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
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:28 am
—————————————
Verification of “operational existence” is easy CM.
You just get a doctor to write a short note in his/her usual unintelligible handwriting to say that he/she has applied a stevcoscope to the red brick wall of the Struth Strand and has indeed heard the sound of a beating heart (though it could just as easily be the sound of Mr Wallace beating his hand on the desk in frustration….)
Question 1 answered, Deloitte tick a box and on we go……
Meantime the 2013 accounts of the trading company remain overdue and unfiled, complete save for a clean audit report.
Morning all.
WRT King and his assertion that Green is still involved,IIRC both were in attendance at the Zurich meeting revealed to us by Corsica.Also attending were Whyte and Ellis.
Barcabhoy says:
March 28, 2014 at 8:13 am
Wottpi
I have seen the AP01, don’t know how to post it on here. The date of appointment is clearly 16-01-2013
=====================================
CH show the AP01 form appointing Wallace as being lodged on 3/02/2014. I did an earlier post profiling the non-Rangers RR directors and Wallace didn’t appear at that time. So I am happy to go with CH on this unless the AP01 was signed and dated much earlier but not submitted to CH until 3/02/2014.
But that would raise all sorts of questions and I don’t really see Ashley being involved or condoning that.
In a quick look through posts this morning I think it was Danish Pastry querying what Garrion Security does. Well it has been slowly taking the Rangers security in-house as I think Group 4 or a similar company’s contracts expired. I think they have taken on some of the Group 4 staff but I have no idea whether there were any Tupe implications 😆
Looking at the Wallace/Somers statements again.
Could this be another example of waters being deliberately muddied?.
Although the threat of insolvency is levelled at theTRFC fans,what Wallace may mean that TRFC could be made insolvent but RIFC may then become a property company,able to continue in “operational existence”?.
These two gentlemen were speaking yesterday on behalf of RIFC,not TRFC.Whilst some of us can distinguish between the two at times,the vast majority of fans think both companies are one and the same.
When Wallace/Somers say they assume the company can trade on,they mean RIFC.
andypandimonium says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:33 am
=====================================
From the Companies in UK site:
RANGERS RETAIL LIMITED
UNIT A BROOK PARK EAST
SHIREBROOK
UNITED KINGDOM
NG20 8RY
Directors and Secretaries
David Forsey 13 Jul 2012 ⇒ Present (1 Year) Director
Barry Leach 13 Jul 2012 ⇒ Present (1 Year) Director
Cameron Olsen 4 Dec 2013 ⇒ Present (3 Months) Company Secretary
Iain Wallace 16 Jan 2013 ⇒ Present (1 Year) Director
Company Registration No.: 08142409
Incorporation Date: 13 Jul 2012 1 Year old
Financial Year End: 30 Apr
Company Accounts: For period ending:28 Apr 2013 Filed on:6 Feb 2014
So much info to take in at the moment but this particular section of the peoples union of judean bears caught my eye.
Firstly though I’ll come to Mr Graham’s defence which is unusual for me and unheard of on here 😈 I see exactly where he is coming from and as Eco is wont to say, if it were happening to my team I’m sure I would be thrashing about in exactly the same way.
Having said that, Chris’ People’s Front said, “For the avoidance of doubt, there is no plan to drip feed season ticket money on a game by game basis. The proposal is simply that season ticket money is paid in a lump sum, prior to the start of the season, in return for security over club assets. This will allow fans to be safe in the knowledge that no matter what happens the club’s assets will be in good hands.”
What that passage says to me is that he/they are trying to formally connect the valuable fixed assets currently held by the reach out and touch legally defined club onto the ethereal cloudy immortal club thingy. I stress again, I understand exactly why he wants to do this. But, and a crucial but, he wants this to happen, with no suggestion of payment by the way “no matter what happens.”
Now 3 years ago I might have passed that statement by without a second glance. But in the last three years what has happened?
1/ A club, without going into extensive detail, has been caught more red handed than (I’ll stop here for obvious reasons).
2/ A club was liquidated having bet the house, and then apparently re-incarnated, house intact, sans significant debt.
3/ A club has climbed its way up the leagues (ignoring if they should have been allowed in in the first place) using a business model, in fact flaunting a business model, that bore more than a strong resemblance to point 2. It did it with its own money (kind of) but it has now run out raising two immediate questions – a/ was that fair on the other teams (particularly if a second insovency event is created) and b/ what does it do now since reasonable forecasters, who have been on the button to date unlike more visible outlets, are questioning how the next season can be completed without further injection of cash.
4/ With the above history in mind, and the assets safely attached to a cloudy thing, the club also flaunt their purpose in life to be to take on all challengers everywhere and especially THEM on the proviso that they have, HAVE, to win the league to get CL monies to have a hope of being profitable and thus sustainable.
So no Chris, for the absence of doubt (your words) your request to have valuable property assets given to you for nothing to allow you to then put the whole lot on blue on a stacked casino table that previously only had black and red does not strike me as a particularly sound idea at all.
Rant over.
Exiled Celt says:March 28, 2014 at 12:33
Barcabhoy says: March 27, 2014 at 11:56 pm……..
Interesting train of thought in your posts.
Reading them brought me back to the future…..
———————————————————————————————————————————-
“Graham Wallace……..maybe not as independent as some would like to portray”..
..” Looks like a Mike Ashley appointee to me, and as a former boardroom colleague of Charles Green you wonder who else he might have links to”…
…”Something was odd in Dave Kings statement that I did not see picked up on”….
… “DK: The club needs my money not the shareholders. Charles Green doesn’t need the money”…
…”Every single pound I put into this I want it spent on the team and on the facilities like Murray Park and Ibrox. Why on earth would I want to give any of that to Charles Green?”…..
….”Why would the money go to Charles Green? He has nothing to do with anything at TRFC as per Aug 20 2013 storyline”…
On March 5th 2014, Dave King said Charles was not involved
– So was his statement that Charles Green benefits from the selling of the shares to King an admission that he found out something during his stay here?
————————————————————————————————————————————————–
My view is Mr King didn’t find out anything he didn’t already know on his recent trip.
So for me its back to Dem Bones.
A nice little ditty for a Friday.
I can’t remember who came up with it first on here but its catchy and if you sing it it will become an ear worm.
“The Murray bone’s connected to the Whyte bone
The Whyte bone’s connected to the Green bone
The Green bone’s connected to the Wallace* bone
And that’s the way of this world”
* The current CEO at The Rangers whoever it might be
The Dem Bones view of the fall and fall or the blue club would make a wonderful musical.
A song and dance metaphor of our times and it takes a hell of a lot of people to make a show.
I’ve probably missed a few
We have Producers
Big “money-guys” like Mr Gavin from BOS, RCO who can fix anything, Ashley and Laxeys and a bunch of other secretive people who are using fronts for their money making enterprises. Their job is to make money ruthlessly. Some people might call some of it “dirty money”.
We have the Cast
The unholy trinity – SDM, Craig, Charles
they are all the stars of the show even if SDM was the star of the prequels.
We have Chorus.
Smaller-part players but an important group that changes from time to time and they often take the stage.
It includes the current CEO Wallace and all his predecessors like Stockbridge.
There is a special role for Mr McCoist.
It has also included RCO’s SFA pals like Brycie and Regan the “transparency bringer” , King, Longmuir, Traynor, Imran, Thornhill, Sir Walter, Mr Doncaster, a few Lords, and a few others.
There are cameo roles from the Charlottes too.
This list is a work in progress.
We have Dancers.
People with bit parts but there to keep the continuity going and sometimes the clowns of the saga.
Dancers like wee sneaky Chic and a fair few of his “Shortbread” pals, Jackson and his red top press release recyclers (with so much pro Rangers space to fill each day), Traynor who possibly deserves a special named credit, Patey and risible rent a quotes like him, Malcolm Murray, Jack, don’t forget Jack and others some of whom have never been on stage but who might be politicians.
And we have a Singing Audience too who are a huge part of the show.
A bit like the Rocky Horror or Sing Along a sound of Music- it is the Singing Audience who make it what it is….
A Comedic Tragedy.
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:28 am
An article about “Operational Existence” entitled The Audit Report under Going Concern Uncertainties can be found here
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00014788.1992.9729449#.UzVFR_l_tps
The Auditors have obviously raised concerns around whether Rangers is a going concern or not. Mr Wallace, has used this rather odd formulation, no doubt in the knowledge that the Scottish Sports hacks, with their room temperature IQs won’t have a clue what he is talking about, skip over it, and gush about all the “good news” in the results.
I completely agree that Mr Wallace is covering his well upholstered behind by getting his excuses in early.
Meantime, I fully expect the Football Authorities to accept whatever assurances they are given by Rangers at face value, and will be suitably “astonished” (copyright Ms Lamont), when it all goes pear shaped.
Giovanni says:
March 27, 2014 at 8:05 pm
“Since the period end, the Company has also obtained access to loan facilities totaling £1.5m. £500,000 of the facility is interest free. £1,000,000 of the facility incurs a facility fee of £45,000 and carries a potential annualised interest charge of 10% should repayment not be made before 2 July 2014.”
These don’t seem to be the same terms and conditions to me. Perhaps Mr Letham is not as generous as first thought.
……………….
Nope
These are Spivs we are dealing with
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
It says in the Letham statement that the premium payment has been “reduced” to £45k
So its a payment that is still being paid to the same people but at a lower rate
………………..
Interim Accounts
The so called “facility fee” is being paid to the group who “facilitated” the deal by generously giving up their Wonga loan
i.e Laxey Partners
So
The nice Spivs have reluctantly agreed to Mr Lethams interest free loan for a “facility fee” of £45k
Nice Mr Letham has loaned RIFC £1m interest free repayable by 2 July secured against the same assets.He gets 10% pa interest on any balance unpaid as at 2 July 2014
Accounts?
Who approved who`s business plan?
– Projections, FPPs etc. as part of the `Conditional` new membership and license?
Who ratified that approval – and on whom(s) authority?
Was Due Diligence applied and was it periodically monitored?
Was 50m [£50 Million Pounds!] expended over 18 months part of projections?
Were full disclosures given? – as in who was the who exactly?
Have any `agreements` been breached?
Was Business Plan viable? – Now that they`re having a 120 day review to formulate one
It’s not solely a rapacious financial shambles
It is a total failure of administration oversight
What are ALL the Authorities going to do about this? – More of the same? – Ad Infinitum?
twopanda says:
March 28, 2014 at 10:12 am
“What are ALL the Authorities going to do about this? – More of the same? – Ad Infinitum?”
Yes more of the same ad infinitum is the only possible answer to your question
slimshady61 says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:39 am
…………………….Meantime the 2013 accounts of the trading company remain overdue and unfiled, complete save for a clean audit report.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
slimshady, the failure by TRFC to file their accounts in accordance with the Companies Act/Companies House requirements is truly key to this. The media and the public are easily confused/confusable by the fact that there are 2 companies (and a club) and by the fact that there are various regulatory reporting requirements in play (Companies House/Companies Act, Fitba and AIM).
So if it is said (by us)- “the accounts are overdue” some response along the lines of “what are you talking about – the accounts are now done- they came out yesterday” will be enough to satisfy nearly everyone because its too hard for people to understand (especially for people who don’t really want to know/want to enquire).
Perhaps the pressure point is the SFA/SPFL (I know – I know).
TRFC is the member.
Its accounts have not been filed in accordance with statutory requirements.
The member is not therefore complying with its legal obligations as a limited company.
It is an offence under s451 of CA 2006 to fail to file accounts.
The offence is committed by the directors.
The accounts are now overdue by a month.
It begs the question:- are G Wallace, N Crighton, A Easdale, J Easdale, and D Somers fit and proper if they cannopt be relied upon to achieve a basic level of compliance with the law of the land?
I am sure I hardly need to point out that more often than not, when a company falls into insolvency, you will find that it was overdue in filing accounts. That is just one reason why, if you are dealing with a company that has not filed its accounts you should be very suspicious.
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 10:16 am
You are quite correct, unfortunately, there is every reason to assume that the SFA/SPFL will do the square root of feck all. They will continue to do their Ostrich act, and then for “the good of Scottish Football, they will do whatever is necessary” to ensure the continuance of a “Stronger” (Copyright 2014 Mr Lawwell) Rangers.
There can and will be no change in what we laughably call the Governance of Scottish Football, until every last one of the current Board members at the SFA & SPFL are fired. I don’t care how good they are at their day jobs with their parent clubs.
Sapaflow – eh thanks – I think. I can’t access the article – looks like I have to register or subscribe to something but the Abstract says:-
“Abstract
This study explores the value of the audit report in the context of the going concern qualification (GCQ) decision along the joint dimensions of auditor competence and independence. Likelihood of company failure, auditor switch rates, the self-fulfilling prophecy argument and audit firm size are analysed as variables potentially affecting the value of the audit report in a GCQ situation.”
😯
I think I will leave it for the moment. 😆
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 10:25 am
Thus proving my point!
There’s quite a good graphic of the previous directorships of Wallace at: http://companycheck.co.uk/director/907403084
I hadn’t realised that he was quite so heavily involved in film/TV type enterprises – going from the company names listed. When I get a minute I’ll have a look at the various companies.
After that period there seems to have been a bit of a gap before he pops-up with a clutch of Rangers directorships and it shows hin with RR in early 2013. Strange that so many different priovate companies are showing that listing a year earlier than the one at CH where they actually buy their information from.
As I said earlier perhaps the AP01 form is signed and dated prior to its actual submission date although if that’s the case how did the private companies show the listing prior to 2014 when the info wouldn’t yet have been released by CH?
Perhaps the publication of the info by the private search companies has only come after the AP01 form was received by CH but they have used the start date of directorship as the date the form was actually signed.
That would certainly raise an interesting scenario and strangely there is a precedent involving Rangers on this very issue in the shape of Sevco 5088. Remember that Green had to get out of town after CW and AE filed AP01 forms for Sevco 5088 in April 2013 but the actual forms were apparently signed and dated by Green in June 2012 from memory.
There has been attempts to claim this was a forgery of Green’s signature but it is clear that following an investigation that the CH Registrar accepted the AR01 forms as legit and confirmed CW and AE as directoirs of the company.
Has lightning struck twice down Ibrox Way ❓
slimshady61 says:
March 28, 2014 at 7:15 am
As at 30 June 2013, TRFC will have owed the holding clumpany a lot of money – >£20M? As of now, that debt must have increased to between £30-40M at a conservative estimate.
———
According to the full-year accounts (RIFC Company Balance Sheet on p25), the actual figure at 30 June 2013, shown as ‘Amounts due from subsidiary undertakings’, was £16.163m. Note 15 on p39 explains that the “Amounts due to RIFC from The Rangers Football Club Ltd represents the proceeds of the Initial Public Offering less costs incurred in the fundraising. The net funds from this activity have been made available to the subsidiary as working capital.”
I think it is unlikely to have increased to £30m.
RIFC had no further cash to lend them at that point and has no income of its own.
However, it may have increased as a result of interest charged, or other charges dressed up as ‘consultancy fees’, etc.
And the recent ‘loan facilties’ (initially a shareholder loan to RIFC, but presumably passed on to TRFCL) now have to be added in too.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26782112
I found this article interesting, and maybe relevant to Scottish football in that Scudamore seems to view Man Utd in the same way that Doncaster views TRFC. Football is clearly rushing towards a franchise system. That seems to be the only logical outcome of this kind of thinking at the top.
ecobhoy says:
March 28, 2014 at 10:30 am
There’s quite a good graphic of the previous directorships of Wallace at: http://companycheck.co.uk/director/907403084
=========================================
Thats the site I looked at.
If you look at the ‘events history’ and compare it with the lists of directors, past and present, everyone holding a directorship took up board positions.
Wallace is only mentioned at joining the board on 5 February 2014.
Therefore why was he not on the board, like all the others, if he was a director from 16 Jan 2013?
That is why I am questioning if the dates on the web site may simply be wrong?
I’m not a regular reader of the ‘Herald’, so I’ve no idea who Gary Keown is. But he does a fly wee job of enjoying talking up the ‘difficulties’ facing Lawwell because of the ‘lack of competition’.
Unconsciously though ( or perhaps consciously!) , Keown reminds us of what this blog is about when he says:
” After the issues involved in continuing to shift tickets when there is no real BONA FIDE (my capitals) competition were briefly raised……” (‘Herald Sport- “No easy cure for Lawwell’s headaches”)
This is clearly a recognition that such ‘competition’ as there was for ten years or so , as WE all know, was anything but ‘bona fide’, being based on the monumental cheatery and deceit of SDM and his compliant, complaisant associates in Scottish football and in the SMSM.
(And I really do wish that Peter Lawwell (and Lennon) would shut up about ‘missing’ any other particular fixture. Thousands of us do not.)
Smugas says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:55 am
Firstly though I’ll come to Mr Graham’s defence which is unusual for me and unheard of on here 😈 I see exactly where he is coming from and as Eco is wont to say, if it were happening to my team I’m sure I would be thrashing about in exactly the same way.
================================================
I would observe that it nearly did happen to my team and I expended a great deal of energy on the issue and it may have looked on the surface that I was a drowning fan just thrashing about. But I can assure you that, like legions of other sensible and informed fans, my legs were pedalling like hell for firmer financial ground. And we got there – Graham and his ilk IMO will only take SS Dignity into deeper and more dangerous waters.
I have never had much time for Graham or where his self-interest might lie and have totally ignored just about everything he has spouted since the debacle that saw Paul McConville prevented from appearing on BBC with Graham. Out of respect to Paul’s memory I’ll say no more on that subject other than to observe that Paul was open with his opinions and prepared to back them with hard facts and logic.
If Rangers’ fans had had a few Paul McConvilles over the years they might have developed not only a support for their club based on football but have been better informed as to how effectively the stewardship of the clubs financial affairs was being handled.
This has been a slow-motion train crash heading down the track for years right back to the earliest DM days. Very very few Bears leaders ever raised their head or voice to challenge the financial affairs at Ibrox and one of the few was Dingwall. There is much about his position I disagree with but many these days find it hard to acknowledge his almost solitary campaign at Rangers AGMs to question Murray over financial issues.
So many of the other fan leaders down the years have done nothing to criticise the financial model being employed at Rangers and sought solace in the ‘culture’ line rather than waking-up and smelling the coffee that Scottish Football was in decline and could never support the level of expenditure at Ibrox.
They have finally exhausted the pockets of the Rangers Sugar Daddies and fallen into the hands of Spivs and all the time these fan ‘leaders’ seemed to have more interest in their future blue blazers than the future of their club.
They have switched position at almost dizzying speed and still fail to spell out the hard financial facts facing Rangers that to ultimately succeed in Scottish football then they have to live within their financial means and that requires NOT living in dreams of a cargo cult Sugar Daddy landing in their midst.
I look at the latest fawning over DK and the madness about tying-up Ibrox and Murray Park under fan control. I try not to split my sides laughing at that one never mind actually considering the legal implications vis a vis the rights of existing shareholders.
Fans have a clear decision to make as to whether to buy STs or not. They have to have the bottle to face the brutal reality that they might collapse the current version of Rangers. I personally have no doubt that rangers will survive in the ,longer term and it’s in that new creation that the fans can build a new club with an honest fan leadership who love their club and not the non-football trappings it has been adorned with.
It will be hard and it will mean abandoning Ibrox or at least the present stadium and starting again – but I am sure they will get there and it’s just a pity they have wasted so much time when they could already be well on their way to a club built on a sound footballing and financial basis.
If they don’t bite the bullet then they could face the same fate anyway but lumbered by the ‘sugar-pill’ of renting Ibrox which IMO is more like a ‘poison-pill’. But as I always say this is a decision for Rabngers fans to make as to what kind of club they wish to support and the reasons they wish to do so.
World Domination is a disease that has caused untold misery throughout world history and truly has no place in Scotland – and sadly if the only reason for Rangers to exist is to beat Celtic then that is truly sad and displays very limited vision.
I read the Herald article and maybe I’m missing something but where is TRIFC2012 mentioned. He talks of more meaningful games? Cryptic without saying anything specific. If we assume he means missing TRIFC2012, would he be talking from a Celtic board point of view or a personal view because every Celtic fan I’ve spoken too, DO NOT want TRIFC2012 back in any shape or form.
He then tells us how brilliant attendances are and how Bayern ran away with their league. Is this a statement of intent towards regional leagues within Europe? I would personally hope to see Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, ICT etc get progressively stronger every year than to see TRIFC2012 given any more of a helping hand from our authorities.
CO may be put forward for a FIFA place? Whoever sanctioned this should be lined up against a wall. Words fail me.
“CO may be put forward for a FIFA place? Whoever sanctioned this should be lined up against a wall. Words fail me.”
CO would appear to tick all the boxes for employment in Sep Blatter’s FIFA
“Fifa’s history is one of chaos and alleged corruption, but the president remains while his allies turned enemies have fallen”
http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/may/30/sepp-blatter-fifa-great-survivor
I can’t say that I miss Rangers in whatever shape or form,and for those to emphasize the importance of the entity , serves to hugely discredit the teams in the upper leagues who are clearly making progress in their development.In addition all the emphasis should be in aiding and abetting those teams rather than save a team ,as Slimshady so rightly points out, can’t even submit accounts
I recall Jock Stein stating that the aspirations of a football team should not be to beat its greatest rival but to achieve footballing eminence on a grander scale.
A thought about Celtic fans saying they’d like more competition from other teams.
I wonder if what is meant is “more competition, but as long as we still win the League every year”?
Would Celtic fans stand for a situation where the League could be won by three, four or five different teams? Would Parkhead still pull crowds of 120,000 every second week if there was no reasonable assumption of a victory on the day followed by a League title a bit later?
A genuine thought.
Rantin
Correct but I’m also reminded of the quote who’s source I can no longer recall (SAF in tea cup throwing siege mentality at pittodrie perhaps?) that the old firm model was never built on world dominance, but to do just slightly better than their city sharing couterparts.
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
There are glory hunters in every support, and its reasonable to assume that successful teams will have a higher proportion
However, I suspect the vast majority of supporters from all sides would be enthused by a league that offered hard fought, close games week in week out, and, would relish the excitement and trepidation of seasons going down to the wire.
Such a prospect would make the cost of attending matches good value for money
Smugas,no doubt such noises were made about the Old Firm,something that no longer exists,which can only be a good thing.Lawwell & Lennon would have been better advised to praise the progress of Aberdeen and indeed Dundee Utd who show that they have a drive and energy not only to compete but to develop.This whole Rangers throwback is regressive and the only way I would have had a semblance of respect for them ,is if they had been thrown out of the leagues,and started again with boys.
Regarding competition
At the moment:-
The top division is being won at a canter by CFC every season.
There is real competition in every other part of our game (apart from the false position of RFC) including cups.
What used to happen was that:-
The top division was won at a canter by CFC or RFC every season.
There was real competition in every other part of our game (including occasionally cups).
Given that I never cared for either CFC or RFC in a domestic setting, it seems to me that its much better the current way.
What a difference a day makes…. Yesterday happy bears, accounts not as bad as first thought, now every story in the papers are questioning the board….The rangers money men NOT investing in the club know the score. The board are merely seeing out Chico’s end game, the only fly in the ointment is the hold up of SBs as this money would have been needed for pay offs to the current spiv board before the shareholders grab the assets and the rangers men fight over the football club remnants who will play at the newly rented Ibrox. Rising damp anyone?.
Fans groups wanting security over property before handing over SB money, having a giraffe right..!!! Over a barrel bear erse exposed to the world..
IMO it will be an absolute scandal if rangers gain promotion whilst in admin to shed the debt that saw them buy the biggest and best team to win that league.. Total Scandal, this cannot be allowed to happen.!! 👿
Things must be bad down Govan way as Ally is far too quiet… Must be concentrating on JUST football matters as always.. 😀
If as suspected Charles Green is still holding the reins at Ibrox, would the bears currently welcome him back with his talk of new moonbeams, I actually think they would, after all he came to their rescue before…
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 10:16 am
slimshady61 says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:39 am
…………………….Meantime the 2013 accounts of the trading company remain overdue and unfiled, complete save for a clean audit report.
—————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
So if it is said (by us)- “the accounts are overdue” some response along the lines of “what are you talking about – the accounts are now done- they came out yesterday” will be enough to satisfy nearly everyone because its too hard for people to understand (especially for people who don’t really want to know/want to enquire).
Perhaps the pressure point is the SFA/SPFL (I know – I know).
TRFC is the member.
Its accounts have not been filed in accordance with statutory requirements.
The member is not therefore complying with its legal obligations as a limited company.
It is an offence under s451 of CA 2006 to fail to file accounts.
The offence is committed by the directors.
The accounts are now overdue by a month.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Perhaps if someone less lazy than me were to draft a letter to the SFA/SPL pointing out the failure to file accounts and the material uncertainty surrounding the RIFC as a going concern as disclosed in the interims and posted it up here I would be happy to write to them and copy it to my club.
Should it include anything else? Maybe the impact that would be created if RIFC became more insolvent in mid season.
JimBhoy says:
March 28, 2014 at 12:28 pm
Things must be bad down Govan way as Ally is far too quiet… Must be concentrating on JUST football matters as always.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I suspect that is not good news for Rangers fans.
Given the previous discussion on Rangers Retail, I thought I would look at the Rangers Retail Ltd. Accounts (year to Apr 2013) which were submitted to Companies House in January this year.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/215035494/Rangers-Retail-Accounts-to-Apr-2013
Points of interest at that stage (Apr 2013)
Note 7 – Rangers Retail owed the parent company £311K
Note 12 – Rangers Retail has no employees and that all staff costs are met by TRFC. No Directors took any remuneration.
Note 13 – RIFC is listed as having ultimate control. (No mention of A & B shares, although the 51% / 49% split is mentioned in Note 14)
Note 14 – Rangers Retail had a loan facility of £1.5M with Sports Direct, but hadn’t drawn down any funds.
P&L – Administrative expenses look high at £224K, particularly with no director remuneration.
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
15 8 Rate This
A thought about Celtic fans saying they’d like more competition from other teams.
I wonder if what is meant is “more competition, but as long as we still win the League every year”?
Would Celtic fans stand for a situation where the League could be won by three, four or five different teams? Would Parkhead still pull crowds of 120,000 every second week if there was no reasonable assumption of a victory on the day followed by a League title a bit later?
A genuine thought.
—
Hi,
I clearly remember a very good Aberdeen team winning 3-0 at Celtic Park, “Black Day for Celtic” screamed the headlines – done by another EK Boy. Anyway, seemed to remember the ground full and the expectation was prior to the game that the Dandy Dons would shade it.
You do get the glory hunters in all clubs , usually chaps that fail to understand it is sport and winning is not guaranteed. So you would lose them to be replaced by folk wanting to see a good game.
Personally, I prefer a hard fought struggle with a bonkers ref making mistakes ( randomly for both sides) to brighten up a Saturday afternoon.
RyanGosling says:
March 27, 2014 at 11:02 pm
14 1 i
Rate This
I may be wrong justshatered but are equity injections not ok by financial fair play rules? I.e. Sugar daddies cannot just fire loads of money in but if shares are sold to bring in money then that is acceptable?
————————————————————————————————————————————————
I am not sure because I dont know what the FPP rules are (or might be whenever (or ifever) implemented) but there is clearly a difference between a sugar daddy lending vast sums to a club and a sugar daddy subscribing the same amount for shares in a club (always assuming the shares aren’t redeemable).
The difference of course is that you dont have to repay share capital investment so its not a liability on your balance sheet in the way that a loan is.
However the purpose of FFP is really (at least as far as I understand it) an attempt to have clubs live within their internal cash generating abilities – not be reliant upon friends throwing money at it.
Now it seems to me that whether any “investment” comes in by was of equity, loan or indeed gift, the cash has come from outside the business (equity and gift dont have to be repaid – loan does). Any such investment skews the real picture. But a counter argument is – my business is so good others wish to invest in it and that is something that arises from the business so I should be able to raise that cash and use it as I see fit without penalty.
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 12:09 pm
Regarding competition
At the moment:-
The top division is being won at a canter by CFC every season.
There is real competition in every other part of our game (apart from the false position of RFC) including cups.
What used to happen was that:-
The top division was won at a canter by CFC or RFC every season.
There was real competition in every other part of our game (including occasionally cups).
Given that I never cared for either CFC or RFC in a domestic setting, it seems to me that its much better the current way.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are right that a one horse race isn’t that much better than a two horse one as far as the other 40 clubs are concerned and the opening up of the cup competitions to more potential winners is an improvement but it’s not “much better”.
It would be much better if there was a concerted effort to redistribute income and players with the main objective of improving the standard of the game overall. That way everybody wins.
I would be very gratefull if one of our esteemed journos could ask Mr Wallace if he has spoken to Charles in the last 30 days,just curious.
Bogs Dollox says:
March 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm
It would be much better if there was a concerted effort to redistribute income and players with the main objective of improving the standard of the game overall. That way everybody wins.
—————————————————————————————————————————-
No doubt – but that is a (slightly) different issue from the one I was addressing – which was that any complaints about the lack of competition are almost always meaning one thing and one thing only – the issue at the very top of the pyramid and therefore treating all other aspects of our game as less (or indeed not) important. In reality it is simply a restatement of the assumption that only two teams matter.
For what it is worth – in my very simplistic mind, the change to the distribution of home gate income all those years ago is the main problem.
Anyone know how they do it elsewhere?
DanishPastry? what happens in Denmark?
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
A thought about Celtic fans saying they’d like more competition from other teams.
I wonder if what is meant is “more competition, but as long as we still win the League every year”?
Would Celtic fans stand for a situation where the League could be won by three, four or five different teams? Would Parkhead still pull crowds of 120,000 every second week if there was no reasonable assumption of a victory on the day followed by a League title a bit later?
A genuine thought.
—————————
A good point Angus and one you already know the answer to, of course some of the fans would drop off.
However, having a loyal core support is not something that is exclusive to The Sheep Chasers, Celtic have a very sizable support that will continue to support them through good times and bad.
Through the years the club (all clubs for that matter) has seen the support hitting highs and lows, which go through phases, the surprising thing is that in many cases, the number went down during times where they were winning!
I would argue that the support would go up when winning is not a given, that is why there are more supporters go to watch Celtic when they play a team that can give them a challenge.
P.S. 120,000 every 2 weeks was before the new seating rules were brought in, that rule really hurts us now :slamb:
I have been saying two things for long enough re T’Rangers situation.
1)The financial poistion was always going to get a to a point they would be walking a tightrope
2) For the club to move forward into the 21st century they need to clear out all connections to the past.
The Bears have been asking for honesty and transparency and thats what they got yesterday.
No more financial trickery re ‘negative goodwill’ and promises of Dallas Cowboys hook ups, Zadok the Priest etc etc. Just the basic money in – money out sums and a clear warning from Chairman, CEO and Deliottes that all is not well if they continue on the same road they have been travelling for a good number of years.
Wallace has given hints of what will be in his review.
My guess is that, as was highlighted by Bill Millar’s man Jon Pritchett, Wallace has found that in addition to the clusterfeck left by Green et al outwith the team there are plenty people around the club with their snouts in the ever giving Rangers trough.
It seems to have been the Rangers way – pay over the top for not a lot.
Assuming the current board and shareholders really want to make a success of the football club and associated business then the old dead wood has to go. There will be folk within Ibrox who, while well meaning and not aware of it, are probably the enemy within.
Wallace needs to restructure the whole business.
From my point of view while the Rangers tradition and history is a selling point it is also a millstone around their necks when it comes to attracting new investment. If there is no obvious change then the club will only have the options of relying on the fans cash and anything King may try and throw at the club.
The whole club needs to be rebranded. The ‘Then Now and Forever’ campaign has served it’s purpose.
The potential for moving forward that will IMHO be lost if King comes on board given his harking back to the days of John Grieg, Colin Stein et al.
Of course on the football side of things then, if the current board do want to take things forward then McCoist and his gang will have to go at the end of the season. (I’d get rid of McCulloch at the same time thus purging the last vestiges of ‘Rangersness’ from the squad) I wouldn’t even give Ally a job ‘upstairs’. A half decent manager and a wee bit of luck should be able to get the current squad out of the Championship next year. A two year contract is what is required to allow the new man to stabalise the club in the Premiership. That gives time to monitor Derek McInnes and see if he was worth a punt or if someone else was better suited to take the club to the next level.
What I believe the fans will have to decide on once Wallace delivers his review is
1) Are the current board genuine and are the likes of Laxey truly interested in the long term rebuilding of the club for the 21st century.
2) If yes to the above then its a clear decision between a new (and most likely initially difficult) sustainable future or reliving the past with the high potential for yet another boom and bust event in a fe years time..
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
20 12 Rate This
===========================
As long as their own team was always capable of challenging I believe you’d find the stadium full. With a cake walk although there’d be strong support it would not be a full house. The added excitement of knowing you’ve a good chance of winning but not being sure makes for more interest. From my own experience the Firhill was packed on several occasions when our nearest rivals for promotion came calling and crowds were up in all games. Not the same situation as celtic by any means but I’d say if we’d walked the league those games against Morton and Dunfermline (before they collapsed) would have been noCmal – up a bit like the other games due to a winning team but not the same packed houses they were.
Madbhoy24941 says:
March 28, 2014 at 1:09 pm
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
I would argue that the support would go up when winning is not a given, that is why there are more supporters go to watch Celtic when they play a team that can give them a challenge.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I suspect you are right. Games with more challenge in them tend to be more entertaining and that in the end is what we all want to watch. Is it not?
Good Afternoon.
Interesting to see that PL says that Rangers will emerge stronger. He could be right. What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.
That does not mean to say that he wants a stronger Rangers to challenge Celtic every year.
Why would you wish someone to compete with you for the only Champions League place?
It doesn’t make commercial sense and I suspect he is choosing his words carefully.
Personally i couldn’t care less if Rangers were banished to the realms of junior football tomorrow. The baggage they bring and their conduct since administration and liquidation has been lacking humility.
As for the accounts, it has been pointed out that TRFC is the member club who have not lodged accounts and so are in breach not only of company law but also SFA regulations(laugh now).
The accouunts produced are for RIFC and are already 3 months out of date. They only show half the picture. We have numbers but we do not know to whom much of the money was disbursed, who had their snout in the feeding trough.
The directors are culpable and accountable but whether our worshipful company of regulators will ever do anything is doubtful.
As for CO going to FIFA there must be an outcry it would be a slap in the face for decency.
There is however a long way to go and perhaps by the time we get the UTT verdict and people are held to acount for the sums which paid for their night out there may be a small chance that the right thing may be done.
On the subject of who is pulling the strings, the present CEO has a track record of being involved with Green and co and I believe that there is still an influence by Green over him.
I also believe that Craig Whyte is still lurking and may yet surface.
He is no fool and I do not think he has been outspived by anyone.
Hoopy 7 says: March 28, 2014 at 1:27 pm
As for the accounts, it has been pointed out that TRFC is the member club who have not lodged accounts and so are in breach not only of company law but also SFA regulations(laugh now).
====================================
For non Premiership clubs, the SFA deadline for accounts is 30th April, not 31st March.
Also, according to UEFA Club licensing criteria, (used by the SFA), Article 46 states that it is up to the club to determine which part(s) of a group structure they will provide financial information, i.e. The SFA are likely to accept TRFC’s accounts being consolidated into the RIFC accounts.
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
A thought about Celtic fans saying they’d like more competition from other teams.
I wonder if what is meant is “more competition, but as long as we still win the League every year”?
Would Celtic fans stand for a situation where the League could be won by three, four or five different teams? Would Parkhead still pull crowds of 120,000 every second week if there was no reasonable assumption of a victory on the day followed by a League title a bit later?
A genuine thought.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
I would happily give up any thoughts of ”10 in a row” or becoming the ”most successful club in the world” when we win our 55th league title and I don’t see a problem maintaining the attendances at Celtic park in fact I would think we could see an increase if there was solid competition every season.
If you consider the C/League,,,,,,, Celtic have no chance of winning that competition and very little chance of beating the majority of teams in it yet they sell out C.P. for each game not because they are going to win but because they are going to have to be at their best to get a result.
The best thing that could come out of this shambles of the last few years would be a stronger competition with the likes of Aberdeen, Dundee Utd, Hibs, Hearts(given time) challenging for trophies including the league every season.
What I wouldn’t want is Celtic being challenged because they drop their quality or standard, I would hope that the challenge comes from a gradual and sustainable improvement from other teams which would see them take a place in the C.L. with a real chance of getting to the group stages.
Its a good feeling winning the league but its much better when its a hard fought battle and when Celtic won it in 1998 for the first time in 10 years the feeling was incredible and I can only imagine what it must be like for other teams to win a trophy after 20/30/40 years waiting.
wottpi says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:39 am
6 0 Rate This
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
wottpi says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:22 am
Barcabhoy says:
March 28, 2014 at 8:13 am
Thanks for the clarification.
Seems like more questions need to be asked of Mr Wallace then.
What a tangled web etc etc
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
andypandimonium says:
March 28, 2014 at 9:33 am
Graham Wallace was appointed a Director of Rangers Retail on 3rd February this year according to CH. Are we all looking at the same incorporation?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thanks for the clarification.
Seems like more questions need to be asked of Mr Wallace then.
What a tangled web etc etc
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Barca was correct in his recollection………we should never have doubted him 😀
Iain Graham Wallace was appointed as a director of Rangers Retail on 16 January 2013. The appropriate filing (AP01) was only made with CH on 3rd February 2014. I wonder why???
re: Celtic winning and being guaranteed CL football every year.
Give me an honest league where the strongest team over the season won it with no cheating [edit]
If Celtic finished well down an honest league, then that wouldn’t be my preference but it would certainly be better than the skulduggery we been witnessing.
If Celtic didn’t deserve the European place then that would be good enough for me. To be honest, I wouldn’t mind Dundee Utd with their young squad getting rewards for this method. The national team can only be enhanced with these young talented guys. It’s a win win.
Here is the AP01 that confirms Wallace’s appointment as a director of Rangers Retail in January 2013.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/215058085/2013-01-16-Rangers-Retail-AP01-IGW
andypandimonium says:
March 28, 2014 at 2:31 pm
…
Barca was correct in his recollection………we should never have doubted him 😀
Iain Graham Wallace was appointed as a director of Rangers Retail on 16 January 2013. The appropriate filing (AP01) was only made with CH on 3rd February 2014. I wonder why???
——————————————
It may be nothing more than a simple error on the year, either at the Rangers end or the Companies House end if not filed electronically. It’s a pretty common error to make in the first month of the year.
toadinthehole says: March 28, 2014 at 3:08 pm
It may be nothing more than a simple error on the year, either at the Rangers end or the Companies House end if not filed electronically. It’s a pretty common error to make in the first month of the year.
===========================
I agree that a typo is the most likely explanation, but it does make for some good conspiracy theories. 😈
easyJambo says:
March 28, 2014 at 2:13 pm For non Premiership clubs, the SFA deadline for accounts is 30th April, not 31st March.
Also, according to UEFA Club licensing criteria, (used by the SFA), Article 46 states that it is up to the club to determine which part(s) of a group structure they will provide financial information, i.e. The SFA are likely to accept TRFC’s accounts being consolidated into the RIFC accounts.
==============================================================================
EJ, I’m not sure the date thing is correct. Section 8.12 of the SFA licensing rules says…
“SPFL clubs – by 31 March 2014
All other clubs – by 30 April 2014”
I believe SPFL includes clubs in all 4 senior divisions – the SPFL is not just the top division. All other clubs, I assume, must mean Highland league, Juniors etc all of whom fall under the auspices of the SFA. I believe therefore that TRFC’s accounts are due with the SFA by 31 March.
I’m in communication with them just now trying to ascertain whether or not they are willing to accept RIFC’s accounts for licensing purposes. I’m not getting a clear answer, but at least I’m getting answered (which is unusual) and getting the opportunity to pin them down on their views.
nawlite says:
March 28, 2014 at 3:19 pm
0 0 i
I’m in communication with them just now trying to ascertain whether or not they are willing to accept RIFC’s accounts
—————————————————————————————————————————————————–
Good work Nawlite. If SPFA are suggesting that RIFC’s interims (out yesterday) might be sufficient, is it relevant to point out that those are just for a 6 month period? Not only that – they are consolidated so don’t give an accurate picture of TRFC. It would be like Liverpool filing the accounts of Fenway Sport Group.
nawlite says: March 28, 2014 at 3:19 pm
EJ, I’m not sure the date thing is correct. Section 8.12 of the SFA licensing rules says…
“SPFL clubs – by 31 March 2014
All other clubs – by 30 April 2014″
I believe SPFL includes clubs in all 4 senior divisions – the SPFL is not just the top division. All other clubs, I assume, must mean Highland league, Juniors etc all of whom fall under the auspices of the SFA. I believe therefore that TRFC’s accounts are due with the SFA by 31 March.
===================================
You are correct.
I had looked at a previous version of the Licensing criteria that I had on file prior to the SPFL being formed, which only made the distinction, between “SPL clubs” and “All other clubs” i.e. the top division only.
I still believe that “Premiership clubs only” may be the intention of the rule rather than the letter of it. Otherwise, there is a new imposition, affecting 30 clubs, to produce accounts to meet a deadline one month earlier.
Madbhoy24941 says:
March 28, 2014 at 1:09 pm
A good point Angus and one you already know the answer to, of course some of the fans would drop off.
——
… and, conversely, other teams would hopefully start to see increased gates as they enjoyed a bit more success. Hence a bit of a redistribution of wealth.
Thanks to all for your thoughts on this.
P.S. I don’t think the current season has been any much better for fans of other teams. Whether it’s Rangers & Celtic scrapping it out, or just Celtic winning by a country mile doesn’t make much difference to the rest of us. It’s second place that’s the interesting one this year, and it’s looking like a proper battle for that.
EJ,
So the next question for Nawlite to ask come Monday is how many of the 30 clubs affected have managed to meet the 1 month earlier deadline following the shift to SPFL status, and how many haven’t? 29-1 per chance?
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/ClubLicensing/2014/Prt%202%20Sct%208%20-%20Leg,%20Admin,%20Finance,Codes%20(2).pdf
The above is a link to the SFA’s club licensing criteria, latest version (December 2013).
This is what is required for the lowest level license (entry level) in terms of financial statements (I can’t copy and paste from the document, so this is my summary)
1. Annual financial statements, approved by the members at an AGM, to a date ending in 2013.
2.To be provided by 31/3/2014 by all SPFL clubs
3.”Where the auditor’s report in respect of the annual financial statements includes an adverse or disclaimer of opinion, a club may meet the terms of the Entry criterion provided that it meets certain conditions as set out by the Licensing Committee, at its discretion, from time to time”
So we are back to SFA discretion, it seems. Even if TRFC produce heavily qualified accounts, then the Licensing Committee will have discretion to award an entry level license regardless.
I cannot think of any rule of the SFA which I have looked at over the last 2 years (and I have looked at more than is good for my blood pressure) which does not allow “discretion” to be applied. These are not, in fact, rules at all, just woolly guidelines which allow the SFA executive to do whatever they think best, or politic, in the circumstances. As I read the rule, for entry level the accounts don’t have to be audited at all, just approved by the members. So panic over, chaps, TRFC will have no problems getting a license from the SFA. Now that’s a shocker, isn’t it?
I just quickly rattled through Companies House – none of the 11 teams in the top division of the SPFL (excluding Hearts – I didn’t bother with them given the insolvency) have all filed accounts at Companies House (most seem to have end of May y/e). None are overdue.
I appreciate that this is not the same as giving them to SPFL though.
EKBhoy says:
“Personally, I prefer a hard fought struggle with a bonkers ref making mistakes ( randomly for both sides) to brighten up a Saturday afternoon.”
==============================
Naw ye don’t. You prefer trudgin’ up an’ doon hills tryin’ tae impress yer wummin on a Saturday afternoon. 😀
Intersting read from Phil Mac ,seems April will bring the begging bowl out again,does anyone know if the accounts give what each player is on ,another world record must be in the offing with the highest paid ,oldest player in the footballing world ,cerainly for the divisions he has been in and going into next season,he could actualy be ,legaly, a grandfather figure to some of the first team youngsters from next season another world record ,they keep racking them up ,dont they.
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 4:19 pm
1 0 i
Rate This
I just quickly rattled through Companies House – none of the 11 teams in the top division of the SPFL (excluding Hearts – I didn’t bother with them given the insolvency) have all filed accounts at Companies House (most seem to have end of May y/e). None are overdue.
I appreciate that this is not the same as giving them to SPFL though.
———————————————————————————————————–
Aaaaarrgghh – idiot me.
To be clear – what I meant is that they have all filed at Companies House. None are overdue.
The date on Wallace’s AP01 for RR may be a typo, but equally it may have been sitting in someone’s desk drawer for a year . I don’t know which is correct.
What I do know is Whyte and Green had multiple lodgings of documents at Co Hse which used incorrect dates of birth, contested signatures , delayed filings and files which were never ever lodged
I’m not saying that Wallace is using the same tactics, I’m saying it has that look. Given the history of deception at Rangers , it would be extremely stupid to give anyone connected the benefit of the doubt.
The facts as they appear based on the Co Hse filing is that Wallace and Green were colleagues on the Rangers Retail board. The RIFC board are asking fans to trust them. The fans clearly do not trust Green.
Wallace should make an unequivocal statement on his involvement with Rangers Retail. Did he have any connection , relationship or influence with Rangers Retail prior to his appointment as CEO of RIFC .
It should be an easy matter to prove. There will be dated correspondence to and from him in this regard
Barcabhoy says: March 28, 2014 at 4:36 pm
——————————-
The Rangers Retail accounts I posted earlier (as at 28/04/13) only list Forsey, Leach and Stockbridge as directors with Green as an ex director and Olsen as secretary.
My gut feel is that Wallace was not involved in 2013 and that the AP01 date was a typo, although recent experience, with all things Rangers, tells us not to discount any possibility or lead.
Good point made by Phil Mac that yesterday’s results may have a few suppliers putting even more pressure on the cash flow situation down Govan way by demanding cash payments for services.
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/rather-concerning/#more-4499
Angus1983 says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:49 am
—————————————–
Some of our biggest crowds were between 1979/80 and 1985/86, when Aberdeen & Celtic won the league 3 times and Dundee Utd won it once. Indeed in the one month of April 1980 we twice had crowds in excess of 60,000 for the home league matches with Aberdeen in a season when the Old Firm matches (remember them?) attracted smaller crowds. Rangers were of course in an 8 year barren spell and even matches with the Arabs regularly pulled in between 40-50 thousand at CP.
So a forceful challenge from both of the New Firm would be very welcome next year, providing Aberdeen can get some consistency going in the league, and Dundee Utd can hold on to the majority of their very talented squad.
On that basis, I think Celtic’s crowds would certainly increase but I remain unconcerned at this season or last; season ticket sales have been excellent but on top of that the cost of actually attending a match remains a burden for many in these times of economic distress
And TV does not help by moving match schedules, even at Celtic Park, to times that make it awkward or frankly impossible for supporters from England or Ireland to attend. Ultimately, even a crowd of 30,000 for a match against a team of the present calibre of say St Mirren represents a remarkable turnout, all things considered.
People, particularly journalists, like to consider the the full houses of the crazy O’Neill/Advocaat years as the norm, which they never were. They were merely an aberration, caused by Celtic’s remarkable renaissance under O’Neill.
Those years remain wholly unrepresentative of the more than 100yr history of Scottish football and it remains, per capita, a remarkably well supported sport in this country. We should be talking it up, not down.
easyJambo says:
March 28, 2014 at 4:49 pm
That was my view which is why I asked the question in the first place.
One error in todays electronic world is easily replicated elsewhere across the web resulting in subsequent confusion.
However as you say stranger things have happened in this saga. 🙂
wottpi says:
March 28, 2014 at 4:49 pm
Meanwhile. in other news, SFA CEO gives a press conference on his return from Oz
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dX06xqN6710
Crisis? What Crisis?
Re the latest Rangers finance position and the strategy ( used in it loosest form ).
It seems the business is still losing money and that has not come as a surprise to many, so a SPL season ticket price hike , hitting the Rangers fans doormats (ahem) will be required to reduce the losses. There appears little in the way of any structural cost cutting and other than the aforementioned increase in the season books , not much room to generate more revenue.
We are back to the following; are we watching a ‘muddle through’ strategy , hoping something turns-up or is it some massive conspiracy amongst all the key players , King, Laxely , Wallace etc.
Past evidence suggests that the entire mess is precisely that, a mess, with a series of incremental ‘ bad decisions / crazy assumptions’ leading to a quickening downward spiral. So on balance for a massive conspiracy it is not really working out for the football club , although the directors, manager and hedge fund have done well.
What passes for business ethics nowadays can make you sometimes draw breath, even in ‘normal’ businesses , so if we accept that actually the hedge fund , banker types who own the shares will do anything to make money then logically they are not in a conspiracy with King. Why cut King a piece of the action?
So no conspiracy, therefore the muddle through strategy for the hedge funds will be to keep loaning the sick patient lots of money (see Lloyd’s for previous as to how well that went) at eye-watering high levels of interest. Whilst , this will be like just normal stuff for these guys , there will come a tipping point , where the patient is not in a position to payback.
Logically, follows that to complete next season then the hedge funds must
– Bridge the funding gap with another investment , and in return
– Take the stadium and training ground into the plc which will provide the football club with another investment , let’s call it a transfer fund.
– Any cash flows problems then the Hedge funds just keeping loaning Rangers money who now are paying rent
So Rangers rather than be run by Lloyd’s are now run by a hedge fund who they will pay rent to , for use of their own stadium. The hedge fund could even test the levels of gullibility (to breaking point) and sell more shares , be a part of the actual physical history , bike , cup etc, etc. Sorry , a step too far there.
There may be several road-blocks to this strategy , King mouthing-off , season ticket boycotts, the hedge fund running into problems , who knows. I suspect that the biggest threat is the Rangers fans ever so quietly walking away due to watching a load of old rubbish , week in week out.
If the Arabs knock them out then the only way they can get any money will be to sell the ground.
Campbellsmoney says:
March 28, 2014 at 1:06 pm
11 5 Rate This
DanishPastry? what happens in Denmark?
————
Good question. I support my local town team, which is what is commonly known as a diddy team, although to me there is no such thing as a diddy team.
Suffice to say, I’m not that clued up on the 12- team Superliga.
However …
* At present tv revenue accounts for 75% of the clubs’ income.
* Last year the tv deal went up by 85m kroner which is about £8m, which means the total tv ‘pulje’ or pool of money, is about 260m kroner, roughly £26m.
* This money is distributed three times during the season. Yes, three times, after 11, 22, and 33 played rounds.
This is where it gets complicated, but there is a method in the madness.
100% of the total is divided
30% Solidarity pool
Distributed after 11 rounds, equally between all 12 clubs. About 6.5m kr to each club (£650,000)
30% league placement pool
Distributed according to this model (percentage of about 78m kroner (£8m)) after 22 rounds of the 33.
1. 20% =3D 5,2
2. 15% =3D 3,9
3. 12% =3D 3,12
4. 10% =3D 2,6
5. 9% =3D 2,34
6. 8% =3D 2,08
7. 7% =3D 1,82
8. 6% =3D 1,56
9. 5% =3D 1,3
10. 4% =3D 1,04
11.2,5% =3D 650.000
12. 1,5% =3D 390.000
20% performance pool
This part of the total pool rewards those with most wins. Simples.
20% media pool
This part of the financial cake is determined by the number of appearances as match of the day.
* The system is set up to 3 x matches per season. Two at home, 1 away (top six teams from previous season get the 2-home, 1 away advantage, however that works?).
* Do people want a 16-team league, with a much fairer (and less boring) simple H/A? Yes, you read comments to this effect. As is pointed out over here, there are teams in Div 2 that have Superliga standard, but they are kept out. Why? Because the big clubs do not want to divide the cake 16 ways instead of 12. It is, once again, greed — not a trait unique in Scottish football.
Would a fairer system in Scotland see a 16-team top league with 2-up/2-down and a play-off for third spot, after the English or Scottish model? I think so. A lot more meaningful games throughout the season, and a better distribution model. Would give lower-league teams a lot more to play for and see more cake … er money … come their way.
wottpi says:
March 28, 2014 at 4:49 pm
“Good point made by Phil Mac that yesterday’s results…”
—————————————-
It has been alleged that philMc is some kind of Charlatan but sometimes I think he knows a lot more than he is letting on.
Good Evening
As if to reinforce my thoughts earlier up pops Phil Mac and hints that CW still has a hand to play. Something I have always maintained.
For me it is just an educated guess but for Phil I think he knows something specific.
To have a question mark over the Titles is serious because, again as I have often said, if CW does indeed own the rights to the Titles and has not been outspived by Charles then it means that everything done to raise money in the IPO has been a gigantic fraud.
In my opinion this is where the real trouble is. If this is the case we have a PLC which owns nothing except a loss making football team which cannot pay it’s debts and if they don’t repay the PLC then the PLC is BUST with no property assets.
On the other hand if I am wrong we still have a PLC with a loss making unsustainable business which will drain any value which may be left in the property and I cannot see spivs allowing their value to evaporate.
Either they will sell TRFC or put it into admin, perhaps quicker than any of us expect. If TRFC were to be put out of Scottish cup there could be bad news ahead for the bears.
The gift that keeps on giving
John Clark says:
March 28, 2014 at 11:12 am
(And I really do wish that Peter Lawwell (and Lennon) would shut up about ‘missing’ any other particular fixture. Thousands of us do not.)
—————————————————————————————————————–
Also all the ex Celtic players who they drag out to spout the we need and miss Rangers blah blah
It is all really irrelevant as they went into administration and are now going through the process of liquidation. So IMO we cannot play them again as it defies the laws of logic and physics as they cease to exist. If the new Govan club which now plays at Ibrox cannot play in a fair financial way and continues to be managed as a business similar to the previous club, then it is not in the best interests of Scottish Football.
I would not want to play a team that operates in this manner, ever.
Easy Jambo
I think the original intent of the club licensing division remains.
Only top tier SPFL clubs need a licence to a standard that satisfies UEFA as only top tier clubs qualify.
I cannot see it being the intent of SFA that lower tier clubs need to reach the higher UEFA FFP standards.
Thus the relevant rules for a club outside the top tier on which the basis of a clubs accounts rest -club or holding company – are National Club Licensing not UEFA FFP.
I would have to check but I think the same kind of provision applies I.e. SFA will take the accounts from a holding company if they relate to the club for whom a licence is being applied for as being the equivalent of club’s accounts.
The thing is National Club Licensing allows SFA to set conditions on granting a licence if the accounts have a qualifying statement by auditors ( as they have).
The SFA have the power to step in an exert their authority but experience tells us they will say it’s not their job.