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.
torrejohnbhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:24
2 0 Rate This
Anybody fancy a punt on Skybet?.
Next Permanent Rangers Manager
Next Permanent Manager Any manager in charge for 10 competitive games will be deemed permanent and settled as a winner. Others on request.
Billy Reid 11/4 Brian Laudrup 7/2 Stuart McCall 5/1 Billy Davies 8/1
Terry Butcher 11/1 Neil Warnock 14/1 Alex McLeish 18/1 Walter Smith 20/1
Brian McDermott 25/1 Nigel Spackman 25/1 Kenny McDowall 33/1 Frank de Boer 50/1
Barry Ferguson 50/1 Paolo Di Canio 50/1 Jim Jefferies 50/1 Mark Hughes 50/1
Jim Duffy 50/1 Derek McInnes 50/1 Steven Pressley 50/1 Steve Lomas 50/1
Stuart Pearce 50/1 Owen Coyle 50/1 Nigel Adkins 50/1 Alex Ferguson 66/1
Roy Keane 66/1 Jose Mourinho 66/1 Steve Kean 66/1 Neil Lennon 66/1
———————————————————————————
I might be temped to stick a quid on Kenny Shiels, especially if he is considered longer odds than any of that lot.
Admit it.
We are all missing Charles, aren’t we? 🙂
wottpi
🙂 not as much as ally is 🙂
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:29
‘..His circus act also provided the required major deflection as to who actually owns Rangers and we still don’t know who that is…’
—-
This is where I regret not having any basic understanding of capitalism and the markets!
I know there is Rangers International Football Club.
I know that the holding company of that entity is FFW Secretaries Ltd,
I know that the ‘ultimate’ holding company is Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP.( is that the same as FFW Secretaries Ltd?)
Does that mean that the real owners of what used to belong to a now dead RFC are the directors and shareholders of a big multi-national legal firm?
Who is actually making (or losing) money?
And how did all these people get so incestuously involved, moving around in that bubble of lies, fraud, and deceit that is the ‘market’?
I scratch my baldy heid in wonderment.
The pennies dropped over on Rangers Rumours and its not just this individual whos commented similar sentiments.
“01 May 2013 13:05:32
Regardless of nonsenses with green and Whyte and deeds and ownership, I believe money is presently the critical factor for survival. We were told in the January interim account statement that £2.4m was being spent every month. Well at first May that’s £9.6m spent since December, plus £2m went to SDM for car park, plus there were about £2m footballing debts settled, plus there were business debts and fines to sort. Aparently there’s Directors, management and playing staff bonuses for Winning div3 and compensation due for Green and Ahmad. There’s also substantial legal fees.
The concern is that its share money paying for all this, hence even a fully taken up season ticket sale will only get the club through a few months of next year.
Fans need to see the P&L and balance Sheet. A statement needs to be made.”
——————————————————————————–
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:52
6 0 Rate This
tomtomaswell says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:43
0 0 Rate This
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:29
Rangers are faced with a difficult equation of how many STs it will lose if it imposes swingeing cuts and how long it can last if it doesn’t even with stadium sell-outs.
—————————————————
There will be absolutely no discussion (in public at least) of cuts until next season’s ST money is in. After that the financial axe will be swung.
———————————————————-
how exactly?
they are going to sell players? who is buying average SFL2 players on SPL wages? OK, maybe release them – are they paying up their contracts? they’d be as well keeping them.
Sure, they might not bring anyone else in – despite already having Bell on a pre-contract. But can they be confident of anyone leaving?
so, what other cuts is there? outsource tickets/catering/stewarding – lay off the staff? Close a stand? Close Murray park? you can see how upset the team would get if you stopped their papers – so, what if you stopped staying overnight in hotels before games a few miles away?
Simply enough – I don’t think it is possible for them to make cuts. (or at elast, big enough cuts to make any meaningful difference) but i am happy to hear your thoughts.
They need to make cuts of about £1M a month. Where is it coming from
=====================================================
That’s the $64k question. I expect a big clear out of the admin staff which although will not amount to anything substantial will be the first sign. After that I would expect that some “problem” will arise with guys they are currently looking at on a pre-contract which will see those deals falling through.
Fully expect McCoist to fall on his sword as well. However, even with these cuts, they are just delaying the inevitable but at least the ST money will be sitting in a place they can get to it.
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:26
—-
This is where I regret not having any basic understanding of capitalism and the markets!
I know there is Rangers International Football Club.
I know that the holding company of that entity is FFW Secretaries Ltd,
++++++++++++++++
No, that’s not correct. RIFC is a PLC, there is no holding company above it. RIFC is owned by a variety of shareholders, including Charles Green, Imran Ahmed, all the fans who bought into the IPO, and a load of mysterious front companies. RIFC is the 100% holding company of TRFC, a limited company which is the purported owner of the assets of “Rangers”, although that is currently disputed by Craig Whyte.
I hope that helps.
exfallhoose2012 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:19
—
Private Eye have a story out? Any chance of more details?
Also what do you mean about writing style? Do you think that it is by RTC or someone else we would all know?
Even if they were in the SPL and charging top dollar for a season ticket, it would still be about running costs and cash flow.
The oldco got into trouble even when it had access to plenty cash.
The newco is not convincing me they are willing to cut their cloth, therefore it will all end in tears again unless they get a grip of things.
The fans need a good still dose of smelling salts so they can smell the coffee and face up to reality, although it appears some are beginning to get the message.
It will be hard enough to survive without having a fight with Whyte and his Worthington crew.
If that kicks off then it could easily be curtains.
Even paying Whyte a few million to go away is going to land them in cashflow bother.
Nope – still see a long way to go on this one.
I just don’t get this…?
Ok, granted I am a long way away from Scotland and maybe not up to speed on the latest…but has there really been no comment from the SFA?….Really?
Are they really sitting on their hands waiting for the outcome of this “independent” investigation?
Really?
Come on…this just beggars all belief surely?
TheTributeAct (@TheTributeAct) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:45
Private Eye have a story out? Any chance of more details?
Also what do you mean about writing style? Do you think that it is by RTC or someone else we would all know?
================================================================
@TTA, the Eye’s ‘In the Back’ and ‘Rotten Boroughs’ sections are often penned by a range of contributors, following a broad house style. I’ve not read it today yet but interested to hear that we might be familiar with the writing style. By way of illustration, and my opinion only, previous coverage has been closer to RTC than Goosygoosy or BRTH (all interesting but with different styles and focus).
anybody know what has happened to the ORLIT claim.
has it been paid [unlikely] or have orlit accepted defeat?
exfallhoose2012 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:19
Private Eye has just popped through my letter box. ‘In The City’ has very worthwhile comprehensive and comprehensible summary of what is happening in Govan.
———————-
Is it the one with ‘Maggie Maggie Maggie’ on the cover?
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:53
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:29
I’m just not convinced that the sale of Rangers season tickets will be prevented this year.
————————————————————————————————————–
My view on this has nothing to do with the share price. I don’t see that as relevant. I base my view on cash flow, and the legality of selling season tickets when any conceivable cash flow forecast shows the money running out before the season ends.
——————————————————————————————————————–
In my original post I said:
‘So really we are back to whether Rangers can actually get through next season financially and I won’t argue with those who have prepared what figures they can to show this is unlikely as I on a very rough guess don’t give them beyond January 2014.
‘To go beyond that needs a new ‘owner’ and a capital injection but then we are back to the age-old problem with a football business that if fans aren’t provided with on-field results they stop being paying customers. Rangers are faced with a difficult equation of how many STs it will lose if it imposes swingeing cuts and how long it can last if it doesn’t even with stadium sell-outs’.
I also made clear that a didn’t believe that there would be such a slump in share price as to force AIM to prevent trading in the company. So we would appear to be in agreement over the importance of cash flow and relative unimportance in share price.
However, it would be silly to dismiss the possibility of a cash injection from a new owner or indeed from a fresh share sale although I do believe this would only attract fan investment. And if Rangers got through another season they might actually start to see benefits starting to accrue from cost-cutting. But without approx £25 million extra capital I don’t think they can survive long enough to get back to the SPL and once there how do they fund better players. If they don’t and results suffer they will lose attendance and that creates a vicious spiral.
The whole problem is that the Green consortium was based on short-term financial gain with no thought or planning to secure the club’s future IMO. Obviously this goes back to the need to finish last season and the failure to wield the axe at that point but we all know that other agendas were in play which necessitated the club remaining in the SPL or at worst SFL1.
Green made a public virtue of not cutting all the fat because in a few years it would all be needed, he said, when Rangers returned to the big time. I have never understood how any savvy investor (outwith the original consortium) could accept that nonsense from the CEO of a new public company with a troubled financial history. So Green not only didn’t cut but signed players on big money for the SFL3 with little resale value – on long contracts it would appear.
To be fair he lost a helluva lot of money when existing players didn’t Tupe over and I still can’t figure-out how he got that so wrong. But that money wouldn’t have stayed in the club IMO so it might have looked good in a snapshot of the accounts but wouldn’t have provided any more time.
I’m not saying that morally STs should be sold but I do wonder if there is any legal barrier as I’m sure that a dual argument of cost-cutting and fresh capital would stay the hands of the courts should it get there which I doubt and the SFA will continue to do what it does best.
I also happen to believe that Rangers fans would fill a 40k petition in less than a fortnight that they know their club is on the financial abyss and might not see out a season but they are buying their tickets anyway and are prepared to take the loss.
I do think that they will also pony-up again to buy shares to save the club – with the right Rangers Men in charge (whoever they are judged to be at that moment) – but I truly doubt if that would raise more than £10 million and possibly only £5-£8 million especially if in December.
When I comment on what I think Rangers supporters might do I mainly do so based on what I would do for Celtic if it was in a similar position which it was not that long ago. I also talk and listen to Rangers supporters I’ve know well for a long time and take their thoughts on board and most of these guys are interested in football and only football and want to save their club and have no interest in the ‘baggage’.
peterjung1 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:52
I just don’t get this…?
Ok, granted I am a long way away from Scotland and maybe not up to speed on the latest…but has there really been no comment from the SFA?….Really?
Are they really sitting on their hands waiting for the outcome of this “independent” investigation?
Really?
Come on…this just beggars all belief surely?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
They may choose to argue that until CW / Worthington’s court case is actually launched they have nothing to investigate/comment upon. In strict terms they would probably be correct in that as RIFC, being a traded company, would be able to launch action against the SFA if that body were to say or to imply publicly that there was an issue under investigation or to be looked at which might impair the RIFC share price etc. That would all change, though, once CW’s action comes to court.
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:24
Is it the one with ‘Maggie Maggie Maggie’ on the cover?
===================================================
Out, Out, Out was the last one.
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:43
that’s not correct. RIFC is a PLC, there is no holding company above it. RIFC is owned by a variety of shareholders, including Charles Green, Imran Ahmed, all the fans who bought into the IPO, and a load of mysterious front companies. RIFC is the 100% holding company of TRFC, a limited company which is the purported owner of the assets of “Rangers”, although that is currently disputed by Craig Whyte.
…………………………..
You’re right neepheid about RIFC (Rangers International Football Club) being the top tier of the organisation, and this is what the fans bought shares in. They, RIFC, in turn, hold TRFC.
However TRFC (The Rangers Football Club previously know as Servco Scotland Limited ) is listed as a private limited company (with share capital) whose business is not been recorded and has no share capital and there seems to be mention of assets. The company has not yet filed accounts. There are 3 current members and 1 company secretary. Perhaps I’m reading the wrong or out of date document; I fear the whole structure it has become a daedalian labyrinth – no doubt deliberately so.
The toing and froing of directors can be seen here.
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC425159
Despite this, what has baffled me (and many others) is the simple question – where does the ‘rangers’ team or ‘rangers entity’ team fit into all of this?
In other words who employs the players i.e who pays their wages?
Any simple answers?
I had a quick scan at the Record when I was out there and there is the largest comment I’ve ever seen in the Hotline from a Dad who son was still traumatised the following morning by what he’d witnessed at Firhill, from both sets of fans. No condemnation of Scott McDermott’s despicable article though but credit to them for giving it the prominence it needs. Not a great deal of comment on here about events. Are some unwilling to admit that the Celtic fans were perhaps every bit as bad as the Sevco fans? Ripping up seats…but that’s not really true as fans were standing on seats causing them to break. Well that’s all right then, I stand on seats at the football all the time!
bobferris70 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:55
10 1 Rate This
Agreed Bob,
The lack of comment on here has been highly disappointing.
Who’s asking the questions TSFM won’t ask?
bobferris70 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:55
Phil mac summed it up rather well: Fans Against Criminal Damage
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/fans-against-criminal-damage/#more-3694
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:52
how exactly?
they are going to sell players? who is buying average SFL2 players on SPL wages? OK, maybe release them – are they paying up their contracts? they’d be as well keeping them. Sure, they might not bring anyone else in – despite already having Bell on a pre-contract. But can they be confident of anyone leaving?
so, what other cuts is there? outsource tickets/catering/stewarding – lay off the staff? Close a stand? Close Murray park? you can see how upset the team would get if you stopped their papers – so, what if you stopped staying overnight in hotels before games a few miles away?
Simply enough – I don’t think it is possible for them to make cuts. (or at elast, big enough cuts to make any meaningful difference) but i am happy to hear your thoughts.They need to make cuts of about £1M a month. Where is it coming from.
==========================================================================
I think you put the finger on the difficulty. And for any cuts to have any effect then they need to get through at least the 2013/14 season but then – if all goes well footballing wise – they face the problem of funding of SPL quality players within another year.
The club has got to be stripped of every single penny of unnecessary expenditure in every department. Paper talk at the start of last season was that those coming in were getting longish contracts from memory but is that true? Could there be a 12 month break clause in view of the high wages being paid for SFL3. If there isn’t then I can only surmise that Green knew he wouldn’t be at Ibrox when the sh*t hit the fan.
Stockbridge in his big interview piece before the most recent one made a comment that the commercial agreements in operation at the club were woeful which struck me as strange because I would have thought going into admin would have provided the opportunity to cancel most contracts and I think of the likes of JJB in that context.
The only way not to have to make cuts of £1 million a month to break-even is to increase income and I just can’t see how they can escape increasing ST prices. I’m not even sure that there’s any longer an argument about McCoist having to go because of his poor managerial abilities – I think he has to go with his coaching team just to save money. But he has to walk to save a pay-off and that could be triggered by Mather refusing a warchest. I haven’t seen anything from the meeting with McCoist and Mather which was to take place yestert5day to fix the transfer money available which I would think is zilch.
Ordinarily getting rifd of McCoist might have reflected on ST sales but there has been a very successful campaign led against him on Rangers fan sites so he might have lost his trump card.
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:43
‘john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:24’
———–
If you’re right, neepheid, then I’ve just been shafted by ‘CheckSure’ instant business reports’, according to whose full report of 1st May 2013 on Rangers International Football Club plc, the ultimate holding company is Field Fisher Waterhouse llp, with FFW Ltd shown as a first holding company!
The bast’ds!!
goosygoosy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 13:05
19 0 i
Rate This
Bringing in a QC at this late stage when the Masons ought to have finished their investigation suggests two possibilities
1 The Masons have already reported and RIFC have salami sliced one innocous section on which a “QC`s opinion” is being sought
The idea being to bury the rest of the Masons report and trumpet the view of a QC on a salami slice of the drama where Green can be proven whiter than whyte
Without actually saying so their comments on the QCs opinion would be carefully couched to let the gullible think that the QC has conducted his own investigation when he has only done what he was asked to do
——————————————————————–
i.e. What the SPL did with the LNS dual contract issue
Brian McHugh (@pbmchugh) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:38
However TRFC (The Rangers Football Club previously know as Servco Scotland Limited ) is listed as a private limited company (with share capital) whose business is not been recorded and has no share capital and there seems to be mention of assets. The company has not yet filed accounts. There are 3 current members and 1 company secretary.
++++++++++++++++
TRFC is a private company limited by shares. That means that there must be at least 2 shares issued. From the details you provide, the company has three members. The members of a limited company are its shareholders, so there are at least 3 issued shares. All the issued shares will be held by RIFC PLC, either directly or via nominess. The statement in Companycheck that it has no share capital is clearly a mistake, in my opinion. Every live company limited by shares has share capital.
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:30
===========================================
John, did Ffw Secretaries Limited act as company formation agents and resign quite quickly?
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:30
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:43
‘john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 14:24′
———–
If you’re right, neepheid, then I’ve just been shafted by ‘CheckSure’ instant business reports’, according to whose full report of 1st May 2013 on Rangers International Football Club plc, the ultimate holding company is Field Fisher Waterhouse llp, with FFW Ltd shown as a first holding company!
The bast’ds!!
=========
Were FFW Ltd not instrumental in setting up Sevco 5088 for Mr C Whyte? Would this be relevant in any way?
Brian McHugh (@pbmchugh) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:38
TRFC (The Rangers Football Club previously know as Servco Scotland Limited ) is listed as a private limited company (with share capital) whose business is not been recorded and has no share capital and there seems to be mention of assets. The company has not yet filed accounts. There are 3 current members and 1 company secretary. Perhaps I’m reading the wrong or out of date document; I fear the whole structure it has become a daedalian labyrinth – no doubt deliberately so.
Despite this, what has baffled me (and many others) is the simple question – where does the ‘rangers’ team or ‘rangers entity’ team fit into all of this? In other words who employs the players i.e who pays their wages? Any simple answers?
==================================================================
TRFCL did have an initial share capital, 2 x £1 shares from memory held by Green the original subscribing shareholder, which were split (possibly down to 0.01p again from memory) and issued to the original consortium investors who were then able to swap their shares on a 1 for 1 basis for RIFC Plc shares.
But any limited company requires at least one shareholder and at least one issued share. So it could be that 1 or more shares were not transferred across to RIFC Plc. The question is who is or are the shareholder/s hiolding the shareholding still in TRFCL?
As a wholly owned subsidiary does it matter who holds the shareholding in TRFCL – not being a spiv or an expert in company control I am unable to answer that one.
However this change happened before December 2012 and it would appear that Companies House hasn’t been told of the change in shareholding which it should have been.
As to who pays the players I do know that in another forum a Rangers fan, who holds himself out to be an accountant, is adamant that none of the players at Ibrox had a changed contract of employment when Green took over and that the employer’s name on the contract is the Rangers Football Club. I have argued that is nonsense as the club is not a legal entity and could not be an employer and couldn’t deduct NI or Tax or indeed even have an insurance contract for Employers Liability in its own name.
However the Rangers AIM Flotation does state that McCoist’s contract is with TRFCL and was transferred there as part of the purchase from D&P. It’s a guess but I would think that also applied to the players who didn’t walk – but does it apply to the players who joined last year or are they employed by someone else? I hope they know who their employer actually is.
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:30
If you’re right, neepheid, then I’ve just been shafted by ‘CheckSure’ instant business reports’, according to whose full report of 1st May 2013 on Rangers International Football Club plc, the ultimate holding company is Field Fisher Waterhouse llp, with FFW Ltd shown as a first holding company!
The bast’ds!!
=====================================
I can’t help on that one- FFW are just a big city law firm, I doubt if they are allowed to act as a holding company at all, and they certainly don’t own RIFC PLC. Ask for a refund!
JC
Ffw Secretaries Limited
16 Nov 2012 ⇒ 4 Dec 2012 (18 Days ) Company Secretary
16 Nov 2012 ⇒ 4 Dec 2012 (18 Days ) Director
What happened at the under17 blues against Celtic the other night was disgusting, but it seems the SFA are holding back on statements of what they plan to do because although they readily punish Celtic, they find it very hard to punish the blue lot ( lost track of what their name is now ) and as there was trouble caused by yobs on both sides the powers that be don’t have a clue what to do!?!?! By giving the blue lot special treatment in the last few decades their hands are being tied tighter and tighter behind their backs 🙁
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:23
============================
…
Ordinarily getting rid of McCoist might have reflected on ST sales but there has been a very successful campaign led against him on Rangers fan sites so he might have lost his trump card.
============================
As TRFC can only bring in ‘free agent’ players, and are probably stuck with several overpaid, demotivated, average players, there is nothing to excite the TRFC fans to rush out and buy their ST’s for next season, [aside from all the ownership issues, etc ! ]
So, what can be done to boost the fans ?
IMO, the only option left is to replace McCoist with a new/cheap manager.
Then, the fans will have to show their support for the new manager and this ‘exciting new era’ for TRFC, blah, blah, blah…
But I presume it would cost TRFC to get shot of McCoist – unless he walked away for nothing, and thus ‘preserving his dignity’ ?
No, perhaps not.
Or what if he was able to take his pay-off in the form of TRIFC shares ? 🙂
blu says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:48 ‘ohn, did Ffw Secretaries Limited act as company formation agents and resign quite quickly?
Carfins Finest. (@edunne58) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:50 ‘Were FFW Ltd not instrumental in setting up Sevco 5088 for Mr C Whyte? Would this be relevant in any way?’
—
I think they were, indeed. But these guys seem to duck and dive and be in and out of each others pockets in a way that bewilders me!
My problem is that I don’t really understand what a ‘holding company’ is, exactly.
Field Fisher Waterhouse llp seems to be quite a big company of lawyers. What’s in it for them
to act as a holding company, and what would they hold other than other companies?
Company size is no measure of professional integrity, of course, and no doubt the big companies don’t mind which cheating shyster they make money from.
But I’d love an explanation of how a holding company makes its money?
The trouble at Firhill the other night can be summed up in two words :
Auld Firm,
with emphasis on the second. It is a corporate strategy. For decades this animosity has been blind eyed by both clubs because the animosity was the best marketing campaign money couldn’t buy. It coralled otherwise sensible people into one camp or the other and forced them to adopt an allegiance that included the hoodlum and the drunken lout.
I think its natural to put up a defence when your tribe is under attack, even if deep down you don’t agree with the common cause. Tribes are like that, they favour cohesiveness over justice. You see it illustrated amply within football teams (Cantona, Suarez) where a player commits an unjustifiable offence but his colleagues rally round to defend him. The herd mentality is very powerful and it exists for a reason.
The reason is that as a group we are more powerful and as individuals we are weak in the face of a crowd and feel very vulnerable. Spartacus died a long time ago and the lesson was well learned. Be a hero if you want to but don’t expect a long life as a result.
So we all aquiesce in injustice. The things we hate about ‘the other side’ are the very selfsame characteristics that invade our own existence. We are no different from each other. Unless however, there is money to be made.
The Auld Firm was a corporate philosophy, not a sporting rivalry. How we gloried in the most fiery rivalry in world football. So successful was the tactic that it began to attract fans from other areas way outside Glasgow to jump the big boys bandwagon. Until it got out of hand.
Then the rivalry became so contentious that if one side got the upper hand on the other it would invade our everyday existence. Now fans of both sides throw money at these institutions and turn up religiously to watch their favourites play on their hallowed turf. It has replaced religion.
What you need is more religion in football. The type of religion that espouses humility and tolerance and fairness… but that was another era that never really existed anyway.
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 16:30
If you’re right, neepheid, then I’ve just been shafted by ‘CheckSure’ instant business reports’, according to whose full report of 1st May 2013 on Rangers International Football Club plc, the ultimate holding company is Field Fisher Waterhouse llp, with FFW Ltd shown as a first holding company!
————————————————————————————————————
CheckSure haven’t updated their records if that info is still showing get your money back. They were formation agents and secy for new company RIFC Plc which I believe has to be done technically so that a new company can be publicly floated.
However some good stuff on links at:
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/charles-green-and-craig-whyte-connections-or-coincidences/#more-2332
This independent inquiry is, in essence, legal consultancy.
It brings home that the SPLIC was, in essence, the same.
The findings will suit the organisation that asks the legal brain to conduct it.
Just as it did the SPLIC.
The integrity and probity of the legal people is not in any question whatsoever – it is not the issue.
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:25
I do think that they will also pony-up again to buy shares to save the club – with the right Rangers Men in charge (whoever they are judged to be at that moment) – but I truly doubt if that would raise more than £10 million and possibly only £5-£8 million especially if in December.
==============================
To go back to the fans for money less than 12 months after a successful IPO smacks of something beyond desperation. The fans provided about £7m last time, and to me that figure is the absolute maximum that can be screwed out of them. A “second pressing” always produces a lot less juice, so let’s say they could get £5m. That is just 2 months expenses. This company needs at least £20m of new capital or soft loans, combined with some sensible cost cutting (bye bye Ally!) to see it through to the start of the 2014/2015 season. So my conclusion is the same as yours, really. Either really savage cost cutting, starting right now, or a £20m+ sugar daddy, or its lights out. I don’t think the ordinary fans can save them this time. For them to chuck in another £5m would just be a waste of £5m.
StevieBC says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:04
Or what if he was able to take his pay-off in the form of TRIFC shares
===============================================================
I don’t think he would get them at 1p a time though like last time – and he might think even 50p was way too much to pay 🙂
I had another look at his contract info on the Rangers AIM Flotation and this bit is interesting: ‘The agreement is terminable by RFCL for cause or on 12 months’ notice and by Mr McCoist
on 12 months’ notice’.
So unless he walks another £750K disappears out the kitty. I can only see him walking if Mather tells him there isn’t a bean in the kitty unless he can ship players out and raise money selling them which I think is a forlorn hope.
From a spiv point of view the £750K might be worth it as Smith would almost certainly follow and this would leave Murray totally exposed. It all depends what the plans are and outsiders won’t know until after they have happened and the money has flown.
Carl31 (@C4rl31) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:17
This independent inquiry is, in essence, legal consultancy. It brings home that the SPLIC was, in essence, the same. The findings will suit the organisation that asks the legal brain to conduct it.
=====================================================================
The questions will be carefully framed to elicit the required answers.
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:16
‘…CheckSure haven’t updated their records if that info is still showing ..’
—
Thanks for that, ecobhoy.
I have just put in a call to FFW to let them know that they are being mis-reported, and use the answer they give to back my claim against Checksure. ( Jeez, I feel like CW or CG making claims, or maybe I’m more like SDM, the dupe!)
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:06
Company size is no measure of professional integrity, of course, and no doubt the big companies don’t mind which cheating shyster they make money from.
But I’d love an explanation of how a holding company makes its money?
+++++++++++++++++
I”ll have a go. A holding company simply holds shares in other companies. Usually it sits at the head of a group of companies, who actually carry out the business. Let’s say I’m Mr Bunn the baker, and I have a thousand shops around the UK. I might want a regional structure, so I would have Bunn (Scotland) Ltd, Bunn (Wales) Ltd, Bunn (South East Ltd), etc. Each of those trading companies would run the shops in its own area. All the shares in those companies are owned by Bunn PLC. Bunn PLC is a publicly traded company whose shares are widely owned by institutions and the general public, although I’m sure Mr Bunn will have retained a large slice himself.
Bunn PLC is a classic holding company. It does not trade with the public, it just manages the companies which actually make and sell cakes and biscuits. As a holding company it will have a board of directors, a finance function, and that’s about it.
As for how it makes money, well all the profits of the trading companies in effect belong to the holding company, which owns all their shares. So each year the trading companies pay dividends to the holding company. They may also pay management charges.
It can get a lot more complicated than that, but that’s basically how it works.
jimlarkin says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:22
5 0 Rate This
anybody know what has happened to the ORLIT claim.
has it been paid [unlikely] or have orlit accepted defeat?
—
There are just too many questions about the Orlit situation for us to know if this is going to be serious or fizzle out.
Orlit was due a commission for finding people to help fund the original purchase of assets. Did they do a deal with Sevco 5088 or with Sevco Scotland? Where did the funds they helped raise end up- Sevco 5088 or Sevco Scotland?
If they did a deal with Sevco 5088 and funds were instead sent to Sevco Scotland, it would go a long way to making Craig Whyte’s case for him. Yet if the deal was done with Sevco 5088, Orlit would have no direct claim against RIFC or Sevco Scotland (the companies trading as ‘Rangers’). They would be a creditor of Sevco 5088 and would need to wait until the other problems were settled.
Rumour had it that Green was trying to pay Orlit off with RIFC cash and Malcolm Murray stopped him. Quite right too if there was no deal with Sevco Scotland to pay them a commission. If this is true, it looks like the Alex Thompson story that a WUO on “Rangers” was coming might or even possible not have been on the money.
It’s another set of twists in this yarn, but I’m not holding my breath on this delivering a knock out punch.
Remember that Sandaza told the bold Tommy that his wages were rising year on year of his contract so , next season the wage bill for the superstars who I presume were also offered a similair deal will rise by 20-25% so to will Ally and his backroom staff .
Even if a hike in season tickets is to happen it may not cover that expenditure .
McCoist is marmite to most at Ibrox ,on one hand, with him they continue to trust that the suits
are trustworthy enough for them to part with their cash . If he goes however the board will need to replace him with someone of equal standing amongst the support. The only individual I can think of is Walter , the 64k dollar question is would Walter thrust himself back into the limelight ?
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:21
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:25
I don’t think the ordinary fans can save them this time. For them to chuck in another £5m would just be a waste of £5m
==================================================
I’ve never thought we were were far apart in ultimate conclusions but googlies are in the unwritten rules and could still be played. I mean of the cricket variety as well as of the tape recording type.
Defn: Googly: A cricket ball bowled as if to break one way that actually breaks in the opposite way. Also known as a: wrong ‘un.
The big problem about going to the market again is that it would be Jan/Feb next year at the latest I reckon which could be worse than just before Xmas because the Xmas bills are in.
However even £5 million raised wouldn’t be a waste of fan’s money as I’m sure the spivs would make good use of it – wonder what generation of spivs it will be by then?
TheTributeAct (@TheTributeAct) says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:47
Yet if the deal was done with Sevco 5088, Orlit would have no direct claim against RIFC or Sevco Scotland (the companies trading as ‘Rangers’). They would be a creditor of Sevco 5088 and would need to wait until the other problems were settled.
—————————————————————————————————————–
The only thing that I would observe is that even if the Orlit deal was with Sevco 5088 they might have been given assurances that Sevco 5088 was the legitimate predecessor of Sevco Scotland and if that was in written form it truly would be interesting depending on who’s name is on any paperwork.
Green has said that the deal with Orlit was verbal but then we know that his memory can be faulty. He may well have come to an agreement to pay them personally and if Orlit and Murray were clever they would have ensured that part of Green’s pay-off might have gone straight to Orlit. If that is the case we will certainly hear no more of Orlit.
timtim says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:50
If he (McCoist) goes however the board will need to replace him with someone of equal standing amongst the support. The only individual I can think of is Walter , the 64k dollar question is would Walter thrust himself back into the limelight ?
================================================================
I have difficulty in believing that Smith would be prepared to replace McCoist especially if he was sacked. I’ve always regarded Smith as ‘a wily old bird’ who owns the original teflon patent and just can’t see him putting his ‘Legend’ in jeopardy.
I was surprised when he backed Green by joining the Board and have always wondered if he actually had a clue about the legal position he was placing himself in as a public company NED as the dogs in Ibrox knew where it was all heading.
The only credible explanation I ever saw was that he was being put in as a placerman for when Green failed to ease the return of Rangers Men which may or may not happen.
bobferris70 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 15:55
—————————————–
Plenty was said at the time, apart from a little bit of whataboutery (myself included), I have yet to see anyone who didn’t think the scenes were an utter disgrace.
I will not comment on the other side but from what I seen, even if seats were broken by Celtic fans standing on them, the behaviour was still totally unacceptable. Without knowing all (or very little for that matter) the facts, I would still be comfortable making the assumption that many of the Celtic fans there that evening were not the type I would be happy calling my friends.
Not much more has to be said, identify the individuals that “actually” broke the law and prosecute them with my blessing, simple!
Maybe you would like to offer up your take on it and why you feel it should be Celtic fans that start or have a discussion about it? I say that as I feel your concern is not just based on airing the ugly side of football fans, more about stiring a pot.
Rangers International FC
56.00p
-2.00p (-3.45%)
May 1 – Close
RIFC back down today to its previous lowest point since flotation. It’s highest point in early January was 94p.
Re where the money will be coming from to keep the sevco on the road ,look no further that the fans .
The fans were seen as the finance vehicle by CW and CG, even Minty ( club deck debentures ) although he had his flexible friends at the bank to help out .
The fans by and large invest without much thought of a return ,as for the money men ,not too many sugar daddies kicking about Scottish football nowadays .
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:39
‘…. A holding company simply holds shares in other companies….’
——
Thanks, neepheid. I get the general idea… I think! But I’d never make a businessman, I fear.
Just heard a hack on SSB saying that he has read the title deeds of sevco and saying that their is a no floating charge on any of the assets except one on Murky park to the bank of Scotland from 2002 .I have seen it posted here that there was a duty on Murky park but I thought it was to sports Scotland
Any ideas
StevieBC says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:04
4
0
Rate This
“….unless he walked away for nothing, and thus ‘preserving his dignity’ ?
No, perhaps not.
Or what if he was able to take his pay-off in the form of TRIFC shares ? 🙂 ”
_________________________________
AMc getting the boot but taking a pay off in the form of TRIFC shares? This would most probably mean walking away with effectively £nothing, while NOT EVEN preserving what little is left of his dignity.
So given his form and judgement to date, that’s the one I am puttying my fiver on!
jonnyod says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:00
An old chestnut, Auchenhowie was built, in part, with public money. Sport scotland, not unreasonably, have protected their investment, all standard stuff.
scapaflow14
I knew about the sport Scotland part but was interested in the hacks comment on it being with the bank of Scotland ,he also said that he was told it was an anomaly in the paperwork that had not been revised .
What anomaly takes 11 years to revise
Re Companies House recording of share holdings: I think only issues of new shares have to be notified in a couple of weeks but a transfer of shares from an existing shareholder to someone else are only notified once a year, at least that used to be the case a few years ago.
jonnyod says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:12
pretty sure the hack is talking bollocks. IIRC the D&P report correctly listed the charge as Sport Scotland, but will have to check
Regarding Firhill, was anyone really expecting both sets of fans to politely applaud each other’s team then all shake hands at the end with a, “Well done chaps”?
In the Blue corner there was a crowd with a sense of humilation and pent up anger from the years of bad news. In the Green corner there were perhaps those who felt outraged by the recent events involving the police and the wee matter of NL being punished on a nonsense, possibly vindictive charge – followed by an unreasonable punishment.
All of the ingredients were there for trouble. Just as well there wasn’t booze available. Just shows that it’ll take a long time before the underlying animosities disappear. On the other hand, it’s important to finger the exact culprits in order to rule out that anyone turned up as an agent provocateur.
Send the repair bills to both clubs and deem that the next match between these two teams be played behind closed doors.
Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:18
Regarding Firhill, was anyone really expecting both sets of fans to politely applaud each other’s team then all shake hands at the end with a, “Well done chaps”?
In the Blue corner there was a crowd with a sense of humilation and pent up anger from the years of bad news. In the Green corner there were perhaps those who felt outraged by the recent events involving the police and the wee matter of NL being punished on a nonsense, possibly vindictive charge – followed by an unreasonable punishment.
All of the ingredients were there for trouble. Just as well there wasn’t booze available. Just shows that it’ll take a long time before the underlying animosities disappear. On the other hand, it’s important to finger the exact culprits in order to rule out that anyone turned up as an agent provocateur.
Send the repair bills to both clubs and deem that the next match between these two teams be played behind closed doors.
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Aye, and a great advert for expediting TRFC up to the Premier League. Not.
When the talk was of Armageddon coming I hadn’t realised it would actually take the form of TRFC. (NB I do appreciate that both sides contributed to this situation but I also suspect a Celtic v. Morton match would not have seen anything like this…)
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
On the subject of an independent Scotland I’m now strongly of the opinion that there would be no ongoing appeal in the EBT case under a Scottish replacement for HMRC. Not a chance. That is one of the many reasons why this saga has convinced me to change my mind and vote “No” in 2014.
Couldn’t wait to get home to log on to SFM for a dose of sanity tonight after seeing a 3 foot Evening Times billboard at central station pronouncing “Fasttrack Rangers to the SPL – says Icon”. There’s no escape! Make no mistake the MSM are engaging in a propaganda campaign of wartime proportions.
Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:18
——————————————–
Agreed Danish!
I couldn’t believe my ears on listening to the STV News at 6 reporter stating that, when ‘Rangers’ receive the 3rd Division Trophy this weekend, they will be adding to the club’s history.
FFS
ps have contacted STV, but not sure why I bothered! Need a chill pill methinks!
redlichtie says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:32
0 1 Rate This
(NB I do appreciate that both sides contributed to this situation but I also suspect a Celtic v. Morton match would not have seen anything like this…)
———-
I agree redlichtie (I didn’t give you the TD btw). To be fair, if it had been the blue team v Thistle I don’t think we’d have seen that either. I’ve disliked matches between these two teams since I was barely a teen. If I never read or hear of another, the world will be a better place.
RFIC shares down 3.45% on the day I see. Google Finance says market cap is now £36.45m compared to Celtic plc at £53.78m – is that accurate? I thought Sevco value had been talked up a lot higher than that. Glad I never bought any………ha ha ha ha.
Danish at 19:49
I fully agree.The world would indeed be a better place.The games between Rangers and Celtic have always been ugly affairs,more often than not played at a frantic pace and usually lacking in skill with the exception of the odd piece of individual artistry.
They are also bad for you and bring out the worst in the human psychy ,irrespective of whether your team wins or not.
jonnyod says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:00
Just heard a hack on SSB saying that he has read the title deeds of sevco and saying that their is a no floating charge on any of the assets except one on Murky park to the bank of Scotland from 2002 .I have seen it posted here that there was a duty on Murky park but I thought it was to sports Scotland
Any ideas
===================================================================
Sports Scotland have a floating charge on Auchenhowie for £500K which covers the public money invested when it was built. The cash allowed some public access and possibly some SFA access if my memory serves me correctly.
john clarke says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 18:57
2 0 Rate This
neepheid says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 17:39
‘…. A holding company simply holds shares in other companies….’
——
Thanks, neepheid. I get the general idea… I think! But I’d never
make a businessman, I fear.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But maybe a poet?
You just don’t know it
Yet!
Very quiet tonight. Is this a Barcelona forum?
bect67 says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:45
I couldn’t believe my ears on listening to the STV News at 6 reporter stating that, when ‘Rangers’ receive the 3rd Division Trophy this weekend, they will be adding to the club’s history.
FFS
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
But it’s true bect. It’s adding to their history of being knocked out of all the cups they have ever entered (main team), of starting life against Brechin as Sevco Scotland Ltd, etc etc
Still no bad news? I needed cheering up…
AM QC
Just to cheer you up.
Q :Is that an elephant i see in the room ?
A : No … It’s an OCTOPUS
Macbrayne – I see what you did there *taps nose*
Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 20:30
5 0 Rate This
Still no bad news? I needed cheering up…
——-
The current 7-0 aggregate score against Barcalona leaves me with a strangely warm glow 😉
#dopingcoverup
Theoldshed
re the times 3ft billboard ,Fast track rangers to the SPL ,it read on to say the Scottish Prison League,should always read down on these billboards.
onnyod says:
Wednesday, May 1, 2013 at 19:00
6 0 Rate This
Just heard a hack on SSB saying that he has read the title deeds of sevco and saying that their is a no floating charge on any of the assets except one on Murky park to the bank of Scotland from 2002 .I have seen it posted here that there was a duty on Murky park but I thought it was to sports Scotland
Any ideas
==========================
Not a legal expert but I always thought that a floating charge covered all the assets of a company. Any charge over Ibrox would be a fixed charge and attached to it (in a legal sense, not stapled to a wall :-D).
I assumed that Whyte, or someone on his behalf, held this charge and that was his safety net
Danish as I’m sure arabest will point out, first time Barcelona have lost both legs since 1987 against Dundee Utd!!
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/hateley-get-gers-back-in-the-spl-now-122935n.20960351