Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century

Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What a bummer!!

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

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

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

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

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

Maybe that is not the correct name for the club?

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

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

Who owns The Rangers?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Every day you call the compliance and monitoring guys:

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

 

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

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

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

This is Scottish Football Administration in the 21st Century.

About the author

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

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

2,130 Comments so far

Resin_lab_dogPosted on8:05 pm - Oct 6, 2013


redlichtie says:
October 6, 2013 at 4:10 pm

20

0

Rate This

Torquemada says:
October 6, 2013 at 2:41 pm
Scottc says:
October 6, 2013 at 2:13 pm
killiemad says:
October 6, 2013 at 12:12 pm

“…It looks to me that a normal business would struggle to get signed off accounts in this kind of situation…”

___________________________________________________________________________

Q. Would that caveat extend to a ‘normal’ business that had put an additional £594K of business the way of its ‘independent’ auditor? …

doh! … silly me… that’s an oxymoron isn’t it!

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on8:21 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Angus1983 says:

October 6, 2013 at 2:38 pm
paulsatim says:
October 6, 2013 at 12:55 pm

“There was a contract put down which I can tell you in all honesty was not negotiated at all”
——
I imagine the conversation went something like this:

“Am I reading that number right?”
“Aye”
“And that means I’ll get a guaranteed £x in my bank every month, with all these extras on top?”
“Aye”
“Got a pen?”

I don’ t think I’d have negotiated much etiher.

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

You forgot the

“And we have an all expenses trip paid for you and your son to do some white water rafting in Colorado:
“What do I need to do to get that”:
“Get a few friends to sponsor you – say 50p a mile – and that’s all”
“So even if the cost of the trip for us costs more than we raise that is ok?”
” Sure – and then you can go to the US Bear convention in San Francisco afterwards so it will save the club money for your travel there to USA when we can charge it to the charity instead”
“Where do I sign…..”

http://www.justgiving.com/AllysIdahoChallenge
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/4059-supporters-set-for-san-francisco

Or am I just being uncharitable?

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on8:56 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Exiled Celt says:
October 6, 2013 at 8:21 pm

Well you know what they say, uncharity begins at Ibrokes

View Comment

TailothebankPosted on9:07 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Re earlier posters comments on KJ and CY..on Radio Scotland couldn’t agree more !
I stopped listening to Radio Scotland when Jackson appeared a few weeks ago..His vitriolic attack on lunchtime radio on the Kilmarnock chairman backed up by cheerleaders Dodd’s and Young was disgusting..and tipped me over the edge !..whether you agreed or not with Johnston’s position..was/is immaterial ..he represents a small club literally struggling to survive…to attack and bully him as an easy ,playing to the crowd , target / small club and not have the guts to do the same to the big guys eg COs, McCoists of the world with their ludicrous positioning and statements is cowardice in the extreme..
That Richard Gordon ‘ I believe’ moderated that particular episode without challenging this imbecile was ridiculous
Talking of imbeciles..I had the pleasure ( not) of being a few feet( yes feet) away from you know whilst he performed on ‘Open all mikes’…Lets just say the off air trash talk was illuminating!
To think we were paying for this ???
It isn’t just the SFA and another organisation’s leadership that needs cleaned out…The Radio Scotland sports ‘team ‘ need gutted..and completely refreshed ….I think the minimum we should demand is that the new pundits can at least construct a sentence properly ..Tough Gig I Know!

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on9:11 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Not sure if this has been mentioned already … Scotland on Sunday have on “Online Debate” hosted by Andrew Smith on Tuesday at 1pm, trailed on today’s Letters page. Apparently at http://www.scotlandonsunday.com .

Subject – “Are Rangers heading for another financial meltdown?”

Should be fun.

View Comment

selfassessorPosted on9:31 pm - Oct 6, 2013


I actually think Ally is doing the right thing by investing in a top quality squad to advance The Tribute Act Untied (see what I did there) back to the top flight. It is also my sincerest hope that he more quickly advances them to financial ruin in the process.

Sale and lease back of the big hoose and training facilities on the cards? Good. It might make up for the years of tainted titles earned through unethical, if yet to be proven illegal, EBTs.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on9:41 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Angus1983 says:
October 6, 2013 at 4:30 pm

I’d watch out for black cars with tinted windows pulling up outside your hoose now, though.

—————————————————————————————————————————–

Even in jest that sums it all up!!!

View Comment

selfassessorPosted on9:41 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Exiled Celt says:
October 6, 2013 at 8:21 pm
24 0 Rate This
————————————————————————-

Copied this from the Just Giving website……..

Fantastic challenge. Have fun.

Donation by Paul Murray on 30/05/13
£100.00
+ £25.00 Gift Aid
————————————————————————

£11k raised in total. Enough to cover the cost of two business class seats, coincidentally.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on9:45 pm - Oct 6, 2013


It’s Sunday night, and nothing much happening. Mrs upthehoops is watching Downton Abbey, so I decided to clear some old e-mails and documents from my laptop. I found a PDF file which formed a response from the Scottish Government to a complaint I made regarding the attempt by the First Minister to intervene on behalf of Oldco in their dispute with HMRC. The response was general and I remember many on the web saying they received the same. That led me to other files including Salmonds ‘fabric of the nation’ statement, and also one from Labour MP Margaret Curran stating she’d written to HMRC saying Rangers must ‘thrive’. Then I found the link to Regan and the ‘social disorder’ prophecy.

I wish I hadn’t bothered, I’ve just made myself angry. 😡

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on9:58 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Selfassessor – also good to know that we the people (as well as the peepil) subsidized Ally, Ally;s son, Andrew Dickson and others on a holiday of a lifetime

The website charges a 5% fee for its services – and also get some money from us (our taxes!) to add to the charitable “moneychest”.

(edit to make clearer) the following is at bottom corner of the webpage I gave above

(Quote)

Charities pay a small fee for our service. Find out how much it is and what we do for it.

Here’s how we charge our 5% fee
1.You donate £10.00 and we send it to your charity that week.
2.We reclaim Gift Aid from the government (which takes a month), adding £2.50 to your donation.
3.We take our 5% fee from the Gift Aid, with credit/debit card/PayPal charges, and send all the rest to the charity. So for every £10.00 you give, the charity gets £11.74, and they get it faster.

(Endquote)

What’s not to love about this!

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:02 pm - Oct 6, 2013


The missing tape:
Chuckles: oooh ye foaning Imran?
IA: Ally McCoist, he didn’t read his contract properly.
Chuckles: That’s not ees numboor! That’s ees bloody wages!!!!!!

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on10:17 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Tailothebank says:
October 6, 2013 at 9:07 pm
====================================
Good points. Leaving aside the stewardship of Kilmarnock for the shareholders and fans to debate, it is safe to assume they have been paying their taxes, and although heavily indebted have not yet tried to shed it to the detriment of their creditors. Perhaps they should get some ‘Institutional Investors’ and lose £1M a month then see if they can get a compliant chip wrapper hack to grandstand on their behalf on Sportsound Extra every week.

View Comment

selfassessorPosted on10:18 pm - Oct 6, 2013


davythelotion says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:02 pm
3 0 Rate This

The missing tape:
Chuckles: oooh ye foaning Imran?
IA: Ally McCoist, he didn’t read his contract properly.
Chuckles: That’s not ees numboor! That’s eyes bloody wages!!!!!!
——————————————————————————————-
Having listened to some of the tapes, I think he was more likely to have said…..
Chuckles: Fookeen, that’s not ees fookeen numboor! Fookeen, that’s ees fookeen wages!!!!!!!
Chuckles: Fookeen, can’t wait to be with my fookeen 30 fookeen horses at my fookeen €400k Castile near fookeen Argentan. Have you seen the fookeen size of it? Fookeen plucked it up from reet under Craig Whyte’s fookeen nose.

Having just typed all of that, did Chuckles have a part in Kes?

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:21 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Chuckles is wearing red

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu-5LCr1kwg

View Comment

CastofThousandsPosted on10:23 pm - Oct 6, 2013


neepheid says:
October 5, 2013 at 10:27 pm

“It didn’t have to be like that, but all that money was chucked away to a deafening round of applause from the mass of the fans.”
————————————
A nice line neepheid that in the context of the passage summed up where it all went wrong.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:23 pm - Oct 6, 2013


neepheid says:
October 6, 2013 at 7:44 pm
BigGav says:
October 6, 2013 at 5:20 pm

Does this relate to the ‘drawdown’ facility that ecobhoy has mentioned several times in the past?
What is its significance?
Does it mean that the real cash position is almost £1m worse off than the headline figure?
+++++++++++++++++++++++
This can only mean that £1m of the cash shown in the balance sheet is not available for use by RIFC, and by extension by TRFC. The way that the shareholding of Rangers Retail is structured means that control is not straightforward, and I assumed on reading that note in the accounts, that Sports Direct have more of a say in the day to day operations of Rangers Retail than their shareholding would normally imply. I’ll have a look and see if I can find out more, maybe by reading some of Ecobhoy’s posts on the subject for a start 🙂
===========================================================
The deal with the shareholding in Rangers Retail Ltd is that TRFCL has 51 shares and SportsDirect 49 so on the face of it TRFCL appears to be the majority shareholder. However there are two classes of shares so that in any vote on a financial issue the SportsDirect shares count x 2. So SportsDirect can outvote Rangers by 98 votes to 51 on financial issues which I would say comprise the most important areas the company would be voting on.

The draw-down loan provided by SportsDirect for Rangers Retail according to Rangers AIM Prospectus was £1.5 million and if you go back pre-Accounts you will see that when Mather/Stockbridge told the fan meeting that there was £10 million in the bank he added that £1.5 million was ‘income’ from SportsDirect.

I have always thought the £1.5 million ‘income’ was the draw-down loan and when I saw the figure of just under £1 million in the accounts it made me think that the £1 million has been drawn up until 30 June 2013 and an extra £500k between then and when the ‘income’ statement was made to fans.

Yip Ibrox doesn’t do loans – it does ‘income’ and ‘draw-down failities’ but not loans even though in the TRFCL/SportsDirect agreement interest is charged on the draw-down which is to be secured on TRFCL heritable or leased property.

Everything statement they make has to be picked apart to see what is actually being said and nothing taken at face value IMO.

Again and this is pure speculation I have often wondered whether the £1.5 million draw-down was specifically used to purchase Edmiston House as it seems very restrictive that the £1 million can’t be used by RIFC Plc. And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc. What I do know is that Green is still a director of it and Garrion Security Services Ltd the last time I looked and of course Sevco 5088 Ltd.

Why?

View Comment

AngusloonPosted on10:27 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Remember when the coalition government got in & this note was left ?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Cabinet Office minister David Laws made public the glib note, left by outgoing Treasury chief secretary Liam Byrne for his successor.
It states: ‘Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck! Liam.’
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Will Stockbridge leave a similar note to the next FD?

View Comment

BigGavPosted on10:38 pm - Oct 6, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc.
———–

Note 13 of the accounts (p38) states the shares in both Rangers Retail Ltd (51%) and Garrion Security Services Ltd (100%) are owned by TRFCL, not the plc.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on10:41 pm - Oct 6, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm
0 0 Rate This

neepheid says:
October 6, 2013 at 7:44 pm
BigGav says:
October 6, 2013 at 5:20 pm
>>>>>>>
Again and this is pure speculation I have often wondered whether the £1.5 million draw-down was specifically used to purchase Edmiston House as it seems very restrictive that the £1 million can’t be used by RIFC Plc. And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc. What I do know is that Green is still a director of it and Garrion Security Services Ltd the last time I looked and of course Sevco 5088 Ltd.

Why?
££££££££££££££
The accounts are similar to the curtains in a theatre, they show the audience the scene they need to see in order to put the act in context. Chuckles and CW are in the wings, picking up their beans whilst the Ray Cooney farce plays out at the Palais de Cardigan on the Southside.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:57 pm - Oct 6, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I did wonder whether there was any basis for consolidating Rangers Retail’s results in with RIFC. I don’t think RIFC has voting control as I would understand it. On the known facts, it would seem to me that Rangers Retail should be consolidated with Sports Direct, who seem to have a voting majority on everything that matters, rather than with RIFC.

Can you point me to a source regarding the 2 classes of shares in Rangers Retail? There is something very fishy about this little corner of the Ibrox empire, I feel.

View Comment

john clarkePosted on10:57 pm - Oct 6, 2013


selfassessor says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:18 pm
‘..Having just typed all of that, did Chuckles have a part in Kes?’

——
Yes.
He played the part of a predatory bird.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on10:58 pm - Oct 6, 2013


A reminder that the draw for the third round of the Scottish cup is tomorrow at 1pm.

Campbell Ogilvie and Nacho Novo do the honours which beggars belief.

It’s as if they purposely want to wind us bampots up! 😕

View Comment

Nuclear SheepPosted on11:00 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Apologies if this has already been raised, but the accounts that are being analysed are that of RIFC, the company that I could buy a share in, if I thought I might like to.

Should it not be the accounts of TRFC Ltd that matter in terms of the football club and how likely it is that it will see its third New Year.

I’m confused.

View Comment

BigGavPosted on11:14 pm - Oct 6, 2013


BigGav says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:38 pm

ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc.
———–

Note 13 of the accounts (p38) states the shares in both Rangers Retail Ltd (51%) and Garrion Security Services Ltd (100%) are owned by TRFCL, not the plc.

But… on p6, it states that Rangers Retail Ltd is a subsidiary of RIFC plc.
I think they make it up as they go along.

By the way, if the £1m (or whatever) cash associated with Rangers Retail is a loan by any other name, should it not show up somewhere as a liability? I can’t see that at the moment.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on11:17 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Nuclear Sheep says:
October 6, 2013 at 11:00 pm
2 0 Rate This

Apologies if this has already been raised, but the accounts that are being analysed are that of RIFC, the company that I could buy a share in, if I thought I might like to.

Should it not be the accounts of TRFC Ltd that matter in terms of the football club and how likely it is that it will see its third New Year.

I’m confused.
+++++
All that RIFC does is hold 100% of the shares in TRFC. It doesn’t really have a business of its own. So the business results of RIFC are really just the results of TRFC. The two companies are in a way treated as one for accounts purposes. So the accounts of RIFC include the accounts of TRFC.

View Comment

FisianiPosted on11:18 pm - Oct 6, 2013


This farce in the spivdom of Ibrox will surely one day be the source of someone’s PhD in accountancy. I cannot believe that Craig Whyte and his frontman Charles Green are still raking in cash from behind the scenes.The obscene payments to board members and backroom staff of a fourth tier team last year beggars belief.
Every week in Scotland dodgy plumbing , roofing and and building companies go to the wall shafting creditors left , right and centre. It is amazing to see the same dodgy practices at what once was a proud and successful club.
The spivs at Ibrokes think that the shredder solves their problems and that they can hide from public scrutiny. They are correct in terms of the MSM who only raise objections once they become public knowledge. They have never encountered the tenacity of the blogista and the internet intelligensia.
The final chapter in this long running train wreck will take place in the next 12 months. It is a gripping soap opera where the end is obvious but how long will they string us along.

View Comment

fergussingsthebluesPosted on11:19 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Angusloon says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:27 pm

Remember when the coalition government got in & this note was left ?
……………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Cabinet Office minister David Laws made public the glib note, left by outgoing Treasury chief secretary Liam Byrne for his successor.
It states: ‘Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck! Liam.’
……………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Will Stockbridge leave a similar note to the next F(u)D?

========================================================
Sorry Angusloon,

Just had to fix that one.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on11:26 pm - Oct 6, 2013


BigGav says:
October 6, 2013 at 11:14 pm

But… on p6, it states that Rangers Retail Ltd is a subsidiary of RIFC plc.
I think they make it up as they go along.
+++++
It is normal to treat the subsidiary of a 100% subsidiary as a group company, and so as a subsidiary for accounts purposes. The idea is to stop companies which are controlled ultimately by the top company disappearing from view.

The group structure of RIFC is about as straightforward as it gets. Some groups have up to 5 layers of subsidiaries, which can take a bit of unravelling.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on11:28 pm - Oct 6, 2013


Nuclear Sheep says:
October 6, 2013 at 11:00 pm

Should it not be the accounts of TRFC Ltd that matter in terms of the football club and how likely it is that it will see its third New Year.
%%%%%%%
Accounts are what they are…a portrait of spending over a period as presented by the people who spend other people’s money. Auditors confirm the accuracy of the portrait.
The accounts that matter are the accounts that are never seen…the knickerleg, the ’round up’ claim, the discount for cash, the ‘mates rates’. Billions of pounds are washed down the tax free toilet in Britain every year, the only thing the government is interested in, however, are the poorest paid and how to hammer them.

I’m confused.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:03 am - Oct 7, 2013


Once again a Journalist fails to write the truth. Michael Grant in today’s Herald describes McCoist as a ‘willing conscript’ to his £825K a year salary. Why doesn’t he print the truth that McCoist for the most part did not actually know how much he was earning, and once he did he immediately decided without question to do the right thing and reduce it by half for the greater good? This has since been confirmed by McCoist himself as a proactive move rather than a reactive one to his salary becoming public. In summary, there is nothing to see here, move along.

An all round good guy is Ally – who wouldn’t want someone like that in charge of their team?!!!

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on7:55 am - Oct 7, 2013


Rangers got nothing because they were classed as a club who no longer exists after their liquidation in 2012 – pic.twitter.com/AvcVb1uaDo

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:37 am - Oct 7, 2013


davythelotion says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:21 pm
5 1 Rate This

Chuckles is wearing red

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Yu-5LCr1kwg
————–

My thought too @davythelotion, Brian Glover was brilliant in that scene. John’s suggestion of the predatory bird made me Chuckle though.

Regarding the fall-out from THAT £825,000 I’ve noticed that the reactions from he who does not do walking away have been (i) annoyance that it was made public (obviously not used to published accounts) (ii) finger-pointing at others on the staff on fat-cat salaries (iii) pleading ignorance (just found out what a whopping pay package he was actually on), and (iv) sainthood, emphasising that money is of no censequence to him

Convinced?

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:45 am - Oct 7, 2013


As the boardroom shennanigans continue down Govan way I was just wondering what the difference between the two main camps are and why either one of them would be feart of a vote at an AGM/EGM.

The long term plans for the football side of things must surely be the same regardless of who is in charge.

Control costs in such a way that the team can sustain a push through the divisions without the need for futher major cash injections- all with the aim of reaching the premiership and thus maximising ticket revenue and sharing in greater TV and prize money.

Playing in the Premiership then provides access (production of accounts permitting) to UEFA tournaments.

If costs are brought under control then the club should still have more cash than all other clubs bar Celtic thus ensuring they have a good pop of being first or second in the league.

With a decent youth development programme and scouting system it would therefore be possible to have a crack at the Euro tournaments, alebit there would have be a degree of realism with regard to how far they could progress, especially in the first few years.

As the years go by the aim must be to keep crowd numbers up so they are seen as a club with a huge fan based that could be welcomed into Euro-wide or cross border leagues if they ever came about.

The general view seems to be that with a degree of stability the share price will most probably level off and perhaps be comparable with Celtic, which is currently sitting 16p higher than RIFC. Even with all the nonesense the shares are still sitting higher than their current all time low of 41.5p There appears to be very little chance in the near future of them heading anywhere near the 94p high that was achieved in January, so the chances of cashing in are somewhat minimal unless you have a stash of bargin bucket shares but many that we know about would appear to have been sold on already.

Therefore it must come down to who is worred about loosing something and what is it they are going to loose?

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:27 am - Oct 7, 2013


BigGav says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:38 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc.
———–
Note 13 of the accounts (p38) states the shares in both Rangers Retail Ltd (51%) and Garrion Security Services Ltd (100%) are owned by TRFCL, not the plc.
==============================================================
Yea but you have to remember that TRFCL is a wholly owned subsidiary of RIFC Plc so any actual subsidiary of TRFCL is efectively under the ultimate control of RIFC Plc and probably a subsidiary in fact although there might be some accounting or company law technicality that means it isn’t a ‘subsidiary’ put perhaps those with knowledge in that arena could give the definitive answer.

Might point is really that I cannot understand how Rangers Retail can in reality be a subsidiary of TRFCL or RIFC Plc if they aren’t the controlling shareholder on any financial issues. Possibly just about every decision in any business could be termed ‘financial’.

Even whether you uses Izal flats in the bog rather than Andrex soft-deluxe – a cost implication and therefore financial comes into play.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on10:40 am - Oct 7, 2013


Onwards & Upwards for the Jags:

Graeme Macpherson ‏@Graeme_Macphers 7m

Patrick Thistle announce plans for new youth academy with financial backing from Euromillions winners Chris and Colin Weir.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:43 am - Oct 7, 2013


neepheid says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:57 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I did wonder whether there was any basis for consolidating Rangers Retail’s results in with RIFC. I don’t think RIFC has voting control as I would understand it. On the known facts, it would seem to me that Rangers Retail should be consolidated with Sports Direct, who seem to have a voting majority on everything that matters, rather than with RIFC.

Can you point me to a source regarding the 2 classes of shares in Rangers Retail? There is something very fishy about this little corner of the Ibrox empire, I feel.
============================================
The detail is in the Annual Return for Rangers Retail Ltd dated 13 July 2013.

Another interesting point is that in the Rangers AIM prospectus it reads to me that in the event that there is a deadlock between SportsDirect appointed directors and Rangers appointed ones that SportsDirect can buy-out Rangers but Rangers can’t buy-out SportsDirect.

If that has remained the same then again it makes it difficult to understand how Rangers Retail can truly be regarded as a subsidiary of TRFCL or RIFC Plc as it looks to me that SportsDirect call all the shots and their draw-down loan is secured on TRFCL property.

Of course the 51% shareholding makes it appear to the Bears that it’s a Rangers subsidiary company – but is it?

View Comment

ZilchPosted on10:43 am - Oct 7, 2013


From Michael Grant’s attempt to rehabilitate Supper Ally in the Herald today:

“He said he signed the contract put in front of him by former chief executive Martin Bain in 2011 with barely the merest look at it.”

Is that the same contract he is on now?

I kind of assumed that he had done a deal with the devil (probably involving a new contract) and was being richly rewarded for his role in the selling of season tickets etc.

It seems I might have underestimated the man. According to this he TUPE-ed over and just kept on taking home his normal wages.

Oh yeah, and some extra shares etc.

But nothing to trouble the conscience of a man whose club is being dragged into the abyss.

What a helluvaguy!

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:56 am - Oct 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:43 am

The detail is in the Annual Return for Rangers Retail Ltd dated 13 July 2013.

Another interesting point is that in the Rangers AIM prospectus it reads to me that in the event that there is a deadlock between SportsDirect appointed directors and Rangers appointed ones that SportsDirect can buy-out Rangers but Rangers can’t buy-out SportsDirect.

If that has remained the same then again it makes it difficult to understand how Rangers Retail can truly be regarded as a subsidiary of TRFCL or RIFC Plc as it looks to me that SportsDirect call all the shots and their draw-down loan is secured on TRFCL property.

Of course the 51% shareholding makes it appear to the Bears that it’s a Rangers subsidiary company – but is it?
+++++++++++++++
Thanks for that. If I have time later, then I’ll look into the guidance for auditors regarding basis of consolidation. To my way of thinking, the accounts don’t reflect the true position, and neither, presumably, do the accounts of Sports Direct. That is potentially a serious matter for traded companies- and their auditors! At the very least there should have been a note in the accounts regarding the share structure of RR.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on10:57 am - Oct 7, 2013


Good news for Partick Thistle fans, looks like they are getting a new youth academy, partially funded by the Euro Millionaire winners.

Well heeled fans willing to invest in their club, good on them!

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on11:15 am - Oct 7, 2013


Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 2m

I am hearing that a Blogger, who oozes “Rangersness” from every pore, was taken to court last week by the Clumpany. Due back next week.

Phil MacGiollaBhain ‏@Pmacgiollabhain 14s

The judge was unimpressed that Mr Blogger was not legally represented and was told to get that fixed.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:21 am - Oct 7, 2013


Zilch says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:43 am

From Michael Grant’s attempt to rehabilitate Supper Ally in the Herald today: “He said he signed the contract put in front of him by former chief executive Martin Bain in 2011 with barely the merest look at it.”
Is that the same contract he is on now?
==================================================
Very good question Zilch ❗

Especially when you look at the Rangers AIM Prospectus (see Undernote) which makes no mention of the Martin Bain 2011 contract. Why does nothing ever seem to add-up down Ibrox way ❓

Undernote:

Rangers AIM Prospectus

‘Under an employment agreement dated 28 December 2010 (but effective as at 8 January
2007) and which transferred to RFCL pursuant to the APA, further details of which are
summarised in paragraph 12.1.1 of Part XIII of this document RFCL employs Alistair
McCoist as the First Team Manager of the Club with a salary commensurate with his
experience and the payment received by people similarly employed in the football industry,
plus all business expenses reasonably and properly incurred. In addition, Mr McCoist is
entitled to bonus payments should the following events occur: . . . . ‘.

Section 12.1.1 Part XIII gives details of the Asset Purchase Agreement but nothing specifically on McCoist.

Btw don’t worry about the bonus bit because unlike Green and Stockbridge the cheeky chappy wasn’t in line for a bonus for moving up a division – what a strange place Ibrox has become where the football manager doesn’t get a bonus for ‘sporting achievement’ but the boardroom executive suits do 🙄

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on11:35 am - Oct 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 11:21 am
===============================
Strange yes,
but I think Ally gets £1m when he wins the Champions League!

View Comment

john clarkePosted on11:43 am - Oct 7, 2013


neepheid says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:56 am
‘…Of course the 51% shareholding makes it appear to the Bears that it’s a Rangers subsidiary company – but is it?’
—–
I think it’s the crooked new club playing fast and loose with words-again. It’s no more than a ‘joint venture’, heavily weighted, voting rights wise, in favour of the other company.

View Comment

john clarkePosted on11:59 am - Oct 7, 2013


scapaflow says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:57 am
‘…Well heeled fans willing to invest in their club, good on them!’
—–
As opposed to shysters and schemers sniffing around for opportunities to get something for nothing.
Well done, the Weirs.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on12:00 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Interesting blog from Corsica Charity on the footballing debts

http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/2013/10/07/how-to-count-in-sevconian/

View Comment

FisianiPosted on12:04 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Every day I waken up and The Rangers are 38,000 pounds closer to closing the doors. No overdraft facility. No credit. No money to buy the pies let alone pay the players.

View Comment

bobferrisPosted on12:24 pm - Oct 7, 2013


I note that Hamilton Accies will be without left back Stephen Hendrie on Saturday at Cappielow as he is away with Scotland Under 19s. Hendrie was Accies man of the match on Saturday and will be a big loss and might mean a total rejig at the back and midfield involving three or four players. Yet Accies are making no moves to get the game postponed, they are shrugging their shoulders and carrying on. We should be further impeded actually, it’s a total mystery how our brilliant right back and sometime centre half Ziggy Gordon has not been called up for the under 21s. Yet Celtic reserve players Herron and Toshney have, some things never change, remember James McCarthy!

View Comment

DelbhoyPosted on12:49 pm - Oct 7, 2013


I think this snippet in The Sun was alluded to earlier :

” Rangers missed out on a share of a £600,000 pay-out from former TV company Setanta – because techically they don’t exist anymore.
Clubs who were part of the SPL between 2009 and 2012 received payments this week as their final dividend for the company going into administration back in 2009.
But Rangers got nothing because they were classed as a club which no longer exists after their liquidation in June 2012 “.

Can’t argue with that. But who classed them as such, because this is a form of taxonomy I can get to grips with.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on12:57 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Who got what!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18148818

View Comment

SmugasPosted on1:02 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Sorry catching up after weekend offline.

I’m going to play devils advocate here on behalf of the one who is pure dead super.

If you are aware that life’s leeches like IA are in the background creaming profit off your life’s work you will naturally do likewise. Ally is the guy that has to go to 4th division grounds and get an unmotivated team to perform. If they do he is rewarded with comments like “as it should be” etc. If he doesn’t he’s getting pelted from every angle. Sorry, but he’s quite correct to grab every cent he can WHILST ITS THERE. I would however suggest he might want to get a PR guy to develop a “Its not my fault its not there” strategy asap.

Going back over the weekend’s posts I’m still struggling to see the motivation for a sale and leaseback of Ibrox (MP is a different teapot full of haddock). Someone posted about selling the contract (what amounted to a 50 year old lease hold) to a pension company. The guys left holding the keys, like a bad game of scabby queen for the card players out there, and therefore the ransom, must know they will then get the treatment. The CY’s and KJ’s of this world will make it their place to mention names and especially addresses in every single report they do. Their mail will treble, its content will be, at best, unappetising.

I still expect to see an end result of the last BK standing holding 51% of TRFCL and within it Ibrox in some shape AND demonstrable form . He will have instant god like status amongst the masses thus buying more time and opening the possibility of a further round of shares. Of course it will probably mask an obscene rental behind the scenes for MP, literally levered by a large legal charge over Ibrox to keep RFC on its toes whilst financially remaining on their knees. I cannot see the tesco option ever coming about, unless RFC specifically go down that road of a green belt stadia or similar. Now that really would be armageddon – well apart from the other 41 teams, obviously.

View Comment

Drew PeacockPosted on1:03 pm - Oct 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:27 am

10

0

Rate This

BigGav says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:38 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

And I even wonder if, because of the different classes of shares, whether Rangers Retail Ltd is actually a subsidiary of RIFC Plc.
———–
Note 13 of the accounts (p38) states the shares in both Rangers Retail Ltd (51%) and Garrion Security Services Ltd (100%) are owned by TRFCL, not the plc.
==============================================================
Yea but you have to remember that TRFCL is a wholly owned subsidiary of RIFC Plc so any actual subsidiary of TRFCL is efectively under the ultimate control of RIFC Plc and probably a subsidiary in fact although there might be some accounting or company law technicality that means it isn’t a ‘subsidiary’ put perhaps those with knowledge in that arena could give the definitive answer.

Might point is really that I cannot understand how Rangers Retail can in reality be a subsidiary of TRFCL or RIFC Plc if they aren’t the controlling shareholder on any financial issues. Possibly just about every decision in any business could be termed ‘financial’.

Even whether you uses Izal flats in the bog rather than Andrex soft-deluxe – a cost implication and therefore financial comes into play.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

When it talks about “financial issues” might it not mean that any profit extraction/movement of money is at the discretion of the other shareholder, as they, as you point out often, are in control of the voting rights despite being only a 49% shareholder. I assume however that any dividends will be shared 51/49.

It’s about trust between partners in a JV – no partner wants to wake up one day to find the piggy bank empty.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on1:04 pm - Oct 7, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 7, 2013 at 12:57 pm

TJB. Your post just reminded me. Again at the weekend someone asked re Nacho Novo – I wonder who is paying his wages now?

Eh, that would still be us mate!

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on1:20 pm - Oct 7, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 7, 2013 at 12:57 pm
1 0 Rate This

Who got what!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18148818
———————–

Just seen two of them making the Scottish Cup draw live on YouTube. A rare sighting indeed of the Lesser-spotted Ogilvie with distinct EBT markings.

View Comment

peterjungPosted on1:23 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Bill1903 says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:58 pm

A reminder that the draw for the third round of the Scottish cup is tomorrow at 1pm.
Campbell Ogilvie and Nacho Novo do the honours which beggars belief.
It’s as if they purposely want to wind us bampots up!

_________________________________________________________________________

I am beginning to think there may be something in this….first they get Graeme Souness to front the launch of the rebranded SPL…. At that I thought come on you are having a laugh…Mr EBT years after he left the club….and now CO and Novo……

I just cannot believe that anyone is so stupid that to think that these people portray the image the games really needs…so I am left thinking someone is really taking the p**s here with these decisions….

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on1:26 pm - Oct 7, 2013


RhebelRhebel ‏@RhebelRhebel 1h
@bbcsportsound Will anybody be asking the @ScottishFA why Nacho Novo was picked to promote the cup after this?

https://twitter.com/joeman42/status/215413862818791424/photo/1

View Comment

justpedylanPosted on1:33 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Bill1903 says:

October 6, 2013 at 10:58 pm
A reminder that the draw for the third round of the Scottish cup is tomorrow at 1pm.

Campbell Ogilvie and Nacho Novo do the honours which beggars belief.

It’s as if they purposely want to wind us bampots up!
_________________________________________________

They have succeeded. Cup drawn by an RFC EBT recipient signed under dubious circumstances that represents everything we know was wrong with RFC (deceased). Yet successive establishment actions have passed not guilty verdicts on it all. And the most conflicted post holder in UK football takes his place alongside. This isn’t just corrupt it’s not giving a damn who knows you are corrupt.

View Comment

torrejohnbhoyPosted on1:43 pm - Oct 7, 2013


@Pmacgiollabhain Leggo case adjourned for 2 weeks. All centres around fraud allegations. Could be interesting.
Retweeted by Exiled Celt

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on1:50 pm - Oct 7, 2013


It’s been quoted before I know (see below), but a delectable tie has been thrown up in the Scottish Cup with the quintessential ‘Liquidation Battle of Britain’.

Airdrie’s problems worsened when it was revealed that Rangers had arrested the club’s share of the gate receipts for Sunday’s Scottish Cup tie at Dundee United.

Airdrie’s finances have been tackled by David Murray Ibrox chairman David Murray applied for an interdict, on behalf of his company Carnegie, for a debt of around £30,000 owed by Airdrie.

Mr Murray said: “I feel very sorry for Airdrie and their supporters but we’re running a business. We have given them repeated warnings and felt they were playing on our good nature.”

The Scottish Football Association described the move as “a private matter between the clubs” and made clear there had been no contact with either party.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/628268.stm

View Comment

Ian58Posted on1:51 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Danish Pastry @ 1:20pm

A rare sighting indeed of the Lesser-spotted Ogilvie with distinct EBT markings.

I presume you’re referring to the brass-coloured plumage around the neck.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on1:51 pm - Oct 7, 2013


peterjung says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:23 pm

I am beginning to think there may be something in this….first they get Graeme Souness to front the launch of the rebranded SPL…. At that I thought come on you are having a laugh…Mr EBT years after he left the club….and now CO and Novo……

I just cannot believe that anyone is so stupid that to think that these people portray the image the games really needs…so I am left thinking someone is really taking the p**s here with these decisions….
++++++++++++++++++
It was the clubs (all of them) who took the p–sh when Ogilvie was elected unopposed for his second term. This news regarding cup draws comes as no surprise whatsoever. The saintly Ogilvie has been anointed by the clubs- and now a “Rangers” EBT is not only not an embarrassment- it is just about compulsory, as a kind of badge of honour. This is where our clubs have taken us. This is the image of our game that they want. A president in receipt of a large loan, courtesy of a member club. Can corruption be much more blatant than that? Don’t answer- I’m sure they’re busy working on it.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:02 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:03 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:27 am
ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

When it talks about “financial issues” might it not mean that any profit extraction/movement of money is at the discretion of the other shareholder, as they, as you point out often, are in control of the voting rights despite being only a 49% shareholder. I assume however that any dividends will be shared 51/49..

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding what you are trying to say but I don’t believe that Rangers are in control of the voting rights on any issue of any importance.
==========================================================================
I think you have missed the point that started the convo that the money from Rangers Retail isn’t available to RIFC Plc. Therefore the minority partner in the shape of SportsDirect appears to have some control over the Rangers Retail money which further casts doubt IMO on the actual status of Rangers Retail.

And the important point is why is that money appearing in the Accounts without an explanatory note over ‘control’.

1) SportsDirect can buy Rangers out in the event of an impasse between SportsDirect and Rangers for an already agreed price but that option doesn’t appear to be open to Rangers. (AIM Rangers Prospectus)
2) On financial issues the SportsDirect shares count as double which means the vote is 98 to 51 in SportsDirect’s favour. (Annual Return Rangers Retail July 2013).

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on2:17 pm - Oct 7, 2013


So when Sandaza was called in to explain why he disclosed the terms of his contract to Tommy and gave an indication he would like to move from Ibrokes, in violation of the terms of his contract wonder if the conversation went like this

Fran : Sorry I didn’t know it was not allowed
Ally : Its in your contract specifically saying not to disclose terms….
Fran : I never read that bit….
Ally : You signed it – you should have read what you were signing……….fired!

Not that I believe Ally that he never read his contract! Otherwise now he has realized he has been overpaid, he would be returning the overpayments…..wouldn’t he?

View Comment

jimlarkinPosted on2:19 pm - Oct 7, 2013


http://www.dothebouncy.com/articles/rangers-to-play-home-tie-against-airdrieonians/

Sevco – v – Clydebank ?!

View Comment

Drew PeacockPosted on2:26 pm - Oct 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:02 pm

Drew Peacock says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:03 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 10:27 am
ecobhoy says:
October 6, 2013 at 10:23 pm

When it talks about “financial issues” might it not mean that any profit extraction/movement of money is at the discretion of the other shareholder, as they, as you point out often, are in control of the voting rights despite being only a 49% shareholder. I assume however that any dividends will be shared 51/49..

Perhaps I’m misunderstanding what you are trying to say but I don’t believe that Rangers are in control of the voting rights on any issue of any importance.
==========================================================================
I think you have missed the point that started the convo that the money from Rangers Retail isn’t available to RIFC Plc. Therefore the minority partner in the shape of SportsDirect appears to have some control over the Rangers Retail money which further casts doubt IMO on the actual status of Rangers Retail.

And the important point is why is that money appearing in the Accounts without an explanatory note over ‘control’.

1) SportsDirect can buy Rangers out in the event of an impasse between SportsDirect and Rangers for an already agreed price but that option doesn’t appear to be open to Rangers. (AIM Rangers Prospectus)
2) On financial issues the SportsDirect shares count as double which means the vote is 98 to 51 in SportsDirect’s favour. (Annual Return Rangers Retail July 2013).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

My point agrees with yours – RIFC have no access to the cash in the JV and this is protected by the 98/51 voting rights. My thoughts were that the voting rights were structured like this to prevent the piggy bank being emptied by say a spiv or something and possibly to enable the retail “experts” to run the company day to day without non expert interference.

When it comes to extracting the profit by way of dividend my assumption was that it would be split following the economic ownership of the shares i.e 51/49 unless of course the agreement says different.
Whether the voting rights/dividend share as regards “financial matters” is caught within that definition is not know.

Although if RIFC/TRFC was due less than a 51% share of profits one would expect the accounts to disclose this. As they don’t then I assume Deloitte have inspected the full JV agreement and decided accordingly.

The cash balances of RR appear in the RIFC accounts because legally and economically RR is 51% owned and as a subsidiary it’s results are consolidated into the RIFC accounts.

I note the existence of a Sports Direct call option. It is not unusual for these to be in a JV agreement in order to resolve disputes without wrecking the company. Often as you say they options are mirrored for both sides but not here.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:32 pm - Oct 7, 2013


torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
October 7, 2013 at 11:35 am
ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 11:21 am
===============================
Strange yes, but I think Ally gets £1m when he wins the Champions League!
===================================================
There’s no amounts but his contract pays bonuses for the undernoted according to Rangers AIM Prospectus:

McCoist is entitled to bonus payments should the following events occur:

(i) the Club wins the SPL and an additional bonus if this leads to automatic qualification to the Champions League Group;
(ii) the Club wins the Scottish Domestic Treble;
(iii) the Club qualifies for the Group Stage of the Champions League through the qualifying route;
(iv) on qualification as one of the last of the 16 teams in the Champions League, such bonuses as are payable by the Company to the players plus an additional 25 per cent.; and
(v) on receipt of prize money in respect of the European Competition (other than the Champions League), such bonuses as payable to the players.

I think it may be a while before he gets a bonus or hears that tune that Green got fed-up waiting for 😆

View Comment

TailothebankPosted on2:40 pm - Oct 7, 2013


I posted a week or so ago..that one potential scenario is CO and co have air cover for their key actions politically from above and / or from the key clubs..
One or two other posters have outlined broader based thoughts on not dissimilar lines
The only thing that i can think of that can justify a ‘relaxed / couldn’t give a tinkers cuss what a tiny group of keyboard jihadists think ‘ .type of attitude ..is that he absolutely knows the MSM will NEVER get the real dirt out ..and even if they do someday .. he is completely protected and won’t get hung out to dry
BRTHs cleverly outlines above what may well be happening daily inside Hampden.and .I really do hope so…but the real fear is CO / the SFA have covered themselves very nicely aided and abetted by the great and the good inside and outside of Football.
If so get ready for more and more of today’s delights
PS. The above tweet from NN has to be a fake..surely??…..surely??…No??…Dearie me..what have we come to?

View Comment

john clarkePosted on2:42 pm - Oct 7, 2013


neepheid says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:51 pm
‘… A president in receipt of a large loan, courtesy of a member club. ‘
———
A possibly illegal loan, and, worse, trying to lie about it!
Man of integrity? Nay, rather, man of straw and lacking in moral fibre.
In no sense fit to be president of anything , except perhaps the Hellfire Club of old.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on2:49 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Drew Peacock says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:26 pm

RIFC have no access to the cash in the JV and this is protected by the 98/51 voting rights.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
But we’re not talking about the cash in the JV – we are talking about the £1.5 million of SportsDirect money that Mather/Stockbridge told the fans’ meeting was part of the £10 million in the Rangers Bank and came from ‘income’ from SportsDirect.

In the accounts the £1.5 million becomes £1 million – presumably still in the Rangers Bank Account – but not available to Rangers to spend. Why not? And if not there should have been an explanation in the accounts. That isn’t what I understand by consolidating accounts because the money is being shown but can’t be used if my understanding is correct.

I also assume that the £500k difference between pre and post Accounts is because the £1 million approx was pre June 30 and the £500k was drawn down after that date. However where in the Accounts is the mention of the £1 million loan or doesn’t a draw-down for a subsidiary from a related or third party need to be shown – of course it should ❗

View Comment

Drew PeacockPosted on2:56 pm - Oct 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:49 pm

Drew Peacock says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:26 pm

RIFC have no access to the cash in the JV and this is protected by the 98/51 voting rights.
——————————————————————————————————————————–
But we’re not talking about the cash in the JV –
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

oops! 😳

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on3:56 pm - Oct 7, 2013


McCoist yet again is mischief making. He questions why his salary was disclosed in the accounts, yet as the holder of 1,000,000 shares he must have been fully aware that the IPO document which was publicly available 11 months ago,contained details of his salary, and bonus opportunities.

What will also be interesting is which way he will vote his 1,000,000 shares at an AGM. My money’s on them being proxied to a nominee. Now we know which way every other key player will vote. We can assume Walter Smith will not be supporting the current board, which only leaves McCoist.

I’m surprised, or maybe I shouldn’t be, that none of the SMSM have asked him yet, or if they have , they appear not to have had an answer.

Over to you Keith.

Oh and if you’re looking in. The board side are still trumpeting the view that the £14 million loss included the non recurring items.

It did not. This is taken directly from the accounts

REVENUE 13 month period to 30 June 2013……………19,107

OPERATING EXPENSES

Amortisation of player’s registration………………………….( 1,718 )
Other……………………………………………………………………( 31,950 )
Total operating expenses…………………………………………( 33,668 )

OPERATING LOSS…………………………………………………..( 14,361 )

Non-recurring items
Loss on disposal of player registrations…………………..( 352 )

– Release of negative goodwill………………………………..20,465. This is a one off profit, which is only a paper revaluation

– Other……………………………………………………………………..(4,261) . This is a one off real cash loss , comprising of repayment of Rangers Football debt, IPO , investigation and acquisition expenses

Profit after non recurring Items………………………………..1,236

In Laymens terms the business lost £14.36 million plus another cost of £240 k interest . Making a real loss of £14.60 million, before any non recurring items.

If you want to understand the cash flow, look at the expenses which have to be paid cash. Wages, Rates, Utilities, Infrastructure, Services and goods provided by suppliers.

Look at how much match day income is likely to come in, excluding the season book income already received in the accounts. The unknown is the merchandising . Should Rangers supporters want this board out, and can’t do it via a vote, then the solution is clear. Don’t go to games, don’t buy food and drink if you do, and don’t buy merchandising.

However the Easdales and pals , very probably, are correct to assume Rangers supporters will continue lemming like to prop up the regime they profess to hate.

Now why would they do that ?

View Comment

MarkybhoyPosted on4:00 pm - Oct 7, 2013


neepheid says:
October 7, 2013 at 1:51 pm

It was the clubs (all of them) who took the p–sh when Ogilvie was elected unopposed for his second term. This news regarding cup draws comes as no surprise whatsoever. The saintly Ogilvie has been anointed by the clubs- and now a “Rangers” EBT is not only not an embarrassment- it is just about compulsory, as a kind of badge of honour. This is where our clubs have taken us. This is the image of our game that they want. A president in receipt of a large loan, courtesy of a member club. Can corruption be much more blatant than that? Don’t answer- I’m sure they’re busy working on it.
———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-
I try not to post on here because I am a prophet of doom and I have already given up the fight. As I have said before I have other things to be getting on with. However, I would like to see the excellent posts made on here by many sterling posters (no backslap Bartin just recognition) get their just rewards.
But the point neepheid has made again about the complicity of our clubs is not the only elephant in the room. The other one being the fans. I can only talk about the tic because that is the only team I’ve ever supported. But when the first cup tie is arranged between Celtic and Sevco, which will be sooner rather than later, then watch the tickets go. Then watch the Willy Wonka Golden ticket status afforded to them and gleefully supported by the MSM. And then weep as Chic and co roar to all and sundry that this is what Scottish Football is ALL about! And outside of here watch how many disagree.

View Comment

BigGavPosted on4:38 pm - Oct 7, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 7, 2013 at 2:49 pm

[…] However where in the Accounts is the mention of the £1 million loan or doesn’t a draw-down for a subsidiary from a related or third party need to be shown – of course it should ❗
———

Can we be sure the drawdown facility has actually been used?
Perhaps it really is genuine ‘income’. After all, the accounts (p12 & 32) show revenue from Retail of £1.607m.

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on4:41 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Markybhoy – you may presume that to be the case but you are making the same mistake as MSM in assuming we are all brain dead. There are many of us that will not go to any Sevco match – if not only to avoid the trouble that will ensue but also because I actually enjoy watching the games now without their brand of poison. Now SSB, MSM and you may keep speaking on my behalf telling everyone that I miss Sevco in SPFL and assume I will want a ticket, but believe me both you and MSM/SSB are wrong – so please don’t lump us all as headless chickens eager to hear the Famine song being sung once more………..

View Comment

Exiled CeltPosted on5:10 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Just when I thought there was hope for them…………

Apparently they need to spend more than Celtic otherwise they are not the bigger club……..just wow!

Quote
Before anyone makes the argument that the two clubs cannot currently be compared financially, I am afraid they can. Despite Rangers’ incoming revenue going significantly down, the club’s size and stature has not, nor has its outgoing costs (enough).
Any Rangers fan disagreeing with this therefore by logical conclusion considers Rangers a smaller club than Celtic. If the clubs cannot be compared financially in terms of outgoing costs, it is presumably because Rangers are smaller in stature. And as we know, that is not the case.
Endquote

Rest of the article is here – but be prepared for some jaw dropping and head shaking…..

http://www.ibroxnoise.co.uk/2013/10/what-they-dont-want-you-to-know-about.html

View Comment

tcup 2012Posted on5:57 pm - Oct 7, 2013


Exiled Celt on October 7, 2013 at 1:26 pm

43 0 Rate This

RhebelRhebel @RhebelRhebel 1h @bbcsportsound Will anybody be asking the @ScottishFA why Nacho Novo was picked to promote the cup after this?

https://twitter.com/joeman42/status/215413862818791424/photo/1
……………….

I can assure everyone that this will ne a made up account with some idiot using his name 🙁
I know nacho personally and from my experience .I would be extremely surprised and disappointed if it was him

1 he is not stupid enough to put anything like this I’m twitter
2 the man does not have a spiteful or nasty.bone in his body

In fact the man would go out of his way to help anyone no matter what walk if life they came from 🙂
BTW I am a Celtic fan (just to clarify)

View Comment

Leave a Reply