Scottish Football and the case for a Bismarck!

Avatar Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Scottish Football and the case for a Bismarck!

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.

About the author

Avatar

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

5,402 Comments so far

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on3:15 pm - May 6, 2013


Interesting take on the Rangers crossbar challenge

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/red-card-warning-for-rangers-1-million-competition-by-ecojon/comment-page-1/#comment-76400

View Comment

Avatar

spanishceltPosted on3:18 pm - May 6, 2013


paulmac2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 15:03

Blue Ribands…themwhere the days…

Reminds me a my father who used to get really upset when the club biscuits (a luxury in our hoose in the 70′s) would tell my maw to buy club biscuits with the raisins in….cos he knew me and my sister hated anything with dead flies in it?
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

We were lucky in our house, we had an auntie who worked in the Beaties biscuit factory and she would bring home carrier bags full of chocolate biscuits, every time you opened a cupboard door biscuits would pour out!
I used to take them into school and sell them to the rich kids who got pocket money.
She told us it was free samples, but when I was a bit older I realised she was a thieving auld sod!

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on3:45 pm - May 6, 2013


Someone asked earlier whether there were charities involved in the Legends game today … Bryan Robson on the Man Utd website:

“I have played with the United lads in a few charitable games and it’s a pleasure to be able to lend our support to the Rangers Charity Foundation and also UNICEF, a charity which is also very close to the hearts of Manchester United and its fans.”

View Comment

Avatar

SquigglePosted on3:53 pm - May 6, 2013


paulmac2 says:

Monday, May 6, 2013 at 14:11

Rate This

Quantcast
Forres Dee (@ForresDee) says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 12:06

Long Time Lurker says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 12:02

Will we see Peterhead crowned 3 Division Champions?
=========================

No the season is over, can’t/won’t change that now, it was all about getting the 36 games finished. Then and only then will they front up the truth about who/what owns the assets.
………………………………………….

So in short….Rangers were liquidated…after years of deceit..cheating…and financial doping on an industrial scale….The SFA chose to ignore and allowed a reincarnation of the old club called SEVCO to play football in Scotland even though they did not meet or fulfill the required criteria…

SEVCO….the reincarnation…having completed 1 season now appear to have completed that season on a bed of lies and deceit…and continued financial mismanagement…

Fool me once shame on you….fool me twice shame on me….fool me thrice..and our corrupt partnership is now undeniable!
////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

Is it the Sevco ‘blindness’? They are coming back – all the way. WE allowed this to happen.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on3:57 pm - May 6, 2013


From the Rangers website-

“THE LEGENDS of Rangers and Manchester United are going head to head at Ibrox today and you can watch it all live on RangersTV.

Wherever you are in the world, prepare to be entertained as some of the most famous players to have worn the Light Blue of Rangers and the Red of United take to the hallowed turf.
It promises to be a fantastic day and it will also be a great day for the Rangers Charity Foundation and UNICEF – kick off 2pm.”

So it seems like the proceeds should be going to charity- but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that, given previous “misunderstandings”.

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on3:58 pm - May 6, 2013


angus1983 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 15:45

Someone asked earlier whether there were charities involved in the Legends game today … Bryan Robson on the Man Utd website:

“I have played with the United lads in a few charitable games and it’s a pleasure to be able to lend our support to the Rangers Charity Foundation and also UNICEF, a charity which is also very close to the hearts of Manchester United and its fans.”

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

angus

well done for that.

OSCR are supposed to be “investigating” the rangers charity foundation, into alleged rule breaches.
this relates to the “charity” match -v- ac milan last year.

apparently, the ‘rangers’ charity, “donated” the proceeds to the ‘rangers’fc, plc,
which is allegedly against the law ?

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on4:07 pm - May 6, 2013


angus1983 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 15:45

Someone asked earlier whether there were charities involved in the Legends game today … Bryan Robson on the Man Utd website:
…………………………………

Ah good old Bryan Robson….the very same man caught on camera last year by Panorama during their investigations into English football corruption….

Bryan was caught stating he would front any takover of any club for the right fee…with the sole purpose that the nominee could take over the club with a minimal outlay….

The whole sham was designed to allow the nominee to acquire financially stricken clubs for next to nowt…Bryan and others were clear you don’t have to spend any cash buying players…there were other clubs who would lend them to you…whilst you could retain all income…as well as punting some of the best playing assets…

It was an eye opener to English football and the goings on behind their top flight clubs!

View Comment

Avatar

paulsatimPosted on4:10 pm - May 6, 2013


Corsica1968’s update re OSCR, tweeted recently, http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on4:49 pm - May 6, 2013


paulsatim says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 16:10

Corsica1968′s update re OSCR, tweeted recently, http://alzipratu.wordpress.com/
……………………………….

Who are OSCR answerable to?

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on4:58 pm - May 6, 2013


neepheid says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 15:57

From the Rangers website-
“THE LEGENDS of Rangers and Manchester United …

So it seems like the proceeds should be going to charity- but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that, given previous “misunderstandings”…
================================

I did take an interest in this yesterday, i.e. was this going to be a repeat of the previous dubious ‘charity game’ that Corsica had been chasing up.

The media reports recently indicated that there would be ‘donations’ to the two named charities.

Also, the previously posted link to the photo of the complimentary ticket, [with a value of ‘0.00’], had the title of ‘Friendly’ game printed on it – and with no mention of any charities.

Maybe they where a bit more careful this time at iBrox ?

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on5:02 pm - May 6, 2013


I suppose that the Board Meeting is over now.

What intrigues me is that this meeting is held on a Bank Holiday Monday. Now that surely can’t be routine. In fact to me that makes it exceptional. If a Board Meeting is held on a bank holiday, there surely must be a pressing and specific reason. After all, why not tomorrow morning?

My first theory is that the timing of the meeting has been chosen to exclude one or more participants, who may be unavailable to attend today, due to prior travel arrangements for example. So we may be in for a boardroom coup, a bank holiday of the long knives, where one faction disposes of its enemies once and for all.

Maybe that’s a bit fanciful. Dignity would surely preclude such unworthy scheming. So what’s the alternative? Can it be that the business to be done just can’t wait until tomorrow? Insolvent, so trading must stop immediately, or the Directors lay themselves open to criminal proceedings?

It’s a slow news day, so just a bit of idle speculation. All should be revealed tomorrow- or will tomorrow bring just another false dawn?

View Comment

Avatar

paulsatimPosted on5:04 pm - May 6, 2013


paulmac2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 16:49

No idea, mate!

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on5:07 pm - May 6, 2013


paulsatim says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:04

Scottish ministers have final responsibility for policy and regulation, but, if you mean accountable for a decision in a particular case, then, I think you are into the judicial review process. Ministers have no control over the day to day business.

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on5:12 pm - May 6, 2013


paulmac2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 16:49
2 0 Rate This
paulsatim says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 16:10
Corsica1968′s update re OSCR, tweeted recently, http://
alzipratu.wordpress.com/
……………………………….
Who are OSCR answerable to?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

OSCR Management

Our work is directed by a Board which is appointed by Scottish
Ministers following an open public appointments process.
The OSCR Board is responsible for our strategy and future
direction, oversight and governance. Our Board Members act as ambassadors for OSCR, promoting our policies and values and bringing their specialist knowledge to the organisation.
The OSCR Board is supported by approximately 50 staff working at our office in Dundee. Corporate decision making that affects our daily operations is delegated to theSenior Management Team (SMT), chaired by David Robb, OSCR Chief Executive.
View our organisational chart for more information on our
staffing structure.

Our work with the Scottish Government

Scottish Government Ministers have ultimate responsibility for
policy in relation to charity legislation and third sector policy. We work closely with the Scottish Government’s Charity Law Team, which has responsibility for implementing charity legislation.

http://www.oscr.org.uk/about-oscr/oscr-management/

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on5:19 pm - May 6, 2013


neepheid says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:02

I suppose that the Board Meeting is over now.

What intrigues me is that this meeting is held on a Bank Holiday Monday. Now that surely can’t be routine. In fact to me that makes it exceptional.
=======================================================

With the Legends game would it not make sense to have a Board Meeting today as I would imagine most of the directors would be at Ibrox anyway to hobnob with their Man Utd counterparts . Any that aren’t can teleconference. Perhaps they have an interim report from the enquiry to discuss or possibly it’s to whip Man U into line to ease their escape from Scotland.

I would also think that Ally’s budget has to be set as mather can’t take that decision unilaterally and the decision has to be made before any ST pitch can be launched I would imagine.

If they are insolvent then that would be a matter for Strathclyde’s finest because I just don’t believe they have gone below £10-12 million.

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on5:22 pm - May 6, 2013


http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/296
Lots of speculation so let’s see
Numbers to 31 DEC
Total raised share capital 35 less 5.5 + ST/ other income & 21.2 cash left – so
Dec31 statement – 21.2m cash
SAY: 4 month spend since – say 1.5m a month [18pa] – should still leave 15m or so to c/f
So what’s the problem?
Is something amiss?

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on5:28 pm - May 6, 2013


twopanda says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:22

Is something amiss?

Possibly – does TGEF require £17m to pay Ticketus?

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on5:31 pm - May 6, 2013


paulsatim says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:04

paulmac2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 16:49

No idea, mate!
……………………………..
Their website states their board members are appointed by the Scottish government ministers…

‘Our work is directed by a Board which is appointed by Scottish Ministers following an open public appointments process.’

Laura Anderson, Head of Enforcement

Laura is responsible for OSCR’s Compliance, Investigation, Accountancy Advice and Monitoring teams where the work includes dealing with complaints from members of the public, issues of non compliance and OSCR’s monitoring of charities. Laura trained and qualified as a Chartered Accountant with PricewaterhouseCoopers and worked in private practice until 2007 when she joined OSCR. She is an active member of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in Scotland and is the joint-Chair of the UK Charities SORP Committee.

Compliance &
Investigation
Manager
B3
Sharon
Walker

They would appear to be answerable to Alex Salmond and the gang.

View Comment

Avatar

goosyPosted on5:48 pm - May 6, 2013


1. neepheid says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:02

I suppose that the Board Meeting is over now.
What intrigues me is that this meeting is held on a Bank Holiday Monday. Now that surely can’t be routine. In fact to me that makes it exceptional. If a Board Meeting is held on a bank holiday, there surely must be a pressing and specific reason. After all, why not tomorrow morning?
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
neepheid
When a Board mtg is held on a Bank holiday Monday it’s usually something to do with an imminent event on the Stock Market
An event that requires the whole Board to present a united front to the City
It is probably something along the following lines
Either

Aim have advised RIFC that their shares will be suspended pending an investigation into the IPO in Dec 2012. Pending the outcome of these investigation sales of STs will be delayed

Alternatively

The RIFC Board are meeting to approve and issue an RNS to the AIM market which has been prepared in advance by lawyers A press release will also be approved
At the meeting those Board members not involved in the issues will get their first look at the Statement under the fig leaf of “discussing and amending it”. In reality unless the lawyers also attend it is a cosmetic exercise to rubber stamp the wordage agreed between the Spivs and the lawyers
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
The content of the RNS could be any of the following
Either
Green and Khan are cleared of wrongdoing but have decided to leave anyway
Or
Murray and Cardigan are resigning
Or
McCoist has agreed to resign in exchange for an pre-agreed termination payment
Or
Worthington have agreed a deal with RIFC whereby the claim by Sevco5088 over the assets is dropped
Or
BDO have advised that they will be investigating the role of Whyte and Green in the Asset Sale
Or
Orlit have applied to the courts for a winding up order on RIFC
Or
STs cannot be sold with a warranty that Ibrox will be the venue for every TRFC home game next season
Or
RIFC have decided to apply for a Members Voluntary Liquidation after the last game of the season
Or
HSE are pressing for costly repairs to be carried out to remove asbestos.Ground sharing may be needed for part of next season

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

One things for sure
Whatever is decided will be decided by the Spivs in the short term interest of the Spivs.

View Comment

Avatar

paulsatimPosted on5:49 pm - May 6, 2013


paulmac2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:31

They would appear to be answerable to Alex Salmond and the gang.
========================

So nothing will happen then, #fabricofscottishsociety

View Comment

Avatar

paulsatimPosted on5:51 pm - May 6, 2013


From @corsica1967 on Twitter.

1/6 Completely forgot to update RFFF news…Glasgow Council admit they’ve never been asked nor given licence for street collections by RFFF.

2/6 That licence is mandatory and to collect without is breach of law.

OSCR & Glasgow Council have both washed their hands, stating its…

3/6 …not their responsibility to enforce law even tho OSCR regulates charities & GCC regulates street collections…

4/6 Instead they refer me to Police Scotland. Not a bad idea except PS have so far not even acknowledged any communication on the matter.

5/6 Not only that but, even tho they are legally responsible for licencing,…

6/6 …and have had the matter drawn to their attention for over 8 months, GCC have not contacted Police Scotland. Strange, eh?

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on6:02 pm - May 6, 2013


neepheid says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 15:57

” … and it will also be a great day for the Rangers Charity Foundation and UNICEF – kick off 2pm.”

So it seems like the proceeds should be going to charity- but I wouldn’t hold my breath on that, given previous “misunderstandings”.
——

As said above, the statement on the Rangers site varied slightly in that it said “donations will be give to …”. I’m sure TRCF and Unicef could use a tenner each.

As well as the AC Milan game, what about the monies received from the boycotted Dundee United cup game? Any sign of TRCF having received that?

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on6:17 pm - May 6, 2013


Nothing to do with the Government North or South

Appeal in first instance is to SCAP Scottish Charities Appeal panel

then the judicial review route

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on6:47 pm - May 6, 2013


goosygoosy says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:48

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

You forgot

Or

Any combination of the above.

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on7:09 pm - May 6, 2013


So who asks SCAP to intervene/investigate?

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on7:16 pm - May 6, 2013


twopanda says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:22
4 0 Rate This
http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/296
Lots of speculation so let’s see
Numbers to 31 DEC
Total raised share capital 35 less 5.5 + ST/ other income & 21.2 cash left – so
Dec31 statement – 21.2m cash
SAY: 4 month spend since – say 1.5m a month [18pa] – should still leave 15m or so to c/f
So what’s the problem?
Is something amiss?
+++++++++++++++++++++++++

The interim accounts show operating expenses of £15712k for the period 14 June to 31 December, giving an average monthly spend of £2.4m . That’s £30m per annum- the root of their problem.

Two properties were purchased in January for £2.4m and football debts of £2.5m were paid off. 4 months outgoings at £2.4m per month is £9.6m. So of the £21m in the bank at 31 December, £14.5m has been spent, leaving £6.5m in the bank, plus whatever income has come in since 31 December, maybe £1m.

There should be between £7m and £8m in the bank. The company shouldn’t be insolvent just yet. But there’s only 3 months money left in the bank, and no money coming in until season ticket renewals arrive. If season ticket sales can’t go ahead, for whatever reason, then it’s curtains, in my opinion.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on7:30 pm - May 6, 2013


twopanda says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:22

From financial statement. Anybody know what “…non-recurring release of negative goodwill of £20.5m”, refers to?

View Comment

Avatar

theoldshedPosted on7:31 pm - May 6, 2013


Suggestion to the SPL and SFL club chairmen who are standing idly by while the football authorities do their best to destroy the game in this country for the benefit of one club:

Please could you consider introducing a “conscientious objector” reduced price season ticket category for those who want nothing to do with any game involving The Rangers.

Thanks

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on7:32 pm - May 6, 2013


Did you factor in Cenkos’ cut neepheid.

There’s also the pay-offs for Green and Ahmad, and the costs of the independent investigation obviously.

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on7:37 pm - May 6, 2013


mullach says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:30

Basically they are saying they got the business for a song and that it’s worth over £20m more than they paid for it.

It is in fact them confirming that they under paid for what they got.

View Comment

Avatar

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on7:42 pm - May 6, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:37
0 0 Rate This
mullach says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:30

Basically they are saying they got the business for a song and that it’s worth over £20m more than they paid for it.

It is in fact them confirming that they under paid for what they got.

__________________________________________________________________________

This is an old Ibrox accounting ploy.

The 2005 accounts should a profit for the first time in years when they threw £15M worth of negative goodwill into the profit and loss account thus hiding the fact that even with the Murray supported share issue the whole structure was as bust as bust could be.

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on7:47 pm - May 6, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:32
0 0 Rate This
Did you factor in Cenkos’ cut neepheid.

There’s also the pay-offs for Green and Ahmad, and the costs of the independent investigation obviously.
—————————————

what about Orlit ? is it 400k they want ?

View Comment

Avatar

timtimPosted on7:47 pm - May 6, 2013


We have to assume that those large investors have actually paid up,
If Green and Imrahn can speak innapropriately (in public) and walk away with a bonus for doing so, why should Sandaza pay the penalty for a private phone call that he didnt make public.
Surely Sandaza has’nt just walked away without a fight ? theres a coupla million at stake there

View Comment

scapaflow14

scapaflow14Posted on7:50 pm - May 6, 2013


jean7brodie says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:09

The person who raised the original complaint. If OSCR reject the complaint you go to SCAP

View Comment

Avatar

therampantbaronPosted on7:52 pm - May 6, 2013


Maggie on SSB has skewered Keevins once and for all

“I don’t know why you live in Scotland, Hugh – you seem to hate it and its culture so much. You don’t even know who I am or who I support but you just jump to a conclusion based on a little story I came on to tell you”

Maggie, we don’t know why he lives here either – well done. The most eloquent contributor to that pitiful programme for many a day.

You should have asked him though why he hasn’t taken up covering lacrosse, as he seems to hate Scottish football so much too.

The bottom line though as has been mentioned previously is that the employment of many Scottish sports journos is on the line if Sevco don’t pull through their current crisis.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on7:54 pm - May 6, 2013


chipm0nk says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:32
0 0 Rate This
Did you factor in Cenkos’ cut neepheid.

There’s also the pay-offs for Green and Ahmad, and the costs of the independent investigation obviously.
==========================

I’ve tried to paint the rosiest picture I can for the establishment’s favourites. I believe that Cenkos would have got their pound of flesh before 31 December, so the bank balance at 31 December is after their payment..

Green and Ahmad have just gone, and the terms of their departure are shrouded in mystery (have they really gone?). But any pay-offs to them, and the substantial costs of the “independent” commission will just bring the day when the money finally runs out that much closer. If I was on the commission, I’d be wanting cash up front, that’s for sure.

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on7:55 pm - May 6, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:42
1 0 Rate This
chipm0nk says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:37
0 0 Rate This
mullach says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:30
Basically they are saying they got the business for a song and that
it’s worth over £20m more than they paid for it.
It is in fact them confirming that they under paid for what they
got.
______________________________________________________________________
This is an old Ibrox accounting ploy.
The 2005 accounts (showed) a profit for the first time in years when they (threw) £15M worth of negative goodwill into the profit and loss account thus hiding the fact that(,) even with the Murray supported share issue(,) the whole structure was as bust as bust could be.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Fixed that for you 😀

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on7:55 pm - May 6, 2013


Brogan Rogan Trevino and Hogan says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:42

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

Indeed.

The ever increasing value of Ibrox Stadium was also suspect. One would almost have thought that the figure was more to do with covering the debt levels at Rangers and MIH than anything to do with the actual value of the stadium.

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on8:00 pm - May 6, 2013


neepheid says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:54

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

Cheers, that makes sense.

One wonders if it’s Mr Stockbridge will be generous to Mr Green and Mr Ahmad in deciding on their payouts. I have heard rumour, no more than that, that Mr Green expects a 6 figure sum.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on8:07 pm - May 6, 2013


mullach says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:30

twopanda says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 17:22

From financial statement. Anybody know what “…non-recurring release of negative goodwill of £20.5m”, refers to?
================

As mentioned subsequently by others, they are being creative in boosting the numbers – on paper only.

But this has no bearing on the main threats to TRFC survival:

the consensus seems to be that TRFC cannot sustain the negative cash flow – and lack of any credit line – in the short-term.

View Comment

Avatar

chipm0nkPosted on8:18 pm - May 6, 2013


The credit line / cash flow is a very good point.

Once the money runs out then fresh money has to come from somewhere, it’s not just a case of debt levels rising. That can only happen if someone is actually willing to supply that money in the first place.

I have seen nothing to suggest that Rangers now have proper banking facilities in place. Perhaps someone could help with that. The last I heard they were going to be using Metro Bank.

It is generally taken that The PLC is supplying the money to The Club (from the IPO) to pay it’s running costs. One wonders how that arrangement is set up.

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on8:21 pm - May 6, 2013


Rangers FC Official @RFC_Official 19m
£75,000 was raised for @UNICEF and the The @RFC_Charity
Foundation as Rangers beat Manchester United today!
bit.ly/16NDcsf

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on8:49 pm - May 6, 2013


I listened to John Brown on Shortbread Radio again tonight and having been impressed with his performance against English I have decided he talks a lot of nonsense. To suggest that he would have taken Pawlett off immediately if he was his player for diving I feel he lost his credibility or am I just being cynical.

View Comment

Avatar

rantinrobinPosted on8:50 pm - May 6, 2013


There is a warmth to the air and with the lull in proceedings something of anticipation ,I sense, of major events and happenings to come.
I see Alex & Phil are cranking up expectation levels.

What will happen this week I wonder?

View Comment

Avatar

Forres Dee (@ForresDee)Posted on8:51 pm - May 6, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 20:49

I listened to John Brown on Shortbread Radio again tonight and having been impressed with his performance against English I have decided he talks a lot of nonsense. To suggest that he would have taken Pawlett off immediately if he was his player for diving I feel he lost his credibility or am I just being cynical.

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

You are correct, Brown, like his pal Gardiner both talk p*sh.

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on9:07 pm - May 6, 2013


alex thomson ‏@alextomo 2h @hunskelper007a mtg on a bank hol denotes crisis – not holding one when scheduled, a deeper crisis.

Trouble at mill – sounds as if the Board fallen out – but why?

View Comment

Avatar

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on9:13 pm - May 6, 2013


Lord Wobbly says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 20:21
1 0 Rate This
Rangers FC Official @RFC_Official 19m
£75,000 was raised for @UNICEF and the The @RFC_Charity
Foundation as Rangers beat Manchester United today!
bit.ly/16NDcsf

——————————–

crowd of +20k reported

£3.50 a ticket?

🙂

View Comment

Avatar

BrendaPosted on9:20 pm - May 6, 2013


NTHM

I heard it was £17 a ticket??? That’s really strange that the figures don’t add up, they’re usually spot on in the accounts dept down govan way 😉

What time does the stock Market open in the morning?

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on9:24 pm - May 6, 2013


Brenda says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:20

‘What time does the stock Market open in the morning?’

Eight o’clock.

View Comment

Avatar

timtimPosted on9:28 pm - May 6, 2013


One of the tricks they used before eg: the Linfield lovefest game is to
issue tickets to ALL season ticket holders whether they want them or not
and deduct it from their bank accounts
apparently the smallprint was changed from previous seasons from cup games to all games
and no one noticed

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on9:31 pm - May 6, 2013


Long Time Lurker says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:07
‘Trouble at mill – sounds as if the Board fallen out – but why?’


Does Alex Thomson’s tweet mean that no meeting took place?

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on9:41 pm - May 6, 2013


Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:13
2 0 Rate This
Lord Wobbly says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 20:21
1 0 Rate This
Rangers FC Official @RFC_Official 19m
£75,000 was raised for @UNICEF and the The @RFC_Charity
Foundation as Rangers beat Manchester United today!
bit.ly/16NDcsf
——————————–
crowd of +20k reported
£3.50 a ticket?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A crowd of 23,177 watched the charity game as £75,000 was
raised for the Rangers Charity Foundation and UNICEF.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/3925-heroes-all-around

Rangers Legends v Manchester United Legends
Monday 6 May, kick-off 2pm
Tickets priced at £17 for adults, £13 for concessions and £5 for
juveniles, family packages (2 adults and 2 children) are also
available for £40 (not available online).
Season ticket holder prices are £15 for adults, £10 for concessions
and just £3 for kids.
Tickets are available online here, by calling 0871 702 1972 (calls
cost 10p per minute plus network extras) or by visiting the
Rangers Ticket Centre.
Fans can also join a host of legends at a gala dinner at the
Radisson Blu in Glasgow after the match.
Tickets for the event cost £100 per person or £1000 for a table of
10 and the package includes drinks reception, 4-course meal with
wine, commemorative gift and programme.
To book call 0871 702 1972 (calls cost 10p per minute plus
network extras), emailevents@rangers.co.uk or book online
here.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/3873-don’t-miss-legends-dinner

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on9:44 pm - May 6, 2013


Long Time Lurker says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:07
‘Trouble at mill – sounds as if the Board fallen out – but why?’

Recurring negative goodwill perhaps?

View Comment

Avatar

Resin_lab_dogPosted on9:45 pm - May 6, 2013


Lord Wobbly says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 20:21

Doesn’t that mean that – in principle at least- they are EPL champions* now?
Wow… Congrats to all down at Ibrox*. That’ll be 56* and counting*, No?
Where’s me Daily Record, while I check if it can really be true*!?
Definitely worth another star on the Badge*, at least!

*title is claimed, but maybe subject to dispute.

View Comment

Avatar

Resin_lab_dogPosted on9:56 pm - May 6, 2013


timtim says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 19:47

22

0

Rate This

And if I was Sandaza, round about now I would be saying: ” Wow I gotta get myself one of these!”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-14905815

View Comment

Avatar

Lord WobblyPosted on10:00 pm - May 6, 2013


If we take the 23177 crowd as accurate (!), and assume an average ticket price of, say, £8, we get a total of about £185k.

Over £100k in costs?

View Comment

Avatar

* (@enmac75)Posted on10:01 pm - May 6, 2013


john clarke says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:31
1 0 Rate This
Long Time Lurker says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:07
‘Trouble at mill – sounds as if the Board fallen out – but why?’


Does Alex Thomson’s tweet mean that no meeting took place?
————————–

that’s what I read it as. So if no meeting took place, but was supposed to………

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on10:10 pm - May 6, 2013


* (@enmac75) says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 22:01
john clarke says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:31
Long Time Lurker says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:07
‘Trouble at mill – sounds as if the Board fallen out – but why?’
—Does Alex Thomson’s tweet mean that no meeting took place?
————————–
that’s what I read it as. So if no meeting took place, but was supposed to………
_

some bugs came up

View Comment

Long Time Lurker

Long Time LurkerPosted on10:16 pm - May 6, 2013


john clarke says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 21:31

That’s my read on AT’s tweet – the meeting was planned, but did not take place. He has another tweet about deep divisions within the Board.

alex thomson ‏@alextomo 3h
@hunskelper007 the Board is riven by deep and bitter divisions.

View Comment

Avatar

Rangers Tax-Case (@rangerstaxcase)Posted on10:22 pm - May 6, 2013


Hello. I just thought that I would type up my own thoughts on some of the recent speculation surrounding Sevco. Much of this has been covered by the likes of Paul McConville already, but I thought that a less learned approach could help communicate a few points. (Apologies if this is all well understood, but this site is too successful for me to read all of the posts).

I have read a few hopeful posts to the effect that “Ibrox could be locked up while asset ownership is sorted out” This will not be the case. Sevco Scotland Ltd (aka The Rangers FC Ltd) owns Ibrox, Murray Park, and the Albion. The title to these assets is owned by Sevco Scotland Ltd according to the Land Registers. In terms of actual ownership that is no longer a matter for dispute under Scots Law. The owners of Sevco Scotland Ltd (RIFC plc) own oldco Rangers’ assets. That does not mean good news for Sevco FC supporters.

Craig Whyte’s legal path is to sue Sevco Scotland Ltd (either personally or as Sevco 5088 Ltd)- as well as any parties who may have helped in scheme. If he is successful in proving that he was defrauded by Green and Ahmad, he would not be able to simply reclaim the assets. If Whyte pursues a claim against Sevco Scotland Ltd- presumably for the value of his share of the assets and expected profits- his reward will be a financial judgement.

Let us assume that Whyte wins an award of £20m against Sevco Scotland Ltd. which would include his share of potential profit from the original deal. (It is worth repeating that this does not give Whyte any claim on Ibrox, at least not yet). As this sum could not be paid, Whyte would then go down a path with which Scottish football monitors have become quite familiar in recent years. He would initiate a Winding Up Order or try to have an administrator appointed. As the major creditor of Sevco Scotland Ltd, Whyte would likely have his choice of administrator- yet again.

The problem for Whyte is that the amount raised in a new administration process will not come close to matching how much he owes Ticketus. Therefore, this above board path is not one that Craig Whyte will want to take. It will be a raging certainty that Whyte’s goal all along in this process has been to secure a payment into an offshore bank long before a court judgement is delivered. Either he has asked for too much or Green and Ahmad did not think that Whyte would or could hurt them too badly. Someone has miscalculated here. Whyte still needs to demonstrate that he is, after all, a ‘poker player from the top drawer’ to extract a free and clear payment from this mess. Time will tell if he has a plan or whether he is just winging it.

On rumours that insolvency is imminent, I am not the loop on this. It seems unlikely to me that events could unfold in the timelines being discussed. (I think the Timternet is interpreting the underlying stories too literally). However, it does seem that the reincarnation of Rangers is doomed to die before too long. The combination of legal threats (Whyte and then the inevitable RIFC shareholder suits) plus cash burn rate make survival very unlikely. Under the misapprehension that Sevco FC would start life in the SPL, Charles Green’s club started life with a cost structure that appears to ensure that it will go through whatever sum was raised in the IPO long before arriving in the top tier of Scottish football. Short of a miracle investment from the outside or drastic cost-cutting on a scale that would endanger inevitable promotion, a date with an administrator awaits. When we add the in-fighting between the spiv and ‘Rangers-men’ factions, you would not bet much on the new club’s survival. How long does it have? I do not know the exact cash burn rate today and I do not know how much cash Sevco FC really has. Therefore, I will not put a date on their demise, but bar the intervention of an oil rich Emir, they look done for within the next year or two at the very best.

Of course, events could move much more quickly. In the coming weeks news from the internal investigation will emerge. I have read with interest assorted theories that say that the ‘Rangers-men’ are likely to try to use this information to wrest control of the club away from the spivs. This will likely mean that they have to crash the RIFC/Sevco Scotland Ltd vehicle into a wall and rely upon the SFA to transplant the soul of the club into another newco. The SFA do have the power to render all of the Sevcos worthless by withdrawing their membership and license. Effectively handing a new Rangers membership to the ‘Rangers-men’ would effectively rid Scottish football of Green and Whyte in one fell swoop. The ‘Rangers-men’ have an old pal at the head of that organisation. We should not be too surprised at how far they will be willing to go to gain control. This theory has one major problem and that is where to play. Ibrox could not be guaranteed to be available for rent immediately, but I am sure that the idea is being considered.

If the notion of the ‘Rangers-men’ killing both Sevcos seems far-fetched, I ask- why did they ask for the internal investigation? Assuming that the Malcolm Murray/Walter Smith sect on the RIFC board have no interest in a cover-up, what else can they do with a report that if leaked could put their club’s SFA membership and license in question? If the Craig Whyte connection is proven and the prospect of a Whyte lawsuit given credence, they will be able to paint a picture through their many media friends of the need to return the soul of Rangers to fit and proper ownership. They might even have a good point if it was not for the fact that so many of these ‘Rangers-men’ presided over the collapse of what should always have been Scotland’s richest club.

(Apologies in advance for typos and grammar errors- I don’t have editing rights on here).

View Comment

Avatar

timtimPosted on10:23 pm - May 6, 2013


Lord Wobbly says:

If we take the 23177 crowd as accurate (!), and assume an average ticket price of, say, £8, we get a total of about £185k.

Over £100k in costs?
——–

If the cost of a night out for Campbell is £85k
I’d say they got Alex and the boys pretty cheap

View Comment

Avatar

rantinrobinPosted on10:25 pm - May 6, 2013


Given the banning of the BBC from Ibrox,perhaps Messrs Cosgrove & Cowan might seek out a response from Mr Traynor to give the footballing public an insight into the current atmosphere of the TRFC boardroom?

Cue dissipation of convivial warmth and charm of said progrramme

View Comment

ianagain

ianagainPosted on10:39 pm - May 6, 2013


So an abandoned board meeting. Deep divisions etc. Markets going to love this. Take it away shorters, it will be 20p in a fortnight. Sorry Chuck you just lost out big time.

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on10:47 pm - May 6, 2013


Maybe an EGM call?? – that`s a two week push-back at least – ducks / row / spiv chicanery stuff

View Comment

Avatar

expectinrainPosted on11:06 pm - May 6, 2013


Apologies if this has been posted before; but interesting article from Jersey.

Tweeted by a Jersey politician who opposes it being a tax haven:

Montfort Tadier (@DeputyTadier) tweeted at 10:29 PM on Mon, May 06, 2013:
Ranger’s football club, HMRC and the Jersey Trustee http://t.co/z6NCX9cWxD

The link is to an article from March, from what I think is a serious UK law firm, discussing the EBT implications of the FTTT. This stood out:

“The case may prove a pyrrhic victory for Rangers’ employees. The loans will need to be repaid ten years after the date on which they were made and, under current law, it will be extremely difficult to refinance the loans without a charge to tax and NICs arising.”

New to me:
(i) hearing the repayment interpretation from a source like this; and
(ii) the specifics of the ten-year repayment period.

Does the ten years ring a bell with anyone, and does this mean some have already come due? Who would be most exposed, I wonder?

(OT, more or less: Jersey has our ‘small country’ problem but to a much greater extent: everyone knows everyone, literally, and it has long been portrayed as treacherous to object to the island’s taxhavenry, despite the enormous inequalities it has created, and corruption – to say nothing of the damage elsewhere; but Tadier and a few others are now speaking out, so the hope is that things can change…)

View Comment

Avatar

timtimPosted on11:07 pm - May 6, 2013


welcome back RTC
dont be a stRANGER*

View Comment

Avatar

manandboyPosted on11:07 pm - May 6, 2013


Rangers Tax-Case (@rangerstaxcase) says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 22:22
___________________________________________________________________________

Is it really you ?!!

Welcome back !

How we’ve missed you !

This is a great day!

View Comment

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on11:26 pm - May 6, 2013


Welcome back RTC….and I agree with your analysis, particularly the timescale for TRFC to run out of cash – their demise has been too eagerly anticipated but the ‘burn rate’ means the inevitable, later rather than sooner.

CW plan was always for a £ payout, Yes, but where did it go wrong with Ticketus? Did our hero expect the debt to be assigned to the oldco and disappear? Or rather, the quick pre pack agreed with Grier would have allowed CW to service the debt with a debt free TRFC, before exiting stage left with a payout.

It’s like 2011 all over again 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

Resin_lab_dogPosted on11:26 pm - May 6, 2013


expectinrain says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 23:06

__________________________________________

Is my interpretation correct?

Either HMRC win the UTT: Result: RFC(past tense) /MIH cheated on their tax to the tune of 10a of millions.

OR

The EBTs become repayable after 10 years and need to be refinanced. Because of the 2010 legistlation, new loans cannot be created, without incurring a tax liability there and then. The EBT loan beneficiaries have agreements which state that MIH/RFC assume liability for any tax which subsequently arises as a result of the payments. So either MIH pays up on behalf of the now defunct RFC (not gonna happen is it?) or…. RFC/MIH have cheated on their tax.

Conclusion:
RFC (past tense) were tax cheats to the tune of 10s of millions. They have won nothing in the FTT but a temporary deferral of tax liability.

The only way to avoid this conclusion is for SDM to hand over £10s of millions he hasn’t got to HMRC.

So where now you’re ‘found not guilty’ claim bears?

View Comment

Avatar

rantinrobinPosted on11:33 pm - May 6, 2013


RTC, how likely is it that the internal investigation will land in the public domain,or is it your thought that given the warring factions,one party will deliberately leak?

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on11:49 pm - May 6, 2013


expectinrain says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 23:06

Very informative article ER and taken from the perspective of the tax avoider which provides a worst case angle.

I was under the impression that MIH instituted the payment scheme. However HMRC wre pursuing RFC for the tax debt so I’m not sure if RFC(IL) or MIH will fall liable if repayment issues arise.

I’m also wondering if the LNS acknowledgement that side letters existed might affect the UTT. Haven’t read the verdict but I understood Rangers were found guilty (without punishment). Would this separate quasi-judicial investigation add weight to HMRC’s claim?

Cap doffed RTC. Will reign in enthusiasm as suggested. Continue counting down Brenda but do not too eagerly anticipate lift off just yet.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on11:51 pm - May 6, 2013


Rangers Tax-Case (@rangerstaxcase) says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 22:22
‘….The SFA do have the power to render all of the Sevcos worthless by withdrawing their membership and license..’
—–
Lovely to have you back again!

have had a small refreshment, will have another now, and read your welcome post in the morning.
Slainte.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on11:56 pm - May 6, 2013


enoughx2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 23:43

I must confess that when I see some posts I am disappointed by the spelling etc of obviously very capable individuals. Then when I started to review my own posts I found that however carefully I proofed them there was inevitably an errpr I didn’t notice, even with the most careful of scrutiny. Seems to me that RTC’s contribution, scripted live is pretty damn exceptional if he is unable to review and edit.

(See what I did there).

View Comment

Avatar

therampantbaronPosted on11:57 pm - May 6, 2013


expectinrain says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 23:06
————————————-
The point about the 10 year anniversary is one that was lost in the furore when the result of the FTT came out.

What has been accepted, reluctantly, by the purveyors of EBT schemes is that the sub trusts formed to administer the individual schemes are actually discretionary trusts for inheritance tax purposes and so are liable to the 10-year lifetime IHT charge – tax charge which has been around for more than 30 years now but which was previously thought not to apply to EBTs.

The rate of IHT tax is only 6% but in truth most sub trusts will have been emptied of funds long ago since they were really pay by another name. The trustees are likely therefore to be unable to pay the charge and will look to the individual beneficiaries to provide funds for that to be met.

In the one or two prudent cases – say the Campbell Ogilvie EBT or the Billy Dodds’ one – funds will no doubt have been left in by the beneficiaries to meet such a rainy day expense.

As far as most exposed is concerned, that’s pretty obvious – David Murray and Barry Ferguson certainly extracted extravagant amounts by way of loan – more than £6M and £2M respectively.

I suspect HMRC are not really waiting with baited breath for the 10 year anniversaries to occur – and yes some of them have already passed – they are more likely just waiting for the Upper Tier Tribunal Tax hearing and decision, both of which are expected this autumn.

This time, there will be no 2 year prevarication and delay such as characterised the FTT – the hearing will be short and to the point – a fortnight at most – and will be on the seminal legal points since the facts of the case are not really in dispute (though it seems the fact of the side letters was one which Murray Group wished not to see the light of day).

Looking at similar cases, typically it will be senior judge sitting alone this time. Reassuringly for some if not others, the judge is not likely to be a Scottish male accustomed to mixing in the rarefied social atmosphere populated by Murray and his coterie of Edinburgh advisers.

The decision can be expected within 2 months at most of the hearing concluding so don’t miss your opportunity for some “in-play betting” between the end of October and mid December.

View Comment

Avatar

enough is enoughPosted on12:01 am - May 7, 2013


enoughx2 says:
Monday, May 6, 2013 at 23:43

I must confess that when I see some posts I am disappointed by the spelling etc of obviously very capable individuals. Then when I started to review my own posts I found that however carefully I proofed them there was inevitably an errpr I didn’t notice, even with the most careful of scrutiny. Seems to me that RTC’s contribution, scripted live is pretty damn exceptional if he is unable to review and edit.

(See what I did there).

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
seems my post has been removed. Guess admin dont want RTC to have edit rights. strange

View Comment

Comments are closed.