. Phil is correct. The alternative to going along with the board is unthinkable to the fans . A significant core will buy into the STs next season, despite the necessary austerity regime – and no matter how severe.

    Without another cash injection, they will be uncompetitive for the foreseeable future, but they will survive to fight another day. The fans won’t like that of course, but the brand will be kept alive because they will like oblivion even less.


  18. Partisani, forgive my pedantry but I think you mean Premiership when you say SPFL. Within a league of four divisions, the Ibrox club are currently “mid-table” in the SPFL. Why they are there is what bothers me.


  19. Long Time Lurker on January 6, 2014 at 9:39 pm
    19 0 Rate This

    One of the aspects that I find interesting about the Rangers saga, is that given all of the events that have unfolded since the RTC blog began, there appears to be a continious expectation that there will be something …
    ———–

    For most, it probably stems from the desire to see justice done. Then there’s those who despise everything the clubs — past and present — represent, and who long for the final, final demise.

    If you follow some of the fevered and baseless twitter rumours to source, they seem to start with someone who is just adding a bit more to the spiralling absurdity, either for a laugh or to boost their online profile. Or maybe they just enjoy seeing how easily people can be hooked by a rumour that, deep down, they want to be true?


  20. They didn’t seek oblivion with the previous club.

    They got it.

    Their huge issue just now, well their other huge issue, is the lack of a proper credit facility to see them over the really difficult period. Who is going to lend them money and on what terms.

    As far as I see it everything is cash flow just now, and when the cash runs out how do bills get paid. That includes a mental wage bill. As we have discussed before a business can’t really just get into debt, someone has to actually be lending it money.

    It’s not a case of brutal cuts to survive. It’s brutal cuts just to have a chance of survival. They may be going to the players and other staff very soon to ask for agreed pay cuts or deferments.


  21. For the avoidance of doubt……… I have always filed my tax return on time and have always paid HMRC every penny I owed them.

    As a law abiding tax payer I am totally scunnered that I and every other like minded person in the UK has been effectively screwed through Rangers’ immoral and unsporting use of EBTs and then the shambles that was the operation and subsequent administration/liquidation of Rangers circa two years ago.


  22. I was going to say that I’m beginning to feel that this is a mutual appreciation, happy slappy society 🙄
    I’ve decided not to and to bide my time.


  23. Folks,

    Please don’t post critiques of postings on other forums – particularly when the posts are wildly Off Topic.

    We are not here to discuss the mindset of Rangers players, officials or fans on the false premise that they are somehow a different breed. I think we have seen enough poor behaviour and attitude from fans of several other clubs in the recent past that should nail that myth.

    This is not, and never has been a platform to ridicule Rangers Football Clubs – past, present or future. Plenty of other sites out there who are better equipped than us for that – with mods who are happy to go along with the myth. If you feel the need to do so, you really don’t belong here. If that is too po-faced for some then so be it – but I suspect our credibility would take a tumble if we were to act differently on this matter.


  24. Flocculent Apoidea says: (18)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:30 pm
    Partisani, forgive my pedantry but I think you mean Premiership when you say SPFL. Within a league of four divisions, the Ibrox club are currently “mid-table” in the SPFL. Why they are there is what bothers me.
    =====
    Yeah. I got that wrong.


  25. Danish Pastry says: (1873)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:33 pm

    ————————————————–
    LTR/DP

    Personally, I keep tuning in because I am an auld romantic type.

    I have the naive notion that justice will not only be done but will seen to be done.

    What happens to Rangers, the Rangers, Sevco, the clumpany, whatever, I really could not give a monkey’s about any more, they are dead, yesterdays chip wrapper material. Rangers wrapped up in a Daily Record seems quite apt, so yesterday.

    I want to see the moment that brings down the Murray’s, the Masterton’s, the Campbell Ogilvie’s, the Reagan’s, Doncaster’s, Longmuir’s, Bryson’s and ANYONE and I mean ANYONE who has perpetuated the disease.

    The game seems to be heading in a decent, healthy direction, in spite of the ruling body, we need our game cleansed.


  26. TSFM says: (591)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:24 pm
    The brand will survive and we have seen in the summer of 2012 the lengths that those who govern the game were willing to bend the rules to ensure that A Rangers was playing at Ibrox.


  27. The Rangers are spending more than they earn. That is not unusual for a football team/company. There are several teams in the EPL with truly vast debts. The difference is that these teams have credit facilities at their bank. The Rangers do not. Therein lies the rub. Any sensible company would not continue full steam ahead until the fuel runs out. Thus we are not talking about sensible and prudent comany mangement. Normally football companies are run by people who are football fans since they tend to receive token fees. The backroom staff and investors at Ibrox receive more money than the combined backroom income of every other team in the Chamionship and Leagues 1 and 2.
    Take a look at the addresses of the spivs. Tax haven upon tax haven.
    What we are watching is a textbook asset stripping of a company. Amazingly 22,000,000 pounds was injected at the start of the season in a share offer and all that money is gone- guess where it has gone. Thousands invested in season tickets promising a seattvery twoweks for a season and virtually all that money is gone. There are just a few more pounds left.
    Expect a rallying call soon for emergency funds from the Chairman flanked if he can by Super Salary, and Rangers greats. You can fool some pople all of the time and perhaps 2,000,000 could be raised from the knuckle draggers but I doubt that the City investors would be so stupid. Two million would keep them going another month and nicely line the spivs pockets. They will laugh at the WATP mugs as they buy their French castles.


  28. TSFM says: (591)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:24 pm
    It is worth remembering that when Donald Muir was “the enemy within” at RFC that although be implemented the bank’s austerity plan the club (it was just a club then-no company) that Lloyds still provided a credit line.
    Graham Wallace doesn’t have that facility (the £2.5Mill personal guarantee doesn’t really count IMO).


  29. Danish Pastry says: (1873)

    January 6, 2014 at 11:33 pm

    For most, it probably stems from the desire to see justice done. Then there’s those who despise everything the clubs — past and present — represent, and who long for the final, final demise.

    If you follow some of the fevered and baseless twitter rumours to source, they seem to start with someone who is just adding a bit more to the spiralling absurdity, either for a laugh or to boost their online profile. Or maybe they just enjoy seeing how easily people can be hooked by a rumour that, deep down, they want to be true?
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    Nail on head DP.

    Certainly the inevitability of the RTC-led insolvency prediction came to pass, but for Rangers fans, despite their protestations to the contrary, know that they were lucky to escape the slide into oblivion that everyone thought was a gimme.

    Of course the wishful thinking cuts both ways. TRFC fans wish fervently for Old Club status – and we have witnessed how powerful a stimulant that has been.

    You could argue (correctly imo) that participation on this site is stimulated by a wish for justice. Certainly from a bar-chart of our viewing figures you could see at a glance when big bad news days for TRFC occurred – and when good news days for TRFC occurred as well.

    I think we are often blind to realities we don’t savour, and even more blind when led by the likes of CtH who despite promising much and delivering squat, is still a big hero(ine) in many places.

    Of course we may yet get justice, and although I doubt, we may even see a non-fatal administration Ibrox, but I think it would do us a lot of good if we were just a wee bit more willing to look at things through a choice of prisms – and not just the one labelled “insolvency”.


  30. TSFM says: (591)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:24 pm
    …”Without another cash injection, they will be uncompetitive for the foreseeable future, but they will survive to fight another day….”
    This is the bit I’m getting at.
    Being uncompetitive for the foreseeable future is I think totally incompatable with WATP, it will leave no way back.
    And if they are indeed uncompetitive for the foreseeable future, how will the investors get their money back?
    Sell Murray Park somehow, take that money for the investors, then leave The Team mid-table for years?


  31. Partizani Tirana says: (27)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:15 pm
    The issue for GW is how to get more out of less.
    Clearly a competent coach would help a great deal ,but the current one is too expensive to sack.
    The low hanging fruit in this austerity scenario is (IMO) the staffing establishment is the other high earning members of Ally’s backroom team.


  32. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (244)

    January 6, 2014 at 11:53 pm

    TSFM says: (591)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:24 pm
    The brand will survive and we have seen in the summer of 2012 the lengths that those who govern the game were willing to bend the rules to ensure that A Rangers was playing at Ibrox.
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    Which makes the point I think. To be honest though, even if there were no OCNC argument, even if the fans, media and authorities had accepted the death of the old club – the brand would still have survived.

    The curious thing is that the SPL clubs, TRFC, the SFA and the media had less faith in the Rangers fans than most of us did, Rangers fans would have ensured the brand’s survival – of that I have no doubt – and that is why I think they will still (with the assistance of the same people as last time) ensure its survival. There may be a realisation eventually that the Old Club did in fact die, but Rangers will survive.


  33. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (244)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:56 pm
    ———————————————-

    It may be a brand, it may indeed survive. I cannot see any other option for them, at the moment, to do anything other than slash and burn the wage bill with a sale and leaseback of Ibrox.
    Ally, I think, will walk away when confronted with reality. He cannot ‘manage’ on a shoestring, there are many Rangerzzz men who can. I have no doubts a ‘mutual consent’ will be arranged, it is in everyone’s interest.
    I also think the likes of King etc would save them from liquidation 2 but admin must be an option being considered.
    Thoughts?


  34. To put things into perspective…it will take 3500 season tickets to be sold to cover Mr. McCoists yearly salary (without bonuse’s)


  35. Bawsman says: (249)

    January 7, 2014 at 12:11 am
    PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (244)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:56 pm
    ———————————————-

    It may be a brand, it may indeed survive. I cannot see any other option for them, at the moment, to do anything other than slash and burn the wage bill with a sale and leaseback of Ibrox.
    Ally, I think, will walk away when confronted with reality. He cannot ‘manage’ on a shoestring, there are many Rangerzzz men who can. I have no doubts a ‘mutual consent’ will be arranged, it is in everyone’s interest.
    I also think the likes of King etc would save them from liquidation 2 but admin must be an option being considered.
    Thoughts?
    ====================
    There is also the point that they have little option but to adopt Celtic’s strategy of develop and sell, but lack the infrastructure in terms of a scouting network to do so. (Maybe that is why a caller on Clyde said he heard they were after John Park). This requirement also suggests they need to keep Murray Park.

    Either that or its about finding players that Celtic do not wish to enter into a wage competition for because they are not worth the higher wage Celtic could offer if they wanted the same player. A bit like it was in reverse in the 50s and early sixties before Jock Stein.

    McCoist is not a manager from the develop your own school, having been tutored under Walter so a new manager will be required.
    All this will take time to put in place and the longer they delay embarking on this path the longer it will take before they become title challengers on footballing merit.


  36. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (246)
    January 7, 2014 at 12:01 am
    2 3 Rate This

    Partizani Tirana says: (27)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:15 pm
    The issue for GW is how to get more out of less.
    Clearly a competent coach would help a great deal ,but the current one is too expensive to sack.
    The low hanging fruit in this austerity scenario is (IMO) the staffing establishment is the other high earning members of Ally’s backroom team.

    Phil, you managed to sneak in two of my most hated management phrases there… “low hanging fruit” and “get more out of less”, said individuals consider that motivation !!

    Anyway for RFC(NIL)/TRFC fans post-AGM he choice is stark
    1) walk away and effectively kill off TRFC .
    2) keep going and give more moey to the spivs.

    Effectively the rock and the hard place!

    Will enough RFC(NIL)/TRFC fans kill their own thingy (use club/company/entity as desired here)?

    Bear in mind they know there will always be “A RANGERS”, it will play in blue and maybe even in ibrox, so why should they give the spivs more money.

    Based on those RFC(NIL)/TRFC fans and other supporters, no one can judge which way this will go.

    Buddy


  37. buddy_holly says: (138)
    January 7, 2014 at 1:52 am
    Apologies for the Boardroom gibberish 😳 😆
    I think the Sevco fans will go for (2) in enough numbers to keep things going-for now.
    Moreover I am of the opinion that the people in charge at Ibrox knows this to be so.


  38. Bawsman says: (249)
    January 7, 2014 at 12:11 am
    I realize that I have been fairly repetitive with the “austerity or insolvency” choice.
    However there is a way in which they can come together.
    A controlled insolvency would solve a lot of the cost cutting challenges.
    The people in charge would just have to be sure that they owned most of the debt (75%).
    The RFC/CW insolvency had HMRC in the driving seat.
    A controlled insolvency could see a debt for equity swap in a CVA.
    This would -of course-dilute down shareholders not in on it.
    All of this is perfectly legal and has some advantages in cutting these costs quickly.
    However I suggest that it is not the first option given the various problems associated with it.


  39. Even if GW does manage to reduce staff costs significantly whilst maintaining a coaching team at £1.5M p.a., and the fans buy STs at a significant increase, and the spivs resist the temptation to further drain cash via bonuses and their inflated salaries, if all this is achieved within the 120 days, there is still the major costs associated with the big house. Running costs, let alone repair and upgrading cannot be met from the existing budget. Even a sale/lease arrangement would involve the club sinking into an ever deeper credit hole.
    It is clear that Chuck’s sponsorship deals have locked them in very unfavourably with SD and others.
    Only someone willing to sink £70m into this venture, with no prospect of a return, can save sevco. Otherwise they will sink beneath the weight of their sense of entitlement, false hope and debt.


  40. TSFM says: (593)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:40 pm

    We are not here to discuss the mindset of Rangers players, officials or fans on the false premise that they are somehow a different breed.
    =========================
    Perhaps it was lost in the furore over his other comments, but Alex Thomson did quote this site as a responsibly moderated forum on his recent blog, which is true. Sadly though, he did imply Celtic fans were a different breed with his wildy general and surely inaccurate ‘most violent fans in the U.K’ statement. For this observer, A.T has lost much credibility by making such a statement.


  41. Got this from another forum, seemingly posted on Facebook last night by James Forrest.

    James Forrest
    3 hours ago near Glasgow
    Thanks tonight to a couple of guys on some of the Celtic pages who’ve flagged up a company called Garrion Security Limited. Who are they you might ask? They are a security company, formed in 2012, run out of Ibrox Stadium, with the mandate to provide security staff to Rangers and events at the ground.

    Why is this significant? Well their founders were two guys you might have heard of; Charles Green and Brian Stockbridge. Both served on the board, Green has since resigned. But the company they formed still lives.

    That company is drawing money out of Rangers like a vampire drinking blood.

    There is another company these two men played a part in forming, and like with Garrion, Charles Green has resigned from the board. It’s a company called Rangers Retail Limited, described as a “limited company with share capital.”

    Who owns the share capital? Green, certainly, owns some. Stockbridge does too. As does a guy called Mike Ashley. This company is the one that runs Rangers’ vast football merchandising arm through Ashley’s Sports Direct websites. But it’s not owned by the club … but by these three men.

    Who needs to be on the board at Ibrox to destroy that club from within? How many other wee companies have been formed inside or outside those walls, by men who’s names we know, and are now charging goods and services to the club itself, sucking the life out of it, day by day by day?

    This is the essence of the “bust out”, a planned bankruptcy, in which the directors and shareholders and financiers put nothing into the company themselves (except a few thousand pounds worth of shares priced at 1p), max out its credit card (or draw down its cash reserves) in small quantities over a period of months, until there’s not a penny left to spend, or to borrow … and then they find a sap and sell the wrecked, hollowed out shell to whoever wants it.

    Let’s face it, they’ll always be able to find a sap to buy this hunk of junk, provided they wrap it in the right colours.

    We are watching a live-action leeching here.


  42. From Richard Wilson in today’s Herald. Where on earth do you start with some of this?

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/striking-the-right-balance-crucial-as-wallace-and-mccoist-plan-ahead.23115080

    The chief executive wants to draw up and implement a football player asset strategy, and that begins with a discussion with the manager.

    They have the same aim, for Rangers to be successful on the field, and they need not have competing interests, since McCoist will have no more wish to spend money that Rangers cannot afford than Wallace himself. None the less, the complexities of the process and the dynamic at play will be significant for the club.

    By his own admission, Wallace needs to cut the cost base at Ibrox, as well as raising revenue streams. During last month’s annual meeting of Rangers International Football Club shareholders, he said that the “cost structure is currently too high for the top division, never mind for the lower leagues”, meaning that the business needs streamlined regardless of any commercial uplifts.

    This is a sensible and prudent strategy, and one that was critically missing from his two predecessors, Craig Mather and Charles Green. They were both courting public approval, but Wallace is a time-served corporate figure, and so brings the financial and business rigour that they did not apply. Indeed, any drastic cuts ought to have been implemented by Green in the summer of 2012, when the consortium he fronted bought the business and assets of Rangers Football Club plc in liquidation; that was the fresh start.

    Rangers need a coherent plan that addresses both short and medium-term progress, which is why the immediate issues Wallace will tackle cannot be considered in isolation.

    The extent of the required cost-cutting is unknown, but it is balance that is more important than simply reducing the bottom line. With Rangers potentially returning to the top-flight in 18 months, it would be a false economy to diminish the quality of the playing squad. There are players earning good money who have not contributed this season, either through the form of themselves or others; Emilson Cribari, David Templeton, or injury; Dean Shiels, Ross Perry, Kyle Hutton, but Rangers will also need to strengthen for next season’s campaign.

    Wallace and McCoist, in their assessment of the squad’s strengths and weaknesses, need to find where costs can be trimmed without affecting the strength of the playing staff overall. The manager and his coaches have agreed to take a wage cut, but any overall assessment of Rangers’ football department needs to take into account the requirement for a chief scout to be appointed and for the youth development set-up and sports science department to be able to operate best practice throughout. The planning for the next two years needs to begin now, and that will be as much a part of the meeting between Wallace and McCoist as any element of initial cost cutting.

    As Wallace has acknowledged, once he has balanced the incomings and outgoings he will draw up a business plan to enable fresh investment to be sought. If Rangers are to return to the status that the club previously held, and which supporters continue to expect, then the requirement is not just to apply some commonsense to the business as it stands, but generate new funding to invest principally in the team.

    It is a question of priorities, but every decision made now has an impact in the coming years. That is where Wallace and McCoist need to work together, to ensure a strategy that strengthens the football department in time.

    Supporters will tolerate cuts at this period in time, but there remains a sense of the fanbase making its own assessments of the current regime. The inevitable rise in season ticket sales for the Championship will be borne without complaint because fans understand the financial necessity, but also because of the excitement that will come from the campaign to try to return Rangers to the top flight. There will be wariness, though, if there is a perception that the squad is not good enough to take that challenge on.

    These are the demands and obligations that every club faces, of course. From the summer of 2012, when a registration embargo loomed and Rangers were in the bottom tier, to last summer, there has been an element of improvisation to the club’s signings. Rangers were restricted as they sought to add to the squad, and not least because the manager was never given a budget to work to. The working relationship between Wallace and McCoist is critical, and in a sense they are both under scrutiny; McCoist for the team’s performance, and Wallace for the business’s. He has already begun a review of every aspect of Rangers’ operations, so it is not just the football budget that is being assessed.

    Rangers are, effectively, in the middle of the journey back to the top flight. Decisions made in the coming months will determine what kind of force they will be when they do return.


  43. upthehoops on January 7, 2014 at 7:24 am

    From Richard Wilson in today’s Herald. Where on earth do you start with some of this?

    ————————————–

    Well that’s the first blow landed on the ribs of the Sevco support to soften them up for the barbaric cuts ahead. (Using a cotton wool boxing glove on a marshmallow cloud of whimsical loveliness)

    Poor sods


  44. upthehoops says: (781)

    January 7, 2014 at 7:24 am
    From Richard Wilson in today’s Herald. Where on earth do you start with some of this?
    ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
    Heres a clue
    Is GW being paid by the Spivs or the Requisitioners?
    Does GW intend to act as the Requistioners would have acted had they won the AGM vote?
    Nope
    Any so called “cost cutting” is intended to extract more short term money for the Spivs
    The quickest route to getting more money will be the path followed
    The rest is just spin


  45. upthehoops says: (781)
    January 7, 2014 at 7:21 am
    14 0 Rate This

    Got this from another forum, seemingly posted on Facebook last night by James Forrest.

    James Forrest
    3 hours ago near Glasgow
    Thanks tonight to a couple of guys on some of the Celtic pages who’ve flagged up a company called Garrion Security Limited. Who are they you might ask? They are a security company, formed in 2012, run out of Ibrox Stadium, with the mandate to provide security staff to Rangers and events at the ground.

    Why is this significant? Well their founders were two guys you might have heard of; Charles Green and Brian Stockbridge. Both served on the board, Green has since resigned. But the company they formed still lives.

    That company is drawing money out of Rangers like a vampire drinking blood.

    There is another company these two men played a part in forming, and like with Garrion, Charles Green has resigned from the board. It’s a company called Rangers Retail Limited, described as a “limited company with share capital.”

    Who owns the share capital? Green, certainly, owns some. Stockbridge does too. As does a guy called Mike Ashley. This company is the one that runs Rangers’ vast football merchandising arm through Ashley’s Sports Direct websites. But it’s not owned by the club … but by these three men.

    Who needs to be on the board at Ibrox to destroy that club from within? How many other wee companies have been formed inside or outside those walls, by men who’s names we know, and are now charging goods and services to the club itself, sucking the life out of it, day by day by day?

    This is the essence of the “bust out”, a planned bankruptcy, in which the directors and shareholders and financiers put nothing into the company themselves (except a few thousand pounds worth of shares priced at 1p), max out its credit card (or draw down its cash reserves) in small quantities over a period of months, until there’s not a penny left to spend, or to borrow … and then they find a sap and sell the wrecked, hollowed out shell to whoever wants it.

    Let’s face it, they’ll always be able to find a sap to buy this hunk of junk, provided they wrap it in the right colours.
    ===============================================

    Re: Garrion and RR

    Would it not be in these two companie’s interests to keep the ship afloat.
    That way, the money will be allowed to continually flow into the safe in Chico’s chateau.

    However, if the ship goes down, then all the contracts would be useless and the contracts would be null and void and the cash flow to garrion and RR would stop.

    N’est pas?


  46. Bawsman on January 6, 2014 at 11:48 pm
    59 1 Rate This

    Danish Pastry says: (1873)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:33 pm

    ————————————————–
    LTR/DP

    Personally, I keep tuning in because I am an auld romantic type.

    I have the naive notion that justice will not only be done but will seen to be done …
    ———–

    Same here @Bawsman. Great post.

    As the eloquent Redlichtie might say: Scottish football needs a strong sense of auld-school romanticism 🙂


  47. Yes the club died but the brand survived.

    But will the brand continue to survive?

    This brand doesn’t come cheap. Maintaining supremacy over Celtic and the rest of Scottish football does not come cheap. When RFC were liquidated they left behind upwards of £120m in unpaid debts, notwithstanding the £110m or so of Rangers’ debts that LBG had converted into equity in MIH effectively writing it off. That is a £1m monthly deficit over 20 years. The new Rangers are still continuing with this £1m a month deficit.

    Without supremacy on the park or at least the future expectation of it you will quickly see the numbers dry up at Ibrox. That is why austerity is doomed to fail. Even if Wallace is able to close off this structural deficit the resulting reduction in season ticket income and merchandise (maybe not this season or the next, but certainly not long after achieving premier league mediocrity) will open up the deficit again.

    In reality brand supremacy is unaffordable without a benefactor willing to pay £1m a month to finance it. The bears on their own are unwilling or unable. In the past 20 years that benelovence has been financed by you and me, taxpayer. Thankfully those days are now gone. Sevco may or may not survive another year or two. Third Rangers another year or two,but ultimately the brand is doomed.


  48. I can’t see Alistair associating himself with the austerity drive. He’ll, in my opinion, stand off to the side and let some other big bad person carry out the work. McCoist is the poster boy for the majority who believe this is a pedal to the floor ride on a steamroller back to the top division. How much dissent he’ll show I’m not sure, but this definitely isn’t close to Alistair’s comfort zone.


  49. It maybe semantics, but garry o’connor’s quote in today’s chip wrapper is worth a look

    . . . “It may take me three weeks to get up to Speed. . . “


  50. PhilMacGiollaBhain’s aside (the £2.5Mill personal guarantee doesn’t really count IMO) reminded me of a question I was meaning to ask – wasn’t that £2.5m in guarantees that enabled the auditors to sign off on accounts from the then directors? Are they all still in situ? And was this the equivalent of an overdraft (i.e. NewGers can tap it if they need it?) or is it something that gets negotiated once the clumpany asks for it?


  51. PhilMacGiollaBhain says: (249)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:13 pm
    11 1 Rate This

    The austerity will need to be brutal.
    It may well be a damn close run thing, but if GW takes no prisoners then it is possible.
    Murray Park seems to be the main issue here.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Phil,

    Based on the conversation I had with Malcolm Murray, I think Murray Park is the only asset of a value (and cost) which will allow austerity to actually work and if the Requisitioners recognised this, I presume GW will also… But how to realise it in such a way that allows a cash injection to the “Club”?

    The cutting of the wage bill through either shedding of enough high value staff won’t work unless they can sell them or they agree to waive the remainder of the contract and if they want to go down the redundancy route, where is cash for the payments coming from?

    Also, if they do a pre-pack CVA, as I asked before, surely they must honour ALL football debts to keep the license? This would presumably include player contracts? (Perhaps Allyjambo knows from his awareness of the Hearts situation?)


  52. Pailmac2: To put things into perspective…it will take 3500 season tickets to be sold to cover Mr. McCoists yearly salary (without bonuse’s)

    =================================================================================

    Hey Paul, I suppose that depends on the (new) cost of the rangers SBs. As suspected the price will more than likely go up by greater than 50%, so we may find that 2000 Sbs will cover McCoists salary…

    We project McCoist’s sal to be >£800k, add to that his car allowance, his expenses for travel, food (could be substantial), pension contribution (maybe another 5%), he probably has sign off on general sports equipment (without prior approval), office footprint costs, BONUS (£2-300k easily) and it will be closer to £1.3m. Question for the Gers support, does McCoist get win bonuses? How ludicrous would that be in the lower divisions? Another qn for the support to put to the board.

    If/when the SB cost rises, will we see less people take them up (because of the cost) or will there be a boost as they enter the championship and the take up as high as it is now?

    I think the major austerity items will be shown this month. Playing staff has to be the biggest drain. Maybe a coach laid off., be interested to see what McCoist has to say about those as they will obviously have a negative on his day to day running of the team.

    If they could have coped with much less admin/support staff I think those costs cuts would have been made already..

    Interesting posts on the spin off companies , (Imran), Stockbridge and Ashley set up… Leggo has suggested in the past that rangers get pennies for a shirt sale… Why cant the gers fans just ask the question, on a £40 shirt roughly what percentage of the cost comes into the clumpany? I have suggested for a long time that would not walk away with just £3-4m. The longer the present rangers run the more he will pocket.. Just my opinion.


  53. Tif Finn says: (1187)
    January 6, 2014 at 11:37 pm

    They didn’t seek oblivion with the previous club. They got it.

    Their huge issue just now, well their other huge issue, is the lack of a proper credit facility to see them over the really difficult period. Who is going to lend them money and on what terms.

    As far as I see it everything is cash flow just now, and when the cash runs out how do bills get paid. That includes a mental wage bill. As we have discussed before a business can’t really just get into debt, someone has to actually be lending it money.

    It’s not a case of brutal cuts to survive. It’s brutal cuts just to have a chance of survival. They may be going to the players and other staff very soon to ask for agreed pay cuts or deferments.
    ============================================================
    Tbh I have always seen the lack of credit facilities as a bit of a Red Herring. If they wanted credit they could get it although the interest rate would be high as there is always someobe prepared to lend if the profit margin is high enough.

    But the reason they haven’t gone for credit is they would need to allow a charge over the property and the spivs don’t want to share that particular pot of gold with anyone.

    They could also go for a debenture solution to raise cash using the property as a guarantee with members of the original consortium who are actually in control anyway or perhaps con an idiot into parting with cash. I’m not suggesting the Easdales are idiots – OK I’m a coward – but are they enough up to speed in all the nooks and crannies of City Spivvery to hold their own?

    I honestly don’t know the answer to that one but in looking at their businesses it looks like a lot of hard work and effort for not a lot of return in profits. That’s not how Spivs earn their millions.


  54. @Para Handy
    Also, if they do a pre-pack CVA, as I asked before, surely they must honour ALL football debts to keep the license? This would presumably include player contracts? (Perhaps Allyjambo knows from his awareness of the Hearts situation?)

    ———————————————————————————————————————————————

    I believe in Admin the players are free to move through TUPE. The company is obliged to offer new contracts on a similar basis to their present benefits, however redundancies (minimum) could be served on the playing staff and only those with a pay off figure pre-agreed within their contract would get the larger severance package. It would take a couple of months to wrap all this up imo.

    I am not sure what football debt they actually have, do they owe any other clubs? Regardless paying football debts (if any) would be part of the admin/CVA process UNLESS the SFA decide they want to try an enforce a 5-way-agreement like contract, which is totally dubious (at best) and certainly not legally binding. Then again who knows what Regan and Doncaster would come up with, they would be hard pressed to be any more unpopular with ALL fans in Scotland.. Again just my opinion.


  55. JimBhoy says: (19)
    January 7, 2014 at 9:48 am

    re McCoist and bonus
    ====================================
    According to the details of McCoist’s salary and bonus entitlement in his contract details spelt-out in the Rangers AIM Prospectus he hasn’t yet earned a bonus which makes the Stockbridge and Green bonus for winning the bottom League even more incredulous.

    UNDERNOTE

    In addition, Mr McCoist is entitled to bonus payments should the following events occur:
    (i) the Club wins the SPL and an additional bonus if this leads to automatic qualification to the Champions League Group;
    (ii) the Club wins the Scottish Domestic Treble;
    (iii) the Club qualifies for the Group Stage of the Champions League through the qualifying route;
    (iv) on qualification as one of the last of the 16 teams in the Champions League, such bonuses
    as are payable by the Company to the players plus an additional 25 per cent.; and
    (v) on receipt of prize money in respect of the European Competition (other than the
    Champions League), such bonuses as payable to the players.

    The agreement is terminable by RFCL for cause or on 12 months’ notice and by Mr McCoist
    on 12 months’ notice.


  56. @Eco Howdy mate…

    You will remember the East Fife fan who often posted on PMcC’s site under various guises.. Well he did have one suggestion that I thought may have had some accuracy, well certainly intriguing.. Kingy was around at the time (Mather’s jolly to SA, new chairman etc etc) when the accounts published showing the £2-2.5m credit facility.. The East Fife fan at the time suggested Kingy offered up that facility maybe as a down payment on a blazer and tie…

    However as we know things didn’t quite work out for the return of the King (for now), so chances are, that facility may have been withdrawn, if the submission above has any credibiliy.


  57. JimBhoy says: (20)
    January 7, 2014 at 10:06 am

    I believe in Admin the players are free to move through TUPE. The company is obliged to offer new contracts on a similar basis to their present benefits, however redundancies (minimum) could be served on the playing staff and only those with a pay off figure pre-agreed within their contract would get the larger severance package. It would take a couple of months to wrap all this up imo.

    Admin, in itself, does not trigger TUPE. TUPE only applies if the business (or part thereof) is transferred to another entity. Liquidation and Sevco triggered TUPE in 2012


  58. @Eco regards McCoists contract and bonuses, it is the norm for fotballing staff (mainly players) to get bonuses on various events, for players, getting into the first team squad on match day, appearance on the park, bonus per point, some will get more on goals scored, assistes, clean sheets. I know of one ex-Aberdeen player (my nephew was with them at the time) whose contract stated that if the club employed anyone who earned more than he did, he would automatically be on the same salary as the new boy (just as Billy Dodds signed for them)… Anyways I was just wondering if ALL details had to be disclosed on McCoist’s contract (in the accounts) or just those based on significant events (like you posted).. I would never assume that all the perks for McCoist are in public domain.

    I mention 5% pension, thats what I would get as a joe bloggs staff member but McCoist could easily be taking double that as tends to be the case with more snr staff.


  59. @Scottc of course you are correct mate thanks for that for some reason I was thinking of my own experiences where there was an outsourcing, ie new company.. Cheers JB


  60. Some excellent debate over the future of TheRangers, but few mentions of imminent CL success.

    The question of survival is “what will survive?”. I expect a team will always play in blue at Ibrox or TheIbrox. But is that survival if they rub along in the lower reaches for 15 or 25 years.

    Will WATP survive or will it become just a football club for football enthusiasts. Will repeated attempts to defibrillate WATP kill even the sustainable lower league club?

    When will the privilege and status of being a TheRangers man fade and rob the club of its establishment benefits And how long will it be necessary to maintain the OCNC fable?

    To me, recovering the current situation with TheRangers men in charge would earn someone canonization.. But with the spivs as owners and string pullers, the football and the fans should expect at least 12 years as a slave.


  61. Gang, reading a lot on the sale (maybe leaseback) of Murray park… I see the benefit in cutting this major cost, especially as it has had limited success in an youth academy sense. However they wuld then need to find a facility to train. Would there be much interest in the facilty if up for sale? Would a Leaseback be any less expensive to run? Maybe they could share the facility (and costs) I suppose.

    Didn’t they just undertake a very expensive resurfacing of the playing facilities.?


  62. upthehoops says: (781)
    January 7, 2014 at 7:21 am
    14 0 Rate This

    Got this from another forum, seemingly posted on Facebook last night by James Forrest.

    James Forrest
    3 hours ago near Glasgow
    Thanks tonight to a couple of guys on some of the Celtic pages who’ve flagged up a company called Garrion Security Limited. Who are they you might ask? They are a security company, formed in 2012, run out of Ibrox Stadium, with the mandate to provide security staff to Rangers and events at the ground.

    Why is this significant? Well their founders were two guys you might have heard of; Charles Green and Brian Stockbridge. Both served on the board, Green has since resigned. But the company they formed still lives.

    That company is drawing money out of Rangers like a vampire drinking blood.

    There is another company these two men played a part in forming, and like with Garrion, Charles Green has resigned from the board. It’s a company called Rangers Retail Limited, described as a “limited company with share capital.”

    Who owns the share capital? Green, certainly, owns some. Stockbridge does too. As does a guy called Mike Ashley. This company is the one that runs Rangers’ vast football merchandising arm through Ashley’s Sports Direct websites. But it’s not owned by the club … but by these three men.

    Who needs to be on the board at Ibrox to destroy that club from within? How many other wee companies have been formed inside or outside those walls, by men who’s names we know, and are now charging goods and services to the club itself, sucking the life out of it, day by day by day?

    This is the essence of the “bust out”, a planned bankruptcy, in which the directors and shareholders and financiers put nothing into the company themselves (except a few thousand pounds worth of shares priced at 1p), max out its credit card (or draw down its cash reserves) in small quantities over a period of months, until there’s not a penny left to spend, or to borrow … and then they find a sap and sell the wrecked, hollowed out shell to whoever wants it.

    Let’s face it, they’ll always be able to find a sap to buy this hunk of junk, provided they wrap it in the right colours.
    ==================================================================
    It’s easy to make wild accusations which may have some truth in them but without actual facts very difficult to prove and I doubt if any illegal acts have been carried out.

    Garrion Security was formed ostensibly in a bid to cut the costs of security at Ibrox basically by replacing the existing security provider as their contract or sections of it expired. From memory Garrion Security is a wholly-owned subsidiary of TRFCL which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of RIFC Plc.

    As far as I know employees of the former security company were offered jobs by Garrion at lower rates and poorer conditions but Tupe doesn’t apply. Some staff took it and some didn’t and the more experienced staff that remain are pretty scathing about the quality of the replacements but whether there is any truth in that or not is another issue.

    However from a business point of view it makes perfect sense and I haven’t looked for a while but again from memory Garrion Security is not owned by Green and Stockbridge and Green is no longer a director. I have seen no evidence provided that the company has been used to illegally syphon-off cash from Ibrox and may well be just be cutting costs. Of course perhaps the money saved by the move hasn’t been used as wisely as it shouyld have been but that doesn’t necessarily make anything illegal.

    Rangers Retail is a much more complex tale and I have written about it on many occasions previously. The Rangers AIM prospectus and other documentation show it as a subsidiary of either TRFCL or RIFC – can’t remember which but for present purposes not important. The reason it is listed as a subsidiary is that the Rangers company has 51% of the shareholding as opposed to the 49% shareholding of one of Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct subsidiaries.

    However as I revealed a long long time ago there are actually A and B shares which effectively means that when it comes to a vote on financial issues the Sports Direct shares count as double and the Rangers one count singly. So in any important votes Sports Direct has 98 votes and Rangers 51 which means Ashley always holds the majority vote.

    There are also a number of very advantageous clauses in the joint venture agreement in favour of Sports Direct which IMO Rangers were mad to sign or agree with or should I say Green. He is no longer a director on Rangers Retail although Stockbridge still is and I think there are 3 Sports Direct directors although that’s easy enough to check on Companies House.

    Again from memory Sport Direct under the agreement published in the AIM prospectus can buy Rangers out of Rangers Retails but the reverse isn’t true. The agreement also allows for a £1.5 million credit draw-down to be supplied to Rangers from Sports Direct with the loan guaranteed on heritable and leae-hold property held by TRFCL.


  63. As a practicing atheist brought up in a strong church going community I knew from an early age it wasn’t for me and that I’d leave it behind when adulthood loosened the hold of that community. I wonder how many young lads down Govan way are thinking along the same lines about the beliefs of their elders as they grapple with what they are led to believe about WATP glory, OCNC, CL potential etc etc and what they see before their eyes each fortnight at Ibrox. Will a generation or two of dropping observance and increased free thinking be the real death of TheRangers?


  64. There have been a number of comments this morning re Garrion Security Services Ltd which I believe are incorrect and just setting loose squirrels.

    Rangers Security Services Limited was set up on 28/09/2012 with two directors Brian Stockbridge and Charles Green.
    On 03/12/2012 the name was changed to Garrion Security Services Ltd.
    Charles Green resigned as a director on 31/05/2013.

    Rangers Football Club Limited is listed as owning 100% of Garrion Security Services Ltd
    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC433635/GARRION-SECURITY-SERVICES-LIMITED/group-structure

    This is confirmed on page 38 of the RIFC plc 2013 Annual Accounts.


  65. JimBhoy says: (24)
    January 7, 2014 at 10:15 am

    @Eco Howdy mate…

    You will remember the East Fife fan who often posted on PMcC’s site under various guises.. Well he did have one suggestion that I thought may have had some accuracy, well certainly intriguing.. Kingy was around at the time (Mather’s jolly to SA, new chairman etc etc) when the accounts published showing the £2-2.5m credit facility.. The East Fife fan at the time suggested Kingy offered up that facility maybe as a down payment on a blazer and tie…

    However as we know things didn’t quite work out for the return of the King (for now), so chances are, that facility may have been withdrawn, if the submission above has any credibiliy.
    =============================================================
    @ Jimbhoy – yea I have exercised the grey matter quite a bit on the guarantee and DK was one of the possibilities but whoever it was would need to be known to Deloitte and I think they would have been very wary of accepting a guarantee from DK.

    At the end of the day I believe Deloitte might come to look very foolish over ‘passing’ the accounts on the strength of a guarantee that fails to materialise when required.


  66. @MCFC Howdy mate I think we will see OC – Apprenticeship (rangers #2) – NC (rangers #3) come to pass…. Where the middle piece, currently so highly prized by the majority of the rangers fans, will be written off in time as a transitory phase to get to the real NC rangers run by real rangers men. The triumphs of the present rangers just baggaged up with the OC as part of the paid for history, seamless progression to the NC and no-one can tell them differently (deja- vu again)..

    I think the prestige and privilege of being in the class that is a rangers supporter is being diluted as every month passes in this ridiculous saga. It will never fully grow to what it was and will from time to time have a resurgence. I think the fallout to this story will have a major adverse effect on the written meeja, they have been shown up over the past few years for what they are hence why their sales are dropping by roughly 10% (i believe pa). The papers try to maintain a balance, rangers / celtic / rest of scottish football to try and appease all sets of fans but that is impossible in the current affairs of rangers (albeit some of the recent Celtic stuff has been deplorable), but over the piece there is more facts and investigations into Scottish football affairs to be had on some good sites like this. The Keyboard clatterers have outed the lazy Journos…


  67. jimlarkin says: (744)
    January 7, 2014 at 9:04 am

    Got this from another forum, seemingly posted on Facebook last night by James Forrest.
    ===============

    Is that really by James Forrest? Unusually for him, it seems to be factually incorrect.

    Both the companies he mentions appear as investments in the RIFC accounts, as follows-

    13. INVESTMENTS

    The Rangers Football Club Ltd holds investments in the following companies:

    Name of company Holding Proportion of Shares Held Nature of Business
    Garrion Security Services Ltd Preference Shares 100% Security
    Rangers Retail Ltd Ordinary Shares 51% Retail

    I’ve only just now noticed that RIFC is shown as only holding preference shares in Garrion. Normally, a company is controlled by the holders of the ordinary shares. I have checked with Companies House, and the annual return submitted for Garrion on 28/09/2013 shows only one ordinary share in issue, held by TRFC Ltd. No indication of any preference shares whatsoever. The sole director is Stockbridge.

    I had always believed (or assumed, more like) that a limited company had to have at least two shares in issue. I simply can’t get my head around the concept of a single share company, but I’m obviously wrong yet again.

    The preference share thing is interesting, though. Either Deloittes have made a mistake (possible but unlikely) or there were preference shares which have been cancelled (very unlikely, and if so the Garrion return is incomplete). Very strange, like most things Sevco.

    I have commented before on Rangers Retail. 51% of the shares are held by TRFC or RIFC, 49% by Sports Direct, but the shares are split into two classes, with all the relevant voting power sitting with the Class A shares held by Sports Direct. An unusual structure, the expression “smoke and mirrors” springs to mind. Somebody wants the bears to think that Rangers Retail is in house, whereas in fact it really isn’t.
    Mike Ashley is calling all the shots on that front, and any money going to TRFC from retail will be on Ashley’s say so.


  68. ecobhoy says: (2185)
    January 7, 2014 at 10:50 am

    Rangers Retail Limited was set up 13/07/2012 when Charles Green was in full money raising mode attracting the initial investors into the Great Gers Project.

    One of the initial investors was Mick Ashley who put in £1,500,000 for his 3,000,000 shares.

    I’ve always wondered if there is a link between this investment into Sevco 5088 and the agreement with Sports Direct to sell football tops to the bears.


  69. Apologies for my last post, I hadn’t seen Ecobhoy’s at 10.50 before posting, and mine is just an inferior rehash of the same stuff.


  70. JimBhoy says: (25)
    January 7, 2014 at 11:08 am

    Howdy mate – so many possibilities – all of which will be fun to watch.

    You’re absolutely right – the MSM are so compromised they have become a players on the panto stage instead of a reporter in the stalls. I wonder if they will ever realize that their lazy life of OF ping-pong is over forever. They might start reporting on the new reality before their papers fold for good – or maybe they’ll just go digital and join the bampoterati 🙂


  71. Para Handy says: (30)

    January 7, 2014 at 9:45 am

    ‘Also, if they do a pre-pack CVA, as I asked before, surely they must honour ALL football debts to keep the license? This would presumably include player contracts? (Perhaps Allyjambo knows from his awareness of the Hearts situation?)’
    _________________________________

    Sorry, Para. I’m afraid I have no knowledge of how this will pan out, though it has been discussed on here that money has been held back from the CVA sum offered, at the insistence of the SPFL/SFA, to meet ‘football debts’. I do know that at least 3 players, MacDonald, Hamill and Stevenson, agreed wage cuts, though I don’t know if there is an agreement to pay backdated pay should the club survive. Perhaps Motherwell or Dundee fans will have a better idea how it panned out for the players whose contracts were terminated during administration, as these things tend to become clearer after the event, rather than during it.


  72. Allyjambo. Not sure about players but when Chisholm and Dodds were made redundant by Dundee’s administrator they had to join the general melee of those who were owed money by the club. They eventually had to settle for something in the pound (6p?) having both voted against the CVA. One could surmise that Billy generally kens what’s important when it comes to spendoolacs.


  73. ernie says: (35)

    January 7, 2014 at 1:15 pm

    Cheers Ernie. That would seem to suggest that an administration wouldn’t save much, or any, money by making players/coaches redundant as those effected would have the same claim within the CVA as the spivs/RIFC.

Comments are closed.