The Existence of Laws

Posted on by

A Blog by James Forrest for TSFM

I am a socialist, and as a socialist I believe in the fundamental goodness of people. Some people find that hard to believe when they read the stuff I write.

I published my first novel recently, on politics and the corrupting nature of it, and it is a deeply cynical book, a book where no-one has clean hands come the end. What has surprised some of those who’ve read it is that I didn’t focus on the lies and smears of the right, but the hypocrisy and deceit of those who claim to be of the left.

Corruption, you see, doesn’t respect political boundaries or points of view. It’s like rainwater. It finds every crack, and gets in there.

My political beliefs revolve around two apparently paradoxical elements; the belief in the inherent decency of people and the need for a strong, and powerful, state. I believe the second underpins the first, and this brings me into conflict with a lot of people, some on the left and some on the right. Too many people see the state as inherently evil, as something that interferes too much in the lives of ordinary people. As something suffocating.

Yet the state exists to protect us. It exists to provide a safety net. It exists to regulate and to oversee. If the state is made up of bad people, if the gears of society are captured by those with malicious or selfish intent, the results are obvious; war, corruption, chaos.

The vast majority of our problems in the modern age can be neatly summed up in two lines from Yeats’ poem “The Second Coming”, which I used to open my novel. “The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.”

We live in a time when those who are protecting their own interests have assumed such power that they’ve cowed the rest of us. They have become a law unto themselves. They have changed the nature of the game, because they have sapped our will to the extent some barely put up a fight anymore. The weak get weaker, and the strong use their strength to crush the rest even more. It is a vicious struggle, a downward spiral.

Society is held together not only by the endeavour and common interests of its citizens but by a collection of laws. We elect the people who make those laws. They do so in our name, and we can remove that right every four years. That is a powerful thing, and we do not appreciate it enough. The present corruption exists because we allow it to exist.

The people around me continue to puzzle over my uncommon interest in the affairs of a football club on the west of Glasgow. My own club plays in the east end. I tell those who ask that my primary interest in the goings-on at the club calling itself Rangers is no longer about football; how could it be, after all? With promotion this year they are still a full two divisions below us, emasculated, skint, weak and unstable. If we were fortunate enough to draw them in cup competition the match would be over, as a tie, by the halfway point … in the first half.

In footballing terms they are an utter irrelevance.

Rangers is more than a football club to me. They are a symbol. Their unfolding calamity is an on-going outrage. What is happening there, what is being allowed to happen, is an offense to decency. It is a stain on the face of our country.

In short, it is a scandal. It is a scandal without parallel in sport.

Yet it’s not just a sports story either. If it was, I might not be so focussed on it. What is happening at Rangers is a colossal failure of governance. It is a damning indictment against the very people who are supposed to oversee our game. It is a disgraceful abrogation of responsibility from those at the top, those who claim to be “running things.”

If this is not a failure of governance it is a result of corruption at the heart of our national sport. It says they are bought and paid for, and I will say no such thing here.

So let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. We’ll say instead that what they are is weak, indecisive, inept and disconnected from reality.

It reminds me of our political class, which has become insular and ignorant about what the public wants, and what it needs. It’s not a wonder parties like UKIP can achieve national vote shares of 25% at local elections. Nigel Farage strikes me as a dog-whistle politician, the kind who knows how to appeal to a select group of voters. He is little different to Charles Green, the man who beguiled Rangers fans into handing over large amounts of money, because he was “standing up for the club.” It is easy to do what he did, easy to do what Farage is doing.

Real leadership requires toughness. Say what you like about the Tories, but they have that in spades. Yeats was right about the worst being full of passionate intensity. Green was. Farage is. Cameron and Osborne personify it in their political outlook.

It is easy to be cowed by blunt force politics, and by “tough talking Yorkshire men” and venomous speeches about “strivers and skivers.” The politics of divide and conquer is the oldest form of politics there is, and it’s no surprise to see it practiced by some of the vested interests in the game here in Scotland. Yet, lest we forget … something significant happened last year. The maligned and the ignored, the weak and the voiceless found something they never realised they had. They discovered that, in a very real sense, the power was in their hands.

Last year, the fans rose up when the governing bodies and the media went all-out to save Rangers from the self-inflicted wounds caused by a decade of cheating, malpractice and ineptitude. I have no problem calling that what it was.

What happened at Rangers seemed incredible, but it was all too predictable, and some of us had been talking about it for years before it hit. The Association seemed caught in the headlights but it would amaze me if they really were as insular and ignorant as they appeared. They must have known how bad the outlook was for Rangers. They just chose to ignore it.

They were aided and abetted by a thoroughly disreputable media, a collection of cowards and compromisers, charlatans and frauds, masquerading as journalists, but who long ago laid aside any claim to be bold investigators and settled for commenting on events as they unfolded. More often than not, with their ill-informed opinions, sometimes due to weaknesses in intellect and others wilfully ignorant, they failed even in that.

Entire newspapers became PR machines for crooks and swindlers. They aided in the scam because they didn’t do their jobs, some because they were lazy, some because they were incompetent and others because they wanted a seat at the table and were willing to sacrifice whatever integrity they once had in exchange for one.

That all of this was embraced by the Rangers fans is amazing to me. They trusted when they should have been asking questions. They closed their eyes, covered their ears and sang their battle tunes at the top of their voices so they wouldn’t have to hear anything they didn’t like. As incredible as I found it then, and still find it now – and now, even more so, when they have already seen the results of it once – I find it pathetic too, and I do feel pity for some of them.

A lot of these people are genuine football fans, and nothing more. They have no interest in the phony narrow nationalism, or the over-blown religion, or the notion of supremacy which manifested itself in a ludicrous statement from McCoist when interviewed recently on Sky.

Some of the Rangers fans look at their team of duds, kids and journeymen, they look at a boardroom of cowards and crooks, they look at a failing manager in his first (and last) job in the game and at a dark future and are not in the least bit impressed by, or interested in, the chest-out arrogance espoused in those ridiculous words “we are the people.” They know full well that their present crisis was made by men like McCoist, and they understand that pretentious posturing is not an act born of strength, but a scrambling around in the gutter, and a symptom of weakness.

They understand their position, and they hate it. And because they care about Rangers, because they value the club, because they cherish those things that made it a great Scottish institution, they want that back. They understand that before the Union Jack waving, Sash singing, poppy wearing, Nazi saluting, Orange element became the public face of their support Rangers meant something else, and that, above all things, is what pains them the most.

People do not hate Rangers. When the country appeared to turn its back last year, they were turning the back on favouritism and the bending of rules. Yet it would be a lie to say that there is not an element of dislike in the gleeful mockery of many rival fans.

But they don’t hate Rangers either. They hate the version of it around which a certain section of the support continues to dance. They hate the version which hates, and so too do many, many, many Rangers supporters, and they definitely deserve better.

David Murray chose not to openly challenge that version. Indeed, he encouraged certain strands of it to flourish and grow, with his “Britishness Days” and his effort to turn the club into the “team that supports the troops.” Other clubs have done as much, if not more, for the British Army than the one that plays out of Ibrox. Other clubs have given more money. Other clubs have lent their support to those on the front lines. They just chose to do it with respect, and with class, and with dignity. They chose to do it in private, understanding that there eventually comes a tipping point between looking after the ends of the soldiers and using them to promote your own.

The army has not battened on to Rangers. Rangers has battened on to them, and although it is unclear when an altruistic motive became darker, what started out as a gesture of solidarity is now used to entrench division and promote a notion of superiority.

Craig Whyte took over from Murray and immediately understood the lure of the “dog whistle.” He knew too that the media would accept whatever he told them, without question, and as he spoke up for “Rangers traditions” he made sure the lunatic fringe was well onside. He met face to face with the hard-core extremists in the support first and made them his praetorian guard. They spoke up for him until the day the club entered administration.

So, whereas Murray pandered to them and Whyte used them to further his own ends, it was only a matter of time before someone suggested to Charles Green that he could use the same tactics to win over the support. He went even further and blatantly promoted and encouraged this mind-set, and stoked the hate and nonsense to frightening new heights. The same people who cheered Whyte to the rafters jumped on board the Big Blue Bus and the results are clear.

Through all of it, the ordinary Rangers fan has seen his club buffered against the rocks, battered, broken, smashed to smithereens and sunk. Now there’s a big hole in the side of the lifeboat, and they are terrified that further tragedies await.

They are right to be concerned. Much of the media is still not telling them what they need to know. The people in charge of their club – the owners who have lied, the former hack who covered up the truth about Whyte and now acts as a mouthpiece for Green, the “club legends” who are content to sup with the devil and take his greasy coin when they should be standing toe-to-toe with the fans – are trying to silence those members of the press who do have facts to present.

How many times now have media outlets been banned from Ibrox for daring to report the truth? The manager who demanded the names of a committee last year defends those inside the walls who are desperate to keep secret the things that are going on. He is either an unprincipled coward, or he is, himself, bought and paid for. The fans suffer for it.

The “inconvenient truth” is still being kept from them, and this denies them any chance to play an active role in their club. Indeed, it is all too possible that they’ve passed a point of no return, and that their club is heading for a new liquidation event and it can no longer be stopped.

In either case, their power has been eroded to the point at which they must feel they have nothing left to do but stand back and watch what happens next.

They are wrong. I am a socialist. I believe in the inherent good of people. I think the ordinary decent Rangers fans are the only people left who can save their club … and the means by which they will do it is as simple as it could be.

They must stand up for “big government.” They must embrace the need for a “strong state.” They must lobby the SFA, and they must trust the SFA and they must get the SFA to follow its own rules and thereby save them from any further harm.

There is a tendency amongst some Celtic fans to see our governing bodies as pro-Rangers. If it is true then those running our game are ruining Scottish football without benefiting the thing they love more. The incalculable harm that has been done to Rangers in the last 20 some months is a direct result of the subservient media and the willingness of the football authorities to be “deaf, dumb and blind.” Those who believe this has actually helped the Ibrox club have not been paying attention in class. It has irrevocably scarred them, and it may yet have played a hand in destroying them once and for all, as a force if not as a club entirely.

For years, the SFA sat and did nothing as a club in their association operated a sectarian signing policy. They did nothing whilst the fans sang sectarian songs. In their failure to act they strengthened those elements of the Rangers support, instead of isolating, alienating and eventually helping to eliminate those who saw that club as a totem pole of division and hate. Their failure over EBT’s, and their lack of scrutiny, led to one of the greatest scandals in the history of sport, and I say that with no equivocation at all. The testimony of their registrations officer in the Lord Nimmo Smith investigation was a disgrace and in years to come it will rank as one of the most disreputable and damaging moments in the association’s history.

The most egregious failures of all were the failures in the so-called “fit and proper person” tests, which allowed first Whyte and then Charles Green to assume controlling positions at Ibrox. They will pass the buck and say the responsibility lies with the club itself, in much the same way as they are content to let the club investigate itself at the present time, but any neutral who looks at this stance knows it is unprincipled and spineless. It’s like letting the defence set the terms at a trial. It is foxes investigating the chicken coop.

It is a blueprint for corruption, and a recipe for disaster.

It is now too late for the SFA to declare Green “unfit”, as it was too late when they finally slapped that title on Craig Whyte. He and his allies own Rangers, and they control its destiny. They can push the club to the wall if they choose, in the final extremity, if that gets them what they want. The time for changing that is past. The damage has already been done. The barbarians are not at the gates. They are inside the walls, and sacking the city.

The SFA will be forced to punish Rangers for the sins of the owners, for the second time in as many years, and whilst it is right that the club face up to that, all the better to send a message to other clubs and other owners, the SFA cannot be allowed to slither off the hook here as though this was none of their doing. Green will skip off into the sunset. Craig Whyte has yet to pay his fine. These people never cared about Scottish football and they don’t care now.

The SFA are supposed to. Our governing body is supposed to govern, for the good of the whole game, and not as a support system for a single club. What they have allowed to happen on their watch is absolutely shameful and if the people responsible were men at all, with any sense of accountability, they would resign en masse.

They can pretend ignorance, but only the truly ignorant would accept that. Craig Whyte was not inside Ibrox a week before RTC and other sites were dismantling his entire business history, with some of the people here doing the work the SFA would not. Whyte himself claims to have made the governing bodies aware of the scale of what was facing the club, and they did nothing at all. Heads should have rolled a year ago.

In October of last year, on this very site, I posted an article in which I wrote:

“Which isn’t to say the due diligence matter isn’t worrying, because, of course, it is. Again, no-one is going to convince me that the SFA has conducted proper due diligence on Charles Green and his backers. No-one will convince me they are satisfied that this club is in safe hands, and that the game in this country will not be rocked by a further implosion at Ibrox. They failed to properly investigate Craig Whyte, because of lax regulations requiring disclosure from the club itself, regulations which are just a joke, but they can be forgiven for that as the press was talking sheer nonsense about him having billions at his disposal, and a lot of people (but not everyone!) were either convinced or wanted to be convinced by him.

To have witnessed what Whyte did, to have witnessed the Duff & Phelps “process” of finding a buyer, and having Green essentially emerge from nowhere, with a hundred unanswered questions as to his background and financing, for the SFA to have given this guy the go ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces later, would annihilate the credibility of the governing body and necessitate resignations at every level. There would be no hiding place.”

There are times when it is fun to be right, but this is not one of them. It is dispiriting and disquieting to have been so on the nose. It scares the Hell out of me, as someone who loves football in this country, to have seen this matter clearly when the people running our game apparently either did not or chose to ignore very real, very obvious, concerns. The Internet Bampots had no special insight or access to information that was denied those at the SFA. We just weren’t prepared to ignore it and pretend that it wasn’t there. There was too much at stake.

I have become convinced that things will never change until the Rangers supporters join us in demanding the full and unabridged truth here. They need to come out from under the bed, and confront their fears. They need to be willing to take the consequences, so that their club can emerge clean from this, and start again, with all this behind them.

And it can all happen with one simple thing. The application of the rules.

The existence of laws comes down to a simple principle; they protect society from those elements within it who are interested only in their own selfish ends. We may cry out at those rules and regulations we see as “restrictive”, but the law was not made to restrict our freedoms but to protect them. Had the SFA years ago acted against Rangers sectarian signing policy, and the songs from the stands, the club would not have mutated to the point where there was no help on hand when they needed it the most. Let’s not kid ourselves about this; Whyte and Green were only able to grab control because the club itself has a dreadful image which put off respectable and responsible buyers. The SFA could have helped change that perception years ago and did nothing.

The SFA could have conducted its own investigation into who Craig Whyte was. They could have asked David Murray for full disclosure when he was running up £80 million of debt, a sum of money that is beyond belief for a single club in a small provincial backwater league. Had they had the guts to do that the club would never have spent itself into oblivion and forced the hand of Lloyds, which led indirectly to their ignominious end.

The SFA could have fully investigated Charles Green and the means by which he took control, instead of rushing through a license. His emergence at the last minute was transparently suspicious and designed to force them into a quick decision, but they did not have to bow to that pressure by making one, without being in possession of the facts, as it is now 100% clear they were not.

Had they asked for every document, had they insisted on legal affidavits and personal securities from investors (and this would have been perfectly legitimate and is common place in other licensing areas) none of this would have come to pass. After Craig Whyte they had a moral responsibility to the rest of the game to get this one right and their failure is without parallel in the history of Scottish football.

As the club hurtles towards a new abyss, names are cropping up which should send a shudder down the spines of every honest, genuine supporter of not only Rangers but every team in the land. The SFA claims that a strong Rangers is essential for the sake of Scottish football, but they have been extraordinarily lax in protecting that club, and therefore the game, from destructive elements. Craig Whyte and Charles Green had dubious personal histories, and the acquisition of the club itself was mired in controversy and scandal. Yet it was allowed.

Neither Green nor Whyte were known to have operated outside the law, yet neither was worthy of trust or stood up to scrutiny. Neither man should ever have been granted the status as fit and proper persons to assume a role in our national sport, and if it is true of them what can we say about the three men who are, presently, being touted as the Great White Hopes for a bright, new Rangers future; Dave King and the Easdale brothers?

King recently cut a deal with the South African government over an on-going dispute over taxes. In other words, he pled guilty and accepted the central plank of their argument; that for years he was engaged in wilfully with-holding vast revenues from their Treasury. The media does not like to put it like that, and the SFA seems willing to ignore it utterly, and this would be scandalous enough. But it does not stop there. HRMC rules – as well as the SFA’s own governance documents – actually bar him from serving on the board of the new club.

Last but not least, aside from being an admitted tax cheat, King is also awaiting trial in South Africa, having been indicted for corruption, forgery and fraud – 300 charges in total. Yet as recently as last week, we were told that the Association was willing to look at him and consider representations from his lawyers. This is almost beyond belief.

If Dave King’s position is untenable, and he is yet to be convicted of a crime, what can we say about the position of the Easdale’s? One of the two brothers, Sandy, has already served jail time. He is a convicted criminal, a fraudster nonetheless, who’s “victim” was the same Treasury who are appealing one case involving the old club and liquidated it entirely over another. This is precisely the kind of “businessman” the fit and proper person test was supposed to weed out, and if the SFA holds its nose here the reek will stink out the halls at Hampden for decades. If King or the Easdale’s are judged fit and proper, then who exactly is the test for? What exactly do you have to do to fail it? How do we explain the existence of laws, when these are not applied?

Pascal says “Law without force is impotent.” The SFA’s weakness has allowed one version of Rangers to destroy itself, and has allowed an existential risk to another. If the next power at Rangers resides in South Africa or Greenock I can say with some certainty that the Association is engaged in an even more dangerous roll of the dice, because the surfacing of fresh scandal will be an ever present risk, and will be of the sort no-one will survive.

The damage to Scottish football will take years to heal. The Scottish game has been through enough trauma. It does not need more. It barely survived the last calamity to hit Rangers. The rest of us should not be forced to pay the price of the next one.

The greater damage will be done to Rangers itself. If the Green crisis ends in another collapse – as it well might; another administration event is a certainty, and another liquidation is a much more likely prospect than it was before 14 February 2012 – the club will once again have to start from the bottom, and this time the reputational damage will be impossible to repair. The club faces internal strife, sporting sanctions, and criminal investigations. The last takeover might be declared a fraud. the Whyte takeover will almost certainly be. The share issue might be invalid, as well as criminal, and the people involved may well end up in jail. Lawsuits could follow from investors, there could be as yet unknown consequences from the Upper Tier Tax Tribunal (thank you Brogan Rogan for pointing out what those might be) and a host of other issues.

Rangers fans must be the loudest voices here. How do you want the world to view your club in years to come? Do you want one to be proud of, or one forever associated with the shame and disgrace of these days gone by? The one which bailed out on its tax obligations. The one with supporters who disgrace your very name. The one which allowed Whyte and Green to take you to the cleaners and send you to the wall. The one which handed over control to one convicted criminal and another awaiting trial. Do you want to be reborn clean, or mired in the muck?

David Murray destroyed your financial stability. He made it so no bank would issue you a line of credit and no investor of note wanted to buy. Craig Whyte liquidated you. Charles Green has cast the future of the Newco into doubt and acted in a manner which has annihilated your credibility with the financial markets for decades to come.

Between these three men, they have taken everything from you, and the press and the people who run the game here, as well as some of your own blindly ignorant fans, have allowed them to do all this and more. Now they conspire to hand the keys to Ibrox to other men of questionable character, who will wreck further havoc on the reputation of the club.

The Scottish Football Association has damaged the game it was supposed to protect, but above all else their greatest failure of governance was a failure to protect one of its biggest clubs from its own excesses and those of its owners.

Rangers fans, the SFA have betrayed your trust, more than the trust of any other club. What you must insist on now is full disclosure and transparency from the powers that be in Hampden. The SFA has to end the charade of allowing your club to handle this in-house. They must hand everything over to an outside agency – whether a legal one, or a footballing body like UEFA – and they must demand co-operation and answers, and threaten to withhold the license if they don’t get them.

You must not be afraid of that. You must embrace it. The men with their hands on the gears at Ibrox are motivated by money, and nothing more. If the license is withdrawn their “investments” are worthless. They cannot risk that.

You must demand that the rules on fit and proper persons are applied, and where necessary even made stronger, to prevent your club falling into unclean hands. You must demand that they protect your reputation from further damage, by getting this all out there and acting accordingly, even if that means your club does not play football for at least a year.

You must be willing to suck it all up, knowing that what will emerge is a Rangers which has been cleansed and moves forward with honour, and dignity, led by custodians who treasure it rather than those who know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

The Rangers Standard has recently emerged as a genuine voice for those in your support who are sick and tired of what Rangers has become, and want it restored to something that is worthy of the love and respect in which you hold it. On that website, there are discussions about the kind of club you seek to be and about whether the institution of Rangers is about more than just football.

If that’s how you feel about it then you know it is about more than how many titles the club can claim, about more than just results on the park, about more than just the game. Rangers, like Celtic, is an idea. It has to be something you are proud of.

I am a socialist, but one with a fevered imagination and a tendency to write very dark things. This piece won’t have been good reading for some of you (perhaps all of you haha!) but I think there’s more hope in here than in other things I’ve written.

In spite of everything that’s come to pass, I still believe. I believe in Scottish football. I believe in our system of football governance, even if those who are working in it are failing on some level.

In society, as much as we strain against them, laws exist for our protection. To fail to enforce them is to leave us at the mercy of those elements who would do us harm. The rules of football ensure the protection of all clubs, not just a few.

The failure to enforce the rules has never had graver consequences than here in Scotland.  The irony is that bending and breaking them has hurt the one club those violations were designed to help. It cannot be allowed to happen again.

The rules must be applied without fear or favour.

The best must find their conviction, and their passionate intensity once more.

James is a co-editor of the On Fields of Green Blog http://www.onfieldsofgreen.com/

This entry was posted in General by Trisidium. Bookmark the permalink.

About Trisidium

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

5,802 thoughts on “The Existence of Laws”


  1. L’Equipe:
    January Streuer, football manager of Vitesse, has on November 13, 2000 approximately ninety thousand euros received by an account of the Rothschild bank in Monaco. The money came from the Serbian players Ranko Stojic. “I’ve got the money for some tips which led to transfers”, reacts Streuer. “Stojic insisted to pay me. With Vitesse has nothing to do. ”
    The deposit is upwards of ninety thousand euros came from a French judicial investigation into the financial and activity of Paris Saint-Germain. As part of that investigation are also examined the books of Stojic and preferably eight p.m. transfers from the last six years studied. These are uncertain cash flows in the (re) sale of Andre Luiz, Jean-Alain Boumsong, Paulo Cesar, Aloísio, Gabriel Heinze, Cristobal, Martin Cardetti, Mauricio Pochettino, Marco e Simo, Branko Bošković, Juan Pablo Sorfn, Eric Rabesandratana Ali Benarbia, Godwin Okpara, Pauleta, Peter Luccin, Frederic Dehu, Nicolas Anelka, Jay-Jay Okocha and Christian. These operations involve accounts of the Monegasque bank Rothschild frequently used for payments to players. Also Martin Bain, general manager of Glasgow Rangers, received on August 20, 2004 through the same bank of 75 thousand euro Ranko Stojic. That was several months after defender Boumsong, through mediation by Stojic, was transferred from Auxerre to Rangers.

    Chairman David Murray of the Scottish club denies that something wrong happened and that the deposit had to do with buying a house in France by Bain. Bain bought the house of Laurent Charvet, a player from the stable of Stojic. It is not the first time the name appears in one such case Stojic. In 2000 he became associated with the so-called envelopes affair at Club Brugge. After the Belgians five players from the former Yugoslavia had bought from Ranko Stojic, and got Rene Verheyen Hans Gaije, both members of the technical staff of coach Erik Gerets, to the board stating that she had received an envelope with money from Stojic. Both Verheyen and Gaije delivered the envelope to the club. Aid Trainer Alex Ouerter later also known to have received such an envelope and was fired. Gerets went to PSV. After examination of the FIFA, the case was eventually dropped.

    Ranko Stojic, former goalkeeper for Club Liege, Anderlecht and the Yugoslav national team, did well in recent years and all the issues with Vitesse. In January 2000, when Jan Streuer football manager has been in Arnhem, the club made use of the services Stojic in attracting Dejan Stefanovic from OFK Belgrade. Goalkeeper Dragoslav Jevrić had always walked around with Vitesse, as midfielder Nenad Grozdić. Especially the transition while the latter had a similar debate, and not just because he came eff Obilic, the club of the late war criminal Arkan. FIFA directed to the elements, which prevented trade with Obilic to circumvent Grozdić paper was transferred to eff Zemun. Two months later lijfde Vitesse him, where a broker Stojic part of the transfer millions in cash received them. The sale of Grozdjc then worked the annoyance of the then chairman Karel Aalbers. “In December 1999 I could not close this deal,” declares the opposite Aalbers VolkskranL “Lens Grozdić wanted to nine million. I submitted as always with the technical and business staff of Vitesse. Also Swelheim (former CEO of the then influential sponsor Nuon, red) was involved. But Grozdić could not leave. Then six months later (June 2000) the same player at one club for the same amount sold. I had only seven percent commission to broker Stojic agreed and gave Vitesse now to three million Stojic away. Unimaginable. ”

    In 2002 Vitesse also attracted to Aleksandar Rankovic. Stojic is now vice-president of RAD Belgrade and still very active, he also represents the interests of Djibril Cisse (Liverpool), Dado Prso (Glasgow Rangers) and Louis Saha (Manchester United).

    January Streuer stresses that the payment of ninety thousand euros total separate from his work in the Gelredome. “The tips were nothing to do with Vitesse had. Stojic example, asked me if I knew a club still needed a left winger and then I shared that knowledge with him. Some of these tips gave excellent deals for him. Therefore, he insisted me to pay. Which was exactly the deals? I can not remember. ”

    Because the payment had nothing to do with Vitesse, Streuer also says never to have recognized the need to inform his employer. “In hindsight I probably should do that, I do not know really. I will still do in oak case, “said Streuer Monday. A day later, the football manager that did. ‘Jan Streuer has informed us yesterday that in fact he in 2000 an amount of ninety thousand euro has received some tips from Ranko Stojic, “responds CEO Paul van der Kraan, that substance would not further comment on the affair. “It is a matter we will handle them internally.”

    And this :

    Nineteen doubtful transfers

    News of the PSG – 14-06-2006 – 12h39

    To see the continuation of the news Heinze, Pochettino, Déhu, Pauleta… The transfers of these players seem irregular. And the business could overflow…

    The investigation into the suspect transfers carried out by the Paris-Saint-Germain is focused on the agents of players. Two reports transmitted May the 29 and 31 to the examining magistrates Renaud Van Ruymbeke and Francoise Desset by the police officers of the national division of the financial investigations (DNIF) throw a light believed on the practices of some of these intermediaries. They also reveal, for the first time, that two leaders of club would have benefitted “retro-commissions”.

    By examining the accounts of the Serb agent of players Ranko Stojic, in Monaco, the investigators indeed discovered movements of suspect accounts – without report/ratio in fact with the PSG. They in particular established that the manager of the Dutch club Speed Arnhem, Jan Streuer, had perceived, November 13, 2000, a sum being equivalent to 90 000 euros on an account open to the Rothschild bank of Monaco from which it is having it right. These funds came from the account – opened in the same establishment – of Ranko Stojic. The investigators are unaware of for the moment within the framework of which transaction this sum was versed. They know some on the other hand more about another transfer carried out, August 20, 2004, always at the Rothschild bank of Monaco, by Stojic in favour this time of Martin Bain, then director financial of Glasgow Rangers (from which he is the vice-president today). Martin Bain perceived 75 000 euros plus 100 000 pounds sterling (146 000). The investigators discovered a document being marked handwritten indicating that this retro-commission would have been versed at the time of recruitment, the summer 2004, of Jean-Alain Boumsong transferred by the AJ Auxerre to the Scottish club. The police officers appear convinced that a part of the commission poured by Rangers on this occasion with Stojic was to some extent “redistributed” with Bain. It will return to the parquet floor of Paris to decide if these new facts, which have nothing to do with the PSG, must be the subject of complementary investigations.

    120 000 euros for Mrs. Déhu

    The parquet floor also will have to come to a conclusion about the continuations to give to the second report/ratio of the DNIF, which synthesizes the suspect transfers carried out by the leaders of the PSG between 1998 and 2005. On the hundred examined transactions, the police officers retained some 19 who, according to them, would have given place to embezzlements likely to be continued. At the end of his report/ratio, the DNIF, which pins the practices of about fifteen agents, estimates to have put at the day “of the facts of forgery and use of forgery, of exercise illegal of the profession of agent of players, bleaching and concealment”.

    There still, of possible continuations could be launched by the examining magistrates only if the prosecutor granted an indictment back-up troop to them. They could, in addition to the leaders of the PSG and the agents, to aim at the players themselves, suspect̩s to be informed perfectly of the fraudulent mechanisms put in places from there so, generally, remunerating them in an occult way. The 19 transfers (which they are acquisitions or sales) concern: Andre Luiz, Paulo C̩sar, Aloisio, Heinze, Cristobal, Cardetti, Pochettino, Simone, Boskovic, Sorin, Rabesandratana, Benarbia, Okpara, Pauleta, Luccin, D̩hu, Anelka, Okocha and Christian. To arrive at this figure, the investigators were in particular based on very detailed testimony that their Pierre Frelot delivered, who was in charge of the administration and finances of the PSG between 1998 and 2003 Рand for this reason put in examination in December 2005.

    To take the example of Gabriel Heinze, bought in June 2001 in Valladolid, the police officers note that the PSG “was surfacturé at least of 2,49 million franks” (380 000 €) by two agents (Roberto Rodriguez and Robin Bolli) so that the latter reassign a part of these funds to the Argentinian defender. The same system was set up for the arrival of Mauricio Pochettino. The DNIF estimates that the allowance of transfer that in 2001 the PSG in Espanyol Barcelona should have paid had been fixed at 16millions franks (2,5 M€)… to be carried artificially to 38 million (5,8 M€)! A part of these funds was transferred with the player himself, according to Pierre Frelot.

    The police officers still estimate that the recruitment of Marco Simone, bought in Milan AC 55 million franks (8,3 M€) in 1997, was coarsely surfacturé: about half of this sum (25 million, 3,8 M€) would have been transferred by Milan with the Italian attacker under cover of a dismissal indemnity. The investigators also wish to look further into their investigations on the case Pauleta, bought with Of Gironde of Bordeaux in June 2003. The PSG would have agreed to pour more de700 000€ with an obscure Portuguese club, Portimonense, officially to acquire the rights of two young players. Actually, the funds seem to be transferred with the Portuguese striker like “complement of wages”. The club saved thus on the social contributions, the player making in the same way with respect to the tax department…

    The report/ratio, which pins in particular the agents Ranko Stojic, Richard Bettoni, Roger Henrotay, Juliano Bertolucci, Roberto Rodriguez or Milan Calasan, is also delayed on the purchase (244 million franks in 2000, 37 M€) by the PSG of Anelka to Real Madrid: “the allowance would have been overestimated fictitiously of 25 million franks (3,8 M€)”, estimate the investigators. This sum would have been used to remunerate Nicolas Anelka and his two brothers (who are also his agents), Didier and Claude. According to Frelot, these funds would have been transferred by Real with the Anelka family.

    Lastly, the investigators discovered that Stojic had given a procuration to certain international French of its stable, who would have thus withdrawn in cash from strong sums at the Rotschild bank of Monaco: it acts of Philippe Christanval, Martin Djetou and Jean-Alain Boumsong. The police officers were also interested in the case of Frederic Déhu, bought in Barcelona in August 2000 with the help of 20 million franks (3 M€). On the 7 million perceived on the occasion by Stojic, a part would have been transferred with the defender by way of complement of wages.
    A thing is sure: July 4, 2003, the wife of Frederic Déhu withdrew with the counter of the Rotschild bank, in Monaco, 120 000 € in cash on an open account in the name of Pro Agency, the company of Ranko Stojic…

    Original French language article


  2. upthehoops says:

    Monday, May 27, 2013 at 20:33

    greenockjack says:
    Monday, May 27, 2013 at 09:04
    ====================================

    Others have had their say Jack but I feel compelled to comment. I came to this site because I wanted somewhere where I could get decent, insightful football debate from knowledgeable people. I’ve certainly got that and it’s not all been from Celtic fans as far as I can see. I agree there is much talk of Ibrox events but a lot of it is very informative, and supports the aim of the forum in providing us with information we would otherwise never hear of via the mainstream Scottish media. If there are Rangers fans out there who can offer realistic alternative views that cast doubt on much that is posted then they should share those views with us. I would welcome such contributions rather than what we get elsewhere from people like Chris Graham, which is basically that a big boy called Peter did it and ran away
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Sorry I’m late to this as it took me wee while to fit together the last day’s postings. I can be slow that way.

    Jack, I agree with upthehoops here (we both posted last night on a similar line on how TRFC fans are representing themselves at the minute).

    The argument you put forward earlier today is a different one but really just leaves us at the same place – yes, a lot of time is being spent talking about TRFC by fans of other clubs, primarily because fans of TRFC will not do likewise, unless of course it is to replay the party line about history, size, stature, same club, world records and hard-done-to-ness. I would be hurt if my club had disappeared as Rangers did, and then had quite surprisingly re-appeared in last years jerseys claiming nothing had really happened, we’ve only been kicked while we were down and been relegated. Add in the dog whistling by McCoist, Mr Traynor ‘at large’, LNS and the latest pantomime and I reckon I’d be looking for somewhere else to watch my football. It does not even make sense, any of it and it gets worse both on reflection and by the week. (that we have got this far and TRFC are still on the go is the sole reason I am convinced that the powers that be are working all of this from backstage – bringing CO into sharp view – and no further footballing harm will ever be allowed to come to TRFC).

    But, you must see, that either TRFC (and their fans) are what they say they are with the attendant responsibility as a big hitter and heritage institution to help all of Scottish football understand what went wrong and how we can change the game, possibly for some good, or, they do what they are actually doing. They would probably receive good wishes and respect if they chose the former, but will definitely receive continued scepticism and well, derision, in the case of the latter and I suspect that this will get a whole lot worse as the corpse turns into a skeleton before being papped away in the cupboard. The smell wont disappear for a while yet.

    Their fans can play a big part in how things go from now, and this in turn will re-shape the discussion in places like this. You cannot simply ask others to stop talking about that which you do not want to hear – and to suggest that people might lose credibility by doing so is a bit of a tricky line to take. You know that Dunfermline and Hearts are not going to raise the same level of discussion here (no disrespect intended) and to suggest that they should is kind of strange.

    Greater success might be possible through TRFC and their fans engaging in a more forthright, honest, manner in their public statements and through participation in places like this – or similar. Consider the benefit to the game for instance, if just one aspect of the SFA’s performance on this topic this last 12 months was subject to full public ‘disclosure’ and debate such that actions could be put in place to prevent a recurrence – you pick which one greenockjack, there are quite a few!


  3. newtz says:
    Monday, May 27, 2013 at 22:03

    “CW has a history of moving assets and/or shareholdings to …. Dormant companies”
    —————

    The picture is far from clear but the new jigsaw pieces seem to surround the potential for money laundering within football (see TallBoy Poppy’s French newspaper extracts).

    The 2006 story he linked to contained this line.

    “French magistrates have been clamping down on corruption in their game. They are scrutinising 19 deals and are worried about the sport being used for money laundering”.

    Then there is the exception taken by Media House to Phil Mc GB’s 31 january 2012 article concerning the ‘Proceeds of crime act’. What Phil seemed to be alluding to was that in that particular case the confidentioality of Collyer Bristow appeared to have been broken in regard to their client Craig Whyte (I’m doing this from memory so please forgive me if I get a bit mixed up). Phil’s point was that the ‘Proceeds of crime act’ was one of the few instruments that could be used to enforce a breech of such confidentiality. Someone looking at these facts might come to the conclusion that Craig Whyte may have been involved in such activities though there is no definitive evidence of this so I cannot assert that.

    I recall being told a story about how a few gangsters had gained control of a small Scottish football club. They used it to mask the proceeds from their illegal activities. The crowd numbers were not verifiable so cash could be banked on the basis it had been received at the turnstiles. Thus laundering it.

    In the football transfer market values have become so enormous that perhaps this could be used as a mask for illegal money. Many of the transfer fees are undisclosed or in dispute. There was a recent case down south where a high profile manager missed out on a big job due to impending court appearances concerning similar activities I believe.

    Craig Whytes history of not always succeeding in his business ventures, as is the way with entrepeneurship, may have provided him with a skill in starting, developing and sometimes terminating a variety of businesses. I’m sure Mr. Whyte would never place assets out of the reach of creditors. However, someone copying these methods might be able to weave a complicated web of interrelationships that made it difficult to pursue assets. If you can do this with legally titled assets perhaps you can dio it with illegal assets also. Who knows? I am far from being a financial expert and anyone who relied on my advice on such matters would be a complete fool.

    Nevertheless, it is very interesting conjecture.

    Can you do 3 dimensional maps with hyperlinks newtz?


  4. TallBoy Poppy (@TallBoyPoppy) says:
    Monday, May 27, 2013 at 22:24

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

    On the original Willow International in Bellshill I don’t think it was in the same office as G M Mining as suggested by KDS. It was in the same postcode but that code covers the Bellshill Industrial Estate which from hazy memory is quite large. Also Willow was a fruit and veg processors and I can see no obvious connection with its directors and Murray or the Gillespies or their joint-venure GM Mining.

    In the same way the fact that some Whyte company registered offices were nearby means little IMO – again because of the industrial estate aspect. So to take the Willow name from way back and link it to an offshore company of the same or similar name a few months ago, which Whyte may have some connection with, I feel is stretching it too far.

    And I don’t actually know when CW got underway but he was born in 1970 from memory so, for instance, in 1995 he was only 25. So would he really be in with Murray and the Gillespies?

    I don’t know the answer to that and it probably is worth looking at that and checking.


  6. “The reality is that it is worth a fraction of what it is being marketed at, or even nothing at all and the people they have trusted with their savings are in fact highly skilled criminals.”

    ______________________________________________________

    ecobhoy says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 00:22

    0

    0

    Rate This

    mullach says:
    Monday, May 27, 2013 at 22:19

    __________________________________________________

    For the avoidance of doubt, this is in no way related to the RIFC share flotation, right?
    Just checking.


  7. TallBoy Poppy (@TallBoyPoppy) says:
    Monday, May 27, 2013 at 22:24

    http://boards.fool.co.uk/liberty-capital-11862335.aspx?sort=whole#11862335
    ———–

    Your musings concerning the finances are currently beyond my comprehension.

    However I did notice a wee comment on the link above that referred to the possibility of a CW company registered in Arizona (The third comment I think).

    Not sure about the pertinence but when we were considering Charlotte’s whereabouts a few days ago a well informed poster pointed to a few possibly redundant CW e:mail addresses that might have been recycled for use by Charlotte. One of them was Arizona based I seem to recollect. I can’t find the post now. It may have been deleted by the moderators due to the inclusion of private e:mail addresses. The address may have been a Liberty Capital one with a .biz extension. It was just speculation (hazy in recollection) and I hadn’t done the research. The poster concerned seemed to know what they were talking about though.


  8. resin_lab_dog says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 01:04

    “For the avoidance of doubt, this is in no way related to the RIFC share flotation, right”?
    ————-

    I’m curious why you would ask such a rhetorical question? Merely for the avoidance of doubt. Was there a Willow International Ltd involved in the RIFC share flotation?


  9. ecobhoy says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 00:16
    mullach says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 01:31

    One of my previous links describes Willow as ” a company domiciled in the Seychelles”.

    As posted elsewhere the young Craig in the nineties was described as ‘ the new David Murray” and his father, the Gillespies and Murray were all in the mining/ mining plant game in Bellshill at that time, so yes, he really could have been in with Murray and the Gillespies.

    I would agree that it’s impossible to link the original fruit’n’veg/ frozen foods Willow in Bellshill with any of the current suspects (apart from the fact that Azure Support Services Ltd, a Murray Company at one point, were at Willow House, Strathclyde Business Park, Bellshill.) The co-incidence is no mare than that, I think.
    The Seychelles Willow is the one.

    Can anybody remember the Charlotte posting last week describing the original “Operation Charlotte” with Murray’s company and the “target” both as a different type of wood? Perhaps each “branch” of the scam has it’s own tree!


  10. A few posters have said that the Achill Island item was something not to be on here – just to point out it was not my intention to belittle anyone by that post nor did I know the links I posted would contain references/names probably best not posted on here – for that oversight I apologize. As said that was not my intention – I did (as others like Danish Pastry, who I hold in high regard for his comments that he has been posting on here and RTC) find it remarkable that this social network got it so wrong and rumours spread like wildfire. The other interesting part was so many believed it to be true – that opposition fans would glorify in what is a barbaric act beyond anyone’s capability of understanding. Such is the chasm in Scottish football that this kind of mistaken assumption about the other side is easily believed – everyone is talking about peace and reconciliation in Scottish football – in the current climate, sadly this is not going to happen. I find it remarkable that reading through TRFC blogs there are “facts” being represented that many of us on here would question/dispute – for example its a “fact” that SPL stole the prize money and apparently its a “fact” that all creditors were paid form RFC liquidation process. Apparently!

    No one on the other side is helping – Graham/Dingwall are leading them further away into the abyss.

    I don’t know how to close the divide – I suppose that is what SR is paid the money for – however every time there is League reconstruction proposals, we all peer to see if it means anyone is being favoured – and in particular one club. We cannot proceed on this basis surely

    Currently there is no trust between all the camps – and a lack of common ground to start on a new beginning.

    For Scottish football to succeed we need to find some and move on – but it is not going to happen while we still have the Old Guard who got us here at the helm of the SFA/SPL/SFL. Then we need a clear the air – 5 way agreements etc all published and the facts given to us. Without this, we cannot proceed.


  11. Unsure if this is has been posted before:-

    Cohen & Stephen (Liquidators of Rangers FC) & Ors v Collyer Bristow

    7 Jan 2013 | By Katy Dowell

    Also in: The Top 20 Cases 2013

    AstraZeneca Insurance v XL Insurance & Ace Bermuda Insurance
    Harbinger Capital v Independent Valuer of Northern Rock; HM Treasury
    AADB v Deloitte
    Manmohan Varma v Mittal
    Ali Dizaei v Metropolitan Police & Ors
    Thomas Hicks; George Gillett & Ors v Martin Broughton & Ors
    Interflora v Marks and Spencer; Flowers Direct Online
    CF Partners v Barclays & Tricorona
    GDF Suez v Teesside Power Holdings& Ors
    R (UK Uncut Legal Action Ltd) v HMRC
    Madoff Securities v Stephen Raven & Ors
    Torre Asset Funding v RBS
    IP IPCom v HTC and IPCom v Nokia
    Graisley Properties & Ors v Barclays Bank
    Constantin Medien v Bernie Ecclestone & Ors
    Merrill Lynch v Comune di Firenze; UBS v Comune di Firenze; Dexia Crediop v Comune di Firenze
    London Underground v Freshfields; Herbert Smith
    Continental Capital Markets v GFI Holdings & Ors
    Ndiku Mutua & Ors v Foreign and Commonwealth Office

    Cohen & Stephen (The Liquidators of Rangers FC) & Ors v Collyer Bristow

    Late 2013, 5-10 days, Chancery Division

    For the claimant Cohen & Stephen (The Liquidators of Rangers FC):

    South Square’s Mark Philips QC leading South Square’s Stephen Robins previously instructed by Taylor Wessing partner Nick Moser, taken forward by Stephenson Harwood partner Stuart Frith

    For claimants the Trustees of the Jerome Group plc Pension Fund:

    Outer Temple Chambers’ David E Grant, instructed by trustees David Simpson, who is also a qualified barrister

    For the claimants HMRC:

    South Square’s Lucy Frazer

    For the claimants Merchant Turnaround:

    Maitland Chambers’ James Clifford and Matthew Smith of the same set, instructed by Macrae & Co’s Julian Turnbull

    For the respondent Collyer Bristow:

    3 Verulam Buildings’ Cyril Kinsky QC leading Matthew Hardwick of the same set, instructed by Clyde & Co partner Richard Harrison

    The financial collapse of Rangers FC put in the public eye the club’s relationship with its professional advisers, including Collyer Bristow and former partner Gary Withey.

    Withey quit the firm in March after he became embroiled in the Glasgow club’s administration because he had advised businessman Craig Whyte on his takeover of the club in 2011.

    Duff & Phelps were appointed as the original administrators of the club and, in March last year, announced it would take action against the firm.

    When liquidators Cohen & Stephen took over the wind-down of the club it pledged to carry on the case. The firm has lodged a Part 20 claim against private equity firm Merchant Turnaround.

    Collyer Bristow stands accused of “deliberate deception” over Whyte’s doomed bid for the club.

    The court heard at a pre-trial hearing in April that Collyer Bristow is alleged to have been involved in conspiracy, breach of undertaking, negligence and breach of trust, with Withey – who acted as the club’s company secretary – complicit in the allegations.

    It was revealed that when Whyte agreed a majority stake takeover offer in May 2011 he also pledged to pay off the club’s £18m debt to Lloyds Banking Group and invest £9.5m of “new money” in the club. This included £5m for players, £2.8m to HMRC and £1.7m for capital expenditure.

    That offer persuaded then director Paul Murray and the board not to launch an alternative £25m share issue to generate the money needed to stabilise the club. Instead, the court was told, they agreed to Whyte’s takeover, with Collyer Bristow acting for Whyte.

    Administrators were called in February 2012 and various parties – including HMRC, private equity firm Merchant Turnaround and Jerome Pension Fund trustees – lobbied to reclaim their stakes in Rangers.

    The firm says it will vigorously defend the claims. Withey had originally applied to intervene in the case, but has now withdrawn his application.

    This battle will be closely followed by firms and fans alike as it promises to lay bare the firm’s relationship with Whyte and the club.


  12. Sam says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 07:28
    2 0 Rate This
    ———-

    Cheers Sam, haven’t seen that myself. Is the entire piece lifted from somewhere? If so, where is taken from?


  15. Neepheid and Mullach: I’d put the draft of the 5 way agreement in a more readable form in January, here:

    http://borussiabeefburg.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/scotland-vague-and-obscure/

    Quiet in here just now, not much news from Ibrox, East End, Tynecastle, or if I may be bold, Dens on developments.

    Noticed Hearts gave Danny Wilson a 3 year deal the other day, and although surprised at this, I spoke to a young Hearts first team player at the weekend, and he was unconcerned in every way about his situation.

    The lad isn’t yet in his twenties, and was driving a flashy wee 13 plate sports car, which to some extent gives a hint to the financial problems which are presently bedevilling Scottish football. He reckons it is business as usual for HoM next season, and that, given the existence the club has had for a number of years, the change in situation will only lead to better things.


  17. TallBoy Poppy (@TallBoyPoppy) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 02:14

    “Can anybody remember the Charlotte posting last week describing the original “Operation Charlotte” with Murray’s company and the “target” both as a different type of wood? Perhaps each “branch” of the scam has it’s own tree”!
    ————

    Yes Tallboy, it was a memorandum of understanding (MOU). I take it that it was a precursor to the Sale Purchase Agreement (SPA). That’s why I twigged when I seen ‘Willow’ since the use of these arboreal terms somehow had a pattern, like street names in a new housing development. Hopefully this one isn’t a cul-de-sac.

    I’ll post up both documents so you can compare what was planned with what actually happened. I suspect you’re the sort of guy that likes that kind of stuff.

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/143265813/Memorandum-of-Understanding-26-Nov-2010

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/142103828/Letter-and-SPA


  18. Sam says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 07:28

    Thanks Sam,

    I think that is the first update of BDOs activities I’ve seen; “deliberate deception”, that is a very strong term being used.


  19. neepheid says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 08:06

    “Yesterday Mullach was looking for a copy of the draft of the 5 way agreement. Hopefully this is it”.
    ————–

    Thanks neepheid. I thought Charlotte had provided one but I cannot find it if she did.


  20. http://www.thelawyer.com/news-and-analysis/practice-areas/litigation/cohen-and-stephen-liquidators-of-rangers-fc-and-ors-v-collyer-bristow/1016288.article

    Anyone have any info on:-
    1. “Independent Trustee Company Limited”
    2. “Westward Consultants Limited”
    3. “Aspartus PLC”

    Greatly appreciated.

    Nb,

    Nick Moser – Partner
    5 New Street Square
    London EC4A 3TW
    United Kingdom
    DX 41 London

    Tel. +44 (0) 20 7300 4866
    Fax. +44 (0) 20 7300 7100

    Head of Restructuring & Corporate Recovery (UK)

    Nick is a partner in our London office and head of our Restructuring & Corporate Recovery group. His experience ranges from contentious and non-contentious insolvency and restructuring to advising pension schemes on insolvency matters.

    Recent work includes:

    leading the bankruptcy team advising the trustee of the Madoff estate on international litigation and asset tracing arising out of the Madoff fraud, involving cross-border insolvency issues;
    leading the team advising Duff & Phelps as administrators of Rangers Football Club
    leading the TW team on the complex, international GP Noble fraud litigation for Independent Trustee Services Limited; and advising the secured lender and administrators of a hotel group.

    Nick was awarded “Insolvency Lawyer of the Year 2011” at the annual Insolvency & Rescue Awards in London.

    Described in Legal 500 2009, Nick “combines a sharp brain with an aura of quiet authority”, Legal 500 2010 comments that Nick “is always calm and keeps things in perspective” and Legal 500 2012 comments that Nick is “one of the top UK lawyers for complex insolvency-related litigation”.

    Chambers 2010 says “interviewees are enthusiastic in their praise of Nick Moser, acknowledging that he is “a great person to resolve a difficult scenario”… and he is “commercial and bright”. Chambers 2012 records that Nick “impresses interviewees with his broad experience of complex restructurings and insolvency” and Chambers 2013 quotes clients’ view of Nick as “very able”. The Lawyer magazine included Nick in its list of “Hot 100 lawyers” for 2013.

    Publications include “UK Insolvency Client Strategies” (Aspatore, 2008) and “Pensions & Corporate Insolvency” (Jordans, 2013).

    Nick studied at Lincoln College, Oxford University, graduating with an MA in Jurisprudence.


  21. Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:07
    1 0 Rate This

    alex thomson ‏@alextomo 10m
    Rangers: Letter Before Action on Craig Whyte’s claims on the club to be delivered today. Real? Or grandstanding?
    ———

    Or just more obfuscation and delay? I thought there was supposed to be a hearing in the BVI regarding CW a few days ago? With so many lining up against him you’d think Mr Whyte might consider helping the authorities, if there was a clemency deal on offer. At this rate, the upcoming movie could easily market a board game as spin-off merchandise. It could be a kind of hybrid of Cluedo and Monopoly 😀


  22. Danish Pastry says:

    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:45

    Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:07
    1 0 Rate This

    alex thomson ‏@alextomo 10m
    Rangers: Letter Before Action on Craig Whyte’s claims on the club to be delivered today. Real? Or grandstanding?
    ———

    Or just more obfuscation and delay? I thought there was supposed to be a hearing in the BVI regarding CW a few days ago? With so many lining up against him you’d think Mr Whyte might consider helping the authorities, if there was a clemency deal on offer. At this rate, the upcoming movie could easily market a board game as spin-off merchandise. It could be a kind of hybrid of Cluedo and Monopoly 😀

    ******

    I like the sound of the game – kind of like, it was the Earley brothers in the Blue Room with the tape recorder…..and now do not pass go, do not collect 100 pounds……..unless you have a Get Out of Jail card…………..

    The game could not be any stranger than reality 🙂


  23. As discussed previously the only way this will get interesting is if Whyte actually gets RIFC Plc into court and even then we know how the vagaries of the law have let people down before. Other than that everything that has gone on the last couple of weeks is just bluster.

    I said a while back that if there is indeed a case then the best strategy to extract some cash out the club, either through a settlement or taking control of the assests, would be to attempt to lock the gates down Govan way just before the start of the season.

    Not sure how quickly these things work in terms of getting a court date but that would be my guess.

    However deep down I think people who are seeking the demise of the newco will just have to be patient and see how they manage their finances. The cash flow issue is still the thing that may sink them, especially as Ally seems to be keen to have a large squad and a relatively high wage bill.

    The reality is that if they played it clever they should survive to get back to the top flight but it will take a few more years to build a team that is capable of winning the top league let alone making any kind of dent in European competition.


  24. Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:58
    1 0 Rate This

    I like the sound of the game – kind of like, it was the Earley brothers in the Blue Room with the tape recorder…..and now do not pass go, do not collect 100 pounds……..unless you have a Get Out of Jail card…………..

    The game could not be any stranger than reality
    ————–

    Indeed not Exiled! Another card: “You’ve just received an EBT, move directly to Hampden Park. You are now SFA president” 🙂

    OT
    #GlasgowTrivia
    Somewhat vaguely on the subject of EBTs, there was a teacher at Whitehill School in Dennistoun called ‘Coco’ Bennett. Wonderfully eccentric (with the kind of squint stare that always seemed focused on something over your shoulder), he issued CBTs. These were small pink strips of paper with the letters ‘CBT’ in block capitals. CBT stood for ‘Cancellation Belt Ticket’. If you were called up for some punishment you could present a CBT to Coco, and get off, in much the same way as EBTs helped not a few avoid punishing tax. Alas, Coco is no more. In 2011, I met up with George Parsonage, another former teacher at Whitehill and Onslow Drive, who runs The Glasgow Humane Society (together with Tony Coia) from a house and nearby jetty on the Glasgow Green. George related the story of Coco’s somewhat tragic demise. By the way, George’s magnificent work is something he’s been doing since the 1950s, following in the footsteps of his father. A true Glasgow hero, artist, and humanitarian. George obliged me with an interview for a project I was doing and made a huge impression on my youngsters, who were with me at the time.
    http://www.glasgowhumanesociety.com/


  25. wottpi says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 10:02

    The reality is that if they played it clever they should survive to get back to the top flight but it will take a few more years to build a team that is capable of winning the top league let alone making any kind of dent in European competition.

    +++++++++++++++++++++
    They can survive the next few years in two ways.

    The first is to slash costs rapidly to the point where expenditure matches income. That would mean dumping half the players and most of the backroom boys, getting a cheaper manager who is used to operating on a tight budget, and getting boardroom costs down from the stratosphere. That way they will survive, but it will be a struggle to get to the top flight, and once they get there, they will really struggle. The Champions League is just a pipe dream for the next 5 years at least.

    The alternative survival strategy is to get more money quickly, either by a new share issue, or soft loans from a sugar daddy. To give Ally his “warchest”, and to cover the shortfall between income and current expenditure, they need about £20m. And that’s just for the coming 12 months. A substantial fresh cash injection will be required annually for the foreseeable future on this basis.

    I don’t think a new share issue is a realistic option. And in any case, that’s only a one year fix even if it raises £20m.

    As regards a sugar daddy, even Dave King might blink at fronting £20m a year for the next 3 years.

    And the cost-cutting option is simply not acceptable to the fans, most of whom truly believe that there is still £20m in the bank.

    I really question whether retention of the football business is what the current Ibrox Board really want. It is surely in the best interests of all the shareholders to sell or give away the loss-making football business, and retain the properties. And the directors have a legal responsibility to act in the best interests of the shareholders.


  26. wottpi says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 10:02

    I said a while back that if there is indeed a case then the best strategy to extract some cash out the club, either through a settlement or taking control of the assests, would be to attempt to lock the gates down Govan way just before the start of the season.

    Not sure how quickly these things work in terms of getting a court date but that would be my guess.

    ——————————————————-

    Call me an old cynic but I just can’t see any court up here allowing the gates of Ibrox to be locked. Civil disorder etc….


  27. My theory of the current Rangers board is quite simple.

    1. They do not want to hold this basket case for long term.

    2. They want minimum fuss regarding their business dealings (Spivery) and to keep things in house (i.e Goodbye Malcolm Murray).

    3. Craig Whyte quite clearly wants his cut of any future deal to sell the club on. (It’s not in his interest to close the club down, he just doesn’t want to get stiffed)

    4. In their thinking they need to get the club promoted and hence why there have been signings made. Regardless of the leaks on the R.S.S Dignity. THEY DESPERATELY NEED THIS PROMOTION TO WORK.

    5. a)They are hoping that if promoted to division 1 they can punt the club to another group of investors and walk away with some profit,

    b)….or if they want the hassle and the promise of more dough try the same again clawing money from wheeling and dealings to attempt the promotion to SPL level, for a bigger selling price.

    c)….OR in some another universal thinking they hope to god that a Shiek or Oligarch would want the tribute as a plaything and a cash windfall would befall them.

    You have to remember they only want to keep the act going through whatever means necessary so that eventually they walk away with a tidy profit and they can all buy chateaus just like Charlie.


  28. Danish Pastry says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:45

    Or just more obfuscation and delay? I thought there was supposed to be a hearing in the BVI regarding CW a few days ago? With so many lining up against him you’d think Mr Whyte might consider helping the authorities, if there was a clemency deal on offer. At this rate, the upcoming movie could easily market a board game as spin-off merchandise. It could be a kind of hybrid of Cluedo and Monopoly 😀
    ———————————————————————-

    How about a special edition aimed at what seems to be the mass of Sevco fans (and the MSM)….

    “Hivnae Got A Cluedo”

    Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.


  30. Update on T’Rangers and the SFL over 21 rule

    SFL Rule 115.2 states:-

    A club shall be permitted to register, at any one time, up to a maximum of 22 players, who have reached the age of 21 years on 1st January of the appropriate year. The maximum number of 22 players includes players registered by means of a temporary transfer. Additional players may be registered by a club, however such players must be under 21 years of age on 1st January of the appropriate year.

    By my reckoning if Bell Daly Law and Clark have signed then they are going to exceed their quota. For anyone else to come in then some oldies or older duffers will have to go to make room.

    Can’t see McCulloch going anywhere. Has Alexander signed up for his reduced offer?

    Team list from wiki with ages (for 1 Jan 2014) gathered from wiki and transfermarket.co.uk

    Andrew Little >21
    Andrew Mitchell >21
    Anestis Argyriou >21
    Chris Hegarty >21
    Darren Cole >21
    David Templeton >21
    Dean Shiels >21
    Emilson Cribari >21
    Fransesco Stella >21
    Ian Black >21
    Kal Naismith >21
    Kane Hemmings >21
    Kyle Hutton >21
    Lee McCulloch >21
    Lee Wallace >21
    Neil Alexander >21
    Ross Perry >21
    Scott Gallagher >21
    Sebastien Faure >21
    Alan Smith 20
    Kamil Wiktorski 20
    Robbie Crawford 20
    Matty Clarke 19
    Andrew Murdoch 18
    Barrie McKay 18
    Fraser Aird 18
    Lewis MacLeod 18
    Liam Kelly 18
    Daniel Stoney 17
    Luca Gasparotto 17
    Tom Walsh 16

    Current Known Signings / Targets

    Cammy Bell >21
    John Daly >21
    Nicky Law >21
    Nicky Clark >21

    Out on Loan

    Carlos Bocenegra >21
    DorianGoian >21


  31. tomtomaswell says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 10:41

    Hear what you say but was Sevco5088 not registered in England, therefore they could challenge the Greem / D&P ‘switheroo’ down there away from the ‘establishment’.


  32. Sam says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:33

    “Anyone have any info on:-…Nick Moser – Partner”.
    ———–

    I can’t help you specifically Sam but the following piece of audio mentions ‘Taylor Wessing’ whom you identify Nick Moser to be a partner in. Right near the beginning, 10 seconds in. CG talks about Blue Knights lawyer, Neil Smyth(e) of Taylor Wessing.

    https://soundcloud.com/charlotteandthefakes/cg3


  33. Wottipi – was just about to start on that task – thanks for the update! Goian seems more than likely to return given his Italian team and him fell out – so would be another over 21. Bocanegra seems 50-50 for a return given his statements in US to return to MLS after his stint in Spain and Klinsman telling him he wont be picked for USA if he is playing in lower leagues.

    http://www.goal.com/en-us/news/1614/americans-abroad/2013/04/24/3929787/klinsmann-advises-carlos-bocanegra-against-rangers-return

    So does this mean a fire sale of some of the older ones needs to happen?

    Or is the SFL rule being changed to only apply to players registered Aug 31st – and so does not apply to TRFC?


  34. wottpi says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 10:59
    0 0 Rate This
    tomtomaswell says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 10:41

    Hear what you say but was Sevco5088 not registered in England, therefore they could challenge the Greem / D&P ‘switheroo’ down there away from the ‘establishment’.
    ———————————–

    Not an expert by any means but could a ruling in an English court be applied in Scotland? At the very least it would be challenged and the result would be the same – the big hoose will stay open!!


  36. Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 11:00

    I suppose the next step would be to have a guess who from the existing nineteen over 21’s is mostly likely for the chop. That is of course assuming that they are on short terms contracts that have run out at the end of the season. If those with longer contracts are given the bullet then its surely a case of money down the pan (not good planning) or face the employment tribunial.

    I’m sure Ally has the balancing act all thought out or as you say it will end up with pleading to the authorities to bend the rules once again.


  37. They could always buy players whose birthday is 29th Feb 😀


  39. I wouldn’t be getting all excited about the number of players over 21 that TRFC will have next season. Reading the list above, if one assumes that both the loan players will leave for pastures new, and all the newcomers sign on 1st September then they only need to lose one more player off the list to comply with the rule.


  40. mullach says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 10:59

    2

    0

    Rate This

    Sam says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 09:33

    “Anyone have any info on:-…Nick Moser – Partner”.

    Sam says:
    Thanks.


  41. Fransesco Stella >21 – I thought he left some time ago

    So, if Goian and Boca return – they are at 25 (3 over)

    Stella, Goian, Boca and Alexander – not returning, gives them 21

    So, 2 signings – 1 will be Clark, that leaves them 1 more (providing Goian and Boca find alternative clubs)

    Then, i expect questions to be asked about further signings


  42. theoldcourse – you are assuming that Ally has finished shopping already, of course – and that the signings will whet the appetite of the ST buyers they need………..

    Seems the trip to Panama was indeed a wasted effort – if of course it was to look for signings….

    http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport/football/ally-mccoist-and-rangers-face-testing-times-1-2881659

    One of the players on McCoist’s list is thought to be the Honduras international Arnold Peralta who claims he is 90 per cent certain to sign for the Ibrox club.

    Peralta plays for homeland club Deportivo Vida, who are second bottom of the Honduran Premier League. His contract expires later this month and he would be available for free.

    McCoist and assistant Kenny McDowall took in Honduras’ World Cup clash in Panama last week.

    And Peralta revealed he had talks with Rangers, which could lead to him moving to Scotland once Rangers’ transfer embargo is lifted.


  44. Further Re T’Rangers and how they will cut down their squad to meet the over 21 rule

    From wiki
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012%E2%80%9313_Rangers_F.C._season

    It appears fromthe wiki info that only a handful of players have contracts that end this year –
    Alexander, Cole and Hemmings.

    From my original list Stella as an over 21 left earlier in the season so there is one small bit of breathing space.

    Mitchell’s contract ended up but it was reported the other week he signed up for another year.

    Below is a list with last season appearances so you can see who may be in the firing line. The main under 21s stalwarts are McKay, Macleod and Aird other then them the team has needed all their over 21s with 14 of them playing 23 games or more.

    Therefore with the signing of Bell then Alexander and the little used Cole and Hemmings could be given the bullet without any pain to the clubs bank balance.

    That along with Stella takes 4 from my list of 19 over 21s to leave 15. Add on Bell Daly Law and Clark that takes you back up to the 19 therefore Ally still has 3 over 21 spots to fill or only 2 if you believe he really wants to keep Alexander as well as Bell and Smith as goalkeepers. His plan to loan out Smith doesn’t affect the over 21 total as he will still be 20 at the turn of the year.

    Name – Apperances 2012/13
    Neil Alexander 47
    Lee Wallace 42
    Barrie McKay 41
    Ian Black 38
    Lee McCulloch 38
    Andrew Little 36
    Emílson Cribari 34
    Kyle Hutton 33
    Lewis Macleod 31
    Chris Hegarty 29
    Dean Shiels 29
    Anestis Argyriou 27
    Robbie Crawford 27
    David Templeton 26
    Kal Naismith 24
    Sébastien Faure 23
    Ross Perry 23
    Fraser Aird 22
    Francisco Sandaza 20
    Kevin Kyle 15
    Andrew Mitchell 7
    Kane Hemmings 5
    Darren Cole 4
    Luca Gasparotto 4
    Daniel Stoney 3
    Tom Walsh 2
    Alan Smith 1


  45. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 11:49

    Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 11:53

    Thanks guys re Stella leaving early. I picked it up from the other wiki page but glad to see others are on the ball 🙂


  46. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/sfl-division-three/rangers-green-whyte-probe-in-new-evidence-delay-1-2945969#.UaSE7oTyLXQ.twitter

    Rangers Green-Whyte probe in ‘new evidence’ delay

    Charles Green: Investigation into Craig Whyte links faces delay. Picture: SNS

    Published on 28/05/2013 08:29

    AN investigation into alleged business links between Charles Green and Craig Whyte faces being delayed after it has emerged that new evidence could be presented to the probe.

    • Investigation into alleged links between Charles Green and Craig Whyte faces delay

    • Initial indications suggest Green has been cleared of wrongdoing in report

    Claims that Craig Whyte has legal rights over Rangers assets following former chief executive Charles Green’s takeover last summer were due to be settled by the report in the next 48 hours.

    Whyte maintains that Green was only a front for the takeover. Amid reports that the investigation, compiled by Pinsent Masons, was likely to clear Charles Green of any wrongdoing, Worthingon Group plc – the company acting on behalf of Whyte – wrote to the law firm on May 16 pledging to produce prima facie evidence of links between Green and Whyte. The Surrey-based firm loaned Whyte £3 million from their Jerome Pension Fund prior to the administration of Rangers in February 2012, and have agreed a deal to help Whyte pursue his legal bid.

    An email was subsequently sent to the law firm asking for the findings of the report to be delayed until a Letter before Claim on Rangers assets could be issued.

    Worthington Group reported Green to the Serious Fraud Office over claims that, amid the £22 million share issue made last December, Green had failed to report that Whyte had contested ownership of club assets.

    Nice to see the MSM catching up!!


  47. Consider these points in regard to new signings for TRFC

    1. When will their employment contract kick in i.e. how many weeks will they be getting paid for doing nothing. Alternatively, how long do you think these players will be willing to go without getting a wage bearing in mind their contracts end about now.

    2. What is the insurance position on an unregistered player if they get injured in training. Would a player be willing to take the risk.


  48. If the over 21 rule is to be adhered to then the problem for McCoist is does he fill his quota with frees just now or does he leave a gap to make a ‘big money’ signing in the January window when they are fully free from the embargo.

    Are there any under 21’s out there that he might want to sign up or get for free

    But even with guys at 20 whether they be on the books or signing targets he must also be having to look ahead to future years as to who will be out of contract at the end of next season and likely for the bullet to make way for those youngsters coming up based on the current scenario that it will be Div 2 then 1 before the SPL.

    I don’t envy him the task of undertaking this balancing act.

    However it doesn’t appear to be on the Bears or the MSM’s radar.

    The various possibilites would surely make for an interesting article in the off season.

    From a pure footballing sense it is a fascinating dilema but any attempt to look at it would probably be seen as a futher ‘attack’ on the newco.


  49. Exiled Celt (@The_Exiled_Celt) says:
    Tuesday, May 28

    Rangers confirm agreement to sign Nicky Clark
    <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
    Looks like some RIFC investors are preparing & will eventually need to take a serious haircut….

    🙂

    ……Al get ma ghd's


  50. My fav sport journalist (wealth of info Keith Jackanory) in paper today predicting another showdown at the ok coral down Govan way tomorrow.

    Malcolm in front of the sheriffs and may be on first stage coach out of town (may be a wee earner for Easdales) Looks like Stockbridge is Unforgiving and there may be more than one Rawhide at the ranch.


  51. theoldcourse says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 12:07

    Consider these points in regard to new signings for TRFC

    1. When will their employment contract kick in i.e. how many weeks will they be getting paid for doing nothing. Alternatively, how long do you think these players will be willing to go without getting a wage bearing in mind their contracts end about now.

    2. What is the insurance position on an unregistered player if they get injured in training. Would a player be willing to take the risk.
    =====================================
    TRFC can employ players right away and pay them if that’s the case.What they can’t do is register them to play before !st September.
    I’d also assume,maybe wrongly,that as the players are employed by TRFC they can’t play as trialists before said date.


  52. Hello, haven’t posted since rtc as i have nothingnew to add, for echoboy, you asked how CW and the Gillespie’s and Murry knew each other at a young age. KELVINSIDE ACADEMY is the answer


  53. mullach says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 01:34
    11 3 i
    Rate This
    resin_lab_dog says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 01:04

    “For the avoidance of doubt, this is in no way related to the RIFC share flotation, right”?
    ————-

    I’m curious why you would ask such a rhetorical question? Merely for the avoidance of doubt. Was there a Willow International Ltd involved in the RIFC share flotation?

    _________________________

    Just a bit of pattern recognition:
    Speculating as to whether the pattern employed in these land bank schemes is actually the very same as in the RIFC issue: Remember CGs wild claims about the value of the RFC brand etc. etc. ?
    If it turned out he knew they might not even own the real estate – because of Whyte’s claim to it -then the whole flotation could conceivably be described as follows:

    “The reality is that it is worth a fraction of what it is being marketed at, or even nothing at all and the people they have trusted with their savings are in fact highly skilled criminals.”


  54. wottpi says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 12:17

    If the over 21 rule is to be adhered to then the problem for McCoist is does he fill his quota with frees just now or does he leave a gap to make a ‘big money’ signing in the January window when they are fully free from the embargo.

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

    OK, lets ignore the fact they have no money to spend on a “big money” signing in January, lets assume they can pay a transfer fee to sign a player under contract at another club.

    Why would they have to wait until January?

    Couldn’t they simply offer a club a fee, agree a deal with player and then “employ” the player?

    He would leave his club, he would no longer be a registered player, but like Law, Clark, Bell and Daly, he would be employed by Rangers.

    Then they could all be registered on 1st september

    No?

    ignore the lack of funds, ignore the league rules on squad size/ages – what is to stop The Sevco Currents buying players right now?


  55. tonto8on8his8high8horse says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 11:11

    Moonbeams about the tribute share price?

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/old-firm-is-still-big-business-as-investors-see-value-in-clubs.21180912?
    ====================================================================

    Well if that piece demonstrates anything to me it would be to ignore anything the writer has to say in future. I found it quite amusing to see how the writer tried to compare the financial closeness of the two companies to each other by announcing: ‘Rangers shares ended the football season less than 2p below those of Premier League winners Celtic’.

    Without going into depth on the irrelevance of that statement – which IMO would never have appeared when the paper was read by the business community and had a staff of expert financial journalists – perhaps a mention of the different share structures of the two companies might have been of assistance as obviously the Herald appears to be aiming more and more at the tabloid market as it scrabbles for survival with a seriously declining circulation. To try and turn the story into a football title race makes me wonder whether the writer is an ex sports journo or wanting to be one. I would say he may well have the makings.

    It might have also been helpful to mention the lock-in and other factors which have seen very very ‘thin’ volumes of Rangers shares traded with often just a handful traded on a daily basis. Many of course worry that when the Institutional shares are sold that the price could fall to 40-50p.

    Today the Rangers International share price is standing at 56.10p and the company has a Market Capitalisation of £36.45 million with 65.10 million shares.

    Celtic today sees shares at 57.22p with a Market Capitalisation of £52.14 million on 91.12 million shares.

    There is also the possible effect of the tens of millions of Rangers shares sold for 1p to members of the original consortium. Unless Rangers suffered another disastrous financial collapse it is hard to see how these shareholders could lose money on their holding and not profit.

    And that takes us to another point regarding the boardroom turmoil in Rangers and possible ‘investors’ waiting in the wings. The writer blithely ignores the fact that anyone seeking a controlling interest in Rangers – should that person or group exist – would not be buying on AIM but in private deals involving big bloc shareholders.

    Indeed it is public knowledge, and even reported in the Herald, that some such deals have been done and other are being negotiated. Perhaps someone with a better understanding of the share market could have taken the opportunity to voice an opinion on how all this might affect share prices.

    I won’t go into things like comparing audited accounts to look more deeply at the underlying financial health of both clubs because Rangers being a new club is at a disadvantage regarding audited accounts and indeed it is some time since the former club, now going through the process of liquidation, presented audited accounts if my memory serves me correctly.

    There are other niggles in the story like the mention of £22 million raised by the AIM Flotation and the statement: ‘(the firm) says it still has much of that in the bank’. I think it truly remiss in a supposedly balanced financial report that Rangers weren’t asked what was left in the bank in view of the widespread speculation it could be less than half that amount. There is also the ignoring of the £2 million approx in AIM expenses which have to be deducted from the £22 million.

    And then there is the statements: ‘£22m on its initial offering’ and ‘RIFC floated on the Alternative Investment Market (AIM) at 70p a share’. The writer doesn’t seem to have realised that the flotation was split into a £17 million pre-flotation Institutional Investor placement and that the 70p offer was to fans only. I don’t know what the institutional investors actually paid for their shares but the AIM flotation price wasn’t 70p as stated by the writer but I believe it was 76p.

    This of course means that the writer’s statement that the current shareprice: ‘Is almost 20% below the original price’ is incorrect. It’s nearer to 25% if we take flotation price v. current share price. I have already mentioned the question of the 1p shares of the original consortium which is apparently lost on the writer as is the fact that they were ‘swapped’ with TRFCL shares into RIFC shares along with all the other pre-flotation shares some of which cost the buyers £1 each.

    I wonder if these purchasers are happy with a Rangers performance which has seen them lose, so far, 44p in the £1?

    Still there is humour to be found in the article from an unlikely source. Michael Jarman, equity strategist at H2o Markets, said: “If the earnings they have projected to earn can match the performance on the pitch then the stock could be valued right back up at 90p.”

    I have my doubts that Mr Jarman is a footie fan as he is the only person I’ve found who appears happy with on-pitch performance. As to projected earnings well I realise that Rangers finance director Stockbridge has given a figure of £100 million as achievable in the not too distant future but I wouldn’t advise anyone to hold their breath.

    I could go on and on but I’ll leave it there as I think I have done enough to expose the shoddyness of the article and I wonder if it was another coup for PR over objective and balanced reporting.


  56. Scottish football’s very own colostomy bag continues to weep at the seems, fun though it is I wish it would just burst, then we can all move on!


  57. Noticed some debate elsewhere on the status of Crystal Palace “returning” to the EPL next season.

    It seems to me that there is a general recognition of the continuation of the brand when, following administration, a new company bought the business and assets of CPFC in 2010. The FA & Football League permitted the transfer of their respective shares to the new company and the old Crystal Palace company was liquidated.

    For those people who think – because of the transfer of shares – it is technically the same “club”, the following passage from the FA’s rulebook may cast some light on the situation:
    http://www.thefa.com/~/media/Files/TheFAPortal/governance-docs/rules-of-the-association/rules-of-the-association.ashx

    (g) Transfer of Membership
    Council may use the following criteria, and any other conditions in Council’s absolute discretion, in deciding whether to approve the transfer of membership by a Full Member Club or an Associate Member Club:
    (i) the shareholders or members of the existing Full Member Club or Associate Member Club have voted to agree the transfer of the membership to the proposed future member;
    (ii) all Football Creditors of the existing Full Member Club or Associate Member Club must be fully satisfied;
    (iii) all other creditors of the existing Full Member Club or Associate Member Club must be satisfied and evidenced as such;
    (iv) the proposed future Full Member Club or Associate Member Club must provide financial forecasts showing their ability to fund the Full Member Club or Associate Member Club for the next 12 months or to the end of the season following transfer (whichever is the longer);
    (v) evidence of funding sources will be required; and
    (vi) where the proposed future Full Member Club or Associate Member Club is a company, then it shall be formed and registered in England and Wales under the Act.

    The phrases “existing Full Member Club” and “proposed future Full Member Club or Associate Member Club” should make it clear:

    “where the proposed future Full Member Club or Associate Member Club is a company,” is the clincher.

    Just so as not to miss it: “where…Club is a company,”

    There is absolutely no doubt that the football club currently using the Crystal Palace brand is recognised as a different member club from that which last played in the EPL.

    If you think “brand” = “club” then you can argue it is the same club as before; but in a technical and legal sense, the old club simply no longer exists.


  59. HirsutePursuit says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 13:14

    Quite Amazing how ScotsLawThoughts is tied-up today on the status of Crystal Palace – the day before a potentially explosive board meeting at Ibrox and the whole P&M investigation about to pronounce or delay depending on whether it will wait for the Worthington evidence. And then there’s Green’s resignation effective at midnight on Friday.

    And now we have Crystal Palace here as well. I can only say that this would appear to make a nonsense of the fact that either of the two blogs are obsessed with Rangers 🙂


  60. ecobhoy says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 14:06
    0 0 Rate This
    HirsutePursuit says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 13:14

    Quite Amazing how ScotsLawThoughts is tied-up today on the status of Crystal Palace – the day before a potentially explosive board meeting at Ibrox and the whole P&M investigation about to pronounce or delay depending on whether it will wait for the Worthington evidence. And then there’s Green’s resignation effective at midnight on Friday.

    And now we have Crystal Palace here as well. I can only say that this would appear to make a nonsense of the fact that either of the two blogs are obsessed with Rangers
    ============================================
    Just marking time.
    🙂

    Slightly OT – but mostly not…

    How, in the world of commerce, a brand can survive liquidation.

    http://mg.co.uk/about-mg/history-heritage/


  61. People in Crystal Palaces should’nt throw stones
    I suppose the same applies to those who live in (Charles) Green houses


  63. tonto8on8his8high8horse says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 11:11

    “Moonbeams about the tribute share price”?
    ————

    Cheerleaders wheeld out to shore up fan shareholder sentiment. It must be bad if they’re concerned the fans might bail out. Its tough out there however and people are having to make hard choices. Reasonable piece of analysis in the middle sandwiched between fantasy at the beginning and end. Trying to alert the proper business types to the hazards without scaring the fans. Utter duplicity. Tip off your mates and leave the minions to get ripped off. Or is it a precursor to the mass exodus when the lock in expires mid June.

    Timmy conspiracy or not Rangers fans. If you’re swithering and its money you can’t afford to lose, think not what you can do for the spivs, think instead what you should do for yourselves.


  64. mullach says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 15:29

    4

    0

    Rate This

    tonto8on8his8high8horse says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 11:11

    “Moonbeams about the tribute share price”?
    ————

    Cheerleaders wheeld out to shore up fan shareholder sentiment. It must be bad if they’re concerned the fans might bail out. Its tough out there however and people are having to make hard choices. Reasonable piece of analysis in the middle sandwiched between fantasy at the beginning and end. Trying to alert the proper business types to the hazards without scaring the fans. Utter duplicity. Tip off your mates and leave the minions to get ripped off. Or is it a precursor to the mass exodus when the lock in expires mid June.

    Timmy conspiracy or not Rangers fans. If you’re swithering and its money you can’t afford to lose, think not what you can do for the spivs, think instead what you should do for yourselves.
    ===============================================
    The fans who need the cash should get out now.Rangers International got their cash(not TRFC) although the fans thought they were helping their club.It should be made clear to them that to sell now does not affect the club in any way.Their cash will come from the buyer of their shares,not RIFC.
    They’ve done their bit.


  65. resin_lab_dog says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 12:50

    “Just a bit of pattern recognition”.
    —————

    Its probably a good faculty to have at your disposal at this juncture since events defy normal linear logic. ecobhoy posted his piece on Willow International to illustrate that there may be different companies with the same name. I think trade mark wise you can have the same name as another company as long as you’re not in the same line of business. So you could be McDonalds joiners but if you tried to open a fast food outlet with that name, the big American corporate would probably come after you with a writ (and have done I understand).

    The internet is great for accessing information but ecobhoy points out that when a connection is made the details require verification. On the wider pattern recognition of scams, I think it is an education for us all. I’ve seen some dodgy business in my time but coming from a technical background like yourself where there are standard practices, it is astonishing that financial contracts can be so poorly engineered. A symptom of the get rich quick era that has subsequently fell on its rear end as any logician might have predicted had there been any chance heed would have been taken of his observations.


  66. torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 15:51

    The fans who need the cash should get out now.Rangers International got their cash(not TRFC) although the fans thought they were helping their club.It should be made clear to them that to sell now does not affect the club in any way.Their cash will come from the buyer of their shares,not RIFC.
    They’ve done their bit.
    ===================================================
    I raised this dilemma for RST in dicussion here a few months ago. They’re trapped by the organisation’s emotional decision to spend fans money and rhetoric – no walking away, loyality and so on. The relatively small number of shares bought by all Rangers fans brings no weight in terms of Board influence and, as torrejohnbhoy says, their initial investment has done its job. Whether it’s been to benefit spivs or to save the club is qed. Best get out now, the trade volumes would hardly impact on the share price and if they happened to be organised, they might establish a fighting fund for the next round of pain. Probably more sensible to cut their losses and put the money back in their pockets though.


  70. The most notable thing to take from the BDO letter to Creditors is their costs and outlays to date to date of £640,000 and that doesn’t include outgoings to other parties (mainly legal costs).

    One other item was confirmation that Newco had given up on any claim to SPL prize money for season 2011/12


  71. Been away for a few days, don’t seem to have missed much, Pinsent, Cup, Island fiasco, Regan pay rise, Navel gazing about the role and future of TSFM etc 🙂 – but having waded through the last few pages of comments, I have to say – I am glad to be back, some excellent posts from many people. Something has been niggling me from day one in this whole RTC/TSFM saga (and I’ll post later on it once I manage to string together some coherent thoughts) but in digging into that I happened across the new SFA articles of association. A weighty tome it is, but putting my best foot froward I made it through. However one article which caught my attention and thought could illicit some comments from the more learned on here is : 97.3, this is essentially a clause that says any fine on an individual connected with a member club, can be recovered from the Club by withholding money due that club. This got me to thinking – what about Craig Whyte’s fine – he was fined as an official representative of RFC, therefore RFC should be liable for this fine – now the questions are – what RFC? (RFC IL) or (RFC Sevco?) and are the SFA pursuing this debt with the club? (whichever one). It also raises the thorny new/old question. As if they are in the eyes of the SFA the same club then RFC Sevco are due the fine, if RFC IL are due the fine they are not the same member so not the same club? anyone better out there can unravel this for me?


  72. I’m unsure about the total amount of what are described as “the contingent debts” (sell on clauses). It appears that, in order to avoid litigation costs, BDO have agreed with Newco that BDO would retain £504,000 of such debts that had already crystallised, but would share equally any further funs received.

    The letter goes on to state that BDO expect to recover in excess of £2M in book debts. It is not clear if this sum is the extent of the contingent debts or includes other debts.

    The external costs to date are £418K, so adding BDO’s £640K, that is over £1M already lost to creditors. Nice little earner if you can get it.


  73. Looking at the summarised list of Unsecured Creditors, there are £7M trade, creditors, £7.7M Debenture holders, £27.2M Ticketus, £3.3M football creditors, £94.4M to HMRC, but the most notable one was £20M to Directors.

    Is the £20M a claim by Dave King, or some other unrelated claim?


  74. I’m surprised at the discussion on the over-21 ruling. Am I the only one that remembers the serial “administrative errors” with player registrations made by the previous Rangers? Footballers have a reputation for not being the sharpest tools in the box so they may forget their dates of birth in their excitement. I’m sure the SFA will understand.


  75. torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    Tuesday, May 28, 2013 at 15:51

    The fans who need the cash should get out now.Rangers International got their cash(not TRFC) although the fans thought they were helping their club.It should be made clear to them that to sell now does not affect the club in any way.Their cash will come from the buyer of their shares,not RIFC. They’ve done their bit.
    ===================================================
    I raised this dilemma for RST in dicussion here a few months ago. They’re trapped by the organisation’s emotional decision to spend fans money and rhetoric – no walking away, loyality and so on. The relatively small number of shares bought by all Rangers fans brings no weight in terms of Board influence and, as torrejohnbhoy says, their initial investment has done its job. Whether it’s been to benefit spivs or to save the club is qed. Best get out now, the trade volumes would hardly impact on the share price and if they happened to be organised, they might establish a fighting fund for the next round of pain. Probably more sensible to cut their losses and put the money back in their pockets though.
    =========================================================

    I did say when the shares were above 90p that fans should sell – maybe keep a couple for emotional reasons – and then buy when the price dropped. I have to say I didn’t think they would drop as far but my rationale was that they could buy back-in at the lower price and increase the number of fan shares held.

    In terms of extending fan ownership it was the way to go and I very much doubt if anyone, including the outfit doing the bloc fan purchase, even considered my advice nor indeed understood it.

    When it comes to spivs v. fan loyalty the supporters get shafted every time and it appears there wasn’t a single person on the side of the Bears who either understood what I was suggesting or who felt able to propose it as a positive plan of action.

Comments are closed.