Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century

Avatar 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

Avatar

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

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on7:40 pm - Oct 4, 2013


BartinMain says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:18 pm

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, +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

You say that like we are not open minded – I am. Maybe it helps if I state my agenda:

1. I’m not a Celtic Fan – many on here are not but so what ! I can live with that and with the sensible side of the Rangers who want their club back and who don’t want to be exploited for sectarian and cash and ego purposes any longer.

2. I want the current lot at the SFA/SPFL exposed and out.

3. I want football to be the driver not commercialism. So yes to gate sharing and other income and a more competitive game. When Celtic won the European Cup in 1967 – gates were shared. The Scottish game was more competitive.

4. I want the ownership of the MSM to be more diverse and not owned by champions of the vested interests in our society – the interweb is helping to debunk their myth creation but it will take a while. They will circle the wagons and feed us the same shite as already exists – that is Jack’s Mission Statement.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on7:45 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Over the last twenty four hours or so, more than one poster has registered on this site to drive home the narrative that everyone here is either thick, untrustworthy or otherwise beneath contempt – whilst simultaneously waging a juvenile Twitter campaign against us.

People are perfectly entitled to say what they like on Twitter (within the limits of the law of course), and on here, we have given these posters a bit of leeway, only removing posts that are considered over the top. I trust everyone will agree that we shouldn’t have to endure excessive criticism which is misplaced. I am equally sure that given the preconceptions contained in these posts, there can be no reason for this behaviour other than to derail the blog.

TSFM shouldn’t be the focus of debate here, and I can’t imagine anything else so unbearably anal. Those who have disagreed with or diverged from the path of the blog have gone elsewhere without feeling the need to make some public valediction, or come back to tell us all how crap we are. The welcome we extended yesterday to returning posters (who were not banned but exiled themselves) only extends as far as the rules and ethos of TSFM.

We will ensure that good manners and respect is maintained.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on7:46 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Those of you who understand the share price (currently 47.50): Do all of these seemingly insignificant micro buys have any bearing at all on the price? In other words, is there a mechanism for keeping it as high as possible until a certain date or event?

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on7:51 pm - Oct 4, 2013


TSFM says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:45 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Agreed.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on8:00 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Danish Pastry says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:46 pm

Those of you who understand the share price (currently 47.50): Do all of these seemingly insignificant micro buys have any bearing at all on the price? In other words, is there a mechanism for keeping it as high as possible until a certain date or event?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

AIM has low liquidity and therefore no real price movements because those that want the shares have the shares. So there is little trading going on other than the Easdales hoovering up small trades that they have previously instructed their brokers (Daniel Stewart?) to buy.

There are the institutional and other investors who will hang on mainly because in this instance there is a lot of property, goodwill and history that can be recycled and sold on again at a profit.

View Comment

TallBoy Poppy

TallBoy PoppyPosted on8:09 pm - Oct 4, 2013


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/
——————————————————————————————————————————————-
Remarkable. Shouldn’t someone tell the SFA? 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on8:11 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:00 pm
Danish Pastry says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:46 pm

Those of you who understand the share price (currently 47.50): Do all of these seemingly insignificant micro buys have any bearing at all on the price? In other words, is there a mechanism for keeping it as high as possible until a certain date or event?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
AIM has low liquidity and therefore no real price movements because those that want the shares have the shares. So there is little trading going on other than the Easdales hoovering up small trades that they have previously instructed their brokers (Daniel Stewart?) to buy.

There are the institutional and other investors who will hang on mainly because in this instance there is a lot of property, goodwill and history that can be recycled and sold on again at a profit.
==================================================================
I think a lot of the very small purchases of say 10 or 15 shares are Bears wanting to get to the AGM. Could end-up quite a turnout.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on8:14 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:00 pm
1 0 Rate This
————–
Thanks Drew. I’m just a little confused as to why the price isn’t falling on the back of the chaos. Other companies that get bad news or poor results tend to dip, don’t they? Could there be fewer major shareholders than there appear to be, if you know what I mean?

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on8:14 pm - Oct 4, 2013


TSFM says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:45 pm

We will ensure that good manners and respect are maintained.
======================
‘Absolutely’ TSFM.

And it was a credit to fellow Bampots that nobody took the bait yesterday and responded with personal insults, [although I almost did that myself a couple of times, but thought better of it just before clicking on the ‘Post Comment’ button.]

Oh no, I think I am “back-slapping” now… 🙄

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on8:24 pm - Oct 4, 2013


StevieBC says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:14 pm
1 0 Rate This
————-

The twitter abuse is kind of, well, abnormal. To be honest, I hope he’s alright, especially as a twitter Goldstein has been created. Help ma boab.

View Comment

Avatar

phill450Posted on8:25 pm - Oct 4, 2013


I’ve been thinking about Bartin’s ‘backslapping’ comments and wonder if it isn’t time to get rid of the thumbs up plug-in.

If a site is truly neutral and has a diversity of opinions you would expect the number of TUs to equal TDs, but that doesn’t happen here, (it’s still not as bad as the Guardian website and their ‘fishing for recommends’ culture)

Feel free to thumb-down this post to add some balance 😐

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on8:28 pm - Oct 4, 2013


phill450 says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:25 pm
0 0 Rate This
———-

I agree. And it’s open to abuse too. I tested it once on myself and managed about 8TDs in a minute 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on8:29 pm - Oct 4, 2013


dedeideoprofundis says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:14 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 12:30 pm
========================
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.
—————————————————————————————————-
Obviously heavy on the guesswork but I think there are a couple of things that could account for the difference.

Firstly is timing in that Murray said in mid-June that the extra money wouldn’t be needed for 2/3 years and the Institutional Investors would provide it. I don’t think is a totally unrealistic expectation as by then it would be thought Rangers would be back in the Premiership and perhaps nearer to Euro cash.

Hart states at the end of July that more money is needed this year and he can’t think of any investor prepared to put substantial cash in. By the end of July there would have been a much better idea for all Board members just how the financial figures were stacking-up or down as the case actually was.

Then there are the two men. Murray was kept deliberately isolated and information was kept from him so he wasn’t in the loop. Then there’s Hart who appears to be quite a central figure to Green and therfore defo in the loop. And perhaps he was over-egging the doom as part of his sales-pitch for Green’s return.

However time will tell!

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on8:30 pm - Oct 4, 2013


TallBoy Poppy says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:09 pm
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/
——————————————————————————————————————————————-
Remarkable. Shouldn’t someone tell the SFA? 🙂
______________________________________________________________________________

They know already – it’s in the file that BRTH is on about. :mrgreen:

They never followed up. Why should it be acceptable that there is a team in the league system that nobody knows who owns it? Offshore company ownership of teams in the SPFL is accetpable?

View Comment

justshatered

justshateredPosted on8:36 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:40 pm

I believe in a lot of what you say.
I want commercialism kicked into touch as, in my view, that is one of the major reasons our sport is haemorrhaging customers. We can’t get highlights on TV on a Saturday when the next generation of supporters, the kids, are able to watch them. The highlights program itself is pitiful with only five minutes for each match. Why can we not have one game in depth and the rest covered for eight minutes. If you ever have more than four goals in a game there is no room to show anything else such as contentious decisions.
The gate sharing issue is more of a contentious issue. It could lead to boycotts of some grounds by disgruntled fans. How could clubs ever afford to upgrade their stadiums if they know that part of the income it generates is given away. Celtic and Hibs spent considerable sums of money developing their stadia, to the detriment of their playing squads, and I don’t think either would be happy to see the benefits of their investment diluted. To simply split gate money could lead to more clubs being dependent on others to the extent if they are relegated the drop in income would be huge because they would be losing income from the bigger supported clubs every other week.
I really don’t know the answer to this issue but I would rather something along the lines of the Inverness v Hearts idea where Hearts were given a 50% split of gate money over the average attendance of previous meetings. This was a tremendous gesture by Inverness to a club in financial distress but I think that this should be adopted in an attempt to drive up attendances. Fans would know that some money will come back to their club if they travel in numbers to away fixtures.
This issue does need to be addressed along with pricing itself, merchandising, media coverage and scheduling, and sponsorship.
Unfortunately I have absolutely no confidence in the people in charge of our sport to bring about any realistic change in the fortunes of our sport. They seem more than happy to hamstring everyone because their favourite club/company is not in the top league. Having said that everyone must be happy because the never voted to change the President in the summer and they have never asked any in depth questions of those bending, breaking, or ignoring the rules.

As for the original article I thought it was magnificent however we should all be under no illusion that the people in charge of our sport simply DO NOT CARE.
They are no better than the people in charge at Ibrox. They are parasites on our national sport taking, taking, taking. Producing nothing. Contributing nothing. Causing grief and division where ever they go.
But as I said above everyone is happy with it because no one seems to wish to change it.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on8:40 pm - Oct 4, 2013


More than happy to oblige with the TUs ad TDs, though definitely not for the reasons Phill450 outlines.

TUs are certainly not indicative of any backslapping culture on here. We squabble and fight all the time. The backslapping which does go on is pretty inoffensive and usually comes about when the blog feels good about itself. High self esteem is not a character defect unless your own self esteem is pretty limited. We shouldn’t be ashamed of it as long as we don’t start to think we are something we aren’t.

By and large I think TUs are backed up with sympathetic comments. TDs on the other hand are often clearly orchestrated and not reflective of voiced opinion. I do disagree profoundly with the notion that a majority of one or the other means we are not neutral. Many posters get a surfeit of both depending on the opinions they hold on any given subject. However I’ve been unhappy for some time that people pay too much attention to them and I believe they do help to influence what people are writing.

It’s just a bit of fun really, which is often abused by people who don’t like to have fun I suppose. I’ll do a poll on it over the weekend if the opinions expressed over the last few comments are backed up. Be glad to see the back of them – although the other mods would differ -).

For information, yet again the most juvenile FF-like poison (and untruth) is being spread again about us on Twitter. NO ONE has been banned from posting. Some posters (three) who have abused are in moderation before being passed for publication until they agree to abide by the rules.

View Comment

Avatar

TorquemadaPosted on8:44 pm - Oct 4, 2013


What are the chances of an MVL before October 14?

Or even putting TRFC into administration and embarking on the much-awaited sale and leaseback?

After all, revenge is a dish best served cold. 😈

Meanwhile, excuse me while I write my letter to Santa. 😎

View Comment

Avatar

ClashCityRockersPosted on9:22 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Goldstein2012 is a contrivance.

View Comment

Avatar

Hartsons CombPosted on9:22 pm - Oct 4, 2013


From the Herald:

McCoist said: “The only thing I ever wanted was an opportunity to manage the club. There was a contract put down which I can tell you in all honesty was not negotiated at all.

“The finances were not important to us and that’s the truth – we just wanted an opportunity to manage the football club.

“I signed the contract and we couldn’t foresee what was going to happen in the next 18 months, two years, which was obviously a massive blow to the club. We are where we are at the moment.

“I would like to point out that my decision to take a wage cut has nothing to do with the accounts. The negotiations started well before the accounts came out.

“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.”
**************************************

Every day McCoist is becoming more like his old pal Charles Green in terms of the BS he spews.

If McC is to believed, he did not negotiate his contract yet he did negotiate his voluntary cut in salary.

What was to be negotiated if it was voluntary?

McC: “Mr. Mather, I request my wages be slashed.”

CM: “Uh, OK. How about we pay you 100,000 pounds less?”

McC: “Nope, not good enough.”

CM: “All right, then. How does 200,000 less sound?”

McC: “You’re not even in the ballpark, Craig. It’s got to be more or I’ll walk away.”

CM: “OK, OK, Ally, geez, you drive a hard bargain. How about we slash your wages in half?”

McC: “Now you’re talking. You’ve got yourself a deal.”

CM: “Whew! You’re such a tough negotiator, I sure am relieved we didn’t have to negotiate your original contract!”

And again, no MSM “journalists” question him at all….

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on9:26 pm - Oct 4, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:11 pm
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:00 pm
Danish Pastry says:
October 4, 2013 at 7:46 pm

Those of you who understand the share price (currently 47.50): Do all of these seemingly insignificant micro buys have any bearing at all on the price? In other words, is there a mechanism for keeping it as high as possible until a certain date or event?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
AIM has low liquidity and therefore no real price movements because those that want the shares have the shares. So there is little trading going on other than the Easdales hoovering up small trades that they have previously instructed their brokers (Daniel Stewart?) to buy.

There are the institutional and other investors who will hang on mainly because in this instance there is a lot of property, goodwill and history that can be recycled and sold on again at a profit.
==================================================================
I think a lot of the very small purchases of say 10 or 15 shares are Bears wanting to get to the AGM. Could end-up quite a turnout.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Doubt it – as i said Daniel Stewart will hoover up the small trades for the Easdales. Sometimes I doubt your analysis. When will you be commenting further on what is a clear conflict of interest between Media House acting for RIFC AND the Easdales. After all the Club is different from Directors/shareholders interest ??

View Comment

Avatar

James DolemanPosted on9:31 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Not posted for a while, password issues.

Just wanted to discuss Mr Goldstein. It seems to me to be a (slightly) more sophisticated version of various different accounts that have popped up in response to “Charlotte’s” revelations. My personal favourite was @charlottehunted which, like them all,promised astounding information anytime soon, honest. The person behind that account when challenged on a minor point, responded “that side of it is not my job” and realising what he has said vanished forever.

Many of the “Charlotte” docs on Jack Irvine show he has a keen interest in social media and how to manipulate it. Luckily this site shows that is less easy than it first appears as posters have a keen eye for new people just trying to whip up dissention.

Goldstein is promising big news at 10pm ( its never now with these people always some time in the future) Personally I will look on with interest, without holding my breath.

View Comment

Avatar

arabest1Posted on9:34 pm - Oct 4, 2013


A DOS attack, organised infiltration………….we must be getting close to the heart of this scandal and certain parties are concerned that the level of forensic dissection on here is dangerous. Keep it up!

Oh and kudos to Danish, the noteriety your input deserves….well done mucker!

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on9:36 pm - Oct 4, 2013


justshatered says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:36 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Share it. That’s how it started. The gains in income come from the size of the support which is fine. The Big Two (formerly the Old Firm) drained the game of its life blood, even stooping as low to taking 5% of the away support income at their home grounds for so called admin costs(which at those two clubs are a fixed cost in any event). That was the low point. Let’s try to work our way back from that.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on9:36 pm - Oct 4, 2013


ClashCityRockers says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:22 pm
1 0 Rate This

Goldstein2012 is a contrivance.
———

Aye he is that, and he’s hooked quite few on the back of Sir Bartin’s wee twitter promotion. Bit of a symbiotic thing going on there. 24 of the 25 tweets within the past 20 hours and 317 followers already. Dearie me, gullible. Pity we ever mentioned that he’ll turn up on twitter. He could at least give us some credit for the idea 😀

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on9:50 pm - Oct 4, 2013


arabest1 says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:34 pm
1 0 Rate This

… Oh and kudos to Danish, the noteriety your input deserves….well done mucker!
—————

Noteriety? What have I done? 🙂

Actually, I’ve been ill for a few days and am stuck on the sofa drinking herb tea, so I’ve actually posted far too much of no consequence. I should apologise. But it’s quiet I suppose and the dialogue is fun. Well, that’s my excuse. Feeling a bit better though, so soon be back to my partial anonymity with one or two wee posts a day.

I’m hoping that analysis of the accounts Phil is working on turns up over the weekend, should get the heavyweight posters going again.

View Comment

Tartawulver

TartawulverPosted on9:57 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Could the graphic for the thumbs-up be changed and the fingers extended so that it looks a bit more like a backslap? I quite fancy that actually.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on10:06 pm - Oct 4, 2013


10 bells have struck, and nothing from Goldstein? or even his alter ago Bartin Main? What a surprise!

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on10:10 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Some more grist for the Donkeys Armaggedon:

From Leanne at the ‘Well tonight (part of the fan ownership thing)

“A message from Leeann:

There has been plenty of negativity around the game in recent months but the new landscape of Scottish Football provides hope and opportunity.

I believe we are about half way through our journey to being a truly sustainable fan owned club. A club working toward a secure financial base, underpinning a community and talent development model. I see the early and encouraging results that are happening because of the changes we made 4 years ago – a strategic decision that moved to fully focus the club wholly on family, on community and on local people.

Our gates are up again this year and importantly we are seeing more young people in the stadium now than at any time in our recent past, this can only bode well for the future. The average attendances at Fir Park were up last year by 13% to 5,948 – non Old Firm attendance averages were up even higher at 19% last season. It shows that when you offer the very best value you can, when you invest in supporter relationships and when there is entertainment to be had on the field, that supporters can and will flock back to the game.”

Murder isn’t it.

View Comment

justshatered

justshateredPosted on10:11 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:36 pm

I think I understand you but can I ask how does a club pay for a major upgrade to it’s stadium when it needs to replace a stand if it is giving away 50% of it’s income to it’s competitors and yet keep a competitive team on the park and avoid going into debt?

In my mind we have two issues here; creating a competitive league and dependency issues.

Clubs have different levels of dependency whether it is to play in the SPFL top league, or to play in Europe to balance the books on an annual basis.

To simply take from clubs with large support to distribute it to the other clubs will certainly redistribute wealth but how will that revenue be used?
Will it be used to buy over the hill foreigners which are no better than our own youth players or will it be forced to go into youth development?
If it is used to buy then we are simply pushing money out the door again and the question still remains unanswered as to what happens when a club with a small support, who has signed these players on long term contracts based on revenue from away games at Celtic, Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Hearts and Hibs, are relegated?

In my mind there is no way they would make up the shortfall in income after being relegated. This will be a recipe for disaster. Imagine if Kilmarnock carrying their current debt were in this situation and used the windfall to buy more players and then were relegated. They would frankly be finished.

What kind of business model would each club be able to operate based on such a scheme when the greater percentage of a clubs income comes from other clubs?

I know I’m sounding negative to what I agree is a difficult problem however you mentioned in your original post of the agreement in the 60’s. Crowds in those days were far higher than they are now and there was not much difference between the clubs attendances so the monies being handed over were not that much different. That is not the case today.

The days of Celtic filling Celtic Park, except for a few exceptions, are over and other clubs have their own issues. If this system was implemented clubs that have a large or largish support would be faced with the prospect of having to radically downsize to match the loss of income. That will not help the standing of our game and may seem more of a ‘rush to the bottom’ where standards will continue to fall. It would ultimately effect any clubs aspirations to compete in Europe which in turn opens another door.
Would you also expect European money to be evenly distributed?

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on10:13 pm - Oct 4, 2013


neepheid says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:06 pm

10 bells have struck, and nothing from Goldstein? or even his alter ago Bartin Main? What a surprise!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Both are always welcome back as long as they can tell us what it is they want from us.

View Comment

RyanGosling

RyanGoslingPosted on10:13 pm - Oct 4, 2013


TSFM – as someone who by nature takes a lot of TDs and negative comments on here, which are only to be expected, I think your posts tonight have been wise and I actually think you do a pretty good job of moderating on here. If TDs follow then bring it on, I’m used to it! Back to the boardroom debates…

As for my tuppence on the accounts being published, I was saddened in equal measure to how much many on here were elated. People are debating on here and on radio and TV when Rangers might run out of money – the astounding thing for me is that after buying assets worth, what was it, 40 odd million pounds for about a fiver, these absolute fools have managed to allow people to even entertain the notion that they company may run out of money. Never mind the fact that it definitely will.

Fools. Crooks.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on10:13 pm - Oct 4, 2013


neepheid says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:06 pm
2 0 Rate This

10 bells have struck, and nothing from Goldstein? or even his alter ago Bartin Main? What a surprise!
——–
Oh, but yes, on twitter. Nuclear info. It’s EBTs, and Barcabhoy knows the truth.

Sir Bartin’s gone all quiet though, must be paying close attention to Goldenballs. No doubt be logging on to twitter after Goldenballs logs off 😀

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on10:15 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Danish Pastry says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:50 pm

I’m hoping that analysis of the accounts Phil is working on turns up over the weekend, should get the heavyweight posters going again.

It’s up already DP.
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/dark-clouds-over-ibrox/

View Comment

Robert Coyle

Robert CoylePosted on10:15 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Danish Pastry says:

Phil put his thoughts up yesterday,

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/dark-clouds-over-ibrox/#comments

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on10:20 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:36 pm
‘Share it. That’s how it started….’
——
Ideally,,yes, because it takes two teams to make a game.
But in the wider world of entertainment, the bigger ‘draw’ gets a bigger share.
I think it’s inevitable that there will be a return to gate share,but not on a 50/50 basis.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on10:23 pm - Oct 4, 2013


justshatered says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:11 pm
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:36 pm

I think I understand you but can I ask how does a club pay for a major upgrade to it’s stadium when it needs to replace a stand if it is giving away 50% of it’s income to it’s competitors and yet keep a competitive team on the park and avoid going into debt?

In my mind we have two issues here; creating a competitive league and dependency issues.

Clubs have different levels of dependency whether it is to play in the SPFL top league, or to play in Europe to balance the books on an annual basis.

To simply take from clubs with large support to distribute it to the other clubs will certainly redistribute wealth but how will that revenue be used?
Will it be used to buy over the hill foreigners which are no better than our own youth players or will it be forced to go into youth development?
If it is used to buy then we are simply pushing money out the door again and the question still remains unanswered as to what happens when a club with a small support, who has signed these players on long term contracts based on revenue from away games at Celtic, Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Hearts and Hibs, are relegated?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
All of those teams you name above have been in financial trouble or still are. Let’s get away from the wee team big team stuff. Without the wee teams the Big teams don’t have anyone to play.

With regard to your point about buying in “over the hill foreigners” – to be honest that is a lot to do with the failure of the SFA and their lack of investment and vision for the game to develop our youth.

Even at International level they paid out big bucks for two narrow vision Rangers men as managers of the National team and then the cheap Levein version. Now they have a man willing to do the job not just for the money and a with bit more nouse and look at the difference? People forget too easily how the SFA have failed the Nation.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on10:27 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Robert Coyle says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:15 pm
1 0 Rate This

Danish Pastry says:

Phil put his thoughts up yesterday,

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/dark-clouds-over-ibrox/#comments
—————-

Thanks Guys, I usually see a link here. That’s me for the night then, away for a read.

PS Goldstein’s 10-o’clock big news is that he’s trying to engage Barcabhoy in a nuclear debate. Yawn.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on10:27 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:13 pm
0 0 Rate This

neepheid says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:06 pm

10 bells have struck, and nothing from Goldstein? or even his alter ago Bartin Main? What a surprise!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Both are always welcome back as long as they can tell us what it is they want from us.
+++++++++++++++++++++
I agree, but can they please not promise important stuff at 10pm if it’s going to be much later. Nurse brings the cocoa at 10.15, and then it’s lights out for me.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on10:28 pm - Oct 4, 2013


john clarke says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:20 pm

Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:36 pm
‘Share it. That’s how it started….’
——
Ideally,,yes, because it takes two teams to make a game.
But in the wider world of entertainment, the bigger ‘draw’ gets a bigger share.
I think it’s inevitable that there will be a return to gate share,but not on a 50/50 basis.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Perhaps not on a 50/50 basis but there is no reason why it shouldn’t be on that basis other than to preserve the BIG Two.

View Comment

Avatar

Humble PiePosted on10:33 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Goldstein’s twittering is the equivalent of ‘winning’ one of a number of prizes including a brand new car on a free scratchcard that fell out of a newspaper, then dialing one of those 0800 numbers to ‘claim your guranteed prize’. You keep expecting the operator to get to the point of actually telling you which prize you have got, only to discover that you have won a £2 digital camera while the 5 minute call actually cost over a fiver.
So far he has proven one thing though. A surprising number of people are as gullible as…..

View Comment

Avatar

fergussingsthebluesPosted on10:37 pm - Oct 4, 2013


TSFM says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:40 pm

For information, yet again the most juvenile FF-like poison (and untruth) is being spread again about us on Twitter. NO ONE has been banned from posting. Some posters (three) who have abused are in moderation before being passed for publication until they agree to abide by the rules.

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

“NO ONE has been banned from posting”

So does that mean I’m back again?

View Comment

Avatar

phill450Posted on10:39 pm - Oct 4, 2013


TSFM says:

More than happy to oblige with the TUs ad TDs, though definitely not for the reasons Phill450 outlines.
________________________

Fair enough, the 50:50 ratio probably doesn’t account for basic human manners (I’ve politely clapped music performances that I didn’t enjoy, I’ve never actively boo’ed someone 😐 )

One of the things though, that I’ve enjoyed most about your site, is that people post theories and ideas, other posters diligently research and analyse them, us non-experts then learn something that we would have never known from consuming MSM.

If the TU/TD system turns out to be a way of filtering what is worth investigating and what is not, it’s possible that some of the finer points will be missed.

This isn’t a criticism of your site, it applies to most of the internet.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on10:46 pm - Oct 4, 2013


phill450 says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:39 pm

More than happy to oblige with the TUs ad TDs, though definitely not for the reasons Phill450 outlines.
________________________

Fair enough, the 50:50 ratio probably doesn’t account for basic human manners (I’ve politely clapped music performances that I didn’t enjoy, I’ve never actively boo’ed someone 😐 )

One of the things though, that I’ve enjoyed most about your site, is that people post theories and ideas, other posters diligently research and analyse them, us non-experts then learn something that we would have never known from consuming MSM.

If the TU/TD system turns out to be a way of filtering what is worth investigating and what is not, it’s possible that some of the finer points will be missed.

This isn’t a criticism of your site, it applies to most of the internet.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It must always be possible that a point (finer or otherwise) gets missed. Not often though – there are enough alert minds on here to pick up the nuances. Sometimes people post facts in a way that is obscure but which protects their identity and that of their source to ensure there is more juicy stuff to follow.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on10:48 pm - Oct 4, 2013


fergussingstheblues says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:37 pm
TSFM says:
October 4, 2013 at 8:40 pm

For information, yet again the most juvenile FF-like poison (and untruth) is being spread again about us on Twitter. NO ONE has been banned from posting. Some posters (three) who have abused are in moderation before being passed for publication until they agree to abide by the rules.

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

“NO ONE has been banned from posting”

So does that mean I’m back again?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

FFS!! Looks like it.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on10:48 pm - Oct 4, 2013


fergussingstheblues says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:37 pm

“NO ONE has been banned from posting”

So does that mean I’m back again?
++++++++++++++
Well I’ve just read this, so I guess the answer is yes.

View Comment

Avatar

nickmcguinnessPosted on11:10 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Mr Goldstein is either an attention-seeking troll or a commercially funded distraction.
Except that he’s not very good at either role.
Don’t waste your time checking him out on Twitter. He has nothing to say but uses a lot of arrogant words to say it.

View Comment

Avatar

Reilly1926Posted on11:11 pm - Oct 4, 2013


I almost had tears in my eyes watching Ally giving up 50% of his annual wage of £750k. Then I remembered that the same man was prepared to accept 1 million penny shares when the Fans were paying 70p. What a guy.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on11:11 pm - Oct 4, 2013


fergussingstheblues says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:37 pm

“NO ONE has been banned from posting”

So does that mean I’m back again?

I thought you chose to leave, rather than being banned. Welcome back though

View Comment

Avatar

fergussingsthebluesPosted on11:19 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Can I also say thanks to BRTH, Great post! That’s what I’ve been trying to say all along. The SFA are probably the most complicit in this whole sorry saga!

SDM, Whyte, Green, etc, etc are also probably the most despicable characters! They’ve got away with murder!

Unfortunately, The SFA are supposed to be “The Guardians” of Football in Scotland.

They are a disgrace! They’ve watched this Pantomine evolve for 2 Years now, and have kept quiet.

It will be interesting to see their reaction when the “New Club” goes bust!

Once bitten, twice shy! Not with this lot!

It’s a disgraceful situation Scottish Football is in now. Personally, I’d like to see TRFC/ RIFC / Sevco or whatever they’re called start again in the Amateur Leagues and start their way back from there.

I’d also like to see Celtic get an invite to play in England. Only to give the rest of us a level playing field.

Then I would probably start taking an interest again in Scottish Football, where any team would have a good chance of becoming Champions!

Think about it? Celtic in The English Premiership, Champions League, etc. When they have an away match at Southampton, supporters might decide “Do you know what, I might just go and watch St Mirren this Saturday!”

In my dreams, eh?

View Comment

Avatar

blackjacquePosted on11:23 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Resolution 10: Authority to Issues Shares for Cash
Section 561 of the Act imposes restrictions on the issue of equity securities (as that term is defined in the Act and which includes the Company’s Ordinary Shares) which are, or are to be, paid up wholly in cash and not first offered to existing shareholders. Resolution 10 will give the Directors authority to allot Ordinary Shares for cash without the need to comply with the statutory provisions in certain circumstances. The relevant circumstances are either where: (i) the allotment takes place in connection with a rights issue; or (ii) the allotment is limited to a maximum nominal amount of £66,000, (equating to 6,600,000 ordinary shares of one pence each), representing approximately 10 per cent. of the nominal value of the issued Ordinary Share capital of the Company in each case. Resolution 10 will also give the Directors power to sell Ordinary Shares held in treasury on a non pre-emptive basis, subject always to the limitations noted above.
If approved, the authorities granted under Resolution 10 will expire either on the date of the Company’s Annual General Meeting in 2014 or 24 January 2015, whichever is the earlier.
Whilst the Directors have no present intention of exercising this authority, they consider that the power proposed to be granted by Resolution 10 is necessary to retain flexibility

Could this be one way of remuneration for super Sally and other ” key personnel” for taking a drop in salary?
1 million shares equates to approximately £500k. Good PR today and will not show up in the accounts until at least late 2014 early 2015 and could be disguised by offshore accounts?

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on11:31 pm - Oct 4, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:26 pm

Ecobhoy
I think a lot of the very small purchases of say 10 or 15 shares are Bears wanting to get to the AGM. Could end-up quite a turnout.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Doubt it – as i said Daniel Stewart will hoover up the small trades for the Easdales. Sometimes I doubt your analysis. When will you be commenting further on what is a clear conflict of interest between Media House acting for RIFC AND the Easdales. After all the Club is different from Directors/shareholders interest ??
======================================================================
I would hardly dignify my own comment with the status of analysis. It was merely an observation and it might be incorrect but then so might your ‘analysis’ or indeed we could both be incorrect, I have noticed quite a large number of Darkside posters in recent weeks seeking information on how to buy small amounts of shares to be able to attend the agm with the battle lines hardening between the various camps. So I would be very surprised indeed if some hadn’t bought little packets of shares. That obviously doesn’t preclude the Easdales from buying as well but in such a low volume market recently I would have thought that might have pushed the price up a bit rather than it slowly moving southwards again recently

I have no problem with anyone questioning anything I have written and am always glad to hear their points and sometimes it makes me rethink an issue or point and I do actually have a track record in admitting when I get things wrong.

You ask: ‘When will you be commenting further on what is a clear conflict of interest between Media House acting for RIFC AND the Easdales. After all the Club is different from Directors/shareholders interest ??.

I have no recollection of ever previously commenting on the issue so please refer me to my post. But if the subject interests you that much why don’t you comment on it yourself. I post on what interests me and not on what anyone else directs me to comment on.

I will assume something is annoying you tonight and let’s hope after a good night’s sleep you will wake in a more sanguine state of mind. Civility actually costs nothing.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on11:42 pm - Oct 4, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 11:31 pm
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I wasn’t being uncivil – sorry if it came across like that. I’m annoyed every night BTW. Off to to watch “Land and Freedom” with the boy.

View Comment

justshatered

justshateredPosted on12:14 am - Oct 5, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:23 pm

Yes you are right those clubs have had or indeed do have financial issues so how will they be helped by giving away half their income?
If a club is in debt how is giving away half of their income going to help their debt when they may not be guaranteed the same return?
I’m only asking questions and I’m happy to debate points but you are only repeating ‘share gate money’ without answering any of my specific questions.
I repeat I do agree that in an ideal world this is what we would do but we are not in an ideal world. We currently have clubs saddled with unserviceable debt, clubs with unsustainable business models, and more clubs than a country of this size can support with the dwindling crowds that we have and one club currently turning a massive profit due to its participation in European football although if it did not have that football it too would be running at a loss. I fail to see how making the bigger clubs financially unviable to sustain other clubs help the situation.

This may be a good idea if you could get everyone to a baseline of no debt but I don’t see that happening.

I used to watch a lot of American football and I loved their draft system where the worst team of the previous season got the first pick of the best college players the following season thus allowing them to get stronger and better. This philosophy means that every team should at some point have success but we do not operate in that environment. We operate in a business environment where each club has a specific level and hope to get to the next one whether that is a team trying to get into the top league, a team in the top league trying to get into the top six, a team in the top six trying to get into Europe, a team in Europe trying to get into the group stages of a competition and so on.
Every team is attempting to get to their own next level while attempting to cherry pick the best players from the clubs either around them or pick up a nugget from one below.

I don’t know what the answers are to making our sport more competitive but as a start I repeat the Inverness v Hearts gesture is at least a starting point for all clubs with the exception of Celtic who would forego any returns. So in other words a straight 50-50 split of away support over the average previous two attendances is at least a start however I believe their will be more resistance to this other than Celtic and unfortunately that is where the ‘good of the game’ goes out the window.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on1:17 am - Oct 5, 2013


ustshatered says:
October 5, 2013 at 12:14 am
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 10:23 pm

Yes you are right those clubs have had or indeed do have financial issues so how will they be helped by giving away half their income?
If a club is in debt how is giving away half of their income going to help their debt when they may not be guaranteed the same return?
I’m only asking questions and I’m happy to debate points but you are only repeating ‘share gate money’ without answering any of my specific questions.
I repeat I do agree that in an ideal world this is what we would do but we are not in an ideal world. We currently have clubs saddled with unserviceable debt, clubs with unsustainable business models, and more clubs than a country of this size can support with the dwindling crowds that we have and one club currently turning a massive profit due to its participation in European football although if it did not have that football it too would be running at a loss. I fail to see how making the bigger clubs financially unviable to sustain other clubs help the situation.
________________________________________________________________________

I’m not having a go at any one club. As you say Celtic have a humpf on their back – being that if they don’t get through the three rounds of qualifying then the going gets tough when they can’t access the honeypot of UEFA money. Maybe if the Scotch clubs were more able to compete in Europe then there wouldn’t be three qualifiers?

The same UEFA who are part of the set up for the next World Cup that will see human life expended (numbers not known at this point) in the heat of the Desert so that we can have a Football Competition (or as some might say a money making extravaganza for the already rich?)

It’s all relative if you’re that Nepalise family member.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on1:24 am - Oct 5, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 11:31 pm
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:26 pm

I have no problem with anyone questioning anything I have written and am always glad to hear their points and sometimes it makes me rethink an issue or point and I do actually have a track record in admitting when I get things wrong.

You ask: ‘When will you be commenting further on what is a clear conflict of interest between Media House acting for RIFC AND the Easdales. After all the Club is different from Directors/shareholders interest ??.

I have no recollection of ever previously commenting on the issue so please refer me to my post. But if the subject interests you that much why don’t you comment on it yourself. I post on what interests me and not on what anyone else directs me to comment on.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Sorry but I have to ask again. The Easdales now control the Club – why are you NOT commenting on this?

View Comment

Avatar

davythelotionPosted on1:28 am - Oct 5, 2013


Were I a betting man I would wager that Ally’s decision to volunteer a 50% salary deduction had everything to do with the publication of accounts which showed that he had copped his whack to the tune of £850 000 (plus shares) and has nothing to do with the assertion that he had signed a contract without reading it first.

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on1:31 am - Oct 5, 2013


davythelotion says:
October 5, 2013 at 1:28 am

Were I a betting man I would wager that Ally’s decision to volunteer a 50% salary deduction had everything to do with the publication of accounts which showed that he had copped his whack to the tune of £850 000 (plus shares) and has nothing to do with the assertion that he had signed a contract without reading it first.
___________________________________________________________________
It is a lot even by current day corporate greed standards. Let’s just say one would have to have delivered more than the Third Division Title for this.

How much did Walt get for his season ticket delivery of the fools money to the comptrollers of the Temple of Hate?

View Comment

Avatar

Humble PiePosted on1:35 am - Oct 5, 2013


Glenn Gibbons’ take on The Rangers financial position and McCoist’s outrageous salary. http://m.scotsman.com/news/glenn-gibbons-rangers-financial-position-1-3127365

View Comment

Avatar

Drew PeacockPosted on1:47 am - Oct 5, 2013


Humble Pie says:
October 5, 2013 at 1:35 am

Glenn Gibbons’ take on The Rangers financial position and McCoist’s outrageous salary. http://m.scotsman.com/news/glenn-gibbons-rangers-financial-position-1-3127365
_________________________________________________________________________________

No mention of Walt? Is Alistair subbing him?

View Comment

Avatar

monsansPosted on2:04 am - Oct 5, 2013


I have found the debate here fascinating and a couple of interesting things spring to mind over the last few days of announcements.

The original financial results announcement referred to the football club’s website. Since then there has been a correction (well done the new NOMAD) which indicates that investors should goto the website of the listed entity. One has to think it is good news management to headline it ‘Change of Rule 26 website’ rather than ‘Compliance with Rule 26 – Change of website address for investors rather than followers’

It is good work for NOMADs and lawyers to be involved in so many announcements over such a short period of time. No wonder administration expenses increase and why a lot of companies consider whether it is worth maintaining a listing when all news that impacts value should be released in an orderly manner (where possible).

I note the collapse of the retail sales is blamed on the ‘financial collapse of JJB’. I believe the initial restructuring of JJB predated the formation of Rangers International Football Club plc by about three years so it is a bit tardy for a new plc to have relied on such a business when as a Newco acquiring assets from a liquidated entity you can choose the trading partners you continue with.

There are more learned contributors on this site than me who could comment on the definition of the ‘Club’ but it is pointed out in the press release that the Club owns the major physical assets rather than the Company or the Group. There appears to be many references that are inconsistent between ‘Club’ and ‘club’ but I’m sure the lawyers cleared it.

I find the Sponsorship paragraph of Mr Mather’s statement interesting when he refers to the decline since the 2009/10 season. That was long before this company was in existence. It also refers to the reduction of income as a direct consequence of the transfer of Club licence which is an interesting description of the liquidation of the previous business which meant that no contracts carried forward unless renegotiated.

Anyone else intrigued by a kit deal starting in July 2013/14. Which is it? Or a proof reading error?

I wonder in a plc’s set of accounts why there is so much reference to an unincorporated (maybe) social entity of a Club undertaking so much on the plc’s behalf. I presume the governance structures allow for this and are set up accordingly.

I find it interesting that Deloitte earned 314k from ‘Corporate finance services for the IPO’ (note 4) yet the total non-recurring expenses as a result of the IPO are 332k (note 5). Everyone else must have been taking a decent discount on the normal fees! Or the disclosure is not consistent.

D&P must be worried about the factual negative goodwill release if only from a professional competency perspective.

Note 16 suggests the available cash balances for Topco are 946k less as Rangers Retail is unlikely to allow that money flow up unless whatever commercial agreement they have is complied with. I have not examined Rangers’ Retail’s accounts.

The supplier payment policy of 20 days (or less if discounts available) is inconsistent with note 17 that the Group takes 32 days credit on average.

As an investor looking at note 20 and the suggestion that the Group will not make a profit for the foreseeable future to utilise tax losses that could be carried forward must be slightly concerning.

I cannot track the disclosure of the 7+m of IPO expenses through the cashflow. Must have been lost in admin expenses, salaries and bonuses and its not explicitly identified in the non-recurring expenditure.

A lot of history mentioned but the financial statements have no comparisons.

Not an investment for the faint hearted

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on7:56 am - Oct 5, 2013


http://www.scotsman.com/news/glenn-gibbons-rangers-financial-position-1-3127365

Glenn Gibbons take on it all. I particularly like his summing up at the end of the praise McCoist is getting for taking a salary cut. My personal summing up of McCoist’s salary can be broken into two parts

1. When he was only heavily rumoured to be on an extortionate salary he could happily work on in the full knowledge he is pretty much infallible in the eyes of the media, without too much scrutiny.

2. Once the accounts actually confirmed he was on an extortionate salary he could then publicly grandstand about taking a cut in the full knowledge he is pretty much infallible in the eyes of the media, without too much scrutiny.

The bottom line is McCoist is very high up on a list of people who are viewed as so honest, dignified, and trustworthy, that the media see it as impossible that they could ever act in any other way.

We are not all daft though.

View Comment

Avatar

Angus1983Posted on8:33 am - Oct 5, 2013


Purely as a matter of interesting comparison, does anyone know what Mr Lennon earns at Celtic – or any of the other top-league managers for that matter?

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on8:51 am - Oct 5, 2013


Angus1983 says:
October 5, 2013 at 8:33 am

Purely as a matter of interesting comparison, does anyone know what Mr Lennon earns at Celtic – or any of the other top-league managers for that matter?

Reportedly in the £350k-£400k range. No increase in basic reported when he signed a new deal recently but there are undoubtedly bonuses to add to that figure

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on9:07 am - Oct 5, 2013


Thought this tweet was worth repeating. Some folks have done a lot on governance issues, so this might be another platform on which to get their material across.

@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

Drop us an e-mail at sdsinfo@supporters-direct.org to find out more

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on9:27 am - Oct 5, 2013


04 Oct 2013 23:57:56
RFC ended up oweing circa £145m (latest BDO liquidators) when it went bust. An analyst reported it was never solvent in accounts year on year since SDM bought it. Every year it spent millions more than income. That’s partly how it ended up oweing so much.
These guys have reduced costs but still over spending. Nothing new there. Don’t appear shocked at accounts. P Murray’s board did the same.
Oh and SDM reportedly bought the club with £6m bank loan TO the club lol.

Put up on Rangers Rumours last night. Are BDO due to issue a new report? Last one is dated 22nd May

View Comment

Barcabhoy

BarcabhoyPosted on9:44 am - Oct 5, 2013


Good morning from a sticky Barcelona

There was a huge thunder and lightning storm last night , which ultimately blew itself out

A bit like my evening on Twitter. I’m not sure whether trolling is the appropriate term for twitter or not. However Goldstein made a point of contacting me on twitter. I didn’t even know he had a twitter account

My take on him is that he is attached to one of the warring sides at Ibrox and is looking to damage the other side. He was clearly looking to get any information which helps him in that objective

His strategy is clear and pretty unsubtle.
I doubt he will ever add anything to the debate on this site.

One to add to the list of those who appeared on RTC and here with the only objective of muddying the water

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on9:47 am - Oct 5, 2013


Charlotte suspended.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:51 am - Oct 5, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 5, 2013 at 1:24 am
ecobhoy says:
October 4, 2013 at 11:31 pm
Drew Peacock says:
October 4, 2013 at 9:26 pm

I have no problem with anyone questioning anything I have written and am always glad to hear their points and sometimes it makes me rethink an issue or point and I do actually have a track record in admitting when I get things wrong.

You ask: ‘When will you be commenting further on what is a clear conflict of interest between Media House acting for RIFC AND the Easdales. After all the Club is different from Directors/shareholders interest ??.

I have no recollection of ever previously commenting on the issue so please refer me to my post. But if the subject interests you that much why don’t you comment on it yourself. I post on what interests me and not on what anyone else directs me to comment on.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Sorry but I have to ask again. The Easdales now control the Club – why are you NOT commenting on this?
———————————————————————————————————————————–
Why is it that I don’t believe for one minute you are actually ‘sorry’ and I will say again that if this topic/issue is of such importance to you then why aren’t YOU commenting on it?

What I choose to post or comment on is my choice and NOT your’s and it never will be your’s and if that causes you a problem well tough!

However to assist you in your task I would suggest that you examine the accuracy of your basic assumption that The Easdales ‘control’ the club and might I suggest that the temporary granting of share proxies to them from mystery overseas shareholders does not constitute ‘control’ as I define it. Indeed I see it more that The Easdales have now, and possibly temporarily, replaced Green as the ‘front’ for the actual owners of the Rangers business and assets.

I remain focussed on chipping-away at these people because that is actually where ownership and control resides and no matter how hard some people might want to deflect me they will fail because I know what is important and what is a smokescreen. And the Sevco 5088/Sevco Scotland apparent switcheroo lies at the heart of the conundrum.

I have often said that Rangers fans will get the club they deserve and I truly believe that. They either waken-up or they don’t and I and others can only marginally influence that process.

Where my real interest lies is in the corruption that this whole debacle has introduced not just into Scottish Football but almost every aspect of Scottish life, including politics, The Establishment and various professions and the cowardice and greed it has brought in its wake. The SMSM obviously carries a heavy responsibility for its failure to report accurately without fear or favour.

That’s what interests me and although Rangers is part of the story it is only a ‘vehicle’ for the spivs and will eventually become an empty shell IMO. The problems that have been created and their consequences will remain and that is what needs to be fully exposed and excised and that’s the hard part.

So, I await your post on how the Easdales ‘control’ Rangers but please excuse me if I continue with my task to expose who actually owns Rangers which certainly does seem to create angst in some others. I wonder why ❓

Just for the record I note you have not provided the reference to the post which I requested after you stated I had previously commented on The Easdales and their ‘control’ of Ibrox. As I advised you I have no recollection of making such a post but you seem to have so I would regard it as a courtesy if you could point me to it.

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on9:52 am - Oct 5, 2013


v
Barcabhoy says:

October 5, 2013 at 9:44 am

Good morning from a sticky Barcelona
———————————————–
Good morning from a wee bit wet West of Scotland, I was looking to see when Goldstein was at his most prolific,looks as if he was diverting us away from the accounts.
As you pointed out the other day the accounts that were published are a load of mince.
Seems to me that he is a present board supporter.

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on9:54 am - Oct 5, 2013


Barcabhoy says:
October 5, 2013 at 9:44 am
Good morning from a sticky Barcelona

There was a huge thunder and lightning storm last night , which ultimately blew itself out

A bit like my evening on Twitter. I’m not sure whether trolling is the appropriate term for twitter or not. However Goldstein made a point of contacting me on twitter. I didn’t even know he had a twitter account

My take on him is that he is attached to one of the warring sides at Ibrox and is looking to damage the other side. He was clearly looking to get any information which helps him in that objective

His strategy is clear and pretty unsubtle.
I doubt he will ever add anything to the debate on this site.

One to add to the list of those who appeared on RTC and here with the only objective of muddying the water

This post and the various ones quoting Rangers’ fans sites scrutiny of that club’s board and finances suggest to me that a good job has been done to raise awareness among them, time to let them get on with it. Time to re-focus the attention on SPFL and SFA, as suggested by BRTH.

View Comment

Avatar

BigGavPosted on9:54 am - Oct 5, 2013


Humble Pie says:
October 5, 2013 at 1:35 am

Glenn Gibbons’ take on The Rangers financial position and McCoist’s outrageous salary. http://m.scotsman.com/news/glenn-gibbons-rangers-financial-position-1-3127365
———
A good article, but let down by this:
“… Mather and his directorial team are entitled to emphasise that the alarming £14m loss recorded last year was due in no small measure to a substantial number of non-recurring expenses …”

As can be seen on p22 of the accounts, the £14m operational loss does not include the non-recurring items, which led to an additional loss of £4.261m.

The confusion (also seen in other reports over the last few days) probably stems from this misleading paragraph in the Finance Director’s Report (p10):
“Whilst an operating loss of £14m was made on a turnover of £19.1m in the period, it will not be repeated this season. Turnover in retail this season is expected to be much higher than the £1.6m received. Operational costs are now significantly lower than they were at the start of the period and additional revenue streams are being generated. In addition there were exceptional cash costs of £4.2m which will not be repeated.”

This gives the impression that the £4.2m exceptional costs are included in the £14m, whereas they are in fact additional.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on9:56 am - Oct 5, 2013


Barcabhoy says:
October 5, 2013 at 9:44 am

Good morning from a sticky Barcelona

His strategy is clear and pretty unsubtle.
I doubt he will ever add anything to the debate on this site.

One to add to the list of those who appeared on RTC and here with the only objective of muddying the water

I watched the ‘discussion’ last night. He seemed convinced that he had made statements which was patently not the case. I note that he then deleted his account. Wholeheartedly agree with your analysis

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:59 am - Oct 5, 2013


Tic 6709 says:
October 5, 2013 at 9:47 am

Charlotte suspended
————————————————-

Dare I ask ❓

From which part of her body ❓

View Comment

Avatar

BartinMainPosted on10:02 am - Oct 5, 2013


I’d like to make it clear that I am not Goldstein. I merely back him up as I thought he had something interesting to impart. It turns out he didn’t.

For what it’s worth, I think he may be behind the Charlotte Hunted account.

I apologise if any of my postings were taken as abusive.

Bartin

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on10:03 am - Oct 5, 2013


Barcabhoy.
A bit like my evening on Twitter. I’m not sure whether trolling is the appropriate term for twitter or not.
=====================
How about Twatting?

View Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.