The Immortality Project

Avatar ByHumble Pie

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.

 

About the author

Avatar

Humble Pie subscriber

3,959 Comments so far

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on9:19 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Mr G
I take great comfort that the posters on this blog resist temptation to bow to those promising jam tomorrow….you stand or fall by the quality of your contribution, rather than your promise of contribution. The senior posters are particularly sceptical of the ‘nod nod, wink wink’ types who imply they know more than they share (no slight intended).

You say you come in good faith, well, in that case, share what you have now, in good faith – please?

On another note, I need to edit my picture as the double act appears to be singolo 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

Madbhoy24941Posted on9:21 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Allyjambo says:

October 2, 2013 at 9:18 pm

Wait a minute, have you ever seen them in the room at the same time?

————————–

I normally see 2 of everyone most of the time I am awake, it’s a medical condition relating to my consumption of alcohol 😛

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:23 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I see CF mentions Tom Stocker at Pinsent Masons.

In case we have a new CF I would urge caution in using material as it isn’t so far backed-up with any documentary evidence.

Tom Stocker

Tom specialises in business crime, regulatory litigation, the conduct of public inquiries and corporate internal investigations. He is particularly experienced in cases concerning fraud, bribery, sanctions, export controls, money laundering, health and safety, and environmental crime. He is experienced in corporate internal investigations, bribery self-reporting and money laundering disclosures. He has extensive experience in defending companies in criminal investigations and prosecutions, and in the conduct of Fatal Accident Inquiries. In addition he has prosecuted regulatory breaches for the Maritime & Coastguard Agency and the Port of London Authority. Tom is the Scots law legal adviser to the international anti-corruption organisation TRACE International.

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on9:29 pm - Oct 2, 2013


v
Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 1m
17/5/2013 Messrs Green, Ahmad Whyte, Earley and others were invited to provide information to the Investigation but have not yet done so.
Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 8m
which they/5088 may have had with Craig Whyte.

Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 8m
On that very same date Pinsent Masons stated that they would be unlikely to give a clean bill of health to Green/Ahmad as regards dealings,,

View Comment

scapaflow

scapaflowPosted on9:36 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Get the popcorn on, the ferrets are fighting their way through the sack

“Ronnie Esplin ‏@RonnieEsplin 2m
Former #rangers c/man M. Murray responds to C. Mather’s claim that he’s to blame for directors’ high wages. On Press Association wires soon.”

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on9:40 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Re: the armed forces day at ibrokes last Saturday

Is the SFA duty bound to investigate – as there was proof of sectarian chanting

Or, does a complaint need to be sent to the SFA first

The SFA really do seem to be very protective of everything SEVCO !

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on9:41 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Hurricane Charlotte is gathering speed,just as Goldstein prophesied.
Prescient or what ?

View Comment

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on9:43 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Tic 6709

Yes, prescient, but is it tittle tattle without corroboration?

View Comment

Avatar

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on9:44 pm - Oct 2, 2013


From @TBK

http://www.business7.co.uk/business-news/scottish-business-news/2013/10/01/charles-green-paid-933-000-106408-24012498/

Rangers auditors paid £594,000 for ‘non-audit’ related work
By Scott McCullochOct 1 2013

inShare
1 3 Share on email Share on print
Non-audit fees dwarf the £90,000 charged for auditing Rangers International Football Club Plc accounts

Auditors of Rangers International Football Club Plc (RIFC) picked up fees totalling £594,000 for “non-audit” work in the 13 months to June 30 2013.

Accounts filed by RIFC for the 13 months to June 30, 2013 reveal the company’s auditors Deloitte were paid £90,000 for audit work but amassed six times that in additional fees for non-audit advisory work.

Those non-audit fees include £314,000 for corporate finance services in relation to the floatation, £128,000 for ‘accounting investigation services’, £117,000 for ‘other tax advisory services’ and £35,000 in ‘audit-related assurance services’.

Explaining the non-audit fees, RIFC said: “The company’s policy on the use of auditors for non-audit services, the reasons why the auditor was used rather than another supplier and how the auditor’s independence and objectivity was safeguarded was controlled by the Audit Committee.

“No services were provided pursuant to contingent fee arrangements.”

RIFC outlined in its prospectus document prior to listing on the AIM market in December 2012, its audit committee was chaired by non-executive director Bryan Smart alongside former chairman Malcolm Murray and non-executive director Phillip Cartmell.

Malcolm Murray and Phillip Cartmell stepped down from the board of RIFC in July, when RIFC also announced it had changed its nominated adviser and broker from Cenkos Securities plc to Strand Hanson Ltd.

RIFC also announced today it has again changed its nominated advisors with the appointment of Daniel Stewart & Company Plc.

RIFC also noted it passed a resolution “in accordance with section 506 of the Companies Act 2006 that the auditors name should not be stated” in the accounts.

Section 506 can be invoked if there are “reasonable grounds that statement of the name would create or be likely to create a serious risk that the auditor or senior statutory auditor, or any other person, would be subject to violence or intimidation, has resolved that the name should not be stated.”

RIFC also notes in the accounts it paid former chief executive Charles Green £933,000 in the 13 months to June 30 2013 despite the company reporting operating losses totalling £14.3 million.

Green was the highest paid director in the 13 month reporting period, taking £333,077 in salary and benefits, £217,850 in severance, £360,000 in bonuses and £22,449 in benefits in kind payment.

Green who headed up a consortium to buy the assets of Rangers 2012 Plc in a £5.5 million deal with administrators in June 2012, resigned in April of this year amid allegations of collusion with former Rangers owner Craig Whyte.

RIFC subsequently launched an internal investigation which subsequently found no links between the two.

Finance director Brian Stockbridge was paid a total of £409,308, including £179,170 in salary and benefits, £30,000 in fees, £200,000 in bonuses and £138 in benefits in kind payments.

And former director Imran Ahmad was paid a total of £303,247, including £127,667 in salary, £175,000 in bonuses and £580 in benefits in kind.

RIFC also notes a £200,000 loan provided by Ahmad in May 2012 included a £50,000 arrangement fee.

Of that loan, £178,000 was repaid in August 2012 and the remaining £22,000 was converted into ordinary share capital of The Rangers Football Club Ltd.

Outwith the boardroom, Rangers manager Alistair McCoist was paid a total of £825,858, made up of £824,697 in salary and benefits and a further £1,161 in benefits in kind payments.

RIFC today reported a £14.36 million operating loss on £19.1 million turnover for the 13 month reporting period.

The company said it also spent a total of £599,000 on “investigation fees”.

Those investigations includes an internal investigation into claims of links between Charles Green and Craig Whyte and a further ‘letters before claim’ from Whyte and his business partner Aidan Early relating to the ownership of the assets.

RIFC said the internal investigation, “based on the assessment of the available evidence”, had “found no evidence that Craig Whyte had any involvement with Sevco Scotland Limited (now called The Rangers Football Club Limited), the company which ultimately acquired the business and assets of The Rangers Football Club plc from its administrators”.

It adds from the evidence it found no evidence Whyte invested in The Rangers Football Club Limited or Rangers International Football Club plc, “either directly or indirectly through any third party companies or vehicles”.

In relation to the letter before claim submitted on behalf of Whyte and Earley, RIFC said it is the board’s view the claims are “entirely unsubstantiated based on legal advice received to date by the board and the outcome of the Investigation”.

However auditors Deloitte have included an “emphasis of matter” qualification in the accounts warning of the “uncertain outcome” of any potential litigation linked to the letters before claim.

The emphasis of matter note adds: “The company commissioned an independent investigation (‘the Investigation’) to investigate the first letter before claim, which was concluded on May 17, 2013.

“On May 30 2013, following the receipt of a second letter before claim, the company announced that the Investigation had been concluded.

“The company is satisfied that a thorough investigation was conducted despite the inherent limitations of a private inquiry, and considers the claims have no legal merit.

“The company has also engaged the services of Allen & Overy to defend against these possible claims, and the company has had no communication with Messrs Whyte & Earley or their legal advisers since May 30, 2013.”

A further notice was also released to the stock market outlining resolutions to shareholders to be included in the business at the forthcoming annual general meeting for the appointment of Malcolm Murray, Paul Murray, Scott Murdoch and Alex Wilson as directors of the company.

RIFC said the considers the proposals “vexatious” and in any event the shareholder notice for the annual general meeting, set for October 24, had been sent for printing on September 27.

RIFC also announcement to the stock market today that “following a disposal of ordinary shares of one pence each in the company on September 10, 2013 by Charles Green, he no longer has a notifiable interest in the company’s issued share capital”.

Green was noted to have held just over five million ordinary shares in RIFC at the date of his resignation on June 4, 2013.

RIFC announced on September 17 Sandy Easdale acquired 2.12 million ordinary shares priced at one pence each on September 10, 2013 from an unnamed party.

The company issued a notice to the market on September 20, noting Beaufort Nominees Ltd – nominees for Cayman-Islands based Blue Pitch Holdings – had disposed of four million shares to Alexander (Sandy) Easdale by “proxy arrangement” as of September 10, 2013.

Blue Pitch Holdings was part of the Charles Green-led consortium which purchased the Rangers assets out of administration.

Further announcements to the stock market on September 20 from RIFC noted Sandy Easdale had also acquired the voting rights for 2.6 million shares held by Margarita Funds Holding Trust – believed to be based in the Turks and Caicos Islands – as of September 10, 2013.

In August, Sandy Easdale claimed he held the largest shareholding in RIFC after agreeing to buy the “vast majority” of Green’s stake in RIFC.

Sandy Easdale, co-owner of Greenock-based McGill’s Buses, had also stated in August he had acquired 1.2 million of former director Imran Ahmad’s 2.2 million shareholding.

As of September 20, 2013, Sandy Easdale held voting rights in aggregate totalling 23.79 per cent of the issued share capital in RIFC.

Sandy Easdale was appointed to the board of Rangers Football Club Ltd in July and his brother, James joined the board of RIFC as a non-executive director.

The RIFC accounts for the 13 months to June 30, 2013 note operating expenses of £33.6 million, the bulk of which are made up of £17.94 million in staff costs and £13.31 million in “other operating charges”, which include matchday costs,such as policing,stewarding and pitch costs.

RIFC reports a pre-tax profit of £1.28 million for the period, which included £16.2 million in “non-recurring items” which includes £20.4 million in “negative goodwill” which is credited to the income statement based on the value of the assets when purchased from administrators against the current fair value.

On a fair value basis, RIFC note the net value of the “assets acquired” from the administrators of RFC 2012 Plc for a total consideration of £6.7 million are now valued at £27.2 million.

RIFC said expenses relating to the acquisition of the assets totalled £0.6 million.

The company said cash held as of June 30 totalled £11.19 million, of which £4.5 million came from season ticket renewals.

RIFC said more than 65 million shares were in issue to the period to June 30 for a total consideration of £29,79 million.

RIFC said while it “maintains cash to fund the daily cash requirements of its business” it does not “have access to any further banking facilities” but adds it does have “access to an unsecured facility of £2.5 million”.

RIFC reports staff costs were reduced to £17.94 million, reducing the first team wages to turnover ratio to 43 per cent.

Commenting on the results, RIFC chief executive Craig Mather said “substantial progress” had been made, adding: “The club is in a very different place to where we were in May, 2012.”

He added: “At no stage was it anticipated nor forecast that the business of the football club could return an operating profit in the first year since acquisition.

“The full recovery of Rangers will take time and I am delighted to report that the club is firmly on track to achieve this objective.”

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:45 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Tic 6709 says:
October 2, 2013 at 9:41 pm

Hurricane Charlotte is gathering speed,just as Goldstein prophesied. Prescient or what ?
==================================================
Organised is more the word I would use and that’s why I’m urging caution in using material with no documentary evidence. Perhaps this is the Punch & Judy Show he also mentioned.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on9:48 pm - Oct 2, 2013


StevieBC 5.36

The SFA will hide behind the excuse that professional auditors have given a bill of health. But what else can they do other than admit that the underlying bond of trust on which their regulatory system is based has been irrevocably broken by Rangers as was and RIFC in all its facets as is.

Other than withdraw SFA membership on the basis that as a club/company they are undesireables that the game can do without?

The SFA lack the ethics and the courage.

Scottish football is being stripped bare and what it reveals about the game and Scottish society is disturbing to folk of ethics and courage.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on9:48 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I see Charlotte is now alleging the SFA were never given a copy of the PM report. Only an allegation of course.

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on9:49 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ollielogie says:

October 2, 2013 at 9:43 pm
======================
I said a long time ago when charlotte had been posting and twittering,not one person has came along and proved that what she/he was revealing were lies.
Why else are her/his posts being removed?

View Comment

scapaflow

scapaflowPosted on9:50 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 9:45 pm

There is a whiff of all warfare is based on deception around some recent posts. All sources are useful, but, they also need to be treated with circumspection, until the info can be corroborated from an independent source

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on9:50 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Tic 6709 says:
October 2, 2013 at 9:19 pm
“..Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 37s
Tom Stocker advised that this was not part of the investigation and that they should stick to matters relating to Craig Whyte.”
—–
This message shows the limitations of Twitter! Does it mean that Tom Stocker told other people that they were to stick to matters relating to Whyte, or that he was told to do so?

View Comment

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on10:02 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Tic 6709 says:
October 2, 2013 at 9:49 pm

Noted, and has to be considered in the equation, but what incentive do parties have to enter into debate if CF telling truths: conversely, what incentive do parties have to enter into debate if CF telling untruths? IMO either way, none. Removing postings is interesting though and a clue to CF veracity…

Without corroboration, there is no requirement for any parties to respond (if only there was a culture of rigorous, principled and diligent investigative journalism in MSM then the CF leads could be explored…and truth brought to bear on the corrupted and corrupting)

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on10:04 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Charlotte in overdrive right now, but I wish she would consolidate her thoughts into a downloadable document. Twitter is utterly useless for what she is trying to do tonight. Quite noticeable that she seems to have no supporting documents. Not at all her usual method.

View Comment

Avatar

NawlitePosted on10:05 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I can’t quite follow Goldstein’s argument that releasing material showing that Green and Whyte were in cahoots was part of the plan to show that Whyte and Green weren’t in cahoots. I think that’s what he said, but now I have to wait for a while until he can explain how it worked?

I don’t mind reading input from anyone on here, as eventually it will either be proved or disproved by events, but I prefer it to make some sense and right now this doesn’t.

Oh and Goldstein, the way you write doesn’t come over at all well – I was thinking of asking Smugas to give up his blogname to make it available to you!

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on10:06 pm - Oct 2, 2013


On the latest Ibrox infighting do I remember correctly that Stewart Regan did ask some pointed questions re CW’s role that were not really answered and appear to be surfacing again?

Oh for somebody in authority to take up that authority and say stop!

This is a football club in a game which whilst part of the fabric of Scottish society is NOT Scottish society.

It does not reflect our values. In fact it reflects what happens when those values are forgotten.

The absence of real leadership in a country debating the pros and cons of independence on a poltical basis where ethics do not appear to form any part of the debate is worrying on a much wider platform than football.

In simple terms if I had a neighbourhood card school and one of my richer neighbours behaved as RFC did and RIFC were doing I would bar them.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:08 pm - Oct 2, 2013


http://www.business7.co.uk/business-news/scottish-business-news/2013/10/01/charles-green-paid-933-000-106408-24012498/

RIFC said while it “maintains cash to fund the daily cash requirements of its business” it does not “have access to any further banking facilities” but adds it does have “access to an unsecured facility of £2.5 million”.
===============================================================

So that’s the size of the safety net ❗

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on10:10 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I posted Charlotte’s latest because some people on here have said that they don’t go to twitter.
It’s up to each individual to make of it what they will’
Personally I have always believed in Charlotte,what she /he has revealed has been an eye-opener for me,the level of collusion is staggering.
Those that can should go and read her latest.

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on10:10 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I was looking for the announcement about change of broker to Daniel Stewart ( ‘third division finance advice!)
and , unconnectedly, came across this observation made about the IPO by the Financial Times, which I had not seen at the time:
‘”Rangers’ IPO has the characteristics of a turkey with a short sell-by date. It may look delicious on Christmas day but will not smell so good in a few months”. FT 16/12/12
But coming to the appointment of a low-level finance adviser/broker, is this a sign that the bigger boys with a reputation to uphold have wisely retreated? And that Mather and Co are scraping around for a non-too-fussy token ‘broker’ ?

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:13 pm - Oct 2, 2013


neepheid says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:04 pm

Charlotte in overdrive right now, but I wish she would consolidate her thoughts into a downloadable document. Twitter is utterly useless for what she is trying to do tonight. Quite noticeable that she seems to have no supporting documents. Not at all her usual method.
==============================================================
There could be an innocent explanation in that she doesn’t want to put up docs in case she is almost immediately banned again. But without docs we have to tread very warily IMO.

View Comment

Avatar

bmchughPosted on10:22 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Charlotte’s recent tweets are not quite in time order.
This might make a bit more sense.
“Despite a request by the SFO to review the report, this was denied on the basis of legal privilege. RIFC do not consider that there are any events which should be reported to the SFO. This was despite the fact that Pinsent Masons were now about to move on to stage 2
AIM and the SFA also asked to see the report.
On the 31 May it was made clear that the current RIFC boards way of thinking was to deny a hard copy. It is plainly clear that as at the end of May 2013, the SFA were to be denied access by the board.
So the primary basis of all comfort from the fact that CW had no rights to the assets appears to have been delivered by FFW….are permitted to view but the SFA are still denied. Legal Privilege was used as the excuse. Well worth checking up if the SFA ever received”
Note:
AIM: Alternative Investment Market
FFW: Field Fisher Waterhouse
SFO: Serious Fraud Office
SFA: …er…
More to follow….

View Comment

Avatar

FIFAPosted on10:22 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Auldheid
Who exactly is this Stuart Regan you mention ,what role does he hold and is it a paid position.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on10:22 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I note with a bit of sadness having read a few of his books recently that Tom Clancy died today.

In one of them “Debt of Honour” the idea that circumvented a planned crash of the stockmarket was that “if you do not write it down it never happened”.

CF has at least written it down and whilst MSM still swerve the revelations, what CF has done, perhaps planned, perhaps not, is to tell what happened.

It is only a matter of time, even if years, before what CF has revealed, whatever the original motivation, like the truth of Hillsborough, becomes the true historical narrative and it aint pretty.

Corruption from corrupt thinking.

What really matters is will we as a society learn from it or continue to live with it?

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on10:24 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ollielogie says:

October 2, 2013 at 10:02 pm

Tic 6709 says:
October 2, 2013 at 9:49 pm

Noted, and has to be considered in the equation, but what incentive do parties have to enter into debate if CF telling truths: conversely, what incentive do parties have to enter into debate if CF telling untruths? IMO either way, none. Removing postings is interesting though and a clue to CF veracity…

Without corroboration, there is no requirement for any parties to respond (if only there was a culture of rigorous, principled and diligent investigative journalism in MSM then the CF leads could be explored…and truth brought to bear on the corrupted and corrupting)
=========================
Surely the incentive to prove that anything Charlotte says is untrue is that it would cement the Board’s relationship with the fans.
After all when the board don’t comment then that makes the fans doubt everything they say,remember it’s only season ticket money that’s keeping them afloat.
The Sevco fans are already asking questions,would you not want them on your side if you were on the board. If there was ANY proof of lies do you think JI would not have spoon fed the Rat Pack ?.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on10:26 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I agree with ecobhoy that we should be very careful about accepting The CtH as the original . Even then, the great concern with CtH from my point of view has always been that information that was plausible and accepted as truth would enhance her reputation – as it has for many of you – and gain trust.

If this were a deliberate campaign of misinformation now is the time that CtH would toss the big lie(s) like a grenade. If the bampots start repeating these lies, it’s not CtH whose reputation suffers, it’s ours.

The attitude of presenting oneself as all knowing whilst flying kites or trolling has pervaded every crevice of this issue since day one. CtH, as well as old friends and new have styled themselves thusly. The tactic always raises a smile, but it has allowed the cult of the personality to rise to the proportions of one giant squirrel-sized deflector.

CtH told us at TSFM a fairly big whopper way back in May. We decided then that we wouldn’t get sucked in, and nothing that has happened since has made us regret that decision. I’m not in the camp of our new contributor Goldstein (amusing as that contribution has been), who thinks that CtH has been an elaborate Cold-War style plot. I do think that CtH has offered some verifiable, but rarely significant morsels, none of which has gotten anyone closer to the truth. I think it is very important to understand that she has an agenda which is self-serving, and has nothing to do with an altruistic desire to get the truth out there. Too many hints, nudge-nudges and wink-winks, too little actual truths and very little (absolutely none in fact) narrative for that.

People will draw their own conclusions, but I’ve run out of pinches of salt I’ve snuffed every time we are told the end game is upon us. Even if you are inclined to believe what CtH says, consider that IF she is out to drop the big lie on us, this is around the time it would be delivered.

View Comment

Avatar

Tif FinnPosted on10:27 pm - Oct 2, 2013


So CF is suggesting it was Cenkos who were behind the attempt to oust the current board and replace them with PM et al.

That seems like quite a dramatic claim.

View Comment

Avatar

AuldheidPosted on10:28 pm - Oct 2, 2013


FIFA

On the basis it is not a wind up Stewart Regan is CEO of the SFA and I recall he wrote to RIFC to seek clarification of CW’s role.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:29 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Obviously CF dagger deeply into Cenkos tonight although she has had a swipe in passing before.

It seems a risky strategy for Cenkos to initiate – contact 15 companies/people to organise a coup and not expect at least 1 to blow the whistle to RIFC Plc. And if proven that they acted against their client it would destroy their reputation. Seems iffy to me.

Cenkos don’t need an account like Rangers so why would they dream od doing what is alleged and risk destruction of their business?

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on10:30 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Auldheid says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:06 pm
‘..Oh for somebody in authority to take up that authority and say stop!’
————
I think the only way that is going to happen is if those with the actual ,football business power , that is the members of the SFA and the SPFL, were sufficiently alarmed at the great damage being done as to demand an EGM and insist on ACTION being taken to rescind the membership of the new club on grounds of grave error under the Articles of Association having been committed ultra vires, and/or on the grounds of the new club having brought the game very seriously into disrepute (many charges, including the defiant defence of gambling players, are available)
I don’t think that will happen, although I imagine that the SFA board and most club owners are praying silently but fervently for the new club to go bust completely, and disappear as any kind of footballing entity having any hope of future admission to membership.
It is a hellish situation, far removed from anything that an ordinary association of businesses has to face.
But I have no sympathy with the SFA Board: their own negligence created the circumstances in which the monster was allowed to grow, and their own cowardice in tackling it that allowed it to grow many heads.
Can anyone see a way forward?

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on10:30 pm - Oct 2, 2013


FIFA says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:22 pm
2 0 Rate This

Auldheid
Who exactly is this Stuart Regan you mention ,what role does he hold and is it a paid position.

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

Stuart Regan is the name of the lining of the material associated with the back pocket of Campbell Ogilvie’s trousers.
Why do SMSM not ask the SFA any questions in relating to the accounts that have now been published.
Why does the SFA not ask Sevco about the accounts.
Why is it just us that ask questions.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:35 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Auldheid says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:28 pm
FIFA

On the basis it is not a wind up Stewart Regan is CEO of the SFA and I recall he wrote to RIFC to seek clarification of CW’s role.
=========================================
That document was released by CF of course and seemed genuine but we have a real departure tonight. The last time we got the tapes which implicated ‘innocents’ and would cause grief to families by publicly blowing the whistlre on infidelity of husbands. That was tacky to me and not how she had previously handled things.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on10:36 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Tif Finn says:

October 2, 2013 at 10:27 pm

So CF is suggesting it was Cenkos who were behind the attempt to oust the current board and replace them with PM et al.

That seems like quite a dramatic claim.
_______________________________________________________________________

Wasn’t that claim made a couple of weeks ago? Couldn’t see it then, can’t see it now.

View Comment

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on10:37 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Tic 6709 says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:24 pm

I see your thinking there, but are the board worried enough about anything CF says to feel the need to respond? An interesting and consistent feature of ra berrs is to discount almost all sources of potentially critical info regarding RIFC, including (especially?) CF. It’s a high risk strategy to validate an already discredited source by publicly responding…

I agree though that the interesting behaviour is to attempt to mute CF and I suspect this is more about what could be released in future rather than what has been released to date. It also has maximum deniability being essentially covert behavior.

Whatever the caveats and motives, I’m glad we have/have had CF as we know more with her than without and can draw our own conclusions regardless of CF intent

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on10:39 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Some context for latest twitfest:

BUSINESS OF THE MEETING (29th May 2013)

3. POSITION OF CHAIRMAN
3.1 It was discussed and unanimously agreed that Walter Smith should assume the position of Chairman of the Company. An announcement was agreed by the Board and released the following day.

4. GENERAL MEETING STRATEGY
4.1 Craig Mather had questioned Chris Morgan and James Easdale on the reason for the resolutions to remove directors and was told that in relation to Malcolm Murray it was due to their concerns over leadership and in respect of Phil Cartmell it was due to him being seen as too closely aligned with Cenkos and being too far removed from the business in Scotland. The proposed resolutions also included the appointments of James Easdale and Chris Morgan. These were discussed and the consensus reached was that it would be good to avert the GM if possible by reaching some form of compromise. Ian Hart did not consider the appointment of James Easdale to be sinister. Bryan Smart, Craig Mather and Brian Stockbridge agreed based on the information that they had seen. It was agreed that Phil Cartmell would discuss with Cenkos the suggestion that the Board appoint James Easdale. None of the Board was supportive of a resolution to remove Phil Cartmell.

5. THE POSITION OF CENKOS
5.1 The position of Cenkos was discussed and it was unanimously agreed by the Board that the quality of the advice received from Cenkos had been below the standards expected. Charles Green considered that, as a director, he had been improperly excluded by Cenkos in certain communications. Craig Mather expressed deep concern that Cenkos had arranged meetings with Paul Murray and specifically requested that certain of the Non Executives refrain from speaking to the Executive directors about this. Craig had raised the matter with Stephen Keys directly who apologised and accepted that this was not ethical. Bryan Smart considered the performance of Cenkos had been poor and thought that Stephen Keys had handled matters weakly. Ian Hart was disappointed that Cenkos had tried to bring people on to the board and considered that this was a matter for the Board to decide rather than for the Nomad. Phil Cartmell considered that most advisers were the same and that it would not be a problem to appoint another adviser if the Board considered it appropriate but that now was not the right time. Walter Smith suggested that the board position and stability should be resolved first and then the Board should assess how Cenkos act. Brian Stockbridge agreed that the Nomad performance of Cenkos had not been high but considered that Cenkos had gone through a difficult time with all of the AIM issues that had arisen and that it would not be appropriate to change Nomad at this stage. It was agreed that Phil Cartmell would report the views of the Board to Cenkos.

6. THE INVESTIGATION
6.1 Bryan Smart explained that he had limited the access to the report by Malcolm Murray and Charles Green because Malcolm had directed the report in a way that was outside the scope of the review and Charles was about to leave the board. Since the report is subject to legal privilege it is vital that the report does not leak out causing the whole exercise to have been a waste of money. Bryan explained that he had taken legal advice and that this position was justifiable in order to preserve the integrity of the report. The Board agreed with this approach.
6.2 The Board discussed a revised letter of Claim that had been received from Craig Whyte and it was decided that Pinsent Mason would complete a second report update taking into account the new information received and would then pass this information over to Allen & Overy who is advising the Company on the claims from Craig Whyte. It was explained that the conclusions from Pinsent had not changed following receipt of the revised latter of claim. A shorter revised announcement to the market setting out the position that Craig Whyte had no claim on the assets of the Club and that there were no links with Existing Rangers employees was agreed at the Board meeting and released the subsequent day.

7. CASHFLOW REPORT
7.1 The consolidated budget and cashflow forecasts for the Year to 30 June 2014 were discussed. The Finance Director explained that the budgets from each department had been consolidated and that further review of these numbers was ongoing. It was agreed that the forecasts would be discussed in more detail at the next Board meeting on Wednesday 5 June 2013.

8. AOB
8.1 The following matters were discussed:
(a) The position of Imran Ahmad – it was unanimously agreed by the Board that IA would be removed as a director of Rangers Football Club Limited
(b) Announcement of Laxey – it was agreed that an announcement would be made of the arrangement between Charles Green and Laxey to transfer shares.
(c) Deloitte Forensic – It was agreed that a separate meeting would take place between Charles Green and Deloitte Forensic to cover off certain of the financial matters included in the report. Charles
was more than pleased to attend and Brian Stockbridge also agreed to provide whatever information and assistance was necessary

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:44 pm - Oct 2, 2013


CF talks of email server run by 3rd parrty – apparently for Rangers email accounts – being breached and urges we should contact RIFC for clarification or implications.

CF also states that the breach was news to her – why/how would she ever know?

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on10:49 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Of course Charlotte has an agenda,we all know that.But does anyone have any idea what it is ?
I have not fallen in the trap of only wanting bad news about Sevco.Attractive though that is.
I said above it’s up to everyone to read what they want from her postings.
There is a line from a film when one character say’s “don’t you believe me ?” his friend replies, ” I always believe you,but you’re not always right”.
We’ll see.

View Comment

Avatar

borussiabeefburgPosted on10:51 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:44 pm
**********
echobhoy, CF actually talks of the regulators being told the email server had been breached, not that she actually thinks the server has been compromised.

What I don’t get, unless of course CF (in this present form) is connected to the club, is why she would be surprised by such a breach, since she is gaining information from that source.

View Comment

Avatar

PlugholePosted on10:52 pm - Oct 2, 2013


CF = RTC? 💡

View Comment

Avatar

bmchughPosted on10:53 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Charlotte’s latest re-ordered

“A nomad should act with the utmost of integrity. However the most recent of requisitions was engineered by Cenkos on their day of departure. Rather than facilitate a smooth handover, Cenkos took the lead role in the recently aborted coup which has crippled the board. A signal was given to them by another director to engage 15 others inc McColl, King, Artemis, Hargreave Hale and Miton, to name but a few. Cenkos turned against their very own client and were given the blessing to proceed if they could gather the support. Very cloak and dagger.”

Not sure if that tells us anything we don’t know…and finally (for now):
“During one of the numerous AIM investigations into RIFC, Cenkos were able to confirm that as a result of terminations, leaks should cease. Also it was stated to the regulators that the email server, hosted by a third party, had been breached. ‘This is news to me. Had such an intrusion taken place, I would have heard about it. I would therefore urge all to ask RIFC for further clarification and implications’ ”

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:57 pm - Oct 2, 2013


borussiabeefburg says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:51 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:44 pm
**********
echobhoy, CF actually talks of the regulators being told the email server had been breached, not that she actually thinks the server has been compromised.

What I don’t get, unless of course CF (in this present form) is connected to the club, is why she would be surprised by such a breach, since she is gaining information from that source.
============================================
I could have worded that better. It really interests me that she states she would have known if there had been an intrusion – if she’s that close how has she not been outed by Rangers?

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on10:59 pm - Oct 2, 2013


bmchugh says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:53 pm

Thanks for turning Charlotte’s tweets into something intelligible- much appreciated.

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on11:04 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:57 pm
=========================
I think the answer is likely to be in the minutes of 29th May

View Comment

Avatar

borussiabeefburgPosted on11:04 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:57 pm
***************
borussiabeefburg says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:51 pm
ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:44 pm
**********
echobhoy, CF actually talks of the regulators being told the email server had been breached, not that she actually thinks the server has been compromised.

What I don’t get, unless of course CF (in this present form) is connected to the club, is why she would be surprised by such a breach, since she is gaining information from that source.
============================================
I could have worded that better. It really interests me that she states she would have known if there had been an intrusion – if she’s that close how has she not been outed by Rangers?
************************

The present CF I think is likely to be connected to the club, while the old CF (with the different avatar ‘seeking truth’) was, I still guess connected to Whytey.

Therefore, in my mind, both the old and the new CF are still connected to the club! 😯

Only my opinion, mind.

View Comment

Avatar

ZilchPosted on11:11 pm - Oct 2, 2013


TSFM says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:26 pm

Reckon you are bang on the money TSFM. Can’t help feeling that there has been an attempt to line up some sort of extra special shenanigans today by people who are not keen on exposure of the truth, the whole truth and nowt but the truth.

The forensic analysis of the accounts by our own esteemed team of fib-detectors has been awesome. There must be a few folk down Govan way wishing they could get these guys to go off and do something else rather than continue to expose the latest cover-up.

I would love to have CF or Goldstein or frankly anyone provide us with the real deal, something truly nuclear that exposed the whole sordid mess in a way that meant unavoidable end game and the righting of so many wrongs that have been commited in this sordid saga.

Not holding my breath though.

In the meatime I am imagining how all of this is being viewed from the office of CO. After everything that he has done for his beloved club, it looks like they are still going down the stank. Must be gut wrenching for him. He must be wondering if he will survive the next admin too.

😈

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on11:12 pm - Oct 2, 2013


nawlite says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:05 pm

Oh and Goldstein, the way you write doesn’t come over at all well – I was thinking of asking Smugas to give up his blogname to make it available to you!
++++++
Brilliant 😆

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on11:14 pm - Oct 2, 2013


The darkside have unveiled part of the great conspiracy between Celtic and GCC through a FOI request 😀

Over £90,000 spent by GCC on conferences at Celtic Park and just over £1,000 at Ibrox.

Apparently over 3 years – perhaps if Rangers paid their debts they would get taken off the black list ❗

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on11:17 pm - Oct 2, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:14 pm

Aye but Eco did CF not reveal that one of the dishwashers was cream crackered and they couldn’t afford to repair it. Cant be entertaining etc if the dishwasher isnae working

View Comment

Avatar

sickofitallPosted on11:18 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Are we getting close to the nuclear event :

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on11:23 pm - Oct 2, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:17 pm
0 0 Rate This

ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:14 pm

Aye but Eco did CF not reveal that one of the dishwashers was cream crackered and they couldn’t afford to repair it.
+++++++++++++
I’ll bet that dishwasher was sabotaged by an elite Opus Dei commando unit, on the direct orders of the Vatican. McMurdo will probably confirm the full details of the plot tomorrow.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on11:29 pm - Oct 2, 2013


http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/2329/tsdq.jpg

A nice take on the audited accounts 😆 😆 😆

It’s by Cartuja on KDS.

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on11:31 pm - Oct 2, 2013


I’m entertaining the residents at Erskine home shortly, second time within a year. I must ask if any of them were abseiling down the stands at the weekend 😆 On a more serious note (I am entertaining at Erskine) but I think these are the guys that should be getting an invite to their favourite club whatever it is and no need for the fanfare

View Comment

Avatar

GoldsteinPosted on11:33 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Hmm

View Comment

Avatar

GoldsteinPosted on11:43 pm - Oct 2, 2013


.

View Comment

Avatar

ratethisthenyabampotsPosted on11:46 pm - Oct 2, 2013


That, my friend Neepheid, from Cartuja, is simply brilliant. A picture paints a thousand words.

View Comment

Avatar

BigGavPosted on11:48 pm - Oct 2, 2013


Goldstein says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:33 pm

Anyone familiar with the concept ‘Balance of Terror’? The idea is that where two opposing sides have an assured way of destroying each other in any conflict, a balance will arise whereby each would understand that it would essentially be suicide to go all in.
——–
Sounds like the theory of Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) favoured during the Cold War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction

Now, who’s got their finger on the nuclear trigger…?

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on11:50 pm - Oct 2, 2013


briggsbhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:31 pm
‘I’m entertaining the residents at Erskine home shortly,…’
——-
Erskine on the Clyde? My dad was an amputee( right leg) there in 1944, having been wounded at Cassino.
Once or twice in the late 40s we would take the tram from Auchenshuggle (No 9) to Dalmuir West and end up taking the ferry across. ( God, it’s so long ago that I can scarcely remember anything but walking along the bank of a canal at some stage: where was that? )
PS There is an Erskine establishment here in Edinburgh, hence my question

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on11:56 pm - Oct 2, 2013


BigGav says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:48 pm
‘..Now, who’s got their finger on the nuclear trigger…?’
——
Unbidden, the image of a deranged Sterling Hayden as Colonel ? strafing some Vietnamese coast from his helicopter gunship springs to mind, with the loudspeakers attached to the chopper blaring out ‘The ride of the Valkyrie’.
Great scene.

View Comment

Avatar

Tif FinnPosted on12:02 am - Oct 3, 2013


Goldstein says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:33 pm

LOOK AT ME … LOOK AT ME … LOOK AT ME.

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

I translated what you said for real people, I hope you don’t mind.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on12:04 am - Oct 3, 2013


Goldstein says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:33 pm
There was no novation as such, more a transfer of ownership — technically a different thing. Those dots are easy to join, my advice is look at the timing.There was no novation as such, more a transfer of ownership — technically a different thing. Those dots are easy to join, my advice is look at the timing.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
When you say a transfer of ownership, what exactly do you mean? Did D&P actually transfer the assets to Sevco5088, who then transferred them to Sevco Scotland? I’m pretty sure that the IPO prospectus mentioned a novation, and this is from note 28 of the recent accounts:

“On 14 June 2012, Sevco 5088 Limited entered into agreements for no consideration to legally reassign its beneficial interest in funding placing letters held and to novate the trade and assets purchase agreement with RFC 2012 plc (in administration), to Sevco Scotland Limited (now The Rangers Football Club Ltd).”

Have the auditors got it wrong?

View Comment

Avatar

GoldsteinPosted on12:23 am - Oct 3, 2013


http://news.stv.tv/west-central/108240-rangers-crisis-ibrox-and-murray-park-hived-off-to-separate-newco/

View Comment

Avatar

enough is enoughPosted on12:24 am - Oct 3, 2013


Can I suggest we remember why this site was created …. to challenge the MSM to report honestly on matters down govan way. In light of recent events …… Keith J ? grow a pair and report the thruth! Tom E? grow a pair and report the truth! BFDJ? Grow a pair and report the truth! Chicofunnybeard? grow a pair and report the truth …. feel free to add to this list

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on12:28 am - Oct 3, 2013


Goldstein says:
October 3, 2013 at 12:18 am
0 0 Rate This

Neepheid, the ownership didn’t change hands as such, they simply changed the name on the form. This is actually in the public domain, stv or the herald covered it, it was changed within a week of the CVA failing. Correct me if I’m wrong, but if I pass something from one company that I own to another that I also own, I wouldn’t call that a novation in the legal sense.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I think it is different where there is a third party involved (D&P in this case). There was some discussion on this a few weeks back. For the benefit of a legal contract to be transferred from one party to another, it has to be done by deed, and D&P would have to be formally notified. I think this related to one of the Board minutes released by Charlotte, which indicated that the paperwork was missing? That’s all from memory, I’ll look at it tomorrow if I have time, I’m off to bed.

View Comment

Avatar

SouthernExilePosted on12:45 am - Oct 3, 2013


Although he is regarded as a complete tit, I think Mr Graham is onto something here.

By Chris Graham | Contributor

Much of the focus in the past two days has rightly been on the release of the audited accounts for Rangers. There is much analysis still to be done on these and they arguably raised more questions than answers but I will leave the detailed analysis to those better qualified than myself to speak on such matters.

However the old adage about certain days being good ones to release bad news was taken to new levels by this current board on 1st October 2013. Not only did they pick the day that Celtic played Barcelona to ensure that scrutiny of their various releases to the London Stock Exchange (LSE) would be minimised, but they also clearly knew the accounts would be the main topic of conversation.

Now the accounts were woeful. Let’s not beat around the bush. Mather and Stockbridge can try, and have tried, to put a brave face on it all but only an idiot would accept that the club has been run well over the last 12 months. Huge director salaries and bonuses, IPO costs around 25% when the standard is around 5%, non-playing staff costs dwarfing those of the playing staff (a unique proposition for football clubs) and the IPO money gone in less than the space of year. The spin that our two esteemed executive directors have tried to place on these matters over the past two days has been bizarre to watch, but that is for another article.

There were no less than four releases to the LSE by Rangers on the 1st October. One was the aforementioned annual results and notice of the AGM to be held on the 24th October at Ibrox. A small side point here – if you are a shareholder make sure you attend and vote in this AGM. If you can’t attend then make sure you find a way to proxy your vote to either a group like the RST or a friend who can attend for you. If you bought your shares from a broker (after the IPO) then make sure you contact them and inform them of your wish to attend the AGM and vote – they should be able to advise you what you have to do.

The second notice was about Charles Green finally disposing of shares beneath the notifiable level of 3%. Many pronouncements have been made over the past few months by both Green and the Easdales about the disposal and purchase of these shares but most of them have failed to materialise on the LSE website. Despite the best efforts of their media and blogging mouthpieces, the levels of shareholdings announced via those mediums still do not tally with the situation as announced to the LSE. It now at least appears that some of Green’s shares have indeed been sold, breaking the lock in agreement with Cenkos, although Green’s assertion that he no longer has any financial interest in Rangers is difficult to verify. I certainly won’t be taking his word for it.

The third and fourth notices are probably of the most concern though and were clearly released in the hope that they would be swamped by the news of the accounts and the incredibly #brave actions of our chums from the East End in another Champions League defeat. To some extent this has worked.

First of all it was announced that we have parted company with our second nominated advisor (NOMAD) in the past year. Strand Hanson took over from Cenkos and are the advisers who were used to block the suggested compromise deal to add Sandy Easdale, Paul Murray, Frank Blin and John McClelland to the board. It would appear things have become too hot for them and they have now been replaced by Daniel Stewart who previously acted as brokers for Rangers.

A number of things are concerning about this: Firstly, the fact that we are now on our third NOMAD in just under a year is virtually unheard of. Cenkos are generally regarded as a top notch NOMAD in the City of London and the circumstances of their departure are still unexplained. Strand Hanson, without being unkind to them, were a step down at least in terms of reputation. Daniel Stewart are a further notch, or several, below that. By their own admission they are incapable of representing a company the size of Rangers. But what is particularly concerning is that Daniel Stewart have clear connections with Charles Green having previously worked with him at Nova Resources.

Daniel Stewart is also the firm which Green famously told Jim McColl to deposit £14 million with in order for him to walk away from Rangers. Why are we appointing a lesser known NOMAD with links to Charles Green on the day that Green’s shareholding drops below the 3% mark? Why can we not hold onto a NOMAD for longer than a few months?

The above is bad enough but the most concerning notice has been left for last. Behind curtain number four is reference to Section S338 of the Companies Act but, in layman’s terms, this board are attempting to block the nomination of other directors at the AGM. In effect this means that instead of the shareholders attending being allowed to have a democratic vote on both the current and proposed directors, the board would prefer it if nobody opposed them.

Now I can understand this. Their performance, in my opinion, has been a shambles both in terms of their financial guidance of Rangers and also their general representation of the club in public and private. If I were them then I wouldn’t want an open and democratic vote on my future either. However that is what the fans want and it is what the shareholders want. No matter what you think of Paul Murray and Jim McColl, you must be concerned that this board do not want to give shareholders the opportunity to vote for change.

I bought shares partly to have a say in such matters but mainly to help my football club to rebuild itself after financial Armageddon. I didn’t expect to make money from the shares I purchased. I’ve watched the money that myself and others put up, in my opinion, squandered on ridiculous executive salaries and bonuses. I’ve seen what I consider to be poor commercial performance and I’ve seen executives make some bizarre and indefensible statements which are unworthy of my football club. I’d like the opportunity to attend an AGM and, along with other fan and institutional shareholders, decide whether these people should be allowed to continue or whether those nominated by the institutional investors should be brought in instead. This board are attempting to deny me that right in what I consider to be a desperate stunt.

Their assertion that the documentation has already been sent to the printers is one of the most pathetic excuses I have ever heard of to stop what amounts to an election. The requisitioning shareholders have already offered to pay any additional printing and postage costs. Why are this board so determined to stop anyone from outside their little clique being brought onto the board? Why won’t they allow a democratic shareholder vote on the direction our football club takes? They will happily use mouthpieces like Bill McMurdo to tell us that they will win any vote easily so why try to stop that vote with these pathetic excuses?

The financial figures are atrocious. Many questions remain about exactly where large amounts of money have gone. The level of IPO fees alone is cause for concern and there is no clarity in the accounts on why those costs are so high. The Pinsent Masons report remains unpublished and will stay as a document seen only by the board. We still have no clarity on the beneficial shareholders behind Blue Pitch and Margarita. We still have minimal clarity on exactly what Charles Green’s shareholding situation is. We can’t hold on to a NOMAD for more than a few months. We can’t see the board’s five-year plan despite their calls for the nominees to produce theirs.

Both the fans and the shareholders deserve a say in the future of this board. They are trying to deny that say to shareholders at the upcoming AGM and to fans in the stands by demonising them for protesting. If alarm bells are still not ringing for a few in our support then they best wake up soon.

View Comment

Avatar

BigGavPosted on12:50 am - Oct 3, 2013


neepheid says:
October 3, 2013 at 12:28 am

There was some discussion on this a few weeks back. For the benefit of a legal contract to be transferred from one party to another, it has to be done by deed, and D&P would have to be formally notified. I think this related to one of the Board minutes released by Charlotte, which indicated that the paperwork was missing?

From the minutes of the October 31st 2012 TRFCL board meeting (as posted by Charlotte):

The Company entered into the APA and acquired Rangers (with Sevco 5088 and the Administrators of RFC 2012 plc being parties to the APA in addition to the Company to provide written consent to the change of acquiring entity).

Regarding the missing paperwork, I suggested on 7th Sept (and ecobhoy later agreed with me) that the ‘missing deed’ actually relates only to the transfer of Ahmad’s loan from Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland, and not to the novation of the asset purchase (for which D&P would presumably also have a copy).

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on1:32 am - Oct 3, 2013


SouthernExile says: October 3, 2013 at 12:45 am

Although he is regarded as a complete tit, I think Mr Graham is onto something here…
=======
A TU for that opening phrase alone. 😉

What’s the betting that due to ‘security concerns’ the AGM has to delayed?

Alternatively, I would be seriously tempted to pay 50p for a share to allow me to attend the debacle!

Would they let you in to the AGM if you where carrying a super-sized bag of popcorn…?

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on1:39 am - Oct 3, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 5:35 pm

“But surely there was millions in cash from the original investors in Sevco 5088 Ltd – so how is that accounted for?”
———————————-
The interrelationships between Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland as you will know are, obscure.

The Charlotte materials indicate that Korissa Capital, Blue Pitch Holdings and Willow International were initial investors in Sevco 5088. S.K Ali may have came onboard soon after the initial May 2012 investment.

Exactly how these financial entities may have morphed into Sevco Scotland is currently beyond our ken; as is who else may have become involved. My strong suspicion is that there will inevitably be some form of continuity between the two Sevco’s but how that would be accounted for is not for us to know, some might hope.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on3:02 am - Oct 3, 2013


bmchugh says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:53 pm

“Charlotte’s latest re-ordered – Also it was stated to the regulators that the email server, hosted by a third party, had been breached. ‘This is news to me. Had such an intrusion taken place, I would have heard about it.”
————————–
Thanks for the narrative b.

Whichever Charlotte this is she seems to be narrowing the locus of her identity to someone who would definitely know if this third party server had been breached. Whatever this exactly means, it does place her in a vaguely identifiably small group of people.

Is the veil of anonymity slipping?

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on3:12 am - Oct 3, 2013


ecobhoy says:
October 2, 2013 at 10:57 pm

“… It really interests me that she states she would have known if there had been an intrusion – if she’s that close how has she not been outed by Rangers?”

HirsutePursuit says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:04 pm

“I think the answer is likely to be in the minutes of 29th May”
——————————
I’m not getting that Hirsute. You’ll need to elaborate for the hard of understanding like myself.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on3:20 am - Oct 3, 2013


john clarke says:
October 2, 2013 at 11:50 pm

” ( God, it’s so long ago that I can scarcely remember anything but walking along the bank of a canal at some stage: where was that? )”
——————————
The Forth and Clyde canal runs parallel with the Clyde at that point before joining it at Bowling.

View Comment

Avatar

CastofThousandsPosted on3:35 am - Oct 3, 2013


Goldstein says:
October 3, 2013 at 12:18 am

“…if I pass something from one company that I own to another that I also own, I wouldn’t call that a novation in the legal sense. Just words either way. ”
—————————-
I think they will be words on a legally binding document that can’t actually be altered without the agreement of the contracting parties.

People are uptight about ownership rights and sadly a man’s word is no longer his bond.

View Comment

Avatar

stevensanphPosted on5:05 am - Oct 3, 2013


Following on from my accounts post yesterday, i’ve looked into the match day revenue a little more and am happier it is what it says it is: Bear with me:

Accounts state 13,224,000 revenue. We know 8m is from season tickets leaving 5.2 to account for.
There were 25 homes games (7 cup games). The cup games average attendance of 27809 which at an average ticket price of 10quid would bring in close to 2m.

The league games averaged attendance of 39335 according to accounts, so a min of 1100 paying customers or 350,000 over the 18 games. Adding this to the cup game receipts and season tickets takes us to just under 10.5m… 2.7 to find.

Hospitality meanwhile – harder to work out, so i looked at the 2010 rangers accounts. In the accounts it is stated that they had their lowest ever hospitality occupancy of 86%. According to the prospectus there is a capacity of 1500,so lets say last season they obtained the same, this would be 1200 ish a game. The cheapest package on the rangers website is 99quid, so using this for the 25 games, gives us 3.2m. Obviously if the cheapest is 99, the average would be much higher (some as high as 1300 a game!) so this would account for the extra 0.5m if a lower occupancy was used (which is entirely possible).

So, they haven’t made up numbers completely here.

Next, I looked at cash balance and does it make sense given the income, share issue and investment income and costs?

So, crude calculation of 19m income, plus 29m in fundraising (this is on page 13 in the accounts – IPO and initial investment activity would make this about right from reported figures).

From this take away what was spent (33m recurring and 4.5m non recurring) and we get, 10.5m, just about what the balance sheet states. This tells me they did receive hard money for the shares… obviously the fees to get it there were a bit more than expected though.

Interestingly, if you take the 29m investment and remove from that the 13m of match day income you quite conveniently get 16m, which happens to be the amount the subsidiary owes RIFC.

View Comment

Avatar

stevensanphPosted on5:32 am - Oct 3, 2013


On 14 June 2012, Sevco 5088 Limited entered into agreements for no consideration to legally reassign its beneficial interest in funding placing letters
held and to novate the trade and assets purchase agreement with RFC 2012 plc (in administration), to Sevco Scotland Limited (now The Rangers Football
Club Ltd).
+++++++++++

Hang on… so Sevco 5088 DID have the assets and gave them to Sevco Scotland for 0.

So if Green was the one that signed these over, without the permission of Craig Whyte, surely this whole facade is about to come crashing down?

View Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.