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

JoethebookiePosted on10:47 am - Jan 27, 2014


Has there been any AIM announcement on Friday’s share dump yet?

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:50 am - Jan 27, 2014


@TSFM

I have a post sitting in moderation – I followed the instructions and clicked the link to verify my address and I think that worked but I notice an annoying typo in my post so clicked edit and fixed it but have ended up in mod again and can’t reconfirm my email address.

Cheers

Sorted
TSFM

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:56 am - Jan 27, 2014


Another Interpretation

Stuart Bathgate’s piece in the Scotsman
The Rangers, a churchilian figure, oft controversial but clearly a contributor to the greater good so we’re told – so much so that no-one in their right mind dares to question it, lies wounded, cold blooded but not fatally 😳 whilst over him stand the surgeon and his two associates, all of course supplied by the NHS and paid for by all of us, well those that pay taxes anyway.

Now, re-imagine the scene, but this time set in the States.
The bed, the victim, the surgeons team are all similar but now you’ve got an authoritative figure standing over him saying “Get that useless uninsured hunk of meat off my sheets, we need the bed for something more worthwhile.”

With apologies to all Stateside medical people.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on10:59 am - Jan 27, 2014


neepheid says:

January 26, 2014 at 9:40 pm

http://www.raithrovers.net/rrfc-news?id=12691

A lot more like dignity than some recent events at another club- in my opinion.
__________________________________________________-
A while back I asked the question of what it is that ‘Rangers’ and their fans refer to when they use the word ‘Loyal’ to describe themselves, what is it they are loyal to? Have they ever done anything other than march and bang a drum to display loyalty?

This sacrifice, by supporters and players of these clubs, is what I think of when I ask the question. I don’t think any of the clubs involved have ever used the word ‘loyal’ in their publications, though, rightly or wrongly (they clearly believed they were going to fight for what was ‘right’) they showed true loyalty to King (a living king) and country, though I doubt many of them would have considered themselves ‘loyalists’.

I believe the program on BBC1 tonight ‘Britain’s Great War’ at 9 o’clock includes reference to ‘MacRae’s Battalion’.

For the record, I believe it is very difficult to get an answer from Ibrox as to their display of ‘loyalty’, ie how many volunteers did they muster, during the Great war?

Sorry, another rant from AJ, but I do get rather angry when they talk of loyalty and sing ‘God Save the Queen’. A living king might not have been saved if the rest waited for them (RFC) to act in 1914. A bit like they do today, actually.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:00 am - Jan 27, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2014 at 9:09 am

Tif Finn says:
January 26, 2014 at 11:48 pm

@ Eco

If you haven’t seen the advert a position has just opened up which you seem ideally suited for. (Sorry if this has already been brought to your attention).

Search Trained Personnel Required – Apply within
http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=994673
=========================================================
Now why do I think I might be found unsuitable for the position as I refuse to wear blue-tinted blinkers – just for the record btw I also refuse to wear green-tinted ones

Awww, come on. At least go for the interview. And wear a wire.

View Comment

Carl31Posted on11:13 am - Jan 27, 2014


Hello all.

Ive got a solution for Rangers’ woes.

But before I share, a quick summary of the context:

Each step of this story has seen almost the opposite of what should sensibly happen.
SDM a number of years back, should have cut cloth to suit.
But, having assessed all options and consequences, decided to spend even more money they didn’t have.

When the old club changed hands, the last guy they should have been selling to was CW.
But the solution decided upon was to sell to CW.

During insolvency of the old club, administration should have seen drastic cost cutting.
Indeed, post insolvency should have seen a much lower cost structure for the new club.
Instead, those looking after the business at the time decided to keep the high costs structure.

What are required now that the last of the gang of 4 – being CW, CG, IA and BS – appear to have now disappeared, are austerity measures.
These would include redundancies, various cost base trimming, a smaller coaching team, and players sales.
But it seems that none of these are on the table.

What they are looking at – if DK is to be believed – is investment, including more spending on the playing squad.

What is driving this? What makes these businessmen turn from what is the sensible and obvious solution, to what is nearly the diametric opposite?
The answer is that which makes a footballing business different from other businesses.

The Fans.

These fans must be kept onside.
Their dollar would have left the business by now were it not for a belief that the sunlit uplands of the top tier and UCL football is just beyond the next horizon.
But their dollar has not, because the paying customers have the strong emotional tie to how watching their team play at their field of dreams makes them feel.
This fanaticism of allegiance owed to a club is the lot of every football fan, so these fans are not to be blamed.

Except many other clubs’ fans, however, are more able to turn away from their club when it is poorly run.
Or, able to discern realistic reporting of their club’s situation from offal journalism or succulent lambery.

So, the fans and their cash must be retained, and in such a way that the next thing they do will see them race to the top.
Where they, apparently, belong.

Watching their team play upon the hallowed turf of their field of dreams would not give the feeling required, were the team to be faced with a future of lower tier competition with no future climb.
The fans would initially maybe continue to stump up, whilst discussing the EPL on their own terraces during lulls in the action.
This would not last, and eventually these fans would turn to spending their match day cash elsewhere.

With this context of counter-intuitive solution in mind, the next step for the current incarnation to take becomes clear.

I guess the current board and pretenders have already sussed what should happen next.
It is not austerity they need but greater spending.
It is not a sale of players, but purchase of players somehow with money they dont have.

But i would offer further advice:
Investment should not be sought from rich people but from poor.
Not from a number of well-off fans, but from one single skint one.

It will surely work due to it passing the counter-intuitive test, and will placate the fans.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on11:14 am - Jan 27, 2014


Oh, Oh. River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP bought the millions of sold shares on Friday. Bampots to your stations.

Alasdair Lamont ‏@BBCAlLamont 3m
River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP bought about 1.7m, giving them 4.8m in total now, from 4.46% to 7.37%

View Comment

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958)Posted on11:16 am - Jan 27, 2014


Holding(s) in Company
Mon, 27th Jan 2014 10:55

RNS Number : 5691Y
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
27 January 2014

?

TR-1: NOTIFICATION OF MAJOR INTEREST IN SHARESi

1. Identity of the issuer or the underlying issuer
of existing shares to which voting rights are
attached: ii

Rangers International Football Club Plc

2 Reason for the notification (please tick the appropriate box or boxes):

An acquisition or disposal of voting rights

YES

An acquisition or disposal of qualifying financial instruments which may result in the acquisition of shares already issued to which voting rights are attached

NO

An acquisition or disposal of instruments with similar economic effect to qualifying financial instruments

NO

An event changing the breakdown of voting rights

N/A

Other (please specify):

3. Full name of person(s) subject to the
notification obligation: iii

River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP

4. Full name of shareholder(s)
(if different from 3.):iv

5. Date of the transaction and date on
which the threshold is crossed or
reached: v

24th January 2014

6. Date on which issuer notified:

27th January 2014

7. Threshold(s) that is/are crossed or
reached: vi, vii

5%

8. Notified details:

A: Voting rights attached to shares viii, ix

Class/type of
shares

if possible using
the ISIN CODE

Situation previous
to the triggering
transaction

Resulting situation after the triggering transaction

Number
of
Shares

Number
of
Voting
Rights

Number
of shares

Number of voting
rights

% of voting rights x

Direct

Direct xi

Indirect xii

Direct

Indirect

GB00B90T9Z75

3,095,500

4.76%

4,795,500

4,795,500

7.37%

B: Qualifying Financial Instruments

Resulting situation after the triggering transaction

Type of financial
instrument

Expiration
date xiii

Exercise/
Conversion Period xiv

Number of voting
rights that may be
acquired if the
instrument is
exercised/ converted.

% of voting
rights

C: Financial Instruments with similar economic effect to Qualifying Financial Instruments xv, xvi

Resulting situation after the triggering transaction

Type of financial
instrument

Exercise price

Expiration date xvii

Exercise/
Conversion period xviii

Number of voting rights instrument refers to

% of voting rights xix, xx

Nominal

Delta

Total (A+B+C)

Number of voting rights

Percentage of voting rights

4,795,500

7.37%

9. Chain of controlled undertakings through which the voting rights and/or the
financial instruments are effectively held, if applicable: xxi

Proxy Voting:

10. Name of the proxy holder:

River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP

11. Number of voting rights proxy holder will cease
to hold:

N/A

12. Date on which proxy holder will cease to hold
voting rights:

N/A

13. Additional information:

14. Contact name:

Hamish Byrne

15. Contact telephone number:

+44 (0) 20 7601 6262

This information is provided by RNS
The company news service from the London Stock Exchange

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on11:17 am - Jan 27, 2014


‘Mr Douglas Odam, Rangers’ financial controller,’
A contradiction in terms surely?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:18 am - Jan 27, 2014


AJ

Funny you should mention that – the Loyalty thing. I had a similar conversation with an RFC pal at the weekend. Note the pal is RFC through and through – he accepts the football team is really sevco.

We had a conversation similar to your point. I can’t recall what brought it up – I wouldn’t have used the word loyalty because of the non football connotations such as those you mention although we’re both blessed with an east coast upbringing where it doesn’t figure anyway. Similarly I don’t have the direct emotional attachment of the WW1 stuff that your club does. I believe my question may have been something more like what is it you are all addicted to, or some such. His answer was intriguing. “Winning” he said.

Yes I can report he did that annoying wee smirk they all do, in fact all repeat winners do. But, having controlled said smirk he said this, “The reason we’re still together is what’s tearing us apart” (to be clear in case Mrs Smugas is reading (unlikely) this was when the conversation was on football, not wives – that bit’s definitely just between him and me). He continued “the groundswell support want the success, but they want it now yet they’re not prepared to pay for it. They expect somebody to pay for it for them, and why not, its been good for the last 25 years. They now equate that with the someone (he’s no Murray lover by the way) getting back in some way what they were putting in.” Investing for return, in other words.

If you can’t break that link – and I refer anyone back to Willie Miller versus Chick Young on Sportsound on Saturday for precisely this arguement – then all you’ve got is an addict (Chick), helplessly addicted to winning.

“So what do we do?” I asked. “Pay for you to keep winning?”

He declined to answer that one. We moved onto wives as it was less complicated.

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on11:21 am - Jan 27, 2014


John Clarke@ 10:32 am
John,I was being facetious.

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on11:37 am - Jan 27, 2014


Rangers- too big to die,fabric of society,blah blah blah. Try telling that to the men and women who lost their jobs in other industries which really did form part of the fabric of society. The miners,the steel workers,the shipbuilders,Timex workers etc.
If arrogance was currency the people operating(just) out of Edmiston Drive would be in no trouble whatsoever.

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on11:51 am - Jan 27, 2014


So River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP bought 1.7m of the approx. 2.5m shares that were sold on Friday.

My questions are this – who sold, why did they sell and was the sale linked to the departure of Brian Stockbridge?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on12:00 pm - Jan 27, 2014


My questions are this – who sold, why did they sell and was the sale linked to the departure of Brian Stockbridge?
=======================
Similarly, why did one existing large shareholder (as opposed to someone less involved) buy, presumably in the knowledge that Stockbridge was going/gone? Possibly a buy all @ price level had been set but even then you must query why – was Stockbridge’ departure likely to increase the shareprice? hence the urgency to get in now. Can’t think why, unless you read the SMSM of course.

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on12:02 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Smugas says:

January 27, 2014 at 11:18 am

“So what do we do?” I asked. “Pay for you to keep winning?”

He declined to answer that one. We moved onto wives as it was less complicated.

———————————————————–

Maybe less complicated but the formula is the same, pay for every little victory… 😕

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on12:39 pm - Jan 27, 2014


I seem to be missing something re River and Mercantile. It’s a new name to me as there had been no announcement re them owning more than 4% previously, nor were they listed on the RIFC investors website, and now they own more than 7%.

There must be some horse trading in shares going on that we don’t know about.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on1:10 pm - Jan 27, 2014


TorreJohnBhoy: “Bampots to your stations”

LOL’d.

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on1:29 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Smugas says:
January 27, 2014 at 12:00 pm
,,,,,,,,,,
Similarly, why did one existing large shareholder (as opposed to someone less involved) buy, presumably in the knowledge that Stockbridge was going/gone?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
I suspect
The only people buying are Spivs
They need to get control up and over 75% so they can issue 1p shares to each other at the expense of the other 25%

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on1:30 pm - Jan 27, 2014


easyJambo says:
January 27, 2014 at 12:39 pm

I seem to be missing something re River and Mercantile. It’s a new name to me as there had been no announcement re them owning more than 4% previously, nor were they listed on the RIFC investors website, and now they own more than 7%.

There must be some horse trading in shares going on that we don’t know about.
================================================
Well I’m sure there will be no connection with the River Clyde – Yangtse perhaps 😆

View Comment

ShooperbPosted on1:30 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Interesting hearing about McCoist’s phonecall to Michael Stewart. You have to wonder if he makes a habit of that, and just chose to phone the wrong person?

However, more interesting (in my book at least) is Stewart’s response to it. From all accounts, he was a decent footballer whose talent was dwarfed by his ego, and whilst that is not desirable if you’re trying to build a football team with him in it, then it may actually be a positive if you’re on the media side of the fence. Of course, that’s assuming you don’t fall into the trap of being Keevins, where your opinion magically becomes fact, and anyone who argues with it has an agenda!

I sort of picture it as McCoist phoning up unsuspecting journalist/summariser, having a rant, threatening to blow his dog whistle, and aforementioned journalist/summariser going ‘Yes Ally, No Ally, Sorry Ally, won’t do it again Ally.’……. except this time he’s phoned up, and Stewart has basically gone ‘Who the **** do you think you are?’.

Then again, it could just be that having been subjected to it, he was too thick to keep his mouth shut on the radio. However, having heard him speak, he does seem a bit more swtiched on and lucid than most summarisers.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on1:35 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Turns out it was the River Plate 🙂

But who is their client/clients who own the shares ❓

http://www.riverandmercantile.com

River and Mercantile was formed in 1881 when the River Plate Trust Loan and Agency Company was incorporated. This company administered various companies in South America and was succeeded in 1961 by the River Plate and Mercantile Trust Ltd.

This company subsequently became River and Mercantile Trust Plc in 1962. By 1994 the company had become synonymous with longevity, integrity and product innovation, managing five investment trusts with a total of £400m under management.

Between 1994 and 1996 Pacific Investments acquired a 100 per cent interest in River and Mercantile and recruited a management team from HSBC to launch a new open ended investment division.

The investment trust contracts were sold to leading London based investment houses but Pacific Investments retained the name and focussed on developing the new investment division, a specialist UK equities fund management business, River and Mercantile Investment Management Ltd (RAMIM).

In 1999 RAMIM was floated on the London Stock Exchange and changed its name to Liontrust Asset Management Plc. Since flotation Pacific has placed down its original 75 per cent holding.

Pacific Investments retained the River and Mercantile name, utilising it purely as a holding company for a number of its fund management activities.

River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP (R&M) was formed in 2006.

View Comment

iamacantPosted on1:51 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Disclaimer

“River and Mercantile does not provide and nothing on this website should be deemed to constitute the provision of financial, investment, tax or any other professional advice in any way”

“This site is aimed solely at UK Investors and is specifically not aimed at persons who are residents of any other country, including the United States of America and South Africa where the funds referred to herein are not registered or approved for marketing and/or sale in which or dissemination of information on the funds or services is not permitted”

These two snippets are interesting.

View Comment

rabtdogPosted on2:08 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Point one: Stuart Bathgate is a professional journalist and does not support Rangers.
Point two: while Murray may have driven them into debt, Whyte drove them into administration and Green was a chancer who made money, Wallace may actually be the professional who can put the current The Rangers on a stable financial footing. It’s a fact that The Rangers have a stadium and lots of supporters – more than enough to run a viable football club.
Point three: it’s profoundly disappointing that someone writing in the press who reckons that there may be a club at Ibrox in the future is seen on here as an adversary, or as a person with an agenda. Bathgate might be stating a case that individuals here don’t like but it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that someone could take the Ibrox situation by the scruff of the neck and make it work.
Wallace has a very hard job on his hands of course but if costs can be slashed, season ticket income for 2014/15 secured and The Rangers put on an even keel, then why not? They wouldn’t be the Rangers who went into liquidation in 2012 but they would be a Rangers. It might not happen but it could.

View Comment

Tic 6709Posted on2:08 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Has anyone the link to willie miller v chick young,
The only podcast missing from last week is Saturday’s.
There is sportsound extra,but not the day-time show.
I wonder why.

View Comment

GiovanniPosted on2:09 pm - Jan 27, 2014


And now there are three: Laxley, Damille and now River and Mercantile. All investment vehicles which wish to maximise the return to investors. These aren’t the normal city investors that people associate with insurance companies etc these three all want, and need, a return on investment in the short to medium term. R&M have a lovely phrase they use “garnering investments”. They must all have calculated the realisable asset value is considerably higher than the RIFC market capitalisation, as that can be their only interest. I repeat, they are not interested in funding a football team in any league. Has anyone checked Graham Wallace’s membership of the Tufty Club? He’s the biggest squirrel I’ve ever seen.

View Comment

Kilgore TroutPosted on2:16 pm - Jan 27, 2014


TSFM
These @ScotFans4Change folk seem to be up for the fight.
Useful allies?

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on2:18 pm - Jan 27, 2014


posted the following on the LSE site.

Fair play – Hugh Sergeant the very successful manager (AA rated by Citywire) of River & Mercantile’s UK Long Term Recovery Fund (for increasing his holding – having seen a 40% drop in the value of the RIFC shares in his portfolio over the last 3 months he is clearly committed to the share. So he increased his share in the company by over half at a time when the share price was under pressure, and in the absence of any new information (other than the departure of Stockbridge and the appojuntment of this cost-cutter fellow). Intriguing – my first thoughts are: is this opportuntistic buying when there are a lot more shares coming on to the market? Or doubling down? Will be scouring the financial press to hear his thoughts – he’s an infequent blogger himself (2-3 posts a YEAR on his own company blog).

Still, given the spivery and spinning of recent times it’s nice to see a buy & hold investor in the share raise their head above the parapet.

Sorry to disagree Giovanni, but it looks to me like River & Mercantile are longer term investors, given the fund that held the shares previously: http://www.riverandmercantile.com/Asp/uploadedFiles/file/Factsheets/RandM_Factsheet_UKLT.pdf

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on2:24 pm - Jan 27, 2014


iamacant says: January 27, 2014 at 1:51 pm

I’d say the second disclaimer related to where R&M have regulatory approval to sell their funds and the first is standard on pretty much ANY communication – electronic or print – and basically means “you can’t sue us for giving an opinion that if you subsequently invest on and lose money in”. It’s the financioal equivalent of a “Any similarity between characters in this move and anyone alive or dead is purely coincidental” – even when its a biopic!

Don’t think there’s anything interesting there…

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on2:31 pm - Jan 27, 2014


jockybhoy says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:18 pm

Sorry to disagree Giovanni, but it looks to me like River & Mercantile are longer term investors, given the fund that held the shares previously: http://www.riverandmercantile.com/Asp/uploadedFiles/file/Factsheets/RandM_Factsheet_UKLT.pdf
=====================================================================================
fair point – but do professional investors invest in football clubs to make money these days.. Surely not after recent events. So they must be investing in something that more than balances out the cash-inferno at RFCL. So more control to known non-football investors – bears beware.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on2:32 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Tic6709

Since I raised the Miller vs Young thing sorry I don’t do podcasts but to expand if it helps; it was just a short piece in a general RFC discussion where Chick unsurprisingly was repeating the Record view that Stockbridge had gone ergo Dave King was desperate to invest. Miller then simply asked the question why would he, or anyone, invest when the thing leaked more than a leaky thing in leaksville. Chick as usual spluttered out but Wallace said………and then didn’t seem to add anything that Wallace had actually said relying more on the old “but its Rangers” defence. Miller then responded to say that as far as he could see Wallace asked the players to take a pay cut which they refused, and at the same time no players seem to be for sale thus the cash problem presumably remains. Chick’s response – but they have to invest to address that!!?!! at which point a slightly exasperated Richard Gordon said I think we’ll move on.

That’s my recollection anyway.

View Comment

expatbhoyPosted on2:32 pm - Jan 27, 2014


” The big question now is where Rangers go from here because what I’m hearing from inside Ibrox is that Stockbridge may have got his numbers wrong when he predicted the business would be down to its last million pounds by April.”
———————————————————————————————————————————————

I am not the inside source, I just guessed, and I believe Keith Jackson is just guessing.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on2:37 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:

January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm
I don’t think anybody has categorically stated on here, regarding the Stuart Bathgate piece, that what he says won’t happen – after all, with all the help they get, from all quarters, anything’s possible. It’s the rather childish/unprofessional way he has written it and making out that just because (in his opinion) Wallace is the right man for the job, everything will be alright for TRFC, that’s so reminiscent of the succulent lamb munchers. Basically he’s used a lot of words to say; Stockbridge has gone, Wallace is great, and TRFC have a lot of fans, therefore, everything will work out just fine. To me it read like something someone with a better than average grasp of English, and the ability to spell, might post on RM. He has, in fact, not given us any information that any TRFC fan couldn’t give us, or anyone else who is following the saga. Which begs the question; why bother? I know, just worked it out 😳 – he was told to write a piece like that, either by his editor, or Jack Irvine 🙂

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on2:39 pm - Jan 27, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2014 at 1:35 pm
4 0 Rate This

Turns out it was the River Plate

But who is their client/clients who own the shares

http://www.riverandmercantile.com

River and Mercantile was formed in 1881 when the River Plate Trust Loan and Agency Company was incorporated. This company administered various companies in South America and was succeeded in 1961 by the River Plate and Mercantile Trust Ltd.

This company subsequently became River and Mercantile Trust Plc in 1962. By 1994 the company had become synonymous with longevity, integrity and product innovation, managing five investment trusts with a total of £400m under management.

Between 1994 and 1996 Pacific Investments acquired a 100 per cent interest in River and Mercantile and recruited a management team from HSBC to launch a new open ended investment division.

The investment trust contracts were sold to leading London based investment houses but Pacific Investments retained the name and focussed on developing the new investment division, a specialist UK equities fund management business, River and Mercantile Investment Management Ltd (RAMIM).

In 1999 RAMIM was floated on the London Stock Exchange and changed its name to Liontrust Asset Management Plc. Since flotation Pacific has placed down its original 75 per cent holding.

Pacific Investments retained the River and Mercantile name, utilising it purely as a holding company for a number of its fund management activities.

River and Mercantile Asset Management LLP (R&M) was formed in 2006.

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

Oh, oh !!

Cue the Celtic [chinese] conspiracies surfacing again.

Pacific Investments

Pacific… = Celtic…=… dermott (under lawwell’s instruction) – buying Sevco to keep Celtic on top to prevent
Rangers* from “getting back” to their rightful place n the SPFL premiership!

You read it here first!

View Comment

seminalPosted on2:43 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Ratdog said:

but it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that someone could take the Ibrox situation by the scruff of the neck and make it work. Wallace has a very hard job on his hands of course but if costs can be slashed, season ticket income for 2014/15 secured and The Rangers put on an even keel
————————————————————–

We hear this argument a lot, essentially it was the same used by the guy in the Scotsman, that Rangers are too big to fail by virtue of their fans.

Basically, Rangers fans are in it for one main reason: Supremacy. Suppremacy over Celtic, Supremacy of Scottish Football. Winning.

Without this supremacy, Rangers would have few fans.

Unfortunately it would cost about £40m to £50m in annual expenditure to achieve this supremacy. The turnover for Sevco is barely half this amount. In the absense of a friendly bank or wealthy benefactor then Sevco will never again achieve the same supremacy over Scottish football.

Then what?

Well, slowly, the post ’86 generation of bears will begin to drift away from Sevco as the product is no longer fulfilling their emotional needs. In 5 years time we may see a Sevco that has an expenditure of £20m based on £10m of revenues.

Whatever happens there will always be a structural deficit of about £1m a month in the finances. THis has existed since 1986. It is because the fans are unable or unwilling to put in enough to meet their expectations. It is Rangersomics.

The current version of Rangers may make it through to the end of season on the necessities of short term cost cutting being sold to the bears. It may even make it to the top division. But ultimately it is doomed as is any form of Rangers.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:46 pm - Jan 27, 2014


This little article might be of some interest,if Sir John Beckwith-property mogul- is still involved!
This is the link: efinancialnews.com/story/2012-08-13/river-and-mercantile-reaches-record?ea9c8a2de0ee111045601ab04d673622

” River and Mercantile reaches AuM record

Sarah Krouse
13 Aug 2012

Boutique fund manager River and Mercantile Asset Management reported a 26% rise in assets under management to an all-time high of £1.7bn in the year to March 31.
River and Mercantile reaches AuM record

Backed by property mogul Sir John Beckwith, the firm posted its fifth consecutive year-over-year rise in assets under management and saw a 55% increase in operating profit to £5.1m. Net inflows totalled £400m – of which its global equity strategy accounted for £310m.

Chief executive James Barham said: “We have been looking to grow assets within our capacity constraints. We’ve taken a disciplined approach to costs… and it has been a difficult environment.”

The firm cut costs by 2% last year to £2.46m and said it looks forward with “quiet confidence” after a challenging year for the asset management industry.

River and Mercantile’s three-year performance in UK equities has been ranked as one of the best in the past 12 months, according to Camradata IQ tables. It is now looking to add the US and Australia as core distribution markets.

The fund manager is starting to develop a new investment division, which was planned when the firm was launched in 2005.

Barham said the unit would not necessarily pursue equities but plans have not yet been finalised and nothing is ruled out. He said: “We’re at the point now where we have sufficient cashflow to reinvest in that business. We’re going to push forward in diversification so we’re not putting out another division driven by the same factors.” “

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:49 pm - Jan 27, 2014


And this link tells us something of Sir John beckwith
http://sirjohnbeckwith.crazybillionaire.org/sirjohnbeckwith.php

View Comment

tearsofjoyPosted on3:03 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm
11 25 Rate This

Point one: Stuart Bathgate is a professional journalist and does not support Rangers.
Point two:………..
###########################

Utterly amazed to see so many thumbs down for rabtdog’s post. What has he said that’s so controversial? I have thought all along Sevco can and will survive – at a cost. At the cost of the spivs ripping the club apart to get their cash out and at a cost to the fans who will simply have to swallow hard and stump up their ST money (maybe earlier than planned and at a higher cost) .That’s the price Sevco fans will have to pay and I think enough of them will stick around to watch what will undoubtedly be a fairly mediocre team (for some years to come) . There will also undoubtedly be some walking away by the fans – but that is the nature of the beast at Ibrox. They walked away in the 80s , they walked away from Champions league nights when they couldn’t stomach getting a regular hiding and they walked away from SDMs moonbeam years when share flotations crashed and burned. Sevco will survive , I’m sure , but the thought of the seasons ahead must be frightening for Sevco fans : merciless suffering at the hands of other fans who can watch & laugh at the poorest Rangers teams you will see for many a long year. They’ll survive allright. They are a “loyal” bunch you know.

View Comment

Tic 6709Posted on3:15 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Smugas says:

January 27, 2014 at 2:32 pm

Tic6709
===============
Cheers mate, I was hoping Willie had clocked him.

View Comment

bluPosted on3:21 pm - Jan 27, 2014


A thought on Dave King’s reluctance to invest in shares in RIFC.

Mr King endured many years of to-ing and fro-ing with SARS because a civil servant spotted reports in the media that he’d splashed out on a whole range of extravagant purchases including c£20m on David Murray’s Rangers and concluded that there was reason to believe that King had broken SA tax laws by not declaring the income that generated these monies, thereby avoiding paying tax due to SARS. King ultimately accepted guilt and didn’t get an 84 year prison sentence. He advised all other dodgy geezers to pay their dues.

What is the current limit for SA citizens personal investment overseas? Is there a company limit for investment? How could King find the cash to buy shares in RIFC/TRFC. If he’s managed to offshore money from his SA companies, will SARS come after him again should he invest a chunk in the new Rangers?

View Comment

TallBoy PoppyPosted on3:21 pm - Jan 27, 2014


john clarke says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:49 pm

And this link tells us something of Sir John beckwith
http://sirjohnbeckwith.crazybillionaire.org/sirjohnbeckwith.php
———————————————————————————-

John, crazy as this might sound, but I have actually seen this page before. I can only assume that it was in connection with research I was doing on another sevco spiv. That site stands out as it appears to be some crank trying to get attention from the great man.

Anyway, as I can’t remember exactly why I landed on there I’ll have a wee guess – as him and another spiv on the River and Mercantile board – Mark Johnsone – also have been involved in private healthcare companies perhaps they know Monseur Vert?

Further reading on Beckwith suggests interests in sports facilities and property, as well as previous in trackside advertising. Perhaps Mercantile see Murray Park as the new “Sir John Beckwith Centre for Sport.”

View Comment

bluPosted on3:37 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Allyjambo says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:37 pm
==========================================
Peter Wright has been dragged into the Rangers discussion a couple of times when covering rugby on Radio Scotland and made the same kind of ill-informed comments (possibly just being polite) along the lines of, “It’s Rangers, so they’ll ‘get back where they belong’ ” Informed analysis it isn’t, and we shouldn’t expect it, really. But, as Rabtdog says, Stuart Bathgate is a journalist. He gets paid for writing this stuff. Maybe a bit more research or better to swerve the soccer comment?

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on3:38 pm - Jan 27, 2014


blu says:
January 27, 2014 at 3:21 pm

http://www.resbank.co.za/RegulationAndSupervision/FinancialSurveillanceAndExchangeControl/EXCMan/Section%20O/Section%20O.pdf

The Reserve Bank for SA has published these guidelines. Different rules apply to overseas investments for individuals and company’s. If Dave decides to invest then the amount will be governed by how he structures the investment.

One thing is for sure. The SA tax authorities will be all over any investment like a rash making sure everything is above board.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on3:48 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm
—-

Just out of interest, rabt … you’re not actually Stuart Bathgate, are you, or one of his mates?

Your points are fair, but argued a just a little over-zealously. 😉

View Comment

nawlitePosted on4:33 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:

January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm

Point one: Stuart Bathgate is a professional journalist and does not support Rangers.
Point two: while Murray may have driven them into debt, Whyte drove them into administration and Green was a chancer who made money, Wallace may actually be the professional who can put the current The Rangers on a stable financial footing. It’s a fact that The Rangers have a stadium and lots of supporters – more than enough to run a viable football club.
Point three: it’s profoundly disappointing that someone writing in the press who reckons that there may be a club at Ibrox in the future is seen on here as an adversary, or as a person with an agenda. Bathgate might be stating a case that individuals here don’t like but it’s not beyond the bounds of possibility that someone could take the Ibrox situation by the scruff of the neck and make it work.
Wallace has a very hard job on his hands of course but if costs can be slashed, season ticket income for 2014/15 secured and The Rangers put on an even keel, then why not? They wouldn’t be the Rangers who went into liquidation in 2012 but they would be a Rangers. It might not happen but it could.
===============================================================================
I personally thought TDs and a response were appropriate, both to Bathgate’s piece and to RabTDog’s post.
If you (RTD) have been reading TSFM, you’ll know full well that many posters on here have provided well argued and financially informed reasons (well, as much as transparency allows) why simple cost cutting by an allegedly good CEO will likely not be enough for RFC* to survive in a reasonable state. These reasons include the millstones of Ibrox and MP, the difficulties and potential costs of downsizing employees, the reasonable possibility of fans leaving due to lack of success, the lack of evidence that Wallace is a good CEO (we all know the lies and false dawns from previous incumbents) etc. It is ridiculous to anyone understanding the thinking on here for Bathgate to suggest that everything is now going to be alright simply because RFC* has lots of fans and – he believes – a good CEO.

It is absolutely understandable for people on here to question why he is putting this forward and not considering the same reservations we do. Suggesting otherwise and deciding that it’s disappointing that he is treated as an adversary or a man with an agenda is deserving of TDs imo. Whether he is stupid or deliberately writing puff, it is only right that the reality is pointed out and we ask why.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on4:37 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Angus,

I think the wider point, since I have no interest in Mr Bathgate per se is that this article, complete with Whyte bad Murray good, Rangers were victims of a mugging etc etc goes onto literally a heap of other supportive articles that stands next to a somewhat smaller collection of critical articles. Was it RTC who first said that there have been a number of factual inaccuracies reported about this case, but coincidentally all in the one direction?

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on4:48 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm

Re: Stuart Bathgate

Personally I don’t care what football team he supports, if any. His piece on Rangers was cringeworthy in the phrasing and language employed – I don’t actually remember any West of Scotland succulent lamb muncher ever doing better for his dog biscuits.

It reminded me of the kind of thing school kids do on a work placement for a local paper such was the enthusiasm for a subject floating on a layer of froth and hopeful speculation with no hard facts. He should stick to rugby.

However on the question of there will always be a Rangers it is tempting to believe that they will always be there because of the numbers currently buying STs. I haven’t checked their attendance on Saturday and have no intention of doing so but lots of Bears on the Darkside say the crowd was well down and the general feeling is that the football on offer is a major part of the problem.

One thing I do know from personal knowledge is that in the not too distant past I can remember Rangers playing to approx 18K fans – football supporters can be fickle and that should always be remembered by every club.

The first year of STs saw 9,000 Bears fail to renew their ST which is a 25% churn on their STs which is pretty high and came from Rangers. The STs were, in the main, taken-up by other possibly younger fans. Last year I reckon approx 3,000 didn’t renew and I’m not convinced they were all replaced by new punters.

The big crunch – if they can actually reach it – is next year and the following IMO. Can they get to the top in 2 years and once there can they break into the top 3/4 clubs. I don’t think anyone can be sure of that answer because so much depends on whether they survive and in what shape they will be financially.

If they limp on playing the same level of football and are getting tanned by full-time teams who don’t tire in the second half then they will lose a lot of ST holders. Even a small drop in STs will have an inordinate financial affect because of the sheer expense of operating Ibrox and if the stadium has to be leased-back that will increase the pressures.

And fewer STs or even people attending games start to impact on all other revenue streams so the cumulative effect can be serious.

Bathgate paints a glowing picture brought about by a Board of wonderful businessmen – Not only have I heard it all before from the SMSM but so have the Bears and many of them actually are waking-up and starting to smell what kind of future might await and be the norm for Rangers for quite afew years if it survives.

Bathgate was basically acting as a brazen cheer leader and on his performance he could be employed at Ibrox for the half-time entertainment. He threw in a few nods to the actual reality of the situation but was unable to restrain his emotions and exercise sound judgement IMO.

EDIT – ADD

abtdog says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm

Point one: Stuart Bathgate is a professional journalist and does not support Rangers.
—————————–
Yea he’s a professional sports journo and probably does good rugby match reports. He is not a financial or business journo and that is where the problem in his story lies. That’s me being charitable and I actually am convinced he is being fed tit-bits which will eventually choke him in professional terms because it will become obvious.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on4:55 pm - Jan 27, 2014


jimlarkin says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:39 pm

Oh, oh !!

Cue the Celtic [chinese] conspiracies surfacing again.

Pacific Investments

Pacific… = Celtic…=… dermott (under lawwell’s instruction) – buying Sevco to keep Celtic on top to prevent
Rangers* from “getting back” to their rightful place in the SPFL premiership! You read it here first!
===============================================

😆

View Comment

rabtdogPosted on5:05 pm - Jan 27, 2014


hi Angus1983,
no i’m not Stuart Bathgate…
but i think he’d make a good TSFM Podcast guest 😉
there’s an unfortunate amount of presumptive, prescriptive writing on here and the blithe but inaccurate assertions about Bathgate just roused me from my more usual lurker-reader state …

If you an convince him to do it drop me a line 🙂
.. and don’t be a lurker!

TSFM

View Comment

bluPosted on5:08 pm - Jan 27, 2014


No1 Bob says:
January 27, 2014 at 3:38 pm
blu says:
January 27, 2014 at 3:21 pm

http://www.resbank.co.za/RegulationAndSupervision/FinancialSurveillanceAndExchangeControl/EXCMan/Section%20O/Section%20O.pdf

Thanks Bob – roughly £215,000 a year then for an individual.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on5:10 pm - Jan 27, 2014


blu says:
January 27, 2014 at 3:21 pm

A thought on Dave King’s reluctance to invest in shares in RIFC.

Mr King endured many years of to-ing and fro-ing with SARS because a civil servant spotted reports in the media that he’d splashed out on a whole range of extravagant purchases including c£20m on David Murray’s Rangers and concluded that there was reason to believe that King had broken SA tax laws by not declaring the income that generated these monies, thereby avoiding paying tax due to SARS. King ultimately accepted guilt and didn’t get an 84 year prison sentence. He advised all other dodgy geezers to pay their dues.

What is the current limit for SA citizens personal investment overseas? Is there a company limit for investment? How could King find the cash to buy shares in RIFC/TRFC. If he’s managed to offshore money from his SA companies, will SARS come after him again should he invest a chunk in the new Rangers?
=======================================
blu if you look at my post:
ecobhoy says:
January 25, 2014 at 2:34 pm

You will see what King is having to do to comply with SARS by way of repatriating overseas businesses to South Africa.

The Cautionary Notice on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange about the resultant related party deal is also interesting.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on5:29 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Stuart Bathgate might well be a rugby man, but for a number of years he covered football in the Edinburgh Evening News, primarily covering Hearts games and stories. He was never popular amongst the Hearts supporters, but maybe the Hearts supporters were wrong in their assessment. Now that it has been pointed out that rugby is his first love, a lot is explained about his football writing skills 🙄

As it’s a very long time since I last bought a copy of any news paper, though I did like the EEN for it’s local coverage, I can’t really comment on Bathgate’s coverage of football there, but whenever pointed in the direction of his articles by an angry Hearts support online, I could usually see what they were getting at.

Anyway, he does confirm one thing; class is permanent, while form is temporary; and after the recent improvement in the form of the SMSM’ coverage of TRFC, Stuart Bathgate just about proves that!

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on6:15 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Resin_lab_dog says:
January 27, 2014 at 12:28 am

“Was SDM part of the establishment or a victim of it? I say the former.”
——————————
I postulated this possibility just for completeness and as I understand it his current business predicament may mark him out as being something short of the financial genius that he was purported to be.

However, exploring the other side of the coin, I was listening to a feature concerning the Republic of Ireland’s recent exit from its Euro bailout. One businesswoman from Cork related how she was offered (pre-2008) astronomical loans (compared to the size of her business), by a bank representative in her coffee shop queue on one occasion. These guys were on a bonus for bringing in business and it seems that the due diligence/risk analysis employed was minimal. Many of these bank representatives had never seen a recession before and possibly thought it was a mythical occurrence (like a tsunami was before 2004).

So SDM could have been a victim but he could equally been entirely complicit in the hubris that was doing the rounds pre 2008.

I see RBS is likely to post huge losses due to all the shenanigans they have been involved in down through the years. These guys magnificently misjudged the situation since to do otherwise risked them being shouldered out of the feeding frenzy. We can look back now and call hindsight to our defence but at the time you were considered a mug if you were not trying to hitch a ride on the gravy train.

The acid test is what happened to the characters that were involved in all this chaos. Did they end up homeless and penniless? Did they throw themselves from the windows of tall buildings? No. They begrudgingly accepted that their bonus would be limited to a mere 100% of their salary. The whole thing is bonkers. Can you hear me world. The whole thing is stark raving lunacy.

I don’t think SDM was set up at the outset. He just bought into the fairytale like everyone else. There may be an even bigger picture but you would have to travel to the moon to appreciate its scope. From a TSFM point of view, banking improvidence only comes into focus post 2008 when tough decisions were required to be made. What I’m poking a stick at is whether a tactic of distressing a business could have been employed in TRFCL’s case. RFC was more than distressed as we all know. Did some fly boy at the bank accept SDM’s IOU on the basis that he would assist in screwing a bit more money out of Scottish football.

I appreciate your retorts RLD.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on6:31 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:
January 27, 2014 at 5:05 pm
5 8 Rate This

hi Angus1983,
no i’m not Stuart Bathgate…
but i think he’d make a good TSFM Podcast guest 😉
there’s an unfortunate amount of presumptive, prescriptive writing on here and the blithe but inaccurate assertions about Bathgate just roused me from my more usual lurker-reader state …
=======================
I made the blithe assertion that Bathgate’s article was a poor piece of journalism. I’ll stand by that judgement.
The Southern General analogy was tortured, to say the least.

On the general point of his aricle, nobody can explain to me how cost-cutting at this stage can save the day. An injection of cash is required urgently just to keep the football team playing until Season Ticket money arrives.

Because of the frankly laughable contracts that Green was happy to dish out to all and sundry, getting rid of people, playing or non-playing, is going to be very expensive. How can a company that has almost run out of cash find the money to pay people off? Wouldn’t that have been a sensible question for Bathgate to address in his piece? Instead he just asserts that costs can be cut, without actually explaining how.

My own view is that the hedge funds will ensure that the cash doesn’t run out, but the price for that help will be the properties, one way or another. That is the value the hedge funds see in RIFC PLC. They see no value for their investors in building a Champions League football team. Football is just a money pit- these hedge funds fully understand that, and they want nothing to do with it. Now, a nice clean property company? That’s another matter altogether. There will be a Rangers playing at Ibrox, I’m sure, but they’ll be paying rent for the privilege. I can’t see any other outcome.

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on6:50 pm - Jan 27, 2014


The Untrained Eye

In the unforgettable words of Jarvis Cocker; “I know that to the untrained eye, I’m sitting on my arse all day”‘

So what exactly has Mr Wallace done to cut costs so far – given that it is commonly accepted that cash is is running out fast and that he is the man to save the day.

1) Public shambles of asking players to take pay cut – impact: ZERO

2) Brian Stockbridge – pushed or jumped – contractual lump sum payment – impact: £200K INCREASE

3) Off-loading expensive/extraneous players – with four full days of the transfer window left – impact: ZERO

So to this untrained eye, Mr Wallace appears to be sitting on his arse all day, while The Rangers accelerate slightly towards their financial terminus.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on6:54 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Neeps.

Agree completely. The disappointment in the article in question was really the selective memory as to what has happened in the last 18 months. He didn’t quite say wouldn’t it be good if they could have had fresh start with 20m in the bank. But he might as well have.

View Comment

twopandaPosted on7:01 pm - Jan 27, 2014


INTERLUDE

No good at this interwebbing lark – post twice, can’t spell, talk nonsense and still can`t change that blessed icon image on the top right. Anyway – lost my TSFM Bookmark then searched for “THE SCOTTISH FOOTBALL MONITOR” – accidently – under – “IMAGES”

What comes up – mostly good starting with TSFM Logo – BUT – at the top;

• Hugh Dallas!! – [must be a hacker virus thing]
• SFA Rulebook Cover!! [eh?]
• Union Bears???
• Nord Nimmo Smith [Good Grief]
• Craig Whyte with a CFC Scarf [Yes!]
• 1978 Argentina World Cup Brochure
• Hearts Financial Statements?
• [One Number] Dalek?
• One Giant Panda [Asleep]
• Plus all you Guys Image Icons

Still – on the whole – much better than ‘rangers + spivs’ – [some too funny for words – e.g. [CG + JT]
Blimey
😉

View Comment

m.c.f.c.Posted on7:14 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Apathy at Fever Pitch.

The latest shift of shares underlines that shares are power at RIFC and hence RFCL. No amount of protest or Rangersness can trump owning the club, the assets and the boardroom by owning the shares. While Dave King appears to be the last hope of salvation – there is a bleedin’ obvious alternative.

Get 38,000 people to pledge £1,000 to buy the shares of RIFC.

There are plenty of current shareholders that would be willing to accept 30p – 35p for a quick profit when they’ve recently bought in below 30p. Remember fans once owned 12.5% – maybe down to 7% – 10% now. Those are two big chunks towards the magic 30%. Then offer the remainder a decent premium over current price at 33p – 35p and Bob’s your uncle.

Or maybe it’s easier to sit on your arse, belly-ache about your misfortune and let someone lelse worry about saving your glorious club – is that the true meaning of Rangersness.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on7:24 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Smugas says:
January 27, 2014 at 6:54 pm

He didn’t quite say wouldn’t it be good if they could have had fresh start with 20m in the bank.
============================================================================

They did have a fresh start with £20M in the bank.
We are now seeing the result of that!!

View Comment

chancer67Posted on7:30 pm - Jan 27, 2014


EcoBhoy

The state aid situation that has got the bears hopes up,can I ask if you can shed any light on the actual accusations and what if any chance there is of them getting a result.
As I understand it,the land at Westhorn was valued at 5million according to the information the bears have and when Celtic bought it the price was 675,000.

The difference in price is what the bears are pining their hopes on,also a geo phys report that they have asked Glasgow City Council for relating to Westhorn,they have asked via FOI for the report but the Council keep stalling on releasing it.One chap has had 8 requests for FOI denied.

The other bee in the bears bonnet relating to Westhorn is that the day GCC sold the land to Celtic for 675,000 Celtic used the land as security to obtain loan/overdraft from the Coop bank and the price placed on the land by Celtic was 6 million. That is the.case they have sent to the European Commission,what is your gut feeling on them being successful.

I don’t hold out much hope for the case of state aid relating to Lennoxtown as that seems a more straightforward case if the Tripartite Agreement is correct.

View Comment

JagsmanPosted on7:31 pm - Jan 27, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2014 at 4:48 pm
I haven’t checked their attendance on Saturday and have no intention of doing so but lots of Bears on the Darkside say the crowd was well down and the general feeling is that the football on offer is a major part of the problem.

I have checked the attendance and a few others. On average, they seem to be down by the number of lost ST sales (when compared to the similar fixture last season). 5066 absent on Saturday, 2794 at the previous home match, 2001 before that and 4686 before that again. About 3600 missing per game relative to last season.

There is also the obvious caveat that the stated crowds are probably like Celtics stated crowds: inclusive of tickets sold but not taken up, so real crowds are almost certainly substantially smaller.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on7:43 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Is the penny beginning to drop. Govan fans asking where will money come from?

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/692448772?-11344:801

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on7:45 pm - Jan 27, 2014


m.c.f.c. says:
January 27, 2014 at 6:50 pm

3) Off-loading expensive/extraneous players – with four full days of the transfer window left – impact: ZERO

So to this untrained eye, Mr Wallace appears to be sitting on his arse all day,
——

Mr Andrew Smith stated in Scotland on Sunday that Mr Templeton has been “hawked around for £150,000” (whether based on fact or not, I don’t know).

Perhaps not so much a case of Mr Wallace sitting on his arse as being completely unable to detach the leeches from the bank account despite his best efforts.

It’s not a huge surprise that movement of players out the door hasn’t happened. Not renowned for their intellect or perspicacity, they’ll simply be hanging onto their regular pay packet in the vague hope that a saviour appears and keeps shovelling money into their pockets.

(ratb: OK, I believe you, and I understand your reason for posting, too. 🙂 )

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on7:47 pm - Jan 27, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2014 at 4:48 pm
I haven’t checked their attendance on Saturday …
——
BBC report says 41207.

View Comment

Flocculent ApoideaPosted on7:59 pm - Jan 27, 2014


blu says:
January 27, 2014 at 3:21 pm

A thought on Dave King’s reluctance to invest in shares in RIFC.

Mr King endured many years of to-ing and fro-ing with SARS because a civil servant spotted reports in the media that he’d splashed out on a whole range of extravagant purchases including c£20m on David Murray’s Rangers and concluded that there was reason to believe that King had broken SA tax laws by not declaring the income that generated these monies, thereby avoiding paying tax due to SARS. King ultimately accepted guilt and didn’t get an 84 year prison sentence. He advised all other dodgy geezers to pay their dues.

If I remember the SA radio interview/podcast, he advised people to pay up if they get caught (rather than waste energy fighting their case). A shining example to us all.

While I’m on, is this 💡 a light bulb or someone mooning?

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on8:10 pm - Jan 27, 2014


rabtdog says:
January 27, 2014 at 2:08 pm

“it’s profoundly disappointing that someone writing in the press who reckons that there may be a club at Ibrox in the future is seen on here as an adversary”
——————————-
I see where you are coming from but I’m not sure the reaction to the Bathgate piece is simply a jaundiced perspective. Rangers have every right to forge a new future for themselves but articles such as this do them no favours in my opinion.

We have seen enough PR to recognise a puff piece when we see it. Perhaps there is a real kernel of truth in there somewhere but if so, the writing style can then only be explained as a hangover from the succulent days. Once you are made aware of this kind of stuff you grow to recognise the style immediately.

View Comment

bluPosted on8:18 pm - Jan 27, 2014


ecobhoy says:
January 27, 2014 at 5:10 pm
blu says:
January 27, 2014 at 3:21 pm

A thought on Dave King’s reluctance to invest in shares in RIFC.

Mr King endured many years of to-ing and fro-ing with SARS because a civil servant spotted reports in the media that he’d splashed out on a whole range of extravagant purchases including c£20m on David Murray’s Rangers and concluded that there was reason to believe that King had broken SA tax laws by not declaring the income that generated these monies, thereby avoiding paying tax due to SARS. King ultimately accepted guilt and didn’t get an 84 year prison sentence. He advised all other dodgy geezers to pay their dues.

What is the current limit for SA citizens personal investment overseas? Is there a company limit for investment? How could King find the cash to buy shares in RIFC/TRFC. If he’s managed to offshore money from his SA companies, will SARS come after him again should he invest a chunk in the new Rangers?
=======================================
blu if you look at my post:
ecobhoy says:
January 25, 2014 at 2:34 pm

You will see what King is having to do to comply with SARS by way of repatriating overseas businesses to South Africa.

The Cautionary Notice on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange about the resultant related party deal is also interesting.

I missed that.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on8:37 pm - Jan 27, 2014


valentinesclown says:
January 27, 2014 at 7:43 pm

Is the penny beginning to drop. Govan fans asking where will money come from?

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/692448772?-11344:801
=================================================
There is a very simple answer to that. Cut the cloth to a level where they can survive on what they earn. What part of that don’t they get?

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on8:51 pm - Jan 27, 2014


“They did have a fresh start with £20M in the bank.
We are now seeing the result of that!!”

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

Indeed, and they cut their players salary budget by, what £14m per year, something like that. Well it was cut for them when the bulk of the players decided not to transfer over to the new club (more proof it’s a new club but that’s not important right now).

Unfortunately they never cut their “other” wage bill at all, and they barely cut their “other costs”. Those pretty much stayed at the same level as a club with a much higher turnover.

Hence a trading loss of £14m on a £19m turnover. I still find that staggering.

As long as they are looking at the players wage budget as the root of the problem they are totally failing to see the point. Ibrox, Murray Park, the size of the staff involved and the wages for management and executives. Those are the real issues. That is not to say that the wage budget isn’t too high, it is by a huge amount, but it is not the main issue and it is not where cuts will come from.

A proper administration could have sorted most, if not all of the problems. However it would not have led to selling season tickets and bringing money in from an IPO, which is what the spivs wanted.

The irony, people here are telling the Rangers support these things. Mark (Grandmaster Suck) Dingwall, Chris (Fury) Graham, the muppets on radio and writing in the papers are selling them the spivs’ and the club’s propaganda. The support are choosing to believe what they want to be true and not facing what is actually true.

Plus ca change …

View Comment

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on8:57 pm - Jan 27, 2014


upthehoops says:
January 27, 2014 at 8:37 pm
1 0 Rate This

valentinesclown says:
January 27, 2014 at 7:43 pm

Is the penny beginning to drop. Govan fans asking where will money come from?

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/692448772?-11344:801
=================================================
There is a very simple answer to that. Cut the cloth to a level where they can survive on what they earn. What part of that don’t they get?

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

historically, the accounts of RFC PLC (IL) show that it cost between £14-16M a year to keep RFC afloat – and that sum did NOT include paying wages (backroom staff, groundskeepers, players, coaches,directors etc)

their income was £19M

no doubt once they are in the top flight, that will be upped a bit due to 1. increased ticket prices, 2. Increased commercial deals 3. slight increase in TV money

Being generous I reckon their top level income will be £25M (excluding any UEFA windfalls if they qualify)

That gives them about £9m to pay everyones wages

lets be generous…£4.5M for the “back of house” staff costs and £4.5M for the players (not coaching staff)

thats less than the current playing staff by about 35%

I reckon that will see them toiling away in mid table SPFL mediocrity – how long before the support tire of the journey and that top level number starts to slide?

they have to sever the costs of MP, cut the playing staff, revamp the coaching staff, cut the non essential off field expenses (flash hotel stays), cut board room expenses, cut the freebies/hospitality, flash cars, bonus’s

only then, a fit, lean, BASIC club can they hope to spend enough on the squad to compete at the top, keep the fans on board and not slip back into financial oblivion.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on9:03 pm - Jan 27, 2014


upthehoops says:
January 27, 2014 at 8:37 pm
4 0 Rate This

valentinesclown says:
January 27, 2014 at 7:43 pm

Is the penny beginning to drop. Govan fans asking where will money come from?

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/692448772?-11344:801
=================================================
There is a very simple answer to that. Cut the cloth to a level where they can survive on what they earn. What part of that don’t they get?
———————————————————————————–
I think they probably get it, but they certainly do not want it.
Having to play on a level playing field financially with WATP attitude just does not cut it. Ally is proof of that.

View Comment

chancer67Posted on9:04 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Why the TD;s i’m only relaying to the blog what the bears have sent to the EC and i’m awaiting echoboy’s take on it.I would appreciate if any of you could shoot down the “evidence” rather than shoot the messenger.

thanks.

View Comment

Greenock JackPosted on9:10 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Angus
BBC report says 41207.
————————————–
According to the BBC, over the weekend there were over 1200 paying customers more at Ibrox than at every other Scottish senior match combined. That includes 5 matches in the top tier, 2 in the Championship, 4 others in SPFL1 and the 5 games in SPFL2.

IMO, the only other relatively decent crowd was at the Falkirk v Dundee match, 4183.

———————————————
DP asked about the Spiers/Irvine connection.
It’s obvious from listening and reading him of late that he has become a subtle pusher of the Irvine remit.

View Comment

expatbhoyPosted on9:16 pm - Jan 27, 2014


I read the Scotsman article, my blood did not boil, in fact apart from the rather painful analogy the commentary bordered on the innocuous, hardly a puff pastry piece of PR to my ear. What I find a little difficult to understand is how this innocuous piece can cause such a negative reaction, if transparency and honesty are to mean anything then it must include ourselves. I assume the conclusion below bothers some more than most, but I do not detect any whiff of spit roast, just logic, and there is nothing biased about logic.

” Given the size of the support base, eventual recovery appears certain. The timing will be variable, depending on how soundly or otherwise Ibrox is run. Without full knowledge of the state of the club’s finances, we cannot be certain, but at least judging by the way in which Wallace and his key colleagues are going about their business, it now looks like that recovery will be completed sooner rather than later.”

In my opinion the dismissal of BS removed any lasting doubt who is now running Rangers, the size of their market is beyond doubt and Rangers are too close to the financial security of the top tier, all of these factors lead me to agree with the author.
I have some concerns about cash flow but until I hear otherwise Rangers have just about enough to see the season out, any concerns I had about ST sales vanished with BS.

I do not expect many to agree with me but please remember, great minds think alike.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on9:33 pm - Jan 27, 2014


valentinesclown says:
January 27, 2014 at 9:03 pm

5

0

Rate This

upthehoops says:
January 27, 2014 at 8:37 pm
4 0 Rate This

valentinesclown says:
January 27, 2014 at 7:43 pm

Is the penny beginning to drop. Govan fans asking where will money come from?

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/692448772?-11344:801
=================================================
There is a very simple answer to that. Cut the cloth to a level where they can survive on what they earn. What part of that don’t they get?
———————————————————————————–
I think they probably get it, but they certainly do not want it.
Having to play on a level playing field financially with WATP attitude just does not cut it. Ally is proof of that.

______________________________________________

If Stockbridge numbers were correct, then Wallace’s timing makes sense.
BS rreckoned £1m in bank to April with £2.5m loan facility.
So that would leave him £3.5m + SB and other sales to get from April to further investment.
The remaining months of the 120 day review will be spent preparing swingeing cuts and trying to secure further investment.
The less investment the more swingeing the cuts.
My prediction: It is going to be savage, but they will make it to the end of the season. P45s a plenty. The £2m will go on redundancy pay,leaving a much reduced club with debt and a hand to mouth existence. 7 years of bear famine to follow.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on9:40 pm - Jan 27, 2014


Looking forward to having our first podcast ready in a few weeks. It has been disappointing that we have purchased the equipment to allow us to do the whole thing on our own, and yet logistics and availability of contributors has delayed the start of the thing.

We are actively seeking assistance from you all – basically to enlist your help in the production of regular podcasts either in a participatory or technical role.

If you want to help, please contact tsfm@tsfm.org.uk

Not all at once now ……. 🙂

View Comment

Comments are closed.