Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century

Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century

 

Imagine you are one of those people who have a nice big mahogany desk, with a gloss finish set in a big corner suite office which comes complete with a picture window, a break out area, a couch to lie down on in moments of stress, a quietly playing stereo sound system, fridge, plush carpet and loads of wee executive toy like things of your choosing.

Imagine, just for a moment, that outside your office you have the executive German car that is almost compulsory when you work in such an office. Added to that, you also have the benefit of a large six figure salary, a pension scheme, substantial holidays, a bonus scheme which nicely enhances your already excellent salary, fantastic perks and trips abroad as part of your job, and that you fill a position which leads to invitations to the most fantastic events, do’s, and sporting occasions imaginable.

Imagine the respect you must command from your peers, your family and friends.

Imagine the awe that you must be held in at dinner parties and social events when you are introduced to strangers for the first time– strangers who will have heard your name, and know of your position in society.

Imagine the personal and professional respect you must command from others in your field — or any other field for that matter — when you go to conferences and meetings in foreign cities and with foreign counterparts.

Imagine the envy that many others sometimes feel for someone who has succeeded in business and society to this extent.

Then imagine that the big office described above is at Hampden?

What a bummer!!

Now, I mention all of this because if you were one of the big cheeses at at Hampden, I wonder just what you do with yourself when the large rosewood door of your office closes behind you when you get in there each morning?

Maybe you make a coffee? Read the papers? Check the mail? Go to a meeting about the latest in 3G or is it 4G pitches being installed in a ground or two in the Shetlands?

However, no matter what you do and who you speak to THAT file is always there— always at the corner of your desk, neatly up there at the top left hand corner just beyond the desk top golf set and  above the Newton’s cradle with the balls that spell your name or whatever.

That file– the one that relates to the finances, compliance, directors details and ownership of Rangers Football Club.

At least that is what the top of the file says. Though to be fair it is a continuation file… continuing from the one that was opened two months ago and is fit to burst already with reports, memo’s and letters- which in turn was a continuation of the one before that and the one before that and the one before that and on and on.

Maybe that is not the correct name for the club?

Maybe that is something that can be clarified  at the next meeting with the Directors and CEO of the club— whoever they might be at that time?

No matter where you go in the room, you can see that file from every position. There is just no getting away from it.

Who owns The Rangers?

There are all sorts of reports, share prospectuses, memos, deeds, documents, contracts, letters, e-mails all asking the same thing. And there you are— none the wiser.

Please clarify this, please clarify that, are there any signed but  unrecorded documents, or contracts?

Are the Companies House records accurate? is the Land register accurate?

At the end of the day you just lie on the couch, place a cold cloth over your head and hope it will all go away.

Then the accounts come out. Oh the figures are shocking and they confirm that most of the people you negotiated with to get their team playing football somewhere after the collapse and liquidation of RFC PLC have exited stage left with huge severance cheques.

They now live in France, or Singapore or the Cayman Islands and you can bet they will never darken a door in Mount Florida on a wet February morning ever again.

But that is not the worst of it — the bleeding internet is full of leaks— documents, letters, e-mails, contracts, company forms and all sorts.

You wouldn’t mind if the documents leaked were ones that you had seen before, but in the main they are things that you have never seen and never had disclosed.Every day someone calls and asks ” Have you seen the latest?” and of course you haven’t so you stand there feeling like a complete chookie!!!

Every day you call the compliance and monitoring guys:

” Eh have you seen this? Have you been notified that he is a director?”
” No boss – never seen that? Never knew it existed?”
” So who owns the company if that is correct?”
” Eh Dunno boss — not sure of anything over there any more!”
“Ok have you checked the titles with the lawyers?”
” yes but the title as registered looks ok, but there is no guarantee that it hasn’t been sold to someone else and they have not registered their title for the moment!”
” Have you spoken to the lawyers? Have you asked for clarification?”
” yes Boss — the Lawyers don’t really answer our questions– well at least not fully!”
” What about these accounts – there are 57 pages there – what do they tell us?”
” Well they tell us that the figures are not good, boss, but not immediately critical.”
” Are they paying their taxes?”
” Appear to be boss– but we can’t be sure.can we? We were told they were paying their taxes before and … well you know the rest.”
” Ok, but Pinsent masons rule out the Whyte guy being involved?”
” Ah well not really – they don’t go into the company he says he owns – they sort of ignore that part!”
” But they carried out an independent investigation, surely?”
True boss, but the independent investigation was only into what the non independent guys wanted investigating Boss, and they appear to have finished their report without speaking to all the witnesses.”
 ” Ok but the accounts – what do the accounts say about Whyte being the real owner — I mean they are from Deloittes for God sake – they must make the position clear?”
” Well we have had a look at them boss and in that regard the accounts are King Kenny!”
” King Kenny?”
” Aye King Kenny Boss – with regard to Whyte’s claim they say ” maybes aye– maybes naw” and they leave it at that”
” Jesus, well have you written to the Directors?”
” Aye – half the letters have come back marked “Gone away”.Boss”
” Do you know who the shareholders are?”
” Naw Boss”
“Do they have a bank account and a bank reference ?”
” Naw Boss”
” Who’s coming to the next meeting from their side?”
” Dunno Boss”
” Is there anything you can tell me that lets me close this file and get it off my desk for good?”
” Naw boss”
” Well who did we grant membership to last year?”
” The first time or the second time Boss?”
” What do you mean – first time or second time?”
” We started out granting membership to one company and then changed it to another”
” Two companies – owned by the same people?”
” Dunno Boss– but they sounded the same.”
” And which one got a licence?”
” Dunno boss”
” What?”
 “Was the licence not granted by Mr Longmuir boss? And then ratified by us as a formality?”
” Why are you asking me, you are the compliance guys?”
” Aye but we were told it would all be ok by … well by someone ….. and by Mr Longmuir”
” When did he tell you that?”
 ” Told us one day at Ibrox Boss – I think it was at half time?”
” Half Time?”
” Aye – though it might have been full time boss …..  free bevvy and sandwiches so can’t quite remember”.
” Well who has the paperwork?”
” Lost boss”
” Lost?”
” Yes Boss – it was meant to come up from the SFL but never appeared. Turns out that the SFL was run as an unincorporated body and none of its records etc, are intact or have ever been audited …… Boss.  Mr Ballantyne might have them in his garage Boss! ……… Boss? ….. are you still there? Boss?”

 

The man in the corner suite leaves the phone dangling, goes to his fridge for a cold drink and switches on the executive plasma hanging on the wall by way of the remote control on his desk.

The screen beams into life and an advert for the brand of soft drink that he is holding fills the wall. The very same brand of soft drink that has just been announced as the official soft drink to partner Scottish Football.

The executive, looks at his drinks can, looks at the file on the corner of the desk, looks at the abandoned phone and finally looks at the screen just as the speakers spell out clearly ………….. the benefits of coming from a long line of Fannies.

This is Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century.

About the author

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

2,130 Comments so far

ptd1978Posted on7:26 am - Oct 11, 2013


Where did the £20m King invested in Rangers come from?

View Comment

joburgbhoyPosted on7:28 am - Oct 11, 2013


On the Hampden thing, I was in the rangers end for the 76/77 league cup final which aberdeen beat celtic 2-1 (great game, crap result) The rangers end was segregated down the middle, celts on one side dons on the other and the celtic end was just green and white.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on7:56 am - Oct 11, 2013


Joburgbhoy says:
October 11, 2013 at 7:28 am
0 0 Rate This

On the Hampden thing, I was in the rangers end for the 76/77 league cup final which aberdeen beat celtic 2-1 (great game, crap result) The rangers end was segregated down the middle, celts on one side dons on the other and the celtic end was just green and white.
—————————————————–
My old man never went back to Hampden after that cup final due to the violence during and after the game.
I can remember the long drive back in our bus with half the windows missing.

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on8:05 am - Oct 11, 2013


I chuckled when I read today’s BBC Gossip

Dave King insists he will pass any “fit and proper person” test ordered by the SFA for him to return to Rangers as chairman. (Record)

I agree Dave, I really do

I also don’t think anyone else put forward by any incarnation of the Blue Govanites would fail that test either.

As for other clubs . . . .

View Comment

joburgbhoyPosted on8:06 am - Oct 11, 2013


Bill1903 says:
October 11, 2013 at 7:56 am
……………..

I never want back to Govan around the same time for the same reason.

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on8:18 am - Oct 11, 2013


upthehoops says:
October 10, 2013 at 10:37 pm

My last word on the Hampden debate and the covered end. The only group of fans always guaranteed to be exposed to the elements were Celtic fans, no matter what team they were playing. I find it laughable that some fans find ridicule in the fact they were sometimes in one end, sometimes in the other – at least they were dry sometimes.

————————

Not strictly true. I remember a couple of semi-finals skol Cup & Scottish (one which went to a replay) when we were in the open end and Celtic were in the covered.

But then again let’s just perpetuate the ‘everybody hates us’ schtik

View Comment

Gym TrainerPosted on8:21 am - Oct 11, 2013


Palacio67 says:
October 11, 2013 at 12:07 am
Hopefully it should not be too long before they come to their decision, it did not take them long initially, what was it a 3 minute phone call to gym trainer……

——8<———–8<———–8<———–8<———–8<———–8<———–8<—–

They never called me… must have been Keith.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on8:33 am - Oct 11, 2013


I wonder if Dave King has employed Jack as the SMSM are going into ‘Super King’ overdrive.

View Comment

paulonotiniPosted on8:33 am - Oct 11, 2013


HirsutePursuit at 1.34pm

Story was published in The Drum on 6/8/13 but not published by MSM until 19/8/13.Scotsman link is below & I’m sure The Herald ran the story.I’m fairly sure this decision is still under review.

http://m.scotsman.com/news/scotland/top-stories/advertising-watchdog-to-probe-rangers-claim-1-3052337

View Comment

Carl31Posted on9:28 am - Oct 11, 2013


Tif Finn says:
October 10, 2013 at 11:23 pm
71 0 i
Rate This

… “The idea that Dave King is some sort of returning hero (if anyone makes Tolkein inspired reference here shame on you) is simply nonsense.” …

Maybe Borrowmair is after the precioussssssss?

🙂

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on9:41 am - Oct 11, 2013


Joburgbhoy says:
October 11, 2013 at 7:28 am

On the Hampden thing, I was in the rangers end for the 76/77 league cup final which aberdeen beat celtic 2-1 (great game, fantastic result) …

(edited for accuracy 😉 )

I still have the Evening Express poster commemorating that game. I was only 10 at the time. 🙂

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on9:41 am - Oct 11, 2013


Have I missed it? Why has Keith Jackson not used the headline “Tax Avoidance Off The Radar’ in a profile of Dave King?

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/craig-whyte-profile-the-scots-billionaire-1076110

Scottish Football needs a strong tax inspector!

View Comment

willmacufreePosted on9:49 am - Oct 11, 2013


upthehoops says:
October 11, 2013 at 6:58 am
4 0 Rate This

Squiggle says:
October 10, 2013 at 10:59 pm
upthehoops on October 10, 2013 at 10:37 pm

Lots of great stuff on this. Did we clear up that Celtic didn’t pay for the roof over the west terracing?
======================================
I have never claimed Celtic payed for it. However, it was well documented in the late 60′s and early 70′s that when Queens Park were in financial distress Celtic donated £10K to them. Many older Sportswriters in the 70′s used to mention it and it has also been stated in books. I doubt £10k even then would have been enough to pay for a roof, but let’s try and see the wood from the trees.
———————————

Thanks UTH for that. I was beginning to think my memory was playing tricks on me. QP were in poor financial health as I recall. The 10 grand went a long way to sorting themselves out. Every Scottish club had the opportunity to help. I don’t know whether any others did.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on9:56 am - Oct 11, 2013


On DK’s taxes and RFC investment.

Are we looking at this the wrong way around? Are SARs not saying you DK received circa £20m from another source (I recall their actual claim was that they believed that they could prove income to one of his shadow companies/trusts was actually to him directly) which was subsequently invested in RFC and lost? The fact it was lost was neither here nor there to SARs, their arguement being it was taxable income in the first place?

TBC its not the answer I want either!

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on9:57 am - Oct 11, 2013


Exiled Celt says:
October 11, 2013 at 5:32 am

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

It might also be worth asking how a payment to Mr King of c£18.75m was reflected in Rangers’ accounts at the time. One would have thought that such a payment would have stuck out like the proverbial sore thumb and would have been the subject of much conjecture.

Particularly as, if I remember correctly, he didn’t actually invest in the Rangers itself but in a company which owned shares in the PLC. Murray Sports Ltd as I recall.

So, on the face of it Dave King invested in a company which owned shares in Rangers, which he received back not a long time later and it is not entirely clear how he got it back, or indeed from whom. Yet the media report that he lost £20m by investing in Rangers, which is apparently wrong, on both counts.

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on9:59 am - Oct 11, 2013


I see that Dave King seems to think he will pass the fit and proper person test as set out by the SFA — at least according to bot the Daily Record and the BBC.

Regrettably, these statements simply prove that many in the media have just not been paying attention, as , regrettably, there is no such test at all.

If my memory serves me correctly, Stewart Regan no less has pointed out that the club declares any Director to be fit and proper. submits their details to the SFA who then accept them, and only if subsequent information comes to light that makes it plain that the person cannot be a fit and proper person will the SFA declare them so.

In other words, the club decides who is deemed to be fit and proper….. not the SFA.

Now., there is nothing whatsoever to stop Mr King investing in Rangers without being a Director….. in fact he can invest and nominate someone of his choice to be his eyes and ears on the board if he so chooses. That happens in business all of the time, so if Dave King wishes to invest then he can…. and indeed will.

However, in any decision to invest, the make up of the board and who has control of the company will no doubt be a significant factor, as if the company is being directed and steered in a way the potential director does not like then he or she is likely to keep their money in their pocket.

The question is will King wish to do business with those in charge at Ibrox by buying them out or will he wish to do business separately from those in charge at Ibrox by investing in some other way?

Again, he may be able to do both.

He can invest in the company by lending it money … working capital in effect…… but I am willing to bet that he will not do that unless he is given some sort of security in return. That security would be of the type that if there is any prospect that he cannot get his money back through the company, then he will be able to shove the company out of the road and take control himself.

By the way, I am not convinced that the recent judgement re King proves that he received money back from Rangers PLC after he made his initial investment of £20M.

The Judgement clearly says that he invested £20M in ” Murray Sports” which was the company that “owned” Rangers — this is presumably a reference to the Murray Group who owned the controlling interest in Rangers PLC. However, as I read the judgement, the assessment re Tax includes a benefit from Rangers amounting to roughly the same amount he invested……. the benefit being the then perceived value of the shares.

King had never declared the income which he used to effectively buy the shares in the first place and so that money was untaxed when he used it to buy the shares in Rangers. Accordingly, on the assessment the sum concerned just shows an untaxed sum ( or benefit ) from Rangers equating to the value of the shares.

However, a detailed reading of that judgement should, in my opinion, terrify shareholders as the judges are absolutely scathing in their assessment of King’s character setting out that he clearly deceived the tax authorities, his own lawyers, the trustees he appointed to his off shore trusts, and everyone else involved in the court case. He eventually refused to co-operate with the officials of his own off shore trusts.

The judges stated that he was a most unimpressive witness who would say whatever suited him to get his own way and was addicted to making money wherever possible— buying on opportunity and selling on market certainty.

The judges described him as mendacious and accused him of complete fabrication of evidence, an opportunist who will never miss a chance to make money, who misrepresents the truth and who has no respect for the truth or Authority.

Eventually, he accepted his guilt and paid very substantial sums in back taxes and fines in return for his liberty.

The issue here is not about Dave King or indeed Rangers, it is about the SFA and their procedures and whether or not they have a duty to look after the interests of football fans of all clubs.

I have friends who have lost fortunes at Ibrox. Families who have had connections to Ibrox going back decades, where previous generations invested not only money– big money— but a lot of time and effort. I have further friends who do not go back that far, but who bought debentures, season tickets, shares and supported the club financially in every way that they could.

I spoke to one yesterday who reminded me that after a meeting of around 20 supporters who had an audience with David Murray and Alex McLeish at Ibrox at which he was present, he told me at that time that he felt that David Murray simply said anything… absolutely anything…. that he thought you wanted to hear in return for getting your money in. He further told me that many at that meeting agreed with him.

Having sat in the same seat for 19 consecutive years he walked away from Rangers altogether as he was simply disgusted.

Similarly, one of my own relatives who has had a season ticket for years along with his two daughters decided to spend the money on holidays instead. The girls are grown now and would rather spend family time with their dad in Spain rather than be fed yet more rubbish from those in charge of the boardroom.

The most damning example comes from the Grandson of a former Director who told me he will never ever return despite the fact that he holds some very valuable and treasured Rangers memorabilia going back to his Grandfather’s time — stuff which previous Ibrox regimes– and indeed others in Scottish Football– would pay fortunes for.

Saturdays are now for golf with his son, and football is the EPL.

By the way he used to ask awkward questions of David Murray at the AGM until it was clear he was not welcome despite being a shareholder.

The point is how much of a roll should the SFA play, after all both they and the media told us all that a strong Rangers was essential to the future of Scottish Football as a whole.

If that is so, then surely to God, given all that has gone on over the past 2 years, it cannot continue to be the case that a club, or a board, can simply self certify that someone is fit to hold an exalted position in football without the regulating body making detailed and clear enquiry of their own? Yet that is what we are told is the procedure.

Equally the press have got to ask questions.

One veteran newspaper man said long ago that a reporter was someone who asked awkward, almost childlike questions, which may actually be embarrassing in the asking and in the answer, with the result that what they “report” are the facts and the truth no matter how they fall.

A Columnist, on the other hand, merely spouts opinion, and as such does not need to be as pedantic about the facts or indeed the truth as he or she is merely giving an opinion.

However, the more the columnist uses the tools of a good reporter, the more respect their opinion will carry over a period of time, and obviously over the same period of time, the lazy columnist will lose more and more respect and more importantly their readership.

To just simply avoid the awkward questions does nobody any good at all — especially those who have invested their money at Ibrox in the past.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on10:02 am - Oct 11, 2013


Smugas says:
October 11, 2013 at 9:56 am

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

If that is the case then the piece linked to is very badly written.

“R200m income from Rangers Football Club, “

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on10:04 am - Oct 11, 2013


With regard to the ‘Fit and Proper Person’ test why not ask clubs to supply an Enhanced Disclosure certificate?

This “contains all conviction information, spent and unspent, and any other non conviction information considered to be relevant by the police or other Government bodies.”

http://www.disclosurescotland.co.uk/what-is-disclosure/

For employers :

“If you are an employer, a voluntary organisation or an agency which places staff in client companies, you could benefit by making disclosure a key element of your recruitment process. Disclosure offers you:

The security of knowing about a new employee’s conviction history
A source of reliable information not available through any other means
A way to identify individuals who are not suited to your work environment or to represent your
organisation”

http://www.disclosurescotland.co.uk/apply/employers/

There is even an opportunity to get bulk discounts by becoming a Registered Body who “is an organisation which has registered with Disclosure Scotland and is able to apply for standard, enhanced disclosures and membership of the PVG Scheme for its employees.”

No ‘cast of thousands’ required – a very cheap option.

In fact do the SFA not already use this scheme?

Ah, but is there a South African version he asks…..

Yes there is : http://www.dfa.gov.za/consular/policeclear.htm

Hopefully these transgression would be picked up :

http://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-courts/dave-king-s-r700m-sars-settlement-1.1570326#.Ule-WxBr1Y4

Scottish Football needs proper regulation.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on10:08 am - Oct 11, 2013


Dave King

Should he be barred by the SFA from holding office at a member club ? Yes of course he should. Excuses of “not my fault” , ” I knew nothing” , and “I was kept in the dark” , sound pretty unconvincing coming from the 2nd largest shareholder.

If Whyte was refusing to hold board meetings and provide management accounts, then you resign your non exec position and alert the Stock exchange. Rangers were still a plc under Whyte and King had a responsibility to the thousands of shareholders who were not in the boardroom

King also now claims to have been duped by David Murray. He was awfully quiet about that as well, for over a decade. That doesn’t sit at all well with his responsibilities to shareholders. He also was on the board which was condemned in very strong terms by Lord Nimmo Smith, for having deliberately deceived the SFA and SPL

Not to mention the minor matter of having been on the board when Rangers went into administration and subsequently to Liquidation.

This doesn’t even include comments made about him by a Judge in South Africa and the fact he was handed a near 4 year Jail Sentence which was only set aside by the payment of a fine of several million pounds. I wonder in fact if King isn’t barred from holding a directors role in South Africa. That would be logical given his behaviour there.

So should the SFA bar this guy from overseeing the investment made by shareholders ? A resounding yes, but will they ? An equally resounding No.

After all there is already a convicted and time served in jail board member sitting happily on the Rangers board, without even a whisper being raised by the SFA.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:16 am - Oct 11, 2013


BRTH

“King…. was addicted to making money wherever possible”

Ah, I predict a problem.

View Comment

TorquemadaPosted on10:31 am - Oct 11, 2013


So “the glib and shameless liar” stuck twenty million in and got just less than nineteen million back?

Must have been the leccy bill for the washing machine. 🙄

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:35 am - Oct 11, 2013


I refuse to read the Scottish papers any more, being of an age when I need to watch my blood pressure, so can someone help me out on this King thing. Has King uttered a single reported word regarding his intentions following the flying visit of Mather and Sockbridge? Because if he hasn’t, then the whole thing smells like an Irvine inspired PR stunt, designed to cool down the restless bears in advance of the AGM- if that takes place, of course. What has happened regarding the requisitioners’ court battle? That’s gone very quiet, or have I missed something?

View Comment

DelbhoyPosted on10:38 am - Oct 11, 2013


At the ’88 Cup Final, the covered end was exclusively designated to Dundee Utd fans. I, and thousands of other Celtic fans, had tickets for that terracing. We turned up with no colours, just scarves stuffed down the jeans. No fuss, no hassle, no fighting. Just common sense.

P.S. Has anyone ever failed the ‘ fit and proper person ‘ test ?
Or as BRTH suggests, does such a test exist ?

View Comment

abrahamtoastPosted on10:39 am - Oct 11, 2013


Torquemada, I get what you’re implying, and had come to the same conclusion myself. But surely that would be just too obvious? Although, if it worked once, it might go some way to explaining why/if King wants to come back.

View Comment

TheLunaticFringePosted on10:40 am - Oct 11, 2013


Muchos Grassyarse Bhoys for all that feedback on the Oh Hampden In The Sun (/Rain) question. It’ll save me going all googley-eyed searching. Any time I went to the old Hampden it was full to the brim – we’re talking prehistoric times here (5% of fans carried clubs/chibs) so TBH, I didn’t actually realize the Celtic end was bigger. ‘Though – even wearing my green specs :mrgreen: I cant pretend that architectural features where high on my list of concerns back then: The game was 1st ,of course. Getting a lift (when wee) and avoiding rival gang members (when bigger), a close 2nd & 3rd, but not necessarily in that order.

However, the fact that the Celtic end was dramatically different, does lend some support to my view that it’s total paranoia to think that covering the Rangers end first was influenced by bias, rather than logistics.

– As I said before, The Rangers end was definately uncovered at the 1965 Scottish Cup final – I was there. I’m still not 100% sure, but, if I remember correctly it was covered when Pele played there in ’66? Anyway, I’m not anal-retentive enough to care about the actual date.

What I can say, is that anybody who was ever at a jam-packed Celtic end in the old days will know that – filthy as it was – the atmosphere come rain, sun, sleet or snow was awesome – Like all of Celtic park squeezed into 1 end. Magic memories

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on10:47 am - Oct 11, 2013


Here’s a fundraiser on sale in the Rangers Megastore.
Wonder how it’ll go?.

CelticResearch ‏@CelticResearch 13m

Just when you try to leave them alone for a while they present more comedy gold. http://www.rangersmegastore.com/team-rubber-duck-845088?colcode=84508806 … Sevco much more inclusive it seems

View Comment

aenmac75Posted on10:53 am - Oct 11, 2013


will stock market allow dave king to be on the TRIFC board ? was being a director of the previous incarnation when it went into admin/liquidation not enough to disqualify him from taking a seat on the new board? and if it doesn’t, will TRIFC be treated as a pheonix club if he gets a seat on the board ?

View Comment

paulonotiniPosted on10:58 am - Oct 11, 2013


Bill McMurdo receives legal letter from Paul Murray camp stating he (McMurdo) was making false statements http://billmcmurdo.wordpress.com/2013/10/10/right-of-reply/

View Comment

ianjsPosted on11:01 am - Oct 11, 2013


Fit and Proper test by Stewart Regan 10th march 2012.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/sfa-chief-responsibility-for-owner-test-lay-with-rangers-1-2165105

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on11:02 am - Oct 11, 2013


aenmac75 says:
October 11, 2013 at 10:53 am

will stock market allow dave king to be on the TRIFC board ? was being a director of the previous incarnation when it went into admin/liquidation not enough to disqualify him from taking a seat on the new board? and if it doesn’t, will TRIFC be treated as a pheonix club if he gets a seat on the board ?
==============================
RIFC are not TRFC,the clumpany that replaced RFC.
Don’t know the legalities but I’d think he could be a director of RIFC without being officially involved with TRFC.
In fact,it wouldn’t surprise me if that was part of the plan all along.

View Comment

BigGavPosted on11:04 am - Oct 11, 2013


TheLunaticFringe says:
October 11, 2013 at 10:40 am

As I said before, The Rangers end was definately uncovered at the 1965 Scottish Cup final – I was there. I still not 100% sure, but, if I remember correctly it was covered when Pele played there in ’66?
======
We already established from cup final video evidence that the cover was installed some time in late 1967 or early 1968.

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on11:05 am - Oct 11, 2013


broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:

October 11, 2013 at 9:59 am

——————————————————————————–
Dave King invests his money, or someone’s money, in an early incarnation of ‘Rangers’.

http://www.murray-international.co.uk/news_archive/rangers_football_club/news02.htm

THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB PLC TO RAISE £53.1 MILLION

Rangers Football Club

30 March 2000
In a letter issued to shareholders of Rangers Football Club today (30 March, 2000), David Murray, the Club Chairman stated that Rangers is aiming to raise up to £53.1 million in cash, before expenses, through a Rights Issue.

The key elements of the letter are as follows:

proposed 1 for 3 Rights Issue of up to 15,380,507 new Ordinary Shares at 345 pence per share, to raise up to £53,062,749 million in cash, before expenses.

minority shareholders, many being loyal fans of the Club, have the opportunity to participate in the issue if they so wish.

Murray Sports, which is controlled by David Murray, has committed to take up its rights under the Rights Issue, through its wholly owned subsidiary RFC Investment Holdings, representing an investment of £32.3 million.

Of the £32.3 million, the Murray Group is investing £9.3 million with new investment of approximately £20 million from Ben Nevis Holdings, a company associated with Dave King, a successful Scottish businessman based in South Africa. A further £3 million is being invested by private parties.

Dave King is appointed as non-executive director and Douglas Odam as finance director to the Board of Rangers.

Rangers main objectives are to:

continue to improve the quality of the player pool

develop young players through the new Rangers Academy

improve Rangers’ performance in European competitions where the revenue streams are enjoying significant growth

increase media revenue, potentially through pay-per-view and through the internet
use Rangers’ brand loyalty to develop new revenue streams from internet distribution channels

as a result of recent significant investment in players, borrowing levels have risen substantially and the Board now wishes to reduce the Club’s reliance on short-term borrowings, as publicly stated at the Club’s AGM in December.

Rangers has had discussions with media companies which the directors believe could lead to a significant strategic relationship.

intention of the Board to seek a flotation of Rangers in the near future subject to market conditions.

the Board considers the Rights Issue to be in the best interests of the Club, its shareholders and supporters.

Interim Results for the six months to 31 December 1999 are:

• Turnover for the six months to 31 December increased by almost 40 per cent to £29.8 million (1998 seven months: 21.4 million).

• Trading profit for the period was £112,000 (1998: loss of £3,090,000).

More Information: David Southern, Tel: 0131-624 0800

View Comment

redetinPosted on11:07 am - Oct 11, 2013


jean7brodie says:
October 10, 2013 at 6:05 pm
redetin says:
October 10, 2013 at 4:41 pm

Ahhhhh!!! Those were the days, James Breen HT?
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes “Big Jim”, I don’t think he was a fitba fan 🙄

But we had a great school team in they days too. Remember they played a cup game at Fir Park and our supporter bus got a windae pit in by an opposing fan. They won the final at Hampden, that was 1965, great day out. Their like will never be seen again :mrgreen:

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/ssfa/scottish_football.cfm?page=1554

View Comment

redetinPosted on11:10 am - Oct 11, 2013


BigGav says:
October 11, 2013 at 11:04 am

TheLunaticFringe says:
October 11, 2013 at 10:40 am

As I said before, The Rangers end was definately uncovered at the 1965 Scottish Cup final – I was there. I still not 100% sure, but, if I remember correctly it was covered when Pele played there in ’66?
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

A wee boy ran out just before 2nd half kicked off and got Pele’s autograph. 😀

View Comment

DelbhoyPosted on11:12 am - Oct 11, 2013


Torquemada @ 10:31.

Succinctly put. The suspicion that Ibrox has been used as a money-laundering operation for years has been hinted at for ages. Perhaps it should be just openly alleged.

View Comment

bluPosted on11:17 am - Oct 11, 2013


redlichtie says:
October 11, 2013 at 10:04 am
==================================================
Redlichtie, I see what you’re driving at here, and clubs would be wise to have proper procedures in place to check whether staff have a criminal conviction or, if working with children and/or vulnerable adults, have been checked with Disclosure Scotland. However, for directors the SFA and clubs should be guided by Companies House – see guidance below. From the information about him, some provided by him, in the public domain I’d struggle to not bar Mr King, if it was my decision.

Company director disqualification
You can be banned (‘disqualified’) from being a company director if you don’t meet your legal responsibilities. You can report someone if you think they should be banned from being a director, or if they’re breaking the conditions of a ban.

You can be disqualified from being a director of a company if an insolvency practitioner or a member of the public reports your conduct as being ‘unfit’.

‘Unfit conduct’ includes:
allowing a company to continue trading when it can’t pay its debts
not keeping proper company accounting records
not sending accounts and returns to Companies House
not paying tax owed by the company
using company money or assets for personal benefit

How disqualification works
The Insolvency Service may investigate your company (or you personally as a director of your company) if it’s involved in insolvency proceedings or if there’s been a complaint.

If they think you haven’t followed your legal responsibilities as a director, they’ll tell you in writing:
what they think you have done that makes you unfit to be a director
they intend to start the disqualification process
how you can respond

You can either:
wait for the Insolvency Service to take you to court to disqualify you – you can defend the case in court if you disagree with the Insolvency Service
give the Insolvency Service a ‘disqualification undertaking’ – this means you voluntarily disqualify yourself and ends court action against you

You may want to get legal advice if you get a letter about disqualification from the Insolvency Service.

Apart from the Insolvency Service, other bodies can apply to have you disqualified under certain circumstances, for example:

Companies House
the Office of Fair Trading
the Courts
a company insolvency practitioner
You’re automatically disqualified from being a company director if you’re declared bankrupt, given a Debt Relief Order or subject to bankruptcy restrictions.

If you’re disqualified
You will be disqualified for up to 15 years.

You can’t:
be a director of any company registered in the UK or an overseas company that has connections with the UK
be involved in forming, marketing or running a company

You could be fined or sent to prison for up to 2 years if you break the terms of the disqualification.

Your details will be kept on Companies House’s database of disqualified directors. Your details will automatically be removed from the database when your disqualification ends.

You must ask a court for permission if you want to be a company director while you’re disqualified. You can get help from a legal adviser.

Other restrictions
There are other restrictions if you’re disqualified. For example, you can’t:

sit on the board of a charity, school or police authority
be a pension trustee
become a registered social landlord
sit on a health board or social care body
become a solicitor, barrister or accountant

Report a director or disqualified director
Contact the Insolvency Service to:
complain about a director’s conduct
report a disqualified director if you think they’re breaching the terms of their disqualification
You can be prosecuted and become personally liable for the company’s debts if you carry out company business on the instructions of someone who’s disqualified.

View Comment

TheLunaticFringePosted on11:18 am - Oct 11, 2013


BigGav says.
======
We already established from cup final video evidence that the cover was installed some time in late 1967 or early 1968.
_____________________________________________________________________________________
Cheers M8, I obviously missed that. – My eyesight’s not what it used to be. – Senile Dementia Rools O. erm. uhm, err, something or other…

Anal retentively, yours

View Comment

paulonotiniPosted on11:25 am - Oct 11, 2013


King’s tax assessment-Claim based on benefits from assets.

With regard to King’s initial £20m investment in RFC and the subsequent SARS tax assessment of R200m,it may be unlikely he earned a roughly similar sum back from RFC in the following year.As others have said it may be that SARS treated the value of his RFC investment as being paid by untaxed funds,hence raising a tax assessment of R200m,as a type of benefit in kind.

http://www.bdlive.co.za/articles/2008/11/11/king-s-tax-assessment-valid—sars

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on11:30 am - Oct 11, 2013


A wee bit of news on Masterton and the Pars. Courtroom beacons within the hour.

http://news.stv.tv/east-central/242800-gavin-masterton-100-certain-dunfermline-athletic-will-not-be-liquidated/

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on11:30 am - Oct 11, 2013


Still can’t get my head round this.
TRFC played 10 home games in the last 5 months of the season.
If walk up income was say £100k per game(8k fans @ £12 average) then that’s only £1m added to the £9.6m declared income for the first 7months.
Total turnover was just over £19m.
If true then TRFC have achieved something that no football club ever does.They’ve made more in the 2nd 6months than the first seven,even though all the ST income is included in the 1st accounting period.
So.if you take the £9.6m,add £1m for walk ups then you’ve got £10.6m.
Let’s call it £11m.
I know there’ll be a wee bit hospitality,merchandising income etc but £8-9m approx!
I don’t believe it.
If you add this seasons ST cash(I know your not supposed to)that would make a serious dent in that figure,making it more plausible whilst still not balancing out.
Can any of our accountancy types tell me where these extra millions came from?.

View Comment

eddie ricePosted on11:56 am - Oct 11, 2013


Barcabhoy says:

October 11, 2013 at 10:08 am

Barca, SA have some very strange rules re company’s and directors. It isn’t even illegal for the head of a company to be involved in insider dealing so I’d be surprised if a silly little matter like tax avoidance would be a problem.

Some of those institutions that were stuffed after buying shares in a new venture which went tits up after the CEO dumped all his shares (70% of total shares in company) may still feel agrevieved at the SA authorities and may plan their own revenge for Mr King.

http://www.iol.co.za/business/opinion/king-still-on-the-hook-for-insider-trading-1.1575272#.UlMm2nVwZjo

View Comment

Galling fiverPosted on12:03 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Just read the papers, to summarise.

Operation bear back = is there to be another opportunity for them to join the illusion of pissing into the black-hole with King Dave ?
or
Being encouraged to shut it with the smart-mouthing and play along, like they did under minty, cause Dave’s here and he’s a loaded Rangersman, in awe at, so he is !

But nothing has changed, more losses, more money out the backdoor and requirement for mugs in the front, only my opinion though. Carry on.

View Comment

eddie ricePosted on12:09 pm - Oct 11, 2013


From Angela Haggerty on twitter

Our sentence agreement with Dave King – NPA

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71654?oid=401431&sn=Detail&pid=71616

View Comment

paulonotiniPosted on12:16 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Excellent read from Corsica1968 on Twitter.A letter to Peter Lawell & why he was returning his Celtic scarf given to him by his mother in 1976.

http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/breaking-the-family-bond/

View Comment

bluPosted on12:18 pm - Oct 11, 2013


eddie rice says:
October 11, 2013 at 12:09 pm
From Angela Haggerty on twitter
Our sentence agreement with Dave King – NPA
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71654?oid=401431&sn=Detail&pid=71616

Follow the link provided by Edie Rice-Angela Haggerty. Do Mr King’s crimes seem a bit more serious now?

In terms of the agreement, the accused was sentenced to a fine of R80 000.00 or 24 months’ imprisonment on each of the 41 counts, being the maximum sentence provided for in the Income Tax Act read with the Adjustment of Fines Act 101 of 1991. The effective sentence, as confirmed in the agreement, is a fine of R3 280 000.00 or 984 months (82 years) imprisonment.</

View Comment

aenmac75Posted on12:26 pm - Oct 11, 2013


RE: Dave King…….aye, but he has sorted out his tax thingies now (Copyright SMSM) 😳

seriously, that is is incredible. pay up or its 82 years !!!!!! wow

View Comment

ParanoidWellFanPosted on12:28 pm - Oct 11, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 11, 2013 at 11:30 am
6 0 i
Rate This

Still can’t get my head round this.
TRFC played 10 home games in the last 5 months of the season.
If walk up income was say £100k per game(8k fans @ £12 average) then that’s only £1m added to the £9.6m declared income for the first 7months.
Total turnover was just over £19m.
If true then TRFC have achieved something that no football club ever does.They’ve made more in the 2nd 6months than the first seven,even though all the ST income is included in the 1st accounting period.
So.if you take the £9.6m,add £1m for walk ups then you’ve got £10.6m.
Let’s call it £11m.
I know there’ll be a wee bit hospitality,merchandising income etc but £8-9m approx!
I don’t believe it.
If you add this seasons ST cash(I know your not supposed to)that would make a serious dent in that figure,making it more plausible whilst still not balancing out.
Can any of our accountancy types tell me where these extra millions came from?.

Yep, Season Ticket Income is recognised as such on a game by game basis. For example if they had £10m season ticket revenue, and 20 home games, the income is realised at a rate of £500K per game. That accounts for around £5m in the second half of the year.

View Comment

arabest1Posted on12:48 pm - Oct 11, 2013


It will come as no surprise to anyone here that Mr King will be given a clean bill of health from the hacks and the football administrators. If Beelzebub himself rose from the firey ashes of hell at half time in the center circle at Ibrox, none of them would think twice so long as he was carrying a suitcase full of cash to save Sevco. Not Regan, not Ogilve, not C*ckwomble will turn a hair, indeed King will be welcomed at the top table as a kindred spirit among glib, shameless liars.

View Comment

Madbhoy24941Posted on12:51 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Torquemada says:

October 11, 2013 at 10:31 am

So “the glib and shameless liar” stuck twenty million in and got just less than nineteen million back
————————————————————————–

I am not sure if the 20m was an rounded up figure; I have still to see an exact number mentioned. Even in official communications about the share issue in Y2000, some of the numbers were exact (e.g. 9.3m from The Murray Group) but when it came to DK’s input it was always listed as “approx” 20m, he may have put in just short of that amount which means he never actually lost a penny.

View Comment

Drew PeacockPosted on1:04 pm - Oct 11, 2013


ParanoidWellFan says:
October 11, 2013 at 12:28 pm

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 11, 2013 at 11:30 am
6 0 i
Rate This

Still can’t get my head round this.
TRFC played 10 home games in the last 5 months of the season.
If walk up income was say £100k per game(8k fans @ £12 average) then that’s only £1m added to the £9.6m declared income for the first 7months.
Total turnover was just over £19m.
If true then TRFC have achieved something that no football club ever does.They’ve made more in the 2nd 6months than the first seven,even though all the ST income is included in the 1st accounting period.
So.if you take the £9.6m,add £1m for walk ups then you’ve got £10.6m.
Let’s call it £11m.
I know there’ll be a wee bit hospitality,merchandising income etc but £8-9m approx!
I don’t believe it.
If you add this seasons ST cash(I know your not supposed to)that would make a serious dent in that figure,making it more plausible whilst still not balancing out.
Can any of our accountancy types tell me where these extra millions came from?.

Yep, Season Ticket Income is recognised as such on a game by game basis. For example if they had £10m season ticket revenue, and 20 home games, the income is realised at a rate of £500K per game. That accounts for around £5m in the second half of the year.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The accounts are made up to 30 June 2013 and as the season had not started none of the 2013/14 season ticket income should be recognised in those accounts.

View Comment

tcup 2012Posted on1:06 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Exiled Celt says: October 11, 2013 at 5:32 am

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

It might also be worth asking how a payment to Mr King of c£18.75m was reflected in Rangers’ accounts at the time. One would have thought that such a payment would have stuck out like the proverbial sore thumb and would have been the subject of much conjecture.

Particularly as, if I remember correctly, he didn’t actually invest in the Rangers itself but in a company which owned shares in the PLC. Murray Sports Ltd as I recall.

So, on the face of it Dave King invested in a company which owned shares in Rangers, which he received back not a long time later and it is not entirely clear how he got it back, or indeed from whom. Yet the media report that he lost £20m by investing in Rangers, which is apparently wrong, on both counts.
———————————

It may have stuck out in their Audited Accounts if they ever released any 😉

View Comment

peterjungPosted on1:17 pm - Oct 11, 2013


redetin says:
October 11, 2013 at 11:07 am
But we had a great school team in they days too. Remember they played a cup game at Fir Park and our supporter bus got a windae pit in by an opposing fan. They won the final at Hampden, that was 1965, great day out. Their like will never be seen again
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/ssfa/scottish_football.cfm?page=1554

_______________________________________________________________________

redetin…many thanks for that very interesting link…had a wee scroll through and low and behold…here in 1961 is the team my old dad captained….will make him happy to know it is remembered even in a small way!

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on1:23 pm - Oct 11, 2013


ParanoidWellFan says:
October 11, 2013 at 12:28 pm
———————————————————————
I get what your saying.the ST holders are creditors of the club and the debt is written down proportionately as each game is played.
What I’m saying(probably badly) is that,from memory,the !st 7 mnths figs showed ST cash of just over £8m at an average price of £213 per ticket(35k STs approx).
Would that not show in the cash account as income during the 1st period but be balanced under creditors on the balance sheet,to be reduced on a game by game basis.17 home league games and a couple of cup ties.Say 20 games over the season.
Creditors balance would reduce by say £350k per game.I get that.
If,however,you can’t count cash received within an accounting period as income because some of it is deferred then,with £6.2m net received in the 1st seven months at an average of £213 added to your figure of £5m for period 2,then we have ST income of £11.2m.At the average stated,thats 52.5k STs.more than the capacity of Ibrox and 17k more than stated by the club.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on1:35 pm - Oct 11, 2013


It is entirely possible that people are correct, in that the SARS case against Dave King included the value of the shares he held, and that the argument goes he must have paid for them from somewhere ergo tax was due on those (unidentified) earnings.

However there are a couple of points to that.

1, That is not how I have seen it reported. As stated earlier the quote relating to rangers is “R200m income from Rangers Football Club”. That is the only mention of Rangers in that article.

2, To the best of my knowledge Dave King did not invest in, or hold shares in Rangers. He put his money into Murray Sports Ltd, which in turn held shares in Rangers.

I am happy to accept that article is wrong, on both what the amount relates to and which entity it relates to. However as it stands just now I haven’t seen anything else to go on. If someone has a link to the actual ruling and that provides greater clarity that would be very useful.

View Comment

Sugar DaddyPosted on1:46 pm - Oct 11, 2013


It takes a lot to leave me speechless. The proposed return of Dave King to The Rangers has done that.

The football authorities are likely to rubber stamp a convicted tax fraudster as fit and proper. What?
Bears believing yet again another rich guy is just going to give them loadsamoney & want nothing in return. Predictable yet incredible all the same.
The media lathering up the PR releases to say its all gonna be ok. No comment required.
Ex players, senior TRFC personnel talking about huge investment needed to catch Celtic. Oh dear lord.

So it must really mean so much to the Bears that they are willing to risk everything just to maybe beat Celtic to a title. King, if he invests, will want the properties. What chance TRFC “surviving” an insolvency event some time in the future without control of the most valuable assets. Heehaw.

Yet, the authorities again, the MSM again, the talking heads again, the fans again are all too willing to believe again that incautious spending is the only route to success.

They are doomed to repeat the cycle.
They have learned nothing.

View Comment

SouthernExilePosted on1:50 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Tif Finn says:
October 11, 2013 at 1:35 pm
0 0 Rate This

It is entirely possible that people are correct, in that the SARS case against Dave King included the value of the shares he held, and that the argument goes he must have paid for them from somewhere ergo tax was due on those (unidentified) earnings.
______________
TF

It is possible, and in some ways more plausible. However a SARS spokesman is quoted in one of the BDLive articles as saying “Mr King is not being taxed on his assets, he is being taxed on the income from these assets”.

It is all very mysterious.

View Comment

scottcPosted on2:05 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Here’s the first seven months figures guys

Gate receipts and hospitality 6,411,000

http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/296

View Comment

Blindsummit63Posted on2:07 pm - Oct 11, 2013


A couple of points:

broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
Dave King invests his money, or someone’s money, in an early incarnation of ‘Rangers’.
http://www.murray-international.co.uk/news_archive/rangers_football_club/news02.htm
THE RANGERS FOOTBALL CLUB PLC TO RAISE £53.1 MILLION
More Information: David Southern, Tel: 0131-624 0800

Would this be the same David Southern who presided over the rape of Hearts, including being an enthusiastic cheerleader for a patently nonsense “share issue” that resulted in Hearts fans being fleeced for @1M pounds without so much as a piece of paper to show for it?

Apologies to this Davd Southern if he’s nothing to do with that fiasco.

Great blog by Corsica1968 this morning. Substitute the name of any other club for Celtic and you could send the same letter to any of the other clubs. As I’ve felt all along it’s all our clubs that are ultimately to blame for allowing and indeed collaborating with the corruption and rule-breaking. We can point fingers at “rangers”, spivs, the SFA etc all day long, but none of this happened without our clubs agreeing to it! I sent a similar although much less well worded letter to Rod Petrie and also refuse to pay a penny more to Hibs, due to their part in this fiasco. Rod Petrie is one of the prime culprits in my opinion.

Finally, and with the greatest respect to the Celtic contributors here, could they please take the Hampden cover discussion over to a Celtic blog. Apart from the fact that it gives the impression that this is a Celtic site, those of us of a non “old firm” (may it rest not in peace) persuasion find talk of a “Celtic” and “Rangers” end at the national stadium a depressing reminder of how inconsequential you see the rest of us, and of how uneven the playing field has been over the decades of my life. The national stadium does not belong to any one or group of clubs.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on2:11 pm - Oct 11, 2013


It is a fair point for a front loaded business such as a football club.

If the turnover was £9.5m in the interims how did it manage to rise to as much as £19m by the end of the period.

Unless of course income from season tickets sold before June 2013 (but for the 2013 – 2014 season) was actually included in the turnover figure for the year end June 2013

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on2:11 pm - Oct 11, 2013


blu says:
October 11, 2013 at 11:17 am
redlichtie says:
October 11, 2013 at 10:04 am
==================================================
Redlichtie, I see what you’re driving at here, and clubs would be wise to have proper procedures in place to check whether staff have a criminal conviction or, if working with children and/or vulnerable adults, have been checked with Disclosure Scotland. However, for directors the SFA and clubs should be guided by Companies House – see guidance below. From the information about him, some provided by him, in the public domain I’d struggle to not bar Mr King, if it was my decision.
============================================
Thanks Blu. The problem is that no-one is going to look at the Companies House criteria because Regan says it would take a ‘cast of thousands’ to conduct investigations. That and presumed cost allows him to throw the matter back into the responsibility of clubs.

Use of Disclosure Scotland (probably already in use for club employees) is a cheap and hopefully effective way to address what is needed.

The South African version is more limited but would hopefully also do the job in this case.

If someone like Dave King, with all the baggage clearly set out in the Forum today, is able to be classed as a fit and proper person to have an influence over a Scottish Football Club then we really do need to think about packing up and going home. There are signs of group insanity here – doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. A proven tax avoider with direct connections to the previous club is not what is now needed at Ibrokes.

BTW has anyone checked the latest SFA regulations just to make sure that the ‘fit and proper’ test hasn’t been replaced by a ‘glib and shameless liar’ one? Isn’t it awful that you even think such a thing might be conceivable?

Scottish Football needs the SFA to show that they understand the need for integrity in the running of our clubs.

View Comment

TailothebankPosted on2:11 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Blindsummit63
Very well said !…

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on2:17 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Tif Finn says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:11 pm
It is a fair point for a front loaded business such as a football club.

If the turnover was £9.5m in the interims how did it manage to rise to as much as £19m by the end of the period.

Unless of course income from season tickets sold before June 2013 (but for the 2013 – 2014 season) was actually included in the turnover figure for the year end June 2013
======================================================

Is there any possibility that turnover could have been inflated by the sale of property assets from TRFC to RIFC? £5.5M worth?

This would of course be pre-revaluation of the assets and put RIFC in a very nice position indeed….

Scottish Football needs a wee bit more clarity on the accounts of a certain football club/company.

View Comment

Tif FinnPosted on2:23 pm - Oct 11, 2013


60. redlichtie says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:17 pm

I’m not an abacus worrier so I will have to refer you to one of those on that one.

However as a layman I would point out that the accounts covered both the PLC and it’s subsidiary so I don’t think a “sale” of assets between them would reflect in the overall turnover.

Sorry if that’s wrong oh counters of the bean.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on2:24 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Haven’t forgotten the podcasts folks – just finding it difficult to get anyone to actually take part! I’ve had a few polite KBs from MSM people, and there are also some logistical problems which I hope to solve using telephone interview apparatus.

We really need to try to find a balance from the very beginning so that the outcome is not slanted in any way. I think the reluctance to participate is partly because of an expectation of that bias, and I think when our credentials and good faith are laid out, people will come around to seeing us as a serious channel for opinion.

Right now around 1,000,000 TSFM are viewed per month by a viewership of around 400,000 over the same period. Translating to a more modest sounding 30,000 and 13,000 respectively per day.

These figures, given that this is not a fan site are more than respectable, and indicative of the role the blog plays in provoking debate and discussion away from the ill-informed, ill-spirited and juvenile nonsense of the radio phone-ins and the (understandable) slant of fan sites.

We are determined to ensure that our podcast is not a hostage to sensationalist fortune, and it will be important to get as much feedback as possible from everyone here.

OT message ends 🙂

View Comment

ParanoidWellFanPosted on2:26 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Tif Finn says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:23 pm

Agreed Tif, all inter-company transactions would be stripped out on consolidation of the accounts

View Comment

briggsbhoyPosted on2:28 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Re Dave King

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71656?oid=246629&sn=Detail

He’s described as “a mendacious witness” AKA a lying B.

redlichtie says:
October 11, 2013 at 9:41 am

What Scottish Football needs is a tax inspector like Mr Chipps the guy who was Mr Kings nemesis.
Interesting piece http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2013/09/02/undictated-the-dogged-mr-chipps-who-brought-dave-king-to-book

View Comment

bluPosted on2:37 pm - Oct 11, 2013


redlichtie says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:11 pm
==============================================
Redlichtie, there is already provision in the SFA’s Articles of Association for dealing with ‘fit and proper’ persons. The rules just need to be applied. I’d think that Mr King’s buy-off of his 82 year prison sentence would designate him as not ‘fit and proper’ under the terms of clause (h) but I couldn’t possibly speculate as to what Messrs Ogilvie, Regan and Bryson might think.

Article 10.2 (updated August 2013):

10.2 The Official Return shall include details of all officials, office-bearers, secretary, directors or members of the board of directors or the board of management or committee of such member, Team Staff, with their full designation, profession, business or occupation and full service address, and also, subject to the provisions of Article 13, full details of the interest of such member or any official, office-bearer, secretary, director or member of the board of directors or the board of management or committee of such member and of its or his associates as defined in Article 13.5 in any other member. The Board must be satisfied that any such person is fit and proper to hold such position within Association Football. The Board hereby reserves its discretion as to whether or not such a person is fit and proper, as aforesaid, after due consideration of all relevant facts which the Board has in its possession and knowledge, including the undernoted list which is acknowledged to be illustrative and not exhaustive:-
(a) he is bankrupt or has made any arrangement or composition with his creditors generally;
(b) he is, by reason of his mental health, the subject of a court order which wholly or partly prevents him from personally exercising any powers or rights which he would otherwise have;
(c) he is under or is pending suspension imposed or confirmed by the Scottish FA;
(d) he is listed in the Official Return of another club in full membership;
(e) he is currently participating as a player of another member club or referee in Association Football;
(f) he is the subject of an endorsed Disclosure from Disclosure Scotland;
(g) he has been disqualified as a director pursuant to a disqualification order granted under the Company Directors’ Disqualification Act 1986 within the previous five years or was serving a disqualification as a director pursuant to such Act at any time within the previous five years;
(h) he has been convicted within the last 10 years of (i) an offence liable to imprisonment of two years or over, (ii) corruption or (iii) fraud;
(i) he has been suspended or expelled by a National Association from involvement in the administration of a club;
(j) he has been a director of a club in membership of any National Association within the 5-year period preceding such club having undergone an insolvency event;
(k) he is currently under or is pending suspension imposed by or confirmed by the Scottish FA in accordance with the Anti-Doping Regulations.
All such persons (including the Team Staff) by allowing their details to be included on the Official Return or any amendment thereto, thereby agree to be bound by, comply with and be subject to these Articles and rules and regulations of the Scottish FA (as amended from time to time) whose decision on all matters shall be final and binding, subject to any appeals or arbitration procedure available in terms of or promulgated under these Articles, and the Official Returns and amendments thereto shall display prominently a notice to this effect.

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on2:39 pm - Oct 11, 2013


WHAT IF? What if the powers that be from theSFA grow a collective pair and tell TRFC and Dave King NO.We will not allow any more spivs or glib liars to infest our game. How will the TRFC fans deal with this? Social Unrest on a grand scale? or an acceptance that the rules have been applied without fear or favour in the best interests of the game. I aint no genius but I know where the smart money would be.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on2:52 pm - Oct 11, 2013


redlichtie says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:11 pm

Good idea re disclosure.
I have just completed the PVG procedure (Protecting Vulnerable Groups). It would be perfect for Mr King, after all TRFC supporters come into that category 😉

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on2:54 pm - Oct 11, 2013


paulonotini says:
October 11, 2013 at 12:16 pm
26 0 Rate This

Excellent read from Corsica1968 on Twitter.A letter to Peter Lawell & why he was returning his Celtic scarf given to him by his mother in 1976.

http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/breaking-the-family-bond/
———

Impressive piece, a balance of reason and emotion. Almost painful to read and not sure he’s doing the right thing. Nevertheless, huge respect

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on2:56 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Slightly OT, but its Friday!

Here is the new item available from sevco magastore!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d15/nickydoc/rubberduck_zps4bcbb0e9.jpg 😯

And here is the first of, I’d imagine, many pisstakes
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BWTG_6FCcAED1Mh.jpg 😆

View Comment

FinlochPosted on2:57 pm - Oct 11, 2013


paulonotini says: October 11, 2013 at 12:16 pm
Excellent read from Corsica1968 on Twitter.A letter to Peter Lawell & why he was returning his Celtic scarf given to him by his mother in 1976.
http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/breaking-the-family-bond/
………………………………
A really intelligent, well written, insightful and touching valedictory gesture by Corsica 1968.

Was there a reply?

View Comment

bluPosted on3:00 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Someone beat you to it paul.

paulsatim says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:56 pm
Slightly OT, but its Friday!
Here is the new item available from sevco magastore!!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d15/nickydoc/rubberduck_zps4bcbb0e9.jpg

torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 11, 2013 at 10:47 am
Here’s a fundraiser on sale in the Rangers Megastore.
Wonder how it’ll go?.
CelticResearch ‏@CelticResearch 13m
Just when you try to leave them alone for a while they present more comedy gold. http://www.rangersmegastore.com/team-rubber-duck-845088?colcode=84508806 … Sevco much more inclusive it seems

View Comment

neepheidPosted on3:21 pm - Oct 11, 2013


Finloch says:
October 11, 2013 at 2:57 pm
2 0 Rate This

paulonotini says: October 11, 2013 at 12:16 pm
Excellent read from Corsica1968 on Twitter.A letter to Peter Lawell & why he was returning his Celtic scarf given to him by his mother in 1976.
http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/10/11/breaking-the-family-bond/
………………………………
A really intelligent, well written, insightful and touching valedictory gesture by Corsica 1968.

Was there a reply?
++++++++++
I came to the same decision as Corsica68 following the SFA AGM, which was the moment for me when all hope was lost. I also wrote a goodbye letter to Lawell, much less eloquently and much more angrily, I’m afrraid. If I ever get a reply, I’ll post a copy. But please don’t anyone hold their breath on that one.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on3:22 pm - Oct 11, 2013


In craigie we trust.
In Charlie we trust
In watty we trust
In dave king we trust. This was the smsm propaganda approach.
Sevco fan’s trusted smsm. Why sevco fan’s cannot trust their own minds is beyond me. How many times will they be duped because that is exactly what is happening.
Will they change? ?
In fact can they change?

View Comment

Leave a Reply