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.
scapaflow says:
September 23, 2013 at 2:14 pm
1 0 Rate This
Interesting development
“Frankie @GersnetOnline 9m
Also had a lawyer email asking us to withdraw all forum discussion on a supposed police investigation into the club. #carefulnow”
TSFM: Have the Two Rons sent the boys round yet?
=========================================================================
no problems there then…police investigation and club !
however
. . .if the police were to investigate the “COMPANY” !!
DG @dcgriff2000
@GersnetOnline I take it this is in connection with Leggat’s suicidally stupid “SFO instructs PF to investigate Rangers” blog last week?
Reply
Retweet
Favorite
More options ViewConversation
Frankie
@GersnetOnline
@dcgriff2000 Yes, we’ve voluntarily removed the discussion after dialogue with club’s lawyers. We’ll see what happens next. #carefulnow
============================================
so, are Sevco lawyers saying there is no investigation and it’s mince or are they saying there IS an investigation but they need to keep it quiet?
Interesting choice of phrase on so many levels.
“suicidally stupid”
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
September 23, 2013 at 2:21 pm
What has struck me is that there has been no announcement to the Stock Market refuting these scurrilous and totally unfounded rumours. Surely, that’s among the first things a world class expert in reputational management would advise?
scapaflow says:
September 23, 2013 at 2:29 pm
1 0 Rate This
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
September 23, 2013 at 2:21 pm
What has struck me is that there has been no announcement to the Stock Market refuting these scurrilous and totally unfounded rumours. Surely, that’s among the first things a world class expert in reputational management would advise?
=========================
not really, they can’t go responding to every half baked rumour/story – especially if it’s true!
Ah as Sir Humphrey would say, the very worst sort of ill-informed, unfounded speculation….
Still I seem to recall them being quick enough to issue statements refuting things in the past???
For accountants everywhere, especially my elder brother
http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/2013/09/23/did-the-uks-accounting-standards-board-knowingly-break-the-law/
Ah hem, well, Charlotte the Harlot’s gag seems to be malfunctioning
“Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 7m
@GersnetOnline Ask FFW why RIFC refused to hand over the Pinsent and Deloitte reports to the SFO despite a request to do so. #CoverUp”
scapaflow says:
September 23, 2013 at 2:46 pm
4 0 Rate This
Ah hem, well, Charlotte the Harlot’s gag seems to be malfunctioning
“Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 7m
@GersnetOnline Ask FFW why RIFC refused to hand over the Pinsent and Deloitte reports to the SFO despite a request to do so. #CoverUp”
++++++++++++
A refusal like that would normally result in a search warrant.
neepheid says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:02 pm
You would think so, possibly the original source of the story?
The SFO may have jusrisdictional issues with that.
So a referall to their chums at COPFS or the Police Service of Scotland might be the order of the day.
scapaflow says:
September 23, 2013 at 2:46 pm
Ah hem, well, Charlotte the Harlot’s gag seems to be malfunctioning
“Charlotte Fakeovers @CharlotteFakes 7m
@GersnetOnline Ask FFW why RIFC refused to hand over the Pinsent and Deloitte reports to the SFO despite a request to do so. #CoverUp”
=============================================================
Well I do know that the police have certain mechanisms to obtain information that they are keen to have – is it not called the ‘Big Red Key’ 🙄
However I wonder who refused? Was it RIFC or indeed the club ❓
I seem to remember there was a previous incident down Ibrox Way when documents weren’t handed over and eventually the door was knocked courtesy of HMRC. Some things never seem to change.
By that I mean the stupidity of Rangers because we all know that the P & M report found no wrongdoing. I’m not sure what the Deloitte report was into but I would be surprised if that august firm of accountants hadn’t carried out their investigation with customary due diligence.
ecobhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:06 pm
Careful ecobhoy, I’m on oxymoron patrol
” I’m not sure what the Deloitte report was into but I would be surprised if that august firm of accountants hadn’t carried out their investigation with customary due diligence.” 😉
David Low @Heavidor 5m
Celtic’s Full years financial fgures to June 30, 2013 now out per link. Just waiting for RIFC now. http://www.investegate.co.uk/celtic-plc–ccp-/rns/preliminary-results/201309231457526700O/ …
This is beginning to look like another interesting week in the Sevco soap opera.
Surely somebody in authority has to say something soon.
Anyone?
Anything?
Celtics Financials (the company, not the club….hahahaha)
http://www.investegate.co.uk/celtic-plc–ccp-/rns/preliminary-results/201309231457526700O/
Financial Highlights
· Group Revenue increased by 47.7% to £75.82m (2012: £51.34m).
· Operating expenses increased by 15.2% to £62.71m (2012: £54.44m).
· Investment in football personnel of £9.66m (2012: £5.24m).
· Year end net cash at bank £3.76m (2012: £2.77m net bank debt).
· Exceptional costs of £1.83m (2012: £0.54m).
· Profit before tax £9.74m (2012: £7.37m loss).
Tif Finn says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:06 pm
0 0 Rate This
The SFO may have jusrisdictional issues with that.
So a referall to their chums at COPFS or the Police Service of Scotland might be the order of the day.
+++++++++++
If the SFO have made a direct request for documents, that means they have a live case. I am sure that they must have a process in place to enforce their requests, even in Bonny Scotland. A refusal to voluntarily comply with a simple request like that will attract any investigator’s immediate interest. At that point, you know you’re really onto something.
Now there may be some rumblings with regards to investigations but Paul McConville pours some cold water on the report based on how such matters would be handled even if the SFO were sniffing around.
Once again, I feel we will all have to wait on the production (or non production) or the accounts.
==================================================================
To be fair, it looks as if someone has taken in Mr Leggat with the story – for various reasons.
As he correctly said, the SFO has no jurisdiction in Scotland. Rangers International Football Club PLC is a Scottish company. At first sight issues about it would be dealt with here. But as the SFO does not have jurisdiction, it is unlikely that it would have “senior figures” looking into allegations before deciding to pass these on.
In any event, as is clear from the various online resources available, even if the SFO thought something fishy was happening, it would contact Crown Office in Edinburgh, not the Procurator Fiscal in Glasgow. I suspect that if, for some reason, the SFO went directly to the PF in Ballater Street in Glasgow, they would be redirected very quickly to the Crown Office HQ in Edinburgh!
And as for the suggestion that, having received information this week from the SFO, the PF had already “launched a police probe” … anyone who knows how the system of investigation and prosecution of serious crime in Scotland works would know (a) that any such decision would come from Edinburgh and (b) in an alleged financial crime there would be lengthy and serious consideration given to what was alleged to have taken place before a single police officer was sent to interview anyone.
As for the slim possibility that Mr Leggat raised that the matter night be concluded by the Rangers AGM … well, if his story was at all accurate, we might be looking at the 2016 or 2017 AGM!
So, all in all, it looks like his story, which effectively accused various named people of being party to a multi-million pound fraud, was inaccurate in almost every conceivable way.
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/09/22/the-ups-and-downs-of-the-rangers-bloggers-civil-war-is-always-more-brutal/
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:12 pm
0 0 Rate This
Celtics Financials (the company, not the club….hahahaha)
http://www.investegate.co.uk/celtic-plc–ccp-/rns/preliminary-results/201309231457526700O/
Financial Highlights
· Group Revenue increased by 47.7% to £75.82m (2012: £51.34m).
· Operating expenses increased by 15.2% to £62.71m (2012: £54.44m).
· Investment in football personnel of £9.66m (2012: £5.24m).
· Year end net cash at bank £3.76m (2012: £2.77m net bank debt).
· Exceptional costs of £1.83m (2012: £0.54m).
· Profit before tax £9.74m (2012: £7.37m loss).
+++++++++++++++
Those results look like a Timmy conspiracy to me. I’ll just wait for what Jack has to say 😆
neepheid says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:19 pm
“Secret payments to Celtic from Istituto per le Opere di Religione keep club afloat….. Opus Dei plot rumoured…”
HAVE THE CO-OP BEEN PAID?
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/rangers-richer-than-celtic-in-a-year-says-1190504#.UkBQJ3iZEqs.twitter
Rangers will be financially stronger than Celtic in a year, claims Charles Green
30 Jul 2012 18:48
THE Ibrox club’s supremo was bullish about Rangers’ future after their opening vistory over Brechin City in the Ramsdens Cup.
RANGERS owner Charles Green last night insisted the Ibrox club would be in a stronger financial position than Celtic in a year.
The battered and bruised club began life as a newco with an edgy extra-time 2-1 Ramsdens Cup win at Brechin but the new chief executive was bullish about the club’s future and claimed within 12 months their balance sheet would be stronger than the SPL champions.
Green said: “If you look at the balance sheets at the end of next season you should see the strength of the two companies.
“We are in the Third Division and Celtic are in the SPL and what I’d like you to do is promise me at the end of this season, when all the games are played, examine the balance sheets of the clubs and tell me which one is the strongest?
“Then let’s see who has got the strongest balance sheet.
“We’ve not got the debt that any of these clubs have and on the last day of the season I would really enjoy some clever financial analyst looking at the balance sheets and debt-to-equity ratio of every club in Scotland.”
Green revealed he will jet to London today to start the process of bringing £20-30million investment into the club by floating them on the stock exchange.
He said: “We said we would raise between £20million and £30m but the reason we couldn’t put the season tickets on sale was the same reason we couldn’t go out and raise further money until we knew we had a football club that was going to be allowed to ply its trade.
“That’s why we got that signed off on Friday and we have a meeting at 8.45am on Monday so we are hardly letting the grass grow under our feet.
“This is the start of the process on Monday when we go to London to start the meeting with stockbrokers.
“That is when the fans can take up ownership. They can buy into the club.”
Green, who revealed the newco will change their name to “The Rangers Football Club” this week, said he had no intention of cashing in on Ibrox or Murray Park.
The chief executive said: “Ibrox and Murray Park are owned by Sevco who will be changing its name to The Rangers Football Club.
“All the assets are owned by the company and nobody is trying to do anything with the assets. Ibrox and Murray Park won’t be sold.”
In case you think the EPL grass is greener
“Eddie Keane @Eddiek62 2m
Arsenal turnover £242.8m, yet record £3m less profit than Celtic. #EPLFinancialMadness”
scapaflow says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:34 pm
0 0 Rate This
In case you think the EPL grass is greener
“Eddie Keane @Eddiek62 2m
Arsenal turnover £242.8m, yet record £3m less profit than Celtic. #EPLFinancialMadness”
————————-
to be fair, i’d rather watch Arsenals players every week.
Dumb question alert:
Regarding the SFO request, what’s to stop them asking the two firms who prepared the reports for copies?
RM poster seems happy with the state of things at Ibrox as undernoted. So it looks as though even the people who posted on sites attacking Leggo’s original post are to be silenced too. All very messy.
If there was a court order then there must have been some kind of hearing I would have thought like an interim interdict being granted. In view of the nature and seriousness of the allegations then I would expect an interim interdict to be granted whether there was counter-argument from Leggo or not.
It will be interesting to see whether Leggo will take things to a full hearing – all depends on how good his sources are and how deep his or the pockers of his backers are. Of course by the date of any hearing then perhaps it will be irrelevant as extrenal factors could be in play like the agm; production of accounts; and who knows what else 😎
It would be interesting to see whether the Auld Inky’s defence will be one of Veritas or in Vino Veritas 😆
And even ex-NUJ members know that sources are sacrosanct ❗
Undernote
‘All that happened is the lawyers had gotten a court order to force Leggo to remove his article and were also asked to go around and politely threaten all the forums which had allowed the article to be posted and commented on. All that was required was for the threads directly related to the Leggo article in question to be removed by 1pm or they would look to get more court orders to force the removal of the content.
‘No big deal and Gersnet were not asked for anyone’s personal details.’
mmm the plot thickens, from FF thread discussing Mr Leggat’s blog post
“I have been advised that the matter is sub judice so please refrain from any further comment until it has been disposed of by the court.”
Whilst we must be conscious that the alleged SFO investigation is a rumour, should it turn out that RIFC/TRFC had refused to cooperate with the SFO would that not be classed as bringing Scottish football into disrepute?
Scottish football may well need a strong SFA in these coming months. And about time too….
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm
2 0 Rate This
Dumb question alert:
Regarding the SFO request, what’s to stop them asking the two firms who prepared the reports for copies?
++++++++++++++
They may well be able to claim legal or professional privilege- which can be got round, eventually, but it’s usually much easier to get the stuff from the client.
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:40 pm
Dumb question alert:
Regarding the SFO request, what’s to stop them asking the two firms who prepared the reports for copies?
=========================================================
Perhaps there only ever was one copy which was handed to the client 😉
Other issues come into play such as client confidentiality and ownership of the info. I think it would probably be normal; to make the first request to the client the document was prepared for,
Obviously these are merely my general thoughts and have no connection to anything which may or may not be happening at Ibrox and of which I have no personal knowledge although I am aware of widespread internet comment on the allegations being made and which were initiated by Rangers posters and bloggers.
I would like to believe that Rangers, like all law-abiding citizens and businesses, would be only too willing to assist the forces of law and order to carry out their duty and I have absolutely no reason to believe otherwise.
SFO may not have jurisdiction in Scotland, but was Sevco not originally registered south of the border before becoming Sevco Scotland 🙄
Why don’t we ask Mr Doncaster to write a guest blog for us about the SPFL sponsorship plans?
neepheid says:
September 23, 2013 at 1:56 pm
10 0 Rate This
“… the game’s a bogey, the cat’s in the lobby, eating a chocolate biscuit (if anyone else is old enough to remember that one).”
————-
If we all finally turn aff fitba, we could do a lot worse than start The Scottish Patter Monitor. One of the highlights of these blogs has been the amusing aliases people come up with and the use of phrases and terms unique to Scotland. It might seem parochial but I love it.
Let me get this straight.
Sevco Scotland are a scottish registered company so would not fall under the jurisdiction of the SFO.
Sevco 5088 are registered in England.
Or is this all just another red herring?
ecobhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:52 pm
1 0 Rate This
Perhaps there only ever was one copy which was handed to the client …
——–
Ok, reasonable answers. Maybe it wasn’t such a dumb question after all.
Btw eco, if I was a betting man I would almost have a wee flutter on Charlotte sitting at home with an extra copy on the mantelpiece (behind the clock) 😛
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 4:07 pm
DP – Charlotte reminds me of Merlin from Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy
Probably just a normal days trading but every Rangers share trade today was a SELL. 11 Trades making a total of nearly 60k of shares punted.
The BBC under fire again!!
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5150-club-statement
CONTRARY to inaccurate reports by the BBC on Friday, September 20, Rangers Football Club confirmed today that Companies House has not raised any issues or questions with them in relation to the Annual Return that was filed recently for Rangers Football Club Limited.
It should be noted that the Rangers International Football Club plc has engaged Capita Registrars to provide company secretarial services for its group.
The Annual Return for Rangers Football Club Limited was completed and filed by Capita Registrars in accordance with their normal procedures.
Companies House have confirmed to the Company that they have accepted and filed the Annual Return for Rangers Football Club Limited and have not raised any queries in relation to it.
The BBC reported that Companies House were to contact Rangers’ subsidiary SEVCO Scotland Ltd over an incomplete report and also confirm if a second Annual Return would need to be filed.
However, Rangers’ lawyers have been informed by Companies House today that Companies House do not normally make public comments or issue official statements to the press in the manner reported by the BBC.
Companies House also pointed out they have no record on file of a conversation regarding Rangers Football Club Limited and its Annual Return last week.
Indeed, it was confirmed by Companies House to Rangers’ lawyers that the Annual Return has been accepted for filing and that Companies House had not contacted and did not expect to be contacting the Company in relation to the Annual Return.
…………….
obtusification as usual.
its not the TRFC annual return that is incomplete, its Sevco Scotland’s.
BBC article clearly states that.
How stupid do they think we are?
neepheid says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:16 pm
I know what you mean, but law and order is a devolved issue, and if the SFO have no powers to act in Scotland then they will have to take any further action via the proper authorities.
http://www.sfo.gov.uk/fraud/faqs.aspx
Fraudsters do not recognise international boundaries. While the SFO has jurisdiction over England, Wales and Northern Ireland (but not over Scotland, the Isle of Man or the Channel Islands), it also works closely with other law enforcement agencies and regulators, both in the UK and abroad to investigate and prosecute people who commit serious and complex fraud and corruption.
Bawsman says:
September 23, 2013 at 4:15 pm
“We” are not the target audience….
They are the same company.
The BBC article goes on to say:
How often do you require a full list of members (shareholders) on the return / AR01?
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/infoAndGuide/faq/annualReturnInfo.shtml
A full list of members (shareholders) is required on:
•the first annual return following incorporation;
•every third annual return after it has provided a full list.
The intervening 2 annual returns need only report changes to shareholder information that have taken place during that year.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If this is first annual return realted to any company under the control RIFC Plc then it appears to me a full lsit of shareholders is required in the annual return.
If they are not provided then why not?
Even if it is not the 1st return then any changes in shareholdings should be recorded and given the departure of certain people then those changes will be required either this annual return or the next.
redlichtie says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:51 pm
Whilst we must be conscious that the alleged SFO investigation is a rumour, should it turn out that RIFC/TRFC had refused to cooperate with the SFO would that not be classed as bringing Scottish football into disrepute?
———————————————————–
I think RIFC/TRFC would have two cast-iron answers to that.
1. Scottish football would have to be in good repute before anyone could bring it into disrepute, and that is currently not the case, therefore no case to answer, or
2. The ‘it’s a fair cop, we dun it, and a lot worse too, and we don’t have any credible arguments to the contrary’. In which case, the currently-in-liquidation Rangers can expect a heavy fine.
There are two Annual Returnson RIFC Plc subsidiaries that were overdue viz: Sevco 5088 Ltd and TRFCL (formerly Sevco Scotland Ltd).
Nothing has been submitted as yet for Sevco 5088 and an incomplete return was submitted for TRFCL.
If Companies House are happy to accept incomplete returns which don’t show the statutory information required then that is extremely disturbing as it means their Register can no longer be trusted and the issue will require to be raised beyond Companies House.
The Pheonix surfaces in Scotland. And thus the “gallant pioneers” bring to us minions “the Franchise”. Penny fur the guiser.
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/gbhtml/gp6.shtml
2. Informal correction of documents. (Section 1075)
The registrar has the power to informally correct a document which is incomplete or internally inconsistent before registering it. Informal correction is only available in respect of the registration of charges. This is because the registration of a charge has significant consequences for the company or LLP, particularly in the event of a subsequent liquidation. There are also statutory time constraints on the delivery of charges for registration.
People who wish to take advantage of this provision must first agree to being contacted and to giving the registrar whatever instructions are needed to correct a document.
Where the registrar receives a document that is incomplete or internally inconsistent, in order to be able to informally correct it he may ask the person who is authorised to correct it to give the appropriate instructions.
An incomplete document is most likely to have information missing from it that the registrar can insert once he has made enquiries of and received instructions from the person who delivered it. An example might be where the prescribed details on a ‘Particulars of a mortgage or charge (MG01 or LLMG01) form do not agree with those on the deed itself. For obvious reasons the registrar will never insert a missing signature.
An internally inconsistent document is where information contained within the document is inconsistent with other information delivered as part of the filing requirement. The registrar may ask the person who is authorised to correct it to give the appropriate instructions.
The registrar must be satisfied that the person giving the instructions is authorised to do so. This involves setting up a password or code between the registrar and either the person who delivered the original filing or the person who authenticated it.
Once the registrar has corrected the document, he treats it as having been delivered when he made the correction.
6. What can the registrar do about inconsistency on the register? (Section 1093)
If the registrar considers that information in a document delivered to him appears to be inconsistent with other information on the register, he must accept it, but he can then take steps to resolve the inconsistency. For example, he may receive notice of the resignation of an officer of a company or LLP whose appointment was not notified to the registrar, or an annual return form including the details of an officer whose appointment had not been notified to him. However, inconsistency for these purposes does not include the form being incomplete or not signed, or being in any other way not properly delivered.
Initially, he may write to the company or LLP asking it to resolve the inconsistency by filing another document to correct the register. If they do not comply with this initial request, the registrar has the power to issue a formal notice of inconsistency to them. This formal notice will:
•state how the information contained in the document appears to be inconsistent with other information on the register, and
•require them to deliver to the registrar an additional document required to resolve the inconsistency within 14 days of the issue of a notice.
He may also annotate the register to show that there is an inconsistency.
If the company or LLP fails to comply with the notice, it and every officer of it who is in default, is guilty of an offence and liable, on summary conviction to a fine.
You have to laugh,
Today.
1. CFC produce a clear audited set of accounts.
2. TRFC or whatever, produce a(nother) silly statement about the BBC.
I’m learning a lot about the dark arts of the PR World these days.
I’m off to buy a magnifying glass
Southoftheborder says:
September 23, 2013 at 4:18 pm
The BBC under fire again!!
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/5150-club-statement
Well what does that mean in real life ❓ Companies House operate an electronic filing system which afaik automatically acks receipt of any documents as having been received by Companies House.
It is therefore correct to say that the AR had been accepted for filing and probably correct that CH did not contact Rangers about subnission of the return other than to ack it as I have already stated.
I am surprised that any lawyer who should be well aware of the glacial speed at which CH operates would think that they would have had any response to the AR even yet.
As to the lawyer stating that CH did not expect to be contacting Rangers about the AR. Well my dear Boy – it’s all about who said that at CH and the context it was said in.
I could easily see a response being made which could be innocently misconstrued and as my Auld Granny used to say: ‘It’ll aw cum oot inra wash’.
The TRFCL AR has been electronically accepted by CH and no human voice or brain was involved. That return as far as I understand CH procedures can’t be rejected. However, I have absolutely no doubt that further information regarding missing shareholders will be requested in due course by a human at CH and not a machine.
If that is not the case then CH will be in breach of its duty and the issue will move up the chain. So more to come on this one I believe.
One thing that surprises me about the ‘Offishal’ Rangers statement is that they haven’t demanded that the BBC retract their story which I must admit puzzles me as they seem to be certain of their ground 💡
Interesting info, unsure if it has popped up before, but the voting rights for Blue Pitch Holdings 4m shares and Margarita Funds 2.6m shares were held, until Sept 10th, by Beaufort Nominees. A previous incarnation of Beaufort was Hoodless Brennan.
Why does the mention of Hoodless Brennan send a shiver of anticipation down my spine?
SheepShaggaExpat says:
September 23, 2013 at 6:01 pm
2 0 Rate This
Interesting info, unsure if it has popped up before, but the voting rights for Blue Pitch Holdings 4m shares and Margarita Funds 2.6m shares were held, until Sept 10th, by Beaufort Nominees. A previous incarnation of Beaufort was Hoodless Brennan.
Why does the mention of Hoodless Brennan send a shiver of anticipation down my spine?
———–
I take it these are the shares that Easdale acquired on September 10?
ecobhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 5:53 pm
Agreed. I think it is a bit of a ‘Sandy Bryson’ in that once it is registered it is registered.
However I would expect CH, via the registrars as mentioned above, to be seeking more information once it is brought to their attention the return my not be complete.
How long that takes is another matter completely.
However these days one would have hoped with all that jiggery pokery of tax avoidance/evasion etc companies who do not keep their paperwork in order should be the subject of some attention??
wottpi says:
September 23, 2013 at 5:33 pm
http://www.companieshouse.gov.uk/about/gbhtml/gp6.shtml
2. Informal correction of documents. (Section 1075)
I would be utterly amazed if the Companies House Registrar doesn’t request the relevant information on the missing shareholders and director 😆
Sometimes when the hole gets too deep it is advisable to stop digging, look-up at the Blue Sky and wonder if you’re heading in the wrong direction 😡
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24207406
Hmmmmmm. . .
I thought the bbc had to be clear and specific about the ‘club’ and the ‘company’.
How much profit (or loss) did celtic the club make
How much profit, did the company make.
ecobhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 3:52 pm
Perhaps there only ever was one copy which was handed to the client
———————————————————————————————-
I don’t think RIFC or its lawyers can claim client confidentiality re: the “whitewash” report. Am I correct in thinking that a copy was sent to the SFA? No doubt the Hampden football authorities and their advisors pored over the report at length before coming to the inevitable conclusion that all was well down Ibrox way.
If RIFC won’t co-operate with the judicial authorities by handing over the papers in question, then surely it is incumbent on the SFA, as a public funded body, to make its copy of the report available to the SFO/Crown Office? Also, the SFA should consider RIFC’s obstruction in the matter clear grounds for bringing the game into disrepute.
Pretty decent Sportsound tonight. Kris Boyd and Mark Wilson good player contributions in the studio. Tom English in forthright mood again. Bravo Tom.
http://sport.bt.com/sportfootball/football/scottishfootball/scottishpremierleague/regan-stands-by-sfa-betting-rules-S11363835651168?
Regan – the. SFA have a ‘Zero tolerance’ of players betting on football matches !!
Regan – the. SFA stand by betting rules !!
What a brass neck he’s got !!!!!!!
jimlarkin says:
September 23, 2013 at 6:34 pm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/24207406
If I remember correctly, this was about two weeks after certain assets were sold for £600k less.
ecobhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 6:27 pm
Surely CH would refer all enquiries to the company that completed the return on behalf of Sevco/TRFC, in this case Capita I believe
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 6:54 pm
0 0 Rate This
Pretty decent Sportsound tonight. Kris Boyd and Mark Wilson good player contributions in the studio. Tom English in forthright mood again. Bravo Tom.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Aye right…has he fallen off the fence at last and said that Sevco / The Rangers, are indeed a new entity and that HE will ask the SFA for a statement to that effect – at long last.
All other football talk is just p1sh in the wind and condoning the cheating / rule breaking / amending
. . . A la Bryson and Lord Numptie Smythe, et al
Re The SFA Judicial Panel on the “Betting Affair”. They came to a verdict and gave a sanction independent of the SFA and which has been accepted by said SFA. As most people on here think it was very lenient, my question is, Do the SFA not have the right to question such leniency privately, as their reputation (no laughing) suffers to the point of incredulity. If the JPs of the future come up with crazy rulings, how do they exert their influence to prevent becoming a laughing stock?
jimlarkin says:
September 23, 2013 at 7:02 pm
4 0 Rate This
——–
The contributions I heard were pretty good — the discussion about youth players’ (such as Watt) lack of opportunity to get games in the current structure, and the betting theme, not to mention the general bewilderment about why a 31 year-old Zaliukas is needed by a club supposed to be saving money was straight talk. I don’t judge a programme’s quality by how much direct Sevco critique it contains, there are other issues to monitor, and there are also subtle ways for intimidated journos to critque any self-important club that has ideas above its station.
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 4:00 pm
13 2
Rate This
If we all finally turn aff fitba, we could do a lot worse than start The Scottish Patter Monitor. One of the highlights of these blogs has been the amusing aliases people come up with and the use of phrases and terms unique to Scotland. It might seem parochial but I love it.
———————————————————————————-
Sounds like a good idea, mind you I’ve nae idea what ‘parochial’ means and I’ve even less interest. 😉
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 6:54 pm
Pretty decent Sportsound tonight. Kris Boyd and Mark Wilson good player contributions in the studio. Tom English in forthright mood again. Bravo Tom.
=============================
Tom was fine apart from saying David Murray ‘propped up’ Rangers. The Bank of Scotland did.
campsiejoe says:
September 23, 2013 at 7:00 pm
ecobhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 6:27 pm
Surely CH would refer all enquiries to the company that completed the return on behalf of Sevco/TRFC, in this case Capita I believe
========================================
Good Spot!
Well does that mean that the record of the CH conversation would show it was with Capita? And are CH following their own rules by stating correctly that they hadn’t been in touch with TRFCL but didn’t expect to be in touch TRFCL regarding the AR? Why would they if they correctly contacted the authorised person who sent the AR which was Capita according to CH?
Indeed CH would only contact TRFCL if they were unable to resolve the issue with Capita IMO.
I just find it strange that any professional who knows anything about the submission of Annual Returns to Companies House is unaware that in an initial return such as TRFCL that all shareholding changes from Incorporation have to be included and there is a separate designated form for previous shareholders and their shareholdings?
If it turns out that conversations took place with the authorised agent for TRFCL then at the very least it will egg on face although the paranoid amongst us may have other thoughts 🙄
A caller to Superscoreboard : ” I’m a Celtic fan and I can’t wait to see Rangers back where they belong: competetive and winning the league”.
Hugh Keevins : ” I couldn’t agree more “.
Mark Guidi : ” Rangers never died ; they continued seamlessly “.
Give me strength. I listen so you don’t have to. But this has been too much. Way too much.
Delbhoy says:
September 23, 2013 at 7:57 pm
7 1 Rate This
A caller to Superscoreboard : ” I’m a Celtic fan and I can’t wait to see Rangers back where they belong: ompetetive and winning the league”.
———–
If it’s the same guy as usual then he is on regularly repeating this parrot fashion. He’s even been on BBC Scotland with the same mantra. Some of the callers just seem too contrived to be true, especially when they are let on so often to repeat the same line …
Danish Pastry says:
September 23, 2013 at 8:17 pm
I’m sure they have a “go to list” of callers, that they contact and prime
A lot of good reading regarding Celtic’s accounts on FF this evening but the views of this accountant stood out for me.
————————————
Battlefield Bear Battlefield Bear is offline
Gold Star Poster Join Date: 17-03-2008
Posts: 3,224
Default Re: Celtic Post Preliminary Results
Phuck thum. We are the people, and nothing they do is of interest to me.
All yous talking financial sense can do one. Yous don’t speak for me.
Reilly1926 says:
September 23, 2013 at 8:42 pm
I’m sure, that with words of wisdom such as those, he will be challenging Keynes for a place at the forefront of economic theory
As ‘The Rangers’ fans plough through Celtic’s latest financial accounts attempting to find the ‘hidden loan’ I wonder if any of them think why they have not seen something similar from their ‘same’ club since 2010?
The irony really is lost on them!
Meanwhile they are being told, and yet again believing, that they cannot even comment on an on going investigation.
I’m not a legal person but surely this must be nonsense where you cannot even disclose that an investigation is happening. Using that thinking the next time there is a murder the media cannot report that an investigation is happening into the murder. They cannot attempt to hypothesise on motive or anything to do with the case. It would be different if they were leaking information that was required for evidence in any future trial but this is not the case.
As an aside I wonder how Lord Hodge (I think that was his name) conflict of interest of D&P is coming along?
So many lords around and none of them making a decision.
justshatered says:
September 23, 2013 at 9:01 pm
As ‘The Rangers’ fans plough through Celtic’s latest financial accounts attempting to find the ‘hidden loan’ I wonder if any of them think why they have not seen something similar from their ‘same’ club since 2010?
================================================================
Yip a whole new generation that haven’t seen top league football nor audited accounts 😉
Reilly 1926 @8-42pm
Re Battlefield Bear.
This person sums up the mentality which previous and current custodians (temporary) of the deceased club play on. They can basically get away with anything. Punters like this one will Follow Follow regardless.
I have come to realise that all the talk , debate, proof of wrongdoing, proof of financial irregularity, proof of cheating, non payment of taxes,collusion, gambling, etc etc , will do nothing to put off people like this. That is one of the reasons the club is where it is today. The blind loyalty mixed with the WATP mentality, has literally Enabled the crooks in the embezzlement of cash from this club. It is similar in the process of enabling an addict. And these people in charge of the club are addicts, addicted to money.. Continuing to be sponsored and enabled by their own supporters.
Do Sevco have to announce their AGM by this time next week if they plan to have it on Oct 31st?
Why is everyone so sure the AGM will happen on this date? has there been an announcement? Is there a legal requirement to do so?
Also, what is the required date that TRFC Ltd must publish its accounts by – same question for RIFC PLC? (i would assume RIFC PLC accounts are not due until at LEAST Dec 2013, but more likely 6 months later than that date
justshatered says:
September 23, 2013 at 9:01 pm
“……So many lords around and none of them making a decision…”
—–
Scotland needs Lord Wobbly on the bench!
Evening folks.
Just a wee observation wrt CFCs results today.
Much gloating but Mr Green did say that he’d happily compare TRFCs results with Celtics at the end of the year and TRFCs would be much better.
Now I don’t want to burst any CFCs fans bubble but good as todays results were,until the fully audited figs for T’Rangers are released then you don’t know if Mr Green was being “economical with the truth”.
Just saying,like.
Scottish Football needs my doc to increase my medication.