Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?

ByTrisidium

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?

A Guest Blog by Auldheid for TSFM

Honesty requires both transparency and accountability. In pursuit of honest, transparent and accountable governance of Scottish football, and only that objective, the following letter, with attachments, has been sent to SPFL lawyers, CEO and SPFL Board Members.

An honest game free from deception is what football supporters of all clubs want. It is the action the letter and attachments prompt that will tell us if there is any intention of providing it.

It is a response on behalf of readers here on TSFM, but the sentiment which underpins it is almost universally held amongst fans of all clubs.  Importantly it is a response directly to all clubs, especially those with a SPFL Board member, that will make the clubs and the football authorities aware just how seriously supporters take the restoration of trust in an honest game, honestly governed.

The annexes to the letter contain information which may be published at a later date. We thought it appropriate to first await any response from any of the recipients.

Please also draw this to the attention of friends who are not internet using supporters and love their football and their club.

Auldheid

__________________________________________________________________

Harper MacLeod
The Ca’d’oro
45 Gordon Street
Glasgow
G1 3PE
19 Feb 2014
Copy sent to SPFL CEO and Board Members *
Dear Mr McKenzie
We the contributors to The Scottish Football Monitoring web site write to you in your capacity as the legal adviser employed by Harper MacLeod to assist the Scottish Premier League (now the Scottish Professional Football League) to gather evidence and investigate the matter of incorrect player registrations involving concealed side letters and employee benefit trusts as defined in the eventual Lord Nimmo Smith Commission.
We note from the then SPL announcement that set up an enquiry that the initial date range to be covered was from the inception of the SPL in July 1998, but that was changed to 23 November 2000 because, according to our understanding, that is the date of the first side letter supplied by Rangers Administrators Duff and Phelps. It is also our understanding that the SPL asked for all documentation relating to side letters as well as the letters themselves.
It is a matter of public record that Rangers Administrators failed to supply the SPL all relevant documentation. Indeed the seriousness of not complying with SPL requests was the subject of an admonition of Rangers/Duff and Phelps from Lord Nimmo Smith under Issue 4 of his Commission.
Quite how serious that failure to comply or concealment was in terms of misleading the Commission and so Lord Nimmo Smith can now be assessed from the information contained at Annexes 1 to 10 attached.
We think that as legal advisers to the SPL (now the SPFL) you have a responsibility to make them aware that their Commission was misled by the concealment of documents starting on 3 September 1999, and signed by current SFA President Campbell Ogilvie, whose silence on the ebt matters referred to in the attached annexes* is questionable at the very least.
This letter but not attachments is being posted on The Scottish Football Monitor web site as this is matter for all of Scottish football and support for the issue being pursued to establish the truth can be gauged by responses from supporters from all Scottish clubs once the letter has been published there.
A copy of this letter with Annexes has also been sent to the SPFL CEO and members of the SPFL Board.
Acknowledgement of receipt and reply can be sent by e mail to:
(Address supplied)
Yours in sport

On behalf of The Scottish Football Monitor contributors and readers. http://www.tsfm.org.uk/

Addressees copied in
Neil Doncaster CEO
The Scottish Professional Football League
Hampden Park
Glasgow G42 9DE

Eric Riley (Celtic),
The Celtic Football Club
Celtic Park
Glasgow G40 3RE

Stephen Thompson (Dundee United),
Tannadice Park,
Tannadice Street,
Dundee, DD3 7JW

Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen);
Aberdeen Football Club plc
Pittodrie Stadium
Pittodrie Street
Aberdeen AB24 5QH

Les Gray (Hamilton),
Hamilton Academical FC
New Douglas Park
Hamilton
ML3 0FT

Mike Mulraney (Alloa)
Alloa Athletic FC
Clackmannan Road
Recreation Park
Alloa FK10 1RY

Bill Darroch (Stenhousemuir).
Stenhousemuir F.C.
Ochilview Park
Gladstone Road
Stenhousemuir
Falkirk
FK5 4QL

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,234 Comments so far

ianagainPosted on8:46 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Ryan

Its the “budget on that” bit that always goes awry though isn’t it?
Its always lets get him him and him because because.
That’s what needs realised in my opinion.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on8:48 pm - Mar 14, 2014


James Doleman, please explain?

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on8:49 pm - Mar 14, 2014


If LNS were considering the two scehemes, DOS and EBT to be sequential and substantially the same, how does the following quote from LNS stack up against the documents ianagain just posted (which I will replicate for convenience).

“Mr Ogilvie learnt about the existence of the MGMRT in about 2001 or 2002, because a
contribution was made for his benefit. He understood that this was non-contractual. Although as
a result he knew about the existence of the MGMRT, he did not know any details of it. He
subsequently became aware, while he remained director of Oldco, that contributions were being
made to the MGMRT in respect of players. He assumed that these were made in respect of the
players’ playing football, which was the primary function for which they were employed and
14
remunerated. He had no involvement in the organisation or management of Oldco’s
contributions to the MGMRT, whether for players or otherwise.”

http://i.imgur.com/q88NFQq.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/ytPbuSp.jpg

View Comment

wottpiPosted on8:50 pm - Mar 14, 2014


RyanGosling says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:38 pm

Ibrox does indeed bring in the punters in huge numbers but IIRC even before this debacle the accounts tended to show annual ‘other’ running cost out with the teams wages as running at £14 to £20m.
If the operation isn’t streamlined in some way then, while, still plenty left for players compared with others the income may not be enough for a title winning / euro successful team.
Dave King is right when he says some soft investment is required to get back to where some think the club should be. Other than that it is the hard struggle I implied to earlier.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on8:54 pm - Mar 14, 2014


RyanGosling says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:42 pm

0

0

Rate This

Wottpi

I think it’s incredibly difficult to try to split the fans between realists and fantasists. Because we are all fantasists, it’s more a question of how many among us are also realists.

How many would keep paying their money to support the journey, the team, the vision, while watching crap and potentially not seeing back to back promotions?

__________________________________

NUFC pull in 40-50,000. They would recognise the turmoil, mediocrity and frustration you describe. For most on the level playing field, it is part of the game.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on9:00 pm - Mar 14, 2014


RyanGosling says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:42 pm

The crap is down to your poor manager.
Once again maybe he is helping people to see what a mess the club is in.
I have no doubt a half decent manager would have had the current squad playing entertaining football, winning the league in style and looking a good prospect for the Championship.
Of course all that may have done was mask the current off field issues. While Ally could go anytime I feel the boardroom battle is going to drag on.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:01 pm - Mar 14, 2014


ForresDee says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:25 pm
3 0 Rate This

Just a thought about Dave King being ‘summoned’ to ibrox. Is he a shadow director and is this all just bluster and cover?
——–

It’s a thought that’s been voiced a few times. But then you’d have to perhaps find the Laxey link.

Didn’t Green speak highly of King at one point? And Green was in touch with Laxey. Maybe they are all birds of a feather (vultures).

Amazing as it seems, another dubious businessman could be about to gain control of newco’s ST money for the third time in three years.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on9:03 pm - Mar 14, 2014


NUFC do pull in those fans, but so do others in the premiership. Rangers and Celtic are the only clubs in Scotland who pull in anywhere near that level of support.

View Comment

FUZZYNUTZ1888Posted on9:07 pm - Mar 14, 2014


If the glib one’s plan works and all the blue pounds are sitting in a trust how do you get your seat , do you meet up in the car park for your money back to buy a ticket at the ticket office ( now that would be a long queue ) and what’s to stop the board doubling the price of a walk up ticket . Is this part of that amazing Govan pastime Bear milking 😳

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on9:23 pm - Mar 14, 2014


parttimearab says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:37 pm

RyanGosling says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:04 pm

Pony up and buy the club
————————–
Ryan
I understand where your coming from here but equally do you really want any potential investment to line the pockets of Laxey/Blue Pitch/Margarita/etc….?

The DK/Union of fans proposal is certainly risky and DKs motivation and commitment (financially) may be open to question; but the alternative…..?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Fan ownership? Annual subscription plus season ticket purchase. Pay per view public whippings of the Easdales? There are many untaped sources of Revenue.

On a different matter. My pal was yet again listening to the Clyde SSB and was very much puzzled by the tone (he said aggression. I’m watering it down a la Jimbo Delahunt to tone) of failed goalkeeper and journalist Mark Guidi toward callers who in any way criticised Dave King. What is in it for him to be so protective? It almost sounds personal.

It appears the DR have adopted their line on this one and it is to support King. There’s battle lines being drawn and nobody’s right if everybody’s wrong.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on9:26 pm - Mar 14, 2014


FUZZYNUTZ1888 says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:07 pm

what’s to stop the board doubling the price of a walk up ticket .
—————————————————————
……fewer people walking up….

View Comment

BrendaPosted on9:37 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Bogsdollox

I listened to ‘super’scoreboard tonight purely for the entertainment of hearing BFDJ tying himself in knots defending the indefensible as usual but struggling 😆 as your friend 😉 said Mark Guidi really lost it when defending the glib and shameless liar guy and couldn’t understand on what grounds the caller thought DK would fail the fit and proper person thingy. Worth a wee listen on the podcast but surprisingly there were a lot of bad lines and people cutting themselves off tonight 😆 😆

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on9:39 pm - Mar 14, 2014


While I’m in LNS mode, this stuck in my craw:

“Although it is clear to us from Mr Odam’s evidence that Oldco’s failure to disclose the side-letters to the SPL and the SFA was at least partly motivated by a wish not to risk prejudicing the tax advantages of
the EBT scheme,…”

This to me is legalised cheating. The side letters were hidden to prevent HMRC being alerted to a remuneration scheme that may be not in accordance with tax guidelines. The existence of side letters has been cited in the UTT as reasoning why the scheme was indeed in breech of legislation. How can the ‘no sporting advantage’ argument be forwarded in the vicinity of a statement that talks about prejudicing tax advantages. It is not a tax advantage if it relies on non-disclosure of information for it to function reliably. It is the definition of a paradox.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on9:40 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:01 pm

Amazing as it seems, another dubious businessman could be about to gain control of newco’s ST money for the third time in three years.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

That is enough to make even a non Rangers fan angry. Once again the working people are taken for a ride by exploitative businessmen. If it’s not the banks or power company, there’s always your favourite leisure pursuit waiting to rip you off.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on9:46 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Castifthousands 8.37

Exactly. You cannot treat two issues as the same when they clearly are not.

Right back to my night out and thanks to whoever posted the links and yup I’m open to all feedback because it was always TSFM’s baby not mine.

There is always PM if anyone has a point they wish to make off screen.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on9:47 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Castofthousands says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:39 pm

0

0

Rate This

While I’m in LNS mode, this stuck in my craw:

“Although it is clear to us from Mr Odam’s evidence that Oldco’s failure to disclose the side-letters to the SPL and the SFA was at least partly motivated by a wish not to risk prejudicing the tax advantages of
the EBT scheme,…”

This to me is legalised cheating. The side letters were hidden to prevent HMRC being alerted to a remuneration scheme that may be not in accordance with tax guidelines. The existence of side letters has been cited in the UTT as reasoning why the scheme was indeed in breech of legislation. How can the ‘no sporting advantage’ argument be forwarded in the vicinity of a statement that talks about prejudicing tax advantages. It is not a tax advantage if it relies on non-disclosure of information for it to function reliably. It is the definition of a paradox.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

For tax “advantages” read “tax scheme”. Tax schemes were what the Ramsay principle identified and countered.

Ever since then no tax adviser or lawyer has ever wrote about about “tax schemes” in their advice to clients because it is damaging to arrangements that later land in Court where the structuring of a transaction gives rise to tax “advantages”.

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on9:51 pm - Mar 14, 2014


LNS, the musical has a nice ring to it. You couldn’t make it up.

Auldheid, I think the salient point is that LNS considered DOS and EBT’s to be a continuous scheme. Since this complexion was placed on deliberations then the DOS scheme faults could have been part of considerations even if an artificial; date of 23 November 2000 had been cited as a limitation. I think that the conclusions reached by LNS could be shredded by anyone caring to make legal challenge to them.

Clubs may not feel that it in their interest to rock the boat however.

Pursuing DOS does appear to be an inroad into the decision.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on9:51 pm - Mar 14, 2014


On the wider debt watch on Scotch football I see KIlmarnock have restructured theirs and are now “debt free” without resorting to Administration, Liquidation or the Hybrid of the two – the Oldco is Newco route.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on10:03 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Dave ‘Smiler’ King
=============
2 observations;

– for a reputed millionaire, he sure looks miserable in all the media photos !

&

– do TRFC fans really believe that someone with Dave King’s background is the best they can get ‘to save’ their club ?
And in difficult times, would Dave King nonchalantly lie to The People/the SFA/SPFL/media/anyone for his own ends…? 🙄

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on10:13 pm - Mar 14, 2014


bogsdollox says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:51 pm

On the wider debt watch on Scotch football I see KIlmarnock have restructured theirs and are now “debt free”
————————-
Looks a little complicated…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26583407

and I’m struggling to work out how part of it works…
“Billy Bowie will convert the balance of the bank debt into equity and become chairman.”

I guess that like Dundee Utds deal the devil is in the detail but on balance a positive step imo.

Just the Dons to go and Lloyds are finally clear of their inherited Scottish football problem.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on10:19 pm - Mar 14, 2014


RyanGosling says:
March 14, 2014 at 8:04 pm

It is truly depressing stuff.
The real problem as I see it is that the people running the club are interested in two things;
1. Making money year on year.
2. Selling the club/company for more than they bought it for.
They are not interested in football. They are not interested in Scottish football and they are not interested in ‘The Rangers’ except as a vehicle for making 1 and 2 above. They are not looking to hand over the reigns for a nominal fee because that defeats the point of 1 and 2.
Now realistically how much could the club/company be sold for?
Is it £5.5M that Chas Green and his buddies bought the assets for?
Is it the £6M that David Murray bought it for 25 years ago?

No Scottish club will go for much more than £10M-£15M simply because, if you want to run as an actual business with a break even point, it is impossible. This is the reality.
The only way to create a viable business model is to qualify for the Champions League year in year out for about five years. The problem for ‘The Rangers’ has been the ascent through the leagues which has bled the entity of all funds at the very point you need the money most. To compete in the Championship is going to be a struggle particularly if season ticket money is withheld. You should also remember points 1 and 2 above as the people running the show will want their annual pound of flesh.
I believe that the people running the show will shut Ibrox, tear it down, leaving the listed frontage, and sell the lot for scrap if there is a serious season ticket boycott. Then simply sell the land. This will make lots of money. I may have just created a number 3 to add to the list above.
Anyway back to the topic at hand. The people running the show have spent all of the money entrusted to them in under two years. No one is willing to continue funding this money pit, because that is what it is, never mind actually buying it. This is before the funding continues to take the next step to the top league never mind actually qualifying for Europe. At the current rate loses will top the £18M which was the final nail in the coffin of the last club.

I really don’t know where this ends but to put it simply the people who are currently in “the driving seat” nudge, nudge, wink, wink are not “walking away” with nothing and indeed why should they. They have bought a total number of shares that means they own RIFC to which the club belongs. These people are not in the business of losing lots of money and I don’t think they are about to start now in the backwater of Scottish football.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:25 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Auldheid

Have a well earned night off. It will all keep until whenever.

Kings not exactly storming the castle.
Don’t usually give the old folks any advice but this old guy strikes a balance:

“Every now and then go away, have a little relaxation, for when you come back to your work your judgment will be surer. Go some distance away because then the work appears smaller and more of it can be taken in at a glance and a lack of harmony and proportion is more readily seen.”

Leonardo Da Vinci

He could write too.

Have a guid yin.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on10:53 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Auldheid

I mean by that as a few have said. The reply needs to be razor sharp. HM are being cute I think.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on10:54 pm - Mar 14, 2014


parttimearab says:
March 14, 2014 at 10:13 pm
bogsdollox says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:51 pm

On the wider debt watch on Scotch football I see KIlmarnock have restructured theirs and are now “debt free”
————————-
Looks a little complicated…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26583407

and I’m struggling to work out how part of it works…
“Billy Bowie will convert the balance of the bank debt into equity and become chairman.”

I guess that like Dundee Utds deal the devil is in the detail but on balance a positive step imo.

Just the Dons to go and Lloyds are finally clear of their inherited Scottish football problem.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It’s not related to Rangers or Celtic so best it is discussed on a forum not called The Scottish Football Monitor.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on11:04 pm - Mar 14, 2014


justshatered says:
March 14, 2014 at 10:19 pm
Now realistically how much could the club/company be sold for?
Is it £5.5M that Chas Green and his buddies bought the assets for?
Is it the £6M that David Murray bought it for 25 years ago?………
I believe that the people running the show will shut Ibrox, tear it down, leaving the listed frontage, and sell the lot for scrap if there is a serious season ticket boycott. Then simply sell the land.
————————–
Given that the value of the assets as measured by the purchases above is only £5.5 – 6.5m then selling the land (minus any demolition costs etc) and given the current land use and costs of permission to change use and length of time of this process (with no income accruing during this process) it’s hard to see any profit other than selling as a …err… going concern.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on11:07 pm - Mar 14, 2014


bogsdollox says:
March 14, 2014 at 10:54 pm
It’s not related to Rangers or Celtic so best it is discussed on a forum not called The Scottish Football Monitor.
————————–
🙂

View Comment

ianagainPosted on11:11 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Lets just get what this particular blog is about down in a few sentences.

The Tribunal believed they had all the evidence (as supplied by Oldco)

They made a judgement on that basis.

They were wrong they were deceived CO lied to them or their agents ( or conveniently forgot).

Read the documents.

View Comment

justshateredPosted on11:28 pm - Mar 14, 2014


parttimearab says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:04 pm

I disagree.
How much scrap metal is in the four stands not to mention the fixtures and fittings and copper wiring.
There is the marble staircase. The wood panelled blue room. Fans would pay to own that.
There are all of the seats that could be sold off as well as part of the turf.
There are trophies and memorabilia.
There is a lot of money in that stadium that could be syphoned off yet.
It is not a pretty thought but that does not make it a possibility.

View Comment

bogsdolloxPosted on11:32 pm - Mar 14, 2014


ianagain says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:11 pm
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Correct.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on11:43 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Auldhied

Initial observations are that Harper Macleod have failed to address the primary issue regarding the change of date for the scope of the commission between the “Reasons for the decision” dated on 28th Sept 2012 and the commission itself. We (TSFM) need to press them further on that issue.

The issues listed by the Commission at 4(a), 4(b) and 4(c) all refer to the non disclosure of documents from 1st July 1998. The existence of any documents (as in the Annexes supplied) with dates between 1st July 1998 and 23rd Nov 2000 is relevant. It is not clear if Harper MacLeod had sight of these documents. If they did, then they did indeed mislead the commission on the range of dates. If they didn’t, then the Commission has been misled by Rangers (D&P) and it should be reconvened to consider these documents.

They are obfuscating the matter with terms such as “Your letter does not suggest that the scheme of the EBT Payments and Arrangements was different as between the first and second trusts” and “Accordingly, I am not clear in what respects it is being suggested that the Commission was “misled” ” – These comments effectively invite a response and allow clarification to be supplied (obviously in words of one syllable that even a lawyer would find difficult to find an alternative meaning)

If you refer to Para 104 of the Commission’s report they state “Nor is it a breach of SPL or SFA Rules for a club to arrange its affairs – within the law – so as to minimise its tax liabilities. The Tax Tribunal has held (subject to appeal) that Oldco was acting within the law in setting up and operating the EBT scheme. The SPL presented no argument to challenge the decision of the majority of the Tax Tribunal and Mr McKenzie stated expressly that for all purposes of this Commission’s Inquiry and Determination the SPL accepted that decision as it stood, without regard to any possible appeal by HMRC. Accordingly we proceed on the basis that the EBT arrangements were lawful.

Now we know that the operation of the DOS scheme was “Not Lawful” and that Rangers had accepted liability to pay it. However the Commission failed to proceed “on the basis that the DOS arrangements were unlawful”. This appears not to have been either disclosed to the Commission, or considered by it.

I’ll have another look at the response at some point over the weekend, so I might get back to you with any more thoughts

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on11:45 pm - Mar 14, 2014


Not seen this piece before

“Mulling these questions triggered a reminder of conman turned Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) adviser Frank Abagnale, the subject of the 2002 movie, Catch Me If You Can. Using a crook to catch many other crooks, Abagnale’s insights helped the good guys wreak havoc on the US’s white-collar criminals.

King is unlikely to be joining SARS any time soon. But by having his affairs so publicly exposed, he’s already become an unwitting Abagnale. Never before has SARS dedicated so much time to the murky financial machinations of South Africa’s uber-rich. It should prove a great investment.”

http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2013/09/02/undictated-the-dogged-mr-chipps-who-brought-dave-king-to-book

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on12:18 am - Mar 15, 2014


A bit surprised the fans want the assets as security for ST money
If their concern is the long term future of a unreconstructed brand should they not be demanding the history as collateral?

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on12:23 am - Mar 15, 2014


GoosyGoosy says:
March 15, 2014 at 12:18 am

2

0

Rate This

A bit surprised the fans want the assets as security for ST money
If their concern is the long term future of a unreconstructed brand should they not be demanding the history as collateral?

______________________________

You are a very very naughty boy! Stand in the corner. 😆

I think if the lying King was a true ‘ger, the de-reversal of negative good will would be all the security he should need.

On a more serious point, somewhere down the line £22m has been punted in to this club… only a fraction of it by fans. Those investors expect to own stuff. Rightly so.
The fact that the cash has been spunked away is not their problem. It is the clubs problem.
Message to TRFC fans: You might not like them… but they own you. Deal with it!

View Comment

DonegaltimPosted on12:46 am - Mar 15, 2014


A little conundrum I have been mulling over.

No personal insults or accusations are intended in the making of this post.

If I stole, purloined or blatantly blagged millions, or dare I say billions, of $, or £s, from the tax authorities in any country I did business with, took that said millions, or billions and invested it in a business in another country and lost it, would I have lost, or would that tax authority from whom it was purloined from be the true losers.

It’s very easy gambling large sums when those large sums belong to somebody else.

Should the fawning headlines not scream,

‘The Man Who Lost £20million of South Africa’s Tax Money’

It would definitely put another slant on things. Very easy gambling with somebody else’s money.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:06 am - Mar 15, 2014


parttimearab says:
March 14, 2014 at 10:13 pm

3

0

Rate This

bogsdollox says:
March 14, 2014 at 9:51 pm

On the wider debt watch on Scotch football I see KIlmarnock have restructured theirs and are now “debt free”
————————-
Looks a little complicated…

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26583407

and I’m struggling to work out how part of it works…
“Billy Bowie will convert the balance of the bank debt into equity and become chairman.”

I guess that like Dundee Utds deal the devil is in the detail but on balance a positive step imo.

Just the Dons to go and Lloyds are finally clear of their inherited Scottish football problem.

_______________________________________

On the surface this is to be welcomed. It LOOKS like a less onerous deal for the club and a more equitable set up.
If this is true, great news. Another club on the road to sustainability if – touch wood – all is as it seems.
A theme of quiet business people doing business deals using business acumen in a spirit of trust.

Interestingly, Killie were among those clubs whose very existence was dependent upon an immediate return to the top flight of a certain glasgow clumpany.

Well, as far as I can see… far from Scots football imploding into armageddon, what we have seen is the flagbeareer of an ‘unpenitent thief’ (now deceased) dropping 3 divisions and struggling, the contrite club with the next dodgiest financial record probably dropping a division but otherwise looking to pull through, and everyone else… erm miles better off.

So if the Ibrox club go under again (I know… I know… its a new club) can we cast them further into the well this time, and see how much better things get then?

One day they WILL learn!

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:28 am - Mar 15, 2014


easyJambo says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:43 pm

5

0

Rate This

Auldhied

_____________________________________

Great stuff.
A reply is not a dismissal.
Follow up point by point.
The dam is creaking.

Suggested tactic: try and get them to state how their position could/might change in the event of a UTT decision in advance of the UTT decision being reached… with reasoning a priori!
(can’t help thinking that too much of this RFC stuff was knwocked up post hoc!)

View Comment

Bryce CurdyPosted on7:27 am - Mar 15, 2014


I’m hoping I will be forgiven for a gratuitous bump, but 1,690 comments early on a Saturday morning was making me slightly uncomfortable.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:23 am - Mar 15, 2014


justshatered says:
March 14, 2014 at 10:19 pm

The real problem as I see it is that the people running the club are interested in two things:

1. Making money year on year.
2. Selling the club/company for more than they bought it for. They are not interested in football.
==============================================================
I agree with just about everything in the guts of your post but not necessarily your first point viz: ‘Making money year on year’.

There is a curious mix of shareholders involved in the Ibrox equation and their actual game plan is still unclear and transparency is hindered because of the powerful bloc of mystery offshore investors who have been there since Rangers was initially bought from D&P.

But nothing I have observed in the unfolding of the Rangers story gives me the slightest indication that those wielding the actual power – and that isn’t the current Board – are interested in making money year on year for the longer term. Indeed, to date, the amount of money spent – some of which hasn’t been accounted for in a detailed fashion – is awesome.

Spivs want to make money year on year but seldom from the same company – they move-in, flog everything that isn’t nailed down and move on to their next fatted pig. Actually running a business and making profits is too much like hard work when there are mugs everywhere begging to be ripped-off and who will thank the Spivs for doing so – well until they disappear with their warchests loaded with dosh.

I don’t regard Laxeys as Spivs unlike some shareholders. They have their well-tried and tested formula in how to make money from companies by unlocking profits that are often tied-up in property assets and they keep within the rules in doing that. The first Gold Rush is over and the Spivs may have departed but with so many unidentified major players it’s hard to be sure about that. But companies in the trouble that Rangers faces attract fly-by-nights out to make a quick buck so I have no doubt that new Spivs will be congregating on Edmiston Drive trying to scrabble their way up the marble staircase.

I haven’t even considered the CW and Sevco 5088 position because the fly in the ointment there for me is Laxeys given that the easiest way for them to unlock a shareholder dividend is through Ibrox and Murray Park. They are a sharp outfit and I just can’t see them getting involved if CW had any major hold over the property assets. That really would have been a sticking point IMO.

Another thing about Laxeys which they might not have realised is that if you take control of a football club like Rangers and tee-off the fans then you can be subjected to a publicity spotlight never before experienced. Sure they act within the law but the Bears truly are capable of, if not reputational damage, possibly making their future business dealings much harder to pull-off and not being Spivs that will concern them.

With that in mind I have no doubt that your second statement is spot-on viz: ‘Selling the club/company for more than they bought it for. They are not interested in football’. I would add lease-back to that comment btw.

At the moment it looks as though ST sales will be the next pitched battlefield between the various factions which will only create further divisions within the support and deepen existing ones.

One thing for sure is that while Laxeys is getting its ducks in a row it won’t want to lose any money – its just not how they do business – so if they judge the ST boycott to be a serious financial threat to them then the whole game plan will quickly shift-up a few gears and I would expect their ‘opponents’ to be left flat-footed wondering what hit them and where their ‘club’ has gone 🙄

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on8:34 am - Mar 15, 2014


Resin_lab_dog says:
March 15, 2014 at 1:28 am
easyJambo says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:43 pm

Auldhied
_____________________________________
Suggested tactic: try and get them to state how their position could/might change in the event of a UTT decision in advance of the UTT decision being reached… with reasoning a priori!
====================================
I understand where you are coming from but there is no way they will lay-out their position in advance of a future decision which could take many forms. It also further complicates an already complex issue.

Auldheid will be concentrating I’m sure on how best to answer their questions to continue the dialogue that has been established, This is a very important first-step that Auldheid has, virtually single-handedly, achieved and the importance of it can’t be overestimated.

We can all assist by looking at the response and suggesting points for Auldheid to mull over or take into account. But we really have to present facts as we understand them to be in relation to the LNS Decision and not on possible future events over which we have no say and even less control.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:56 am - Mar 15, 2014


James Doleman says:
March 14, 2014 at 11:45 pm
11 1 Rate This

Not seen this piece before

“Mulling these questions triggered a reminder of conman turned Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) adviser Frank Abagnale, the subject of the 2002 movie, Catch Me If You Can. Using a crook to catch many other crooks, Abagnale’s insights helped the good guys wreak havoc on the US’s white-collar criminals.

King is unlikely to be joining SARS any time soon. But by having his affairs so publicly exposed, he’s already become an unwitting Abagnale. Never before has SARS dedicated so much time to the murky financial machinations of South Africa’s uber-rich. It should prove a great investment.”

http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2013/09/02/undictated-the-dogged-mr-chipps-who-brought-dave-king-to-book
——————–

It’s a very insightful piece. Thought this quote stood out:

He also issued a grovelling joint media statement, promised to unwind offshore structures and bring the funds back home …

Makes you wonder about those offshore structures and where they have their funds tied up. Obviously nothing to do with his current urgent ‘mission’, although some might suggest otherwise.

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on8:58 am - Mar 15, 2014


James Doleman says:

March 14, 2014 at 11:45 pm
Not seen this piece before

“Mulling these questions triggered a reminder of conman turned Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) adviser Frank Abagnale, the subject of the 2002 movie, Catch Me If You Can. Using a crook to catch many other crooks, Abagnale’s insights helped the good guys wreak havoc on the US’s white-collar criminals.

King is unlikely to be joining SARS any time soon. But by having his affairs so publicly exposed, he’s already become an unwitting Abagnale. Never before has SARS dedicated so much time to the murky financial machinations of South Africa’s uber-rich. It should prove a great investment.”

http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2013/09/02/undictated-the-dogged-mr-chipps-who-brought-dave-king-to-book
=============================================================================JJ
JD…millions of thanks for the link…some real home truths about Mr King and his business ethics, all of which are in line with the ethical behaviour of David Murray when at the helm of RFC(IL).
I commend this article to all blog readers…words of one syllable which even I can understand, viz.:
“Mr Chipps built a case that resonated with Mr Justice Willie Hartzenberg, who opened his September 2002 judgment as follows : “Scotsmen are known to be thrifty. (King) is a Scot. He cannot be accused of squandering his money on the unnecessary payment of income tax.” (Just how apt is that ?)

PS nice to see that a Chartered Accountant, albeit a South African one, has made a positive contribution to this omnishambles!

View Comment

essexbeancounterPosted on9:09 am - Mar 15, 2014


Danish Pastry says:

March 15, 2014 at 8:56 am

========================================================================
DP….verily a few re-quotable line from this no holds barred article. Your quote was my second favourite.

Silly question: why does the SMSM not think of even selectively quoting from this?

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on9:14 am - Mar 15, 2014


Auldheid says:
March 14, 2014 at 6:17 pm
37 0 Rate This

Folks
Just when I’m going out we got a reply.

Accordingly, I am not clear in what respects it is being suggested that the Commission was “misled” as regards any of the Specified Players in particular and/or in relation to the participation of Specified Players in EBT Payments and Arrangements in connection with the Rangers Employee Benefit Trust. For the Commission to have been misled it would be necessary for it to have been induced into a false belief by the actions or inactions of a party and/or third party and for it to have relied on that false belief in coming to its various decisions.

There’s nothing like expert analysis of legalese, and this is nothing like expert analysis: isn’t the above a kind of open invitation to answer another question than the actual one being raised? Either that, or an oblique form of: ‘Please supply more actionable info.’?

Whatever, congratulations Auldheid in cranking into life the seized up cogs of the wheels within wheels. Cue Lance-Corporal Jones’ well-known phrase 😮

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on9:51 am - Mar 15, 2014


May I congratulate Auldheid on his success in eliciting a response from those who would prefer we all ‘moved on’. No mean feat.

I’m sure, while I type, he is mulling over his own response, which is likely to be the most important piece of writing anyone will do from this blog. The reply he received is probably the first defensive response the ‘Hampden Cabal’ have been forced to make and certainly the first that has been made to a non-compliant medium. It is not a dismissive response and perhaps even invites further dialogue. It is very unlikely we will ever see a better opportunity to force the hand of those who have something to hide, and maybe even give an opportunity to honourable men who know they were were duped, and are not too happy about it, to revisit a sham inquiry!

There was something in their response, though, that suggests they would prefer to know who they are talking to, or at least that it is someone who represents TSFM in an ‘official’ capacity. I am not suggesting Auldheid divulges his identity, for as we know, there are Charlottes about, but if he could, somehow, be given an official position within the blog (I think it has become more than a blog) he may find he is given more respect than an anonymous blogger would receive. There is clearly no time, and perhaps no real will, for a vote of all contributors to appoint Auldheid as, say, our official spokesperson, but perhaps the moderators could get together with Auldheid and come up with something that would satisfy Harper McLeod that he does have some official status here, and does speak for the blog.

Anyway, Auldheid, it is an onerous task you have here, but you have already shown you are the man for the job. All power to your pen!

View Comment

No1 BobPosted on10:23 am - Mar 15, 2014


Danish Pastry says:
March 15, 2014 at 8:56 am

Danish, the following article provides more details on the glib one’s agreement to repatriate his overseas investments back to SA.

http://www.iol.co.za/business/companies/micromega-ticks-off-all-conditions-of-nosa-deal-1.1637807#.UyQe8pVF214

Given that the SA tax authorities are making the ‘glib and shameless liar’ bring all of his overseas investments back to SA why would they now be willing to let him take funds out of SA to invest in ‘Rangers’?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:32 am - Mar 15, 2014


Couple of quick comments on a busy weekend for us lads from the north :mrgreen:

Auldheid. Fantastic effort. Open dialogue will be rewarded I’m sure. Telling them how it is, verging on, as GJ would no doubt say, how we might like it to be, will not be rewarded. I maybe missed it. Can you say who the response is from (HM presumably on SPFL instruction or even SPFL directly). Understand completely if you don’t want to give an actual name.

On Killie Debt. As I understand the deal the hotel is being sold and Billy Bowie is paying for it AT MARKET VALUE. The remaining debt, with the hotel proceeds netted off, is being paid off IN FULL by Billy Bowie, and he will be given shares in return to make him a majority player. In addition Mr Bowie is going to inject HIS OWN MONEY in some shape or form to provide working capital for the development of the club going forward.

In the interests of balance – since my focus above is hopefully clear – existing loan provider James Moffat is writing off his substantial loan to the club but I assume he is ‘happy’ to do so?

Oh, and the working capital facility does not seem to be preconditioned by parachuting anywhere, nor an entitlement to a CL place being fulfilled, just coz!

Comparisons anyone?

View Comment

andygraham.66Posted on10:36 am - Mar 15, 2014


Barry Glendenning in today’s Guardian

Caley’s fans have bought up just 7,000 of their allocation for Sunday’s final, which leaves over 13,000 seats at Celtic HQ unsold. Despite vociferous demand from Aberdeen for more tickets to be released, panjandrums in the Scottish Professional Football League and the local police force have declined to oblige the club’s supporters. “In the current climate of Scottish football it’s disappointing we can’t cater for fans desperate to come to a game and see their team play,” said Aberdeen’s manager, Derek McInnes, this week. In the current climate of Scottish football, which seems riven with infighting, media conspiracies and self-serving governance, it’s certainly disappointing, but no great shock. BG

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on10:59 am - Mar 15, 2014


andygraham.66 says:

March 15, 2014 at 10:36 am

I suppose it’s a form of Armageddon; that our football bodies can’t cope with success, or at least when it comes from outwith Glasgow. The idea that rivalry equates to hatred is so ingrained in their psyche that they can’t come up with a plan to move the gap between supporters a few dozen yards (or whatever it takes). Still, they have plans afoot to try to ensure they have the required level of hatred at the Scottish Cup Final 😈

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on11:07 am - Mar 15, 2014


Smugas says: March 15, 2014 at 10:32 am

On Killie Debt. As I understand the deal the hotel is being sold and Billy Bowie is paying for it AT MARKET VALUE. The remaining debt, with the hotel proceeds netted off, is being paid off IN FULL by Billy Bowie, and he will be given shares in return to make him a majority player. In addition Mr Bowie is going to inject HIS OWN MONEY in some shape or form to provide working capital for the development of the club going forward.
=========================
My reading of the Killie statement is that the proceeds of the Hotel sale will go to the Bank, but that Billy Bowie “purchased” the remainder of the debt from the bank, rather than paying it off in full.

I’m pretty sure that the bank would have discounted the residual amount payable by Bowie given that the “market value” of the hotel asset was being realised and set against the balance. We might get more information from the next set of accounts once they are published

James Moffat has seemingly written off anything up to £1.8M, although I can’t find any evidence of this level of debt to him in recent accounts.

All in all it is a sensible deal for the club.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on11:20 am - Mar 15, 2014


Rangers media not very happy about the Kilmarnock deal that cheats the taxpayer. 😀

Why weren’t they supported like this by the SFA/media when they had tax problems blah blah blah

Just unbelievable so of the claptrap they come out with.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on11:30 am - Mar 15, 2014


Allyjambo says:
March 15, 2014 at 10:59 am

The idea that rivalry equates to hatred is so ingrained in their psyche that they can’t come up with a plan to move the gap between supporters a few dozen yards (or whatever it takes).

That is PRECISELY what drives the powers that be in Scottish football. Whilst hatred is perhaps good box office, and a good window for English audiences to have a peek at the Barbars north of the border, it is most definitely NOT sporting rivalry, and most definitely the antithesis of sport.
The MSM though, led by the Keevinses of this world, would have you believe otherwise – that the overcrowded A&Es, the domestic violence, the street brawls and the disgustingly lazy thinking are inconsequential compared to the “damage” being done to the “sport”.

Maybe it’s time we changed the strapline on the blog to “Hatred is not Rivalry”

I think you have encapsulated in one sentence the very core of what is wrong with our game, and how that WoS-centric slant has damaged not only our sport, but the cohesion of our country itself. It is good to see that may of us here are on the same page.

I would recommend a round of backslapping, but given the upcoming result of the demographic poll, I’m not s sure that would be a good thing 🙂

View Comment

TSFMPosted on11:42 am - Mar 15, 2014


Results of the demo poll below. I have to admit to being a little surprised. I tend to think that flies in the face of the TU/TD trends on the blog – although voting was only possible for registered users (who are in turn the only people who can comment) and TU/TDs are available to casual visitors.
My inference being of course that the older we get the less (in general) we cling to partisan views.

Clearly, the modal class is the 45-59 age group, and the mode can be estimated at around 56. I am a bit disappointed at the almost total absence of under-35s, but draw your own conclusions 🙂

Group No %
Under 18 2 0%
18 – 24 6 1%
25 – 34 36 3%
35 – 44 224 19%
45 – 59 638 54%
60 – 75 264 22%
Over 75 8 1%

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:12 pm - Mar 15, 2014


TSFM says:

March 15, 2014 at 11:42 am

I think if the poll had been taken 18-24 months ago there would have been a higher ratio from the lower age groups, but the more analytical, and less tub thumping style that the blog has become, has left us with the older age group, who are, perhaps, more inclined to spend time analysing and don’t expect good things to happen overnight. The acceptance that ‘good things come to those who wait’ is perhaps easier for those with years of experience of waiting, but who, through that experience, have come to accept that good things don’t always happen, and they never happen without the will to change things.

There is, of course, the possibility that we older, less IT dependent, see our laptops, PCs and tablets as tools of communication, rather than playthings of communication, means we have a lot more of our web-time on sites such as this.

View Comment

FinlochPosted on12:41 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Auldheid
The response to you is the kind of letter you have to read half a dozen times to try and understand what it means.
Kind of patronising and I guess seeking to confuse, divide, blindsight and divert.
I don’t think they will like a simple response with supporting facts about the issue as you / we see it – not their corralled variant.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on12:48 pm - Mar 15, 2014


andygraham.66 says:
March 15, 2014 at 10:36 am
==========================
The irony is that ICT demands ‘not to be stuck in the corner’ is what is preventing Aberdeen getting more tickets. If Celtic Park was segregated the way it used to be when Celtic played Rangers, Aberdeen could have had 50K tickets. I use the term irony because ICT have sold the optimum number of tickets for the ground to be segregated on those lines.

View Comment

DonegaltimPosted on12:58 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Although I may be grey and balding and fall into the highest bracket, I certainly enjoy a good old tub thumping as it gets the old juices going.

View Comment

Bill1903Posted on1:00 pm - Mar 15, 2014


I doubt if anyone imagined we would take anywhere near 40k
Last time we won against Dundee in 95 the total crowd was 33k
Looking forward to it 😎

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on1:15 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Donegaltim says:

March 15, 2014 at 12:58 pm

😯

View Comment

Paulmac2Posted on1:25 pm - Mar 15, 2014


The Dave King nonsense is an insult to anyones intelligence….and yet the SMSM pump it out without question or any real objective comment to the details…

Auldheid…the response you received is on the face of it a patsy answer….a lot of words that say very little other than pretend to provide an answer…and suggest they are not sure what you are asking?

A typically worded formal answer in a legally structured context which is standard practice for someone who does know the thrust of your request but is aware that to provide the answers in any other way would open pandoras box!

Keep at it my friend…I for one appreciate your enthusiasm to bring these people to task!

Ps. Good luck to Aberdeen and ICT tomorrow…I hope the weather… the occasion and the football on show are a credit to Scottish football..

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on1:33 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Are you human?
Or are you dancer? 😛
60 – 75 🙄
formerly ianjs
made it. 😯

An F quoting The Killers? Old geezers rock 🙂

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on1:49 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Paulmac2 says:
March 15, 2014 at 1:25 pm
2 0 Rate This

The Dave King nonsense is an insult to anyones intelligence
===============================================
Listening to 15 minutes of Radio Clyde last night it was clear there are some in the media who are quite happy to have their intelligence insulted. There is clearly a desperation to somehow return to the illusion of Rangers as the club that existed under David Murray. Incredibly many in the media said two years there had been lessons for them which would impact how they will report in future. Looks like nothing has been learnt at all with many of them!

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:51 pm - Mar 15, 2014


upthehoops says:
March 15, 2014 at 12:48 pm

2

0

Rate This

andygraham.66 says:
March 15, 2014 at 10:36 am
==========================
The irony is that ICT demands ‘not to be stuck in the corner’ is what is preventing Aberdeen getting more tickets. If Celtic Park was segregated the way it used to be when Celtic played Rangers, Aberdeen could have had 50K tickets. I use the term irony because ICT have sold the optimum number of tickets for the ground to be segregated on those lines.

_______________________________________________
Accepted.
To be fair to us though, those initial seats were the worst in the stadium. Many are restricted view. Fans blocks separated from each other. Its a shame that some Aberdeen fans aren’t getting to go and of there was any way this could be mitigated you’d have the full support of ICT fans. But sticking us up in the parapet for our first ever senior cup final on the off chance that Aberdeen might bring more than 40,000 wasn’t the answer. Especially when Aberdeen selling their 40k so quickly was a surprise, albeit a pleasant one.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on2:08 pm - Mar 15, 2014


No1 Bob says:
March 15, 2014 at 10:23 am
11 0 Rate This

Danish, the following article provides more details on the glib one’s agreement to repatriate his overseas investments back to SA.

http://www.iol.co.za/business/companies/micromega-ticks-off-all-conditions-of-nosa-deal-1.1637807#.UyQe8pVF214

Given that the SA tax authorities are making the ‘glib and shameless liar’ bring all of his overseas investments back to SA why would they now be willing to let him take funds out of SA to invest in ‘Rangers’?

————

The media are bigging up the idea that he wants to ‘invest’ (gift Ibrox tons more money to burn). I have only read that he wants to help organise a new round of funding. Funny how a lot of international businessmen are attracted to football clubs for no apparently logical reason. As you say, his Ibrox involvement seems at odds with the SA agreement.

The idea that he is in cahoots with board members, past or present, is intriguing. He clearly knows a great deal about the anonymous offshore would, so maybe he is the man to rumble Blue Pitch and their ilk, or is he, in fact, …

But I’m sure there’s a perfectly reasonable explanation to it all. It may just be severe Rangersitis.

View Comment

WhulliePosted on2:11 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Slightly OT (ish) but there was a real jaw-dropping quip from Derek Johnstone on SSB last night in respect of Dave King’s F&PP status, and I quote:-
“There is the law and there is football law. The SFA will use football law”
It went unchallenged by Jim Delahunt.

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on2:13 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Talking ticket allocations

General rules being (I would have thought)

Ground Capacity – (sponsors, club officials, SPFL etc) / 2

So by that reckoning there must be about 25K hingers oan got their names down for the Albion Rovers vs Dundee Utd semi as Utd have been allocated 13K according to Jim Spence on Twitter.

Seems fair?

View Comment

bad capt madmanPosted on2:31 pm - Mar 15, 2014


I read that Dundee Utd requested and were refused a change of venue if they are to face TRFC in the semi final.
It got me to wondering what the usual process is for paying the host clubs. Is it in advance or arrears, and if there is any way of discovering if the SFA have already paid TRFC and if this is one of the reasons that Dundee Utd’s request was refused?
Maybe Dundee Utd can find out from SFA Board contacts? Can Phil Mac find out from his contacts?
If there has been any irregularity by the SFA in providing what is in effect interest free loans to TRFC by way of early payment outwith the usual financial procedures, then this could be another piece of ammunition for those seeking a clear out in the SFA leadership.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on2:33 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Resin_lab_dog says:
March 15, 2014 at 1:51 pm

Accepted.
To be fair to us though, those initial seats were the worst in the stadium. Many are restricted view. Fans blocks separated from each other. Its a shame that some Aberdeen fans aren’t getting to go and of there was any way this could be mitigated you’d have the full support of ICT fans. But sticking us up in the parapet for our first ever senior cup final on the off chance that Aberdeen might bring more than 40,000 wasn’t the answer. Especially when Aberdeen selling their 40k so quickly was a surprise, albeit a pleasant one.
==========================================
I wasn’t having a go at ICT fans, and I hope it didn’t come over that way. I do agree it is a surprise Aberdeen have sold so many. If you are going I hope you enjoy your day. You may even be in my seat as that is the area I sit at Celtic Park!

PS Be prepared for overpriced, poor quality catering, should you choose to make use of it. Major source of complaint from the fans, and the club are making changes for next season.

View Comment

JimBhoyPosted on2:34 pm - Mar 15, 2014


44k at Ibrox, must be a lot of fans dressed as seats…!!

View Comment

James ForrestPosted on2:43 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Scandalous if true that United are being given 13,000 tickets. The SFA has turned it into a home tie for Sevco Rangers. Utterly deplorable behaviour. When does thie end?

In the meantime, our take on King and the suicidal plan he’s proposing …

http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/suicide-kings/

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on2:50 pm - Mar 15, 2014


upthehoops says:
March 15, 2014 at 2:33 pm

1

0

Rate This

Resin_lab_dog says:
March 15, 2014 at 1:51 pm

I wasn’t having a go at ICT fans, and I hope it didn’t come over that way.

_________________________________________

No, I didn’t take it like that at all.
I do feel some responsibility for the disappointment of Aberdeen fans who don’t get to go, and wish there was a way that more tickets could be found for them without disadvantaging us… (we beat the same number of teams to get there after all!).

Wish we could get more ICT fans along. But I am going. Am taking the kids so am doing my bit. And pretty much all of the Caley fans I know are going too. If we haven’t sold more tickets, its because there aren’t any more of us! Its a young club after all. But the city is growing and the club will grow with it. Especially if we can start to collect trophies now and again.

View Comment

Angus1983Posted on2:56 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Utter disgrace, if true, that United are geting a non-negotiable 13K tickets for a semi-final at a NEUTRAL ground. Albion Rovers will never sell their share.

If there are any petition-like complaints that need a name added, let me know.

P.S. I see Celtic are proposing to play their (potential) European Qualifier ties at Murrayfield next season due to ParkRed being used for a WRVS tea-party or something. I thought Murrayfield was seen as unsuitable for fitba. If not, why are provincial clubs having to go to Glasgow club stadiums for semis and finals while Hampden is out of action instead of playing them at neutral Murrayfield?

Conversely, why won’t Celtic be playing their Euro games at Ibrox?

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on2:56 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Also worth pointing out: 60% of ICT tickets for the final have been sold to family groups.
That can only be a good thing for the game.

View Comment

FIFAPosted on2:58 pm - Mar 15, 2014


Came in and watched the last 15 min of the tv games,thought to myself what are the programme planners at bt sport smoking this weather,I cannot recall a Rangers game that has been on this channel that would create a worthy topic of discussuion in the pub,apart from the penalties and sending off that are a constant event the quality of football is not worth the bother,do the bears get worked up in their pub discussions after games ,can someone spill the beans .

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on3:01 pm - Mar 15, 2014


The European Commission has advised the Spanish Government that State Aid may have been granted by Madrid Council to Real Madrid football club and has asked interested parties to submit comments on the recently issued summary of their investigation to date.

Things could be looking a bit bleak for the club because Article 14 of the EC Council Regulation Number 659/1999, states that all unlawful aid can be subject to recovery from the recipient.

No doubt the Bear Land ‘Experts’ will proclaim to the rootops that Celtic’s time has come. That most certainly is the case IMO on the football field but neither Celtic, Glasgow City Council or any other public body smeared by preposterous claims of public corruption by deluded Bears will lose any sleep over the Madrid connection.

I’ll explain why although I have absolutely no doubt that, as usual, the so-called ‘experts’ will ignore the facts and twist the tale to suit their own sectarian agenda.

Back in November 1996 the Real Madrid football club agreed to transfer a plot of land to the council on the understanding that at a later unspecified date some unidentified plots of land would be transferred to the club by the council.

In May 1998 the council agreed to transfer some plots to Real Madrid including ‘Las Tablas’ which the council’s own administration valued at 595,194 Euros. However there was a snag because the Council didn’t actually own Las Tablas so the agreement stipulated that the legal transfer would take place 7 days after the council was registered on the Spanish Property Register as owner of Las Tablas.

This registration took place in February 2003 but the agreed transfer ran into problems because in 1997 Las Tablas was designated under town planning rules for bassic sport use and this was known to the club and council when they reached their 1998 agreement as both were of the opinion that transferring the plot to private ownership wouldn’t breach planning rules if the sporting use classification was guaranteed by Real Madrid.

But by 2003 Madrid council re-interpretated the legal position and determined that Las Tablas should be designated for public use and owned by a public entity which ruled-out a transfer to Real Madrid – a private company.

The impossibility of transferring the land to Real madrid despite the agreement to do so in the May 1998 was finally addressed in July 2011 when the council ‘assumed’ it had to compensate the club for the land transfer failure and the council’s administration valued the Las Tablas at 22,693,054 Euros in 2011.

As part of the agreement another plot of land was transferred to the club but 3 months later it was transferred back to the council for a payment of 6.6 million Euros plus a piec e of land in front of the Mirabeau Stadium for the construction of a shopping mall and hotel. The EC apparently received no info on how the valuation was arrived at for this transaction.

In assessing the State Aid complaint the EC stated that Real Madrid:

‘Appears to enjoy an economic advantage from the fact that a plot of land, which at the time of its acquisition was valued at EUR 595,194 and kept in the books with a value of EUR 488,000, appears 13 years later, in an operation to offset mutual debts, with a value of more than EUR 22 million.

‘The remarkable increase of the alleged value of the land raises serious doubts. The Spanish real estate market rose considerably after 1998. But real estate started going down sharply already in 2008. The classification of the area had not changed in the meantime.

‘Furthermore, in case of a real estate transfer between a public authority and a private party it should be ensured that the underlying value of the land is the market value. In the absence of a bidding procedure, an independent expert evaluation of the land value would serve this purpose. However, neither the 1998 agreement nor the 2011 agreement were accompanied by an independent evaluation.’

More detail can be found at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2014:069:0108:0114:EN:PDF

View Comment

neepheidPosted on3:13 pm - Mar 15, 2014


http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/suicide-kings/

The latest from James Forrest.

View Comment

Comments are closed.