The Immortality Project

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.

 

3,959 thoughts on “The Immortality Project


  1. ecobhoy says:

    September 14, 2013 at 7:30 pm
    I have to say that even as a prolific poster I am concerned at the recent postings of ianagain in terms of frequency and language used which IMO doesn’t fit with the ethos of this blog
    ===========================================================

    ecobhoy
    Just ranting im afraid on the utterances from the Sportsound extra prog as it came out.
    Some folks cant get it live.
    And some folk given privileged access like PM, I don’t get.


  2. ianagain says:
    September 14, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    ianagain
    My concern was that I honestly thought you were becoming agitated but your explanation to ecobhoy makes me feel better and I don’t mean that in a patronising manner.


  3. I have to say that ianagain’s posts have more relevance to this blog than quoting some woman about fascism,
    no matter how brave she was.


  4. jean7brodie says:

    September 14, 2013 at 8:01 pm

    0

    0

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    ianagain says:
    September 14, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    ianagain
    My concern was mainly that I honestly thought you were becoming agitated but your explanation to ecobhoy makes me feel better 😀
    =========================================

    Jean
    I was agitated in the extreme that they let him away with the drivel he came out with.


  5. ianagain says:
    September 14, 2013 at 7:53 pm

    Perhaps a reasoned post dealing with the issue as you see it might have more effect than what looks like a random collection of personalised attacks IMO.


  6. Tic 6709 says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    I have to say that ianagain’s posts have more relevance than quoting some woman about fascism,
    no matter how brave she was.
    ========================================================
    I fear you have actually missed the whole point of my post re Jim Spence which had nothing to do with ianagain’s series of rants.


  7. Re the intimidation tactics of the mob.

    I guess part of the problem is that as this kind of thing goes on, has gone on and will go on, people start to see it as normal.

    It isn’t normal, nor is it acceptable.

    Is it better to die on your feet than live on your knees? The mob assume that nobody will be willing to test that. And for most people, they just want a quiet life.

    To pull out another quote, all that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.

    We ignore it, we keep our heads down and we tolerate it. To go back to the civil war references. If you tolerate this, your children will be next.

    Phil Mac touched on this already and with more erudition than i. What kind of Scotland do you want to live in?


  8. ecobhoy says:

    September 14, 2013 at 8:08 pm

    0

    0

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    Tic 6709 says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    I have to say that ianagain’s posts have more relevance than quoting some woman about fascism,
    no matter how brave she was.
    ========================================================
    I fear you have actually missed the whole point of my post re Jim Spence which had nothing to do with ianagain’s series of rants.
    ++++++
    I did not miss the point of your post in Any respect,some of us have posted on here along the same lines many times.
    My point was the relevance of your post allied to the comments you made about ian.I think if you had any concerns about the posts you could have quite simply contacted ian privately instead of publicly.
    He ,like yourself, is a valued poster on here and I think he deserves a little more respect than was shown by yourself,trying to make him sound like an errant schoolboy does you no credit.


  9. Folks
    Rants and game over.
    Lets not yet again get in to a he said she said circle.
    I value everything eco says and he spends obviously a great deal of time and effort doing it.
    Im out as it were.
    Until the next time I go off on one.
    Agreed?


  10. ianagain says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    Point taken and agreed with.

    Tic 6709 says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:03 pm

    Very relevant comparison by ecobhoy re La Pasionaria in my humble opinion.


  11. ianagain says:

    September 14, 2013 at 8:32 pm
    Rate This

    There are better fish to fry than eco or
    ==============================
    Agreed,and his face was shut.


  12. Tic 6709 says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:24 pm

    As I said earlier I fear you have conflated my post re Jim Spence with the comment I made re ianagain and I find that quite sad considering the gravity of one which is the hounding of Spence and the attack on Denocracy entailed and then someone getting upset over Sportsound, Give me a break,

    I think every poster on here is valued but there are certain times when self-restraint is called for otherwise IMO what we are all attempting to achieve is damaged.


  13. ianagain says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:30 pm
    Agreed?
    =================================
    With pleasure 🙂


  14. Sorry just cant help myself keeps falling in my lap:

    From RR anyone now these ladies?
    I think it may have emanated from George.

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

    14 Sep 2013 19:23:25
    I hear that the HR manager Clare stinks oops sorry meant rinkes has left the company in a rather hurry?

    I wonder if she JUMPED or was PUSHED?

    This no doubt will be her conscience bothering her after the disgraceful chain of events she managed on behalf of Stockbridge and Mather, I hear he begged her to stay! Just wondered if she got a hefty pay packet? Unlike her colleagues who left with a pittance after years of loyal service.

    It would be VERY strange if she was made redundant as the company have employed a graduate to cover some duties.

    This now leaves a complete disaster in her place, Yvonne Whitelock who if completely useless! But then again that would suit Mather and Stockbridge as they will still keep there “insider traders” strategically placed to carry out there dirty deeds all nice and neat in house!

    The latest boardroom anarchy is now getting very mysterious and the panic is very evident as they try and jockey for position and cover their a***s before the account come out and the votes start in the AGM?

    The accounts issue where are we in terms of the club showing full year to date instead of watered down timescale are they trying to HIDE anything?

    This is going to be very messy and the fans must keep asking questions

    Where are the supporters clubs? Why are they not demanding answers!

    Keep watching the “great stadium robbery”

    RR


  15. SouthernExile says:
    September 14, 2013 at 8:31 pm
    @ecobhoy.
    ====================================================================
    I have no idea where or when the quotation was made but I have no reason to doubt it. However IMO it sits slightly at odds as a counter-balance to Sportsound.

    It matters not whether La Pasionara is right or wrong in her opinions – what is important is that she fought for the right to be able to express them. I doubt if anyone could accuse her of being a handwringer as has been suggested of some of Spence’s BBC colleagues and neither am I.

    I feel sure that I could go searching Wiki and find that Winston Churchill made a number of speeches stoutly defending Stalin and the bravery and sacrifice of the Russian people, However I doubt it has anything to do with Sportsound either.


  16. Interesting stuff from Paul Murray on Sports Sound Extra earlier.

    On the plus side he gets basic accountancy (Doh!) and is worried where all the money has gone and is concerned that if the same burn rate is maintained his ‘club’ goes out of business again.

    He calls out out JI for what he is.

    Call out those a T’Rangers for taking money out of the club in salary and bonus.

    He still thinks D& P were at it

    Negatives

    He implies SDM was a dictator but at the same time he takes credit for being on a board that cut the debt in half.

    While saying that nowhere else in the world would D&P have got away with the asset sale agreement after failure of CVA, he still can’t stomach saying that when compared to every other business in the world his beloved club is deid.

    Fails to acknowledge that Rangers did not disclose EBT payments to SFA and SPL in the manner required by footballing rules.

    Thinks a South African an Tax Dodger is a great person to have on board.

    In conclusion I think he is a guy who has the best interest of the club at heart but like many involved in the Ibrox story he can’t bring himself to actually admit that, on a number of levels, the oldco did wrong.

    As they say on Dragon’s Den, we like your passion but on the failure to tell the truth and tell it how it is then I’m out.

    Actually on second thoughts why waste my time typing . To hell with the lot of them and their stinking lies, denials and lack of common decency.

    Guessing from what Paul Murray’s said that was perhaps what Frank Blin thought.:-)


  17. I don’t know? the game has been rigged for a hunner year, the polis can jail you for being patriotic in your own motor, but this forum gets outraged over items you can fire up your chimney off the high street shelves (green , blue, maroon, orange, whatever).
    Old steamer pissing down your leg was unacceptable, bigotry, racism and violence, ditto.

    FFS the same folk greeting there is eff all worth attending for, telling attendees not to get excitable. Probably the same folk who will tell you foreign grounds are very intimidating.

    Commence, but have a word with yersell after.

    Eff you San Diego.


  18. wottpi says:
    September 14, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    Paul Murray – Sportsound

    Did he say whether he was aware of the EBT Payments?

    Wrt being happy with a South African import perhaps it might be that Murray is more happy at the prospect of his Krugerrands 😆


  19. ecobhoy says:

    September 14, 2013 at 9:36 pm

    wottpi says:
    September 14, 2013 at 9:19 pm

    Paul Murray – Sportsound

    Did he say whether he was aware of the EBT Payments?

    Wrt being happy with a South African import perhaps it might be that Murray is more happy at the prospect of his Krugerrands 😆
    ============================
    I’m nearly sure I heard him saying that the EBT’s were irrelevant, anybody?


  20. ianagain says:
    September 14, 2013 at 7:53 pm
    ‘ [Sportsound]…..And some folk given privileged access like PM, I don’t get.’
    —–
    I wondered at that as well.

    P Murray was protected by Jackson, and Spiers and English tried to act the part of hard, paxman-like interviewers. Not very successfully.

    I thought they let P Murray deflect them from talking about SDM’s huge responsibility for the tax problem and subsequent desperate sale to CW.

    P. Murray got an easy enough ride as he glibly trotted out his well-rehearsed answers to fairly basic questions, and stuck the boot into evil jack (my words, not his!).
    Mather’s faction were not represented.
    I wonder will they complain?
    (And to be absolutely scrupulously fair, I think they would have a strong case in complaining that the BBC was less than even-handed. There wasn’t even the usual “we invited the Board to take part …”


  21. Piers?? Spiers,of course. Sorry, forgot about the edit facility!


  22. ecobhoy says:
    September 14, 2013 at 9:36 pm

    ‘..Did he say whether he was aware of the EBT Payments?..’

    He said he wasn’t, he had nothing to do with things like that kind of routine business, but, of course, as a Director he accepted the collective responsibility of Directors!
    ( and claimed certainty that he he is a fit and proper person to be a director again!)


  23. Murray was asked if he thought Sevco could become insolvent this year,he never gave a direct answer,maybe that’s why not so Blin walked away.If they are not prepared to stay and fight for their club/company it must be really bad,never mind the nonsense about JI putting the boot in.Blin is supposed to have 38 yrs of business experience,he must have fought some tight corners before,so why walk ?
    There is a black hole that could pull a Planet through.


  24. I have been reading follow follow with regard Paul Murray’s performance on radio tonight (didn’t listen myself but that isn’t the point).

    It seems for most of them he (with Jim McColl) are the new Messianic figures, with anyone straying from that line a troll, idiot, not real Rangers supporter or whatever.

    Have they learned nothing from D Murray, C Whyte, C Green. Do they still need a grown up running their club for them and it’s all or nothing. You totally support them or you are an anti-Rangers traitor. Is there no such thing as healthy scepticism, or guarded optimism for them.

    After all the old club and new club went through have they really learned nothing. The answer it seems is yes.


  25. I’ll admit I love a conspiracy theory as much as the next person, but it seems the last 48 hours have seen :-

    1. The subsidiary has filed its annual return (late, and incomplete)

    2. Sandy Easdale appointed to the board of the subsidiary, just after the AR01 is filed.

    3. Jack Irvine gets a bit feisty on twitter.

    4. Charlotte returns.

    It looks like the stage is being set for a transfer of assets,
    can any of the bampots 😛 fill in the gaps?


  26. Re the EBTs Paul Murray took on a CO type defense.

    Nothing to do with him directly
    They were in the accounts
    Grant Thornton signed all the accounts off
    Ranger s’ won’ the FTTT
    In fact all was hunky dory down Govan way during his time as a director other than SDM selling to CW.

    For someone who claims he understands basic accountancy better than the Spivs, he failed to acknowledge that having burned tens of millions over the years and not put anything away for a rainy day, that even after paying the bank their £18m the oldco was still spending more than it was bringing in and was gambling on a run in Europe to keep afloat. Not a sensible business plan and that’s why CW had to keep a hold of the PAYE and NI cash. Had CW been honest the club would have been put into administration as soon as he walked up the marble stair case.


  27. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24095962

    Ex-Rangers director Paul Murray demands fiscal transparency

    Paul Murray has told BBC Scotland the current board at Rangers needs to demonstrate financial transparency.

    Murray was part of a group of shareholders who have withdrawn demands for an extraordinary meeting and the removal of certain board members.
    “This is a board – by their own admission – raised about £50m or £60m pounds and there’s only £10m left,” said Murray.

    “You can see why investors who put £17m into the club are concerned.”

    The group, which includes businessman Jim McColl, had demanded that directors Brian Stockbridge and Bryan Smart should stand down at Ibrox and wanted accountant Frank Blin and Murray appointed to the company’s board.

    Murray was previously a non-executive director on the board of The Rangers Football Club PLC – which is currently undergoing liquidation proceedings – from September 2007 until May 2011.

    On Friday, Rangers chief executive Craig Mather accused the shareholders of lacking vision, investment or a plan, saying he hoped their decision to withdraw their demands would lead to “a period of calm and stability” to “continue the progress” of the club.

    However, McColl warned that the battle for control of Rangers has only been postponed and Murray insists the group has always had the best interests of the club at heart.

    “I spoke to Jim McColl and we’re both very disappointed by Craig’s statement,” said Murray. “There’s a lot of personal insults in there and I don’t want to get involved in tit-for-tat.

    “There’s a lot of inaccuracies in Craig’s statement. The first one is that people have to understand that this wasn’t myself, Frank Blin and Jim McColl on some sort of wild goose chase trying to cause trouble.
    “We were asked by shareholders representing almost a third of the shares to come forward. They had concerns about corporate governance and financial transparency at the club.

    “This isn’t about the three of us, it’s about he investors who helped Rangers to go forward.
    “There’s more financial transparency and corporate governance in my golf club than there is at Rangers.”
    Murray also insisted that he was not concerned about any suggestions about his suitability to operate on the board of the club’s parent company.

    His bid to return to the club could face scrutiny under the Scottish FA’s Articles of Association rules regarding fit and proper office bearers, as he was a director in the five-year period preceding the insolvency event suffered by the Rangers Football Club Plc in 2012.

    The Scottish businessman was also part of the board that issued almost £50m in tax-free employee Benefit Trust loans to players and staff, which was subject to a First Tier tax Tribunal, and is currently undergoing appeal proceedings.

    However, he claimed he had helped reduce the debts at Ibrox during his time there – and could do so again – encouraging Rangers shareholders to vote at the forthcoming annual meeting to affect change at boardroom level.

    “I joined the board in 2007 and debt at that point in time was £35m,” said Murray. “When I left four years later, the debt was £18m – it halved in those four years.
    “We had won three SPL trophies and reached our first European trophy in 36 years.
    “People go on about how bad the old board was and the EBT case, which pre-dated me joining the board and was signed off by Grant Thornton for 10 years.
    “The last time I checked, Rangers won the case against HMRC.
    “I’d like to ask Rangers fans the question: would they like to have the four years when I was on the board or the last two years of utter chaos?
    “Let me diplomatically say this: I have no doubt that I am a fit and proper person to join the Rangers board, put it that way.
    “I would encourage everyone who has shares to go along to the AGM, listen to the debate and vote for what they want and who they want on the board.”


  28. Reached a European trophy? Has he been misquoted or is this the latest flannel akin to buying history, winning the EBT case, recovering from liquidation, relegated to the bottom tier, not being allowed to field new players (during a registration embargo), etc, etc, etc? What a farce.


  29. What Paul Murray, his beknighted namesake and everyone else pushing that line fails to recognize , is that Rangers were running on empty before Whyte tipped up.

    If Murray hadn’t sold, then the only options were increase the debt or inject working capital in via a soft loan or equity.

    The increasing of debt option was a non starter. MIH was bust, and Lloyds had no appetite to allow any more of their shareholders money to be burned

    The soft loan was a non starter. None of the board were wealthy enough to make a difference, except King, who’s assets were tied up in a dispute with SARS

    increasing the Equity was a non starter, MIH were under complete Lloyds control with Balance sheet insolvency and £hundreds of millions in losses

    So, there were no realistic options for Rangers pre Whyte. Thanks to McCoists disastrous management in Cup competitions, Rangers would have run out of money even earlier than when the plug was pulled on Whyte, as presumably honourable men like Paul Murray , would not have allowed HMRC not to have been paid PAYE and VAT

    So spare us the crocodile tears. Rangers were bust on Murray’s watch. Rangers went bust because David Murray had a lunatic plan. NO OTHER REASON

    Whyte only affected timing, everything else was Murray


  30. Barcabhoy says:
    September 14, 2013 at 11:40 pm

    Absolutely correct, thankfully people like him don’t try to re-write history. :irony:

    Some recent ones

    1, We asked the fans and they voted for SFL 3

    Lie, you applied for the SPL and were rejected.

    2, We have managed to cut the wage bill massively.

    Lie, you tried to force the players to stay and they refused and walked away. They reduced the wage bill. If anything you increased the wage bill by bringing new ones in.

    3, Rangers were cleared in the failing to declare side contracts case.

    Lie, you were found guilty, you just liked the penalty.

    Paul Murray is just another revisionist, telling people things they desperately want to believe.


  31. Sometimes I worry that my obsession with justice has robbed me of my delight at their predicament.
    Sometimes I’m astounded at my own naivety with regards to how power is forged in Scotland.
    Sometimes I’m just plain disgusted.
    But most of the time I’m so angry that this has happened and sullied what was once one of my great loves in life.
    I don’t enjoy football much anymore.


  32. Tif Finn says:
    September 14, 2013 at 10:41 pm
    5 0 Rate This

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24095962

    Ex-Rangers director Paul Murray demands fiscal transparency

    Paul Murray has told BBC Scotland the current board at Rangers needs to demonstrate financial transparency.

    Murray was part of a group of shareholders who have withdrawn demands for an extraordinary meeting and the removal of certain board members.
    “This is a board – by their own admission – raised about £50m or £60m pounds and there’s only £10m left,” said Murray.

    “You can see why investors who put £17m into the club are concerned.”

    The group, which includes businessman Jim McColl, had demanded that directors Brian Stockbridge and Bryan Smart should stand down at Ibrox and wanted accountant Frank Blin and Murray appointed to the company’s board.

    Murray was previously a non-executive director on the board of The Rangers Football Club PLC – which is currently undergoing liquidation proceedings – from September 2007 until May 2011.

    On Friday, Rangers chief executive Craig Mather accused the shareholders of lacking vision, investment or a plan, saying he hoped their decision to withdraw their demands would lead to “a period of calm and stability” to “continue the progress” of the club.

    However, McColl warned that the battle for control of Rangers has only been postponed and Murray insists the group has always had the best interests of the club at heart.

    “I spoke to Jim McColl and we’re both very disappointed by Craig’s statement,” said Murray. “There’s a lot of personal insults in there and I don’t want to get involved in tit-for-tat.

    “There’s a lot of inaccuracies in Craig’s statement. The first one is that people have to understand that this wasn’t myself, Frank Blin and Jim McColl on some sort of wild goose chase trying to cause trouble.
    “We were asked by shareholders representing almost a third of the shares to come forward. They had concerns about corporate governance and financial transparency at the club.

    “This isn’t about the three of us, it’s about he investors who helped Rangers to go forward.
    “There’s more financial transparency and corporate governance in my golf club than there is at Rangers.”
    Murray also insisted that he was not concerned about any suggestions about his suitability to operate on the board of the club’s parent company.

    His bid to return to the club could face scrutiny under the Scottish FA’s Articles of Association rules regarding fit and proper office bearers, as he was a director in the five-year period preceding the insolvency event suffered by the Rangers Football Club Plc in 2012.

    The Scottish businessman was also part of the board that issued almost £50m in tax-free employee Benefit Trust loans to players and staff, which was subject to a First Tier tax Tribunal, and is currently undergoing appeal proceedings.

    However, he claimed he had helped reduce the debts at Ibrox during his time there – and could do so again – encouraging Rangers shareholders to vote at the forthcoming annual meeting to affect change at boardroom level.

    “I joined the board in 2007 and debt at that point in time was £35m,” said Murray. “When I left four years later, the debt was £18m – it halved in those four years.
    “We had won three SPL trophies and reached our first European trophy in 36 years.
    “People go on about how bad the old board was and the EBT case, which pre-dated me joining the board and was signed off by Grant Thornton for 10 years.
    “The last time I checked, Rangers won the case against HMRC.
    “I’d like to ask Rangers fans the question: would they like to have the four years when I was on the board or the last two years of utter chaos?
    “Let me diplomatically say this: I have no doubt that I am a fit and proper person to join the Rangers board, put it that way.
    “I would encourage everyone who has shares to go along to the AGM, listen to the debate and vote for what they want and who they want on the board.”
    ——————

    Should the bbc not have to be more specific now, regarding what is being referred to;

    The Rangers football club LTD
    Rangers International Football Club PLC
    Rangers Football Club PLC (1872)


  33. How many sevvo fans listening to Paul Murray will believe and put more money into a dead club? For someone who put no brass into his club he sure has a brass neck. To sevvo fans concerning their money fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me 3 times we are the really dumb people. I wonder if BBC sports will get Mr Mather on for the sake of balance. Paul Murray fit and proper my a★★★


  34. Don’t forget.
    This more important case.

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

    Late 2013, 5-10 days, Chancery Division

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

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

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

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

    For the claimants HMRC:

    South Square’s Lucy Frazer

    For the claimants Merchant Turnaround:

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

    For the respondent Collyer Bristow:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


  35. As I see it any AGM could be overturned by this court case.
    Legals opinion?


  36. 6 0 Rate This

    Don’t forget.
    This more important case.

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

    Late 2013, 5-10 days, Chancery Division

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

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

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

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

    For the claimants HMRC:

    South Square’s Lucy Frazer

    For the claimants Merchant Turnaround:

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

    For the respondent Collyer Bristow:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Can someone send this to jim spence via twitter, as it clearly states

    . . .The financial collapse of Rangers FC put in the public eye the club’s . . .
    Withey quit the firm in March after he became embroiled in the Glasgow club’s administration . . .
    (Which is now being liquidated)
    . . .Duff & Phelps were appointed as the original administrators of the club . . .
    (Which is now being liquidated)

    . . .When liquidators Cohen & Stephen took over the wind-down of the club . . .
    (To finalise the liquidation of ‘the club’)

    Thank you COHEN & STEPHEN – it’s there in black and white for Sevconians to see!


  37. Catching up on Paul Murray interview on Sportsound and hearing lots of spin to set an inaccurate narrative.

    On debt

    He quotes it reducing over the last three years of his time at Rangers from 2007 down to £17M

    The table at this link if you scroll down

    https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B62m3ggkEX2RQ2tZdTFOTHFRN0E/edit

    shows it was £5.9m in 2006 and rose to £31m in 2009 because of spending on players in 2007/08 at a gross spend of £29M ((£11m net but NOT, not including wages), that brought in CL money to reduce it to the £17/18m in 2011. That is THREE times the debt in 2006 and totally dependent on CL money.

    The narrative that the Rangers Board were doing ok before CW arrived is pure spin that flies in the face of the facts. See here for transfer spending in 2007/08

    https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aq2m3ggkEX2RdDZsUlEzQkg5U0NUZ08xajhtbUJWcXc#gid=0 . They allowed SDM and Walter Smith to embark on spending with a possible tax bill of at least £24m on the table in 2008. To claim debt reduction only works if you make the start point 2007/08.

    On EBTs which P Murray said were not tax evasion..

    Whilst to date EBTS are not tax evasion because the FTT upheld Rangers appeal, that may change with the UTT. What Murray does not say (either because he is unaware or is keeping the secret) is that the payments made from 2000 to 2003 to Moore, De Boer and Flo were tax evasion. A FTT said so and a UTT did not disagree. The DOS scheme involved side letters whose existence Rangers denied to HMRC when they enquired and whose existence was not reported to the SFA according to LNS.

    The ONLY difference between the wee tax case and big tax case in terms of tax avoidance/evasion status is the wee tax case born of DOS IS tax evasion, the big tax case has still to be decided.

    Why did LNS not pick up on this? That is a HUGE question particularly when Campbell Ogilvie, who was interviewed by LNS, never mentioned the distinction in spite of the fact both DOS and EBTs had the common linkage of concealed side letters not reported to the SFA on registration of the players and in the DOS cases were deliberately hidden from HMRC who asked if any existed.

    Given concealment of side letters was the prime focus of LNS why was he not told the De Boer and Flo payments were in fact tax evasion and could not be treated as regular payments?

    I’ll give Paul Murray the benefit of the doubt on knowing the difference between instances of tax evasion and tax avoidance, after all it has been hidden from the sight of everyone from cradle to grave.

    However it is another example of an attempt to set an inaccurate narrative for public consumption. Any journalist reading please note.


  38. Just catching up on some of the Paul Murray interview from last night. It appalls me that a certain ‘type’ of Rangers man is still afforded a level of respect by the media that no-one, from any other club, ever receives. As others have already pointed out, it would have been simple to blow apart many of his claims, but instead all we got was more sycophantic puff piece journalism from Graham Spiers and Tom English. I wonder if Craig Mather would have been tip-toed around in the same manner, but then again he is not that certain ‘type’ of Rangers man. Some aspects of life in Scotland have changed little since the 1950’s it would seem. The only difference now is there are opportunities to get an alternative viewpoint out there, whereas in the past we were only told what traditional Rangers man wanted us to hear.


  39. jimlarkin says:
    September 15, 2013 at 12:11 am

    Spot on jim, and the people they do the biggest dis-service to by allowing this particular obfuscation to continue are the Rangers’ support.

    Take recent financial discussions where the mantra is “we don’t owe anyone any money”. Well that really depends on what particular “we” you are referring to.

    Is it the holding company, in which case it almost certainly isn’t true, but the debts will probably be fairly controlled, Close Leasing and some other smaller creditors.

    Is it the Ltd Company (club) in which case they could be very substantial, depending on how the money from the IPO was spent. Was it in fact loans from the holding company to the Ltd company to cover ongoing costs. It could be tens of millions.

    Or what about Sandy Easdale, blocked from being on the board of the PLC apparently, but not the subsidiary, so is now a director of Rangers.

    Right from the start this has been a deliberate ploy to confuse the hard of thinking. Craig Whyte did the same thing with the structure he was setting up, claiming things like the club being “debt free” whilst it owed him £18m by the way the debt and the ownership was structured. Remember, he was two people depending on how you looked at it. The current position doesn’t appear to be much different.

    Tell that to a Rangers supporter though. You are a Rangers hater with an agenda, facts therefore become irrelevant.


  40. sixtaeseven says:
    September 15, 2013 at 5:38 am

    The Holding Company and Club are separate entities now. It would be entirely possible for RIFC PLC to sell it’s share in RFCL Ltd and it may well do that.

    The point is that was not the previous structure. There was a PLC and that was it. The PLC was formed from the Ltd Company which had been formed from the Club.

    Basically the current structure is what they are trying to convince people the previous one was, it’s a lie. If old Rangers had a Holding Company at all it was MIH. (which even has “Holding” in it’s name, as a clue.)


  41. Tif Finn says:
    September 15, 2013 at 9:04 am
    —————————————————————————————
    Would the holding company at the death of the oldco not be The Rangers Football Club Group Ltd,formerly known as Wavetower and as far as I know,still alive if not exactly kicking?.
    If so,surely any spurious argument that the club lives on whilst the holding company got liquidated is wrong?.


  42. policeandthieves says:
    September 15, 2013 at 12:06 am
    47 1 Rate This

    Sometimes I worry that my obsession with justice has robbed me of my delight at their predicament.
    Sometimes I’m astounded at my own naivety with regards to how power is forged in Scotland.
    Sometimes I’m just plain disgusted.
    But most of the time I’m so angry that this has happened and sullied what was once one of my great loves in life.
    I don’t enjoy football much anymore.
    —————–

    Yes, this stuff is wearying. And Mr Paul Murray is meant to be ‘the decent Rangers man’.

    OT (look away now)
    A good antidote is to visit a local junior or amatuer club. I’m a supporter of my local team, which is from a small rural town. Thanks to a lower-league triumph last season it has moved a little higher on the steps of the great fitba pyramid, though is still some way outside the 3 regular leagues.

    But there is a feeling of belonging when you watch the home-town team — even from your adopted home town, as it is in my case. And seeing the senior 11 with the same colours that your own son once wore in the youth ranks only re-enforces that sense of community.

    Yesterday’s very basic home-made match programme, honoured ‘Per’. He achieved a new club record of 460 matches. We know him as one of the people connected to the local nursey and after-school youth care. Now well into his 30s, he plays alongside some of those he once taught to tie their laces and to hold hands when crossing the road. A nice touch of continuity.

    Of course, moving up the leagues — even these very lowly 14-team regionals — is a big event. The entry fee has gone up from 30 to 40 kroner (from £3 to £4) and the one page home-made programme is now done on someone’s colour laser printer. Yes, you can tell we’re nearing the big time.

    My guess is that there were less than 50 actual paying supporters as the crowd included lots of local youth, with players and sometimes whole teams coming and going. The guy taking the entry money was eager though. He challeged anyone who walked past him, in a friendly-ish kind of way. The barbacue was open and by snacking on a pretty decent home-made burger or the ubiquitous Danish ‘pølse’ you were supporting the club, particularly the youth work.

    Our team, which has the eerily, TSFM-appropriate initials of ‘FBI’, has started life in the rarified air of ‘Danmarkserien’ well. They are mid-table and will climb a bit higher after a fine 3-2 win yesterday*. Rather nice too, that for the equivalent of £10 I can watch the match, have a barbacue snack and a drink. Of course, that’s only possible because lots of people give their time, free of charge.

    During the natural lulls in each half I played fly-on-the-wall to some conversations. One was bemoaning the pricing policy of the national association. In reality, it means that people stayed away from friendly matches ‘because for a family of four a trip to Parken could easily cost £120’. Ticket pricing is a common theme in some countries. Another, more fun discussion I evesdropped was about last week’s away match, which involved a ferry and bus trip to the island of Bornholm. That kind of thing is almost Euopean football for our club! It had been a ‘great day out’ apparently. For a lowly, rural town fitba doesn’t get much better. And from the huge number of youth teams, junior players and coaches milling around it looks as though the football talent will keep coming through.

    So, if you’re weary of corporate fitba, I can recommend a wee trip tae your community club. When all is said and done, that’s where football starts, and for some of us, where it truly flourishes.

    This concludes the voting of the Scandinavian jury 🙂

    * Joint second on points, though 5th on goal difference. Intoxicating stuff.


  43. torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    September 15, 2013 at 9:12 am

    Thanks, very good point.

    Apologies, I seem to have missed out the whole Craig Whyte era.

    I must have fallen for the propaganda and painted it out of history. That is an honest admission btw, no irony intended.

    You are correct Wavetower (as was) was indeed the holding company. Craig Whyte had bought Rangers from Murray (MIH) using that vehicle. As you say that did not die, it was the club which went into administration and liquidation not it’s holding company.

    (The principle is still the same, torrejonbhoy just got the facts right).


  44. companycheck.co.uk/company/SC457172…Easdale Holdings? New Company.New owners of Ibrox Park?
    Cant get the link thingy to work. Need to copy and paste into address bar.


  45. Danish Pastry says:
    September 15, 2013 at 9:12 am

    OT (look away now)
    A good antidote is to visit a local junior or amatuer club. I’m a supporter of my local team, which is from a small rural town. Thanks to a lower-league triumph last season it has moved a little higher on the steps of the great fitba pyramid, though is still some way outside the 3 regular leagues
    ======================================================================
    What a lovely story and totally on topic for those who love football for what it should be and actually is in some communities. It gives us sometimes jaded ones the fire needed to keep fighting to improve Scottish Football by cleansing Hampden and getting people of principle in to not only run the game but to show honest and open leadership and display transparency in the decision-making process so that fans with genuine questions and grievances get answers.

    They might not always be happy with the answers but as long as consistency has been shown in arriving at them then I think we are all adult enough to accept that we don’t have exclusivity on wisdom. Obviously if those at the top consistently get major things wrong then they have to go for the good of the game.

    But I think their role would be much easier if they genuinely engaged with fans and listened to their concerns and suggestions. But they can’t be expected to listen to a to a Tower of Babel. Fans have got to be organised and decide on clear ‘messages’ which are supported and I don’t necessarily mean just one as there will usually be room for options.


  46. Danish Pastry says:
    September 15, 2013 at 9:12 am

    A cracking tale. A reminder of why we love football. A reminder that it is a great game.


  47. sixtaeseven says:
    September 15, 2013 at 5:38 am (Edit)

    I discovered in this article that “Rangers” have two boards, one Football board and one PLC board:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24091694

    Is this common in modern football, or are they trying to reinforce their notion of club and company being distinct entities?
    ______________________________________________________________

    No, it is not unusual to separate the plc from the football operation. Celtic have what is affectionately termed in-house as the “wee board” which is the Celtic Football Club Limited.

    Sounds like the name of the originally incorporated club, but it is not. That company I believe was an off the shelf company (bought by Fergus McCann when the club incorporated as a plc), as a device to allow the football operation to be run in isolation. It also allowed people with some football, but not plc expertise to be put in place on its board.

    The appointments of the likes of Willie Haughey, John Keane and Michael McDonald to that board were a reward for their part in Fergus’s takeover, but kept them apart from Dermot Desmond, Paddy Sheehy and Brian Quinn on the “big” board of Celtic plc, which IS the originally incorporated club.

    If I have been slipshod in any aspects of detail, I am sure our experts will put me back on the right track.


  48. Instead of a long, rambling, barely coherent rant, why doesn’t Craig Mather just put this whole carry on to bed by publishing the accounts and allowing sevcovians to move on?

    The Director of Communications previously stated that he wasn’t prepared to get involved in every little squabble about the new club. Apparently this hasn’t been communicated to ‘Jack Irvine, who no longer speaks for this club’.

    Could it be that, along with a gorilla and an elephant, another potentially dangerous animal has entered the Blue Room?

    Are all creditors up to date?
    Have the ‘new signings’ read the small print?
    Does Ian Black have the full skinny on who was backing who at HT/FT (Hence the kid gloves)?
    Integrity is a small dot in the sevco rear-view mirror!


  49. Paul murry stating he had been approached by investors who had invested £17 million 😯
    Could this be Ticketus 😉


  50. Carfins Finest says:
    September 15, 2013 at 9:54 am
    companycheck.co.uk/company/SC457172…Easdale Holdings? New Company.New owners of Ibrox Park?

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    These people seem to buy/create new companies like a normal person would change socks. Flicking around through the various directors and directorships you find other ‘new’ companies like ‘Sportsco’

    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC448865

    Delving into the financial side of things you get snippets like “The combined cash at bank value for all of James’s current businesses is £484,210, with a combined assets value of £1,989,824 and liabilities of £5,374,251” and “The combined cash at bank value for all of Alexander’s current businesses is £311,341, with a combined assets value of £1,645,544 and liabilities of £4,059,903”

    I hope nobody is thinking the Easdales are going to be bankrolling anything.


  51. TSFM’s answer to sixtaeseven’s question has raised a couple of academic points for myself. I have been aware of the “wee” and “big” boards at Celtic since Fergus’s original flotation, but I assume that the “wee” board’s company is only an internal company organisational device and not in itself a member of the SFA, since the plc is.

    Does anyone know what the structure is?

    Also, are there any other Scottish clubs which have a similar structure? The mechanisms of plc’s make as much sense to me as a conversation in the kitchen of New York diner, but the complex ways of business are a device behind which TRFC Liquidation-Deniers hide as they claim what has happened to RFC is just the same as what happened elsewhere (at Celtic Park).

    Some clarity would be helpful for the commercially illiterate lie myself.


  52. scottc says:

    September 15, 2013 at 10:31 am
    Carfins Finest says:
    September 15, 2013 at 9:54 am
    companycheck.co.uk/company/SC457172…Easdale Holdings? New Company.New owners of Ibrox Park?

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    These people seem to buy/create new companies like a normal person would change socks. Flicking around through the various directors and directorships you find other ‘new’ companies like ‘Sportsco’

    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC448865

    Delving into the financial side of things you get snippets like “The combined cash at bank value for all of James’s current businesses is £484,210, with a combined assets value of £1,989,824 and liabilities of £5,374,251″ and “The combined cash at bank value for all of Alexander’s current businesses is £311,341, with a combined assets value of £1,645,544 and liabilities of £4,059,903″

    I hope nobody is thinking the Easdales are going to be bankrolling anything.
    ======================
    Scott, I think you are forgetting all the brown paper bags.


  53. Auldheid says:
    September 15, 2013 at 3:28 am

    The ONLY difference between the wee tax case and big tax case in terms of tax avoidance/evasion status is the wee tax case born of DOS IS tax evasion, the big tax case has still to be decided.

    Why did LNS not pick up on this? That is a HUGE question particularly when Campbell Ogilvie, who was interviewed by LNS, never mentioned the distinction in spite of the fact both DOS and EBTs had the common linkage of concealed side letters not reported to the SFA on registration of the players and in the DOS cases were deliberately hidden from HMRC who asked if any existed.

    Given concealment of side letters was the prime focus of LNS why was he not told the De Boer and Flo payments were in fact tax evasion and could not be treated as regular payments?
    =======================================================================
    It is clear from the LNS Decision that he was aware that two different schemes existed and also clear he didn’t know that there was any difference between them and treated the EBT scheme as a continuation of the previous one.

    I have always believed since I understood Auldheid’s excellent work on this subject that it was inconceivable that not one person who represented the parties or gave evidence was unaware of the true facts that the DOS scheme was different and had been found illegal by a FTTT decision in favour of HMRC against Aberdeen Asset Management.

    I can’t understand why the SPL preparatory investigation didn’t throw-up the DOS details and even more surprised that the HMRC didn’t highlight the differences in the RAngers FTTT. Of course as the SPL were in control of presenting the evidence and questioning the witnesses at LNS they bear the biggest share of the blame.

    We have always been stymied in that no transcript of proceedings was produced and I don’t know if one even exists. We didn’t even get important written evidence or even Counsels’ statements.

    We now know that CO would have been well aware of the DOS scheme and I think it beggars belief to imagine he didn’t know it had been declared illegal. The simple test to me is if DOS was OK why was it dropped by Rangers and the EBT scheme introduced. It’s obvious to me that the timing coincides with HMRC moves against DOS.

    Another interesting document provided by CF was the transcript of evidence dealing with DM’s evidence about how the EBT’s came about. There is no mention of DOS. It looks as though it’s just soemthging else that was airbrushed out of Ibrox history and might have slipped beneath the waves except for Auldheid.

    The SFA and SPL appear to have given a guarantee that no matter what the UTT decide on the HMRC FTTT appeal re Rangers that there is no going back. However it’s as clear as the nose on my face that they can go back and deal with the DOS case as that has never been dealt with.

    Will the SFA have the bottle to do so – Of course not and conflicted Ogilvie has done his job rather well.


  54. Tic 6709 says:
    September 15, 2013 at 10:54 am
    4 0 Rate This

    Scott, I think you are forgetting all the brown paper bags.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Of course. How silly of me. Also the cash lying about in bus depots. 😆


  55. Good Morning,

    I listened to the whole Paul Murray interview yesterday and as I did so I thought to myself, that of all the old board members, Murray — followed by AJ — was the one that I had heard most often give a public interview.

    David Murray gave fewer and fewer interviews, Bain kept his head down, Mclelland rarely, Muir virtually never — and so we always get to hear Paul Murray.

    Now, Paul Murray clearly loves his football and the Rangers Club he grew up supporting. He has always struck me as a decent guy — going by my measure of what a decent guy is — and someone who was proud and excited to be a Director of Rangers PLC.

    However, that enthusiasm and passion does not excuse his failing to grasp and acknowledge what actually happened on his watch as a Director.

    Remember, that even if you have an all powerful chairman and owner such as David Murray, it is the duty of a Director to ensure that the company — in this instance the club as defined by Duff & Phelps— is run properly.

    Paul Murray did not sit on a board that did that and there is no evidence that Paul Murray raised concerns about the way the club was run.

    The only time when Paul Murray has been known to speak out was when there was objection to Murray’s decision to sell to Craig Whyte.

    Listening to Murray yesterday, I was genuinely sorry that here was a guy– not a wealthy guy– who had lost £250,000 of his own money. Money which he appears to have paid for a seat on the board, taking up an unremunerated position at Rangers. There is an argument at least that Paul Murray was played by SDM — another supporter who stuck money in and who saw nothing in return.

    Maybe, like many genuine football fans, he did not expect to get his money back– in which case fair play to him— but at the same time any examination of the facts suggests that he was a “tame” non exec who did not rock the boat while the ship was sinking.

    His explanations yesterday were naive, and regrettably suggest that he did not understand that sometimes Directors have a duty to sink the ship rather than allow a fatal journey to carry on any further.

    Auldheid has already dealt with the actual facts concerning debt and has studied the detail of the small tax case to the nth degree.

    However, a few small details are worth noting.

    Paul Murray was there when Lloyds decided to put Donald Muir on the board and give him the power to determine policy going forward. Did Paul Murray think that Lloyds took such a step because they were desperate for a corporate box and a good Saturday out? Or did it just not dawn on him that the bank had reached the end of its tether?

    As a man of business, did he not see that from 2004/2005 Rangers financial position was one which only looked the way it did because David Murray underwrote a share issue and wiped £60 Million– yes £60 MILLION — of the creditors balance by switching the debt to MIH?

    Where was the change in fiscal policy that lead to that situation? Where was the grand plan that made sure that never happened again?

    When David Murray decided to sell the club, Paul Murray had the inside line to be able to go and get a consortium of good Rangers supporting business men to come and buy the club or the company or whatever way you want to describe it. He had 4 YEARS in which to come up with a plan.

    He didn’t or couldn’t persuade anyone to come in with him.

    Now, stop and think about that for a minute. Nobody wanted to buy the company he was a Director of!

    When that company went into Admin, and the toxiticy of both Craig Whyte and the old board could be left behind — various buyers looked at buying the assets — as long as they were free of the old board’s tax legacy ( illegal or not ) and Craig Whyte’s shenanigans.

    However, let’s go further.

    When the deal to sell to Whyte was announced, Paul Murray’s colleague AJ announced that the board did have an alternative plan to Whyte– and that was once more to ship some of the debt on to MIH?

    AJ is on record as saying that Murray was in hock to Lloyds to the tune of some £750Million– so what difference would another £20Million or so make– thus leaving Rangers virtually debt free!

    I have never heard Paul Murray criticise or disassociate himself from that plan. Had the old board learned nothing? Had they been completely blind to the fact that LLoyds were never going to agree that and were looking to exit altogether?

    Walter Smith knew it! He openly complained that it was THE BANK who was making fiscal policy — so how come the likes of Paul Murray seemed to be oblivious to the kind of fiscal governance that was required to make the company run properly?

    On the question of the EBT’s and DOS scheme — he completely ignoes the DOS scheme and cites the EBT position as a red herring and of no consequence.

    Let’s take those schemes at their height and best.

    The DOS scheme has been declared and accepted as unlawful. It has also been accepted by Rangers that the side letters for 3 players under that scheme were concealed from the SFA and SPL. Was that good corporate governance?

    With regard to the EBT scheme, he cites the fact that Grant Thornton approved the scheme and that it was declared in the annual accounts. Further he says that Rangers won the FTT.

    Except that for something like 4 -5 years the Rangers PLC board knew that they were under investigation re the EBT case and that there was an allegation being made which might cost millions of pounds. Such was the potential liability, that any right minded individual would know that while that claim was ongoing the business was incapable of being sold….. and more importantly…… incapable of being re banked and made stable.

    Was entering into such a scheme which allowed such a cloud to hang over the company good corporate governance?

    Now, the FTT decision is under appeal.

    However, the evidence given to the FTT is now known and out in the open with one judge being hugely critical of the conduct of MIH and Rangers PLC directors.

    The existence of the side letters were denied when HMRC first enquired, and it took a criminal warrant to uncover them. There was obfuscation and delay, with complaints from HMRC that correspondence went unreplied to and that their requests for information was ignored or deflected.

    Is that the behaviour of a responsible and diligent board of Directors?

    It may be argued that MIH actually dealt with HMRC and not the board of Rangers PLC. Fair enough let’s take that head on. The Board of Rangers PLC had a duty to ensure that the affairs of Rangers PLC were conducted properly — and leaving such serious matters to the board of MIH and not asking questions or not ensuring that the matters were being attended to properly ( as shown in evidence ) is a complete failure of duty.

    However, MIH and David Murray only owned 85% of Rangers PLC. What did Paul Murray and his colleagues do to protect the other 15% of shareholders who ultimately lost their investment. Did they sit idly by and just say ” Ah well SDM will sort it with his gazillions” or the like? Did they check that MIH were doing what they should have been doing on behalf of all the shareholders? Again, the investigation went on for years?

    Did they not ask themselves just why it was taking so long? If they did what explanation were they given by SDM or whoever?

    Or was it the case that when David Murray said “Jump” they only asked ” How high?”.

    No– Paul Murray absolutely failed as a Director– completely and utterly failed to take notice of anything that was going on around him.

    He said that he was unaware that the side letters had not been registered with the SFA and SPL but accepted that he had to share that responsibility. That is an admitted failing.

    He said that he viewed Dave King as a good guy– notwithstanding King’s well known brush with the law regarding his own tax affairs– including warrants for his arrest and so on.

    Fair enough– everyone is entitled to their view.

    Dave King’s view is that David Murray duped him and other Rangers fans over the running of the club.

    What does Paul Murray have to say about that?

    Was he lied to and mislead by David Murray in the same way that King suggests?

    And what about the tax return that says that King received some £15Million pounds out of Rangers not long after he invested money into the club? Has Paul Murray ever been asked to explain that?

    Further, with regard to the EBT’s, I think that anyone with any business knowledge will be aware that a set of accounts are always signed off by the auditors with a caveat which states clearly that the auditors have relied purely and solely on the information provided by the Directors.

    Paul Baxendale Walker went on TV to explain that his EBT scheme was, in his opinion, perfectly lawful PROVIDED it was administered properly and that the payments to players and staff were not linked to their contracts of employment.

    Grant Thornton, quite rightly, included the EBT payments in the accounts and stated that there was a statutory scheme in existence. They did not certify at any time that the scheme was being properly run, and I will bet you a pound to a penny they will say that they were not aware of any side letters which governed the payments made under the scheme.

    Yet those side letters were prepared by employees and officials of Rangers PLC and were known about by officials and directors of Rangers PLC.

    So– was Paul Murray not aware of them or how the EBT scheme worked?

    If so– should he have gone and found out?

    If he did not know about over 80 side letters, was that an accident or were he and other directors kept in the dark quite deliberately? What does he have to say about that?

    What steps were taken by the board to ensure that they complied with the EBT regulations on an annual basis?

    What is his explanation as to how the board determined who would be given what by way of an EBT payment and how did the board ensure that these payments were within the legal bounds of the Baxendale Walker schemes?

    Equally, why did the board agree key payments to former employees some considerable time after they had left the employment of Rangers PLC?

    Further, when did he become aware that the company who administered the trusts in jersey had chosen to resign because they were concerned about how the scheme was being run, and did that of itself not set off some alarm bells within the boardroom?

    No– I am sorry— I believe Paul Murray to be a nice guy– and that is the problem, he was probably too nice to sit on this board and possibly any other board because at times the job of a board director is to be an awkward bugger and tell everyone else in the room that they are making a cod of it.

    By failing to do that you are selling the shareholders down the river. If you ask awkward questions and are given coherent and minuted explanations then it can be shown that the board stopped, considered a position and then decided on a course of action, took advice and conducted themselves properly.

    If they make the wrong decision, then that is neither a crime nor a catastrophe in many cases as no individual or group of people are perfect and right all of the time.

    However, when you don’t ask and bury your head in the sand that is when disaster will assuredly strike and you are left defenceless to claims of negligence and improper trading, and a failure in your duty of care.

    The old board of Rangers PLC failed all ends up — even to the extent that they had to shred some documentation in an attempt to hide Martin Bain’s contract ( this was stated in court by Bain himself ).

    They didn’t let me down — they let every fan of Rangers Football Club down and in particular they let the people who had invested money in the club deck debentures down… and that should never be forgotten!

    Paul Murray needs to ask some questions of himself in the cold light of day and he has to stop pretending that all on his watch was ok — because it clearly wasn’t!


  56. From a land down under:

    “The integrity of football is paramount,” FFA chief David Gallop said in a statement.
    “We provided information to Victoria Police within 24 hours of receiving an alert from our international betting integrity monitoring agents.
    “We’re determined to keep football clean. Alongside other sports bodies in Australia and globally, we must eradicate corrupt behaviour from sport.”

    Compare and contrast…………………..
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24098876 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24060801


  57. Rabo Karabekian says:

    September 15, 2013 at 10:34 am
    Rate This

    Quantcast
    _________________________________________________

    Celtic have never been liquidated as they paid their debts. Celtic have never had their membership taken away from them.


  58. Carfins Finest says:

    September 15, 2013 at 9:54 am

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    companycheck.co.uk/company/SC457172…Easdale Holdings? New Company.New owners of Ibrox Park?
    Cant get the link thingy to work. Need to copy and paste into address b
    —————————————————————————————————————————————–
    Carfin
    Easedales Holdings is a New Zealand based company so no conspiracy there. On the subject of The Easedales I had a quick look at their companies and I can tell you they are not exactly “wealth off the radar”. I also found out from a trusted source that although an agreement has been reached with Green, no actual money has changed hands…..which might just join up the dots regarding the lack of clarity or indeed proper PLC governance regarding public notification of appropriate shareholdings.


  59. 100BJD says:

    September 15, 2013 at 11:32 am

    0

    0

    Rate This

    Carfins Finest says:

    September 15, 2013 at 9:54 am

    Rate This

    Quantcast

    companycheck.co.uk/company/SC457172…Easdale Holdings? New Company.New owners of Ibrox Park?
    Cant get the link thingy to work. Need to copy and paste into address b
    —————————————————————————————————————————————–
    Carfin
    Easedales Holdings is a New Zealand based company so no conspiracy the
    =================
    With a head office in Greenock?


  60. Bangordub

    So the SPL can take action against Sevco Scotland Ltd re the EBT’s IF it proves that those EBT’s constitute a CW event or act as defined?

    I would need to check back to see who that is defined


  61. Is this another ‘Wow’ moment?

    From the side letter to the 5-way agreement published by CF this morning :

    “…..the SPL shall not after Completion take or commence disciplinary proceedings against Sevco under and in terms of the SPL Rules (as defined in the Agreement) for an alleged breach of the SPL Articles (as defined in the Agreement) and/or theSPL Rules by RFC and/or Rangers FC (as defined in the Agreement) prior to Completion in respect of any EBT Payments and Arrangements (as defined below), except where any such EBT Payments andArrangements shall constitute a CW Enduring Act or Acts..”

    “Sevco must keep and maintain the existence of this letter, the terms hereof and the Undertaking in the strictest confidence………In the event that Sevco shall by itself, its officers, employees or agents,…..fail to keep and maintain the existence of this letter, the terms hereof and/or the Undertaking in the strictest confidence or Sevco shall purport to assign the benefit of all or part of this letter and/or the Undertaking the SPL shall be entitled by notice in writing to Sevco to terminate the benefit of this letter and the Undertaking.”

    My comments :

    1. SPL undertaking not to pursue Sevco for EBT transgressions – were the SFA also party to this officially or unofficially? Would explain a lot about what transpired.

    2. With the letter now in the public domain is Sevco liable to face action on the EBT issue from the SPL or it’s successor?

    I’m sure the world’s greatest administrator would have ensured this letter did not become public knowledge.

    Any more side letters or agreements we don’t know about?

    Thanks for this Charlotte but what we need at the moment are financials showing just what is really going on and either confirming Mather’s statements or setting off Armageddon 2.

    Scottish football needs a strong SPFL & SFA in these days ahead. Do not repeat the mistakes of the past.


  62. broganrogantrevinoandhogan says:
    September 15, 2013 at 11:56 am
    1 0 Rate This

    Bangordub

    So the SPL can take action against Sevco Scotland Ltd re the EBT’s IF it proves that those EBT’s constitute a CW event or act as defined?

    I would need to check back to see who that is defined

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    From the definitions in the 5 way agreement, least the version of it I’ve got saved.

    “CW Exempt Acts” means all acts and omissions of or undertaken under instruction from or with the actual knowledge of Craig Whyte during the period of his tenure as Chairman of RFC, the sanctions for which are enforceable against RFC and not against CW as an individual and which are not CW Enduring Acts;
    “CW Enduring Acts” means all acts and omissions of or undertaken under instruction from or with the actual knowledge of Craig Whyte during the period of his tenure as Chairman of RFC, the sanctions for which are enforceable against RFC and not against CW as an individual where such acts or omissions relate to or are in any way connected with, directly or indirectly, corruption, fraud, bribery, match-fixing, unauthorised or undisclosed payments to players or Match Officials, or any matter similar in its reprehensible nature to any of the foregoing which acts or omissions are of at least equal gravity to those found to have been committed by or engaged in by RFC in the JP Determination;


  63. davythelotion says:
    September 15, 2013 at 10:23 am

    Instead of a long, rambling, barely coherent rant, why doesn’t Craig Mather just put this whole carry on to bed by publishing the accounts and allowing sevcovians to move on?
    _______________________________________________________________

    Perhaps Mr. Mather is reluctant to make public the true financial state of Sevco.


  64. Carntyne says:
    September 15, 2013 at 12:13 pm
    %%%%%%
    Unlike cynics like you, I’m patiently waiting for Charles to throw open the books to show that his new company is: debt free, is in a better financial position than Celtic and has £10m to give to Ally McCoist to spend on world class players.
    Off to watch that reality show ‘Harry Potter & the Chancer’s Magic Account Ledgers’ 😛


  65. davythelotion says:
    September 15, 2013 at 12:23 pm

    Carntyne says:
    September 15, 2013 at 12:13 pm
    %%%%%%
    Unlike cynics like you…
    __________________________

    Me?

    Cynical?


  66. Auldhied if you are about ,how does the May 2011 date in the post from Ianagaian 12:27am with regards the SFA knowing of an outstanding tax liability prior to issuing a Euro licence

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

Leave a Reply