Good Evening.
When considering any type of protracted negotiation or discussion that seems to be going on too long, there is a story that is always worth remembering– whether it is actually a true story or not as the case may be.
It is said, that heads of state all met at a congress in what is now modern Germany sometime after the Franco Prussian war of 1870-1871.The entire congress was being run almost singlehandedly by the then Prussian Chancellor Otto von Bismark and he was keen to get all the necessary signatures on paper to seal some deal or other.
However, others at the congress were not too keen to sign up to certain elements of the proposed deal and so they hithered and dithered and in the eyes of Bismark they simply waisted time by concentrating on the minutiae- the little matters, with a view to ensuring their own interests were best served in these small areas– and did not focus on the big issue.
Having tried to talk these others round and educate them in his own beliefs and point of view on the bigger picture without any success, Bismark grew weary of the continuing delay and the posturing of his colleagues. All attempts at reason and diplomacy had failed in his eyes and so he decided to take a different tack.
Accordingly, it is said that whilst others were still inside debating endlessly on this matter or that, Bismark left the building and began simply shooting the windows in with the aid of a riffle which he just happened to have handy.
Those inside were naturally alarmed at this turn of events. They soon forgot about the minutiae under debate, they abandoned the previously expressed self interest and simply signed up so that they could get away from the mad chancellor and his house.
Job done so to speak.
Whilst I do not in anyway condone the behaviour of Otto von Bismark in this instance, and have no doubt that he was an autocrat, what I will say is that he believed that there was too much time being spent on the unimportant stuff and not enough time recognising what really needed doing– from his point of view of course.
Today– and it seems every day for months— we have endless debate about the future of Scottish Football. League reconstruction and the redistribution of footballing wealth has become a marathon– even before it has started.
Yet I believe that at the moment all parties concerned are not focusing on the radical reform that is fundamentally needed which is the creation of one, strong, properly structured and constituted body which is capable of the proper and ethical governance of Scottish Football and the business that surrounds football.
No matter what system you try, or distribution you agree, without proper sensible strong governance you are wasting your time.
Further, whatever body is set up, and whoever is chosen to be its CEO (or whatever the head honcho is going to be called), they must tackle the issue of corporate and fiscal compliance and the proper administration of any body corporate which actively takes part in Scottish Football– and that includes any such body or person who is involved in the running of a member club.
In addition, in so dealing with any corporate malfeasance or chicanery or whatever, the rules have to be applied with a rod of iron by an iron body.
As we can now clearly see, Football clubs and football in general is not, and never will be, immune from the effects of bad corporate governance and on occasion downright manipulation of facts, figures and contracts.
Whilst great play has been made of the fact that Gavin Masterton has handed over his shares in Dunfermline FC ( or its holding company ) the fact of the matter is that this in no way solves the problem faced by the football club. Whoever gains control of that club will still have to rent the ground from Mr Masterton’s company– and it is a rent that the club may just not be able to afford.
Ever!
It is only my opinion of course, but I am of the view that Mr Masterton has sealed a loan deal with his bankers which is of a type and duration which could not normally be achieved by other borrowers. The Loan has a lengthy period during which no repayments are necessary and interest can continue to accrue.
All very good you may say, but the level of debt concerned is not one that appears to be sustainable by Dunfermline FC and so whoever buys the club as a going concern ( if anyone buys it at all ) will have to pay an agreed rental to Gavin Masterton– and if the rental is not sufficient to repay Mr Masterton’s lenders, then I suspect that the end game here will be a search to find a buyer for the ground at some point over the next twenty years or so, with the hope that as part of the deal a space will be found somewhere for a new ground like New St Mirren park– the difference being that in that instance St Mirren were in charge of their future whereas Dunfermline are not.
The Governance of that club and the financial arrangements behind the club should have been looked at and examined by the SFA long before now– and the Dunfermline fans warned about the dangers of any such arrangements. Effectively those finance arrangements, should they continue, will probably mean that the club will have no option but to move from its established home!
All to suit one man!
Thankfully Dundee were spared a full takeover by Giovanni Di Stefano, however is it not a bit worrying that this man who has been jailed for over 14 years for various fraudulent acts, was allowed to roam around Scottish Football for a prolonged period?
Not so long ago Di Stefano did play a part at Dens, was in line to buy almost 30% of the shareholding, and was oft quoted in the papers and so on. The thing is that there were those who were prepared to give him a place at the Dundee table and in so doing invited him into Scottish Football.
Surely the SFA, had they been inclined to, could quite easily have pointed out that many of the claims of Mr Di Stefano were at least dubious if not completely incorrect? Yet nothing was being said at the time and silence prevailed.
Whilst not in the same calibre as Di Dtefano, Vladimir Romanov has now been at Hearts for a prolonged period. While I have no quibbles about the legality of Romanov’s takeover of Hearts, any money of a sizeable size which is transferred into Scotland from a foreign country will be subject to scrutiny by the Crown office to ensure that it is clean. Lithuania in particular is said to have a banking system which is governed loosely and sometimes does not meet the compliance standards expected in this country.
With his bank having gone bust, Romanov still retains the majority shareholding at Tynecastle, but there are questions still to be answered about what has happened at Hearts but life will be very different for the Edinburgh club going forward.
Again– could the SFA have done more to monitor the situation and could they have demanded clarity and detail from the Hearts owner as to his business dealings and the detailed arrangements with his bank?
At Ibrox, well things just go from the weird and inexplicable to downright astonishing– and all through a tremendous amount of smoke and mirrors.
It is clear that the SFA have no idea what to believe from Charles Green or for that matter Craig Whyte. On the face of it, there are clear links between Whyte and Green with the former paying over a six figure sum in return for absolutely nothing it would appear– with similar transactions going between Whyte’s colleague, Aiden Early, and Charles Green.
What is clear is that Green gave a clear undertaking to the SFA that he had nothing whatsoever to do with Whyte and would have nothing to do with Whyte going forward. Now, at the very least he is admitting that he met Whyte on several occasions, and whilst he may have made representations to Craig Whyte— these were all lies designed only to get Whyte to where Green wanted him.
This is hardly the act of someone who has been bona fides in his business dealings either with Whyte or with the SFA as the licensing body.
It is against this background that the Scottish Football Agencies need to wake up before they find the fans of the game ( at least those who want to stay interested in the game ) doing a Bismarck and panning in the windows of this whole house of cards.
Football Clubs, football fans, and indeed football itself needs protected from the financial and corporate shenanigans, and the governing body must be much more active and permanently vigilant in watching out for and if necessary anticipating the people and the transactions which have and will jeopardise clubs and the game in general going forward.
It is clearly no longer acceptable to rely on self regulation or mere declarations and undertakings from the clubs themselves. The Administrators must be much more active and employ far greater professional expertise in carrying out an almost constant analytical and reporting function in relation to club finance and corporate regulation.
All and any changes in funding, boardroom changes, investor changes and anything else major should be the subject of immediate and proper scrutiny by the SFA and there should be fair, immediate and stiff sanctions for non compliance, and any type of dilatory behaviour on the part of club officials who would seek to conceal the truth or who fail to properly disclose vital matters which should be out in the open.
Further, the funding detail– such as the never ending loan re Dunfermline should be a matter of public record in all its detail so that fans and investors can make information based value judgements when dealing with any club.
Such stiffer regulation should not develop into anything like a corporate witch hunt or any kind of draconian big brother syndrome, however the need for change given all of the current troubles is obvious to one and all.
Further, the attempted fudge surrounding Rangers league status last summer and the ongoing disquiet surrounding the position of Campbell Ogilvie does nothing to boost faith in and the reputation of Football Administration in Scotland.
Things are far from clear and there appears to be continual dithering and fudging. No one has any idea where the Nimmo Smith Report has gone nor what import it is to have— if any. Why is that?
Dithering and bumbling over detail is no longer an option. Strong clear governance is required to protect the game from being hijacked by those who have their own corporate and financial agendas.
Such people cannot be allowed to determine the way Scottish Football runs or to conduct themselves in a fashion that leaves football and everyone involved in limbo.
It is time for Scottish Football to find its own Iron Chancellor! There is a need for someone who will, if necessary, come along and shoot the lights out of any club or Company Director who wishes to play fast and loose with the game of football.
Excellent post BRTH. Keep up the good work.
Fantastic stuff BRTH. Hope every one of those mentioned read this.
Brilliant as usual BRTH!!
Excelellent post BRTH but have we now reached the point where lax legal regulation allows the type of behaviour by the Whytes, Greens, Murrays’ Mastertons and Marrs etc of this world to ride roughshod over the rule of the sports governing bodies by hiding behind the law of the land?
If HMRC still had preferential status as a creditor would the farces being played out across Scottish football be taking place?
Laws that were put in place to allow companies that fell into financial difficulty to continue trading are being abused by the unscupulous and i doubt that any change in the SFA will allow us any protection against this.
It’s St.Mirren, not St.Mirrin 😉
Good points, well made.
In a rational environment what you are arguing for would be delivered, no questions asked.
However, this is Scottish football and the old adage about Turkeys voting for Christmas comes to mind.
Too many people making too good a living from football who won’t relinquish their position. Where else would they get paid so much money for being so incompetent and weak?
And one strong, fair, impartial body acting equally on behalf of all Scottish teams might not meet with the approval of those running the club operating out of Ibrox. The Ibrox club have controlled – or given a very good impression that they’ve controlled – Scottish football for well over 100 years. Can’t see the Ibrox powerbrokers (and their clubs’ supporters) giving up that power voluntarily.
Keep up the good work.
This site has become anti-Rangers and there are good reasons why that is the case. Rangers are the establishment team in the most influential sport in this country. I think the absence of Rangers from the upper echelons of the game has helped sanitise the sport since the tension and big0try has been drawn out. It has become ‘fun’ again. However ‘fun’ doesn’t generate as much cash flow as ‘big0try’. Witness the number of Celtic fans who have become lukewarm toward their club in the absence of an identifiable hate figure to directly compete with. It should be possible to be competitive without hating the opposition, at least for not more than 90 minutes at a time. The big0try has distorted the governance and any new structure will likely inherit the flaws of the old. We need the fair minded Rangers fans to stand up and be counted. We need them to take back their club from the cash generating big0t goaders. Celtic fans too. This hatred is unavoidable. It may be convenient but it is not taking us anywhere.
BRTH.
Great post, without doubt A true leader is needed at the top who’s qualities should contain some of the undernoted
Honesty, Focus & Clear Vision, Passion, Respect, Persuasive, Integrity, Communicative, Fearless. He/she should understand finance and have a good track record in corporate business and be good a nurturing succession management.
Many of these traits have been missing in the current set up but I think we all know who could possibly fit the bill!
poetry in motion from BRTH (again)
The Green (double) Cross Code :
1- Think First ,find a safe place to (double) cross then stop at Edmiston Dr
2- Stand on the pavement ,near the kerb ,by an imaginary line you have drawn
3- Use your eyes and ears ,look all around for gullible people and listen
4-Wait til its safe to (double) cross , if the shredder van is coming let it pass
5- Look and listen , when the shredder van is gone walk straight across the road to the bank
6- Arrive alive ,keep looking and listening for squirrels while you (double) cross
Remember the Green (double) Cross Code
mullach says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 19:48
…………………………..
A well meaning post…but tosh all the same..
2 THINGS…
1. Rangers no longer exist (legal fact…or in the words of Neil Patey technically)
2. Pointing out dishonesty and corruption does not make anyone Anti anything
We all know with this and other forums what is required to move our sport forward but I’m comming to the conclusion that it will never change the reason being that the main players do not want it to change.
The proposed league re-construction with the carrot of streamlining footballs governing bodies will fail. Even if the re-construction does go through the SPL, SFA and SFL will find some way to fudge the amalgamation of the three bodies.
The fact that these three bodies should be amalgamated prior to any league re-construction is the most glaring issue facing football in this country. It is the fact that no one trusts these three bodies is why reconstruction is doomed to failure. The maladministration from these three organisations are why fans are deserting their clubs in droves.
St Mirren recently voiced their concerns regarding the 11-1 voting system and they are right to do so however Celtic do no wish to change this for possibly selfish reasons and I believe Aberdeen are supporting them in this. Is it possibly because with the abolition of the 11-1 rule it will become easier to fast track a certain team back into the SPL. Celtic and Aberdeen along with Dundee Utd will see their supports decimated if this happens. This is why I believe this rule will remain until ‘The Rangers’ are in Division One.
The above is just an example of why there is no trust within our sport.
Charles Green shows up a St. Mirren park and within 10 days they annonce that they are against league re-construction. This immediately causes mistrust from other clubs.
The other clubs don’t trust Celtic as they have said in the past that they wish to leave Scottish football.
Some clubs distrust others for their reasons for wishing to ditch the 11-1 voting structure.
Most fans wouldn’t trust Neil Doncaster to ‘keep kids oot a close’.
Most fans wouldn’t trust Stewart Regan ……………………….. well ditto.
Campbell Ogilvie………………………………………………….. ditto.
David Longmuir ……………. ditto.
Who would trust the SFA after the way they have behaved in the last year.
Indeed the decline of the sport over the last two decades should have led to fundamental changes in this organisation long ago.
The SFL clubs distrust the SPL and probably rightly so after the way they were cut adrift during the creation of the SPL. They have been marginalised and ignore ever since.
Financial and Corporate governance are now dirty words within our sport. Is this because the powers that be know that one specific club would fail even a cursory glance in both of these areas. Rules in this area seem to be incredably lax. If the applicant tells them ‘what they want to hear’ (copyright Charles Green) the that is accepted. This is how Craig Whyte and Charles Green both got their hands on RFC and ‘The Rangers’. Any rule as poor as this MUST be changed given what has transpired over the last two years. Indeed any rule book should be constantly evolving to ensure all clubs adhere to the highest standards but those standards must apply to all clubs.
Mistrust is now rife in Scottish football and it would take some one with incredible diplomatic skills to heal our sport. Who that person is I’ve no idea.
Thanks BRTH, top post.
This point stands out for me, ‘No matter what system you try, or distribution you agree, without proper sensible strong governance you are wasting your time.’
I smiled when I heard that the blue club’s board were holding an independent inquiry into their chief share holder / Head spiv.
An independent inquiry to the guy who controls the shares who control the votes who just happens to let them sit on HIS board.
The loonatics are taking over the asylum and as they say in Aiberdeen ” it’s a ballacks min”
As a young and naive Finloch I worked in a company where our executive board made serious decisions like that and then the real board i .e the owners with the shares and the power did what they wanted.
Just like Charlie will.
The spivs can do what they want here too because I guess they own the decision making shares.
The average msm hack will think the noose is closing but Charlie has bought time and will move quickly enough to protect his pay out.
The rest is “a ballacks min”.
Even BRT&H’s Bismarck would have seen that.
briggsbhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 20:07
Honesty, Focus & Clear Vision, Passion, Respect, Persuasive, Integrity, Communicative, Fearless. He/she should understand finance and have a good track record in corporate business and be good a nurturing succession management.
Many of these traits have been missing in the current set up but I think we all know who could possibly fit the bill!
Thanks Briggsbhoy – but I’m far too busy at the moment .
Incitement Ally continues to BS and cravenly attempt to deceive fans of TRFC;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22138982
If Ally’s really so interested in fans finding out ‘the truth’, why doesn’t he just tell them instead of leaking stories to the DR. His whole ‘Mr Rangers’ shtick is entirely designed to preserve his status and employment despite the widely held view that he is quite probably the worst football manager in Scottish Football,
What we need is unambiguous rules and someone with the bravery to implement them.
Apologies if this been linked to previously, the always sensible Diddy Simon Barrow; Claiming back Scottish football for the people.
http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/18307
to be honest and to tell you the truth we deserve to know- doging the awakward bit whilst probably wnating to say a big YES. Sleekit is as sleekit was
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9992499/Rangers-investigation-into-Charles-Green-welcomed-by-Ally-McCoist.html
On the prospect of a quick resolution, McCoist added: “It’s more important that we get it right and the independent commission are given the time required.
“In an ideal world, we’d get it done as quickly as possible.
“But the most important thing is that the independent commission are given as much time and support as they need to come to the correct decisions. Then we can look to the future and start rebuilding again.”
Striker Francisco Sandaza was recently suspended by Rangers during an investigation over comments made during a hoax phone-call, before his contract was terminated by the club.
Asked whether Green should also be suspended pending the outcome of this probe, McCoist said: “It would be very unfair of me to comment on a matter that the board have made their own comments on.
“I understand where you are coming from but the board have made a statement and I’m delighted with the statement.”
he’s a effing idiot. he just doesnt get that this is a plc, listed on a stock exchange and that they are subject to other, grown up, rules than he’s used to.
they need to get this sorted now, make a decision that’s in the best interests of the shareholders and the stakeholders and not give some independent commission weeks to come to a reasoned conclusion. these are liars and sharks, crooks and fraudsters, they arent going to give jack shampoo to an independent commission.
bloody joke, but all good though :thumbsup:
Offline Profile
liveinhop says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 21:53
Thanks for the warning today about the problem in this strange wee town. Avoided Sunnyside Road and the Bears. Husband saw it and said it was carnage!
Interesting call on Sportsound Extra from a switched onRrangers fan reminding us that Sir Cardigan’s late bid was turned down by Duff & Phelps possibly because to the ‘exclusive arrangement’ with Sevco 5088
Walter said the following at the time.
Was he duped as well and what did he say at today’s meeting??
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2161598/Rangers-crisis-Smith-casts-doubt-rival-Green-abandoning-bid-buy-new-club.html
http://espnfc.com/news/story/_/id/1108081/walter-smith-consortium-withdraws-bid-for-rangers?cc=5739#
However, Smith – who stressed their initial offer to administrators Duff and Phelps was made before Green’s acquisition was completed – is now prepared to step aside following “verbal assurances” provided by the new regime.
The statement continued: “Members of our consortium had met with Charles Green and Zeus Capital prior to the CVA meeting and it had been agreed that we would be provided with significant information which would give us comfort as to the identity of the consortium members, their strategy and their funding capacity. This information had not been forthcoming by the date of our offer.
“We are therefore withdrawing completely from the process to enable Charles Green and his consortium to move forward. We very much hope the verbal assurances they provided to us – and the public statements made – are adhered to and that the club will therefore be financed and managed with appropriate governance and can go forward in a sustainable manner. We wish the new Rangers Football Club every good fortune.”
liveinhop says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 21:53
PS what do we expect when there are thousands of marches for so many months every year?
Someone press the nuclear button for gods sake. Not the North Korean one of course.
liveinhop says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 21:53
To be honest and to tell you the truth we deserve to know- dodging the awkward bit whilst probably wanting to say a big YES. Sleekit is as sleekit was
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9992499/Rangers-investigation-into-Charles-Green-welcomed-by-Ally-McCoist.html
Yep – the awkward truth
Yet more of the same:the alter ego morph `Ally says`. – tiresome uninformative useless copy
Their sisyphean tasks are useless. C`mon Plod put an end to this
justshattered – St Mirren didn’t all of a sudden declare they were against 12-12-18 following Green’s visit, they were quoted back in February as having major doubts.
twopanda says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:17
Yes. As I have alluded to before, clearing up this mess is like ‘ mucking out the Augean Stables’.
A great post, although I can’t see a way out, it is not just a Bismark distracting them enough to see the bigger picture, I think Scottish football, is going to have to go through something a lot more damaging, more attritional, before the survivors will sacrifice the minutiae. It will be more in the form of circling the wagons, a do or die situation, if we are not at or nearing that point at the moment. The writing has been on the wall for many years and was ignored for all that time. We have had too many clubs (including the one I support) walking and sometimes falling from the tightrope of administration and the trend is still ongoing, this suggests to me that Scottish football is fundamentally flawed. I have no idea what the answer could be, apart from down sizing our game and losing clubs, which I do not want. But the problem remains the same, expected remuneration too high, but not enough money coming into cover costs never mind planning/building for the future.
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 19:02
ecobhoy and others make a reasonable case for todays outcome being the best option. I remain unconvinced, would there have been a rammy? Yes, but with Mr Smith et al backing the board, it wouldn’t have been a very big rammy. Indeed, I suspect that many fans would have seen suspension as the, (I almost said reintroduction, but then I remembered the (S)DM years), introduction of good corporate governance and would be relieved.
Instead, I expect we will see a drawn out process, (unless other events cause AIM to step in), further damaging revelations from Mr Whyte, and a series of competing and increasingly bitter leaks from the factions on the board and their surrogates.
No doubt it will be vastly entertaining, but it’s no way run an organisation. One thing is for sure, thanks to this investigation, if Mr Green is cleared, the duped excuse just went out the window.
Having said that, I would bet on Mr Green going, pockets bulging, before the commission completes its task
There’s a couple of points in the Rangers press release re the Board meeting decision today I don’t quite understand.
1) ‘Instructions recently given to lawyers in England and Scotland with a view to taking legal action to challenge these recent allegations will form part of the independent examination’
Why is that forming part of the investigation? Is it because Green acted outwith his powers or is it because the Board are wondering whether they should pursue Whyte themselves. And is the Board happy with a ‘blackmail dossier’ being prepared and presented to the police?
2) ‘Green faces a Scottish FA disciplinary charge over the comments made and the board see this as a personal issue for the Yorkshireman, rather than a club one’
Surely the only power that the SFA has to call Green or hold him to account is because of his club position so how is it a personal issue when he was only being interviewed in the first place because he is who he is and not because he used to be a miner or so he says. Perhaps the Board means that any fine will need to be paid personally by Green and/or that any legal costs will need to come out of his own pocket. But why not just say that rather than spout seeming gobbledegook?
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:48
Point 1 is very odd, there must be more to it, no doubt someone will leak it in due course.
Point 2 is just priceless, “We have every confidence in Mr Greens ability to discharge his duties, and by they way, Alf Garnet here is not with us” It’s ridiculous
scapaflow14 says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:52
Meant to add, I think they mean that any fines arising from point 2 are coming out of Mr Green’s renumeration
scapaflow14 says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:40
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 19:02
ecobhoy and others make a reasonable case for todays outcome being the best option. I remain unconvinced
======================================================================
I thought today’s Board Meeting outcome was the most likely given that there were 5 NEDS + 2 Exec members and one of them was Green.
Given the duty owed to shareholders I thought any other outcome was highly unlikely but my judgement on the decision shouldn’t be confused with what I would have thought was the best outcome. That would have been to sack Green on the spot on the grounds of his racism.
For the other Whyte-related allegations some kind of in-depth investigation would need to be done, by someone or the Board, before any action could be taken against Green by the Board otherwise the Board would have been handing him a blank compensation cheque.
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:58
I agree with all of that, the only major difference is that I would have sent him on gardening leave wrt the Whyte issues
scapaflow14 says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:40
I would bet on Mr Green going, pockets bulging, before the commission completes its task
—————————————————————————————————————————-
I think that you are forgetting that Speedy Gonzales is the fastest Yorkshire Puddin at Ibrox and I think he may well be long gone before the commission begins its task. After all it shouldn’t take those Big Hands long to scoop up the wonga and fill the warchest 🙂
But he may indeed have contracted rangeritis and should that be the case then no one can predict the final outcome other than it will be a downfall.
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 23:04
All the more reason to put him on gardening leave 😉 (and change all the access codes)
paradisebhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 21:06
Your application was not considered because you had not folded your letter in the proper fashion 🙂
scapaflow14 says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 23:01
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:58
I agree with all of that, the only major difference is that I would have sent him on gardening leave wrt the Whyte issues
———————————————————————————————–
Not if you think like a NED because that could really hammer share price.
But if he is sacked for racism I don’t think it would do much damage to the share price and it might actually give it a boost because of the principled stand taken. I really do believe they missed a trick today which they may live to regret especially when they seem to have let him off the racisn hook. If he’s fined by the SFA they can argue it’s a personal issue and nothing to do with the club – it’s a bizarre position IMO but it’s where they are.
I reckon the reason it took so long today was the whole leaving package was thrashed out and that would need checking with lawyers and some kind of guarantees and confidentiality agreement hammered out and a timescale set.
Otherwise they could have reached their decision in jigtime – not unless there was a lot of other Board business to discuss. I’m not sure if this would have been a normal Board Meeting brought forward or one specifically called to discuss Green’s actions right enough.
ecobhoy says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 23:14
If god forbid I had been a NED I would have argued that the SP would probably take a hit either way, but being at least being a bit decisive and sending him off on paid leave, would mitigate it somewhat. Time will tell on that one.
Your points about the racism charge are excellent.
what with mentions of jigtime and big hands is the clock tick(etus) tocking towards chico time (up)?…
over to you brenda…
Can I just point out that Rangers have not announced that there will be an INDEPENDENT COMMISSION inquiring into the circumstances of Charles Green’s purchase of the old club’s assets.
What they have announced is that the board:
My reading of this statement is that, as far as they are concerned, the “facts” are already clearly understood. What the board appear to be doing is limited to obtaining legal opinion on where they can or must go from here.
This could be one of two things:
1. That the club consider the allegations both malicious & damaging and are simply exploring their options for legal recourse.
or, perhaps more likely;
2. That they consider the alleged conduct of the three directors so prejudicial to interest of the club that they need examine the potential consequences in some detail.
Remember, the principle duty of a NED is to protect the interest of the company’s shareholders. It is interesting that:
Given the complexity of the situation, it may not be absolutely clear to the NEDs that what Green & Co are said to have done is actually illegal or has current or future consequences for them.
I do not believe this is an inquiry per-se. It appears to me to be stating the intention to:
1. independently assess the legality (or otherwise) of the three directors alleged actions
2. consider what the consequences may be for the club & its shareholders
3. determine what potential liability rests on the shoulders of the board as a whole
This, to my eye, is no more than an exercise buying some time and in covering gluteus maximi.
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/3756-rangers-board-statement
bobferris70 says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 22:17
You may very well be correct but I was using the St. Mirren statement as an example of how everthing that happens in Scottish football is viewed through a prisim of mistrust and doubt in the same way I used the other examples.
meant to add…
ah’ll get ma cloak…
i know, i know!!!
Can I assume that Messers Hart, Cartmell & Smart all attended today’s Board Meeting .
Given the seriousness of the accusations against Mr Green I am sure of there would be a full turnout the Board.
Or maybe not
Quorum ?
with regard to my pun based posts and the thumbs down…
is it cause i is a tim(e)?
http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/130413-Rangers-v-Clyde/G0000.NYtuv41lus/I0000hmsGyNUK49Q/6
If you can bear looking through the pics you can maybe identify the various cabal members
Some young kids put a Green must go banner and an older yob with the statutory skinhead and England top ripped it down .
Nice to see the old traditions living on
Nope
Todays Board Mtg was won by the Spivs. They got the delay they needed to collect in ST money I doubt if much time was spent debating Greens Spiv credentials.if they didnt already know last summer they sure know by now .Once you conclude he is a Spiv you stop believing anything he says.
The meeting may well have discussed a proposal from Whyte setting out the price of his silence
If so its more likely than not that someone was authorised to negotiate with him
Ignoring Whyte isn`t an option
——Although the Spivs main priority today was most likely to postpone RIFC liquidation until the ST money has been collected………..
——they may have bluffed Murray by pretending that an immediate MVL was favoured by key shareholders
Murray cannot prevent an MVL So ultimately his position is weak. His only card is to resign jointly with Cardigan and publicly call for an AIM investigation. Perhaps his threat to do so lead to a prolonged debate on ways of preventing his resignation
Smith seems to have aligned himself with Murray in not resigning. One assumes he figured he has effectively agreed to be gagged during the ST collection season.
Murray has bet his City reputation on the “Independent Investigation” being sufficient to fend off suspension of RIFC shares and RIFC being reported to the FSA.
This cannot have been based on any widespread soundings without leaks
It may be based on an informal chat with a few key players in the Aim regulatory body
However the concept of an “Independent Enquiry” is the sort of conclusion that comes in the wake of a resignation. an “in house smacks of a Board level Compromise founded on distrust
By not resigning and by agreeing to an RIFC controlled enquiry Murray has been outmanouvered by the Spivs. Unless of course he is working hand in glove with AIM and perhaps other agencies
In which case he may turn out to be the real Hero
,,,,,,,,,,,
The stakes are high but the end game hasn`t changed
An RIFC MVL looks pretty likely after the ST money is in.
on a more serious note which should be of interest to us all in my view…
last week i took my 7 year old son to his second celtic game, his first being the kilmarnock game around christmas 2011 when rangers lost to st. mirren and allowed celtic back in to the race for the championship…
very exciting for him and me…
in the intervening period we,including my wife (a newcatle united supporter by the way, they don’t do second teams) went to watch olympic football honduras v morocco and japan v spain, i think, at hampden…
a wonderfull family day out watching the game for the game’s sake…
he loves football…
i kept him away from the bile and bogitry which so saddens our national sport and which unfortunately appears to be the only thing which makes it box office to the world at large…
almost inevitably he follows celtic because i do…
i want him to love celtic for the reasons i do…
unfortunately he will probably not experience the highs of the european nights that i have given the state of of our national game which appears to be in an ever decreasing downward spiral for many reasons, most of which cannot be laid at the doors of ibrox…
do kids in spain, france and italy not have accesss to ideo games, ps3’s etc…
there are many other factors at play here in my view…
he loves barcelona, he loves the premiership (in fact he will drag me from bed in 6 or so hours to watch match of the day) and he loves the champions league…
he is a football supporter…
back to the point…
the guy behind us spoke loudly and confidently of things sevco related…
apart from the fact that he had obviously gleaned his knowledge from the MSM and without any other investigation…
he punctuated his remarks with an almost tourette’s like affliction and with the confidence only the truly ignorant can manage…
nobody said a word against him…
i was bealing…
i can swear and curse with the best of them, in fact i would challenge anyone to a sweary match…
my son has NEVER heard me swear…
EVER…
now this guy was not a bogit…
but surely he and the rest of us have a duty to behave appropriately in the presence of youngsters…
it’s football FFS…
ecobhoy says:
(from previous thread)
Also in the STV interview Green has said that some have cashed-in and made good money on their ‘cheap’ shares which cost as low as 1p.
——
I was of the understanding that those who bought at the lower price 1p/50p were tied in for
6/12 months ?
Is this another misleading statement from Charles !
(add it to the list)
so do i take my son to more football games?
how do i explain the t’rangers situation as oppossed to dunfermline etc…
how do i explain what f**k means before i have to? remember this was a VERY comfortable win for celtic without ANY pressure regarding the result! ( and i know it’s a bigger societal problem)
watch the game, support your team and encourage the the youngsters to love the game…
in fact get them playing the game instead of watching it,,,
that’s what the telly’s for…
which iwill find out soon…
abigboydiditandranaway
@ 23:30
I’m on it ma man 🙂 from say 16:00 Saturday 13/04/13
9hrs and counting……………………..
in case anyone was wondering, my wife’s away and i get to stay up late!!!
Sorry for going off on a tangent, did the Ross County chairman issue a positive statement on reconstruction? I have noticed a few posts (On another site, I know!) but cannot find anything concrete.
Congratulations to Hibs and Falkirk for a fantastic semi final today, you were a credit to the Scottish game. Armageddon Eh!
Big fan of the posts by BRTH and similarly Paul McConville always well written, thoughtful, educational, enlightening and entertaining.
However often wonder where all the intellectual and legal ponderings is getting us.
As opposed to talking about the actions of Bismark I can’t help but wonder if the best answer would be to line up Ogilvie, Regan Doncaster and Longmuir against a wall and keep booting them in the chuckies until they got the message.
timtim says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 01:07
ecobhoy says:
(from previous thread)
Also in the STV interview Green has said that some have cashed-in and made good money on their ‘cheap’ shares which cost as low as 1p.
——
I was of the understanding that those who bought at the lower price 1p/50p were tied in for
6/12 months ? Is this another misleading statement from Charles ! (add it to the list)
=======================================
Good point. But I’ve never believed the original investors were tied in with lock-ins because Green desperately needed their money to buy the assets and lock-in would have been a big No No in attracting it. Also the original shares were in TRFCL – a private Ltd company – so lock-in wouldn’t have been required to create an orderly market required in the publicly traded shares of a Plc such as RIFC.
In any case most of the ‘cheaper’ shares were early-doors from May onwards last year so any lock-in would be long gone. But as always with Green there is confusion because I’m sure on the STV interview he also mumbles that the original investors have stayed with them. If not on that interview it is another recent one.
Lock-ins can be evaded in any case but where they apply such as probably to the institutional ‘placement’ investors there is a certain ‘herd’ mentality in observing them unless the sh*t really hits the fan and it is every spiv for his money with the fleetest of foot or with a flash of second-sight most likely to minimise any losses.
There was also a lot of grumbling last year which never quite surfaced that many of the original shareholders were grumbling because they weren’t being paid back in cash but in a 1 for 1 swop with shares in the new company. Green turned quite nasty and blasted them – I think at a fan forum no doubt after he was fed-up with his robe being touched – when he blasted original investors who had already made a 50% profit. There was also the curious incident that he had to humiliatingly admit that the fabulously rich and powerful Pakistani-born Mr Naqvi, whom he claimed to be an investor, wasn’t one.
It had long been suspected that Mr Naqvi was the main investor in Blue Pitch Holdings and some thought he had become disenchanted with a Rangers investment because of the moving of the goalposts in not paying-out in cash. Of course this raises the problem of what is actually meant by words that Green uses. Blue Pitch Holdings is the investor in Rangers and as with many other Rangers investor trusts no one knows who are the actua lmembers in each of the anonymous offshore ‘vehicles’ used. So I have no hesitation in accepting Mr Naqvi’s assurance that he wasn’t an investor in Rangers in his own name and I say that because Mr Naqvi and his wife are Pakistani ‘Royalty’ and have done enormous charitable work in the far and middle east especially with women and children.
Green even refers to him as a personal friend but somehow I don’t ever see Green having the balls to add the insulting remark tagged to his other friend Mr Ahmad. I have nothing but respect for Mr Naqvi who appears to know the difference between a good and poor investment opportunity and I can but assume he must know Mr Green very well 🙂
HirsutePursuit says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 23:38
Can I just point out that Rangers have not announced that there will be an INDEPENDENT COMMISSION inquiring into the circumstances of Charles Green’s purchase of the old club’s assets.
What they have announced is that the board:
“…is to commission an independent examination and report in view of recent allegations in the media concerning the Chief Executive, Charles Green, the Commercial Director, Imran Ahmad,and their management of the Club.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is a very good point HP and would also explain why the ‘dossier’ would be included. They present it and ask for a legal opinion as to whether they should hand it to the police.
Given the length of time one of these independent ‘lookies’ tend to take though I hope the members ask to be paid up front. There have, after all, been rumours of ‘difficulties’ in that area recently and the speed at which things have been coming out recently, reality may well overtake the examiners.
timtim says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 01:07
——
I was of the understanding that those who bought at the lower price 1p/50p were tied in for
6/12 months ? Is this another misleading statement from Charles ! (add it to the list)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think, Tim, that it is only Directors and the like who were locked in, so as not to spook the market. Other investors could sell as soon as RIFC hit the stock market.
BRTH. Another great post.
If the SFA want to become more pro active whn carrying out due dillegance testing then they need do nothing other than read TSFM. The attention to detail and overwhelming urge to get right to the bottom of things is quite remarkable. The level of professionalism and knowledge shown by the contributers here is nothing short of outstanding.
The Sevco timeline when read in conjunction with Duff and Phelps official reports makes for interesting reading
March 29 …
.Sevco 5088 formed
May 3…….
.Green appointed Director of Sevco 5088
May 9 …..Whyte and Earley appointed Directors of Sevco 5088
May 23 ….
Green signs forms confirming disapplication of shareholder rights. Effectively canceling the rights of Whyte and Earley to receive share options
May 29
Sevco Scotland formed
May 29
Duff and Phelps issue CVA proposals naming Sevco 5088 as preferred bidder, with a legally binding contract to purchase assets regardless of whether CVA succeeds or fails
June 12
CVA rejected
June 14
Sevco Scotland purchase assets from Duff and Phepls, despite creditors never having been informed of Sevco Scotland’s existence, far less of their new status as the preferred bidder. There was an obligation in the CVA document for Duff and Phelps to issue a failure certificate should the legally binding contract with Sevco 5088 not crystallize. They issued no such certificate
July 10
Duff and Phelps issue interim report. For the first time they report that the owner of the assets is Sevco Scotland
December 27
Green signs forms to wind up Sevco 5088
Summary
It appears that Green has persuaded Duff and Phelps that Sevco Scotland is a successor company to Sevco 5088. This however is not legally correct. They are separate entities. Whyte will argue, with some justification , that Green acted illegally on at least 3 occasions.
1 He removed the entitlement of Whyte and Earley to own shares at a board meeting that they were not informed of and therefore could not attend. A board needs a Quorum to hold a meeting, and 1 out of 3 does not constitute a Quorum.
2 He represented to Duff and Phelps that Sevco Scotland was a successor to Sevco 5088, and he did not have the approval of the Sevco 5088 board to do so
3 He attempted to strike of Sevco 5088, thereby getting rid of the opportunity for other documents to be lodged, and he did this without the approval of the Sevco 5088 board
All of the above enabled Green to become the beneficial owner of approximately £4million worth a Rangers shares at a cost of roughly £40,000.
Everything I have written here is recorded at Companies House and in Duff and Phelps Official reports. The non executive directors at Rangers do not need an independent enquiry to decide Greens future. The facts are readily available. Their job is to interpret the information and make a decision. The Non execs are being paid a total of £220,000 a year for part time work. They need to start making decisions and not passing the buck
The only possible question they may want answered is from Duff and Phelps. ” What did Charles Green do to prove to you that Sevco Scotland was a successor company to Sevco 5088″
I very strongly suspect the answer will be we needed a Scottish registered business to own an SFA member club and as the shareholders are the same it’s a technical and adminstrative necessity
Based on the timeline above and the questionable legality of Greens actions the asset sale may be illegal, the IPO illegal and the SFA and SFL memberships improperly awarded
This isn’t just about Green, it’s about much more, and should be the subject of a Police investigation
abigboydiditandranaway says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 01:18
your son
=========================================
All you can do is bring your child up by showing what you and your wife as a family believe is an acceptable level of behaviour. You have to lay that basis from a very early age but not in an overbearing and dictatorial way.
I never found the football a difficult arena with my boys as I was there supervising and influencing them and very gently sending the message that the foul-mouthed were inadequates in terms of language and that’s why they acted the way they did. Then later at home I would tell the wife – in our little game in front of the children – about some of the ‘incidents’ and she would laugh and say what an idiot and I would laugh and she would say I’m so glad that you would never act like that and have people laugh at our family.
It was all so much ham-acting it wasn’t true but we came from a tough background and wanted so much more for our children and back then football was so much more foul-mouthed as a way of life thing.
But the real dangers to children is what happens when they start leaving the nest a bit and start making you new friends – that is the time IMO of greatest danger and you have to be on high-alert for a few years and when you spot a ‘friend’ capable of damaging one of your precious children then it is one of the hardest things in the world to ease them away and yet leave the impression in your child that it was their idea.
Sleekit – you bet! Many of my former school friends died young through violence and motor bikes and by my mid to late 50s most were dead through mainly through poverty, ill health and alcohol, As I view my 70s unwind before me it has all been worth it and my children are settled and without any discussion or planning with them they all instinctively seem to be bringing up their own children the way that my wife and I brought ours up.
But don’t think for a minute that I raised children who were only suited to the academic cloisters where they have all excelled – they also were, when younger extreme sports junkies and the more danger the better; they have travelled the world; can take care of themself; and can cuss like a trooper. The big difference is they know when and where to do it. Oh they have gotten into scrapes and there have been a few serious moments but they survived and usually seem to have learnt from the experience.
One other thing – the thing I was most strict about was that when I laid down the word about something that was that and they knew it was pointless trying to change my mind. It wasn’t because I had any dictatorship streak but because I truly believe that self-discipline is essential for a rounded and happy-life and it must be built in children as it becomes much harder to do the older one gets. Of course, being human, I made mistakes and it is essential to openly admit that and explain the reason why the mistake was made in language and reasoning appropriate to the age range.
It takes a lot of hard work to raise children to stand on their own two feet and be proud of what they are and the proof of success is when you see them as adults with a mixed bunch of friends from various walks of life and stations, colours, religion and sexual preferences and especially when they challenge some of my ingrained prejudices that I never ever saw for myself. I think I taught them too well.
But perhaps the most important thing and that’s why I’ve left it to last is just to love them as much as possible because that’s the key to everything that follows.
Quality post BRTH.
Bismarck was quoted as saying “Whoever rules Bohemia holds the key to Europe.”
Who holds the power in Scottish football?
I believe that since the Souness/Murray period, those who had access to the most money temporarily held the most power. Crassly (S)DM famously boasted (apologies for paraphrasing) for every £5 Celtic spend we will spend £10. As we have seen, the problem with the (S)DM spending model was that he had borrowed the money – and it had to be paid back. Que desperate measures – EBTs…
Previously to that era, the fans had much leverage – if there was a poor product on the pitch – the fans walked, and the Chairman who had put money into their clubs had to balance things accordingly. In that regard the fans provided a check and balance.
It is almost beyond belief that a bank (according to reports on #Charlote18) had afforded significant power to former Chairmen whereby they could take on finance on terms that were significantly more advantageous, than were available to other clubs. I hope that the current events at Ibrox do not distract internetbampots, journalists and a presenter of Off the Ball from unraveling the spiders web of #Charlotte18.
John Emerich Edward Dalberg Acton, (aka Lord Acton) in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton (1887) said – “Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men.”
While Acton’s quote on the exploration of the corrosive effect of total power, he was not the first to explore that theme – In 1770 Wiliam Pitt in a speech to the House of Lords noted “”Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it”
Scottish football should reassess who holds the power over the game – we have seen significant buses of that power, notably where others have held absolute power
Chairmen with preferential access to financiers – securing credit and loan terms unavailable to others;
A MSM who have followed an agenda, which has until recently hid the truth from the public;
An inability of the SFA to apply the published rules of the game without fear and favor;
An 11-1 voting system that may destroy attempts to re-structure the game.
I believe that to counter-act absolute power – the SFA should have an element of fan representation. I have no idea how that would work, but I believe strongly that this is something that should be explored.
The one thing that is clear – that in Scottish football – those who corruptly use power will destroy the game. The RTC blog has changed the playing field – internetbampottery has provided more leverage, meaning that fans will walk away, if they are taken for mugs.
Returning to Bismarck, “Whoever rules Bohemia holds the key to Europe.” – Hats off to John Brown for standing at the front door of Ibrox and demanding to know who holds the deeds to that stadium.
I hope that Internetbampottery continues to explore fully the murky goings on off Messers Whyte/White, Green and (S)DM – all fans of Scottish football have a right to know who owns the assets of the TRFC, as do others such as the AIM, BDO and not least the SFA.
Sadly, internetbampottery appears to be the only vehicle at the moment that is prepared to dig deeper to understand who owns what – and how were the assets moved about pot administration. TRFC have announced that they will investigate themselves. The SFA as the licensing body should have stepped in and said no. That is our gift, we will investigate. It is not beyond belief to suggest that someone at the SFA suggested to the Board of TRFC that they might want to hold an independent investigation.
Absolute power does corrupt and it is clear that Scottish football sadly needs a counter balance. Internetbampottery may not last for ever – the heavy hitters RTC et al will not always find the time to keep things moving along.
The fans threat to walk away cannot be held over the heads of Chairmen each time there is a critical issue on the table. Again, perhaps we need now to move towards a reconstituted SFA – which has an element of fan representation.
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 07:30
May 23 ….
Green signs forms confirming disapplication of shareholder rights. Effectively canceling the rights of Whyte and Earley to receive share options
============================================================
This has always been a sticking-point for me. Obviously Green would have been aware of this as soon as the resolution was posted on Companies House – and ignoring for the moment whether Green and Earley were de jure Sevco 5088 directors and shareholders – why didn’t they oppose the disapplication move.
They wouldn’t just have swallowed some story from Green such as this will help hide your involvement even deeper. I am speaking hypothetically of course trying to understand a very confusing situation which also appears to confuse Mr Green one of the main players.
Perhaps they did oppose it and had some guarantee given which would need to have been in writing and legally enforceable but perhaps not to them but to a third-party. I throw Ticketus in here but I freely admit that I am no expert in the Ticketus web as I just don’t have enough brain cells to get my head round it.
So I reckon Green must have more than he has shown and I have always worried that his playing strip-poker with his revelations is just a tease to force an off-the-table settlement to prevent the nuclear option button being pressed which will not only destroy Ibrox but Whyte. Instead of strip-poker perhaps with the Russian influence I should be referring to the layer-removal technique required of Russian Dolls (of the Matryoshka variety of course).
If he gets his settlement all continues as before – and that of course is with a non-sustainable business model. Funnily enough I do believe that Green would have no problem of making the necessary cuts but why would he bother if he only want to escape as quickly as possible with his wonga. In any case I truly believe that for him the end game is nigh but perhaps not for investor spivs firmly in the shadows.
Ecobhoy
It was Green who signed the disapplication forms. I’m presuming its Whyte you mean who is engaging in the drip of revelations
Whyte only wants paid. Everything he is doing is towards that end
The issue is whether Green acted illegally to financially benefit himself , that’s a Police matter.
Green ended up as Rangers largest shareholder , only paying 1p per share, would he have got to that position if 5088 had been able/allowed to complete their legally binding contract
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 07:30
The only possible question they may want answered is from Duff and Phelps. ” What did Charles Green do to prove to you that Sevco Scotland was a successor company to Sevco 5088″
I very strongly suspect the answer will be we needed a Scottish registered business to own an SFA member club and as the shareholders are the same it’s a technical and adminstrative necessity
===================================================================
Your answer is fine but no matter whether Sevco Scotland was registered as a Scottish club or not it is regulated under the same UK-wide legislation so the question of proving it is a ‘successor company’ remains the same.
But I seem to have a memory trace that English registered companies can be transferred and given a new Scottish company number so why not do that?
Perhaps that was a bit of the ‘history’ that Green not only didn’t want but would have been happy to see disappear.
There is also the strange notion that Green raises with his ‘handing back’ of Sevco 5088 to Green and Earley when it ceased to be the purchase vehicle for the Rangers assets. Green had the £1 subscriber share which is the minimum for any company so was that handed back and to whom?
If it was I don’t think the necessary documentation has been filed with Companies House so the subscriber share in Sevco 5088 is still held by Green and no other share issue has been notified to Companies House. So how could Sevco 5088 have been handed back to anyone as it isn’t a legal entity without at least a £1 share IMO. There is also the argument that a sole shareholder can’t just hand a company to anyone but must arrange for it to be stuck-off or wound-up following it’s financial affairs being put in order.
Which brings us to the application by Green as the only director of Sevco 5088 to have it struck off at the very end of last year. This of course makes a mockery of the Rangers official statement re the timing of Green’s resignation from Sevco 5088 which still hasn’t been notified to Companies House. Sometimes spivs can be tripped-up by other things than tape spools.
The other timeline that is absolutely damning of Green relates to when he lodged the disapplication of shareholders rights forms for Sevco 5088 with Companies House
He signed them on May 23
The CVA is rejected on June 12 ( A Tuesday)
He completes the deal for Sevco Scotland to buy the assets on June 14
He lodges the disapplication of rights form on June 14
He waited until he had his deal signed before making public to Whyte and Earley that he had cancelled their options to be major shareholders in Sevco 5088. He probably also wanted to hide that information from creditors in case they asked who’s rights were being cancelled
If he was genuine then he would have lodged the forms on June 12. He didn’t , and he stands accused of deception for significant personal financial gain
goosygoosy says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 00:47
Todays Board Mtg was won by the Spivs. They got the delay they needed to collect in ST money
======================================================================
I would be very surprised if the collection of the ST money wasn’t very very carefully controlled. Murray is no fool and knows exactly what he is dealing with and any kind of under the radar non law-breaking transfer would require Stockbridge to be involved and I don’t think that’s a possibility as he really does have too much to lose. And if the finance director doesn’t sanction a transfer then anyone else who does will be speaking to Mr Plod and it won’t be about blackmail.
It also has to be remembered that the enquiry is also into the running of the club – now that is a very intersting concept. Not the Holding Company RIFC Ltd but the subsidiary of which Murray is no longer a director so he is totally clean. The only directors left in TRFCL are Green, Ahmad and Stockbridge. So what has been going on there that has been picked-up on by the Main Board?
As to the MVL I just think that is a non-starter and when the patient – Rangers – is lying in the gutter requiring immediate brutal life-saving intervention from paramedics I don’t think that a lot of thought is going into the convalescence stage should the patient survive which is highly unlikely IMO – at least in its present form
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 08:41
I would like to think that your salient points find their way to AIM and the Enquiry as it might help concentrate minds as it is a very good clear piece of analysis – well done 🙂
barcabhoy says: Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 08:41
The CVA is rejected on June 12 ( A Tuesday)
=========================
The CVA wasn’t rejected on 12th June. HMRC indicated that they would vote against the CVA on 12th June, but the creditors meeting that formally rejected the CVA was held on 14th June.
HirsutePursuit says:
Saturday, April 13, 2013 at 23:38
Can I just point out that Rangers have not announced that there will be an INDEPENDENT COMMISSION inquiring into the circumstances of Charles Green’s purchase of the old club’s assets.
What they have announced is that the board:
“…is to commission an independent examination and report in view of recent allegations in the media concerning the Chief Executive, Charles Green, the Commercial Director, Imran Ahmad,and their management of the Club.”
==============================================================
I think you have made some very valid points in your post and it is always careful to read, re-read and then re-read again the words as at this level every one is carefully chosen. I fully believe however that the circumstances of the purchase of the assets will form the major plank of the investigation.
However, I still keep coming back to what is it about Ahmad and Green’s management of Rangers (TRFCL) which is causing concern. Also interesting to see that Stockbridge isn’t included which appears to signal that the money side is OK.
I fully accept that a large part of the strategy is to create a buffer-delay because of shareprice considerations although I think that is to facilitate Green’s deparure along with his friend rather than primarily to cover the NEDS erses. I really haven’t seen a verifiable shred of any impropriety attaching to the NEDS.
Excellent stuff as ever from BRHT.
So who currently does hold the power in Scottish football. At the moment it seems like Stewart Gilmour and possibly Roy McGregor. Nothing wrong with them voting their way under the current 11-1 structure of course, but (in Gilmour’s case at least), this 11-1 structure is what he seems so keen to get rid of – why? Is it simply to put in place a collective where half of the season book money paid to the better supported clubs by their own fans is paid to the lesser supported clubs? We should be told, because that would be an abuse of power IMO.
Barcabhoy
Interesting and helpful timeline above. There was a statement, I think from Rangers, which confirmed purchase of assets by Sevco5088 before transfer to Sevco Scotland. That must have some relevance. If correct then it raises the question of who authorised. If incorrect then why issue the statement? You’ve maybe covered this already and given your view. But it does seem to be worth adding as part of the timeline.
1 Green enquiry begins.
2 It finds against green (whatever than means) in time for ST renewal.
3 Out With Green in with wattie
4 Rise in ST prices but no one cares because Wattie is the saviour.
5 Rangers fans duped for the 3rd time.
Easyjambo
That’s not relevant. As soon as HMRC made an official statement the CVA was rejected. Green could not risk lodging papers he signed on May 23 before he had his deal to buy the assets through Sevco Scotland signed and concluded
His actions and timings strongly indicate his intent
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4886920/Charles-Green-has-just-weeks-to-save-his-skin.html
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 08:22
Ecobhoy
It was Green who signed the disapplication forms. I’m presuming its Whyte you mean who is engaging in the drip of revelations
Whyte only wants paid. Everything he is doing is towards that end The issue is whether Green acted illegally to financially benefit himself , that’s a Police matter. Green ended up as Rangers largest shareholder , only paying 1p per share, would he have got to that position if 5088 had been able/allowed to complete their legally binding contract
===========================================================
Thanks for spotting my typo: ‘So I reckon Green must have more’ which should have read ‘So I reckon Whyte must have more’.
I totally agree that Whyte just wants a pay-out, possibly not just for himself, but there may well be very pressing reasons for him to want Ticketus or some of their investors off his back so that he can relax in the balmy and usually healthy sea breezes of Monaco.
As to what the position would have been if Sevco 5088 had completed the deal – I honestly don’t know because there is still too much unknown. We should also never fall into the Darkside adulation of Green – he is and has always been nothing but a ‘front’ with a gift for raising AIM money but he seems to have a poor track record with companies beyond that stage. In the past he appears to have acted for others and as part of the share raising exercise was capable of wielding a cost-cutting axe,
I don’t think he has a lot of personal cash and is of an age where most of his age contemporaries involved in his line of work have long-since retired as very rich individuals. I keep getting the feeling that Rangers popped-up and he saw it as his once in a lifetime chance to lift the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. So he went at it full-tilt and possibly caution was abandoned somewhat along the way and he now is where he is with the dream fading and slipping from the grasp of his Big Hands.
I think he made a huge miscalculation of the Scottish establishment and equated their intellectual level at that of the more follow follow minded Bear btw that isn’t an attack on the FollowFollow Rangers supporters grouping but more of the attitude that needs a strong leader to follow.
What Green didn’t realise was the all-powerful all-pervading influence and canniness of the Scottish Establishment who saw Green as a gift from gawd to get the debts cleared, then get rid of him and restore the debt-free club to ‘righteous’ owners. It should never be forgotten that this self-same Establishment sold their country when Union with Britain looked financially more attractive to them.
However, I digress, The blueprint was all drawn-up and much as it might pain some there are many Catholics and Celtic supporters in today’s Scottish establishment as befits a modern and inclusive Scotland 🙂
But the wheels came off the chuck wagon because they thought he was in it for the money pure and simple and would do the required job and leave as originally planned to allow things to return to normal.
Well Chuck genuinely may have caught Rangeritis or perhaps, acting as a free agent without his normal shadow partners keeping him on track, he went native and all control was lost. On top of that those pesky bampots and clatterers derailed the train which required to stay on the SPL mainline and then even prevented the points being thrown to divert it onto the SFL Div 1 loop for a short journey back to the main line.
No matter what happens with Rangers the ‘mob’ have demonstrated to the Scottish Establishment that they can be beaten and that must be scary for them and will become more so when the ‘mob’ fully understand and start to fully use their new power. There will be many false dawns but I can recall as yesterday Bill Keys, an old Sogat TU campaigner, shouting from a platform in the 70s: ‘If we all spit at the same time we will drown the b******s’.
The internet has given us the means to drown them and all we need to do is develop our aim a bit better 🙂
BRTH
Excellent post ,but like you say forget seperating the chaff from the wheat,when do we start panning the windows in.
barcabhoy says:
Sunday, April 14, 2013 at 07:30
————————————————————————————————————————-
Barcabhoy
Re your time line– the date of 12th May is very significant for a number of reasons.
First of all it is at :00:30 hours on 12th May that Imran Ahmed texts Craig Whyte to say that he has funded the £200k (as agreed) for the non returnable deposit referred to in the exclusivity agreement with D&P. In the text he says that this money was transferred this evening– meaning the evening of 11th may.
In their report, D&P say that they entered into an exclusivity agreement with Sevco 5088 Ltd on 12th May– and from that day forward Sevco 5088 Ltd have preferred bidder status and an absolute right to buy Rangers PLC or the assets of Rangers PLC– with a mechanism in place for either purchase.
We already know that Ahmed has asked Whyte for money by 12th may, and we now know that Green had asked for £25,000 ( supposedly for expenses ) by that date– and it appears that he got it.
Per the Rangers International interim accounts — Green injeted £25k ( by sheer coincidence of course ) on 21st May ( from memory ) and so on we go.
The point is that immediately before the exclusivity agreement was signed, both Whyte and Aiden Early were asked to supply the money necessary to secure the deal to buy the assets– and it is clear that Green and Ahmed appear to have been working for and with Whyte.