The Immortality Project – or – Death and Denial – Guest Post by Humble Pie
Death has a tendency to put everything else into perspective.
My family recently suffered a bereavement. It wasn’t a sudden death but it was still far too quick and far too soon for any of us to get our heads around. As our loved one’s illness progressed, each of us, in our own way, began to prepare for the inevitable. In the end, whilst it was not unexpected, it was nevertheless very traumatic, for everyone concerned.
Grief is a strange and often debilitating set of emotions. Even now, a few months on, when the intense sadness and tears have given way (mostly) to disbelief, we still find it hard to fully comprehend what has happened. We might never completely ‘come to terms’ with that fact, however, we do accept that it DID happen, much as we all wish that it hadn’t.
Many of you will be familiar with the Kubler-Ross model of the five stages of grief; Denial, Anger, Bargaining, Depression and Acceptance. Well, I am aware of having experienced each of these stages over the last year, as well as a couple of others which I wasn’t prepared for (a lot of personal reflection, a little guilt and a not insignificant amount of pain).
It seems to me that the Rangers supporters have been purposefully ensnared in an interminable cycle of the first two stages of KR; alternating between the denial of the death of Rangers and anger at what they feel has been done to their beloved club then back again to denial. This, as any first year psychology student will tell you, is a very unhealthy state of mind which, if not addressed, can quickly lead to physiological and behavioural problems.
At its lowest level, for example, people throughout the ages have continued to set places at the dinner table for their long-dead loved ones. They know in their hearts that the person has died but are comforted by the familiarity of doing the same things that they have always done. However, in extreme cases people have even kept and maintained the actual cadavers of the deceased, dressed them, talked to them and watched TV with them, in a state of absolute denial.
In archaeology, accepting and recognising the inevitability of death through conducting ceremonial burial services is considered to be one of the very first signs of a civilised people. You see, grief is a uniquely human and cathartic process i.e. it can produce ‘a feeling of being cleansed emotionally, spiritually, or psychologically as a result of an intense emotional experience’.
In short, grief is ultimately a good thing which leads you through a series of natural psychological steps towards acknowledgement of an unalterable situation, allowing you to take stock, re-evaluate and start to move on with your own life in a positive way.
That is what should have happened with the fans of the old Rangers.
Instead, this ‘never-ending cycle of the undead’ was positively encouraged by those many unscrupulous individuals who saw a way of making a fast buck from maintaining the ‘Then, Now and Forever’ illusion. Worse still, this resurrection fantasy is being facilitated by the very people whom we have entrusted to stop this kind of thing from happening in the first place. If only the SFA or the MSM had told them the truth, they might have had a chance to actually face up to the situation.
Unfortunately, these two bodies were so complicit in Rangers demise, so right up to their necks in the brown smelly stuff, that they were too afraid to face the inevitable anger which would have rightly come their way. So, they made up grim fairy tales to feed to the bereaved souls about non-existent ‘holding companies’, the ethereal ‘club’ which transcends death and by suggesting that it is ‘all a matter of opinion’.
Ernest Becker, in his 1973 Pulitzer Prize winning book ‘The Denial of Death’, posits that “human civilization is no more than an elaborate, symbolic defence mechanism against the knowledge of our own mortality”. This fear of death acts as an emotional and intellectual response to our basic survival instincts.
‘By embarking on what Becker refers to as an ‘immortality project’, in which a person creates or becomes part of something which they feel will last forever, the person feels they too have become part of something eternal; something that will never die, compared to their physical body that will die one day’. When this ‘immortality project’ is threatened it leads inevitably to fear, depression, loss of identity and sense of purpose.
In that case, the initial reaction of the fans to the imminent demise of Rangers was entirely predictable and understandable. “No way, this can’t happen to us, we are the people”. However, as soon as the full realisation of their club’s inexorable slide into liquidation began to sink in, came the expected anger. But towards whom should their righteous wrath be directed?
“Who did this to us, who are these people?” they cried. “Not I”, said Sir Murray of the Mint, “for I was duped”, “Nor I”, said President Ogilvie, “for it was never my role”. “Nor I”, said Mr Smith, “for I never knew nothing or nothing”. “Not us”, squealed the media monkeys in unison, “for that’s what we were told”, “Nor us”, said the SPL “it was nothing to do with us”.
“Who then?, we demand to know who these people are”, howled the horrified hordes. “T’was the Whyte knight”, they all concurred, “he alone caused this calamity”. “And the bampots”, sneered the slimy slug. “And the taxman”, puffed the pundits. “And the unseen hand of Mr Lawwell”, whispered the bilious bears from the safety of their den.
There were even those who tried to warn them, not least Hugh Adam, Phil Mac and RTC but they didn’t want to know. Even when their very own Messrs Green and Traynor spelt out, in no uncertain terms, that liquidation meant the death of their club, still they chose wilful ignorance. The MSM, with access to the same information, encouraged them to keep their heads firmly ensconced, ostrich stylee, on the banks of that ironically blue and white river in Egypt. Which just goes to show ‘you can lead a lamb to knowledge but you can’t make it think’
The point though is that the Rangers fans have heard the truth and once you have heard something you cannot unhear it. Even if you reject it, even if you deny it, it gnaws away at the back of your mind, infecting your subconscious.
Almost a year ago, I posted the following on TSFM. http://theinternetbampot.wordpress.com/2012/09/ in which I postulated that the SFA were too frightened to say anything which might imply that The Rangers were a new club.
Looking back at that post, I am amazed at how little the landscape has changed.
A year on and it has become apparent that the corporate cancer that destroyed Rangers has continued to metastasize in its new host. Charlotte’s revelations may have shown us that the rabbit hole goes much deeper than we first suspected. However, in my humble opinion, the information provided has only succeeded in ‘poisoning the well’ and deflecting attention from the main culprits in this disaster. Layer upon layer of complexity has been added to an already opaque story and the majority of her utterances appear designed to engage the more enquiring minds on this forum and consume their excess mental energy.
I know that some people are bored with this ‘debate’ but, to my mind, the single most important step for the redemption of Scottish football is the fan’s acceptance that The Rangers, who currently ply their trade in the SPFL First Division, are a new club. Once they have accepted that then everything else that they perceive has happened to them will begin to make sense. They will see that rather than everyone having a fly kick at them when they were down, most were actually trying to help them. It will also dawn on them that the very people who have been telling them that there is an anti-Rangers conspiracy against them are actually the same ones who are screwing them over.
Rangers were not relegated to div 3, The Rangers applied as a new club and were granted entry into the bottom tier of Scottish football. They are not banned from European competition, merely ineligible as a new club without the requisite financial ‘history’. Any reference to ‘rulings’ from ECA, ASA, the BBC Trust and any internal or so-called ‘independent’ enquiries are completely irrelevant, as none of these bodies are the final arbiter in this case. Scots Law is clear that there is no distinction between club and company after incorporation, when the company dies the club dies with it. That is not a matter of opinion, it is a matter of fact.
Sooner or later The Rangers fans are going to realise this fact and when they do, there will be hell to pay. Until they do, their new club can never become truly cleansed. Only then can they move on and only then can they join together with fans of other clubs to root out the real cancer at the heart of Scottish football. That’s why the MSM and the SFA are still petrified to say anything. In the meantime the real creators of this disaster are sneakily positioning themselves further and further away from the scene of the crime.
I am sure the majority of us would happily accept a new Rangers, cleansed of its financial, emotional and supremacist baggage. A club that all decent Rangers fans could support without feeling any guilt about Rangers downfall or that they were being taken for mugs. The prospect of a new dawn in Scottish football, where sporting integrity took primacy and clubs lived within their means was very real. However, as usual the SFA couldn’t miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.
The truth is that Scottish football is in the state it is in, not because Rangers died but because those with the power and mandate to effect the prognosis sat back and did nothing. I am sure that they believe that ‘time heals all wounds’ and that the longer this injustice is allowed to stand the more likely it will be accepted by the man in the street. No doubt the authorities feel it is in the national interest to ‘let sleeping dogs lie’. However I cannot accept this. I believe that it is vital that we are able to face up to reality so we can move on for the benefit of all football supporters.
Scottish football is at a crossroads right now, I think we all feel it. Rampant corruption has become so mainstream that many of our fellow supporters have began to accept this as the norm. However, it just doesn’t sit right with me and I suspect that many regular contributors and readers of this blog feel likewise.
We have quite lost our way and we live in a society which spends vast amounts of money paying people like Jack Irvine to ensure that we stay lost. The mainstream media treat us like little imbeciles and demand that we conform to their assumed ‘professional superiority’. The PR machine plays up to our stereotypes and feeds our fantasies while the poorest people pay to swallow their poisonous propaganda and relentless trivia.
So what can we do ? Clearly, battering out a few blog posts and strongly worded letters to the various authorities involved has been rewarded by the square root of FA.
How can we make this an opportunity for growth rather than contributing to the destruction of Scottish football ? It is not good enough to tear down a system unless we have a better system to replace it. However, I believe that it is not the system itself which is broken. It is that those charged with administering the system are hopelessly corrupted, hugely conflicted and unable to apply their rules without fear or favour.
By their incapacity and inaction (wilful or otherwise) the SFA have facilitated a motley crew of various spivs, chancers and con-artists to glean the last few meagre pickings from the bones of the emaciated loyal supporters of this new club purporting to be the once mighty Rangers. They have permitted these ne’er-do-wells to collectively appropriate many tens of millions of pounds from the Rangers fans, the creditors and the public purse. They have already allowed this corporate malignancy to spread to a new host, ‘The Rangers’, and the absence of ‘moral hazard’ makes it more likely that the disease will continue to spread.
Benjamin Franklin once said, “‘Nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.”
Someone else once said, “The wages of sin are death, but by the time taxes are taken out, it’s just sort of a tired feeling.”
I sense that we are all beginning to get tired of this. It is time to stand together, all football fans, face the facts and direct our anger against the officers of the SFA who have allowed this sham to develop into a catastrophe.
I have no doubt that my humble opinions expressed here will raise the ire of many deluded souls. However, I am comfortable in the knowledge that the only people who get mad at you for speaking the truth are those that are living a lie.
RIP Big Man.
“I therefore direct that future hearings, whether in the Upper Tribunal or the First-tier Tribunal, shall be in public.”
_______________________________________________
Car 54 where are you? – sorry I mean John Clarke where are you. I hope you are available for the UTT public hearing. I understand the beautiful barrister, you so succinctly 😉 described at the previous hearing, will not be present at this hearing. I hope this will not put you off!
What about a donation to send John, on behalf of this blog, to this important public hearing.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/sep/13/bbc-rangers
upthehoops says:
September 13, 2013 at 6:04 am
Quck question for anyone who knows the answer. When was the last time any club from Ibrox filed fully audited accounts?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is a difficult one to answer. Even if we go back to the last ones signed off by GT. In light of recent disclosures it could be argued that they were not “fully audited” because important documents and information was withheld from them by the then Directors. So I’m guessing the answer is longer a go than we think.
“The essential question before the First-tier Tribunal was whether, as HMRC say, payments made into the EBT were emoluments subject to PAYE and NICs deductions or, as the Murray Group argues, they were not so subject. That is also the fundamental issue before the Upper Tribunal.”
I think this is a very important part “… payments made into the EBT …” not whether what was paid out was loans.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:47 am
I still think giving them to 31st Oct to raise as many consultancy fees as they can then hand over TRFC including the troublesome (cost wise and emmotionally charged) Ibrox is their best way out. One might even say pre planned?
rantinrobin says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:32 am
“I therefore direct that future hearings, whether in the Upper Tribunal or the First-tier Tribunal, shall be in public.”
Now that’s want we want to see and hear!
John Clarke,book your place in Court!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
As a registered tax geek I too may pop along to this and provide JC with some technical input.
Smugas says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:06 am
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:47 am
I still think giving them to 31st Oct to raise as many consultancy fees as they can then hand over TRFC including the troublesome (cost wise and emmotionally charged) Ibrox is their best way out. One might even say pre planned?
_________________________________________________________________________
If we consider Rangers to be a Fir tree then the objective of spivs is too strip all of the branches over time leaving only a bare trunk. Stripping a branch at a time does no real damage to the tree until of course a critical point is reached and the tree is unable to breathe.
At present they will be busily paying out fees to themselves and their interests and making “special” provision for the TRFC properties. They will transfer these to RIFC at as low a value as possible in return for writing off some of the loans advanced to TRFC by RIFC since floatation. The objective will be to secure the property and leave debt in TRFC for the new owners to service.
Recent valuations of the stadium etc in the accounts and prospectus were far higher than what was paid from the administraightors but remember that valuation was very much a “desktop” one and new information about dilapidations and asbestos should make it possible to revise that number downwards.
Tif Finn says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:05 am
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Agreed and it is why HMRC did not advance the sham argument in relation to the operation of the EBT’s. They were focusing on the very first step in the scheme and trying to knock that down what happened after the payments in to the EBT’s was not so important to them and in 5 cases Rangers conceded this.
I just emailed FIFA and UEFA about the “Black decision”. PLus I emailed the SFA to tell them that I had done so.
Now let’s wait and see what happens.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Aye, precisely feck all but I do feel slightly better that at least I tried to do something.
SFA – the association that Integrity forgot.
From CQN:
TRFC submit incomplete Annual Return
13th September 2013
Companies House published the long overdue Annual Return for The Rangers Football Club Ltd (previously Sevco Scotland Ltd) today. Although only received by Companies House yesterday (12 Sep 13) it was dated 29th May 2013, however, the submission was incomplete.
A company is required to detail all their shareholders since their previous Annual Return (or as in this instance, since formation). Companies House say the Annual Return must detail “the name of every shareholder (or joint-shareholders) who has ceased to be a shareholder since the made-up date of the previous annual return (or in the case of a first return, since the incorporation of the company)”.
The only shareholder detailed on this Annual Return is Rangers International Football Club PLC (RIFC PLC). RIFC PLC was not formed until 16 November 2012, nearly four months after Sevco Scotland Ltd was formed, so could not have been a founding shareholder.
And there’s more…….
The Rangers Football Club Ltd issued a Statement of Capital to Companies House, dated 31 October 2012, showing the same number of shares in issue as this Annual Return (33,415,200), some two weeks before Rangers International was formed. The Statement of Capital was submitted by Caroline Nicholls of Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP, who should be in a position to assist the directors.
I’d never really given any consideration to who owned Sevco Scotland Ltd prior to the shares being consumed by Rangers International, but this omission is curious. The story will move on now with auditors Deloittes taking centre stage. They have plenty on their plate prior to signing off the PLC’s accounts so may be happy to turn a blind eye to the reporting requirements of a subsidiary company. Companies House already have an active issue over submissions for Sevco 5088 Ltd, it remains to be seen whether this one passes below the radar.
This is all so unnecessary as I am sure the correct information would be perfectly appropriate and in good order.
Can you imagine what we would be doing if our ‘club’ was being run in this manner? This story is being played out while all those who should be asking questions are being distracted by a player betting against his own club!
In the grand scheme of things it doesn’t matter if Ian Black hedges against himself, or what embarrassingly light punishment he receives. The real story is so much bigger, it is being written in large type but the football authorities appear happy to stand back and let events take their course.
No looks of surprise next time around – from anyone.
senior says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:59 am
‘..Car 54 where are you? – sorry I mean John Clarke where are you…
——
Right here, senior.
Running late this morning and have just this minute logged in.
Let me scroll back a bit and see what’s what.
Blin walking away..interesting.
“@BBCchrismclaug: Frank Blin no longer seeking election onto board and will have no further involvement.”
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:47 am
Procedure for calling an AGM in a publicly quoted company requires 20 clear working days notice, so effectively four weeks . A copy of any accounts should be included with the AGM Notice, so if the plan is to hold the AGM by the end of October, we should know soon enough whether they have audited accounts to lay before the shareholders…………..they may just provide a note to the effect that there is no more money and wishing the next set of rogues the very best of luck.
They could delay the AGM until the end of the year, but I can’t think why they would wish to do that……
senior says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:59 am,
rantinrobin says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:32 am
.’John Clarke,book your place in Court!,
Drew Peacock says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:14 am
‘..As a registered tax geek I too may pop along to this and provide JC with some technical input..’
—-
All else being equal, boys/girls(?), I’ll be there.
And if Drew ( or any other poster ) can make it,too, I shall identify myself ( via PM if necessary).
I have printed off the FTT T judgment for further careful amateurish study.
Quite looking forward to it!
Frank Blin is not playing anymore,wonder why ?
Blin and Gone.
If I was a sevco fan, thankfully I am not, I would have thought any supporters association’s would have been keen to keep the pressure on and ask for the EGM to take place………too late now (again)………….so more weeks of secrecy before the AGM, didn’t Mather state in his love in meeting (50 Q&A’s) when reassuring the angry bears, he would sort a few things out , apart from getting rid of ja ja binks. How did that go?
I know they are gullible but didn’t think they would be that stupid, not to keep up the pressure.
Also, does anyone know what happened to the high flyer from London , that was handing out flyers one Sunday at Ibrox?
Tic 6709 says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:01 pm
Frank Blin is not playing anymore,wonder why ?
Blin and Gone.
————————-
Blin there, done that.
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:41 am
From CQN:
TRFC submit incomplete Annual Return
13th September 2013
Companies House published the long overdue Annual Return for The Rangers Football Club Ltd (previously Sevco Scotland Ltd) today. Although only received by Companies House yesterday (12 Sep 13) it was dated 29th May 2013, however, the submission was incomplete.
======================================================================
I never doubted that Rangers read this Blog and now we know 🙂
Now the fun begins 😉
I find the headline in that Guardian report curious – The phrasing makes it sound like Jim Spence is having a public spat with someone via the media. What it doesn’t do is convey the fact that he was threatened in the street. Odd.
And I do geuinely mean odd, I’m not inferring any subtext.
Drew Peacock says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:31 am
2 0 Rate This
Tif Finn says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:05 am
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Agreed and it is why HMRC did not advance the sham argument in relation to the operation of the EBT’s. They were focusing on the very first step in the scheme and trying to knock that down what happened after the payments in to the EBT’s was not so important to them and in 5 cases Rangers conceded this.
====================================
Imagine that all the main transport routes between say, Belgium & France, had border posts where non-EU citizens had to register their entry and exit from each country.
In this hypothetical situation, say that it is illegal for any non-EU citizen to enter or exit Belgium without registering via one of the available border posts and the punishment for illegal entry is 2 years imprisonment.
A Chinese tourist, who had registered his entry into France at Charles de Gaul airport, subsequently drives to Brussels, crossing the border using a quiet country road & without registering in Belgium. He later tries to return to France using the same route; but is stopped by a local police patrol and is arrested in Belgium as an illegal alien.
His defence is that, he drove legally at all times, obeyed all traffic signs and there were no signs or clear prohibitions that prevented him from taking that path into Belgium. He argues that he should not be punished for the authorities failure to have registration points at all border crossings.
The prosecution can argue their case in one of two ways.
1. That the tourist deliberately chose his particular route to avoid registration.
2. Present an argument that Immigration legislation has primacy over traffic regulations. That the precise route or conformity with traffic regulations is unimportant to the matter in hand. It is the overall result that matters. Entry to Belgium by non-EU citizens is illegal without registering at one of the registration points. It is up to the tourist to find a route that has one of the available points.
If the former option is taken a successful prosecution would depend on the particular circumstances and does not help in the prosecution of future cases.
If the latter option is taken and is successful, the prosecution of all future cases reasonably straightforward.
……..
If, in the FTT(T), HMRC had argued that the MIH EBTs were a “sham”, the application of the precedent it creates would be fairly narrow.
As I understand it, HMRC argued that PAYE/NI legislation has primacy over the legislation for employee loans. Therefore a success would mean that HMRC can apply apply the precedent to almost all EBT cases that have, so far, failed to settle.
From Wednesday 7 August 2013
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/jim-mccoll-dont-see-charles-2133990
JIM McCOLL is a man in a hurry. By his reckoning there are just 36 days left to save Rangers from
20 years of further financial pain and suffering.
The clock began ticking LAST THURSDAY when McColl, along with a group of London-based institutions who share his worst fears, demanded an EGM in order to wipe out the current Ibrox board and remove Charles Green and his cohorts from power.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So from 1st August 2013 I make the 36 days last Thursday 5 September.
As Chico said on Sportsound last night have they walked away or do they think they have the Spivs in the bag?
However if it was their belief that the spivs could do enough damage that would take 20 years to repair why give then an additional 56 days in which to cause more havoc.
Good Morning,
ecobhoy says:
September 13, 2013 at 8:46 am
If you read back to ecobhoy’s comments above and indeed previous, and compare those against the official annual return submitted to Companies House this morning on behalf of Sevco Scotland Ltd — something odd will strike you.
Namely, that according to officially lodged records, Charles Green would appear to have never been a shareholder in Sevco Scotland Ltd. which of course was reamed The Rangers Football Club Ltd.
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but was this not the club which was admitted as associate members of the SFA and admitted into the SFL?
As can be seen from the CQN piece, the annual return states that all shares in this company are and indeed were held by RIFC PLC — which was formed several months after Sevco Scotland limited, and several weeks after Sevco Scotland issued a capital statement showing that it had a very substantial shareholding and issued share capital.
Yet for some reason, those involved in that company are doing everything they can to hide just who the shareholders of that company were, when they acquired shares, when they sold them, and who they sold them to?
Now why would that be?
Further, who was controlling that company when it was admitted as a member of the SFA?
Who did the SFA do their checks against when determining that this company was being run and was owned by fit and proper people?
In other licensing areas, I have seen licence applications being refused because the licensing authority could not get to the bottom of who actually owned and controlled a company — and so they could not declare the company to be fit and proper to hold a licence.
Similarly, I have seen applications refused when the police or someone else produced evidence which tended to suggest that those fronting the application were precisely that– a front– for others who were associated with the company or business but who did not appear on any of the official documentation — probably because if they did any application for a licence would be refused.
So who did the SFA and SFL look at and what do they have to say now that this annual return has been produced and seems to indicate that no one other then RIFC PLC has ever held a share?
Again I ask — to whom was membership and a licence granted … and why and on what basis or undertakings?
Re the UTT decision that has been discussed:
Everyone with any sense knows that a properly formed club in Scots law has no legal status.
I used to licence numerous junior football clubs for the SJFA when Wilie Blaney was president — clubs from Carnoustie Panmure to Yoker Athletic ( Think I was the secretary ) to Auchinleck Talbot
To be a registered club each club had to have a constitution, a committee with named office bearers and all of that information had to be provided to the local Sheriff Court where the Sheriff would grant the appropriate certificate.
However, each office bearer was personally liable for the club debts and that had to be spelt out in words of one syllable.
When social clubs got into trouble with brewers loans or banks you would find the office bearers heading for the hills as they feared losing their houses.
The only alternative was incorporation into a ltd Co.
The judge in the UTT case is merely stating the common sense and obvious situation with virtually all modern football clubs — they are a ltd company and as with any ltd company the primary obligation is to its shareholders.
After that the obligation is to the company creditors ( including customers who have prepaid for services or entertainment in advance).
If the company cannot meet its debts in the course of trading then it is insolvent and it will cease to be by either winding down and being struck from the roll, or by winding up by way of enforced or members voluntary liquidation.
Another business may start up with a similar name, but it is another business.
For example, I will bet that Rangers PLC will have had a unique tax code as an employer stretching back many many years possibly even before the Ltd company became a PLC.
If Ally McCoist has any old pay slips he will be able to check the code for his employer on those payslips.
If he checks his payslips for last month he will see that he is now being paid by someone else entirely — he does not have the same employer as when he was a player.
All of this is as plain the nose on your face — whether that is a blue nose or otherwise!
Wottpi
I refer you to my earlier post below.
Smugas says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:06 am
I still think giving them to 31st Oct to raise as many consultancy fees as they can then hand over TRFC including the troublesome (cost wise and emmotionally charged) Ibrox is their best way out. One might even say pre planned?
What’s that you say – McColl’s financial placeman has pulled out? deal done.
threats to all and sundry involved if Ibrox isn’t in the final purchase? – deal done.
And everyone lived happily ever after.
PhilMacGiollaBhain says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:00 am
15 1 Rate This
http://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2013/sep/13/bbc-rangers
“There is a continuing controversy over the status of the current club that uses the name of Rangers. The former club became insolvent, entered administration and was then liquidated last year. Its business and assets, including the name Rangers FC, were supposedly bought by a new company. But the situation remains unclear.”
I like that “supposedly” 🙂
what guarantees are there that there WILL be an AGM by 31st October?
Will audited accounts be presented 1 month before the AGM (as is usual practice)
Will Shareholders be given 1 months notice of the AGM date?
what happens if by 1st October, no AGM date has been set? another EGM? Will Murray/McColl/Blin want to be so publicly bitch slapped again after todays climb down?
Will Spivco make it to Christmas?
A note of clarification regarding the UTT
That latter quote from Judge Bishopp’s direction is actually a presentation of HMRC’s argument and does not necessarily represent Bishopp’s opinion.
Going back to the EBT case and the FTT decsion.
I believe that the appeal will focus on a very simple point possibly among other arguments.
The FTT majority decision was reached on the simple hypothesis that HMRC did not argue that the trusts set up, or the loans from those trusts were shams.
The Tribunal was therefore invited to treat them as real trusts and real loans.
The tribunal concluded, that as these were real loans made by real trusts, then no PAYE and NIC are payable on loans — end of story and goodnight!
Heidi Poon went behind the sham argument and found that the loans and trusts were shams, and so the payments attracted PAYE and NIC … so there!
However, the appeal point will be this:
It is irrelevant if the loans and the trusts were real or not.
It is unnecessary to follow the steps taken by Doctor Poon or examine the evidence she did ( the majority judges did not consider the evidence in any detail at all — and they certainly did not dissent from Dr Poon’s assessment of the quality, reliability and credibility of that evidence ).
Instead, the revenue will focus on the point that the money left the account of Rangers PLC to fund real trusts or sham trusts which in turn may have made real loans or sham loans.
The argument will be that what is clear is that the decision to pay any money of any type into one of these trusts was governed by the contractual relationship between the footballer or other employee of Rangers PLC.
The minute that any type of payment is made to anyone– sister, brother, mother, auntie or whoever as part of a remuneration package set out by a contract of employment or what can reasonably be considered as a contract of employment — then PAYE and NIC are due.
No one at Rangers sad anything in evidence about these payments being loans from Rangers — they were not.
The payments were admitted to be a means of remunerating and rewarding employees and nothing else.
They were made in furtherance of contacts of employment and side letters which were adjuncts to those contracts of employment, signed at the same time on the same day as the principal contracts of employment.
As such, the payments were governed by contract ( as was shown when at times payments were made late ) and one would beg the question just what would the players have done if the club had refused to make the payments concerned?
They would have relied on the side letters to force the issue.
That will be the argument and the issue of sham trusts and loans will not come into it other than as a side issue.
Drew Peacock says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:26 am
11 0 Rate This
Smugas says:
September 13, 2013 at 11:06 am
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
September 13, 2013 at 10:47 am
I still think giving them to 31st Oct to raise as many consultancy fees as they can then hand over
TRFC including the troublesome (cost wise and emmotionally charged) Ibrox is their best way out.
One might even say pre planned?
_________________________________________________________________
If we consider Rangers to be a Fir tree…
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Blue and spruce are not two words that go together in that context.
Danish Pastry says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:27 pm
6 0 Rate This
Tic 6709 says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:01 pm
Frank Blin is not playing anymore,wonder why ?
Blin and Gone.
————————-
Blin there, done that
——————–
the blin leading the blin
is it normal for a NOMAD to block an EGM proposal to add an individual to the board – and not give a reason?
broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:00 pm
“…The payments were admitted to be a means of remunerating and rewarding employees and nothing else.,,”
——
Very true.
There is , of course, great interest in the question of whether Murray and Co were indeed tax cheats of a high order.
But we mustn’t forget that the huge FOOTBALLING crime of failing to disclose( to the Footballing Authorities) those payments ,and deriving thereby ( despite the absurd view of the LNS panel) an unfair and massive ‘sporting advantage’, has not been properly and appropriately punished by the stripping of deceitfully obtained titles and honours.
As said before, while RFC(IA) may indeed be proved at the UTTT to have been tax-cheats( a la Dave King in South Africa), the more important ‘criminals’ for us and Scottish Football , through their initial negligence in policing the rules, their complicity by silence when it became clear that Murray’s insane debt position was leading to desperate measures, and their craven submission to bullying by CG,are the SFA and the then SFL.
As well as their running dog lackeys in the MSM.
broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:00 pm
Exactly, and as I have said all along. The money was paid into a sub trust for the player. At that point it was a payment to the player, it was non-returnable.
As it formed part of an agreement it was a contractual payment.
Tax and NI were due at that point, what happened next is really quite irrelevant. Rangers did not make loans to anyone, loans are repayable. They made contractual payments.
I always find BRTH’s posts on legal matters interesting and illuminating:
This one stirs in me some confusion. Is it possible to be liable to pay tax on a loan? If the EBT is not a sham and the player is genuinely loaned the money, at what point is tax payable on the loan? Does the club pay the tax on the sum they put into the EBT or does the player pay it on receipt of the loan?
If an EBT beneficiary was suddenly to start repaying his loan, or was suddenly asked to repay his loan would this alter who ought to be paying tax?
Tif Finn says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:40 pm
What if the loans suddenly started to be repaid or demands were made for them to be repaid? Would that render all argument at the FTT & UTT regarding tax payable on them redundant?
I’d like to assume such a lengthy legal argument could not be short-circuited so easily, but I really don’t know.
Night Terror says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:44 pm
RFC (actually MIH) paid money to a trust. Said payments were taxable given their direct link to contracts made and services received. Ignore the loans. Its a bit like asking if Ronnie Biggs used his money to do something illegal? Moot point IF IT WASN’T HIS MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE!
and yes the side issue of the undisclosed payments, the clearly and blatantly undisclosed payments remains the bigger crime in my book.
Can anyone explain the sale/leaseback theory?
it’s not clear to me.
my understanding was this
RIFC are lending money to TRFC ltd. When RIFC money runs out, it goes into ADMIN.
As TRFC only owe RIFC, then RIFC will take the properties as settlement for the debts
Then rent them back to TRFC ltd
RIFC will then sell TRFC ltd off to another company – Blue Knights/King/McColl/Ra peepil/Murray/Bill Ing/Mill Miller – any of teh 500 M fan base really.
Spivs get a healthy income from rental for rest of their days – plus whatever they have already leached out of the IPO cash.
Where does that leave them as shareholders in RIFC? there will be no value to them really. SO, is it either sale/leaseback or sell their shares. Can’t be both can it?
Or is the sale/leaseback theory that they will sell properties to external company – say a bank – who will then collect rent. This puts cash into RIFC which they can leach out. And then sell on their shares as well – but shares will still be worth little if RIFC/TRFC has no cash left and no properties – but an expensive rental agreement.
Can anyone clear up exactly what they think is the end game for the SPIVS?
Night Terror says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:51 pm
————————————————————————————————————————-
it doesn’t alter the contractual arrangement that this money was paid into the individuals’ sub trusts as per their employment contract. Disguised renumeration => taxable.
the fact that nearly 100% of the money paid into the sub trusts was subsequently loaned and nearly 100% has never been repaid supports the argument but it isn’t the underpin of it.
MIH’s legal team successfully shifted focus to the loans as a diversionary tactic.
Night Terror says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:44 pm
Did you actually read what BRTH wrote?
Surely the crux of his opinion is
“However, the appeal point will be this:
It is irrelevant if the loans and the trusts were real or not.”
Smugas says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:53 pm
Thanks – makes things clearer in my mind.
Regarding the undisclosed payments – it’s only ever the unpaid tax that gets them in the end, isn’t it? Er, isn’t it?
saskya1888 says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:16 pm
Is it not alright to ask a clarifying question on here?
‘Frank Blin is not playing anymore,wonder why ?
Blin and Gone.’
__________________________
Correct me if I’m wrong, but are they not a firm of reputable liars.
I consulted that other practice ‘Argue and Phibs’ and they have confirmed the above!
Spartacus.
NTHM,
I think where you’re going wrong is that RIFC will not go into admin, rather it will be TRFCL. The properties could be transferred as settlement of some of the loans made by RIFC, leaving RIFC with any residual cash all the properties and still potentially the main creditor. They would then be in a position to agree a CVA for TRFCL allowing some Blue Knights to step forward with a plan to run TRFCL going forward debt free.
Fortunately they will still be a basket case financially and the spivs will be the only ones to have come out on top. Save for the whisperer and his like drawing their ridiculous salaries and still owning shares in RIFC which will effectively become a property company.
Or mibbes naw!
ecobhoy says: September 13, 2013 at 8:46 am
————————————————————–
broganrogantrevinoandhogan says: September 13, 2013 at 4:16 am
———————————————————————————————
Ask yourself this question. Charles Green has always said that he acts on behalf of and with a consortium. At any given time, who was in that consortium?
Who was in the consortium as at 12 May 2012? Who was in his consortium as at the day of the share placing?
Who did Charles Green tell the SFA and SFL was in his consortium and who did the prospectus say was part of the consortium that brought the RIFC offer to the market?
===================================================================
The problem is that we have always only had Green’s word about who was an investor and he was very careful with not fully revealing these. In his laughable STV unravelling just before he was forced to walk away in April this year he made the ludicrous claim that it was all in the public record which it isn’t.
However the CF released minutes of the TRFCL board meeting gives us at lease the ‘official’ line as to who the investors were up until flotation. But as far as I can determine these were only the investors who were promised Sevco 5088, Sevco Scotland and TRFCL shares. I believe other investors had no interest in shares and put cash in and wanted cash + interest out and I assume they had some kind of property-backed debenture as security.
However many of the consortium placees are anonymous overseas trusts and companies so knowing the name means nothing. I strarted looking at the ‘original placees’ the other night and immediately rant into a problem with Putney Holdings Ltd an ATP Investment Ltd – I just don’t know and a quick look on CH failed to spot them so I’ll need to go back and try harder. Although the latter might be connected to the ATPI group although that might just be a similar name.
That’s why the overdue Annual Returns for Sevco Scotland and TRFCL are important IMO as the info there will be OFFICIAL and any errors or missing names can be pounced on
——————————————————————————————————-
@Eco
@BRTH
The prospectus issued by Sevco Scotland’s holding company, Rangers International Football Club PLC, states that the Club Assets were acquired by Sevco Scotland directly from RFC 2012. It also states that Sevco Scotland raised £7,719,000 by the issue of 25,340,000 shares in the period to 31 August 2012. Sevco Scotland’s filings with Companies House on the other hand show share issues took place between 29 May 2012 and 17 August 2012 involving the issue of some 29,340,000 shares at an aggregate subscription amount of £9,545,975.
Having inspected both documents carefully, I can confirm that this is the case.
So how will RIFC account for the missing shares allocations which appear on the prospectus over an extended time period than that filed at Companies House by Sevco Scotland and signed off by Charles Green ?
Are there any other non-disclosed shareholdings ?
If Sevco 5088 were able to demonstrate to D&P that the necessary funding was in place (as they claim so), then did Charles Green utilise that funding through Sevco Scotland, or somehow provide alternative funding ?.
Given the timescales, cost and legal paperwork required I simply can’t fathom the latter. In which case how and where has he hidden the Korissa and Willow International allotments ?
What is the accumulated shareholdings of any single beneficiary …..
This last point could become extremely important as there are market stipulations ….
Are there any subsequent allotments that benefit any existing significant shareholder …
As Eco mentioned ….. the annual returns will be very interesting and will require scrutiny.
Charlotte released a document showing the list of signatories against shareholders for the requisition of the failed EGM. Don’t seem to have grabbed a copy myself so if anyone can list the signed up shareholders it would be useful.
Who supplied Charlotte with that document, and for what purpose ?.
Was it a current board member, or (as I suspect) one of the proposed board members.
Tif Finn says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:40 pm
broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:00 pm
Exactly, and as I have said all along. The money was paid into a sub trust for the player. At that point it was a payment to the player, it was non-returnable.
As it formed part of an agreement it was a contractual payment.
Tax and NI were due at that point, what happened next is really quite irrelevant. Rangers did not make loans to anyone, loans are repayable. They made contractual payments.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Agree with both of youse.
normanbatesmumfc says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:28 pm
NTHM,
I think where you’re going wrong is that RIFC will not go into admin, rather it will be TRFCL. The properties could be transferred as settlement of some of the loans made by RIFC, leaving RIFC with any residual cash all the properties and still potentially the main creditor. They would then be in a position to agree a CVA for TRFCL allowing some Blue Knights to step forward with a plan to run TRFCL going forward debt free.
Fortunately they will still be a basket case financially and the spivs will be the only ones to have come out on top. Save for the whisperer and his like drawing their ridiculous salaries and still owning shares in RIFC which will effectively become a property company.
Or mibbes naw!
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
RIFC sell TRFC for a pound loaded with debt and needing recapitalised – step forward the bears, the Man who would be King et al to stump up but at least this time true Rangers men are in charge.
RIFC will become a property company with a lot of land in the Govan area. One could build many houses on that land and in the Milngavie area too! The listed stand can stay (or be moved and rebuilt) and be converted to flats etc just as was done at Highbury.
For various reasons Ibrox is past it’s sell by date as a sports venue and to make a high spending Rangers viable again they need to increase the capacity to achieve increased income. There is plenty of cheap land in brownfield sites in Govan for a New Ibrox to replace the Old Ibrox and I’m sure Govt, Sports Council, Football Trust, Council funding would be readily available.
In the interim until planning permission is obtained at the two sites Rangers will rent Ibrox.
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/09/13/international-journalism-body-calls-action-over-threats-and-intimidation-journalists
International journalism body calls for action over threats and intimidation of journalists covering Rangers crisis Share1Tweet30 inShare 0Share4 Problem: A minority of Rangers fans have indulged in the behaviour The tribulations facing BBC Scotland football pundit Jim Spence over the last week have again highlighted the intimidation tactics faced by some journalists in Scotland over the coverage of Rangers FC’s financial collapse. The issue has even caught the attention of the International Federation of Journalists – a body that speaks for the profession within the United Nations. The organisation, more used to defending journalists in less stable parts of the world, described the situation as “unacceptable”. Meanwhile, the BBC and NUJ have come out fighting after Spence received “vile and disgusting” emails and texts and the BBC received over 400 complaints over a comment about the status of the club following its liquidation in 2012. But the level of abuse directed at Spence over his comment was reported to have left him considering voluntary redundancy, fuelling concerns that intimidation tactics against journalists reporting on the story have not eased. Professor of journalism and Guardian media blogger Professor Roy Greenslade has described the situation as “very worrying” and BBC Scotland sports pundit Stuart Cosgrove said the “incoming fire” was forcing journalists away from reporting the story. “I think that they’re facing an alarming situation in Scotland where newspapers and broadcasters are being intimidated into concealing reality and concealing the truth and that is very worrying indeed,” said Professor Greenslade. “Clearly, a journalist should never face a threat for merely carrying out his job. It’s unacceptable to abuse someone who has merely attempted to report the truth.” Last year, Channel 4 News broadcast a segment revealing a Scottish QC, Gary Allan, had been given anti-terror guidance from Scottish police after sitting on an SFA panel examining potential rule breaches by Rangers. Another panel member, chairman of Raith Rovers Football Club Turnbull Hutton, described a phone call from Fife police informing him that people had been “lined up” to torch the Raith Rovers stadium. The incidents were part of a bigger picture. In last year’s Channel 4 News broadcast, NUJ Scotland organiser Paul Holleran said he had been contacted by more than 30 journalists in Scotland who had reason to be concerned for their safety after working on the story. But although he says indications are that the situation has calmed in the last 12 months, he says he believes the tactics have resulted in censorship for some. “The situation has improved with far less complaints being registered with the union. However, every now and again, like this week, the situation reverts back to high levels of abuse,” he says. “It is of course a way of attempting to censor journalists and stop them raising certain issues. I believe there has been some self-censorship because of the levels of abuse.” Holleran said he has intervened three times with employers in a bid to tackle the problem and said the NUJ would take all steps it could to support those being targeted. “We exist to protect journalists and journalism and we will not stand by and do nothing. We have taken steps this week which we believe will send a message out to the worst offenders but it is a problem for wider society to tackle.” Of the latest developments in the now long-running saga, a spokesperson for the Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists said: “We stand firmly with all the journalists who have been targeted by these threats and urge the Scottish authorities to take them seriously, investigate them thoroughly and bring those who are behind them to justice. “Together with our regional group, the European Federation of Journalists, we consider that these reported threats to journalists in Scotland are an attempt to intimidate our colleagues and stifle public debate, something which is unacceptable. He added: “There are legitimate venues for redress to those who wish to raise their concerns over publications in the press but threatening journalists with violence should not be tolerated in a democratic society.” The Jim Spence incident comes almost exactly a year after the Scottish Sun pulled a serialisation of a book on the Rangers story, Downfall, by campaigning journalist Phil Mac Giolla Bháin, following a massive backlash by Rangers fans. Upon publishing an interview about the death threats Mac Giolla Bháin had received after breaking many of the major stories charting Rangers’ descent into crisis, the journalist who conducted the interview, Simon Houston, was then deluged with abuse himself on social media. “He wasn’t prepared for that,” a source close to Houston told The Drum. “He called police in when it became clear on Rangers fan forums that there were attempts to track down his address. There was some really horrible stuff said about his family members. He came off Twitter for a while to let it die down.” Mac Giolla Bháin believes the levels of abuse facing journalists in Scotland have impacted on their ability to do their jobs properly for fear of the consequences. “Several journalists based in Glasgow have told me that they ‘tone it down’ when they are required to write about the behaviour of that section of Rangers supporters who indulge in racist and sectarian chanting because of direct threats made to them or because they know of what has befallen other colleagues,” he says. “I think this is one of the reasons that sports journalists in Glasgow were slow to investigate the impending financial collapse of Rangers in 2010 and 2011.” Mac Giolla Bháin, who lives in Ireland, is another on the list of journalists who have called in police after serious safety concerns. “When my home address in Donegal appeared on the Follow Follow website and there was a free flowing discussion then about how and why I should be killed,” he went on. “Further threats were made against me this year on two separate occasions via Twitter and once more the police here in Ireland were excellent. “That was in June and although An Garda Síochána have been very diligent in keeping me in the loop I have not heard of any action being taken in Scotland about these threats.” For some, the Rangers story has been a prime example of an emerging problem presented by the tools and influence digital technology now offers and there could be wider implications for the media if forms of intimidation online are not faced down. Director of creative diversity at Channel 4 and BBC Scotland football pundit Stuart Cosgrove said the “democracy of debate” was being threatened. “Online abuse is unacceptable in any context and passion for your club is not a credible excuse. We have gone through a period of extreme tribalism over the last year and some web forums have heightened emotions. It is now very easy to make ‘cut-and-paste’ complaints and therefore to use complaints as a tactic of intimidation. “Some journalists can’t be bothered with the incoming fire and so avoid controversial football subjects which compromises the democracy of debate. When people bring a journalist or broadcaster’s kids into the fray you wonder if they have abandoned their humanity in the name of football.” He added: “If you cannot advance reasonable opinions then something has gone wrong with the democratic mood and all titles and broadcasters should want to protect that fragile idea. All reasonable people whether they are journalists or hard-core football fans should respect diversity of opinion.” According to the NUJ, BBC Scotland’s plans to back Jim Spence include taking its fight to the BBC Trust and challenging a ruling made in June that upheld complaints that the broadcaster’s use of the terms “old” and “new” to describe Rangers FC did not meet accuracy standards, despite liquidation over a year ago. Professor Greenslade has thrown his full backing behind plans to fight the case. “I think the BBC Trust should reconsider their ruling in the light of better evidence that shows that BBC Scotland reporters were attempting to tell the truth and their ruling was a mistake. “There were clearly unaware of the special circumstances and BBC Scotland should return to argue the case. They need to understand the situation better.”
Drew Peacock says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:47 pm
————————————————————————————————–
one minor flaw in that plan.
Highbury was in Islington.
Ibrox is in Govan.
Tic 6709 says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:01 pm
Frank Blin is not playing anymore,wonder why ?
Blin and Gone.
________________________________________________________________________________________
Frank Blin was probably happy with the price of the pies & Bovril – (bbc joke)
but not so with the cost of the spivs.
On a slightly more serious note, I think that once his eyes were opened, it was a no brainer –
and Frank said to himself
‘let’s get the hell out of here!’
http://www.thedrum.com/opinion/2013/09/13/intimidation-over-rangers-story-left-me-fear-scottish-media-must-unite
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/09/13/international-journalism-body-calls-action-over-threats-and-intimidation-journalists
The Jim Spence story is getting bigger.
Charlotte’s back….old tweets anyway.
beanos says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:03 pm
I’m sure property prices in Govan would rise substantially if there wasn’t a dirty great big football stadium in the middle of it, along with the surrounding wasteground and car parks.
Any chance Charles Green is a director of Rent-a-Mob Ltd a yet to be declared subsidiary of RIFC Plc
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-24068989
This time it is Whyte who gets ‘the treatment’.
beanos says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:03 pm
Drew Peacock says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:47 pm
————————————————————————————————–
one minor flaw in that plan.
Highbury was in Islington.
Ibrox is in Govan.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Good spot – but it doesn’t mean there isn’t money to be made from building houses/redeveloping Govan. It’s all relative. If it wasn’t there would be no Milne or Miller Homes etc.
Night Terror says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:25 pm
———————————————————————————————————————–
possibly but i’m not sure its enough of a catalyst. i could see a moderate rise in the immediate surrounding area happening as with any development but still not enough.
The Highbury conversion was a sure fire winner, insane property prices in the area and shortage of space to build on. I just don’t see the same conditions here.
To make this work, they would have to be charging premium prices for the properties and i don’t see who is going to pay those prices to live there. the surrounding area just doesn’t have the right shops, restauraunts and bars that would make it attractive to buyers.
edit – the cost in demolishing an old (possibly asbestos ridden) building, retaining a listed facade is massive compared to starting from scratch on an empty site. that cost has to be factored into the price of the properties as a premium and I personally don’t see enough people being willing to pay that premium to make it viable.
i may be wrong…………
I see CF is back on twitter.
nowoldandgrumpy says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:00 pm
A very useful link to a very worrying article by responsible journalists, noag.
Nice to see Cosgrove getting right in there: ” BBC sports pundit Stuart Cosgrove said the “incoming fire” was forcing journalists away from reporting the story”.
It’s pretty disgraceful that our editors ( frightened of the ‘dirt’ that evil jack has on them?) have not positively encouraged their journos to get into the story.
They must be made of the same stuff as the editors of the press in pre-war Germany- gutless putty or party allegiance.
Bad cess to them.
Well finally, the dam has not just started to leak it’s got holes big enough to drive a bus through.
The MSM have no hiding place now.
The relevant authorities MUST take action.
Of all the things I thought should/could bring the house of cards down,I never thought it would be a tosser in Dundee threatening wee Jim Spence.
No Celtic fan involved,feckin Karma.
broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
September 13, 2013 at 12:43 pm
ecobhoy says:
September 13, 2013 at 8:46 am
If you read back to ecobhoy’s comments above and indeed previous, and compare those against the official annual return submitted to Companies House this morning on behalf of Sevco Scotland Ltd — something odd will strike you.
Namely, that according to officially lodged records, Charles Green would appear to have never been a shareholder in Sevco Scotland Ltd. which of course was renamed The Rangers Football Club Ltd.
Now, correct me if I am wrong, but was this not the club which was admitted as associate members of the SFA and admitted into the SFL?
=================================================================
Good point and also the one about hiding shareholders. I can only assume that FFW is working to their usual level of diligence but then so are the bampots and clatterers who know that the first Annual Return of TRFCL must provide a list of all shareholders between Incorporation on 29 May 2012 and the AR date of 29 May 2013 and the list must include ceased shareholders. I am sure Companies House are aware of the statutory requirements and will already be on the case 💡
And as you say Green was never a shareholder according to the AR and, of course, has never been officially listed as a shareholder in Sevco 5088 whose return is more overdue than that of TRFCL and still hasn’t surfaced.
nowoldandgrumpy says:
September 13, 2013 at 3:00 pm
http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/09/13/international-journalism-body-calls-action-over-threats-and-intimidation-journalists
…
The issue has even caught the attention of the International Federation of Journalists – a body that speaks for the profession within the United Nations. The organisation, more used to defending journalists in less stable parts of the world, described the situation as “unacceptable”…
======================
I don’t think The UN will be sending in the ‘blue helmets’ to control the Govan mob just yet !
However, perhaps the Scottish MSM can now quote the IFJ to get the message across to a wider audience – and without inviting personal attacks ?
And whilst TRFC felt it necessary to issue a statement on their website today denying any new Board appointments, there is still no mention of their fans’ behaviour wrt Spence – and even Whyte.
normanbatesmumfc says:
September 13, 2013 at 2:28 pm
NTHM,
I think where you’re going wrong is that RIFC will not go into admin, rather it will be TRFCL. The properties could be transferred as settlement of some of the loans made by RIFC, leaving RIFC with any residual cash all the properties and still potentially the main creditor. They would then be in a position to agree a CVA for TRFCL allowing some Blue Knights to step forward with a plan to run TRFCL going forward debt free.
Fortunately they will still be a basket case financially and the spivs will be the only ones to have come out on top. Save for the whisperer and his like drawing their ridiculous salaries and still owning shares in RIFC which will effectively become a property company.
Or mibbes naw!
===============================================================
My take :
1. TRFC get to a point where their debt to RIFC equals or exceeds the value of the property assets.
2. RIFC accepts the assets to cancel the debt but then announces their intention to put TRFC into voluntary liquidation at the end of the season as it is not viable.
3. ‘Rangers Men’ ride to the rescue and buy TRFC for £1.00 . Company & ‘club’ saved.
4. RIFC rents Ibrokes to TRFC on a lease (with a one year honeymoon sweetener) subject to mutual agreement on future renewals – TRFC have a pre-emption right to purchase Ibrokes/MP.
5. RIFC at some point then solicits offers for Ibrokes/MP and TRFC cannot meet the purchase cost – TRFC ships out to Hampden whilst new stadium plans are developed or…
6. RIFC at some point solicits offers for Ibrokes/MP and TRFC cannot meet the purchase cost – the sale to a pension fund or similar goes through but TRFC stay on as a tenant at a higher rent as otherwise they will be chucked out.
7. RIFC then goes into voluntary liquidation and splits up the loot amongst the various spivs.
Beautifully done…….
Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.
McCoist keeps his pie-hole closed, shocker !
====================================
“…Craig Mather and myself have sat down and had a chat,” he said. “Disciplinary action has been taken but it is an internal matter and that’s the way it will remain.
“The [Scottish Football Association] decision has been made and he’s been punished. Now we just move on…
====================================
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/mccoist-i-dont-have-a-problem-with-black-playing-for-rangers-again.1379076721
Even penny shares sold in December for a few pence more will be worth more pence again in a CVA. Did they steal that idea from SFA/Setanta debacle?
Penny arcade right enough.
But what of the pies? And the peepuls money? Its a shame, oh dear, how sad………..
An addendum :
6 (a) RIFC at some point solicits offers for Ibrokes/MP and TRFC can meet the purchase cost – but only by appealing to the fans to dip their hands in their pockets once again.
Scottish football needs a strong BBC – looking forward to Off The Ball this weekend!
TW says:
September 13, 2013 at 6:31 am
Who in their right mind would sponsor anything to do with the SFA these days? What kind of product or service could possibly be boosted by such a tie in? And to pay for the privilege?
———————————————————————————
Sadly, as I have bored on about before…… we do – we taxpayers throw millions at the SFA in various guises every year (sometimes under the cover of youth and apprenticeship development). There is no way the SFA who are the Guardians of “Rangers the fabric of our society” will be allowed to go bust.
The recent Scottish International at Hampden had only @28,000 Scottish fans at it – the SFA are in serious financial bother – but as long as the Scottish Government needs the SFA they will continue to throw millions of pounds each year to the SFA
it breaks my taxpaying heart……….
p.s. why did the First Minister meet Craig Whyte and Ali Russell in Mid-December 2011 – just 8 weeks before Administration? did they tell the FM that they were going into administration the way they told the SFA? and if so, why did he continue to allow Rangers to run up hundreds and thousands of pounds debt/credit to Strathclyde Police and Strathclyde Ambulances and hmrc knowing that money would never be paid?
my taxpaying heart weeps…..
redlichtie says:
September 13, 2013 at 4:28 pm
An addendum :
6 (a) RIFC at some point solicits offers for Ibrokes/MP and TRFC can meet the purchase cost – but only by appealing to the fans to dip their hands in their pockets once again.
==========
A further addendum
RIFC at some point is offered by the malificent CG & Co’s consortium (still unnamed) the deeds to the ancestral home at a marked discount proving just what good bluenoses CG & consortium were now a/ raise the money pronto or its tesco time, b/ please leave us alone on our tropical beaches and stick yer fatwa’s up yer proverbial, c/ away and bother that nasty Whyte man and the journos who are all against you anyway and d/ you might want to have a word with this guy from the cooncils compliance dept, something about asbestos…
Know where my money is. Completely agree on the other propoerty assets right enough.
Night Terror says:
September 13, 2013 at 1:44 pm
This one stirs in me some confusion. Is it possible to be liable to pay tax on a loan? If the EBT is not a sham and the player is genuinely loaned the money, at what point is tax payable on the loan? Does the club pay the tax on the sum they put into the EBT or does the player pay it on receipt of the loan?
If an EBT beneficiary was suddenly to start repaying his loan, or was suddenly asked to repay his loan would this alter who ought to be paying tax?
=========================================================================
My understanding is that HMRC’s action against Rangers wasn’t an anti-Rangers move but a means of clarifying the law on the issue of EBTs so that it would be possible to reclaim tax from a host of other companies who had implemented the schemes.
That’s why it has always been clear that HMRC would very probably exhaust the full appeals process if necessary but most Rangers fans regarded this as victimisation which it wasn’t. Rangers in many ways self-selected themselves to be the ‘victim’ in this whole affair by the way they ducked and dived to try and delay and divert HMRC.However that is another issue and is well documented in the FTTT Decision.
It is also clear that the ‘loans’ weren’t genuinely loans and that tax and NI and were payable. IMO the Majority on the FTTT Decision misdirected themselves in law and Bishopp clearly alludes to that and how they got it wrong but it doesn’t necessaruly men that Bishopp will adopt Heidi’s position. Again that’s another issue.
As to who should pay the tax and when it is due I think there is no better answer to that than what is contained in the Aberdeen Asset Management case involving DOS – the mechanism was also used by Rangers as we know from Auldheid and may well raise its head under Bishopp.
However the answer to your questions is contained in the relevant FTTT and UT decisions. In short the UT decided the employer and not the employee was liable for the tax, But the detail of both decisions is interesting if you have a couple of hours to spare.
http://clients.squareeye.net/uploads/pump/documents/aberdeen310112.pdf UT appeal
http://www.financeandtaxtribunals.gov.uk/Aspx/view.aspx?id=5148 FTTT appeal
Smugas says:
September 13, 2013 at 4:45 pm
redlichtie says:
September 13, 2013 at 4:28 pm
An addendum :
6 (a) RIFC at some point solicits offers for Ibrokes/MP and TRFC can meet the purchase cost – but only by appealing to the fans to dip their hands in their pockets once again.
===========================================================
Tons of activity on the Darkside for a few days punting the idea of a members subscription scheme to buy Ibrox – not shares you understand but a glorified debenture exercise. Well they lost their seats before and now after the subs are paid over they’ll finally lose Ibrox if the spivs have their way,
The only way to get rid of them is a bit like trolls – stop feeding them. When the spivs see there is no more money coming they’ll be off like a shot. But with £500k in the RFFF they’ll be trying to figure out how to get their hands on that,
Spoke too soon.
Whilst McCoist appears to have kept quiet, Derek Johnstone has imparted his wisdom on the Ian Black punishment. 🙁
Couple of standouts…
===================
1) “…The sad thing is that this whole sorry [sic] affair will not stop Scottish footballers from betting on football. They will just ask their brother or a friend to put the bet on for them.
I had never heard of this rule myself…”
So a supposed football commentator, [and/or his ghost writer], confirms he doesn’t know the rules about the game he is paid to comment on.
&
2) “…PFA Scotland have spoken to their players about the rules. But I think relaxing the SFA regulations and coming into line with other associations should be explored…”
Which ‘associations’ is he referring to – imaginary or real ?
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/rangers/rangerscomment/derek-johnstone-black-is-just-a-fall-guy-136181n.22130593
Ecobhoy
Interesting one regarding the members subscription scheme ,lets face it there are plenty of members taking their seats every second week at Ibrokes already 😯
All I can say to them is keep a bit back for a very good law firm to go over any sales doc from Sevco otherwise they might find the assets they were expecting went to someone else .
On an entirely different subject ,anyone heard from CW recently . 🙄 🙄
Danish Pastry says:
September 12, 2013 at 8:51 pm
This just popped up as a retweet on my twitter. Insult to injury?
———-
RangersMedia News
@RangersMedia
Fifty six journalists murdered in Russia since 1992. One Scottish football reporter heckled in the street #bitofperspectivepleasejim
__________________________________
As so often, what they write, in an attempt to reduce the seriousness of their actions, actually does the opposite. Basically, what has been pointed out is that journalists in Scotland, compared to elsewhere, lead a professional life no different from the average person – until they upset RFC or TRFC supporters. Then they realise what it must be like to be a journalist in Russia…
Allyjambo on September 13, 2013 at 5:26 pm
Re: treatment of Jim Spence – typical bully mentality – offend or abuse someone then dismiss their grievance by appealling or comparing to extreme situation – other variants employed after hurting someone include “it was only a joke”, “can’t you take a joke”, etc.
On RIFC / TRFC administration scenario – which company does the player sign a contract with and won’t this information be lodged very visibly with SPFL?
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=13720
TRFC submit incomplete Annual Return . .
This is crazy crazy crazy.
How can people like Green / whyte etc, get away with this jiggers pokery ?
How can business ‘Law’ be so bast4rd1sed ?
Obviously the spivs are being legally advised by unscrupulous solicitors
. . .why are these solicitors not being investigated ?
Is it corruption or is it not !!??
jimlarkin says:
September 13, 2013 at 5:56 pm
Jim, surprised at you. I thought you would have offered a multiple choice answer.
Anyway, answer is YES
A couple of wee questions for anyone who can remember: from season 2001-2. The questions concern prize money handed out to clubs dependant on the position they finish within the league systems.
The old Airdrieonians finished as 14th ranked side in Scotland, sitting just behind promoted Partick Thistle who returned to the top flight. Clydebank were the 26th ranked side in Scotland.
Both old Airdrieonians and Clydebank departed from senior league football at the end of season 2001-2.
Did the authorities make any ‘place money’ payment to those in charge of liquidating old Airdrieonians, or to Clydebank, or in fact to the new club formed on the back of Clydebank’s league membership? And was there any fuss made by supporters of the fallen clubs, or indeed our sports journalists, if this did not happen?
All this talk of EBTs and loans just reminded me that the next time Spiers or someone else impersonating a real journalist bumps into CO they need to ask him what the timetable is for his EBT loan repayment.
Scottish football needs some balls from the journalists….we are all Jim Spence!