Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?

By

Just back from today’s UTTT finale. As always, I will …

Comment on Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed? by easyJambo.

Just back from today’s UTTT finale. As always, I will wait for JC’s superior note taking abilities to post on the UTT thread. In general terms, I thought Thornhill wasn’t at his best today with some bizarre arguments about net and gross payments. Thomson had a shocking start to his rebuttal, losing his thread completely at one point, but recovered pretty well in the afternoon session.

Lord Doherty said that it would take some time before a decision is made.

It seems that there are four options available to Lord Doherty,
Dismiss the appeal ūüė•
Allow the appeal :mrgreen:
Remit the case back to the “same” FTT tribunal with directions ūüôĀ
Remit the case back to a “new” FTT tribunal with directions ūüėź

If it is to go back to the FTT, then understandably Murray Group want the same tribunal and HMRC was a new tribunal.

My gut feel is that it will go back to the FTT, but I don’t know whether it will end up with the oldco tribunal or a newco tribunal. Cost and time may well be factors in which option is taken.

easyJambo Also Commented

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Bizarre decision for Lunny to issue a notice of complaint against Leigh Griffiths for singing about Hearts being in Administration.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2566&newsCategoryID=1&newsID=13206

Now why have 41 clubs not been sanctioned for their fans singing about RFC being in Liquidation?


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
STV’s report on today’s proceedings
http://news.stv.tv/west-central/270081-imran-ahmad-obtains-documents-from-rangers-during-50000-court-case/

Former Rangers commercial director Imran Ahmad has been successful in obtaining documents from the club relating to his £500,000 legal case against them.

Mr Ahmad claims he is owed the amount as a contractually-agreed bonus for negotiating a reported £10m deal with sportswear firm Puma and retailer Sports Direct.

He failed, however, to secure copies of the contracts with the two companies, with Rangers raising fears they could be leaked on the internet.

Ahmad’s contract with Rangers, which was terminated last year, stated he would receive five per cent of revenue on any commercial deals he negotiated during his time at Ibrox.

At a court hearing on Tuesday, Mr Ahmad was given certain documents to try and form his case that he was contractually entitled to £500k bonus. However, he failed to secure the handing over of actual contracts negotiated, for now, as Rangers argued confidentially issues.

The case, which could be brought forward to November instead of a February 2015 hearing, will determine whether he was entitled to a bonus on deals he did not exclusively negotiate.

It will also determine whether a handwritten letter from former chief executive Charles Green, which stated he would receive ¬£500,000 in bonuses, was legally binding. Rangers’ counsel argue Green did not have the express power to authorise such a payment.

At the Court of Session on Tuesday, Ahmad’s counsel, Kenneth McBrearty QC, requested the transfer of a series of commercial documents from Rangers relating to the case.

Ahmad, who was not present, requested copies of the contracts entered into with Puma and Sports Direct to form his case that he was involved in the negotiations.

Rangers’ QC Alan Summers argued that those contracts contained commercially sensitive information and expressed concern that an “unnatural interest” in the club’ inner dealings could lead to the documents being leaked into the public domain.

Lord Woolman agreed to hold over a ruling on whether Mr Ahmad could have access to said documents until a hearing on May 13.

Ahmad also called for financial statements relating to the deal. He requested both financial projections and up-to-date statements on turnover and profit from the retail business.

He also requested contracts and leases regarding the purchase of the Albion Car Park, which he claims to have been involved in. Lord Woolman granted access. Rangers’ counsel stated it would take three weeks for all details to be provided.

Ahmad was also successful in having Rangers hand over e-mails from his club account which relate to the deal.

An agreement was reached whereby a court-appointed commissioner will be given the data to extract relevant information. The main part of Mr Ahmad’s case, which was due to be held in February 2015, could now be held in November this year. A decision will be reached on that matter at the next court date.

The availability of star witness Green will also play a part in determining whether the case will be heard in November. It was stated that Mr Green had been contacted to state whether he would be available but had not yet replied.


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
John Clark says: April 1, 2014 at 1:01 pm

easyJambo says: April 1, 2014 at 12:48 pm
‚ÄĒ‚Äď
EJ, I thought further action on the Ahmad case had been kicked into next year. Is Grant reporting a |Court hearing?
==============================
Apparently it was a hearing today, to discuss Ahmad’s request for disclosure of documents.

The date for the full case to be heard had still to be set. I thought this was due to start yesterday, but another poster put me right isn saying it had been delayed. I din’t know anything about today until I saw Grant’s tweets.


Recent Comments by easyJambo

Fergus McCann v David Murray
Given that the blog has reverted to its seemingly inescapable time warp relating to events of 8-10 years ago, it is appropriate to mark the 10th anniversary of an event that set the ball rolling in contributing to
the sale of RFC for £1, its financial collapse and subsequent consequences of administration, 
liquidation, as well as Res 12. 

That event was HMRC's success in the Aberdeen Asset Management FTTT, the decision for which was published on 29 October 2010

RFC, who operated a similar Discounted Option tax avoidance scheme, had actually been presented with a Tax assessment as early as September 2007, which they appealed.  Their appeal was put on hold pending the outcome of the AAM case. Following the decision, HMRC issued RFC with a new offer to settle the following month.

The rest, as they say, is history and "in the past it must remain".  No matter how many times the blog returns to the events of 8-10 years ago, no-one in the football authorities or in the SMSM is listening, nor are they likely to change their mind now.

I believe that it is now time to move on. Not to forget what happened, but to move on all the same.

That is what I plan to do.


Fergus McCann v David Murray
bect67 26th October 2020 at 20:05

Probably an unfair question, but could you venture an opinion (for the less financially astute members of our community e.g. me!) as to what the comparable returns for TRFC might look like ‚Äď assuming, in a break from their 8-year old tradition (?) that these be¬†‘unpockled’?

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

You are correct. It is an unfair question mail, but we should get sight of the accounts in the next month or so.

We know they had a forecast ¬£10m shortfall in last year’s accounts. That was almost certainly reduced by their unbudgeted extra EL revenue.¬† We also know that DK provided a ¬£5m loan facility. We can also state with some certainty that Park, Letham and Taylor plus Gibson provided additional funding which has since been converted to equity in the recent share issue.

They will show a loss, albeit that it will have been covered by the loans/share issue.¬†How much is still outstanding is anyone’s guess.¬†¬†¬†

They have operated with year on year losses, but despite the doom mongers forecasts they have found a way to remain afloat and grow their business, improving the strength of their squad and on-field performances year on year.

They may forecast¬†further shortfalls for this current year, perhaps with yet another share issue, but there is nothing to suggest that their business plan is failing.¬† Indeed, they appear to be getting stronger on and off the park.¬† Their new merchandising deal appears to be working and bringing in additional revenue¬†(I don’t know if SD walked away, with or without cash, or declined to make a matching offer).¬† They have also sold out their 46,500 ST allocation, meaning that their match day revenue will be as high as it can be in the circumstances.

Covid restrictions will still impact them, but I do think that they are in as good a shape as most other Premiership clubs to come out the other side relatively unscathed. 


Fergus McCann v David Murray
The fall in Celtic’s revenue is across all areas.

Football Operations down £7.5m
Merchandising down £3m
Multimedia and other Commercial activities down £2.7m

This current season could be even more challenging with the increased liabilities and reduced income. The club has also increased its revolving credit facility from £2m to £13m (still unused) just in case.


Fergus McCann v David Murray
Current liabilities  2020 2019 

Trade and other payables     20,744     13,957

Lease liabilities¬† ¬† 604¬† ¬† ¬† ¬†–

Borrowings  1,364     1,364

Provisions    5,942      3,479

Deferred income    21,275    25,614

Totals                    49,929     44,414

Looking at the above figures I was trying to work out the ongoing liabilities for deferred wages.¬† I don’t know if it will be included in the ¬£6.8m increase in Trade and Other Payables, or in the ¬£2.5m increase in Provisions.

The drop in deferred income suggests a fall of £4.2m in Season Ticket revenue.


Fergus McCann v David Murray
The previous post should read "cash in the bank down"

https://www.londonstockexchange.com/news-article/CCP/results-for-the-year-ended-30-june-2020/14732713


About the author