Spot the difference?

Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Spot the difference?

Good Afternoon.

Announcing outstanding financial successes for Rangers PLC the then Chairman of the club opened his Chairman’s report in the annual financial statements with the following words:

“Last summer I explained that the Club, after many years of significant investment in our playing squad
and more recently in our state of the art facility at Murray Park, had embarked on a three year business
plan to stabilise and improve the Club’s finances. The plan also recognised the need to react to the
challenging economic conditions facing football clubs around the world.

Following a trend over a number of years of increasing year on year losses, I am pleased to report that
in the first year of this plan we have made important progress by reversing this trend. Our trading loss
for last year of £11.2m reflects a £7.9m improvement versus the £19.1m loss for the previous year and
although it will take more time to completely reach our goals, this is a key milestone. We also intend to
make significant further progress by the end of the current financial year. This improvement is the
consequence of having a solid strategy and the commitment and energy to implement the changes it requires”

Later on in the same statement the chairman would add:

“Another key part of our plan is associated with the Rangers brand and our Retail Division goes from strength to strength. Our financial results this year have been significantly enhanced by an outstanding performance in merchandising Rangers products, in particular replica kit, which makes our Retail Division one of the most successful in Europe.”

In the same set of financial reports, the CEO would report:

“To further strengthen Rangers hospitality portfolio, a new dedicated sponsor’s lounge was unveiled this season. The Carling Lounge is a first for the Club and was developed in conjunction with our new sponsor, Carling. ”

and

“Our innovative events programme continues to grow and this year saw a record number of official events including the highly successful annual Hall of Fame Awards Ceremony, Player of the Year and 50 Championships Gala Dinner, all of which catered for up to 1000 guests.

At Rangers, we continually develop our portfolio of products and as a key area of income for the Club, we evaluate the market for new revenue opportunities on an ongoing basis in order to exceed our existing and potential customer expectations and needs.

Demand for season tickets reached an all time high last season with a record 42,508 season ticket holders in comparison with the previous season`s figure of 40,320. Over 36,000 of these season ticket holders renewed for this season – a record number.

For the new season, we are delighted to welcome brewing giant, Carling on board as our Official Club sponsor. Carling is one of the UK’s leading consumer brands with a proven track record in football sponsorship.
The Club also continues to work with a number of multinational blue chip brands such as National Car Rental, Sony Playstation 2, Bank of Scotland and Coca-Cola. This year, we will also experience the evolution of the Honda deal via Hyndland Honda and welcome the mobile communications giant T-Mobile to our ranks.”.

The year was 2003 and in the previous 24 months Rangers Football Club, owned and operated as a private fiefdom by Sir David Murray, had made operational losses of some £30 million.

Yes – 30 MILLION POUNDS.

Of course the chairman’s report for 2003 was written by John F Mclelland CBE and the CEO was one Martin Bain Esq.

As Mr Mclelland clearly stated, by 2003 the club already had a trend of increasing year on year losses covering a number of years and was losing annual sums which stretched into millions, if not tens of millions, of pounds.

However, the acquisition of Rangers Football Club was absolutely vital to David Murray’s personal business growth, and his complete control of the club as his own private business key was more important than any other business decision he had made before buying Rangers or since.

When he persuaded Gavin Masterton to finance 100% of the purchase price of the club, Murray had his finest business moment.

By getting control of Rangers, Murray was able to offer entertainment, hospitality, seeming privilege and bestow favour on others in a way that was hitherto undreamed of, and he bestowed that largesse on any number of “existing and potential clients” and contacts – be they the clients and contacts related to Rangers Football Club or the existing and potential clients of David Murray, his businesses, his banks, or anyone in any field that he chose to court for the purposes of potential business.

His business.

It wasn’t only journalists who benefited from the succulent lamb treatment.

Accountants,lawyers, surveyors, broadcasters, football officials, people in industry and construction, utilities, financiers and other areas of business were all invited inside the sacred House of Murray and given access to the great man of business “and owner of Rangers” while attending the “record number of official (hospitality) events”.

Twelve months on from when John McLelland made those statements in the 2003 accounts, David Murray was back in the chair at Ibrox and he presented the 2004 financials.

In the intervening 12 months Rangers had gained an additional £10 million from Champions League income and had received £8.6 million in transfer fees from the sale of Messrs Ferguson, Amoruso and McCann. Not only that, the Rangers board had managed to reduce the club’s wage bill by £5 million. Taking all three figures together comes to some £23.6 million in extra income or savings.

Yet, the accounts for 2004 showed that the club made an operational loss of almost £6 million and overall debt had risen by an additional £7 million to £97.4 million.

However, the 2004 accounts were also interesting for another reason.

Rangers PLC had introduced payments “to employees trusts” into their accounts for the first time in 2001 and in that year they had paid £1million into those trusts. Just three years later, the trust payments recorded in the accounts had risen to £7.3 million per annum — or to put it another way to 25% of the annual wage bill though no one in Scottish Football asked any questions about that!

By the following year, the chairman announced that the 2004 operational loss had in fact been £10.4million but that the good news was that the 2005 operational loss was only £7.8 million. However Rangers were able to post a profit before taxation if they included the money obtained from transfers (£8.4 million) and the inclusion of an extraordinary profit of £14,999,999 made on buying back the shares of a subsidiary company for £1 which they had previously sold for £15 million.

All of which added up to a whopping great profit of ……… £12.4 million!

I will leave you to do the maths on 2005.

Oh and of course these accounts included the detail that 3000 Rangers fans had joined David Murray in participating in the November ’94 share issue where the club managed to raise £51,430,995 in fresh capital most of which was provided by Mr Murray… sorry I mean MIH ….. sorry that should read Bank of Scotland …… or their shareholders……. or should that be the public purse?

The notable items in the 2006 accounts included the announcement of a ten year deal with JJB Sports to take over the merchandising operation of the club and increased revenue from an extended run in the Champion’s League. However, the profit before tax was declared at only£0.1 million in comparison to the £12.4 million of the year before but then again that £12.4 million had included player sales of £8.4 million and the £15 million sweety bonus from  the repurchase of ones own former subsidiary shares for £1.

Jumping to 2008 Rangers saw a record year in terms of turnover which had risen to £64.5 million which enabled the company to record a profit on ordinary activities before taxation of  £6.57 million although it should be pointed out that wages and bonuses were up at 77% of turnover and that a big factor in the Rangers income stream was corporate hospitality and the top line of income was shown as “gate receipts and hospitality”.

However, 2009 saw a calamitous set of figures. Whilst Alastair Johnston tried to put a brave chairman’s face on it, the year saw an operating loss of £17.325 million which was softened only by player disposals leading to a loss before taxation of a mere £14.085 million.

Fortunately Sir David did not have to report these figures as he chose to stand down as chairman in August and so Johnston stepped in and announced that he was deeply honoured to do so.

In 2010, the income stream jumped from £39.7 million to over £56 million with the result that the club showed a profit before taxation of £4.209 million.

However, by that time the corporate hospitality ticket that was Rangers Football Club was done for as a result of matters that had nothing to do with events on the football field in the main.

First, the emergence of the Fergus McCann run Celtic had brought a real business and sporting challenge. This was something that Murray had not previously faced in the football business.

Second,the Bank of Scotland had gone bust and Lloyds could not and would not allow Murray to continually borrow vast sums of money on the basis of revalued assets and outrageous hospitality.

Third, the UEFA fair play rules came into being and demanded that clubs at least act on a semblance of proper corporate governance and fiscal propriety.

Lastly,Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs tightened up the law on the use of EBT’s which meant that Rangers could no longer afford to buy in the players that brought almost guaranteed success against domestic opposition.

On average, since 2002 Rangers PLC had lost between £7 million – £8 million per year – or roughly £650,000 per month if you like – yet for the better part of a decade David Murray had been able to persuade the Bank of Scotland that this was a business that was worthy of ever greater financial support or that he himself and his MIH business was of such value that the Banks should support him in supporting the Ibrox club whilst operating in this fashion.

Of course, had Murray’s Rangers paid tax on all player remunerations then the losses would have been far larger.

Meanwhile, all the other clubs in Scottish football who banked with the Bank of Scotland faced funding cuts and demands for repayment with the bank publicly proclaiming that it was overexposed to the football market in Scotland.

But no one asked any questions about why the bank should act one way with Murray’s club but another way with all others. No one in football, no one in the media and no one from the world of business.

Looking back,it is hard to imagine a business which has been run on such a consistent loss making basis being allowed to continue by either its owners or by its bankers. However, a successful and funded Rangers was so important to the Murray group that David Murray was clearly willing to lose millions year after year to keep the Gala dinners and corporate hospitality going.

Rangers were Murray’s big PR vehicle and the club was essentially used by him to open the doors which would allow him to make more money elsewhere on a personal basis and if it meant Rangers cutting every corner and accumulating massive losses, unsustainable losses, then so be it.

Today, the new regime at Ibrox run the current business in a way which clocks up the same colossal annual losses whilst the club competes outwith Scotland’s top division. Each day we hear that the wage bill is unsustainable, that the playing staff are overpaid, that the stadium needs massive investment and that the fans are opposed to the stadium itself being mortgaged and the club being in hawk to lenders.

Yet, in the Murray era the Stadium was revalued time and time again and its revaluation was used as the justification for ever greater borrowing on the Rangers accounts. The playing staff were massively overpaid and financially assisted by the EBT’s and most years the Chairman’s annual statement announced huge losses despite regular claims of record season ticket sales, record hospitality income, European income, shirt sponsorship and the outsourcing of all merchandising to JJB sports instead of Sports Direct.

The comparison between the old business and the current one is clear for all to see.

It should be noted, that since the days of Murray, no major banking institution has agreed to provide the Ibrox business with any banking facilities. Not under Whyte, not under Green, not under anyone.

Yet few ask why that should be.

The destruction of the old Rangers business led those in charge of Scottish football to announce that Armageddon was on the horizon if it had not actually arrived, yet today virtually all Scottish clubs are in a better financial and business state than back in the bad old days of the Bank of Scotland financed SPL. Some have succumbed to insolvency, and others have simply cut their cloth, changed their structure, sought, and in some cases attracted, new owners and moved on in terms of business.

In general, Scottish Football has cleaned house at club level.

Now, David Murray has “cleaned house” in that MIH has bitten the dust and walked down insolvency road.

What is interesting is that the Murray brand still has that capacity to get out a good PR message when it needs to. Despite the MIH pension fund being short of money for some inexplicable reason, last week it was announced that the family controlled Murray Estates had approached those in charge of MIH and had agreed to buy some key MIH assets for something in the region of £13.9 million.

The assets concerned are land banks which at some point will be zoned for planning and which will undoubtedly bring the Murray family considerable profit in the future, with some of those assets already looking as if they will produce a return sooner rather than later.

However, what is not commented upon in the mainstream press is the fact that Murray Estates had the ability to pay £13.9 Million for anything at all and that having that amount of money to spend the Murray camp has chosen not to buy any football club down Govan way.

Perhaps, it has been realised that a football club which loses millions of pounds each year is not such a shrewd investment and that the Murray family money would be better spent elsewhere?

Perhaps, it has been realised that the culture of wining, dining, partying and entertaining to the most lavish and extravagant extent will not result in the banks opening their vaults any more?

Perhaps, it has been realised that the Rangers brand has been so badly damaged over the years that it is no longer the key to the golden door in terms of business, finance and banking and that running a football club in 2015 involves a discipline and a set of skills that David Murray and his team do not have experience of?

What is clear, is that the Murray years at Ibrox were not good for the average Rangers fan in the long term and that when you have a football club – any football club – being run for the private benefit of one rich individual, or group of individuals, then the feelings and passions of the ordinary fan will as often as not be forgotten when that individual or his group choose to move on once they have decided that they no longer wish to play with their toy football club.

David Murray did not make money directly out of Rangers Football Club. He used it as a key to open other doors for him and to get him a seat at other tables and into a different type of “club” altogether. He did not run the club in a day to day fashion that was designed to bring stability and prolonged financial, or playing, success to the club. its investors and its fans. He did not preside over Ibrox during a period of sustained financial gain.

Mike Ashley will not subsidise 2015 version of Rangers to anything like the same extent that the Bank of Scotland did in the 90’s and naughties.

However, Ashley, like Murray, will use his control of the Rangers brand to open doors for him elsewhere in the sports retail market, and he will use the Rangers contract with Sports Direct to make a handsome profit. He will also control all the advertising revenue just as he does at Newcastle. In short, Mr Ashley is only interested in The Rangers with a view to using it as a stepping stone to achieve other things elsewhere.

However, don’t take my word for any of this, take the opinion of someone who knows.

Mr Dave King is quoted today as saying the following about the current board of Directors who are in charge of the current Ibrox holding company.

“History will judge this board as one of the worst the club has ever had. There is not one individual who puts the club above personal interest.”

That is an interesting observation from a man who became a non executive director of the old Rangers holding company in 2000 and who had a front row pew for every set of accounts and all the financial statements referred to above.

Whether or not Mr King is a glib and shameless liar is a matter of South African judicial opinion. Whether or not he can spot someone who puts their own self interest ahead of the interests of Rangers Football Club and the supporters of the club is a matter that should be discussed over some fine wine, some succulent lamb and whatever postprandial entertainment you care to imagine.

I wonder if he has ever read the accounts of Rangers PLC and compared them to the corresponding accounts of MIH for the same period?

 

About the author

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

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

4,992 Comments so far

jean7brodiePosted on9:55 pm - Mar 6, 2015


ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm

I truly wonder how many of the especially vitriolic posters on here actually attend football matches.

_______________________________________________

I don’t think it is necessary to do so to have an opinion on corruption.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on9:55 pm - Mar 6, 2015


ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm
=========================
Broadly agree with this but….

“Sadly the bigots were able to voice their hatred at away games and the home clubs accommodated them for the money earned.”

As far as I know away tickets for Celtic,and Rangers normally (except during boycotts, DUFC or doubts about solvency, Raith) are sold through the visiting club and I’m at a loss as to how the home club could weed out the bigots without excluding decent supporters ❓

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:00 pm - Mar 6, 2015


Resin_lab_dog says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:48 pm
ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm

In recent weeks I haven’t seen posters on here treat DK as a figure of fun but more as a target of hatred under many guises.
—————————————————————-
Why don’t you actually answer the questions you have raised and provide supporting evidence and then we can actually debate the issues.

Increasingly I feel this site has turned into a PR warzone. People of good intention really have to ask themselves why we don’t get ordinary Bears coming here to discuss what is happening in Scottish Football never mind Ibrox.

Like it or lump it Rangers won’t die and that has to be factored into how we debate the future of Scottish Football. Those who refuse to accept that simple fact are a bigger danger to Scottish Football IMO than anything that Rangers or their fans might present in the future.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on10:01 pm - Mar 6, 2015


johnthered says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:51 pm
parttimearab says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:40 pm

Latest on Leeds/Cellino
=======================
Thanks JH, I’ve been keeping an eye on this as its relevance wrt the current situation in Scotland is all to obvious…as are the limitations within which the Sports governing bodies have to operate.

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on10:02 pm - Mar 6, 2015


ecobhoy says:

March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm

… Back in the day many opposed Fergus and it wasn’t because he saved my club but because of his hard-line stance against sectarianism within Celtic’s support …

______________________________________________________

We don’t often agree eb, but as a fanzine editor who supported the FM stance on bigotry, we found ourselves in some pretty scary situations with that constituency of people you refer to. I agree 100% with your analysis.

It is inevitable though, given Fergus’s success, that a degree of revisionism is employed. Strangely you can never find anyone who didn’t like him 🙂

Having said that, I could name you a team and a half of ex-players who still actively hate the very mention of his name in conversation – but that’s got nothing to do with bigotry 🙂

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:04 pm - Mar 6, 2015


jean7brodie says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:55 pm
ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm

I truly wonder how many of the especially vitriolic posters on here actually attend football matches.
_______________________________________________

I don’t think it is necessary to do so to have an opinion on corruption.
——————————————
If you have any actual evidence of corruption then might I respectfully suggest that it is your public duty to draw this to the attention of Police Scotland.

ecobhoy
Tone it down please. No-one goes to the police to inform them of their opinion on corruption.
TSFM

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on10:06 pm - Mar 6, 2015


The SMSM menu has been updated to restore succulent fayre.

Daily Record Sport @Record_Sport · 9m 9 minutes ago
Rangers chairman Paul Murray: I’d like to thank the Daily Record for its courageous journalism over the past 4 years http://dlyr.ec/PKak08

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on10:11 pm - Mar 6, 2015


ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:04 pm

________________________________________________–

Silly me! I thought we discussed it constantly ❓

“Corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. It hurts everyone who depends on the integrity of people in a position of authority.”

View Comment

neepheidPosted on10:12 pm - Mar 6, 2015


ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:00 pm

Increasingly I feel this site has turned into a PR warzone.

======================
What is that supposed to mean, exactly? That PR firms are employing people to post on here?

The posters on here, in my opinion, are honestly expressing a personal view. To suggest otherwise is outrageous.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:20 pm - Mar 6, 2015


parttimearab says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:55 pm
ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm
=========================
Broadly agree with this but….

“Sadly the bigots were able to voice their hatred at away games and the home clubs accommodated them for the money earned.”

As far as I know away tickets for Celtic,and Rangers normally (except during boycotts, DUFC or doubts about solvency, Raith) are sold through the visiting club and I’m at a loss as to how the home club could weed out the bigots without excluding decent supporters
————————————————————
I don’t know what age you are so I don’t know if you actually experienced the era I am talking about when the Celtic away support sang extremely vile songs. In many ways it was a differenr era especially because of what was happening in NI.

Sadly the majority in my experience were singing the songs they weren’t allowed to sing at Parkhead. I therefore don’t think that Celtic can be held responsible for away clubs allowing them to spout their bigotry.

As to the decent supporters then sadly if they are in the minority or unable to drown-out the singers of sectarian songs then they have to pay the penalty of the home club not allowing visiting fans.

But of course that never happened because of the money involved because the visiting Celtic support often well out-numbered the home support.

And it was all repeated with the Rangers’ progression through the lower leagues. Money truly is the King ❗

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on10:24 pm - Mar 6, 2015


parttimearab says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:22 pm

Re King/Ashley…I’ve been pondering this and am beginning to think that MA was blindsided by DK’s (and T3B) share purchase.

MA was in at an early stage and who had his ear at the time… :mrgreen:

Doubtless he was informed that DK was all mouth (maybe MA lurked on here and noticed the constant references to DK being a serial tyre kicker 🙂 )

Did MA just assume that there were no Bears prepared to put money in (or at least not at “market value”)…did he think that with no competition he could extract maximum value from the brand and that the fans would have no choice but to come round ❓

Was this based on his experience with NUFC fans who, with some exceptions, have simply accepted Ashley’s control, unhappy but seemingly unwilling to take him on ❓

Ashley won’t loose out financially but some dented pride may be in the offing.

Speculation, but it may be that Make Ashley’s Hubris has met its Nemesis in Dave King….anyone expecting the Sports Direct supremo to have some aces up his sleeve may be sadly disappointed.
======================================================
MA had/has no interest in owning or running the bottomless money pit that is the TRFC/RIFC group. He was however interested in Rangers the ethereal brand and maximising the exploitation of it, and he seems to have got that tied up very nicely. He is still NUFC owner as none of the Real Geordie Men have stumped up the readies to buy him out, not from choice.

The blind fervour created by the second coming of the King will end up making more money for SD/MA than if the previous stand-off carried on, as retail sales are more than likely going to increase as the less savvy bears snap up blue shirts with King on the back.

MA is a genuine off-the-radar hard-nosed wealthy businessman and he would have no qualms about putting TRFC into admin if DK and his cronies start messing him about. Think USC on a pocket money scale.

Will the TRFC Ltd board be reconstituted in time to sort out a replacement source of funding for the second SD £5M? All the SMSM attention has been on RIFC PLC due to their clumpany mindset, but it is TFRC Ltd that is in danger of administration if the funding gap is not filled, and SD would be the ones appointing the administrators unless the directors went for a pre-emptive protective administration first. DK must have a contingency plan, despite the public facing cluelessness. Mustn’t he?

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on10:28 pm - Mar 6, 2015


easyJambo says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:06 pm

The SMSM menu has been updated to restore succulent fayre.

Daily Record Sport @Record_Sport · 9m 9 minutes ago
Rangers chairman Paul Murray: I’d like to thank the Daily Record for its courageous journalism over the past 4 years http://dlyr.ec/PKak08
==========================
That Paul Murray’s got a cracking line in sarcasm.

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on10:32 pm - Mar 6, 2015


neepheid says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:12 pm
ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:00 pm

Increasingly I feel this site has turned into a PR warzone.
======================
What is that supposed to mean, exactly? That PR firms are employing people to post on here?

The posters on here, in my opinion, are honestly expressing a personal view. To suggest otherwise is outrageous.
————————————————————–
As I personally know only a small number of posters on here I have no idea whether the rest are expressing a personal view or not.

However I think it would be a tad naieve to believe that all posters on here have an open, unbiased viewpoint and take on-board contrary arguments and heaven forbid perhaps even change their mind.

But I admit to being an old cynic well-versed in the ways of the media and PR spinners and if I was a player in the Rangers circus and didn’t have people trying to manipulate opinions on this site then I would have no complaints about being sacked for gross incompetence.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on10:59 pm - Mar 6, 2015


ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:20 pm

I don’t know what age you are so I don’t know if you actually experienced the era I am talking about when the Celtic away support sang extremely vile songs. In many ways it was a differenr era especially because of what was happening in NI.
================
Sadly old enough to remember 🙁 (in both senses 🙂 )

If the away end had been cleared out due to sectarianism we could have gutted the home end for racism, homophobia (not to mention what I’d describe as the sectarianism of convenience) etc..

I miss the seventies fitba wise for the atmosphere of a packed, all standing ground, esp night games…but I don’t miss the c**p that went with it.

I was of course referring to current/recent times so apologies for picking you up wrongly there.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on11:06 pm - Mar 6, 2015


The Cat NR1 says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:24 pm

SD would be the ones appointing the administrators
===================================================
Sorry Cat, must be my night to be picky, but ain’t SD loans secured…and secured creditors can’t IIRC appoint administrators..

No doubt MA won’t come out of this poorer but I doubt it’s gone as he planned…can’t be doing the brand image much good…can’t help wondering if the NUFC fans have been watching and wondering…

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on11:14 pm - Mar 6, 2015


TSFM says:
March 6, 2015 at 6:39 pm

King is clearly a flawed character, certainly not the stuff of dinner party invitations,
===================================
And while I’m being picky….rich businessman (off the radar wealth I understand)…domiciled in South Africa…excellent wines I understand…would probably bring a nice pinotage..would go nicely with some :slamb: …are you sure about this 😆

You are most likely correct pta – just not my kind of dinner party 🙂
TSFM

View Comment

ianagainPosted on11:19 pm - Mar 6, 2015


Let DK get on with it.

The actuallitie might be very interesting when the drawers are opened the envelopes found etc.

My guess is the first 2 to 3 mill will go in lawyers fees rather than players given his determination NOT to pay contracts he deems naughty.

View Comment

boywithoutanaitchPosted on11:21 pm - Mar 6, 2015


First post, Gers fan, been here since the off (and RTC before) for the outstanding quality of analysis by some posters that kept me better informed than SMSM ever could.
Eco makes a pertinent point that TSFM is a very uninviting place for Rangers fans and would be an even better vehicle for change if it could become more inclusive.
He is also right to point out that it is Rangers fans choice what type of club we want/have going forward (although that choice has rarely been in our gift these past few years)
I hope today is a turning point for my club. The new guys may not be perfect but i believe that they are genuine and also brave to gamble in diving into the unknown. Who knows why lurks below the surface, given the procession of chancers who have systematically and professionally (probably legally too – but thats a sad inditement on UK corporate law) ransacked our club over the past few years, but these guys are using their own money with virtually zero chance of any return and i will support them, as will all of my Rangers supporting friends that i have spoken to recently.
The majority of Celtic friends I have (and I have many) want a strong Rangers back challenging them. This is especially true of the ones who attend the matches. We are close friends, family and colleagues. None of us has any time for the “baggage” and I would rather befriend a good, real Celtic/Aberdeen/Hearts/whoever fan than a bad Gers fan.
We have a long journey ahead of us but i hope we can now rebuild.
Anyway back to lurking and maybe some day we can all work together for the good of the game and the future generations

View Comment

BallyargusPosted on11:46 pm - Mar 6, 2015


Ì can’t but think that MA must have seen this scenario coming and allowed it to happen for some reason that suits him. I don’t believe that DK has put one over on him or that he has been humiliated as some suggest.
Surely if he wanted to defeat DK all he had to when the EGM application was passed was to have a nominee buy sufficient shares. Also don’t forget some shareholders didn’t cast a vote and it is likely that they were MA supporters.
Maybe the lamb should be kept in the fridge a little longer.

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on12:19 am - Mar 7, 2015


parttimearab says:
March 6, 2015 at 11:06 pm
The Cat NR1 says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:24 pm

SD would be the ones appointing the administrators
===================================================
Sorry Cat, must be my night to be picky, but ain’t SD loans secured…and secured creditors can’t IIRC appoint administrators..
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Isnt it the other way about? SD have a floating charge and therefore the right to appoint an Administrator/Liquidator if the terms of their loan are not fulfilled? Thats what CW did in 2012

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on12:29 am - Mar 7, 2015


TSFM says:
March 6, 2015 at 6:50 pm

The_Pie_Man says:
March 6, 2015 at 6:42 pm
I wonder now that King et al have won the EGM how long the Loan Players from Newcastle will remain at Ibrox.
__________________________________________________________________________

I think that is an interesting question. I remember an old boss telling me that to be successful in negotiations, you had to check your testosterone in at the meeting room door. Given that Ashley has been spectacularly successful in business, my guess is that he will display no petulance, and that the loanees will remain.

But that’s just my guess. How MA reacts on that kind of trivial level will be very interesting.
======================================
Isn’t it in MA’s interests for the Gerdie Five to stay from several perspectives?

He owns NUFC, so by getting them off the NUFC wage bill, he’s saving his company money. They wouldn’t be used at St James’s, so there is no opportunity cost.

If they get game time, it may improve them as players or increase the possibility of offloading the ones NUFC no longer wish to keep.

If they do well on the pitch, it may help increase the feel-good factor at Ibrox, and that increases the SD profits through increased merchandising sales.

If they do nothing but bench warm, it’s TRFC not NUFC paying for it.

In the event of administration, the loans would be terminated immediately as one of the first cost cutting moves, but is there a termination or recall clause in the loan deal that could be excercised in the normal course of business? Have the terms been made public?

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on12:37 am - Mar 7, 2015


Ballyargus says:
March 6, 2015 at 11:46 pm

Ì can’t but think that MA must have seen this scenario coming and allowed it to happen for some reason that suits him. I don’t believe that DK has put one over on him or that he has been humiliated as some suggest.
Surely if he wanted to defeat DK all he had to when the EGM application was passed was to have a nominee buy sufficient shares. Also don’t forget some shareholders didn’t cast a vote and it is likely that they were MA supporters.
Maybe the lamb should be kept in the fridge a little longer.
______________________________________________

My view: Mash could not and would not have bought additional shares.
Reason: Bad for business. It would have made him look untrustworthy.
Mash is ruthless.
But his reputation for ruthlessness is secondary to his reputation for legality and propriety.
The censure from the SFA for undue influence would be laughed off!
A shot across the bows from a corrupt regulator.
No serious outsider would look at that negatively.
But to blatantly increase his shareholding in defiance of explicit rules and agreements freely entered into that prevented him from doing so?
That would make him look like someone who would not keep a bargain.
That is bad for business.
Mash is no crook.
His reputation as a non crook is worth as much to him as the badge is to the 50p polyester shirts he sells in his outlets to willing punters at many multiples of their cost price.

Ironically, this is why I think he would have been the best way forward for TRFC.
The same rules as apply to everyone else DO apply to Mash.
He is just very adept at coming out on top and turning the weaknesses of others into his strengths.

With a strong regulatory oversight, and a hostlie press, there could have been a good outcome for all.

Instead we are faced with a club run by villains and a venal and toothless regulator, shady deals, patronage, entitlement etc that created the mess in the first place.

Wind the clock back 5 years everyone. What do you see?
A veneer of dignity painted over a pit of depravity and corruption.
Back we go!

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on12:49 am - Mar 7, 2015


Resin Lab Dog,

Regardless of what anyone thinks of his plans, it is clear that Rangers would not have survived long with the way things were with Mike Ashley owning the club in all but name. If the business was loss making with full crowds and good merchandising revenue it was dead in the water with 10,000 crowds and no merchandising revenue.

I have yet to fully formulate a view on today’s events, but I am convinced that there would be no Rangers had things continued as they were. The business may yet fail, but if it does I personally don’t see that as any different as to what would have occurred if Mr Ashley had remained in control.

I think the thing a lot of posters are missing here is that Rangers fans in general, after everything we’ve been through over the last few years, are not opposed to austerity per se. What has really got to the fans has been the knowledge that finances were dire, and austerity was needed, but in large part that was due to the fact that money was being shipped out left right and centre.

Rangers have a smaller worldwide fan base than Celtic, I’m sure of that. But they have a not insignificant fan base. They generate substantial revenue. There is no reason whatsoever that a properly run Rangers can’t be competing at the pinnacle of the Scottish game, without any need for sugar daddies.

I look forward to seeing what happens next. This is the first time since liquidation when someone who wasn’t there in the immediate aftermath has been in charge. And if it all goes Pete Tong, then I will rest comfortably knowing that it was going to go that way if the status quo had been maintained.

View Comment

ianagainPosted on12:53 am - Mar 7, 2015


To put it simply CG put Sevco on the markets.
When you do that you are obliged to do what the market dictates.
The market has dictated (today) a change of personnel.
What that personnel wants to do is up to them.
Subject to that markets rules.
I wont comment on how closely that market rules its rules as it were.

We shouldn’t be in the business on here of working out convoluted ways to liquidation etc.

Why do we care?

Maybe if someone we knew bought a car we knew the brakes didn’t work at all we might.

These are big bright financially savvy men o the world.

Sit back and see what’s next.

As someone said a few days back stop fitting a outcome to suit. What will be will be.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on12:54 am - Mar 7, 2015


ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:00 pm

Resin_lab_dog says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:48 pm
ecobhoy says:
March 6, 2015 at 9:31 pm
TSFM says:
March 6, 2015 at 6:39 pm

In recent weeks I haven’t seen posters on here treat DK as a figure of fun but more as a target of hatred under many guises.
—————————————————————-
Why don’t you actually answer the questions you have raised and provide supporting evidence and then we can actually debate the issues.

______________________________________

OK
slowly:
Times and tenures of DK directorships of RFC 2012: a matter of public record.
DK served on the board that awarded EBTs, that turned the funding crisis at RFC into an impending catastrophe after Boumsong ‘bung’ enquiries uncovered evidence of EBTs that had been witheld from tax authorities, leading to unearthing of side letters, improper player registrations etc.
DK served on the board under CW, and did not resign even when Tax and NI was being withheld.
DK had fiduciary duties in this regard that he neglected.
CF material (which has established provenance in courts of law, although limited ability to circulate) creates a less than transparent impression of goings on in RFC around the time of the transfer of assets to CW wavetower and subsequently.

Evidence.
Threads.
Pull anyone of them.
King is too mixed up in this web to be considered clear.
Precautionary principle needs to apply in this case.

View Comment

The Cat NR1Posted on1:07 am - Mar 7, 2015


GoosyGoosy says:
March 7, 2015 at 12:19 am

parttimearab says:
March 6, 2015 at 11:06 pm
The Cat NR1 says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:24 pm

SD would be the ones appointing the administrators
===================================================
Sorry Cat, must be my night to be picky, but ain’t SD loans secured…and secured creditors can’t IIRC appoint administrators..
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Isnt it the other way about? SD have a floating charge and therefore the right to appoint an Administrator/Liquidator if the terms of their loan are not fulfilled? Thats what CW did in 2012
============================================
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12227853.html
The first £5M is secured by a combination of fixed and floating charges.
The second £5M I’m fairly sure would be secured by floating charge, subject to positive due dilligence.

https://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/technicalmanual/Ch49-60/Chapter%2056-1/Part%203/Part%203.htm

EDIT
I just noticed that the second £5M will have a five year repayment plan, so that would give TRFC some wriggle room. However, the first £5M has no specified repayment date.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:12 am - Mar 7, 2015


And respect eco.

Its not me giving you the TD and I would like to state publicly that I think these are undeserved (and unimportant).

Thanks for engaging and please continue to do so in the face of whatever contrary opinions or expressions you find.

We clearly come at the DK thing from different sides, but I respect the points you raise.

I am an NUFC fan as well as an ICT fan and lose no love over Mash. (quite the opposite, trust me)

But my honest opinion is he stays the right side of criminality (more’s the pity, as some of my Geordie friends would contend).
He may be dispassionate, but he’s legal and there is an honesty to his brutality.
And my honest opinion of DK:
A crook. A charlatan. a weasel. A liar. He will tell you what you want to hear all the live long day. But only a fool would believe any of it.
He may be passionate. He may be a Rangers fan. I do not know for sure. Because I have only his word on this. And he is also a consummate liar.

But on the basis that you may be right and I may be wrong, I look forward to constructive engagement.

And if I could start by challenging you, similarly, to produce evidence of DKs bona fides and sound character, by which I might be swayed in my – admittedly – detrimental opinion of him, I will endeavour to pry open my closed mind to the prejudicial (or is that merely judicial?) view I have formed over the gentleman in question.

View Comment

Head HunterPosted on1:27 am - Mar 7, 2015


Ecobhoy…I don’t always agree with your viewpoint, or perhaps more accurately at times I don’t like the somewhat certain, uncompromising language you use -but you are who you are as you often say yourself. You have an opinion and you will share it no matter. I respect that and I certainly value the enormously positive contributions you have made to this and other forums over the past few years. However, I have to say that over the last week or two your posts have become increasingly erratic and uncharacteristic, somewhat reminiscent of others of this parish who were working their ticket. I hope that you will respect my opinion. Alternatively your account has been hacked by level 5 😀 .

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on1:53 am - Mar 7, 2015


RyanGosling says:
March 7, 2015 at 12:49 am

_________________________________________________

I can see where you are coming from there Ryan, but I think there was a 3rd way.

My premise was that the club would be bled dry under King or Mash.
We’ll see if I am right.
Perhaps the only difference under king will be that the bears will throw more good money after bad on the way to what you consider the inevitability under Mash.

I think it would have been ineviatble that Mash would have owned you lock stock and barrel.

And he’d have bled you dry and run you tight.

But He would never have let you go under. The bills would be paid.
Financial discipline would be imposed, but the lights would stay on.

He would have imposed financial discipline and lean ness and exploited opportunities ruthlessly to his own advantage.
But he would have done so honestly
And in doing so he would have built you sustainably while hoovering off the bulk of the proceeds.

But one day… he would have cashed in and sold you on.
Lean.
Fit.
Cash positive.
Sustainable.
With development potential.
And you would have been sold to someone with different ambitions.
And you would have been in good shape.

When the unsustainable football finance models that surrounded you were crashing down, you would have breezed through to the big time… The Inverness Caledonian Thistle of the Champions league! Punching above your weight but bombproof from the weathered storms.

Whereas: Dave King:
Cheated before. Will Cheat again. All comers.
End of.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on2:00 am - Mar 7, 2015


Resin lab dog,

I am not discounting the points you make, which are valid, but I think you are mistaken in one key point. Mr Ashley would not have turned Rangers into an efficiently run club, he would have turned Rangers into a club that was run efficiently for the benefit of himself / Sports Direct, and that is a big difference. I don’t believe he would have sold it on, because from my point of view I would not buy into a business which had the majority of its revenue streams being siphoned off.

Mr King has an undesirable past, I accept that. And I am not a cheerleader for him by any stretch of the imagination, I have yet to make up my mind whether this turn of events is for the good. But I was rightly told off recently for making ad hominem remarks, and even though Mr King appears slippery I will wait to see what he does next.

Headhunter,

I think calling ecobhoy erratic and uncharacteristic is wide of the mark and a wee bit out of order if I’m being honest. He is the most fearless poster here, he says what he thinks and gets as many thumbs up as down and doesn’t care in the slightest. He goes against the grain often, but crucially, only if that genuinely is his viewpoint. In my opinion he has never posted anything on the wind up, and as someone who speaks his mind on a given topic without fitting the answer to the question, is one of our most valuable contributors.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on2:25 am - Mar 7, 2015


RyanGosling says:
March 7, 2015 at 2:00 am

_________________________________________________

Ryan,

I accept your valid concerns.
But in the longer term, the revene streams that mash relies on to add value to his nylon are intimately linked with the club.
For a while he can trade off the history.
Then he has a choice.
Invest to sustain, or sell out.
This years skoda is last years Audi with a different badge. Next years skoda is reliant upon this years Audi. He has to invest… i.e plough back in to the value of the ‘badge’ at some point to keep things moving. He’s not stupid. He knows this.
Calculating how much and when is his stock in trade.
So the domesday scenario you describe with SD has a limited shelf life. Or maybe I am underestimating the willingness of TRFC fans to blindly go on flogging a dead horse?
I suspect not however.

So Mash has 3 possible choices to keep his revenue streams optimised:
1.Milk and close down.
2.Invest and grow/sustain… keep the streams open and flowing
3.Or cash in and move on.

1 would probably not be Mash’s preferred model of first choice. Its the choice of last resort, which ironically is where DK might be taking him.

Both 2 and 3 would be acceptable to the bears I think, and leave them better placed than where they are now, certainly.
Its not nice. But it is fair.
That is my opinion. I may be wrong.

View Comment

Head HunterPosted on2:47 am - Mar 7, 2015


RyanGosling says:
March 7, 2015 at 2:00 am
Headhunter,

…He is the most fearless poster here, he says what he thinks and gets as many thumbs up as down and doesn’t care in the slightest. He goes against the grain often, but crucially, only if that genuinely is his viewpoint. In my opinion he has never posted anything on the wind up, and as someone who speaks his mind on a given topic without fitting the answer to the question, is one of our most valuable contributors.

0 0 Rate This

Ryan,
I’m not sure what your point is? I don’t dispute anything you say, your synopsis is spot on, and I’m absolutely certain he could not care less what I, or anyone else thinks. None the less his recent implicit support for King is bizarre.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on3:02 am - Mar 7, 2015


ecobhoy@10.00pm:
“…..like it or lump it Rangers won’t die…..”
……………….
Many of us believe that they did die, and the neew club for all its trappings and lying is in existence o ly because our Football authorities sank to Qatari depths of deceit and one section partisanship to bring it into schizophrenic life.
We further believe that the same authorities have worked assiduously to favour DK and will again pyrotect and defend the new club at all further costs to Integrity of fotball governance.
My interest lies in getting our sport’s governing bodies staffed by people of unimpeachable integrity.
Whether a club named any version of Rrangers lives or dies is very much a secondary concern,
provided that it does not claim and is not permitted to clai, the titles and honours that were honestly won by a now defunct club.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on3:06 am - Mar 7, 2015


boywithoutanaitch says:
March 6, 2015 at 11:21 pm

First post, Gers fan, been here since the off (and RTC before) for the outstanding quality of analysis by some posters that kept me better informed than SMSM ever could.
Eco makes a pertinent point that TSFM is a very uninviting place for Rangers fans and would be an even better vehicle for change if it could become more inclusive.
He is also right to point out that it is Rangers fans choice what type of club we want/have going forward (although that choice has rarely been in our gift these past few years)
I hope today is a turning point for my club. The new guys may not be perfect but i believe that they are genuine and also brave to gamble in diving into the unknown. Who knows why lurks below the surface, given the procession of chancers who have systematically and professionally (probably legally too – but thats a sad inditement on UK corporate law) ransacked our club over the past few years, but these guys are using their own money with virtually zero chance of any return and i will support them, as will all of my Rangers supporting friends that i have spoken to recently.
The majority of Celtic friends I have (and I have many) want a strong Rangers back challenging them. This is especially true of the ones who attend the matches. We are close friends, family and colleagues. None of us has any time for the “baggage” and I would rather befriend a good, real Celtic/Aberdeen/Hearts/whoever fan than a bad Gers fan.
We have a long journey ahead of us but i hope we can now rebuild.
Anyway back to lurking and maybe some day we can all work together for the good of the game and the future generations
__________________________________________

I hope you are right bwoh.

But any list of people aho have so far put their ‘own’ money into RIFC has to include:

Easedales
Ashley
Laxley subscribers & shareholders

And any list of people who have reomed money from RIFC has to include

Charles Green
Ally McCoist
all previous board members except the easedales
The playing and coaching squad

Sometime its hard to know who are friends and who are enemies!
Keep asking the hard questions and do not be intimidated.
We’re decent folk hereabouts
Hail fellow, well met!

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on3:13 am - Mar 7, 2015


Head Hunter says:
March 7, 2015 at 2:47 am

RyanGosling says:
March 7, 2015 at 2:00 am
Headhunter,

RyanGosling says:
March 7, 2015 at 2:00 am
Headhunter,
________________________________________________

None the less his recent implicit support for King is bizarre.

_________________________________________________

Disagree.

King has tapped into the pent up emotions of thousands of frustrated bears who are friends families and work mates of all of us. They have had a tough time, unarguably, irrespective of the relative merits or apportionment of associated blame, justified or otherwise.

Their optimism is a natural reaction to the circumstances in which they find themselves today. Some of that rubs off.

As, indeed, is our cynicism.
A natural reaction to the circumstances in which they find themselves today.
😯

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on7:34 am - Mar 7, 2015


Resin_lab_dog says:
March 7, 2015 at 3:13 am

Disagree.

King has tapped into the pent up emotions of thousands of frustrated bears who are friends families and work mates of all of us. They have had a tough time, unarguably, irrespective of the relative merits or apportionment of associated blame, justified or otherwise.

Their optimism is a natural reaction to the circumstances in which they find themselves today. Some of that rubs off.
===============================

Hmmm…does that explain the theory my (otherwise sensible) colleague spouted yesterday that ‘Celtic are f*cked now?’

I must admit a glance around the media this morning makes depressing reading. It’s like a return to the worst excesses of David Murray and in my view any hack who writes they want all clubs to be strong is lying.

As for the SFA holding a fit and proper test for King. Why even bother going to the expense? Clearly they will not block him and clearly this is common knowledge among the media. No lessons have been learned and any type of person is welcome at Ibrox. I assume the SFA will not care where the money comes from either. If they are prepared to overlook crime on this level then they may as well not have any rules or guidelines at all. Well that’s not true, because they do have 41 other clubs to apply the rules to. It’s only one that is exempt.

It’s time to batten down the hatches as lazy hacks accept Jim Traynor’s PR releases without question, while they busy themselves trying to discredit Celtic in any way they can. Aberdeen will no doubt have to face some time being told their Manager is being taken away from them. Various other clubs will be told their players are being taken away from them. King will tell them the world is flat and they will collapse and lick his feet.

Scottish football administration and sports journalism reflects an era best forgotten in Scotland. An era where supporting a particular team or possibly being a member of a particular organisation brought a man real benefits in life, whether he deserved them or not. Why is such organised bias still allowed in our national sport?

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on7:43 am - Mar 7, 2015


Some interesting comments from DK – a peace offering to MA….

“But if Mike Ashley is going to continue his relationship with the club and we assume his contracts are robust and we have to live with them and come to the conclusion they’re fairly balanced to the club and we let the fans know that then they can resume spending”

…and a hint that RIFC won’t be troubling the AIM market for much longer…

He said: “The Nomad is not an issue. Whether Rangers is listed is not an issue. The listing is irrelevant.

“It is something that affects a specific group of investors – of which there is very few right now.

“You have really only got River and Mercantile who as a London-based institution can’t invest in unlisted companies.

“But most of the other shareholders would be as happy to be in the club whether it is listed or not.”

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/rangers/king-targets-reclaiming-rangers-assets-after-seizing-power-at-ibrox-199520n.120113068?

View Comment

fishnishPosted on8:41 am - Mar 7, 2015


There has been a remarkable churn in leaders down Govan way in recent years, some proving to be of poor or reprehensible qualities and character. So one king departs and the next is lauded as the long-awaited next best thing/king.
I have found this perplexing.
However…
An academic announcement this week (from a respected fellow with Oxbridge credentials) gave me better understanding of this. It has cast light on its origin…
http://www.thenational.scot/culture/was-king-arthur-a-glaswegian-from-govan.732

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:52 am - Mar 7, 2015


boywithoutanaitch says:
March 6, 2015 at 11:21 pm

… Who knows why lurks below the surface, given the procession of chancers who have systematically and professionally (probably legally too – but thats a sad inditement on UK corporate law) ransacked our club over the past few years, but these guys are using their own money with virtually zero chance of any return and i will support them, as will all of my Rangers supporting friends that i have spoken to recently…
———–

Nice to see both you and Ryan chipping in. I think the reason there is still a sense of ‘hostility’ towards Ibrox is that the perceived ransacking of Scottish football that went on under oldco has never really been resolved. A lot of people are still out of pocket from the previous club, not to mention ‘sporting issues’. All the valuable trading assets appear to have been passed on so that oldco could morph into debt-free newco. There is a sense of shame connected to that.

As Auldheid often mentions, the authorities appear to have been helpful facilitators, and that has damaged the whole structure.

For the life of me I cannot understand why the fans, and the real Rangers men, did not seize the chance to start again in 2012. There was a poster on RTC called Yojimbo (sp.?) who, like several others, expected a newco to emerge in a different kit, playing at a different location, but as a continuation of the legacy and heritage of the former football club. I’ve little doubt that such an entity would have been welcomed by the broad church of Scottish football. You can’t help wondering where that club would be today — if it had seen the light of day.

From one perspective, the ills of the past three years have been created by a desire to blank out reality and embrace the Charles Green doctrine of blaming everyone else, ‘enemies of Rangers’, same-now-forever nonsense, and encouraging a triumphalism at being ‘debt free’. Nothing to be proud of, imo. Yet, he was warmly embraced by 40,000-50,000 fans.

From day one, Sevco/The Rangers appeared illegitimate. I suppose until some sort of natural justice occurs wrt oldco debts, it’ll be hard to consider the current entity worthy to be involved in the leagues. I remember thinking at the time that a new entity could create a ‘payback-the-debt’ arrangement over a period of years. That way there would have been less animosity among fans of other clubs to newco claiming to be oldco. It would have been the dignified thing to do.

Perhaps Dave King has been on the road to Damascus, and a new day will dawn, but as far as anyone can see, Dave King included, there are still too many unknown unknowns. That means the very real danger of yet more good money poured down the drain. It could all have been avoided if The Rangers of Glasgow had been created in 2012. Alas.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on9:34 am - Mar 7, 2015


It will be interesting to watch the development of this club,there is obviously more to come from Dave King after what he was obviously hinting at in his speech yesterday,youth development,new coach,not a manager,scouting system,all makes sense,so why then drop in the possible 1to 2 year turn around,he certainly will not be looking to the English leagues to draw players from unless quality loan players and having to pay the rising wages that the sky deal will create down south,as for them being “back”the additional finance this will bring to the other clubs will allow them to improve with ease as their finances will all be in order after the past few prudent years,they will discard the rest of Scottish football at their peril

View Comment

iceman63Posted on10:13 am - Mar 7, 2015


Even if we disregard DK’s past disasters, then the following are pressing reasons to be fearful for the Ibrox masses.
1. DK’s claims that he had a NOMAD, even this week, and now stating that delisting is a preferred option.
2. DK insisting he had no impediments to his taking up a directorship role, and his inability so to do now.
3. His dismissal of the SD loan of 10 million as insubstantial and his referencing to Rangers having the substance to borrow up to 50 million as being no real problem.

View Comment

boywithoutanaitchPosted on10:18 am - Mar 7, 2015


DP
Wow….and you wonder why you can’t get Rangers fans to engage on TSFM

Um … I believe DP was a fan of the original club
TSFM

View Comment

HamerdoonPosted on10:43 am - Mar 7, 2015


I think it was the Fast Show.

Today, I will be neither listening to the radio nor reading pish in the newspapers (eh ……. I mean fanzines).

View Comment

iceman63Posted on10:44 am - Mar 7, 2015


[]

View Comment

EstebanPosted on10:46 am - Mar 7, 2015


A vignette of what is wrong is on the front page of the Daily Record this morning. There’s the triumphalism in a large photograph of the three new directors of RIFC with their hands in the air, but also a smaller inset image at the top right with Derek Llambias in a taxi, with a banner headline reading ‘Cheerio, cheerio, cheerio’, and underneath that the words ‘How’s that ban working out for you now, Derek?’

Why does there have to be a ‘baddy’? Why does there have to be someone to stick the boot into? Why can’t they just report straight on what happens without turning it into Hamlet versus Claudius?

It’s not healthy.

View Comment

yakutsukiPosted on10:56 am - Mar 7, 2015


iceman63 says:
March 7, 2015 at 10:13 am

Even if we disregard DK’s past disasters, then the following are pressing reasons to be fearful for the Ibrox masses.
1. DK’s claims that he had a NOMAD, even this week, and now stating that delisting is a preferred option.
2. DK insisting he had no impediments to his taking up a directorship role, and his inability so to do now.
3. His dismissal of the SD loan of 10 million as insubstantial and his referencing to Rangers having the substance to borrow up to 50 million as being no real problem.

————————————–

Iceman, what are you trying to imply?
Someone being economical with the truth? Surely no???

My honest feeling is that there is a whole lot more to be revealed yet. Many, many chapters to go on ‘The journey.’

I can understand why Boywithoutaitch
should be upset at DP’s recent post if I put myself in his shoes for a moment. He might try the same and see what the rest of Scottish football thinks/feels, and that post encapsulates it in my opinion.

Sorry, but as long as this cankerous sore goes unchallenged, Scottish football can never recover.

The clean cut would have healed much better and faster. Instead we are forced to watch as people have picked at the wound, tried to cover it up, pretend the wound is not there at all even!!!

I hope you get the picture as I’m never too sure if my analogies make any sense. Just trying to convey my feelings on the mishandling of this shambles.

Hope to see you posting more often BWOA
the blog is a better place when Ryan posts – even if I disagree with him most of the time!

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:03 am - Mar 7, 2015


parttimearab says:
March 7, 2015 at 7:43 am

Some interesting comments from DK – a peace offering to MA….
—————————————————————
There are obviously a lot of imponderables about the egm vote and especially the decision to abstain by the Easdale proxies.

But wrt to DK and MA it is well within the realm of possibility that they will reach an accord. It might be helpful to know the timing of the decision if indeed one was reached.

But even if it wasn’t agreed before the egm then I have no doubt one might well be on the cards. IMO there won’t be the slightest taint of criminality with any of the Ashley dealings with Rangers.

The contracts are most probably very generous to Ashley at Rangers’ expense but the former Rangers Board agreed to them.

So by and large they will probably run their course although Ashley knows that unless there is a nod from King then effectively the Bears will still be boycotting SD kit.

I don’t think it’s beyond the whit of King and Ashley to agree a bit of a renegotiation to allow a better percentage from kit sales to Rangers. It won’t cost Ashley anything because the loss in profit will be more than covered by the increased turnover as King tells the Bears that for the rest of the Ashley contract it’s beneficial to the club to buy from SD.

On the question of DK saying the AIM listing is ‘irrelevant’ that’s true unless you intend to raise money on the market. It will be interesting to see what happens wrt to replacing the NOMAD and where the imminent cash needed to keep Rangers in operation is going to come from.

In that respect it will be interesting to see how long the honeymoon period will be for the new Board and how quickly King will attempt to join it.

As usual down Ibrox Way there are many more questions than answers although that obviously won’t diminish the speculation no matter whether informed or not.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on11:09 am - Mar 7, 2015


I’ve watched the events of the past few days and have to admit that the margin of King’s victory has taken me by surprise, though clearly aided by some surprising (perhaps not so surprising in the TRFC saga) turncoats. I don’t know what the future may hold for TRFC/RIFC, but I do know that a man, more famous for his use of words not akin to the truth, has now taken over the helm of the club with words that show his modus operandi has not changed since his attempts to fool a South African court.

At the start of this most eventfull week he was telling every one of his succulent lambs that he already had a NOMAD lined up. He said this until he knew the votes were in to assure him of his victory. Once over the finish line, though, there is suddenly no need for a NOMAD nor a listing on AIM. This might well be true, but he wasn’t saying that a few days ago when it would have been no less true, maybe just a little bit awkward, though.

There might be an announcement within the allotted time of a new MONAD, but in my opinion, the only reason anyone would suddenly say one wasn’t required was because he isn’t certain to have one, or else, it was always his intention to delist and was lying by ommission during his EGM campaign.

Now, in the interest of saving one’s football club, a lie of this nature might be forgivable, but when it is just another lie from a man known to lie, big time, it is safe to assume there are other lies within his public announcements.

I don’t know if his Rangersness will lead to him having a character change and see him following through with his promises to the fans, only time will tell, but I suspect we are going to hear more bluster, and excuses, than any signs of money entering the club’s coffers from King’s pockets, though it’s imminent arrival will often be hinted upon by the succulent press.

Hasn’t this past few days felt so like the arrival of that other king, what was his name? You know the one, hailed as a true RRM? The media lapped up his every word. He wasn’t a convicted criminal though! Oh yes, Craig Whyte!

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:12 am - Mar 7, 2015


Esteban says:
March 7, 2015 at 10:46 am

Why does there have to be a ‘baddy’? Why does there have to be someone to stick the boot into? Why can’t they just report straight on what happens without turning it into Hamlet versus Claudius?

It’s not healthy.
—————————————–
Perhaps not. But it is football we are talking about and for a helluva lot of fans if you ain’t a ‘winner’ then you’re nothing.

Even fans supporting clubs who are more likely to lose than win most games still have a dream of winning in their hearts. They might hide it well to cover the disappointment of defeat but the craving for victory is what keeps most coming through the turnstyles IMO.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on11:15 am - Mar 7, 2015


Esteban says:

Why does there have to be a ‘baddy’? Why does there have to be someone to stick the boot into? Why can’t they just report straight on what happens without turning it into Hamlet versus Claudius?
======================================

There are several types of Baddy. There’s the Peter Lawwell type. The very successful type that manages his football club very well and is not prepared to accept being treated as lesser than others. For that he will receive organised, negative media coverage as we witnessed the other day. There is also the Steven Thompson type of Baddy, who successfully manages his club and is prepared to publicly challenge bullying comments and threats. For that he will also receive organised, negative media coverage as we witnessed several times. Then we have the Baddy’s such as Whyte, and Green, who were initially regarded as heroes but quickly turned to zeroes, by the same fans and media who roared them through the front door. Then we have the Baddy’s who actually aspired for Rangers to live within its means. We can’t have that, can we.

The only Goodies in this of course are the type who took the reigns yesterday. Scottish born Rangers men, no doubt with links which opened several doors to them in life. Their honesty and integrity will never be challenged, because that type of Rangers man is the most honest, decent type of man there is, who knows what’s best for everyone and always strives to spread his brotherly love across football and wider Scottish society. Criminal convictions are no stain on the character of such a man, as we can see today.

The authorities and the media have what they want now. Anyone who still sees Scottish football as a meritocratic sport should be worried.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:34 am - Mar 7, 2015


Ryan

I enjoyed Fishnish’s link to the piece about Arthur, Breeze is not the first historian to put forward the Arthur was a North Briton thesis. But the current self declared incarnation of Merlin is no friend to the latest would be Arthur :mrgreen:

When it comes to Ashley, Danegeld is a more appropriate analogy, and like the Danes, the more geld Rangers paid, the more Ashley has taken, and the more the mysterious beasties in the far famed Sevco Triangle have taken.

Therein lies, perhaps the most intractable of Kingco’s problems. Their ascension at Ibrox has not changed the fundamentals for the better in any material way. Ashley is still owed millions, and still has a vice like grip on assets and important income streams, whatever one thinks of the morality of that, the fact is that the contracts, will be legal, enforceable and very expensive to break. Since its never been denied, I can only assume that payments are going to the Sevco Triangle at eye watering rates, again if these contracts were easily breakable, Ashley’s men would have done so. The company has no credit line, no normal bank account, and is now suspended and faces automatic de-listing from AIM, which will make getting a normal bank account and access to a credit line much more difficult, and raising funds from the capital markets next to impossible.

I fully expect the fans to return to Ibrox in droves, to the benefit of the company, but also to the benefit of Ashley and those mysterious beasties.. Kenny MacDowell is right when he says that it will take at least 5 years to re-build the footballing infrastructure, some tasks can’t actually be brought forward very much by throwing money and resources at them, besides Mr King has made clear, all be it quietly, that unlimited resources are not available. No wonder Mr King does not look bouncy!

The future may be many things, but currently, I can say with confidence that it won’t be Blue

View Comment

borussiabeefburgPosted on11:36 am - Mar 7, 2015


Have you ever been had?

Does anyone think that the return of D King and P Murray (or similar, perhaps eventually D Murray) into the Ibrox boardroom has been part of the master plan for a very long time. I’m interested that their PR advisor is J Traynor, the same bloke who counselled C Green.

C Green, who has been connected to M Ashley and C Whyte via email trails.

M Ashley’s men D Llambias and B Leach portrayed as pantomime villains, olive branch though for M Ashley from D King. C Mather coming out of the woodwork to support D King, among other surprises.

But these shouldn’t really be surprises. Have you ever been had?

View Comment

ecobhoyPosted on11:44 am - Mar 7, 2015


Allyjambo says:
March 7, 2015 at 11:09 am

There might be an announcement within the allotted time of a new MONAD, but in my opinion, the only reason anyone would suddenly say one wasn’t required was because he isn’t certain to have one, or else, it was always his intention to delist and was lying by ommission during his EGM campaign.

For a couple of weeks I have always seen a possibility of delisting but I thought it more likely to come from MA rather than DK.

Again there’s always been the possibility of administration which has certain advantages for both sides but I’m not sure that even DK would be prepared to take the gamble to work the oracle and attempt to persuade fans yet again that the club can never die.

There’s also the slight inconvenience that Ashley would own or control huge chunks of ‘The Club’ given as security for his loans.

IIRC in order to delist voluntarily from AIM you need a 75% vote from shareholders and to take the company to a private Ltd entity you need a 100% shareholders vote.

Of course if you are automatically delisted because of a lack of a NOMAD then you don’t need the shareholder approval fro the action which I think might be very difficult to achieve.

So if RIFC Plc is delisted could control/ownership be passed to TRFCL or indeed a new Ltd company. I know we have always tended to look at this the other way in that RIFC could pull the plug on TRFCL but times could be changing.

I genuinely don’t know whether this is possible but if King declares to the Bears that – after looking under the bonnet – this is the only way to save the club then that honeymoon period might come to his rescue.

And one thing I haven’t seen DK mention – although I may have missed it – is who owns Ibrox? That remains a key element and if that is secured in a manner that satisfies the fans then DK IMO will get away with whatever he wants to.

The fans will be given a blood, sweat and tears Churchillian vision of the road back to the Rightful Place and it will work for a lot of them and, indeed, might be the best thing that could happen.

I just hope that this time there are a helluva lot more sceptical Bears out there who not only ask question but now know what are the important questions that need answered.

The biggest problem of course is the SMSM and it’s highly unlikely they will be probing or asking awkward questions. And we will still have the SFA heaping bonuses on paid officials to take the blame for the governance void created by the silence of just about every single club in the SPFL.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on11:47 am - Mar 7, 2015


boywithoutanaitch says:
March 7, 2015 at 10:18 am
DP
Wow….and you wonder why you can’t get Rangers fans to engage on TSFM

—————————————————————————-
From Do The Bouncy (Described as simply the best rangers fc news and fans forum)

My wife has asked me on many occasions over the last few years why I have got myself so upset and angry over it all. As she isn’t interested in football whatsoever she could never begin to even try and understand what The Rangers mean to me. My anger stems from the actions of SPL, SFA, HMRC and the chairmen or CEOs of just about every club in the country who even after we proved in the highest court in the land we did nothing wrong not one had the common decency to apologise or admit they were wrong.
————–
Now this may be a minority (and we all know how big a noise a minority can generate) but this view and sense of injustice somehow prevails and I wonder deep down how many fans of the Govan club feels this way? IMO it is a majority and they do not want to believe anything else. full stop. They do not want to listen and cannot engage in numbers in any other blogs apart from ones that support their agenda. IMO they cannot change and do not want to change, the thought that their club is not the same club will get defended (I was going to say to the death, but inappropriate maybe) to a man.
This is where they are and they can thank the smsm, SFA, SPFL but most of all they can thank themselves and the culture they believe in and maintain the myth about their club. So I do not expect and meaningful input from many of the fans that follow this myth, sad to say but that is how it is. They feel persecuted in some strange way and they just want justice in their eyes which is a read sad affair. We can move on they cannot.

View Comment

TrisidiumPosted on12:06 pm - Mar 7, 2015


ecobhoy says:

March 6, 2015 at 10:00 pm

Increasingly I feel this site has turned into a PR warzone.

__________________________________________

ecoBhoy, I think it is disingenuous of you to on the one hand counsel us all on the requirement to back up our views and conjectures with corroborative facts whilst on the other making unfounded accusations about the bona fides of other posters.

Not only have you failed to provide evidence of PR activity on the blog, but you don’t even appear to know who these PR hacks are! In fact you admit you re just guessing that it happens, which is a lot different from “this site is turning into a PR war zone”!

Maybe it is just those who disagree with you who give you this impression?

Some might even believe that your comments are ironical in nature.

I can say with a huge degree of confidence that your claim is unfounded. There actually is PR traffic on here but none of it never gets to you, because the mods do a great job of weeding out that activity.

However well versed you may be on PR arts, you have much to learn about the excellent work the mods do to keep them in their place.

Your post has brought the blog into disrepute. I respect your right to hold views, however mainstream or bizarre, but I am becoming increasingly weary of your finger-wagging style and ad hominem posts.

View Comment

Resin_lab_dogPosted on12:19 pm - Mar 7, 2015


upthehoops says:
March 7, 2015 at 7:34 am

Resin_lab_dog says:
March 7, 2015 at 3:13 am

___________________________________________

Let me clarify:
I disagree that their support for King is bizarre!

I don’t think it is bizarre for the reasons stated. These reasons are largely emotional, rather than intellectual.
And as such, it is a true to form and entirely predictable response from the bears in the circumstances.
It is in fact the ‘de rigeur’ response for the Ibrox omnishambles.

Is their support for King misplaced? Yes imo
Is it ill-judged? Yes imo
Is it naive? Yes imo
Is it bad for the sport as a whole? Yes imo
Is it typical of the narratiive of the ongoing Ibrox farce? Yes
Is it predictable behavior for the bears? Yes imo
Is it optimistic and heartfelt? Yes imo

Is it bizarre: no.
It is in fact true to form. Craig Whyte and Charles Green were similarly lauded. He has played them like a violin.

And he is about to do one or more of the following I suspect:

(a) feign utter shock and surpise at what he has found under the bonnet and the (entirely unpredictable) financial mess that he has inhereited
(b) delist making the shares they all bought worthless
(c) milk them mercilessly a la Charles Green
(d) try to cozy up to Mike Ashley
(e) distract them with squirrels a plenty while he taps them ruthlessly for the cost of rebuilding with ‘managed’ expectations (expect endless speculation on signings and new manager, re-org , footballing titbits, hover ptches etc..)

Whoever pays for what needs to be done, it won’t end up being Dave King. That is my prediction.

View Comment

hangerheadPosted on12:19 pm - Mar 7, 2015


How do all the rest of the clubs feel about this?

“Johnston told BBC Scotland. “”It gets competition back in there and that’s what’s good for Scottish football.””

Obviously, with the tightest top league in years, the fact that 2nd place is guaranteed not to belong to another Glasgow club. we can’t possibly be having competition, can we?

I wonder if competition is all about marble staircases and all other clubs looking up.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:24 pm - Mar 7, 2015


valentinesclown@11.47 am
………………
The author of the piece in Do the Bouncy that you quote is either an ignorant fool (and might possibly be pardoned as being simply stupid) or a person
who is a stranger to the truth and who,like many of
our sports hacks, peddles untruths with
cold,calculating cynicism and viciousness.
Whether any or all of the DOS/EBT payments infringed tax legislation is, from a sporting point of view, not the issue, or the main issue.
The main issue is that SDM for many years,and probably with the connnivance of some officials in the SFA, lied to the both the SFA and to his fellow business men in the SPL, about the payments he was making to players,against very clear cut rules.
whether the money he was able tpo spend came from tax evasion or avoidance is really neither here nor there. From a sporting perspective, the bast.td lied to everyone in Scottish professional football.

Many, perhaps a huge majority, of the defunct club’s fans, perversely choose to ignore the central fact that it was not the tax evasion/avoidance issue that killed RFC so much as the lying information provided to the SFA and the then SPL as to how the liar and deceiver and base charlatan

View Comment

Cluster OnePosted on12:26 pm - Mar 7, 2015


The tycoon’s landside victory ends years of ibrox civil war since it’s old holding company was Liquidated in 2012.
Paul Thornton. The sun 😥

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on12:29 pm - Mar 7, 2015


blo.ody stupid wer useless keys and screen on this tablet thingy!
you wil forgive me if at this time of night I leave my post unfinished…. I think you get my general drift.

View Comment

thequayPosted on12:42 pm - Mar 7, 2015


I followed TSFM from the start but for quite some time have rarely read and never posted but having read Danish’s post at 8.52 today I felt compelled to throw in my tuppence worth. If ever one post encapsulated the emotions, the irritations felt by so many non Rangers fans it is Danish’s. Excellent stuff.

If any Rangers fan feels surprised or hurt by the remarks it’s because they haven’t properly tested the views of those looking in to Ibrox from the outside.

I recall the debate about inclusiveness of Rangers fans in this forum going back to the beginning. I’m sure it was raised often on RTC before and I think it is desirable for them to feel welcome. That can’t though be at the expense of folk having to swallow the old line of ‘we’ve suffered & it would be good for Scottish fitba’. Too many wounds and no one big enough to say sorry.

The RTC poster Yojimbo was mentioned. I think it’s the same chap I occasionally chat with on twitter. Not because we always agree but because he has a sense of how Rangers has impacted on others. He’s able to look in from others’ perspective. He’s a good guy and for him I hope things turn out well. As a Celtic fan I’d have preferred a new entity to emerge to take its’ proper place, wherever that was, in our game and would have welcomed that. Have to say I don’t feel awfully welcoming to what seems to be coming out of Ibrox today.

View Comment

stan freePosted on12:46 pm - Mar 7, 2015


How does one report a perceived offence under the Insolvency Act?

Let’s say I became aware of someone taking up the post of Director, or having a substantial influence on, a successor company bearing an almost identical name (let’s call it “newco”)and involved in the same trade as a company which has gone into liquidation (let’s call it “oldco”) when that person was a Director of the oldco right up to the point of liquidation.

There have been many posts on here stating that this cannot be done without the leave of a court. How does a concerned citizen then report this. Who is the enforcing authority?

View Comment

wildwoodPosted on12:57 pm - Mar 7, 2015


hangerhead says:
March 7, 2015 at 12:19 pm
How do all the rest of the clubs feel about this?

“Johnston told BBC Scotland. “”It gets competition back in there and that’s what’s good for Scottish football.””

Obviously, with the tightest top league in years, the fact that 2nd place is guaranteed not to belong to another Glasgow club. we can’t possibly be having competition, can we?

I wonder if competition is all about marble staircases and all other clubs looking up.

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

It’s an absolute scandal. We all live with a bent press and nothing surprises us any more I suppose.

There are multiple facets but this reportage of ‘there is no competition’ throughout a season when there quite patently is competition is just incredulous.

Why would TRFC say 12-20 points behind Celtic (but in the same league) be more ‘competitive’ than Aberdeen or Utd nip and tuck within sight of the split. This absolute injustice is stomach churning.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on1:03 pm - Mar 7, 2015


thequay, TSFM et al

We are where we are. I sometime get the feeling that some folk believe that if they all wish hard enough Rangers & Ibrox will simply disappear, it didn’t work when the Vietnam War protesters joined hands and tried to make the Pentagon vanish, and it won’t work now.

There is also the constant railing against the ungodly triumvirate of Ogilvy, Doncaster and Regan, as if they, and they alone bear total responsibility for all the actions and inactions of the SFA/SPL/SPFL since 2012 & before. This comfortable mythology, ignores the inconvenient truth, that with one or two exceptions, exactly the same men are at the top of Scottish Football in 2015, as were at the top in 2012, all that happened was a wee round of musical chairs.

Effecting change from the bottom up is always an immensely difficult task, this site can play a part, we need new structures for fan engagement, maybe the proposed rival to supporters direct can play a part too. However, one thing is clear to me at least, we all, (including me), need to start from a point of recognising the objective realities and working forward from there.

It won’t be easy, or comfortable, the “right” things seldom are.

View Comment

TrisidiumPosted on1:06 pm - Mar 7, 2015


thequay

We still have hopes of adding more Rangers fans to our number. I think part of the problem is that many Rangers fans conflate disapproval of the behaviour of their club with distaste for them.

As a Celtic fan, I disapprove of (putting it mildly) many of the things that the club and many of its so-called fans do and say – but that doesn’t make me a Celtic-hater.

I think most reasonable football fans of any colour understand that and can substitute the word “Rangers” into my Celtic equation above. The ones who can’t or won’t do that are not the types we are after to become members of our community.

The main barrier to decent Rangers fans contributing more here is the casual trivialisation of, and demeaning language towards Rangers, individuals involved in Rangers, and their fans. We don’t do name calling on individuals concerned with other clubs, and the fact that some posters don’t see a contradiction when Rangers are the subject matter sometimes depresses me. We do aim to rid ourselves of that behaviour, or those who exhibit it.

View Comment

GoosyGoosyPosted on1:12 pm - Mar 7, 2015


You invariably get an sympathetic response reprimanding people when you are at the height of your popularity
So
What are the chances of the new Board condemning sectarian singing at todays game against Cowdenbeath?
Have King and co got more guts than the governing bodies
…… or the Police?
We shall see

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on1:24 pm - Mar 7, 2015


hangerhead says:
March 7, 2015 at 12:19 pm
How do all the rest of the clubs feel about this?

“Johnston told BBC Scotland. “”It gets competition back in there and that’s what’s good for Scottish football.””

Obviously, with the tightest top league in years, the fact that 2nd place is guaranteed not to belong to another Glasgow club. we can’t possibly be having competition, can we?
==========================================================
Hangerhead, you’ll forgive me if I find it hard to get excited about non Glasgow clubs finishing second (I take it your ruling out a late rally from Partick Thistle btw 😛 )

While I’ve been impressed by Aberdeen’s tenacity this season and its refreshing to see them still in touch I think we all know just how this ends.

Same as the season before, the one before that…and so on.

We’re looking at Elephants in the room here and whether or not it stays at one or goes back to two it’ll have to be addressed sooner or later or Scottish football will die on its a**e.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on1:40 pm - Mar 7, 2015


It does not please me to say I completely agree PTA.

But I would have to turn that arguement the other way. What exactly does one of the elephants have to do in the room before the remaining inhabitants including the other big grey one with the trunk decide to change it. Was ten years cheating not enough?

View Comment

The_Pie_ManPosted on1:43 pm - Mar 7, 2015


R.I.P. Dave Mackay a great Footballer North and South of the Border 🙁

View Comment

broganrogantrevinoandhoganPosted on1:53 pm - Mar 7, 2015


Good Afternoon.

No matter what is written, what is broadcast via radio or tv, or what appears in the Sunday papers tomorrow, there is only one significant thing to know arising from the events which took place at Ibrox yesterday.

And that is that the people who write, the people who film, the people who speak into the microphones and the people who edit, publish and promote their magazines and newspapers don’t know — anything at all!

The fact of the matter is that there are various legal proceedings taking place which call into question the legality and lawfulness of the the activities of Mr Whyte, Mr Withey and the chaps from Duff and Phelps.

Only when those matters are dealt with and have subsided in importance will the civil shenanigans begin.

Remember that it is acknowledged in at least one set of the Rangers accounts that the ownership of Ibrox has been claimed by Mr Whyte and his consortium. That claim is acknowledged by the company who appear to own the stadium, but as yet no contingent liability figure has been inserted into the accounts. The claim has not been determined by any court or rejected by way of any binding judgement.

It is also apparently acknowledged that there are in existence a number of onerous contracts which allow Mr Green still to be paid and for various aspects of the club’s business to be run for the benefit of certain private individuals. These contracts are apparently binding, have been honoured so far, and are a drain on the finances of Rangers FC whoever or whatever that may be at any given time.

The press do not know, or have not thus far published, the detail of such contracts or their long term financial implication.

The press also do not know the exact terms and conditions of employment of various people who work at Ibrox, who used to work at Ibrox and are still being paid, and who either do work at Ibrox or used to work at Ibrox and who are due yet more money next year simply because they are a year older.

The press also don’t know the key dates, terms and conditions of the loans made to the club by Mike Ashley or what happens if he demands payment on those key dates.

It would appear that Mr King, who does not own the majority of the shares, but who does appear to be running the club from a minority position, is also in the dark about the full financial and commercial standing of the club.

Similarly Mr Murray P and Mr Gilligan J.

It therefore follows that the wealthy investors they have lined up ( and perhaps most importantly the advisers to those wealthy investors ) are also in the dark regarding the essential terms, conditions and contracts which will shape and determine the viability of their investment in the short to medium term at least..

I seem to recall that it was only a few months ago we were being assured that Mr Donald Park and others were not acting in concert with Mr King and that Mr Park was also astounded at the alleged nature of the contractual terms that this company had bound themselves to.

While many will debate whether the club itself is new or old, what it is called, who it puts out on the field of play and so on, what can never be disputed is that Ibrox park must remain the size that it is, is in need of major repair work, and is dependent on the use of The Albion Car Park for legal occupancy reasons. There is a finite earning capacity there and during the apparent hey day of the club on the field, when it enjoyed more and more record streams of income, it regularly made colossal losses and those running it felt that they could not compete unless they used beneficial and now illegal tax schemes to attract the best available employees.

In the space of 25 years or so, this club or its predecessor depending on your point of view, has never traded on the same business footing or to the same business standards or terms as any other club in Scottish Football,

Further, the club has a contract with Ashley which gives him valuable merchandising and advertising rights for the foreseeable future which he will not give up unless paid handsomely with cash that Rangers do not seem to have. This is income that the predecessor company regularly enjoyed and which, we were told, was vital to that company’s financial and sporting success.

Further, before the new directors can improve the team on the park they are going to have to pay off the expensive player contracts they are bound by at the minute and are then going to have to go down the expensive route of employing a manager and a backroom staff in whom they have faith and who they will allow to purchase new playing stock either at experienced or youth level.

In the interim they have to live on a cash basis as they are without commercial banking facilities and they have to operate on a basis where auditors are happy enough with their financial position and the professionalism of the board and senior employees to allow the same auditors to sign off their accounts on a going concern basis without qualification and comment.

Further, given the history of Mr King, Mr Murray P and possibly others still connected to this saga, the board will preside over the affairs of a company whose fiscal compliance and payments will be watched like a hawk by HMRC — an organisation which does not tend to share its concerns and activities with the aforementioned commentators, journalists and broadcasters in advance.

As has been mentioned already, Mr King seems to be able to face all points of the compass at the one time when it comes to his level of investment, the appointment of a Nomad, the effect and terms of his convictions in South Africa, his position with the SFA, his involvement in the EBT years and the losses of Rangers PLC and so on.

In short, for those who wish to follow the affairs of Rangers Football Club or are interested in the ideals, ideas and business savvy of its directors at any given time, and the future of the club or company concerned, I have but one piece of advice and it is this:

Ignore the broadcasters, journalists, scribblers, bloggers, commentators and pundits when it comes to all of this as they know more about the whereabouts and the journeys of the late Lord Lucan and Shergar than they do about the financial affairs of Rangers Football Club.

They know even less about the law or business practice and the consequences of failing to read documents properly, the appointment of appropriate officials and the consequences for running any type of business when so much remains unknown.

I would honestly recommend that as to what the future holds you should consult with the Tarot cards or the tea leaves before going to the newsagents.

As for the TV and the Radio they are no more than wires, bulbs and microchips in a box and therefore completely useless unless operated and used by human beings with a semblance of intelligence.

View Comment

GiovanniPosted on1:58 pm - Mar 7, 2015


stan free says:
March 7, 2015 at 12:46 pm
How does one report a perceived offence under the Insolvency Act?

Stan,

Try the Insolvency Service:

https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/insolvency-service-investigations-and-enforcement-what-we-do-our-outcomes-and-complaints

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on2:07 pm - Mar 7, 2015


brth @1.53 pm
……
Superb

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on2:23 pm - Mar 7, 2015


brth @1.53 pm

Excellent post. Plain English which even I understood!

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on2:29 pm - Mar 7, 2015


Utterly shocking arrogance from Paul Murray on Sportsound right now.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on2:30 pm - Mar 7, 2015


BRTH

Ok so I call it cheating, you call it umpteen paragraphs of a perfectly laid out, factually backed, legally specifc, balanced and well thought out challenging hypothesis.

Let’s call it a draw! 😀

View Comment

Comments are closed.