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.
CF http://i.imgur.com/VAFqXjI.jpg
I have written many times about the curious relationship between Ian Hart and Charles Green stretching back to the very beginning when Green declared the Blue Knight Hart as an investor in his original consortium only for Hart to immediately deny it.
Shortly thereafter he did become a shareholder in Green’s consortium with the shares paid for by money apparently found ‘lying about’ in the Rangers youth department. I have never quite understood what that meant and still don’t but have always wondered how CW managed to miss it as he hoovered-up everything else that wasn’t nailed down.
Obviously I’m sure there will be a perfectly acceptable explanation and I don’t believe for one moment that a man with Hart’s business credentials could be guilty of even the slightest impropriety. However from a confused beginning Hart has apparently staunchly supported Green on the Rangers Board and the latest CF email disclosure appears to show he remained wedded to the Great Man as late as 29 July 2013.
In an email allegedly sent to Rangers Board members Mather, Smith, Smart, Stockbridge and James Easdale, purportedly sent by Hart, he notes an email received from Green and writes: ‘As many of you know there has been talk as whether Charles would return.
‘Against this background I asked Charles if he would consider returning and what did he see as the future for the club and his plans in relation to his shares’.
I have to shake my head at this if Hart actually wrote it. Because it seems he has forgotten the email he allegedly was sent on 21 April 2013 from Bryan Smart which clearly states that if the Rangers Board ‘really pressed’ then Green would be ‘vulnerable to a gross misconduct charge’ and indeed might not even get 1p of the £600k settlement that the Rangers Board agreed to prevent the matter going public.
And yet just three months later we have Hart pondering about the advantages of bringing Green back to Ibrox. I haven’t a clue what these allegations of gross misconduct are and haven’t a clue if there is any truth in them but presumably Hart must be aware of them. Strange that the Nomad Cenkos and the rest of the Board appeared to be terrified of Green publicly contesting them to prove his innocence. Why would Hart even countenance having Green back if the Board are sorrect in their position?
Hart does raise an interesting point as to whether Green’s return would be acceptable to the SFA and talks of sounding them out before a decision is taken. I might be a bit jaundiced but I’m sure an accommodation might well have been reached in the Hampden corridors of power.
What is staggering is that a businessman like Hart talks of Green being instrumental in bringing £22 million into ‘the club’. Oh really – is that what came in from the IPO. Perhaps someone better tell Deloitte they got the net figure badly wrong in the accounts.
More worrying in the email for Bears is that Hart doesn’t know of any investor willing to put a substantial amount of money into running the club. And he states: ‘It seems to me we will urgently need considerable more investment over the next year if we are to progress up the divisions’.
Once more I wonder how Deloitte managed to miss that worrying view from one of the Directors, with a strong commercial business background, which doesn’t seem to be shared, and least not publicly, by the Rangers Board Executives Mather and Stockbridge.
And Hart further states that he sees it as ‘absolutely crucial’ that Green returns with his contacts to raise money by welling the club to investors. It appeared to me that the original Green consortium struggled to raise capital and that this was only done by huge incentives being offered.
The IPO capital came from Institutional Investors and it seems apparent that Malcolm Murray played a large part in that and appears to still have their support and also the fans did their bit. So whether there are any more mystery offshore investors out there that Green hasn’t tapped is open to question.
And more importantly can Rangers really afford to pay them the kind of investment incentives they received under Green’s tenure. As a simple punter I don’t think they can but hey that’s probably why I don’t live in a French chateau with 30 horses.
Or perhaps I just don’t like shovelling sh*t to earn my living ❗
Possibly a very interesting turn of events later today.
Well, here’s gift horse as Charles might say …
@ScottishFans
We’re looking for fans interested in being involved in some research on the role of supporters in football governance. Please get involved
1:17pm – 4 Oct 13
Eco, I can almost hear the gears cranking in your brain trying to work out what it is that Green might have done to allow the opportunity of his leaving with no payoff, but that was so bad that they were willing to pay him the £600k so that he would not then disclose it. Do you think it could be to do with Rafat again? Or that he could blow the CW connection wide open?
Would Cenkos be willing to cave in to that sort of ‘blackmail’? What would they lose by refusing or gain by paying? Obviously, RFC* would and the SFA would lose big time, but would Cenkos care about that enough to cave in?
Forgive me if I’m off on the wrong track, but I can’t think of anything big enough.
Saw this re-tweeted by Paul Brennan. It’s from last year but a stoater …
Manchester City makes £250 million bid for Arsenal’s history
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/sport/sport-headlines/manchester-city-makes-250-million-bid-for-arsenals-history-2012072335298
Case resumes 2pm
nawlite says:
October 4, 2013 at 12:49 pm
Forgive me if I’m off on the wrong track, but I can’t think of anything big enough.
_________________________________________________________________
CG knows who actually owns Ibrox ? – and it isn’t a friendly.
A little thought on the apparent change in Charlotte. Is she now being used by someone who, until recently, was an Ibrox insider and, realising he/she might find a use for it, copied emails etc. for future use? This might also explain the narrative CF is now providing – things committed to memory by my (imaginary?) ex-insider.
Well it’s offishal – Ibrox is infested with spawning ‘Aphorisms’. Seemingly the PR bunker is where this manifestation of Rangeritis was first cultured before it escaped its asbestof-clad containment and bit the brass necks of its creators.
It was fed to the compliant SMSM dressed up as succulent lamb but it has had the curious affect of turning ‘Offishal’ Ibrox Press Releases into damp squibs.
Former chairman Malcolm Murray seems to have an inbuilt immunity and speaking after the latest personalised Ibrox aphorism attack was launched at him said: ‘I made a statement yesterday of factual accuracy. I’m disappointed by the aphorisms in the RFC official statement.’
What a man Oor Malcolm is ❗ Video star ❗ Grouse destroyer ❗ And he just refuses to fall down ❗ No way will a few aphorisms stop him in his tracks 😆
I did a few posts earlier today dealing with the fact and fiction of the ‘Offishal’ position but little did I realise I was up against the usually deadly aphorisms.
Wikipedia explains it better than I ever could: “The term was first used in the Aphorisms of Hippocrates. The oft-cited first sentence of this work is: ‘Life is short, art long, opportunity fleeting, experience deceptive, judgment difficult’.
“In modern usage an aphorism is generally understood to be a concise statement containing a subjective truth or observation cleverly and pithily written.”
Yip that’s exactly what I thought the deflection guff being spouted from Ibrox was – I just didn’t know the fancy word for it 🙄
Im about to blow a gasket again. Ogilvie and the well kent Scots player Nacho Novo will make the 3rd round cup draw on Monday!
ianagain says:
October 4, 2013 at 1:48 pm
12 0 i
Rate This
Im about to blow a gasket again. Ogilvie and the well kent Scots player Nacho Novo will make the 3rd round cup draw on Monday!
————————————————————————————————————————————–
maybe they can compare EBTs afterwards………
‘It seems to me we will urgently need considerable more investment over the next year if we are to progress up the divisions’.
——
Of course they will.
Given the apparent standard and wage of players required to win the 3rd and 2nd Divisions (excuse old terminology please), by the time they get into the 1st they’re going to need the likes of Messi and Neymar at the very least. And that’ll be a few quid.
Dog knows what they’re going to do if they ever get into the top league. They’ll have to buy the whole Brazilian or Spanish squad.
Looks like Goldstein is more interested in trying to damage TSFM than anything else. This is his last paragraph from a long winded amount of nothingness:
‘All those clever people sitting at the table on tsfm and not one thought to ask and explore a basic, obvious, question like that. Utterly hopeless. Are we to blame the mainstream media for that? That website is now part of the problem, not part of any possible solution.’
He continues to be a man with questions, he wants others to ask, while suggesting he knows all the answers. He now wants someone to ask about Paul Murray, specifically why no one at Ibrox pre, during and after administration wants him at Rangers/TRFC. He doesn’t say who he thinks we should ask, or why he’s not asking the question himself. It’s beginning to look like he’s on a one man/organisation campaign to discredit TSFM. I wonder who would benefit from that?
CRAIG WHYTE AND THE GOLDEN GOOSE
Turning the clock back to SDM time, May 2011, and he’s desperate to sell RFC.
The Club is terminally ill with debt disease.
But yet, is not without value – if only.
Along comes Scotland’s soon to be, most celebrated venture capitalist, CW.
What does he see?
He sees a golden goose – the rangers supporters/followers.
He sees the goose’s nest – Ibrox
He sees the golden eggs – ST sales + share issues
Craig knows what he’s after – goose, nest, eggs.
Anything else is chicken feed.
But, he needs help. So he calls on –
CG. who appears and then later disappears with, guess what – a nest egg .
Others are still waiting and hoping for theirs,
dreaming, perhaps, of a chateau and a french filly or two ?
Mais oui, mais non.
I’d say it’s going to be a bit of a scramble to the finish
Wouldn’t you ?
Allyjambo says:
October 4, 2013 at 2:26 pm
Looks like Goldstein is more interested in trying to damage TSFM than anything else. This is his last paragraph from a long winded amount of nothingness:
==================================================
Personally I’ve taken the decision now to totally ignore him, not read his posts before he deletes them and not even mention his name in future.
Barcabhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:36 am
Just imagine what kind of outcome there would have been to Rangers scandalous behaviour without , the internet, blogs, and twitter.
Imagine if all the publicly available information was provided by the Scottish Press. Those who suspected foul play, would have been largely isolated. No platform to share and expose.
————————————————
I’ve thought about that on many occasions over the past two years. And I genuinely believe that if this platform and others had not been open to me and you then I would’ve left the country instead of just the football.
When Not If.
TRFC does not have its problems to seek. Their problems spill over into being Scottish Football’s problems in a practical sense if TRFC don’t have the wherewithal to get through the season.
For some time now the question of admin for TRFC has been of ‘when’ not ‘if’.
At end June (end accounting period) the club, TRFC, had £11.5m in the bank according to recent published accounts, and then the FD about a month ago or so stated there was £10m in the bank. The FD was asked to indicate the split of this £10 between TRFC and RIFC – he stated it is all in one pot. That’s 2 months spending equating to about £1.5m on the face of it. However, if there has been a reasonable chunk of ST income included in that latter £10m, then monthly spend is running a fair bit higher.
If about a third of ST money for season 13/14 is included in the £10m in the bank about a month ago, then operating costs have been about £4.5m in the 2 months of July and August – £2.25m a month. This is lower than the monthly average for the accounting period, but still worrying for those in charge if that’s the cash burn rate. Operating costs were £33m for the 13 month period to end June ‘13 – £2.53m a month on average.
Then there’s the issue of quarterly tax due and when. Without knowing an exact figure I would guess that more than £1.5m of the £10 bank cash will need to be paid to HMRC in the quarter to end Sept. That’s not to suggest any tax has not been paid when due.
The club will struggle to get through the season if they have £8.5m available to use, no further large sum incoming, and need to spend over £2m a month. There will have been some funds incoming from matchday income that is not ST income over the last few months, but not massive – I would guess about £1m.
My guess is they have about 4-5 months from now before the cashflow beast bites. That’s not enough to get them through to May ’14.
But it doesn’t matter what’s considered to be reality by anyone on here – it’s more important that the financial reality is addressed by the board running the club. With current shenanigans at the board of TRFC and RIFC going as they are – no-one seems in a position to do so.
nawlite says:
October 4, 2013 at 12:49 pm
Why did this affair have to remain uncontested? What was Cenkos and the Rangers Board apparently terrified of that they were happy to throw away £600k? I can only surmise that whatever it was and whoever had their finger on the nuclear button it was judged, rightly or wrongly, to have been capable of costing a helluva lot more than £600k and possibly even terminal damage to the club.
Eco, I can almost hear the gears cranking in your brain trying to work out what it is that Green might have done to allow the opportunity of his leaving with no payoff, but that was so bad that they were willing to pay him the £600k so that he would not then disclose it. Do you think it could be to do with Rafat again? Or that he could blow the CW connection wide open?
=============================================
@ nawlite – the brain cells most certainly are cranking 😉
It would appear the Board seem to know exactly what the skeleton in the warchest is as did Cenkos. Now I wonder whether the Cenkos attempt to seemingly organise a Board cleansing was also connected to the secret rather than just a straightforward wish to protect the Institutional Investors from a falling-down board.
In my speculation Cenkos could still have been working to protect the Institutional Investors from an even bigger loss and, of course, if anyone on the Board knew what the skeleton was then they too would become as empowered as Green if indeed there was any skeleton. So the Cenkos clear-out would make sense.
In some ways things become clearer but in others the mystery deepens. But if there was a skeleton that Green knew about then I have little doubt that Ahmad knew as well.
So I can understand the apparent wish of the Board – except for one member – to pay him off. It would be nice to know who the 1 was. Do they know about the skeleton (if it exists) or have they, for whatever reason, been kept in ignorance if it does exist?
Barcabhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:50 am
So a current Rangers director emailed the rest of the board in July 2013 , stating significant further investment was vital, and Deloittes sign off on a going concern without qualification ? That might come back to haunt Deloitte’s
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I too am struggling with how they managed to sign off on a going concern basis. I’m sure they have some convoluted explanation that stretches all known definitions of the concept of “going concern” that they hope will cover them.
scapaflow says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:53 am
When that day comes, it will not be the spirit of 1690 that rules, but that of 1789. The suits won’t have to send for whom the tumbrils roll, they will be rolling for them. Events over the last year, have transformed me from a loyal supporter and a happy customer, into a Jacobin, convinced that a Robespierre is required to lead the Revolution that we desperately need to sweep away this despicable Ancien Regime that is sucking the life out of Scottish Football..
__________________________________________________________
I hope that movement will include all clubs.
From Yesterday,Rangers: Malcolm Murray denies Rangers salary role
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24376563
Actually no he does not,the only thing even close to a denial is this (But Murray responded: “His remuneration was never certified by me.”) he says that sentence a few times.
From the article,
.
(“The contracts I was shown last summer were significantly higher than current levels and I struggled to get them down.”)
I Struggled to get them down meaning he personally entered into negotiation with CG and IA to reduce the amount in the contracts.
—–
(“Cenkos and I tried again to lower them at IPO but found severe resistance,” he claimed.
“Pre-IPO, I was the only non-executive and as a private company there was no remuneration committee.)
Not only was he involved he then collaberated with the clubs nomad to get these contracts reduced,also note that he says there is no remuneration committee but later in the article states this,
(In fact, Phil Cartmell was chairman of the remuneration committee, which never met once despite his attempts, and he is on record at being unhappy with levels of remuneration.”)
So was there or was there not a remuneration committee?This 1 is from the start of the article,
(“I joined the board on the recommendation of the institutions to instil a high level of corporate governance at Rangers.)
Really,how high a level of corporate governance is it to collaberate with the clubs nomad to overthrow an entire board?
http://i.imgur.com/KZuPO9E.jpg
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:05 pm
It has to, otherwise we are simply replacing one unfit structure with another.
ianagain says:
October 4, 2013 at 1:48 pm
Im about to blow a gasket again. Ogilvie and the well kent Scots player Nacho Novo will make the 3rd round cup draw on Monday!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wonder who pays Novo’s wages these days?
Drew Peacock:
The phrase “going concern” is seen nowhere in the statement by the auditors. It is mentioned in the club’s own statement, where the Directors state that they regard the club as a going concern if certain conditions are met, such as all revenue going up and all costs going down.
Meaning, that as things stand at present, and if revenue does not go up, costs don’t go down, and no additional source of funding is found, then the Parent Company of the Holding Company that was assigned the SFA membership of the now-dead club CANNOT be considered a going concern.
It was on the basis of that statement being issued by the Directors of RIFC that Deloitte’s signed off the accounts.
Basically, the silence of Deloitte’s on the “going concern” issue can be read as: “We think they’re feckt but we don’t want to say it because these chancers insist they’re going to perform some form of financial miracle.”
Silence is golden.
ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 2:43 pm
Allyjambo says:
October 4, 2013 at 2:26 pm
Looks like Goldstein is more interested in trying to damage TSFM than anything else. This is his last paragraph from a long winded amount of nothingness:
==================================================
Personally I’ve taken the decision now to totally ignore him, not read his posts before he deletes them and not even mention his name in future.
____________________________________
I totally agree with your sentiment, but wonder if this is a sign that someone like Jack Irvine is setting us up, can’t imagine why 🙁
Maybe we should be on our guard, and it’s never a bad idea to know your enemy!
nickmcguinness says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:17 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Deloitte would have to have seen evidence of the planned revenue increase and cost reduction to be in a position to say nothing. They cannot just rely on Directors assurances (especially not these ones). Would the accounts not have to be qualified and perhaps prepared on a different basis to that of a “going concern” if they had not seen evidence..
If the Rangers International board are found to have acted illegally at today’s Court of Session hearing by attempting to block the nom’s for the AGM, does that mean that we may potentially see a suspension in the trading of Rangers International’s shares?
Anyone know?
As discussed previously it seems the safe standing could well be being introduced. I think it’s an excellent idea, for all clubs. I genuinely believe that all seater stadiums took away from the atmosphere.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/doncaster-spfl-would-welcome-standing-areas.22333112
Doncaster: SPFL would ‘welcome’ standing areas
Friday 4 October 2013
NEIL DONCASTER, the chief executive of the Scottish Professional Football League, has welcomed the prospect of a safe-standing area being introduced at Celtic Park and believes that bringing back terracing would “enhance the experience” for many spectators.
The rules on standing areas in Scotland’s top division were relaxed two years ago and last week Peter Lawwell, the Celtic chief executive, revealed the club was giving serious consideration to modifying its stadium to create an area for those who no longer wished to sit at games.
Drew,
Perhaps they saw evidence of an invitation to join the EPL, a tie-up with Dallas Cowboys and an estimate of revenue from 500 million shirt sales.
But the auditors certainly did not use the phrase “going concern basis”/
Allyjambo says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:21 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 2:43 pm
Allyjambo says:
October 4, 2013 at 2:26 pm
Looks like Goldstein is more interested in trying to damage TSFM than anything else. This is his last paragraph from a long winded amount of nothingness:
==================================================
Personally I’ve taken the decision now to totally ignore him, not read his posts before he deletes them and not even mention his name in future.
____________________________________
I totally agree with your sentiment, but wonder if this is a sign that someone like Jack Irvine is setting us up, can’t imagine why 🙁
Maybe we should be on our guard, and it’s never a bad idea to know your enemy!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I missed most of Goldsteins posts but I am willing to take him seriously if he answers this question:
What is it you want from us?
I did see one of his posts and the piling in of BartinMain which related to the Sevco 5088/Sevco Scotland origins and I know ecobhoy thinks there is some vital information regarding the shareholdings in Sevco Scotland (now TRFC). I tend to agree.
Sevco 5088 was to be the company to acquire the assets of DeadCo and Craig Whyte was the man behind it. Green was also a shareholder but didn’t need to be if all he was doing was buying CW’s Deadco shares.
The SFA were tipped off about CW’s involvment in Sevco 5088 and knowing that CW was not a fit and proper person to own a Scottish club he had to recede further into the shadows – hence the use of Sevco Scotland and a fake falling out with CW and Green. I believe the SFA actually made an enquiry to Green about CW involvement.
The investors who had set up Sevco 5088 will be the same ones in Sevco Scotland (possibly Korissa and Willow?) and that is why the Annual Return does not disclose the full share history of Sevco Scotland from the date of incorporation. My understanding is that the Pinsent and Deloitte reports, following client instructions, did not look at Sevco 5088 but the recently leaked Board emails allude to gross misconduct by CG (maybe the racist remarks?) but may be something arising from the report i.e a connection with CW.
As BRTH and others note ALARM bells should be ringing all over the SPFL & SFA (did they ever get a reply to their letter about RIFC ownership or a copy of the PInsent and Deloitte reports?) are they certain TRFC can fulfill their fixtures this season.
As to whether CW still holds a floating charge over the RIFC assets I just don’t know the answer to that but what I do know is that asset strippers of his ilk don’t get involved in situations like this and let the assets slip carelessly through their fingers.
At a guess, I would imagine the ‘one’ would be James Easdale. Him and his brother seem to be getting set up to be left holding the baby.
Both, Robert. Prior to the IPO TRFC Ltd was a private company and so there was no remuneration committee. Afterwards, when RIFC became a plc, there was one and PC was the chairman.
nickmcguinness says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:35 pm
Drew,
Perhaps they saw evidence of an invitation to join the EPL, a tie-up with Dallas Cowboys and an estimate of revenue from 500 million shirt sales.
But the auditors certainly did not use the phrase “going concern basis”/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think we are misunderstanding each other. The accounts are prepared on a going concern basis unless otherwise stated so they would have no need to mention it if they had seen evidence from the Directors that plans were afoot to raise Revenue and reduce costs.
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:54 pm
Are they certain TRFC can fulfill their fixtures this season?
——
As we know, the SFA and SPFL have large supplies of both hooks and crooks (pun unintended, but apt) which, despite having to be seriously replenished over the last year and a half or so, will be deployed to ensure that TRFC complete their fixtures.
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:54 pm
Wavetower held a floating charge over the assets of a PLC which is being liquidated.
This will give that company a preference when any assets recovered are split up.
So if BDO can get any assets / funds they will be at the head of the queue to get paid.
This only really matters if BDO manage to bring money in. They are currently trying to get a shedload from Collyer Bristow and possibly others.
I believe the amount owed by Rangers to Wavetower is the £18m Wavetower paid to Lloyds when they had the floating charge re-assigned to them.
Angus1983 says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:00 pm
Correct. Also, if as some predict RFCas-is-as-in-as-of-now can only make it to April May 14 you can be sure the season ticket offers will come on stream early. “Get yer tickets here” has a nicer ring to it as opposed to “pay up or its Tesco time”. I’m not convinced bankruptcy is going to be the ultimate game changer here, but only on the basis that I’ll be amazed if they can last that long, the way it looks at the moment.
EDIT: Thats not to say of course that a looming bankruptcy (and the contributory factors to it) isn’t the very reason they can’t look to inward investment at the moment.
From the bbc article about ally’s, slimmed down salary
£££££. “McCoist insists that wages were not a motivating factor in his decision to remain as manager of the team, following a turbulent 19-month period in which the Ibrox outfit experienced a major insolvency event and was required to play in the lowest professional league in Scotland.” £££££
————————-
BTW – BRTH – great post
jimlarkin says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:25 pm
Three quarters of a million pounds to manage a team in the fourth tier of Scottish football and a bag of free shares.
Of course money wasn’t a factor, he didn’t even read the contract apparently.
From twitter
David Conn @david_conn 10m
Labour shadow sports minister @CliveEfford on #FIFA: “The Qatar World Cup fiasco is showing the world that Fifa is rotten to its core.”
—————————————————
Remember the days of thinking that UEFA or FIFA might step in to demand that the SFA cleaned up their act? FIFA going out of its way to show the world that the standards of football governance here in Scotland are not just a little parochial difficulty, but pretty much the norm.
It seems the Rangers’ hearing at the Court of Session has been put back to a week on Monday.
I suppose that means if the McColl group win then practically the AGM would have to be put back.
Goldstein makes many sweeping claims and claims the intellectual and investigative high ground.
He’s months late and lots of $ short
The link below shows what i wrote nearly 6 months ago on Tsfm regarding Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland . I wasn’t the only one on TSFM commenting on the issues, and this link was far from my earliest comment.
The lack of a good search facility on blogs, means that the likes of Goldstein can appear from nowhere and regurgitate original material from some time previously, and claim it as their own.
http://www.thefanclub.com/comment/celtic-glasgow/8502419
Really enjoyed the BRTH post – very happy to be reminded to look at the on-going role of the SFA in this shambles.
I have to say that I am increasingly being drawn to the arguments about complicity, as Scapa mentioned today.
Specifically, whilst it is perfectly reasonable to castigate CO, SR, ND, DL and any of the rest of the greatest football administration team in the world, I am increasingly uncomfortable with the role of other players in the scene.
At what point do the members of the association say enough? Will a second administration event at Ibrox, possibly mid-season, do it?
At the risk of paraphrasing Mr McCoist’s worst moment, I really would like to know how the SFA / SPL / SFL reached their decisions with respect to letting Sevco join Div 3 and who it was that made that decision (amongst others!). Wouldn’t it be interesting to see those documents? How about some transparency from the governing bodies?
The thing is, I am not sure I am going to like the answers. I have a terrible feeling that the web of complicity is spread wide across the sport.
Nonetheless, I do want to know.
Without this level of transparency, I don’t see how we go forward and move on from the current corruption.
Presumably there will be minutes of meetings, records of e-mails and letters sent etc. BRTH has pictured it for us with The Big File on The Big Hoose. I sincerely hope that the contents are brought out into the public domain.
For the avoidance of doubt, this is not about pointing the finger of blame, but making sure we don’t get fooled again.
(I’m sure there was a good The Who gag to be had in there somewhere 😳 )
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:54 pm
……….The investors who had set up Sevco 5088 will be the same ones in Sevco Scotland (possibly Korissa and Willow?) and that is why the Annual Return does not disclose the full share history of Sevco Scotland from the date of incorporation….
————————————————————————————————————-
Willow and Sevco? Any links, Drew?
Barcabhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:51 pm
“.The link below shows what i wrote nearly 6 months ago on Tsfm regarding Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland . ..”
—–
Good man, yourself.
I now am convinced that certain individuals who worked for D&P will get their collars very roughly felt.
And is there an extradition treaty with France?
How I long to see these chaps arraigned.
As well as some others, of course.
Well, well, well, RFC Board v Requistioners case adjourned till a week on Monday.
looks like there won’t be an AGM on the 24th!
TallBoy Poppy says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 3:54 pm
……….The investors who had set up Sevco 5088 will be the same ones in Sevco Scotland (possibly Korissa and Willow?) and that is why the Annual Return does not disclose the full share history of Sevco Scotland from the date of incorporation….
————————————————————————————————————-
Willow and Sevco? Any links Drew?
___________________________________________________________________
I’m afraid not. As evidenced by the ? it was speculation on my part.
I don’t want to set any false hares running – I was recalling (perhaps incorrectly – I haven’t checked) CF revealed offshore companies called Willow and Korissa were two of the investors in Sevco 5088. I’m sure about Korissa but maybe I’m not right about Willow. Eco will know.
@BarkingMain
It’s half time in Edinburgh, but it does appear that the requistioners do have a case for the Board to answer!
A nice warm up for Ahmed v HMS Dignity…..
I have dealt with the various ‘Offishal’ comments made by Rangers vis-a-vis the CF emails.
But Tbh I think the most important and telling story involves the comments made by CEO Mather regarding former chairman Murray and I don’t intend to use CF material in this post but instead rely on public records and, in particular, the Rangers AIM Prospectus and Companies House documentation.
Rangers CEO Craig Mather has publicly indicated that payments to his predecessor Charles Green were “decided” by Murray.
Mather added: ‘It was a decision taken by the remunerations committee and the chairman at the time, which was Malcolm Murray. So Malcolm Murray decided the remunerations for Charles Green and Brian Stockbridge and unfortunately the directors are duty bound to honour those scenarios historically.’
The first observation I will make is that I would trust that directors, especially Executive ones, of a public company would adhere to legally binding agreements in preference to any historical precedent.
But let’s get a few easy bits out of the way first. Murray states that the RIFC Plc remuneration committee, consisting of chairman Cartmell and members Smith and Hart, never met despite attempts by Cartmell to arrange this. Murray further states that he ‘never certified’ Greens remuneration.
So who has got this right? I think it’s very simple if people actually know what they are talking about and don’t indulge in the ‘aphorisms’ that Murray has accused Rangers of employing.
Mather states that the pay levels of Green and Stockbridge were set by the RIFC Plc remuneration committe – He is incorrect in this and I also believe he was incorrect in stating that Murray was involved.
Green’s wages and bonus are laid out in a contract with TRFCL signed on 17 September 2012 which was backdated to 12 June 2012. Stockbridge also signed a contract on the same date with TRFCL but in his case it was only backdated to 1 September 2012.
However Malcolm Murray’s contract of employment, as a TRFCL director, wasn’t signed until 18 September 2012 and although it was backdated until 1 June 2012 it is clear that before he signed his contract the contracts for Green and Stockbridge had already been signed and were legally binding.
This explains what I found to be a puzzling remark by Murray in response to what appears to me to be Mather’s mistaken assertion. The former chairman stated: ‘The contracts I was shown last summer were significantly higher than current levels and I struggled to get them down.’
But when I saw the one-day time gap in Murray’s agreement with TRFCL compared to Green and Stockbridge then it seemed clear to me what he had ‘struggled’ with and it may well be that the original wages sought were higher than what ended-up in the two agreements thanks to Murray’s efforts. What is obvious however is that if Murray could be outvoted on the RIFC Plc board then he was on a hiding to nothing on the TRFCL Board which consisted of himself, Green, Ahmad and Stockbridge.
However let’s move on to RIFC Plc where Green and Stockbridge were Executive directors of the company on 6 December but not employees of it until AIM Admission on 19 December 2012 and in accordance with an agreement dated 7 December 2012 – effective on Admission – the amount of wages and bonus from the TRFCL agreement were basically carried forward into the new company.
The position with Murray is that As at 6 December 2012 he was a director of RIFC Plc but had no terms of appointment or engagement and wasn’t an employee of it. On Admission at 19 December 2012 Murray was to be appointed as a Non-Executive Director of RIFC Plc the Company under a letter of appointment dated 7 December 2012.
I have struggled to see what legal power Murray had at either TRFCL or RIFC Plc to determine the wages and bonuses of Green and Stockbridge. It may well be that there is some information not in the public domain that could alter my opinion but I can’t think what it could be.
Perhaps Mr Mather has simply been struck-down with an attack of ‘Aphorism’ which is often preceded by roaring in the ears followed by goosepimples on the arms of the afflicted.
Barcabhoy on October 4, 2013 at 4:51 pm
3 0 Rate This
Goldstein makes many sweeping claims and claims the intellectual and investigative high ground.
—————
Anyone who’s been paying attention probably sensed from the off that Mr Goldstein was an odd fish, apart, that is, from Sir Bartinstein Goldmain (no relation). Now I follow Mr Goldmain on twitter and find him a great wheeze but for the life of me I can’t understand why he eagerly promoted Mr Goldstein while bad-mouthing TSFM, and certain individual members particularly skeptical of said Mr G. It’s just not cricket old fruit.
I suggest reading this BBC article very carefully. It is dated June 19th 2012, so after D&P completed the asset sale to Sevco.
The really interesting areas are a comment by Companies House on the process for SEVCO 5088 to change its name to The Rangers Football Club Ltd. No mention whatsoever of SEVCO SCOTLAND.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18509619
Of course a deferred requisitioner’s case and postponed AGM will always get us a little bit closer to lock-out day, no? Or am I barking up the wrong dog’s leg?
john clarke says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:00 pm
And is there an extradition treaty with France?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
European Arrest Warrant, John.
Danish Pastry says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:10 pm
3
0
Rate This
Barcabhoy on October 4, 2013 at 4:51 pm
3 0 Rate This
Goldstein makes many sweeping claims and claims the intellectual and investigative high ground.
—————
Anyone who’s been paying attention probably sensed from the off that Mr Goldstein was an odd fish, apart, that is, from Sir Bartinstein Goldmain (no relation). Now I follow Mr Goldmain on twitter and find him a great wheeze but for the life of me I can’t understand why he eagerly promoted Mr Goldstein while bad-mouthing TSFM, and certain individual members particularly skeptical of said Mr G. It’s just not cricket old fruit.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Yes I found that odd too. Are we sure it is the same BartinMain – I don’t recall him being abusive on RTC or on here until yesterday.
Is there actually anyone left who is ‘locked-in’?
Barcabhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:51 pm
To be fair you made points, rather than just ask cryptic questions and also wrote it in English.
That can be quite confusing for some people.
BartinMain says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:00 pm
looks like there won’t be an AGM on the 24th!
———————————————
Presumably if the AGM is delayed, that raises the possibility of a Rangers home game before the AGM again. Are any other reasons for postponements likely to crop up do you think?
Zilch says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:55 pm
“.. I am increasingly being drawn to the arguments about complicity, as Scapa mentioned today. ”
——–
There are , I suppose, two kinds of complicity: before the event , and after the event.
I think that the SFA ‘executive’ members of the Board, without the knowledge and consent of the full Board, took underhand action to ‘save’ the doomed club. That action, in the case of elected members, taken for partisan reasons, and in the case of appointed members, for perhaps slightly more well-intentioned reasons and because they were under orders as an employees.
There is undoubtedly complicity after the event in so far as no member clubs of the SFA raised their heads above the parapet to ask the questions that many thousands of their supporters and others were asking.
Scapa rightly was scathing of the non-opposed re-election of a particular President. ( But ,remember, non-opposition is not the same as voting for, and where there is no other candidate, it might have been suicide for any one member to have objected to that one candidate).
It would have been better if some brave club had tried to lead a demand for full transparency, and to have called for an immediate EGM once the dirty deeds of ‘the executive’ had become known, with a view to having anything they had done wholly rescinded.
Had they done so, then there would be no RIFC having membership of the SFA-end of story. And End of problem. For then the ‘decent’ Rangers support would ( presumably) have joined the non-senior leagues, and over a number of years tried , in or out of Ibrox stadium, to build their way back honourably
What can be done now?
Well, the Celtic Trust is concentrating on getting their own club to request UEFA’s ‘Club Financial Control Body’ to audit the SFA’s licensing department.
Perhaps if the supporters’ groups of other clubs were to lobby their own chairmen, a real groundswell would develop which might embolden clubs to eqally call the SFA board and officers to account, with UEFA looming in the not to far background.
Other than something along those protracted lines, I can’t see where Scapa’s Robespierre is going to come from- every other agency can back off with the assertion that it’s an internal matter for the SFA membership.
And we suspect already what The Scottish Government would say to any request that they, through the Sports Council, should intervene.
One possibility exists-and that is that the new club goes bust.
It would be impossible for the SFA to pull the same stunt again in relation to membership of a new club!
Not saying I wish for that, but it would bring a degree of clarity.
Barcabhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:17 pm
Good recall, use of the nasty L word too, the phone lines to Pacific Quay will be red hot tonight!
scottc on October 4, 2013 at 5:22 pm
1 0 Rate This
————-
Reaching lock-out day is looking like what the Danes call “the raisin at the end of the sausage” (“rosinen i pølseenden”) 🙂
Barcabhoy says: October 4, 2013 at 5:17 pm
“I suggest reading this BBC article very carefully. It is dated June 19th 2012, so after D&P completed the asset sale to Sevco.
The really interesting areas are a comment by Companies House on the process for SEVCO 5088 to change its name to The Rangers Football Club Ltd. No mention whatsoever of SEVCO SCOTLAND.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18509619”
_______________________________________
There may be nothing in the non-mentioning of Sevco Scotland. If the BBC believed that Sevco 5088 had purchased the assets they (BBC) would have asked Companies House about how/when Sevco 5088 could change its name. There is then every reason why the CH spokesperson would mention Sevco 5088 and make no mention of Sevco Scotland.
Of course, I could be ‘up a gum tree’.
scottc says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:22 pm
Is there actually anyone left who is ‘locked-in’?
====================================
I’m sure there isn’t but the fans will soon be locked-out I fear ❗
john clarke says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:28 pm
TBH, I don’t know where my Robespierre is going to come from either, I just firmly believe we need one.
I’m not sure what you mean by ” SFA ‘executive’ members of the Board, without the knowledge and consent of the full Board, took underhand action to ‘save’ the doomed club.” If you mean Messers Ogilvy & Regan took a flier on their own, then I don’t buy it. They are stupid, but they are not that stupid.
However, assuming you are correct, then my contempt for the Board members would only increase, (something I didn’t think was possible). It would mean that instead of dealing with two cases of Gross Misconduct in the appropriate way, the miscreants would have been rewarded, with re-election in one case, and a massive bloody pay rise in the other!
An outcome which would make complaining about Mr Green’s pay off an act of rank hypocrisy!
3rd tier manager selflessly ‘getting by’ on c. GBP400K salary [tbc 🙄 ]
======================================================
“…
The results revealed McCoist’s own salary to be £825,000, before agreeing to a wage cut, which the Light Blues boss says is “nearer” to the 50 per cent figure quoted in one newspaper today than other suggestions of around 15 per cent.
McCoist said: “…We just feel that where we are in terms of our league status – and the income and turnover is down – that it’s the right thing to do.
“We are not looking for a pat on the back for it because any Rangers supporter in our position would do the same.”
============
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/u/ally-mccoist-i-took-pay-cut-because-it-was-right-for-rangers.1380882794
Anyone know if Derek Weir resigning SPL July 2012 had any relation to the date of the 5 way?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18683703
ianagain says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:57 pm
Sounded at the time that he couldn’t stomach what was happening, but, like a good soldier he has since kept schtum….
Paul Murray statement
“We are delighted with today’s hearing and we look forward to having the opportunity of establishing the validity of our proposed director nominations on Monday 14 October at the full hearing.
In the meantime we would ask shareholders to firstly DO NOTHING until it is clear what they are being asked to vote upon at the AGM and secondly note the actions of this Board of Directors who seem hell bent on putting up every legal and technical blockage to our nominations.
Why are they so scared of a vote if they have all the shareholder support they claim to have? It is ridiculous that we are forced into going to the Court of Session in order to give the shareholders a democratic vote at the AGM.
The stalling tactics of this Board are indicative of why the shareholders felt compelled to make these requisitions in the first place.”
Ends
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:04 pm
TallBoy Poppy says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Willow & Korissa
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/charlotte-fakes-red-herrings-for-rangers-or-smoking-guns-for-green-and-whyte/
Speaking for Rangers board Jack Irvine said: “A small group of shareholders served notices on the Club seeking to have themselves appointed as directors at the AGM.
“The Club is obliged to take steps to verify that the shareholders had made a valid request. The club’s lawyers were of the firm view that the notices were not valid and entered into open discussions with the shareholders’ lawyers on why they took that view. They sought clarification from the shareholders on the question of validity. The Club extended an open offer to those shareholders to meet to discuss the issues. That offer was not even acknowledged.
“Instead without any warning the shareholders went to court seeking an order to stop the AGM taking place. The court declined to grant the order and the legal process will now continue”.
ianagain says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:57 pm
scapaflow says:
October 4, 2013 at 6:09 pm
Or perhaps he saw what was hapening to guys like Turbull Hutton and his stadium….
Point is, there are probably a fair number of folks that DO know what went on – hard to believe it will remain a secret forever. All it takes is one leak and the whole thing could blow…. oh please, oh please oh please…. 😛
scottc says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:22 pm
Smugas says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:17 pm
Of course a deferred requisitioner’s case and postponed AGM will always get us a little bit closer to lock-out day, no? Or am I barking up the wrong dog’s leg?
Is there actually anyone left who is ‘locked-in’?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Odd isn’t it. Charles is facing charges of “gross misconduct” but gets unlocked and £600k for his troubles. As Tom English said on Radio Shortbread five minutes ago ” The Easdales are running the company”
ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 6:12 pm
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 5:04 pm
TallBoy Poppy says:
October 4, 2013 at 4:56 pm
Willow & Korissa
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/charlotte-fakes-red-herrings-for-rangers-or-smoking-guns-for-green-and-whyte/
=++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Cheers ears – to be honest I knew I wasn’t imagining it -it’s all in my head. I have a good memory.
Morning All
first post after finally tupe-ing over from RTC where I posted as ‘nil sine labore’.
Just had to do it to let you know about Chuck’s latest gaff re his new gaff in France.
Ta to Danish for the French article yesterday which I read and then did a bit of research and read it in the original form in the French newspaper.
From that I was able to track down the property in the village of Gordey nr Argentan via a quick google search for ‘chateau de gordey’. There was a link to the Rightmove website which showed the property.
Have a look and you will see that the starting price for the property was 910000€ which is a tad north of what he is claiming he paid.
Bit closer to his walk away sum though, isn’t it? Perhaps he didn’t want to upset ra Berzz so he was conservative with numbers.
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 6:51 pm
Willow & Korissa
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/05/18/charlotte-fakes-red-herrings-for-rangers-or-smoking-guns-for-green-and-whyte/
=++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Cheers ears – to be honest I knew I wasn’t imagining it -it’s all in my head. I have a good memory.
=============================================================
Yea I say that as well and my kids laugh at me 🙁
ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 12:30 pm
And Hart further states that he sees it as ‘absolutely crucial’ that Green returns with his contacts to raise money by welling the club to investors. It appeared to me that the original Green consortium struggled to raise capital and that this was only done by huge incentives being offered.
The IPO capital came from Institutional Investors and it seems apparent that Malcolm Murray played a large part in that and appears to still have their support and also the fans did their bit. So whether there are any more mystery offshore investors out there that Green hasn’t tapped is open to question.
====================
Subject:
NOMAD
Date:
Tue, 18 Jun 2013 11:35:32 +0100
From:
Malcolm Murray
To:
Brian Stockbridge, Craig Mather, Bryan Smart, Phil Cartmell, Walter Smith, IanHart
At the moment we have a blue chip list of shareholders that many public companies of >£1bn would die for. It also means that we have the currency and constituency to further fund whenwe need it in 2-3 years…
Our institutional investors would most definitely not favour a change to a minor broker.
Thanks Malcolm Murray
========================
What can you make of it where one side says they need Green to raise money, the other side says they wont need any for 2-3 years as the blue chips love them.
For those of you interested in what Goldstein had to say- and what he has yet to say- he’s on twitter @Goldstein2012
[]
[Edit – abuse]
We’ll find out if Mr Goldstein is “at it” soon enough. He’s promised some news at 10.
Will he bear fruit? I have an open mind,
[Edit – abuse]