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/
upthehoops says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 20:45
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 19:50
============================================
Couldn’t agree more about following on from TD’s if people feel strongly enough. Having posted on football sites elsewhere on the web I can vouch for this site being the most intelligent, objective, and welcoming of differing views that I’ve seen. I rarely post anywhere else now.
===================================
It’s no coincidence that CtH offered her material to this site first.
My thoughts were,and still are,that CtH has a plan,maybe to release soundbites whereby people who kne how thing work,would eventually take her clues and put everything together.
She came here because this is where this was most likely to happen.
Did we(I include us all,not just the mods) do the right thing by rejecting her advances?,
I don’t know but I take it a a back handed compliment that the site admin rejected her advances if they weren’t satisfied wrt the legalities whatever of publishing said info.
The site has a standard,started by RTC and now carried on by TSFM that it will not compromise.
That’s good.
ozyhibby…
Why did you pick out Hemdani to attempt to prove your point about every tiny detail of Rangers (sic) situation being pored over?
What about Tommy McLean FFS?
On a more serious note, you were being transparently disingenious, unless of course you were kidding which i doubt given the tone of your posts…
You know full well that the peepil the posters on this site are truly interested in, for myriad reasons, are The Cardigan of Dignity and the pie eater and that is as it should be in my opinion…
The unfolding Hearts story will, i’m sure, be debated, however there is only one Establishment team and I fear their troubles will always take precedence…
I’d love to update everyone on the going ons at Dens,
But I don’t think anyone has a clue about that at the moment!
Charlotte’s latest is intriguing.
Let us all banish these silly colours. Full hearing has been captured and transcribed. http://i.imgur.com/uhbt0RW.jpg #ComingSoon
She says, “Full hearing has been captured and transcribed”. Reading that literally it suggests there is audio as well as text. The image suggests that it is an official court transcription. Perhaps someone could verify.
I’d have thought it would be a bit tricky to get access to detailed records of court proceedings. Even for CW.
Its time to get out on a limb. I don’t think Charlotte is working to a pre-ordained agenda that we would recognise.
I am naive enough to think that the good guys will win out in the end, even if the vast majority of the evidence suggests otherwise.
What has been discussed on here over the last few days? LNS!
What lies at the heart of LNS? EBT’s!
Lo and behold what does Charlotte come up with? Stuff on EBT’s!
Remember, she came here first before going to twitter. We were a bit cautious, quite rightly. However as time has passed our suspicions have remained just that. Suspicions. We haven’t been able to piece together a modus operandi that can identify who this person is. Yet the blog has proven itself capable of sniffing out all other kinds of covert activities.
Time to publish or be damned. I think Charlotte’s on our side. I think she shares our aspirations. I think she shares our exasperations.
bailemeanach says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 20:57
Re the lock in period. I was under the impression it was a 12 month period. Was the 12 months just for institutional investors who bought a certain amount at an arranged price? Is there a threshold where 6 months kicks in? Sorry but I’m not au fait with city matters.
==============================================================
12 months is for directors and key employees – there were only two key employees: McCoist and Ahmad.
The institutional investors bought £17 million of shares at flotation on 19/12/2012 and they had a 6 month lock-in from that date,
The original consortium members have always been a bit of a puzzle to me and although their TRFCL shares were swapped 1-for-1 with RIFC Plc shares I have never been sure if any kind of lock-in applied and I don’t know if all the original TRFCL shares were actually swapped.
I also don’t know if the original consortium members all received TRFCL shares or whethher some other type of arrangement was put in place if they were deemed to have a ‘loan’ rather than a shareholding. If they had loans I can only assume if they were savvy investors it was guaranteed on the likes of Ibrox Stadium. I also don’t know what any repayment period might be or what interest would be payable.
Of course if they all received a share swap none of this might apply – I just don’t know but I have the feeling that all might become clear fairly soon. Btw I’m not au fait with City matters either just inquisitive 🙂
Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 21:00
“I suppose the issue of achieving success with money that wasn’t really there will then come up and that 1-5 Cup defeat will seem even more hard to accept”.
—————
Did you miss a smiley off that last line Danish 🙂
mullach says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 21:09
Lo and behold what does Charlotte come up with? Stuff on EBT’s!
Remember, she came here first before going to twitter. We were a bit cautious, quite rightly. However as time has passed our suspicions have remained just that. Suspicions. We haven’t been able to piece together a modus operandi that can identify who this person is. Yet the blog has proven itself capable of sniffing out all other kinds of covert activities.
=================================================================
Let me be quite clear – I am not Charlotte 🙂
I felt in view of my EBT posting I should make that clear 🙂
Still and I could be wrong in this but just looking at her info and twitter exchanges – it seems to me that she doesn’t intend just to hand the goodies over. I really get the feeling she wants punters to work for the info and do something with it. I might be havering but it’s what I feel and perhaps she has that much info she might decide to drop tit-bits when she sees posters have an interest in a subject.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 21:04
Did we(I include us all,not just the mods) do the right thing by rejecting her advances?,
I don’t know but I take it a a back handed compliment that the site admin rejected her advances if they weren’t satisfied wrt the legalities whatever of publishing said info.
==================================================================
I post/have posted on a number of sites and tend not to argue with Mods anywhere as it’s their site although sometimes I will privately ask for direction. If I don’t accept/like the controls then I go elsewhere or can always start my own site.
However, to return to Charlotte I back the site admin on the CF issue because I felt that if she was for real I could see a huge and fairly immediate problem coming down the track that if TSFM became the exclusive disseminators of her material then site could be shut-down.
I think what’s happening now is the best way – this isn’t about blowing our own trumpet it’s about getting as much coverage for her documents as possible and our part is to try and analyse what we can and try and get a handle on its authenticity.
If lawyers close down one of her outlets there are plenty more she can move to and they’ll never actually be able to close her down. I very much doubt that they’ll try to close sites down that are just discussing publicly available material. If they do it will be great for the bampots and clatterers and a PR disaster for them IMO.
ecobhoy, thanks for your insight. Very helpful to my understanding of how things are playing out.
On a wider note, this site is great for simpler folk like me. I can follow events to an extent, but when I need a wee bit of guidance or clarity, the experts on here are always on hand to reply personally
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 20:57
“Paras [39 46] cover the evidence given by the three Ibrox employeesto LNS – read and judge for yourself”.
————
ecobhoy, I had a quick read at para’s 39 to 46 at your suggestion. I have not read the ‘reasons for decision’ so my logic here is superficial.
What immediately jumps out is Mr. Odam’s statement :
“There was a common understanding of those involved that the company was not
required to register the [side-letters] as part of the player registration process because the
players or other beneficiaries had no unfettered contractual entitlement arising out of the
scheme and because any monies advanced to the players by a sub-trust were loans not
payments. Throughout my employment with [Oldco] I was acting within my
understanding of what was required by the player registration rules.”
This sits very uncomfortably alongside the following extract from one of the side letters published bu LNS :
”
1. £600,000 in total, payable £150,000 in October 2003, £150,000 in April
2004, £150,000 in October 2004 and £150,000 in April 2005.
2. Effective from the date of this letter until 31 May 2004, £2,000 for each
competitive First Team match in which you have played for the Club, the
relevant amount being payable in quarterly instalments in arrears on the
last business day in each of October, January, April and June during each
season. In the event that there have been less than 5 matches for which
payment is due in any instalment, payment in respect of the same will be
deferred until the next instalment date”.
If the EBT payments were not contractual, why would they have an associated schedule that was dependent on a player’s ‘appearance’. Surely loan payments made on the basis that the player performed ‘work’ for the club strongly infers that they were remuneration (or benefit in kind).
Is there anything in the ‘Reasons for decision’ that clarifies the legal standp[oint on this? Or do you have a view as to why these loans were not considfered remuneration when on the face of it they were triggered by the player performing useful work for the club?
The phrase “…beneficiaries had no unfettered contractual entitlement…”, is the critical one.
The side letters detailed the ‘work’ that had to be performed (appearance). They provide a date range when the work is to be performed and they detail the payment that is to be expected. To me that is the bare bones of a contract. The ‘fettered entitlement’ was that work had to be perfortmed to procure payment. Was LNS untutored in commercial law which meant he did not recognise a contractual obligation when he saw one?
Even if the loans were to be later repaid, they would still have been a benefit in kind surely. When advancing commercial loans the creditworthiness of the recipient is generally tested to ensure repayment can be made. Often there is an interest rate attached. I cannot walk into my bank and demand a loan with no interest charge. If I could then surely I would derive a benefit from such an arrangement.
ozyhibby says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 20:16
——————————————–
You reap what you sow!
If you truly want to debate the Hearts situation then don’t come onto the blog spouting statements about Hearts stealing money, who wants to debate with someone that comments in that manner?
And to compare the situation with Rangers is totally wrong, to date; Hearts have being paying all creditors and stiffed nobody. Badly run? Yes! Criminal? Not even a consideration in my opinion.
If you want a serious debate then start by being serious.
mullach says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:07
======================================================
Good man – you’re looking at the Decision and thinking what the Rangers defence was and rejecting it. You’ll be happy to hear that LNS agreed with you and rejected the thinking as well and ruled the payments were no different from wages and should have been declared and that’s why the £250K penalty for non-disclosure was applied. See you don’t need to be a legal expert to know what’s right 🙂
However the FTTT accepted the Rangers argument and I can understand why although I think they were wrong. But the dissenting minority opinion from Poone cut through all the legal guff and said – never mind all the legal eye candy, smoke and mirrors and let’s look at what actually happened in real life. she said that the recipients should be paying tax and NI on the ‘loans’ because they weren’t loans but income and that’s as clear as the light of day. If the HMRC don’t win their appeal I truly will be flabbergasted.
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:24
“…ruled the payments were no different from wages and should have been declared and that’s why the £250K penalty for non-disclosure…”.
————
I scrolled to the top of the LNS decision and saw that in para 1 after making my post. Perhaps I should have read/listened more carefully on the previous occasions you have pointed this out. I have a lot of reading to do. I’ll try and be a bit better informed next time.
easyJambo says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 16:08
============================
Thanks for your analysis of the Hearts situation – very useful to someone like myself who has a lot of knowledge gaps on the Hearts detail.
So it’s not always about money: Fan power forces Bolton to drop QuickQuid sponsorship. Bravo Bolton W.
http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/local/10466108.Bolton_Wanderers_pull_out_of_QuickQuid_deal/
mullach says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:33
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:24
“…ruled the payments were no different from wages and should have been declared and that’s why the £250K penalty for non-disclosure…”.
————
I scrolled to the top of the LNS decision and saw that in para 1 after making my post. Perhaps I should have read/listened more carefully on the previous occasions you have pointed this out. I have a lot of reading to do. I’ll try and be a bit better informed next time.
==========================================================
Documents like the LNS Decision are a bit awesome to begin with and it has taken me a long time to start to feel I understand what happened and that has meant re-reading it countless times. But I think its always easier in something like that to looks at the different issues or strands and tackle them separately and they eventually start coming together in terms of understanding the linkage which is going on.
Not easy but with a bit of patience it can be done and there are always others to ask for an opinion or a pointer.
Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013
So it’s not always about money: Fan power forces Bolton to drop QuickQuid sponsorship. Bravo Bolton W.
http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/local/10466108.Bolton_Wanderers_pull_out_of_QuickQuid_deal/
==============================================================
I’ll need to find a Bolton Wanderers fansite and send a message of support – excellent move by them!
Ecobhoy, shooting from memory I’m sure I read an article which stated 5 cases weren’t considered by LNS, this maybe in the msm so perhaps needs a healthy pinch of salt.
You have forced me to d/l the LNS PDF & actually start reading it. 39-46 is quite enlightening an organisation where the senior managers/board seem to work with each other on a need to know basis like MI5 with no questions or discusions in the boardroom. Financial managers taking everything McMillan said without checking for themselves, the stock answer seems to be McMillan said it was awright so there. This is a man who’s credibility was shot to pieces in the FTT.
My conclusion is no questions were asked or discussions recorded because they all knew full well the dodgyness/rule breaching/illegality of it all.
Mullach, again shooting from memory 10 years was considered a default time period for a loan with no specific repayment plan in place, if it wasn’t a sham loan as HMRC conceded in the FTT, I think someone posted this & also thought this was a deliberate ploy to allow them/BDO to ask for the loans to be repayed which if it did happen would enrich the creditors pot & allow BDO to gorge themselves in fees for a few years.
I have put together all the names that CF has stated received EBTs that I don’t think are in the LNS lists. Some shouldn’t be in the LNS lists because they are Rangers managers and admin staff and even ex-staff when they got their EBT it would appear. And some are players who should have been on the LNS lists but weren’t.
Alex McLeish, Andrew Watson, Bert Van Lingen, Bob Reilly, Campbell Ogilvie, Daniel Cousin, David Joliffe, Dick Advocaat, Douglas Odam, Dragan Mladenovic, Emerson Costa, George Adams, Graeme Souness, Ian McGuinness, Jan Wouters, Joel Le Hir, John Greig, John McClelland, Jose KarlPierre Fan Fan, Libar Sionko, Martin Baird, Nick Peel, Paul LeGuen, Sitirios Kyriakos, Stephane Wiertelak, Tero Pentilla, Tommy McLean, Walter Smith and Yves Colleau.
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:24
‘.. If the HMRC don’t win their appeal I truly will be flabbergasted.’
——
And so will many, many other people!
(But, with respect, I don’t think Dr Poone, in cutting through, as you say, the ‘legal guff’, was in any way being any less of a lawyer in her approach.
On the contrary, she did what any good judge is required to do: read the law, read how the law has been applied in precedent cases , and read the law with a proper, intelligent, real life understanding of what Parliament clearly intended the law to mean , and apply that understanding in a clear straightforward manner to the facts before her, with no perversion of the English language to try to justify a ridiculous decision).
I venture to suggest that the credibility as lawyers of her two fellow tribunal members hit rock-bottom in the minds of legal people generally, and that the said two may find themselves not getting too many important gigs in future!
I do remember RTC going mental at the suggestion that Cardigan returned to any position at ibrokes. Has come to pass and the EBT is finally revealed.
I venture to suggest that the credibility as lawyers of her two fellow tribunal members hit rock-bottom in the minds of legal people generally, and that the said two may find themselves not getting too many important gigs in future!
=======================================
I wouldn’t say that. With potential Sevco legal actions threatening to run for the next decade, I’m sure there will be some opportunities on the horizon.
ddmc999 says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:53
Ecobhoy, shooting from memory I’m sure I read an article which stated 5 cases weren’t considered by LNS.
==============================================================
I’m certain you are correct and I think it was because Rangers accepted at some stage that it was taxable.
But that wasn’t of any significance to LNS in the context of non-disclosure because he held that all non-disclosure of EBTs was an offence. I haven’t actually seen anyone on here articulate why these 5 would have affected the LNS Decision on eligibility and that as far as I can see is the only area that might influence things.
But I can’t really comment until I hear what the argument is and where the necessary citations are in the FTTT and LNS Decision so that I can form an opinion. They may be right but I would need to hear the details.
Still I’m glad to see you’re looking at the Decision because so few actually have read it and if they have I doubt it is with an open mind. I agree with your opinion by the way – they appear to have been walking on egg shells and saying nothing so that they could deny later if ever called to account.
I’m not answering for Mullach but on the loan issue when I started reading the the FTTT Decision I thought HMRC had made a mistake in not asking for them to be declared ‘sham’ but I came to realise they were playing a cleverer long term game designed to maximise claw-back. The appeal will be very interesting.
I think 5 were deemed by both sides accepted to be taxable in the judgement and basically put on pay at your leisure status.
However isn’t the discrepancy more than 5?
I have to pause in my reading of the LNS decision to flag up these paragraphs :
[39] Campbell Ogilvie is currently president of the SFA. He was employed by Oldco from
1978 until 2005. He was initially employed as assistant secretary, and became company
secretary in 1979. He became an executive director of Oldco in 1989, but remained as company
secretary until 2002. Mr Odam took over the role of company secretary until he left in 2003.
Mr Ogilvie dealt with aspects of football administration at Rangers until late 2002 or early 2003…
[40] Mr Ogilvie learnt about the existence of the MGMRT in about 2001 or 2002, because a
contribution was made for his benefit. He understood that this was non-contractual. Although as
a result he knew about the existence of the MGMRT, he did not know any details of it. He
subsequently became aware, while he remained director of Oldco, that contributions were being
made to the MGMRT in respect of players. He assumed that these were made in respect of the
players’ playing football, which was the primary function for which they were employed and remunerated. He had no involvement in the organisation or management of Oldco’s
contributions to the MGMRT, whether for players or otherwise.
He said:
“I assumed that all contributions to the Trust were being made legally, and that any
relevant football regulations were being complied with. I do not recall contributions to
the Trust being discussed in any detail, if at all, at Board meetings. In any event, Board
meetings had become less and less frequent by my later years at Rangers.”
He also said:
“Nothing to do with the contributions being made to the Trust fell within the scope of my
remit at Rangers”.
However it should be noted that Mr Ogilvie was a member of the board of directors who
approved the statutory accounts of Oldco which disclosed very substantial payments made under the EBT arrangements.
————
So the President of the Scottish Football Association presided over a policy of mis-registration of players for a possible period of years. I know this will have been posted in the past but it bears repetition.
“I assumed that all contributions to the Trust were being made legally, and that any
relevant football regulations were being complied with”.
Well we can sleep well at night knowing our national game rests in capable hands.
“I assumed that all contributions to the Trust were being made legally, and that any
relevant football regulations were being complied with”.
In any other country that statement would have made him a national laughing stock.
I have zero training in matters of the law, so can someone tell me why that statement wasn’t demolished by cross examination?
One Scotland – Many Brogue Wearers
Front page Thursday DR,
stevendoyle @stevendoyle75 1m
Hahaha the viz pic.twitter.com/AHMiNNBxlK
paulsatim says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 00:24
This surely has to be a wind up or photoshop job?
Please tell me it isn’t actually true?
CO
I’m still trying via the well soc on the board to get his tenure terminated, no luck so far too many immediate issues like getting a team together.
Could the tic troops do something at the Liverpool game.
This issue drives me mad.
Tartan army also approached.
mullach says
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 23:48
…
(Ogilvie) “I assumed that all contributions to the Trust were being made legally, and that any relevant football regulations were being complied with”.
=================
That Ogilvie defence is as pathetic / unconvincing as this suggestion ;
(Whyte) I assumed that all contributions to HMRC were being made legally, and that any relevant payroll and VAT regulations were being complied with.
Not sure which character is less trustworthy… 🙄
bangordub says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 00:28
Could be, cant find any entry for Kingsnorth on google, unless someone is hiding his business deal a la Craigy Bhoy!
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 21:19
Let me be quite clear – I am not Charlotte
——————————————————–
and let me also be clear ….. it is Not Mark Leiser
Harassment ongoing right now on twitter ….
dj1234567890 @dj12345678902
@mleiser @Vanguard_Bears @CharlotteFakes Cool, tell you what I’ll get the ones out to your work you have f##ked off with bogus accounts
paulsatim says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 00:34
0 0 Rate This
Funny enough neither could I. Has to be a wind up, It couldn’t be that hilarious
If true, we could have a lot of fun with the past and present cast of characters who would make it to Viz magazines pages………
Looks like its true….
The Daily Record @Daily_Record 39m
Today’s front page. pic.twitter.com/dzGaDExnyx
Retweeted by Scouse Tims
Now this is interesting:
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/former-rangers-chief-charles-green-1933249
Deal struck LAST OCTOBER?
https://twitter.com/Daily_Record/status/342415566675517440/photo/1
mullach says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 19:35
25
5
Rate This
I’m left wondering where Charlotte is getting all this stuff from. This appears to be the opening extract of the court stenographers transcription. Whose e:mail account would have that? This is curioser and curioser. Only providing a snippet of the opening section is enough to illustrate that its in her possession but not enough to provide juicy details we might like to feast on. Its as if we are not her audience. We are merely bystanders on the pavement outside the theatre.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Indeed so. Is the drip drip of embarrassing info designed to run along side the the claim against Rangers in such a way that it creates a bigger mess and puts pressure on TRFC to cough up? The timing is perfect.
…at least Carol Vorderman still looks good… 😉
Mark has links to Tom Watson (MP) when working on Leveson, …. so I know how they worked out the alleged link …. #NotGoingThere
mullach says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 23:48
‘..Well we can sleep well at night knowing our national game rests in capable hands.’
—-
I bang on about the real problem for Scottish Football having been, and continuing to be, the revolving door between the SFA and the dead club.
The fact that CO is still in post is proof positive that that ol’ door is still revolving!
Any other organisation on the planet ,with any pretensions to ‘integrity’, would have had a quiet word with such a ‘conflicted’ member and told him to GTF pronto.
And any other organisation, with the level of business integrity to be found in the RIFC boardroom (i.e.none at all) BUT possessing an animal instinct for survival , would have done the same.
It is very clear to me that the SFA Board have shown, and continue to show, neither integrity NOR ordinary business PR savvy.
There simply has to be a ‘Prague Spring’ in Scottish Football!
The SFA membership as a whole has somehow got to face up to reality, clear out ‘compromised’ persons, wrest power from ‘the bureaucracy’ , tackle the bully and assert their rights to operate their businesses in a fair and free open market place, not one in which they have to grovel for crumbs tossed to them disdainfully by hubristic, megalomaniac, deeply deceitful ( but fawned upon by the MSM) club owners.
The malign influence of the SDMs , CGs, CWs of the football world needs to be countered by honest men of business.
It only takes 10 ( or maybe 12-damn it, I meant to look that up!) club chairmen to requisition an EGM where that could be done.
And, in my view, it should be done
Now.
Record FP
Nae worries ‘makes millions’.
Hey
They’ve got real. Not billions. 100% improvement in accuracy by the hacks.
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/sfl-division-three/tom-english-cringing-at-charles-green-tribute-act-1-2955392#.Ua_MyWa7Z9U.twitter
By TOM ENGLISH
Published on 06/06/2013 00:00
Craig Mather’s spiel about the enemies of Rangers and the vengeance that will be visited upon them won no marks for originality.
It was a depressingly familiar and grimly predictable routine as practised by Charles Green last summer, a cynical play for the affections of the support by telling them what they want to hear.
It was as if Mather, the interim chief executive, went rummaging in the drawers of his predecessor and found a gameplan on how to prise season ticket money from the fans. Mather’s words at a Rangers supporters’ soiree in North America last weekend were cringe-making.
“You [the supporters] might believe we don’t feel hurt to the same extent as you, but we do,” said Mather. Frankly, Craig, I very much doubt that you do, but anyway. . . “Sometimes you have to wait,” he continued, when referring to the action that would be taken against these Rangers haters. “We’ve chosen, and we will continually choose, the right moment to strike. Please, never believe that I or any other directors don’t know the names of the people who have tried to damage this club. We know them all. We know what each one’s tried to do and I can assure you we will never, ever forget about that.”
If this was coming from John Greig or Walter Smith or Ally McCoist you might still find it melodramatic and completely daft, but at least you’d know that it was heartfelt from people who have Rangers in their blood, people who are emotionally involved. Coming from Mather, who couldn’t find his way to Ibrox until relatively recently, it is utterly pre- posterous.
It’s hard to know how best to describe Mather’s rallying call. In this instance he comes across as a kind of Phil Neal figure, if you remember that documentary about Graham Taylor when he was manager of England. Neal was Taylor’s assistant and also Taylor’s parrot. Green may have left his position at Ibrox but he appears to have an acolyte in Mather in the business of galvanising season ticket sales. That’s something the new chairman might want to address. The Odditorium at Ibrox has seen enough nonsense for one lifetime without Mather adding to it with his Green tribute act.
bangordub says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 00:43
‘..Deal struck LAST OCTOBER?’
—
Yesterday ,I sent an email, as below ,to Cenkos
‘Good afternoon.
Just wondering why Mr Green’s agreement in October 2012 to Laxey is only NOW being announced?
Did RIFC feel it necessary last October to be less than open and up-front about Mr Hyperbole ( ‘500 000 000 fans world-wide!) Green’s decision not to leave all his shares to his grandchildren, for fear of causing potential investors to distrust him if they knew that what he said publicly was not on all fours with what he did privately?
Presumably you knew at the time. Were you quite happy that that agreement was kept dark?
Cheers,
JC ‘
i enjoyed sending it. i do not expect a reply!
I’m certain now cf is craigie.
All interested parties could receive the transcription.
On you go son.
john clarke says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 01:06
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Why not raise the issue of non disclosure with AIM. The market has been misled. I wouldn’t know who to send it to because I find it difficult to believe AIM have a compliance officer of any note.
JC
If you do get one it will be a belter of a lie.
The Odditorium at Ibrox…
___________________________________________
Wow: that’s almost journalism…? I cry foul! Has TE gone on holiday and got himself an unemployed footballer in a ghostwriter? OK its only spoundbite journalism, but a step up nevertheless.
(Ask the questions of the SFA Tom. Quotes on paper please. The fans that pay the money have a right to know, and if you don’t ask the question and report the answers or lack of, you are failing your profession! )
AIM don’t give a monkeys.
Its your money their profit. Spivland.
Rangers fans money is burnt already.
bogsdollox says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 01:13
‘..Why not raise the issue of non disclosure with AIM..’
—–
Like you, I suspect that AIM is a bit like the house of Commons and the House of Lords.
No more notion of ‘regulating’ anything to do with how their members feed at the trough that we so generously and unquestioningly fill with goodies ( they are MPs! and, God save the mark, our ‘Lords’- who are we to question such?)
(And, way off topic, do not, I pray you, get me started on the effing 60th anniversary guff on radio Scotland.
On coronation day 1953, I took a pair of scissors to a wee green ‘coronation’ tie (that some misguided auntie had given to me) that had a picture of a Household Cavalryman on it.
Even then, I knew how absolutely ridiculous is the concept of monarchy.
And the idea that sharks in the finance world will seriously police their fellows is, sadly, also ridiculous.
Aim responsible cue Buddy HOLLY
Poster on KDS has put up info on new “kingpin” that is getting Big Hands’ shares…
http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/?p=12263868&t=8817196
Also an article about him
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-1355368/COLIN-KINGSNORTH-INTERVIEW-The-frugal-bargain-hunter-eyeing-Alliance-Trust.html
I can see that last night’s “Phantom of the TD’s” went to bed at about 21.30. Looks like his maw said it wiz past his bedtime 😀
@paulatim
That Tom English article about Mather carried almost the exact same sentiments that were expressed on here a several days ago. Although I’m not sure how English can argue that Mather’s “enemies” sentiments, if stated by ‘Rangers legends’, would have made them any more acceptable or less embarrassing.
Thursday 06 June, 2013
Rangers Int F.C. PLC
Update re General Meeting
RNS Number : 4152G
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
06 June 2013
Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers”, the “Company” or “Club”)
Update re Requisition of General Meeting
On 16 May 2013, the Company announced that it had received a notice requisitioning a General Meeting of shareholders. The Company is engaged in discussions with a representative of the requisitioning shareholder and the timetable for posting a notice to shareholders has been extended with the agreement of the requisitioning shareholder.
Further announcements will be made as appropriate.
For further information please contact:
Rangers International Football Club plc
Craig Mather, CEO
Brian Stockbridge, FD
Tel: 0141 580 8647
Cenkos Securities plc
Tel: 020 7397 8900
Stephen Keys, Adrian Hargrave, Max Hartley (Corporate Finance)
Russell Kerr (Corporate Broking)
Newgate Threadneedle
Tel: 020 7148 6143
Graham Herring / John Coles / Roddy Watt / Fiona Conroy
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 07:27
2 0 Rate This
Thursday 06 June, 2013
Rangers Int F.C. PLC
Update re General Meeting ….
———
Sounds a bit cagey … what does it all mean?
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 07:47
Rangers Int F.C. PLC
Update re General Meeting ….
———
Sounds a bit cagey … what does it all mean?
++++++++
They’re trying to cut a deal, meanwhile the EGM is on hold. I expect to see boardroom changes announced shortly.
As regards Green’s share deal agreed last October- no mention of this important fact in the AIM prospectus. If I had invested in the IPO, on the basis that Green was the new Messiah who would leave his shares to his grandchildren, I’d be feeling somewhat let down. And asking for my money back on the basis of material misrepresentation.
Charles Green’s grandchildren have unusual names, don’t they:
Dodgy Hedge Fund Green, Convicted Vat Fraudster Green, and Wanted By Interpol Green.
neepheid says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 08:19
4 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 07:47
Rangers Int F.C. PLC
Update re General Meeting ….
———
Sounds a bit cagey … what does it all mean?
++++++++
They’re trying to cut a deal, meanwhile the EGM is on hold. I expect to see boardroom changes announced shortly.
As regards Green’s share deal agreed last October- no mention of this important fact in the AIM prospectus. If I had invested in the IPO, on the basis that Green was the new Messiah who would leave his shares to his grandchildren, I’d be feeling somewhat let down. And asking for my money back on the basis of material misrepresentation.
———-
Cheers neepheid. A deal about MM? I am beginning to wonder if any of the others have similar deals lined up, regarding share sales. Just shows that Green was hardly in the door before he was planning his exit.
y4rmy says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 08:29
8 1 Rate This
Charles Green’s grandchildren have unusual names, don’t they:
Dodgy Hedge Fund Green, Convicted Vat Fraudster Green, and Wanted By Interpol Green.
———
Those names are perhaps not too surprising when you realise that one anagram of ‘Charles Green’ is ‘Rangers Leech’.
Paul McConville blog on this mornings AIM announcement
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/06/06/rangers-egm-no-decision-yet-blue-pitch-holdings-in-talks-with-rangers/
alex thomson @alextomo 2h
25c forecast, and at 52 it’s 25 years today that I joined Channel 4 News.
Brian mcguire Brian mcguire @Bthebhoy 1h
@alextomo weldone Alex a great career!now nail sevco before you retire lol
alex thomson alex thomson @alextomo 1h
@Bthebhoy I have no retirement/walking away plans, as the next probe of Rangers’ massive tax-avoidance scheme looms.
Read this as a power play whereby said `requisitioning shareholder` can now instigate an EGM at the drop of a hat – which they probably will call once the STs in, and / or wait for June lock-in releases. Murky stuff.
Good post form CelticJoe on KDS on the Laxleys
http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/?p=12264058&t=8817196
The fact that Green’s deal with Laxey was agreed last October suggests the shares are in return for financing — the firm specialises in “short-term arbitrage”.
They also have interests in Malaysia and Singapore, where Green’s convicted fraudster pal Rafat Ali Rizvi plies his trade.
So Laxey may be getting 15% of the shares for helping Green pay for his 85%.
Just an indication of the murky waters this shower of chancers and spivs are swimming in.
I don’t think it signifies over much. Yet
JohnBhoy
June 6, 2013 at 8:30 am This is a beezer.
TWO ME OR NOT TWO ME
Ok, so The Rangers haven’t made a decision about an EGM, but I made a decision yesterday! I changed my name!! Phoned all my creditors and told them I’m not me, I’m somebody else, so they can whistle for their money ha ha. Would you believe it, I had to repeat myself, so I explained to them, in language that a golden labrador would understand, that I am not me because my name is me and I have changed it so that makes me a different me which means that the me that owed them money was some other me, not me. Now the old me is a new me. Simples.
Then I got a phone call from a bolshy education authority and some ancient Universities asking for the return of the qualifications that belonged to that other guy who owes people money and I claim is not me. Bloody nerve! I tried to explain to them that although I am a new me I’m still the old me because my name is not me because I am me; but if it’s all right by them then I’d still like to be known by my old name because if I’m not me then who the hell am I? I offered them money for the qualifications that belonged to the old me to make me me and they told me – the new me, that is – to take a hike. Bloody cheek!
Then one of the fellas was really nice when I bunged him a tenner and he told the new me about a friendly website called Sertificates_For_All.con and they said ok we know you’ve changed your name and you have no debt because you are no longer the old you but a new you who wants to be known as the old you with the same qualifications as the old you, and so here’s a nicely embossed print-out of the qualifications you had and we’ve even put on it the old name that you’ve changed – and we’ve included a wee covering letter to say that the new you is the old you without the historical debt of the old you but with the historical qualifications of the old you. Did warn me not to find myself in a real court. Says if that happens then games-a-bogie – I’ll have to give my real name! Anyway, now the new me is the old me again. Simples.
I think the Duedil site provides interesting information. It only let you browse for a wee while then insists that you register so use your time efficiently. Turnover for Laxey Partners is about £4M currently. I’d imagine the bus company would do more than that. Business is valued at £1.5 – 2.0M. I didn’t get to the ‘opinions’ tab before registration lockout. There are 101 items listed under ‘group structure’ which is much larger than I have seen for other companies. Not a big company by any measure :
https://www.duedil.com/company/04030014/laxey-partners-uk-limited
Cannot fathom how these chaps ever got elected as leaders…….
Mark Dingwall of the Rangers Supporters Trust said: “Laxey’s small shareholding should not be a problem in itself but their pattern of behaviour in other companies is worrying.
“Rangers have not paid a dividend to shareholders in the last 30 years.
“We think that should continue, with profits reinvested in the team and infrastructure.”
Questions for him (anyone can join in cos he has no clue)…………
(1) In what year did RFC_NIL make a profit?
(2) The shareholders of the last 30 years – do they have the same share certificates currently? Or was there a different certificate given? Why would that be?
(3) If a company paid dividends because it made a profit after stiffing the taxpayer for 60 million quid, that would be ok?
(4) Profits means dividends – RFC means loss – draw a connection for me please.
http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2013/06/rangers-exposed.html
A good laugh, this one. Or is he a genuine decent bear?
neepheid says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 10:02
1
0
Rate This
Quantcast
http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2013/06/rangers-exposed.html
A good laugh, this one. Or is he a genuine decent bear?
_____________________________________________________
Read that on RM and the amount of them up in arms! LOL.
neepheid says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 10:02
http://www.thecoplandroad.org/2013/06/rangers-exposed.html
A good laugh, this one. Or is he a genuine decent bear?
—————————
Hacked or just being upfront about who unashamedly they are and are now so empowered that they no longer need to hide it!
Some light touch moderation right now because I am up to me neck in New Site (but still the same blog!)
Be good as only one mod on duty. Update at the weekend.
mullach says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 09:46
I think the Duedil site provides interesting information. It only let you browse for a wee while then insists that you register so use your time efficiently.
======================================================
You can register on Duedil free of charge using a free email account and any name you want and use Duedil as much as you want. But no point in buying any docs from it as they are cheaper from Companies House.
neepheid says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 10:02
I had a look at your link and particularly enjoyed reading the undernoted.
HL90June 6, 2013 at 10:41 AM
What a load of fecking pish. As a Mason and a very proud mason at that, the Masonic Fraternity is not religious, and have many religious sections within the organisation, including catholics, seiks, jewish, so how fecking dare you.
you are totally out of order and this kind of pish should not be aloud onto a computer.
There seem to be a contradiction in his posting ” the Masonic Fraternity is not religious and have many religious sections with in it” what’s that all about doh! 🙂 as for his “this kind of pish should not be aloud onto a computer” I didn’t realise there was an audio button, did I miss it 🙂
john clarke says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 23:16
ecobhoy says:
Wednesday, June 5, 2013 at 22:24
‘.. If the HMRC don’t win their appeal I truly will be flabbergasted.’
——
And so will many, many other people!
(But, with respect, I don’t think Dr Poone, in cutting through, as you say, the ‘legal guff’, was in any way being any less of a lawyer in her approach.
On the contrary, she did what any good judge is required to do: read the law, read how the law has been applied in precedent cases , and read the law with a proper, intelligent, real life understanding of what Parliament clearly intended the law to mean , and apply that understanding in a clear straightforward manner to the facts before her, with no perversion of the English language to try to justify a ridiculous decision).
I venture to suggest that the credibility as lawyers of her two fellow tribunal members hit rock-bottom in the minds of legal people generally, and that the said two may find themselves not getting too many important gigs in future!
=====================================================================
I think that you have to remember that, unlike the other two FTTT members, Heidi Poone isn’t a lawyer but an accountant. She understood the evidence in terms of what it meant in real life terms and not buried in legal jargon designed to give an ‘alternative universe’ disguise to what EBTs were actually all about.
So that’s what I meant when I said she cut through the ‘legal guff’. She knows that the actual reality of all the legal guff surrounding tax avoidance schemes is to prevent Tax and NI being paid. She also did something which a lot of people have missed and concentrated on the huge amount of written evidence including lots of financial documentation.
The two legal members of the Tribunal concentrated more, it would appear, on the quality of oral evidence given which Poone appears to have been much more wary off especially as this evidence was, if not coached, then certainly rehearsed by senior legal people representing Murray Group and their witnesses. Nothing illegal with that of course but it does tend to create a single hymn sheet to sing off.
I am reminded of a phrase from the LNS Decision which I don’t think was followed as far as it should have been. But Dr Poone certainly, in her minority dissenting FTTT Opinion, showed just how powerful that phrase could actually be:
‘In a case recently decided in the Supreme Court, Lloyds TSB Foundation for Scotland v Lloyds Banking Group Plc [2013] UK SC 3
Lord Mance said in paragraph 21 that “the proper approach is contextual and purposive”. He cited Prenn v Simmonds [1971] 1 WLR 1381, in which Lord Wilberforce said at pp 1383 to 1384:
“We must . . . enquire beyond the language and see what the circumstances were with reference to which the words were used, and the object, appearing from those circumstances, which the person using them had in view.”
briggsbhoy says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 11:40
neepheid says:
Thursday, June 6, 2013 at 10:02
“This kind of pish should not be aloud onto a computer”
I didn’t realise there was an audio button, did I miss it 🙂
============================================================
Obviously the Brothers have moved on technologically with the ‘Black Spot’ replaced by a ‘mute’ button.
As to the organisation being full of ‘seik’ (sic) people – well I suppose I’ll need to accept the word of someone who appears to be a member of it.
That cringe-inducing “satire” from the CoplandRoadOrganisation blog is, I presume, what passes for humour in Sevco circles. It just made me groan.
Somewhere, some day, an honest Rangers fan may summon the courage to challenge the shameless anti-Catholic bile that finds such a welcoming and unquestioning home in the Ibrox stands and on the messageboards of Rangers fans’ websites.
But I guess we’re not at that stage yet. Not even close.
Ah, well. What a shame.