Reflections on Goalposts

ByDanish Pastry

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.

About the author

Danish Pastry author

4,642 Comments so far

Lord WobblyPosted on8:32 am - Jan 21, 2014


‘ALLY McCOIST last night launched a staunch defence of Rangers’ plush pre-match preparations for Forfar.

And the Gers boss, below, vowed his squad will continue to be treated like royalty for as long as the club can afford it.’

He said: “I can understand people questioning it but it’s my job as the Rangers manager to give our players the best opportunity we can to perform.
“We are still Rangers Football Club and have always attempted to be as professional as we can”.

“That will never change as long as I’m manager”.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manager-ally-mccoist-launches-defence-3042744

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:33 am - Jan 21, 2014


Exiled Celt says:
January 21, 2014 at 3:43 am

Here is my view – all of course my own opinion – but nonetheless as a disclaimer I could be wrong, but I of course think I may well be right.
======================================
Brilliant read and well presented and I also think you are much more likely to be right than wrong when The Journey comes to an end.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:42 am - Jan 21, 2014


Lord Wobbly says:
January 21, 2014 at 8:32 am

‘ALLY McCOIST last night launched a staunch defence of Rangers’ plush pre-match preparations for Forfar.

And the Gers boss, below, vowed his squad will continue to be treated like royalty for as long as the club can afford it.’

He said: “I can understand people questioning it but it’s my job as the Rangers manager to give our players the best opportunity we can to perform.
“We are still Rangers Football Club and have always attempted to be as professional as we can. That will never change as long as I’m manager”.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/manager-ally-mccoist-launches-defence-3042744
=============================================================
I wonder what other shareholders who paid 70p a share make of Ally’s position especially as he went shopping for his own shares in the Penny Bazaar.

Surely he is asking to be chopped while still on his full salary to ease the pain of being forced out of his beloved Ibrox against his will 😆

Surely no Plc Board could put up with these utterances from a man described in the Rangers IPO AIM Prospectus as one of only two ‘key’ employees at the club. The other one was Imran Ahmad and that didn’t end well either 🙄

View Comment

stevensanphPosted on8:53 am - Jan 21, 2014


An interesting article by Tom English. I predicted when the accounts came out that they would be out of money come January. Take out a little bit of the cost (eg, Ally’s pay cut 🙂 ) and you might extend that to February.

But i’ve scratched my head on how they get to April with 1m in the bank… Unless.

1) They take the 2.5m facility detailed in the last accounts.
2) They extend payment terms with suppliers/slow down the payment of suppliers.

There was a post on the last page from a poster insinuating that a friend had supplied services at Ibrox and not been paid. One way of getting to April would be to simply stop paying suppliers, or extending the credit terms with these suppliers. Extending terms out to say 90 – 120 days would allow Wallace to tell the truth to English (they are upto date, as they are not due till April), while allowing the business to stumble on. As long as essential services are paid for, other suppliers can be left past the payment terms until they start threatening legal action – at this point and only this point, you pay them. What was that Singaporean company that did that last year? Ortiz?

I believe the aim of Wallace is to get this trainwreck through to April/season ticket renewal time. At that point, you can switch the assets to satisfy the debt owned to RIFC from TRFC and dump the club (minus stadium, advertising, catering, training ground and shirt deals) to the fans/Rangers men, with the attraction that there is season ticket sales to come to keep them afloat for another season (albeit with massive cost cutting).

That’s when the fun will begin…

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on9:00 am - Jan 21, 2014


selfassessor says:
January 20, 2014 at 11:04 pm
……………………………………
How’s this for a corker…I had a Company vehicle a few years back….had it for 6 years…each year I had to pay the same amount of cash in Benefit in Kind?…I spoke to HMRC and asked why as the cars value dropped each year therefore so shoud the Bik….the answer from HMRC…if we allowed the owner to submit a new value each year it would be open to fraudulent values being submitted…so I then asked…’so to stop a fraud you commit a fraud?’…clearly they could not answer that with a straight yes or no…but in essence they applied the tax to a value knowing it to be false….they finished the call with…’it is what it is’…
=====================================================================
I’m not a tax expert – just a sufferer 😆

However surely the car value is written down each year through depreciation and this shows in the books and tax returns submitted – so what’s wrong in changing the annual BIK figure to match the depreciated value and then there can be no suggestion of a ‘fraudulent’ BIK value being used.

View Comment

coatbrigbhoyPosted on9:06 am - Jan 21, 2014


By Michael Gannon

Manager Ally McCoist launches his defence of Rangers’ expensive pre-match preparations:

You do what you think is right

Then the clincher

“It would be disrespectful just to turn up. The Forfar players were away for a pre-match meal as well.”

So Forfar had booked into the four-star Carnoustie Hotel, ……….did they ?

View Comment

coatbrigbhoyPosted on9:12 am - Jan 21, 2014


McCoist,as confusing as ever when asked about his forthcoming meeting (s) with Wallace

“I don’t know what to expect, it’s not my gig.

“I’m not closing my eyes to the situation like some people seem to think.

“I’m very aware of the situation and we’ll react accordingly.”

we’ll “REACT ” accordingly

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:49 am - Jan 21, 2014


Quick points

Tif,

My understanding is if you cannot pay your debts when due and avenues of credit are exhausted then you are bankrupt (see Rolls Royce amongst others for details). You are not trading whilst insovent as long as you have verifiable assets behind you. Good job there’s no question over the ownership of the assets eh!

Re the Carnoustie 11. Really the message is to the true blue suppliers (I can’t imagine there’s many of a green persuasion offering tick). You are all contributing to this magnificent unbeaten run. We are royalty as long as we are winning – the four star formula to beat guys coming off the day shift surprisingly seems to work. Now if you’d just ignore that invoice just a wee bit longer….

and finally, and most importantly, re the Forfar Catering and half time Bridies.

Can’t believe no-ones asked yet……..were there ingin ane’s?

Angus where are you? Your cue, sir.

View Comment

ZilchPosted on9:59 am - Jan 21, 2014


Some really clear, concise analysis above – great stuff !

I am currently trying to get my head round one aspect of the asset shift / leaseback scenario.

If RIFC “dump the club (minus stadium, advertising, catering, training ground and shirt deals) to the fans/Rangers men” – who are the “Rangers men / fans” going to be?

I get the bit about hundreds of thousands (possibly millions or billions) of Gers fans desperate to save their club, but history tells us that they are not so keen on financing it. At least not to the extent required to fuel global domination or even Scottish supremacy.

So who is the sugar daddy going to be this time?

I ain’t sure that Dave King is daft enough to part with the kind of cash needed to keep the Replica Ship Rangers afloat – particularly when he knows it is simply lining the pockets of the RIFC spivs.

TBH – you would either have to be mad or sufficiently wealthy that it did not matter.

In the latter case you would just buy the institution lock stock and barrel – didn’t see too many lining up to do that previously when it was going for a quid – is it likely now? Hmmmm….

So who will it be then?

And how much would it cost to keep the lights on (the roof on?) and pay the rent, never mind “bring back the glory days”?

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:00 am - Jan 21, 2014


Smugas says:
January 21, 2014 at 9:49 am

My understanding is if you cannot pay your debts when due and avenues of credit are exhausted then you are bankrupt (see Rolls Royce amongst others for details). You are not trading whilst insovent as long as you have verifiable assets behind you. Good job there’s no question over the ownership of the assets eh!
=====================
Assets are fine if you can turn them into cash, but if you can’t, then you shouldn’t be running up bills you can’t pay on time.

There are two tests for insolvency defined in Section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986, being 1) are assets exceeded by liabilities and 2) is the entity failing to discharge its debts as and when they fall due. If an entity fits either of these criteria then it is technically insolvent.

Assuming TRFC own the properties, then they are probably not insolvent under 1) but will still be technically insolvent if they haven’t the cash to pay their bills.

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on10:04 am - Jan 21, 2014


Manager Ally McCoist launches his defence of Rangers’ expensive pre-match preparations:

I wondering if this is signs of the attitude you sometimes get when a company makes cuts to salaries and staff benefits. His train of thought may be “F**k them, I’m taking them for what I’m entitled to which is a sign of a widening divide between company and staff. You have seen what others have taken or still take and the sacrifices you have been asked to make and resentment creeps in. He may even see the writing on the wall and so if they are going down they are going down in style, a last supper almost.

Can you describe it as reasonable expense when it’s an evening kick off and only a couple of hours up the road ?

I’m also wondering who took the booking ” hello can I have 15 twins and dinner for 30″ “sure that’s available and it will be £x, what’s the name and how are you paying and can I just take some credit card details” I know what I’d be looking for if I was the manager of the property.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on10:17 am - Jan 21, 2014


ecobhoy says: January 21, 2014 at 9:00 am
selfassessor says: January 20, 2014 at 11:04 pm

Another bugbear of mine is insurance companies who know that value of the car insured is going down year on year but the premiums go up, or if you are lucky stay the same. I had an fairly old banger, which got nicked, was insured for £3500, they said the book value had gone down to £1750, minus excess, here’s your 4 marbles and two bazooka joe wrappers… Hey, if you KNOW the value of the car is £1750 (from the book we’re not allowed to see) WTF are you encouraging me to insure it for 2x the value knowing you will never pay out? Crooks.

OK, back onto topic:

So Steve Simonsen, who was recently highlighted as a “luxury buy” and an example of NewGers acquiring expensive talent they don’t really need was singled out for praise by Ally “Alistair” McCoist on his debut. Graham Shiels who was recently hightlighted as a signing on decent wages that wasn’t getting a game got a “rare start” and scored a brace.

Has recent criticism of these types of “luxury” singings prompted McCoist to change his selection of late? Or just coincidence? I genuinely don’t know, so perhaps some of our bluer-nosed posters on here could infiorm us if there were injuries or suspensions (sorry, clearly I’m not obsessed enough to know the minutiae of the NewGers treatment room…)

View Comment

BrendaPosted on10:19 am - Jan 21, 2014


Nothing mccoist says makes sense but this has been the case for a long, long time, I have met him on several occasions he was always very charming and courteous but then again I was young and daft then 😉 the words I would use to describe him now are arrogant, forgetful (he keeps contradicting himself) and my fave adjective on the sevco saga ‘sleekit’……. Have a nice day, maybe we’ll have some cost-cutting news by the end of play today 😀

View Comment

stevensanphPosted on10:21 am - Jan 21, 2014


neepheid says:January 21, 2014 at 10:00 am
Assuming TRFC own the properties, then they are probably not insolvent under 1) but will still be technically insolvent if they haven’t the cash to pay their bills.
———————

but if they are just deliberately not paying them, when there is cash in the bank to pay them, that isnt trading while insolvent. Extend the payment terms as long as possible, then ‘forget’ to pay certain non essential suppliers until they kick up a fuss is an entirely legal, but immoral way of doing business.

Of course, you run the risk a supplier might go straight to a winding up order over the unpaid debt, but the costs, hassle and bad publicity is probably enough to stop most business’ doing this. Instead, they’ll keep phoning and sending emails…

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:23 am - Jan 21, 2014


Neepheid,

Funnily enough I had something similar in the back of my mind – I think is it not something to do with the americanisation of the term bankrupt? I would be very surprised (although I’ve said that before in this affair) if a Judge approved a trading whilst insolvent decision in the event that test 2 had been failed but 1 was rectifiable. Cue Whytie!

I’m still of the opinion that its the authorities that need to look at the situation as opposed to a high court judge. I can understand, in fact absolutely expect, a shrug of the shoulders and a “that’s a rule needs changing” quote the very second RFCnew hit 26 points of a defendable lead. In fact I have a degree of sympathy as I’m a firm believer in such rules being in place before a competition starts and not changed during it. In this particular situation though there is an interesting contra angle in that the active creditor also dictates next season’s ticket prices and possible rent. Both the club and the fans are effectively held to ransom. That can’t be good but then their defence (again my expectation) will be “well here’s 37,500 people that weekly disagree with you.”

Who’s right?

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on10:32 am - Jan 21, 2014


http://www.theaa.com/route-planner/index.jsp#fromNode=0%7CIbrox%20Stadium%7C%7C-4.311093%7C55.853551%7CtoNode=0%7CForfar%20Athletic%20Football%20Club%7C%7C-2.884924%7C56.652264

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on10:39 am - Jan 21, 2014


@Coatbrigbhoy Howdy mate AMcC is going round in circles, he is gettig tied up in his own words and he is obviously playing games to keep the fans on his side and those who need to make the hard decisions at arms length… He has actually been doing that since Green hit the scene and all who have followed..
Now he seems to realise he is now amongst men who are reallly trying to do a proper job and all the bad stuff that needs to come with that and they go against the ‘Money in the bank, no debt’ mantra that he likes as it allows him to hide his own frailties as a manager, ie, buy his way out of a hole..!!
Some rangers fans see thru AMcC but if the raise those concerns they are sometimes shot down by some of the loyal bears.

Reardless of what is about to transpire, one thing will run true imo, the rangers fans will stick to the viewpoint that they and their great club are the VICTIMS in all this. Victims at the expense of (SDM, well never to be voiced of course), Whyte, Green & Imran, D&P, SFA, Lawell, Malkie, Mather, the rebels, Sons of struth, Soon to be Stockbridge and more to come no doubt…. Victims or sheep???

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on10:42 am - Jan 21, 2014


Could deliberately engineering an administration event be seen as another different breaking of the rules such as bringing the game into disrepute? CW’s deliberate non- payment of PAYE & NIC was deemed quite separate from going into administration although I believe this was qualified by the suggestion that at least at the time of non-payment, the Ibrox club could afford to do so.

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on10:49 am - Jan 21, 2014


Lots of talk about either an agreed or otherwise extension of credit terms, but this is only a trick that can be played once. So is bringing forward the Season Tickets payment due date. Both undoubtedly help see the Ibrox club through to the end of this season but equally both mean an inevitable hangover for next season’s 2nd tier challenge. I have no doubt that if the Ibrox club believe that taking the points hit this season is in their best interests (they won’t worry for a nanosecond whether they will get away with it) this is exactly what they will do. They will also continue to claim unsurpassed dignity even if they indulge in such shameless cheating.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on10:55 am - Jan 21, 2014


@Stevensanph
Of course, you run the risk a supplier might go straight to a winding up order over the unpaid debt, but the costs, hassle and bad publicity is probably enough to stop most business’ doing this. Instead, they’ll keep phoning and sending emails…
=================================================================================
What if the major supplier/creditor is HMRC (again), maybe that’s the play here again… Is this the next big piece to break in Feb..

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on11:16 am - Jan 21, 2014


Am I correct in believing that no explanation was offered about why the start of the Ibrox club’s player registration embargo was not immediate but delayed until after the next ‘transfer window’?
Am I also correct in believing that in that ‘transfer window’ the Ibrox club registered more players than any other club in the country?
And am I also correct that the 18 month player registration embargo only covered two ‘transfer windows’?
And finally am I also correct that by using ‘the pre-signing trialist loophole’ the Ibrox club again registered more players in that ‘transfer window’ than any other club in the country?

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on11:28 am - Jan 21, 2014


as saving of 85 minutes

http://www.theaa.com/route-planner/index.jsp#fromNode=0%7CCarnoustie%20Golf%20Hotel%20%20Spa%7C%7C-2.713811%7C56.498520%7CtoNode=0%7CForfar%20Athletic%20Football%20Club%7C%7C-2.884924%7C56.652264

View Comment

Billy BoycePosted on11:48 am - Jan 21, 2014


That ‘dick’ Campbell has been shouting his mouth off in the wake of the superior Sevco skill on show last night. Is it just envy – or perhaps some subtle sarcasm on his part, I wonder?

(from the Sky Sports website)

Forfar boss Dick Campbell was impressed by his side’s opponents.

“Get off Rangers’ backs,” he said. “The goals they scored were magnificent. World class. Honestly, Barcelona couldn’t defend those two goals. Credit to them, their quality beat us. You would expect that because they are full-time, while I have got plumbers and boys coming off the boats at half five to play. So I have no excuses.”

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on11:55 am - Jan 21, 2014


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/tom-english-interviews-rangers-ceo-graham-wallace-1-3275716

Tom English does not like Brian Stockbridge
“but what about a proposal to cut the wages of the executives? At what point do you target them? We all know who we’re talking about here. Rarely have I seen a more unpopular executive at a football club than Brian Stockbridge”.

Here’s a thought Tom. Stockbridge was put in place to do a specific job for the shareholders who own and control the company. He is still doing that job because those shareholders are happy with his performance. And he will continue to do that job and only leave when it suits those shareholders.

Graham Wallace is in the same position. He has his job because he has been put in place by the shareholders who own and control the company. His job, like Stockbridge, is to run the company on behalf of those shareholders.

Stockbridge and Wallace will both stick to ‘the plan’ which, in the short term, is to get the bears to cough up for another round of season tickets and for the assets to be stripped out of TRFC Ltd.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on12:07 pm - Jan 21, 2014


As I understand it there are effectively two types of insolvency.

The first is when the value of your liabilities is greater than the vvalue of your assets. Strictly speaking you could not pay everything you owed if you were forced into it, but this is not a real issue as it would rarely happen.

The second, and much more important is when you cannot pay your bills, as they fall due. That is when the real problems start. Unless you can make an arrangement with your debtor, or borrow the money to pay them then you have a real issue and they can move to have your business wound up in order to satisfy your debts to them

This is what happened with Hearts, they could not pay HMRC several times and HMRC applied for winding up orders. Hearts managed to pay at the last minute but eventually they got to the stage where they simply could not pay anyone and were placed into administration.

In my opinion, based on the values they have placed on the assets Rangers probably do not fall foul of the assets / liabilities test, and it really isn’t an issue anyway. As Phil has pointed out it is that fabled “internal debt”. However if they get to the stage where there is no cash to pay other creditors, that is when the real problems kick in.

View Comment

ThomTheThimPosted on12:09 pm - Jan 21, 2014


TSFM,
For the second time,in the last few days, I have had posts removed.

In the interests of clarity, can you explain, specifically , why.

In both cases, I don’t believe I breached the rules. However, if I have, I would appreciate which rule I broke.

PM us.
TSFM

View Comment

rabtdogPosted on12:10 pm - Jan 21, 2014


people or organisations in positions of power, who have found themselves in what are alleged to have been morally dubious situations, often seem to cry “victim” when faced with accountability – see LibDem peer Lord Rennard for example… the phenomenon is not unique to Rangers/Sevco

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on12:16 pm - Jan 21, 2014


The concept of “trading whilst insolvent” does not exist in law here. I think there is a risk of confusing when a company is insolvent (in terms of s123 of the Insolvency Act) and when the directors are at risk of wrongfully trading under s214 of the Insolvency Act.

Wrongful trading is not criminal and only a subsequently appointed insolvency practitioner can take action against the director(s) who indulged in/permitted the wrongful trading.

The test for wrongful trading is not whether at any time a company is insolvent (either cashflow insolvent or balance sheet insolvent) but whether the directors knew or ought to have concluded that there was no reasonable prospect of the company avoinding insolvent liquidation.

Even if a company is balance sheet insolvent it does not mean it cannot avoid liquidation. Even if a company is cashflow insolvent it does not mean it cannot avoid liquidation. Even if it is both kinds of insolvent, liquidation can still be avoided.

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on12:21 pm - Jan 21, 2014


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/tom-english-interviews-rangers-ceo-graham-wallace-1-3275716

The “A” word not mentioned and the Insolvency question unasked.

jack is on the ball….

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on12:22 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Recently I worked for a major iconic High Street retailer and I was out with most of my former colleagues on Saturday night. They were explaining that results at Christmas for the group were not good which was wildly discussed in the news. Overall their branch performed well. What I found disgusting was that these poor staff who are on in most cases a £1 above minimum wage are being asked in January to take unpaid leave where possible to reduce the deficit as it is “Being demanded by the City”. What really gets me is that figures were down some 2% and the profit was still in the multi millions. Why is it then that Football Clubs can go on making losses and nobody in “The City” says boo

View Comment

rabtdogPosted on12:23 pm - Jan 21, 2014


passing observation of the day no.2

After Murray (debt), after Whyte (administration) and after Green (opportunist) wouldn’t it be funny if a real, head-screwed-on professional appeared – Wallace – but he was the one who precipitated the fans walking away? Three strikes, cutbacks, disillusion, over & out. Interesting…

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on12:45 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
January 21, 2014 at 12:16 pm

Even if a company is balance sheet insolvent it does not mean it cannot avoid liquidation. Even if a company is cashflow insolvent it does not mean it cannot avoid liquidation. Even if it is both kinds of insolvent, liquidation can still be avoided.
=========================================================
How would a company avoid insolvency in the above three scenarios?

View Comment

neepheidPosted on12:52 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Smugas says:
January 21, 2014 at 10:23 am

I believe that either one or two are conclusive of insolvency on their own. I’ve just done a bit of research on the legal aspect, and came up with this:

Wrongful Trading is an unlawful act set out in Section 214 of the Insolvency Act 1986. Insolvent Trading or trading whilst insolvent may be evidence of an act of Wrongful Trading, however it is not of itself an unlawful act. The difference is whether the period of trading while insolvent actually leads to an insolvent liquidation. If it does, and if the directors should have foreseen that the creditors would lose out, then a charge of wrongful trading could be brought against the directors, resulting in personal liability for company debts.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on12:59 pm - Jan 21, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 21, 2014 at 12:45 pm
0 0 Rate This

How would a company avoid insolvency in the above three scenarios?

=======================
Is that not what a sugardaddy is for? A share issue could also bring in the cash to avoid an insolvency event, although you have to wonder who would subscribe in such circumstances.

Campbellsmoney, apologies for my last post, just covering points you had already covered. I hadn’t seen yours before I pressed the button.

View Comment

PlugholePosted on1:00 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Lord Wobbly says:
January 21, 2014 at 8:32 am
18 0 Rate This

‘ALLY McCOIST last night launched a staunch defence of Rangers’ plush pre-match preparations for Forfar.
And the Gers boss, below, vowed his squad will continue to be treated like royalty for as long as the club can afford it.’
“That will never change as long as I’m manager”.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

neepheid says:
January 21, 2014 at 10:00 am

There are two tests for insolvency defined in Section 123 of the Insolvency Act 1986, being 1) are assets exceeded by liabilities and 2) is the entity failing to discharge its debts as and when they fall due. If an entity fits either of these criteria then it is technically insolvent.

Assuming TRFC own the properties, then they are probably not insolvent under 1) but will still be technically insolvent if they haven’t the cash to pay their bills.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Wallace and McCoist both know this is the end. McCoist admits he wll not reign in spending while it can be afforded, ie when there is liquid cash. Wallace continues to provide liquid cash to ensure it gets spent and ensure it runs out, so that other bills cannot be paid, thereby facilitating insolvency.
TRFC moves into administration or gets bought for a quid, the assets get sweated or flogged off by RIFC PLC.
McCoist is the worst of the two as he konows this is the end game and has consistently lied to his own fans, while enriching himself. He won’t walk away, he’ll get kicked out, if they survive or drive off blaming everyone else if they padlock the gates. He is a truly revolting specimen.

View Comment

manandboyPosted on1:07 pm - Jan 21, 2014


http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25824196

“We are still Rangers Football Club ….” Ally McCoist, (Hector, wake up, and take note)

and still living in the parallel universe.

A spokesperson is believed to have said that a return to Planet Fitba is not expected until after the ST’s for next season have been sold, and even that will be just to collect the money.

She then said, ‘Watch this space’, before disappearing in a flash.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on1:10 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
January 21, 2014 at 11:09 am
———-
What could always previously have been put down to the odd individual rotten apple- a particular referee, a Farry, or Walker or some such ( who all paid some kind of price ( and did not get re-employed later by the SFA as did the infamous Dougie) was exposed as ‘institutional’ corruption, naked and obscenely in our faces.

I don’t think the enormity of that crime committed by the Football “Authority” (!) has yet been fully realised.

And I do not hesitate to state that they stand ready to commit any and all offences against sporting integrity and truth which they would deem necessary to save the failing RIFC.

And,if that effort fails, they will happily be midwife to the birth of another bastard club.

They have sold their soul big-time.

They would do it again without a blush, while hypocritically spouting nonsense about efforts to ‘Keep it Clean’
There must be a complete change , and honest clubs must be made to force that change, if they are not prepared to do it because it is right!

View Comment

PhilMacGiollaBhainPosted on1:11 pm - Jan 21, 2014


For the avoidance of doubt:
TE should have asked GW the Administration question.
If the PR people then called the interview off then that’s the story.
TE must have a very understanding editor if that copy is acceptable.
THE most important question was not asked.

View Comment

Galling fiverPosted on1:11 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Not back slapping.

But I find it almost unbelievable that the author of a best selling book, detailing the downfall of RFC has not been invited to opine on the endless outlets of TV/Radio/MSM discussing the matter in the usual protected environment. Although I’m not sure I’d fancy BEING the :slamb: , as that may be the result.

Its becoming obvious that even a minority of the majority 😉 are scunnered with looking gullible, and that their opinions are being manipulated by the machine, yet they make no request for anything resembling a dissenting view to re-evaluate, other than maybe reading a book they no doubt stipulate a mate :mrgreen: bought.

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on1:23 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Reading the above about Stockbridge’s teflon role it occurred to me that he might be either Blue Pitch Holding or Margarita (who have sold on their interest). My reasoning is that he has very few 1p shares for someone who entered so early and appears to be at the epi-centre of things. It might explain his favoured place with the “investors” and might conveniently position him more as a paid-employee Financial Director rather than a player in his own right – to be scrutinized. Not a shred of evidence you understand – just a passing thought.

My mischievous side then wandered to other possible identities of BPH & M. Bear with me – but – what if real Rangers haters had taken a sneaky punt – nothing malicious – just for a bit of a giggle you understand. And then it struck me. If Cardinal Richelieu and Niccolò Machiavelli were BPH & M – what more damage could they have done down Ibrox way, what more humiliation could they have engineered, what more pain could they have inflicted, what more cognitive dissonance could they have induced, what more indignity could they have solicited, what more intrigue could they have conjured and what more money could they have extracted. No more witnesses m’lud, I rest my case.

View Comment

RaymacPosted on1:25 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Would you deliver services to Newclub if they didn’t pay cash upfront? I mean, they have previous here. Has the VAT, N.I., Tax been paid? How about the work already completed round the stadium. Has that been paid for? The longer they linger about without drastic costcutting, the tighter the rope round their necks will get.
That will be £1,000 quid please.
No, I won’t give you my VAT number.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on1:46 pm - Jan 21, 2014


I am surprised the rangers settled for a 4 star hotel, I would have thought a 5 star would be more apt.. maybe travelludge from next month..!!!

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on1:48 pm - Jan 21, 2014


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/interview-craig-whyte-chairman-of-rangers-fc-1-2098205

published just over a week before RFC admin in 2012

this week – tom spoke to CEO Wallace – naw, surely not…..just a coincidence right?

View Comment

Greenock JackPosted on1:56 pm - Jan 21, 2014


PMGB
For the avoidance of doubt:
TE should have asked GW the Administration question.
If the PR people then called the interview off then that’s the story.
TE must have a very understanding editor if that copy is acceptable.
THE most important question was not asked.
————————————————————————-
Why not tweet Tom English directly and ask?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on2:05 pm - Jan 21, 2014


After first reading TE’s interview with GW I thought all the hard questions had been answered in a ‘no doubt’ fashion, but on re-reading I’m now not so sure. As an example I’ve chosen the following two, linked, questions and answers.

TE: Is the club up to date with payments on tax and VAT?
GW: Yeah, completely.

TE: All bills being paid on time?
GW: Yeah. Trading as per normal. There is no issue there.

Re the tax and VAT response; the value of that answer depends on whether the most recent tax and VAT bills, due this month, I believe, were payable on or before the date of the interview. If not, it could be an accurate answer, but…
There’s also the distinct possibility that, in the true ‘Rangers’ way, tax bills that would otherwise be outstanding, are currently under appeal!

Then; ‘Trading as per normal’. Does that mean, ‘as per normal for a Rangers’? Or, ‘trading and paying our bills as they fall due’? Also, he could have said, if true, something along the lines of, ‘there are no outstanding bills, all our bills are paid as they fall due’.

As per usual, answers accepted by the interviewer with no follow up or pressure applied. I suppose it’s a necessary failing, if the interviewer wants access to the CEO in future!

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on2:05 pm - Jan 21, 2014


On players wages, it was claimed that Fransisco Sandaza was on fixed increases, one wonders if anyone else has a similar arrangement.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2303592/Francisco-Sandaza-sacked-Rangers-club-investigated-hoax-phone–listen-clip.html

Last night, the player and his father were taking legal advice over the cancellation of his £4,500-a-week deal, just nine months after his arrival.

Sandaza’s wages would have risen over the period of his four-year contract, reaching £10,000 weekly for the final 12 months.

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

That would be, dare I suggest it, catastrophic.

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on2:11 pm - Jan 21, 2014


How the diddy teams in the Premiership (England) do it – http://www.ellisonstravel.com/Premiership-Coach-Range

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on2:13 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Allyjambo says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:05 pm

TE: All bills being paid on time?
GW: Yeah. Trading as per normal. There is no issue there.

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

we actually know that this is not true…..there was a poster on here who has confirmed his friends company is getting messed about for work they did 8 months ago regards laying a pitch for them. I believe the sum owed is >£200k

No issues about the work had been raised until after the bill had arrived, and since then every single complaint/issue raised has been proven to be unfounded – but the bill remains unpaid.

I don’t expect teh company involved to make too big a deal of this in public…however, maybe they could contact Tom directly and tell him (off record) that it’s simply untrue and he may want to revisit the interview and try again

For the company involved…..given the past performance of the clumpany, they should move straight to a winding up order and flush this out once and for all. they quite literally have nothing to lose.

View Comment

DenPosted on2:15 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Raymac says:

January 21, 2014 at 1:25 pm

========================================================================
As I said earlier, anyone who expends credit to RIFC or TRFC only have themselves to blame.

I suspect that credit terms will be unilaterally extended, disputes over receipt, quality: quibbles re Purchase Orders, invoices etc will increase.

I hope HMRC are awake.

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on2:16 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Tif Finn says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:05 pm
1 0 Rate This

On players wages, it was claimed that Fransisco Sandaza was on fixed increases, one wonders if anyone else has a similar arrangement.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2303592/Francisco-Sandaza-sacked-Rangers-club-investigated-hoax-phone–listen-clip.html

Last night, the player and his father were taking legal advice over the cancellation of his £4,500-a-week deal, just nine months after his arrival.

Sandaza’s wages would have risen over the period of his four-year contract, reaching £10,000 weekly for the final 12 months.

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

That would be, dare I suggest it, catastrophic.

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

Tif….the article is nearly a year old, and i seem to remember an article not long after this sordid affair stating that an “agreement” had been reached and the matter was closed.

basically, they paid up

View Comment

Galling fiverPosted on2:24 pm - Jan 21, 2014


But can he still naw Bless ‘m’ sell ? 😆

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on2:31 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Allyjambo says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:05 pm

Raging hangover, way to old for this.

Ally, are we not being a bit naif if we expect any CEO of any company, other than possible a former CEO of Rantners :mrgreen: , to say anything which would be detrimental? That’s why the analysts exist, surely?

I thought the Tom English article is about as much as we could reasonably expect in the circumstances.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:33 pm - Jan 21, 2014


You really have got to know the history if you wish to understand the present and this is particularly true of the Westthorn land sale to Celtic by Glasgow Council which has been subject to a frenzied campaign from biased Bears who smell a conspiracy at work stretching all the way to Rome :mrgreen:

This PR-driven campaign is woefully ill-informed as I have explained in detail in previous posts which also cover the Lennoxtown land sale. Common to both sites is a totally artificial and false method employed by the Bear ‘experts’ to arrive at land values bespoke-tailored to suit their so called ‘forensic examination’ which has laughingly concluded that Celtic has been the illegal recipient of State Aid. I have adequately demolished their house of cards and so too will the European Commission in due course.

However with Westthorn there seems to be a Bear fixation that the excuse used to cover an alleged fraudulent land price reduction was the existance of soil contamination. The Bears believe this is a charade and have been searching for the Holy Grail in the shape of a ‘secret’ site report which proves there is no soil contamination. They have bombarded the Council with emails and Freedom of Information requests demanding production of the all-important report. However – from personal experience – when trying to tease information out using FOI requests you have to know what to ask for and if you submit garbage you get a garbage response.

The cry from the Bears is that the only thing impaired at Westthorn is the price – catchy PR slogan but untrue nevertheless. I have uncovered the industrial past of the Westthorn site with just a little bit of googling over the past couple of days and posted here to list the abnormal ground conditions at Westthorn caused by heavy industrial useage. The icing on the cake was the discovery of a coal mine slap-bang in the middle of the site in an early 1800s map. Old coal mines are common in the East End of Glasgow and the value of development sites are routinely reduced to take account of the abnormal ground conditions they create such as at Westthorn.

However last night I really couldn’t watch more that 15 minutes of the Mighty Gers in awesome action and wondered if perhaps the coal mine I had discovered was just a very shallow scratch and scrape operation with little effect on the development potential of the site. So I got the google entrenching tool out and started digging again and here’s what the history revealed.

The church lands of West Thorne were first mentioned in the diocesan rental book as early as 1522 but were seized by the Crown at the Reformation mmmmmmmm obviously the plot thickens 🙂 It seems that from the time of James VI Westthorn was part of the Dalbeth Estate and from the mid 1750s was owned by the Hopkirk family with an early history noting: ‘Mr Hopkirk wrought extensively the coal which abounds in Dalbeth. Indeed, all the adjoining lands were full of that mineral, and it was a source of much emolument to the several proprietors during many years.’

Sometime in the late 1700s Westthorn passed to Glasgow merchant James Sword Jnr and an early history notes: ‘He wrought extensively the coal in Westthorn, and long resided in the antique mansion on that property’. The Caledonian Mercury reported that on Saturday morning 5 December 1801: ‘A boy of the name of Stobo who had gone to Westthorn coal pit for a cart load of coals, while looking into it, fell down, and was so shockingly bruised that he died shortly after.’ Sad but interesting as it suggests a fairly deep vertical shaft rather than a shallow drift mine.

The Court of Session records in December 1834 show that Tam Harvey who owned Westthorn and was being sequestrated – yea the guy that tried to block the right of way along the banks of the Clyde – was working the lands at Westthorn which ‘contained valuable coal’.

So the historical record points to long term and possibly fairly large-scale coal extraction from the Westthorn site which would obviously affect the open market sale value of the land. However let’s not rely on the history but look at the British Geological Survey where the results of the dozens of bore holes drilled on the Westthorn site can be inspected online.

They invariably show 1-1.5 metre wide seams of coal at a depth varying from 20-40 metres throught the Westthorn site which to my untrained geological eye suggests that extensive mining could have taken place throughout the site from tunnels radiating from the shaft of the mine sunk in the centre of the site following the seams. The boreholes also disclose there is some made-up ground which might relate to the two giant reservoirs – each holding 4 million gallons of water – which were built on the site and possibly infilled with rubbish, in the 1930s.

But perhaps the most exciting finds in just about every bore hole I checked was the evidence of marine life from the times when the whole area was at the bottom of an ocean. Eat your heart out Time Team ❗

Unfortunately the boreholes haven’t revealed the slightest trace of the ghostly hand of the Opus Dei or even a hint of incense which the Bears believe has actually contaminated the whole site 😆 Still, for the time being, the lands of Westthorn have come home and in due course will be redeveloped by Celtic as a safe environment to build new homes for people eager to live in the regenerated East End. And the club will, of course, be awarded State Aid by the European Commission to bring it about after making millions by using modern methods to extract the coal 🙂

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on2:35 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Q. How could a company avoid future insolvent liquidation if it was currently balance sheet insolvent and cashflow insolvent?

A. Equity investment, successful CVA, stretching creditors, reducing costs, selling some assets, securing bank facilities. These are a few possibilities – usually you would need to do more than one of these.

Didn’t say it was easy 😉

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on2:36 pm - Jan 21, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:33 pm

In all seriousness, you should write this up and pass it along to the local historical society 😀

View Comment

SmugasPosted on2:37 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Re the ‘A’ question

One would assume that when Tom phoned and asked can I come and do a Q&A he was told yes, but don’t ask the ‘A’ question since I can tell you now, on the phone, what the answer will be but you subsequently won’t have the rest of what is quite an informative if puffy interview. So personally I am not surprised that the question did not feature.

If you take the Wallace interview with the Ally carnoustie-gate stuff you increasingly come to the conclusion that the plan, for want of a better word, was to get back to full time football (Div1) – do not stall with the part timers at any cost – and then see what happens. From this, the spiv faction took that we’ll have the assets thanks very much, and the rangersness faction saw that they would eventually get their club on the cheap with the added dimension of visible justification for yet another cash plea to the masses. The Rangers supporters groups I see are headlining with their question, “is there a plan B?” Well increasingly that plan B looks to be er, dear SFA, We’ve made a booboo once more. Please help. You know where to find us, Yours etc.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on2:42 pm - Jan 21, 2014


scapaflow says:

January 21, 2014 at 2:31 pm

I’d agree that we shouldn’t expect more, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t dissect the interview, and be critical of what goes unasked. As I said, it’s a necessary failing if he wants future access to the CEO.

I don’t think it’s the way of this blog, I hope it isn’t, to accept any ‘journalist’s’ input just because he’s done better than most. Unless TE breaks the mould, and becomes more Paxman-like, he will remain, in my opinion, just another hack, just a bit better at looking better, than the rest!

Anyway, off to the dentist now, no doubt for more bad news 😥

View Comment

SmugasPosted on2:47 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:35 pm

In the sevco situation

Equity investment – difficult with regards to dilution and control aspect – one would have to question why any new investor would turn up, and dripping roasts don’t tend to use £1m per month of basting.

Successful CVA – I’d personally have a problem with this since it assumes that several, as opposed to just one, investors were in it neck deep, with no thought to asset value (albeit particular complication of what’s a stadium worth if its not a stadium?)

stretching creditors – only if you can use the creditors funds to profitable effect – oops

reducing costs – novel idea

selling some assets – will only work if you sell them for valuation uplift so unlikely in these circumstances

securing bank facilities – nope, makes insolvent position even worse unless new debt used to turn ship around. Unlikely if you were making a loss before that expensive debt will solve it.

Didn’t say it was easy either!

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:47 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:35 pm

Q. How could a company avoid future insolvent liquidation if it was currently balance sheet insolvent and cashflow insolvent?

A. Equity investment, successful CVA, stretching creditors, reducing costs, selling some assets, securing bank facilities. These are a few possibilities – usually you would need to do more than one of these.

Didn’t say it was easy 😉
=========================================
Ta for that but I was wondering what measure or combination of measures would best suit each of the three scenarios viz: balance sheet; cash flow; and both.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on2:51 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Smugas says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:37 pm
Re the ‘A’ question
One would assume that when Tom phoned and asked can I come and do a Q&A he was told yes, but don’t ask the ‘A’ question since I can tell you now, on the phone, what the answer will be but you subsequently won’t have the rest of what is quite an informative if puffy interview. So personally I am not surprised that the question did not feature.
================================================================

I suspect that you are right. It does however say something about TE and his editor that they would accept this stance over what is one of the burning issues at this time.

Better to have outted RIFC/TRFC on this matter and thus placed it on the agenda.

If however TE felt that he has indeed asked all appropriate questions then that just confirms his uselessness as a journalist.

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on2:53 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Greenock Jack says:
January 21, 2014 at 1:56 pm
10 2 Rate This

PMGB
For the avoidance of doubt:
TE should have asked GW the Administration question.
If the PR people then called the interview off then that’s the story.
TE must have a very understanding editor if that copy is acceptable.
THE most important question was not asked.
————————————————————————-
Why not tweet Tom English directly and ask?

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

He has…………………..and so has everyone else……………….but no answer………………

View Comment

SmugasPosted on3:17 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Allyjambo says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:42 pm

scapaflow says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:31 pm

“I’d agree that we shouldn’t expect more, but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t dissect the interview, and be critical of what goes unasked. As I said, it’s a necessary failing if he wants future access to the CEO. ”

To be fair, it wasn’t unasked as such if not skirted around a bit. He says quite categorically (apologies I can’t scroll to the original text just now but something to the effect of) that “without stating a number there is cash there to the end of the season.” What is Tom supposed to do? Stamp his foot and say, “no there isn’t.” Yes he could have followed up with something like “It would be understandable if previous analyses (such as the brilliant TSFM website 😆 ) proved to be correct and that the well did appear to run dry in February, that if the solution was to seek administrators protection would you accept that there should be footballing consequences, financial implications going foreward and also, at the very least, that sympathy levels would be reduced on last time.” That’s where the interview was lacking, IMHO.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on3:20 pm - Jan 21, 2014


nawlite says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:14 pm

Genuine naïve question.
——
Firstly, either you have an excellent spell-checker – or you’re as bad as me when it comes to the written word! 🙂

As for whether a chap must necessarily be bigoted to sing certain songs associated with WoS sectarianism – no, he need not be at all.

As an example, I hold up the Aberdeen support of the 80s. We used to absolutely delight in singing “Hello, hello, we are the Beach End Boys” when Celtic were in town. The fact that the song petered out after the second line indicates that very few of us knew the words after that – just that the song wound up the Celtic fans.

We also used to sing songs about either the UDA or IRA, and f**king either the Queen or the Pope, depending which side of the OF we were playing. You’d be hard pushed to find a sectarian fellow whose team plays out of Pittodrie.

(I should note that I haven’t the faintest idea what “Old Derry’s Walls” may be about – although I’m highly interested in history, my scope does not include Irish towns and, possibly, their ice cream retailers.)

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on3:20 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Allyjambo says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:42 pm

Wouldn’t disagree with you.

I think we have to remember that Mr Wallace is far more “normal” operator than Mr Green. The media would have been serving the public interest if they had really gone after Green, but they failed, and partly as a result of that failure, we are where we are.

I doubt if Paxman would have got more out of Mr Wallace, he would just have retreated into the “market sensitive” box. That’s where the analysts come in.

The city analysts are intelligence officers in all but name. They take the “hard” info, share price movements, accounts, financial statements,etc, and, the “soft” info like interviews with CEOs and build up an assessment of where the company is likely going. The mere fact that the CEO is having to deny problems with paying bills, administration fears, etc is useful info, and helps to build the picture. Good journalists, of course, do exactly the same, it’s that analytical function that has been absent from this story from day one, with one or two exceptions.

Honestly, some folk on RTC and here should be filling in time sheets and sending them in to the bears, because if the silly bs had only listened, they would have been spared much money and heartache.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on3:23 pm - Jan 21, 2014


On the Sandaza thing, I wasn’t really thinking about Sandaza himself, just wondering if other star players were given similar deals, where their salary increased as they moved up the leagues.

View Comment

arabest1Posted on3:34 pm - Jan 21, 2014


slimshady61 says:
January 20, 2014 at 9:32 pm
45 5 Rate This

neepheid says:
January 20, 2014 at 9:14 pm
—————————————-
Agreed, and I agree also with Stuart Waiton. When a law in this country only applies to some people and not to all of its people, something has gone wrong and Waiton is right to highlight it, as is GJ.

Laws must be applied equally across the board or else scrapped. It is simply inequitable that a football supporter can be admonished for singing “F*** the Pope and F*** the queen” simply because “this law is not meant for you…”, the reported words of the sherriff who dismissed the case involving the Partick Thistle fan.

We are moving towards a police state where the trendy, polo-top wearing chief constable of Police Scotland can dictate laws to the hapless Kenny MacAskill – to date the only Justice Secretary to have been held in a London Police station, accused of being drunk and disorderly going (ironically) to a football match – on matters such as behaviour at (Celtic and Rangers only) football matches or scrapping the centuries old law of corroboration, instituted precisely to guard against those who would lie in court (not that cops would do such a thing).

One regret I do have is that the chasm between Celtic and Rangers supporters has become so wide since February 2012 that they cannot bridge it to work together and have this odious, partial, discriminatory law abolished. They actually have a lot in common in terms of the way in which they have been singled out for police attention in the past 21 months.

————————————

Interesting discussion. First up I think the legislation is cack-handed at best….constructed by an administration desperately posturing to be seen to be doing something. That said IMO, ‘sectarianism’, the not always accurate, name given to describe the tribal conflict that infests our nation is a serious social problem and football in our biggest city, is inseparable from this issue. The offending comment from the Thistle fan is clearly a ‘plague on both your houses’ is an anti sectarian chant, and should be seen in that context. However clumsily this individual is distancing himself for the binary world view that dominate much of the city. Indeed the problem with Dr Waiton’s position is the refusal to distinguish between a generalised conception of ‘offence’ and conduct that picks and claws at a deep rooted social problem. Any effort to police language is inherently problematic, and this is no different, but I have noticed that the absolute freedom of speech advocated by Stuart Waiton, and other libertarians is only ever wheeled out to defend something abhorrent, and that is my concern that defending the right of bigots, nazis mysoginists etal merely functions, at worst to legitimize their position, at best it throws them the red meat of encouragement. Stuart is correct in that football is a pantomime for adults it would be ludicrous to arrest fans from the terrace who goad Dons fans over their unnatural caressing of sheep, that is banter. When I started attending football in the 70’s racism, homophobia, sectarianism were the absolute norm, and god help any woman who entered view, she would subject to an outrageous torrent of mysoginist bile. Things have moved on a lot and there are clear lines drawn regarding racism and I personally consider that a major cultural advance….the question now is should sectarian chanting be in the same category?

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on3:35 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Rangers saved from financial meltdown by exploiting players’ IP rights

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/club-news/item/6042-gers-in-spfl-sticker-collection

children – always remember to agree a safe word before engaging in extreme tickling – a good one to use is DIGNITY

View Comment

DenPosted on3:45 pm - Jan 21, 2014


‘HIGH flying table toppers Rangers feature prominently, as you would expect, in the first ever SPFL official sticker album’

They really have no self awareness !

View Comment

nawlitePosted on4:00 pm - Jan 21, 2014


ecobhoy says:

January 21, 2014 at 2:43 pm

Genuine naïve question? Aye right pull the other one. If you have no interest in the subject why raise it?
================================================================================
Eco, not pulling anyone – I’m married!!

Seriously? I didn’t say I had no interest in it, my naive question was because I didn’t understand it. You’re suggesting that because I raise something that interests me I can’t then ask a naïve question?! For lots of my education and employment years, that’s exactly what happened. Subjects/strategies were explained to us and we then got to ask questions – some naïve – to clarify our understanding.

Growing up around the WoS divide, I would deliberately not find myself singing Derry’s walls or its equivalent, so I was interested to see if anyone thought it believable that DC could have inadvertently found himself doing so if he didn’t subscribe to those views, that was all.

Your response was a bit harsh, but I agree it’s OT for this site, so happy not to take further.

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on4:03 pm - Jan 21, 2014


m.c.f.c. says:
January 21, 2014 at 3:35 pm
1 0 Rate This

Rangers saved from financial meltdown by exploiting players’ IP rights

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/club-news/item/6042-gers-in-spfl-sticker-collection

children – always remember to agree a safe word before engaging in extreme tickling – a good one to use is DIGNITY

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

Have a GOOD look at the Sevco player on that link to their website – you will see the Blackthorn sponsor.

Now, look at Topps own website selling the product, you’ll see the alcohol sponsors removed from Celtic/Hibs players.

http://www.toppsdirect.com/collections/scottish-premier-league.html

Soooooooooooo….mistake by Topps, or have Sevco added their own alcohol sponsor back into promoting a product aimed at kids???? I demand to know!!!

(just to shoot down the amoral booze to kids promotion theory I just started, the SPFL website has this image

http://spfl.co.uk/news/article/first-spfl-sticker-collection-on-sale/

you can see the blackthorn image is removed from the large sevco player image, but is also on the small sevco image – so looks like Topps messed up and not the dastardly sevconians)

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on4:05 pm - Jan 21, 2014


smugas/ecobhoy

I hope nothing I said might suggest that I believe that any of the options that I put forward are likely to be achievable at RIFC/TRFC – they are simply tools in the restructuring toolbox.

First thing to do is to fix the cashflow – if you run out of money to pay your debts it really doesn’t matter how positive or negative your balance sheet is. So – stretch your creditors as far as you reasonably can. Can you raise cash on your assets? If so, this is where bank borrowing might assist – it certainly does not assist in a balance sheet insolvency I agree. Also look to reduce costs – wage costs? (bearing in mind that redundancies give rise to short-term costs for long-term savings. Other costs that can be saved? – Hotels – food – repairs on property etc etc etc.

If you have fixed the cashflow issue you can look to address the balance sheet deficiency. Only two sides to a balance sheet – assets and liabilities. You need to increase assets or decrease liabilities (ideally both). You could do the first by an equity investment and the second by a CVA.

You could give the appearance of an increase in the assets by having a completely stupid valuation of an asset in your accounts (say a property asset at more than £100million 😯 ) but actually that achieves precisely nothing except giving a misleading picture.

In effect you have to fix a cashflow problem long enough to sort your balance sheet problem. So if you could raise £10million on the stock market but it will take you (say) 60 days to do that, you need to have enough cash to get you through 60 days. At which point you get £10million pounds and you can spend like an idiot again (until the next time).

View Comment

CampbellsmoneyPosted on4:20 pm - Jan 21, 2014


As I read my post (above at 4.05pm) I see that I have started from the position of someone who genuinely wants to save the company – so it may make sense (for example) to borrow money secured on a company asset – if I could find a lender. However what can be achieved depends upon what end result you want.

If, for example you weren’t bothered whether the company was saved or goes into liquidation (provided that no one had a security ranking ahead of you in that insolvency) you wouldn’t try to save it by borrowing funds and granting a security.

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on4:22 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Sorry guys, i’m still not seeing how a club out of Ibrox is a sustainable business….

looking at RFC’s accounts, the costs EXCLUDING ALL STAFF COSTS was in the £14-16M a year range.

So, to run A rangers out of Ibrox/MP costs just over £1.1M a month – and Sevco’ accounts show it being at around the £1M a month mark when you strip out the non recurring and wage costs.

So, £12M a year without employing a player, coach, director, grounds staff, catering/security/ticket office/cleaner/accountant/tour guide/bar staff/receptionist etc

Turnover – £19M
1st team bill £7M
operating costs £12M

thats it – gone

now, they employ about 160 people – ok, most will be part time, match day only staff, but there will be well paid staff in there as well – not to mention the CEO and others – and then there is Ally as well!

Lets say all other staff costs can be cut to £5M – that leaves them £2M for the team

that is currently the ONLY way it’s sustainable to run an organisation that size….and will they turn up for that?

Of course, mothball/close MP, that might save another £3M a year, of course, sell it and you could even get some cash in as well as shave costs. The bears might even buy that as a prudent measure. But, lets wait until it’s sold – until it is, A Rangers playing out of Ibrox/MP will be a championship/Premiership bottom feeder club at best.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on4:25 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Campbellsmoney says:
January 21, 2014 at 4:05 pm

You could give the appearance of an increase in the assets by having a completely stupid valuation of an asset in your accounts (say a property asset at more than £100million 😯 ) but actually that achieves precisely nothing except giving a misleading picture.
=========================
They have already pulled that trick in the accounts we have seen. The property values at 30 June looked pretty inflated to me. I doubt that they could go even higher next time.

But as you say, the immediate problem is cashflow. Once the cash runs out, that’s it, some creditor will go to court for their money. The biggest danger now in my opinion is a rush of suppliers demanding payment right now- or else. Assuming that they haven’t all been paid on time, that is.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on4:28 pm - Jan 21, 2014


Angus1983 says:
January 21, 2014 at 3:20 pm
16 1 Rate This

nawlite says:
January 21, 2014 at 2:14 pm

Genuine naïve question.
——
Firstly, either you have an excellent spell-checker – or you’re as bad as me when it comes to the written word!

As for whether a chap must necessarily be bigoted to sing certain songs associated with WoS sectarianism – no, he need not be at all.

As an example, I hold up the Aberdeen support of the 80s. We used to absolutely delight in singing “Hello, hello, we are the Beach End Boys” when Celtic were in town. The fact that the song petered out after the second line indicates that very few of us knew the words after that – just that the song wound up the Celtic fans.

We also used to sing songs about either the UDA or IRA, and f**king either the Queen or the Pope, depending which side of the OF we were playing. You’d be hard pushed to find a sectarian fellow whose team plays out of Pittodrie.

(I should note that I haven’t the faintest idea what “Old Derry’s Walls” may be about – although I’m highly interested in history, my scope does not include Irish towns and, possibly, their ice cream retailers.)

——————————————————————————-

Thankfully the brief spell of singing UDA/IRA all the way was shouted down by the majority.
I do agree that it was purely as a means of winding up whichever Glasgow team we were playing.
I’m for ever grateful that in the north east we were sheltered from the religion and parade nonsence those in the central belt have/had to suffer.

View Comment

Comments are closed.