The increasing attacks on social media by the main stream press, fuelled in some respect by David Murray’s vague threats of litigation against bloggers, has brought into sharp focus the challenges facing the Blogosphere. It also brings into even sharper focus the prescience of Stuart Cosgrove’s assertion that this summer’s ‘epistemological break’ had begun to marginalize the Scottish sporting wing of the MSM.
The reality of that assertion is embedded in the misreporting of the FTT decision as a victory for RFC, falsely alleging that those who operated the EBT scheme had been exonerated, that RFC had ‘done nothing wrong’, and consequently accusing ‘vindictive anti-Rangers bloggers’ of playing a part in the downfall of that once great Scottish institution. It is also evident in Tom English’s rather bitter and one-dimensional anti-RTC polemic today in the Scotland on Sunday. Had it been entitled “Self Preservation”, it may have rung a few more truth bells.
I am not of the belief that the MSM is an instinctively pro-Rangers estate, but I do think that their reportage of the FTT is more geared towards discrediting the newly emergent forces in the social media area than it is towards rehabilitating the public image of RFC or David Murray.
However despite the contempt in which many people here hold the MSM and Murray, English does have a point that we would be foolish to ignore. No-one can deny that we do have a duty to ensure that we are responsible in how we present ourselves to the public. Now that our (and others’) success as a real and creative alternative has spurred the MSM into action, we are subject to greater scrutiny than at any time in the past. Our view is that we have to be pro-actively engaged in setting a standard for ourselves that is above those that the MSM have set for themselves.
We have on TSFM an audience exponentially greater than the number of posts. That presents us with a great opportunity to get our message across, but it also burdens us with an increased responsibility not to fall into the trap which has besought the Succulent Lamb Brigade.
We are a very different animal from RTC. RTC him or herself had information and insight to bring to the table that the administrators of this site do not. The founder and former admin of TSFM had the idea that the talent available from posters on the RTC – not just RTC himself – should continue to have a forum in a post-RTC world, and that those talents could be used to challenge the myths regularly represented as facts by lazy journalists in the MSM.
We have at our disposal on this blog forensic analysis of legal, media and corporate matters. We have an abundance of creative minds, all passionate about the game of football AS WELL AS a partisan love for their chosen club. With all that talent and expertise, we can make an impact on the agenda by challenging the misinformation and substandard journalism of the MSM, and our finest moments are when we do that. We lose authority and influence when the debate is impeded by bald accusation or innuendo backed up with little more than an historical view of our country.
Our biggest impact (and largest audience) is to be found when when our experts have collectively torn apart those myths presented as truths by the MSM, and when we have asked the questions that the MSM either can’t or won’t ask or answer. Those are the things that have driven the traffic to this site, and many of the emails we get congratulate us on that.
Our credibility plummets though when we go down the partisan path. We also get literally hundreds of emails from fans who ask that we cut down on the comments of those who are merely venting outrage at how they see the game being mismanaged (mainly so they can access the important stuff more quickly), and from fans who are just fed up with the constant name-calling – almost exclusively aimed at Ally McCoist and other Rangers figures.
If we claim to be an intellectual and journalistic rung or two above the likes of the Red Tops (not to mention to be decent and respectful of others), we need to refrain from the name calling and accusatory culture. We can ask questions, put items for debate on the public agenda, point out apparent irregularities and anomalies. In rushing to judgement of others from the comfort of the glow of our own laptop screens, we are guilty of the same lazy journalism we see in others. Name calling (all good fun of course on a fan site) is just a lazy thought process and as English says, comes across as “nasty”.
We never saw RTC as a fan-site. The original administrator of this blog never saw TSFM as one either, and nor do we. In order to succeed properly, we need sensible fans of ALL clubs to be comfortable and feel secure in our midst. Of course we are not breaking any laws, but can anyone honestly say that we have evolved into a welcoming place for Rangers fans?
TSFM is not about hounding any one club out of existence or into shame or infamy. In the Rangers saga we have sought to ensure that the football authorities play fair with everyone and stick to their own rules. One well kent RTC contributor, and no friend of Rangers, often said that if the FTT found in favour of Rangers we should move along and accept it. Well they did find in favour of Rangers in the majority of cases. That may not suit many of us, but we are the Scottish Football Monitor, not a Judicial Watchdog. We can say why we disagree with the decision, but criticism of the process through which the decision was arrived at is beyond our purview.
Since the accusation is often made in the MSM, we should state, unequivocally and unreservedly, that we are NOT anti-Rangers. Their fans face the same issues as the rest of us and they are welcome here. We are however, equally unequivocally against the gravy train journalism of the Scottish Football Wing of the MSM (with one or two honourable exceptions).
If the Anti-Blogateers in the press are correct, the popularity of the TSFM will recede as the Rangers Tax case reverts to the back pages before disappearing for good. However I do not believe that they are correct. I don’t believe that Scottish football fans are only motivated by either hatred – or even dislike – of one club. I believe we are more concerned with the game itself than the pot-stirrers in the MSM would have us believe, because we understand the interdependence of football clubs.
But we also understand that the people who run football clubs do not always run their clubs for the benefit of the fans. In the business world, that may not be out of the ordinary, since businesses are run for the benefit of shareholders.
However football reserves for itself a special place in the hearts of people in this country. If the people who run football clubs want to retain that favourable status, they have to be accountable to the fans.
The difficulty in holding them to account though, is that the cosy relationship cultivated between club directors, managers and players and the press renders the access to information a closed shop, and the information itself is heavily filtered and spun.
As long as we keep asking questions in response to the fruit of that cosy relationship, we will be providing people with an alternative angle and viewpoint, allowing them to come to their own conclusions, and not the one the MSM post-presser huddle delivers to us wrapped up in a bow.
For the SFM specifically, we believe that to have any influence, we need to enable the expertise at our disposal to flourish. It is also vital to our project that Rangers fans are included in our dialogue. We just can’t call ourselves the Scottish Football Monitor if they are largely excluded from participation because they feel they are being treated disrespectfully.
We can’t tolerate the accusations and name calling. We need to stick to what we have done best; factual analysis, conjecture based on known facts and on-line discourse leading to searching questions being asked.
One of the things we are looking at for the near future is to set up some kind of formal and transparent channel of communication between the SFM and the football authorities. Being truly representative of fans will make that easier to achieve.
The MSM will continue to attack the social media outlets. In one way you can understand it. Their jobs are at stake. The business model of the print media in particular has changed massively over the last five years, manifesting itself mainly in increasingly under-resourced newsrooms. Consequently it is besought by increasingly unreliable and under-researched journalism, even to the point where much of it is no longer journalism at all.
By comparison the Blogosphere has access to greater human and time resources, is able to react to unfolding events in real time, and crucially (because it has been eschewed instead of embraced by print media proprietors) has been occupied by ordinary folk with little or no vested interest.
We are still in position to provide a service in our small niche of the on-line world. We have rights to publish and speak freely about our passion, but we also have to live up to the attendant responsibilities, and thus the appeal for discretion on posting comments.
Where Tom English got it completely wrong (in the uniquely ironic way the MSM have about them), is that his industry has mistaken the rights others have earned for them as entitlement, and ignored almost completely the responsibility they had to act on behalf of those who pay their wages.
Well done Mr. Cowan…
———————————————————————-
‘Come on, Chuck, spare a thought for the Rangers fans who haven’t missed a game since… well, since the club was formed in the summer’
There are two small words causing a lot of debate and frustration and they are “voted out”. This could be cleared up if certain people understood that to be “voted out” you have to have been “in” in the first instance. If you are “out” you cannot be “in” and if you are “in” you cannot be “out”. It’s a difficult concept for some I know.
Cannot agree with Cowan’s views on the rearranged match. Would the police etc ignore their fees for a rearranged match? As has been pointed out, 1.5 entry price for 1.5 matches was the charge to punters.
More disinformation from the MSM – even one of the good guys gets it wrong.
Hearts director Sergejus Fedotovas has warned there will be consequences should fans fail to find £250,000 for the financially-stricken Edinburgh club in the next 11 days. (Record)
how come hearts can afford another striker [lithuanian top scorer] in january – then ?
New Rangers prospectus p77, re. ‘We have not had the opportunity of inspecting the Title Deeds of the subjects under valuation…we have assumed that the subjects are held under Title which is the equivalent of Heritable Ownership…have further assumed that the properties are free from encumbrances, restrictions or outgoings of an onerous nature which would have a material impact on the value.’
————————-
Why would a valuer not insist on seeing these, as their assumptions may be completely wrong? I didn’t see a statement along the lines of “and we have been assured by the title holder that this understanding is the case”. So basically it’s just a guess that everything is fine?
I always thought Traynor had tupe’d over anyway.
jimlarkin says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 11:14
0 0 Rate This
Lord Wobbly says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 07:46
“When we were voted out of the league, a lot of the chairmen and club representatives told us that they were listening to their fans, which is totally understandable and acceptable.
“With this stance, we’ve decided to do the same.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
There is absolutely nothing wrong with listening to your fans. In fact it’s the right thing to do. But you have to know the difference between right and wrong. The Chairman of the other clubs recognized the just and true nature of the stance the fans took when insisting that the replacement Rangers must not be allowed entry into the SPL or indeed SFL1 or 2.
The Rangers, on the other hand, do not have ANY justification for their boycott of the cup tie with Dundee Utd.
Their fans have, of course, whipped themselves up into a frenzy with quite mind boggling instances of perceived slights, none of which should even hint at the sort of action now being taken by Green and his gang.
Those in charge at The Rangers are simply showing themselves up as cowards. They have shiny brass necks but absolutely no backbone whatsoever. They should have listened to their fans, of course they should. But then they should have politely informed them that they could not support a boycott and they should have urged fans to go and support their team. That they didn’t do so is utterly reprehensible
============================================
they were not VOTED OUT OF THE LEAGUE.
they were refused entry.
why – because they were being wound up, as a consequence they lost their share of the SPL.
the spl chairmen didn’t agree to the rules being broken and
allowing a “new” team into the spl.
entry into the spl has to be via promotion.
as the rangers were a new team, they would have to start at the bottom division and gain access to the spl on merit, i.e via
promotion.
in fact, they shouldn’t have been allowed into sfl 3 either, as
spartans [and others] were/are waiting in the queue to get entry into sfl div 3, so they took spartans place and to make matters worse, they [the rangers] got a “temporary licence” which isn’t even in the rules !!!!!!
~~~~~~~~~~~~
No argument from me.
and p78 ditto for ‘We have not had sight of an Asbestos Risk Assessment relative to the subjects and cannot report that they are free from risk in this respect. Accordingly, we have made the assumption that such an investigation would not disclose the presence of any such material in any adverse situation or condition.’
——————–
There is no mention of ‘after investigation’, e.g. just asking previous directors or contractors if they are aware of asbestos having been used.
paulmac2 @ 10:12
So that’s what happened to the Cup Winners Cup
I never realised it was merged with the UEFA Cup to give us the Europa League
Muppets 🙂
I’m obviously stuck in some freakin’ parallel universe, where lateral and obdurate thinking is the norm for a good part of Sevconia – a prospectus written by the new club owners: details in black and white that the old Rangers is no more … and yet they celebrate a 140th anniversary.
When did that number become a milestone in human timelines?
Could it be they’ve now also boycotted the Gregorian calender, redefined the vernal equinox measurements and their history is now expounded in – Bear years.
is the money still to be in chucks back pocket by the 17th?
not much mention of this prospectus on RM? does that mean
a. they didn’t all register to get one?
b. don’t care what it says they’ll buy anyway?
c. it doesnt look good so don’t mention it
d. is sone aluko a traitor is the bigger question
Rangers: Jim Traynor appointed Ibrox director of communication
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20652118
Lord Wobbly says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 12:20
Rangers: Jim Traynor appointed Ibrox director of communication
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20652118
——
Just hilarious. You couldnae make it up. 🙂
Lord Wobbly says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 12:20
Phil Mac Broke this story last Sunday I believe. The MSM really do need to catch up
The bampots are still leading the way….:)
Rule breaking, rule bending, imaginery rule making, about turns, blind eyes turned to infringements …. all offences against SFA and UEFA ….. and no action taken. This blog repeatedly outlines these offences against ‘the Rules of Law’ (of the various bodies). There have been frequent calls for the various men (I don’t think there are any women involved) who have presided over the farce to be kicked out. Nothing has happened.
So the question is – how can these people be removed? Who has to take the first step? What is stopping them? Fear? Is it down to the Chairmen of the various clubs?
Perhaps someone could ask whoever …. why are you not at least raising the issue at a level where action can happen? That commonly quoted passage about, ‘They came for the communists and I said nothing’, comes to mind. My focus of ‘blame’ is moving slightly, away from the transgressors, towards those who are silent. If you are allowed to avoid paying tax, paying debts, rule breaking, causing trouble, etc. – and it is in your own interests so to do: if you realise that without immoral or downright dishonest actions your company will go bust ….. you will have no great incentive to be honest.
My hope has always been that someone on this blog can raise issues at a meaningful level to start the honesty ball rolling. Clearly not – otherwise it would have happened. We can all complain, be angry, etc. but we do not have any power to do anything to combat the dishonesty.
BBC report has a typo;
James Traynor has been appointed Director of Miscommunication.
(Well he’s not likely to change his ways after 37 years of misreporting, is he? 😉 )
James Traynor has been confirmed as Rangers Head of Communications on the Rangers website. He takes up the position in the new year.
Despite Traynor’s undoubted connected status with the press, he has also made many bitter enemies amongst journalists. I think there is a danger that he may be as ill-advised an appointment as Jock Brown’s was at Celtic. Depends on how many scores require settling.
Whatever, it will be fun, and perhaps from Charles Green’s point of view, a welcome distraction from his activities.
More importantly, now that confirmation has come through , it must call into question the integrity of the Daily Record’s recent editorial policy. Or will they have us believe that JT was only contacted by Rangers AFTER his swansong last week?
One would think that with precipitously diminishing sales in mind, the DR would seek to assure readers that Charles Green hasn’t been dictating the editorial over the past several months.
“Rangers have appointed Jim Traynor as their new director of communication”.
Only Sevco would pay a man who cannot string a coherent sentence together as a “director of COMMUNICATION”.
Celtic support previously labelled paranoid……………….now, not so much.
How the hell did the Record allow that last column to be published? There were rumours Traynor was heading to Sevco before it was printed, so it beggars belief that the editor didn’t hear these stories as well. Given that, it puts a very ugly spin on a very ugly peace of prose.
In a world where lots of very poisonous and ill-informed comment and judgements are being made, this appointment is unlikely to pour oil on very troubled waters.
Very poor attendance from Kilmarnock supporters at their home game today. Could some be away Christmas shopping or possibly at someones Birthday Party? Only asking.
Lord Wobbly says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 12:20
Rangers: Jim Traynor appointed Ibrox director of communication
—————————————————
Surely ‘formally appointed’, as the informal appointment might be thought to have been in place for some time
Humble Pie:
I was being charitable! Generous guy that I am.
I’m honestly intrigued to see how a man who utterly hates the internet is able to effectively use it in his new role. Mind boggling.
if he is a “director”, which is a very lofty position, but which sevco company is he a director of.
obonfanti 88:
You’re too kind. I can’t wait to see his first attempt at spinning the ‘we are still Rangers’ yarn.
Sometimes you need to know where to draw a line and start again. So as an Arab, I’d like to say many thanks to The Rangers for appointing Jim Traynor.
It’s takes a degree of integrity to start paying someone for services he has been performing for years. I’m sure he will be paid a proper salary and not some form of mysterious non repayable loan.
Rangers should also be thanked for their services to the Daily Record and the BBC as I hear Traynor is away from the BBC and Jim and Your Call is no more!
Now that Rangers(IL) have been found to have had a ‘plant’ in the MSM, it shouldn’t be too difficult to conclude that they also have had, at least one plant in the SFA, namely EBT recipient Campbell Ogilvie.
Maybe that’s why after Craig Levein was sacked as Scotland manager, James Traynor opined, “However, to be fair to SFA Chief Executive Stuart Regan and president Campbell Ogilvie, they didn’t negotiate Levein’s contract.”
I wonder why Traynor was so ready to let Ogilvie off the hook?
Ogilvie out now!!
Read on the BBC text commentary that the poor attendance at the Kilmarnock game may be down to some sort of boycott due to them abstaining on the Sevco vote. I’m sorry, but if that’s true, then it’s pathetic. I would hope that it’s just the time of year and the lack of money to blame. The Bootleg Bears have rightly been condemned on here for this sort of petty point scoring, and I would hope that other teams are above that sort of thing.
areyouaccusingmeofmendacity says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 13:47
1 0 Rate This
Read on the BBC text commentary that the poor attendance at the Kilmarnock game may be down to some sort of boycott due to them abstaining on the Sevco vote. I’m sorry, but if that’s true, then it’s pathetic. I would hope that it’s just the time of year and the lack of money to blame. The Bootleg Bears have rightly been condemned on here for this sort of petty point scoring, and I would hope that other teams are above that sort of thing.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I assume you mean Kille fans in some sort of boycott of their own club.
Release the prospectus and announce the controversial Traynor appointment at the same time.
Hmmm!
Is it possible that the boycott is merely sour grapes over the 40k due from a previous cup match that trfc said was paid but dutd said wasn’t paid ? …. And has it indeed been paid ?
Im surprised at Traynor taking the role at The Rangers. Correct me if im wrong was it not Murray who put the final nail in the coffin of Airdrie when they were in trouble financially? It takes a better man than me to be able to forgive for the lack of mercy shown to his beloved football club!
Methinks he shouldve been on garden leave as I take it he was involved in creating the birthday piece for the oldco then that bitter farewell he bode us all.
Im sure The Rangers support will be ecstatic at his appointment.
Killie Fans
Your team have played better than they did today,
but i have to say, i loved your huge banner behind the goal.
” A CLUB WITH HISTORY !
a nice touch,
Let,s keep football an Honest game.
“Rangers FC as we know them are dead. It’s all over. They are
about to shut down for ever but not a single person among the
game’s hierarchy was open for comment.
And that just about sums it up for Rangers, the club the rest of the Scottish game came to detest.”
… “They’ll slip into liquidation within the next couple of weeks with a new company emerging but 140 years of history, triumph and tears, will have ended.”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/james-traynor-spl-will-not-be-able-1129166
Re: ‘Jabba’.
=========
Having recently decided to pay $4 Billion to acquire the Star Wars franchise, Disney might be more proactive in protecting the image/integrity of their films’ characters. 😉
Maybe we will have to drop the Jabba reference: well if I shelled out that sort of dosh I certainly wouldn’t want a film character associated with a failed, discredited and bitter hack!
SSB said the sights at ibrox are ‘unbelievable’ today kind of apt really having a birthday party for a dead entity is quite ‘unbelievable’ 😉
ABSOLUTE BELTER of a link by Lord Wobbly ……. …. Maybe the “airdrie” fan has a hidden agenda in his terms of employment …. To do what CG appears unable to do (no matter how hard he tries) …. Oooh this might produce some fun moments …… http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/james-traynor-spl-will-not-be-able-1129166
re Traynor to Ibrox;
I hope we all feel vindicated today.
Stand tall, stand together, don’t let them grind you down!!!!
killiemad @15:26
I’ve got BBC Sportsound on in the background on a Saturday afternoon for the first time in many years. I had to stop listening as I felt that James Traynor was turning it into just another piece of low-class Talksport style of broadcasting awfulness.
Since then I have resented being legally obliged to contribute to his income.
Glad he’s gone.
Loved you banner today, by the way!
…….. Richard Gordon has just informed me that the odious creature will be on briefly later this afternoon. Fortunately I’ll be away doing other things by then.
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 11:35
and p78 ditto for ‘We have not had sight of an Asbestos Risk Assessment relative to the subjects and cannot report that they are free from risk in this respect. Accordingly, we have made the assumption that such an investigation would not disclose the presence of any such material in any adverse situation or condition.’
…………
TW
Very interesting………
Green may have shot himself in the foot for the sake of a couple of £m
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Owners of buildings built before 2000 have a duty to manage the presence of Asbestos under the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012
See
http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg223.pdf
The presence of asbestos is something you either know from the construction specifications or you discover it from statutory records like an ARA report
Clearly the Surveyor has covered himself by making no provision for asbestos in his valuation
The real issue however is
Why?
Why was the Surveyor not given access to the most recent Asbestos Risk Assessment for Ibrox?
RFC revealed in Dec 2010 that asbestos was found in the Main Stand during repair of burst pipes. The next match due to be played was in doubt until RFC satisfied Strathclyde Police that there was no risk to people using the Main Stand.
Make no mistake
This decision could ONLY have been taken following an Asbestos Risk Assessment by properly qualified Assessors in Dec 2010
Without this ARA report, Strathclyde Police would be legally compromised by giving the go ahead. for the Main Stand to be used for football purposes
So there is at least one ARA in existence from Dec 2010 It will have been carried out by MIM possibly using an external Surveyor
Craig Whyte, Duff and Phelps and the current legal owner of Ibrox were all legally obliged to keep this record on file and provide HSE with access to it on demand
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Implications
Think about this in the context of selling your house
It is not a minor matter for a Surveyor to discount the known presence of asbestos when valuing a property. It is a grave matter to do so when the Surveyor knew the property was the subject of an Asbestos Risk Assessment in the past 2 yrs.
The Surveyor is clearly aware that an Asbestos Risk Assessment was carried out. As professionals he should have requested sight of this report If so it appears the request was refused
By continuing with the valuation the Surveyor ends up with a meaningless valuation that would be unacceptable to any potential purchaser
At worse the presence of asbestos could cause the Main Stand to be permanently closed or even demolished. At best an annual ARA would be carried out and accruals made in the accounts for remedial works to be done at some future date
However in the context of the Prospectus it is extremely useful to ignore the known presence of asbestos in the Main Stand
It means that no provision is made anywhere in the Prospectus for either the capital or the on-going revenue cost associated with the presence of asbestos in the Main Stand
@MattLindsayET: Banner in the Stirling Albion end at Ibrox read: “More Like 140 Days”. #upye!
From BBC live text commentary page:
BBC Sportsound’s Chick Young has exclusively revealed… that two SPL players will be heading to Ibrox once their transfer ban has been lifted…
Drew, Gers fan. “Who are the players Chick is mentioning bound for Rangers after ban is lifted?”
Not sure Drew, he’s keeping his cards close to his chest…
Anonymous: “Is Chick saying he has evidence of players being tapped by Rangers while in contract then?”
Celtic Underground @celticrumours
The following post appears to have disappeared from ff. Its entitled “don’t buy shares…” … Unless you like (cont) http://tl.gd/k9e3m8
The following post appears to have disappeared from ff. Its entitled “don’t buy shares…”
… Unless you like wasting your money
Sorry, but it’s a dud deal.
I have conducted this analysis purely with an investor’s hat on and my Rangers hat off.
You need to remember that most public offerings are conducted purely as an exercise to help seed investors liquidate and take profits, and this case, that is certainly the case. Following the listing, there will be up to 71m shares of RIFC, of which 33m will be left over from the pre-listing investors. Some of these, including Charles Green, bought in for 1p. The rest got in for 20p. After the float, subject to some who are bound by 12 months escrow rules, they will be able to sell their shares and take very large profits.
The price and valuation they have arrived at assumes an overall value of Rangers at £50m, which assumes a valuation of 77p/share, thereby justifying their offer price of 70p as being at a discount to the overall value. However, IMO this valuation has been derived by accounting tricks.
Take for instance, the profit figures. Well firstly they are dangerous because they only cover 3 months of operations and don’t show a full year’s operation (we all know how Celtic are very good at hiding losses by deferring them to later or earlier in a season), but nonetheless the Club claims to have profits of £13m from £40m revenue on an annualised basis. This struck me as a very high margin, which caused me to look more closely at it. The accountants have added £20m in profit by virtue of gains from negative goodwill – in other words, they bought Rangers really cheaply from Duff & Phelps, so the additional true value gets recorded as profit. No cash actually changed hands and it’s a one off, so without that extraordinary item, the club was actually losing £7m.
Then consider the cash position. It declares £4m in positive cash flows, but £7.7m of this came from equity injections. Then further consider the balance sheet: £47.7 in net assets, but £43m of this is property (Ibrox and Auchenhowie) which is very difficult to sell or use for any other purpose than what it currently is. Admittedly, the prospectus does recognise this factor, as this valuation is already heavily discounted from the £70m independent valuation, but it’s highly debatable as to whether the club could ever realise that much on sale.
As an investor, if I were going to pay 70p per share, I would be expecting annual earnings to be at least 5p/share (7% equity risk premium) which assumes that RIFC has to make a profit of no less than £20m on average annually. That’s possible, but experience tells us that is highly unlikely unless something game-changing like joining the EPL or winning the CL happens… and the prospectus tells us a move to England is not being considered.
Football clubs rarely ever pay dividends, so the only hope of recouping your investment is to sell your shares one day for far more than 70p, as the time value of money principle means your initial investment is actually eroded by inflation.
IMO, the offer is probably only worth about 30p, which is a long way short of 70p.
Now putting the Rangers hat back on, there is even more reason to be cynical about this offer. Post float, the public will only have 20% of shares. 34% are being offered privately to institutional investors (banks, pension funds, etc) and the other 46% will remain with the original investors. My experience with listed companies is that this provides no democracy at all. Institutional investors don’t get active and more or less just always support the existing directors. If they are unhappy investors, they just sell-out. So no matter how many shares you or I buy, we will never have fan control unless we buy out the original owners like Green, Khan and Mather.
Yet another example of why this is a dud deal.
Fans will be better advised to save their money and invest it in things like tickets and merchandise and make them earn it the hard way, rather than allowing them to cash out their profits Facebook style.
goosygoosy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 16:07
————————————
A disclaimer regarding the asbestos risk, and no sight of the title deed does not seem to be a very thorough valuation.
———
Condition of Buildings
Our inspection of the subjects did not constitute a structural survey nor did we inspect woodwork or other parts of the structure which were covered, unexposed or inaccessible. Also, the various services have not been tested and we are not in a position, therefore, to report that any of the properties are free from defects.
We have not had sight of an Asbestos Risk Assessment relative to the subjects and cannot report that they are free from risk in this respect. Accordingly, we have made the assumption that such an investigation would not disclose the presence of any such material in any adverse situation or condition.
————–
But bear in mind this is a Depreciated Replacement Cost, as I understand it, how much it would cost to rebuild the stadium, as opposed to a value if they were to sell it.
————-
IBROX STADIUM, 150 EDMISTON DRIVE, GLASGOW
Total value, calculated on a Depreciated Replacement Cost
basis –
£65,200,000 (SIXTY FIVE MILLION TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS)
allocated as –
Buildings
£61,500,000 (SIXTY ONE MILLION FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS)
Land
£3,700,000 (THREE MILLION SEVEN HUNDRED THOUSAND POUNDS)
Good concise analysis from the FF deleted dude there.
Probably irrelevant though.
The Rangers fans know deep down they’re being lied to but also know they are not able to do anything about it. Not buying shares ensures their club fails faster. Buying shares buys them time to find another solution, which will eventually be forced on them when Green exits.
goosygoosy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 16:07
…
It means that no provision is made anywhere in the Prospectus for either the capital or the on-going revenue cost associated with the presence of asbestos in the Main Stand
================================
Great spot gg.
The average person in the street – who knows nothing about construction, [like me], – at least appreciates that anything to do with asbestos work today is seriously expensive.
As you noted, you would expect this risk – and certainly some financial provisions – to be recorded in the Prospectus.
It would seem that TRFC doesn’t like making financial provisions – a bit like that other Govan club that died during the summer !
And at what point could the Prospectus be declared invalid/misleading/etc, if at all ?
Does anyone know if a Prospectus has ever been ‘pulled’/revised prior to a proposed flotation before ?
[Or would Cenko take the flak after the event ?]
I believe there is a class action in progress against the RBS directors who encouraged shareholders to double down on new shares without disclosing the full extent of the bank’s problems.
If there is salient information omitted from the prospectus, any investors who in future feel deceived may have recourse to the courts.
goosygoosy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 16:07
Re: your comments on asbestos in Ibrox.
Last year in his Daily Record column and on ‘Your Call’ on BBC Scotland, Jim Traynor referred to necessary repairs at Ibrox, which would cost between £12 and £14 million. This was shortly after the infamous burst pipes episode that caused at least one home fixture there to be postponed. I thought this piece of information was significant as there was no mention of these costly repairs elsewhere in the MSM. I was puzzled why Traynor, of all people, should be the one to publicise the bad news. There was no denial from Rangers that the trouble existed or that Traynor’s figure was a grossly inflated version of the true cost.
At the time, I commented about Traynor’s assertions on the RTC blog as I thought the repairs related to asbestos. Although Traynor did not use the word asbestos I suspected that what he was talking about was a ticking financial bomb. The fact that the surveyor has now had to heavily qualify his report suggests that the incoming director of communications was not too far off the mark.
Mr GWB
IMO, the offer is probably only worth about 30p, which is a long way short of 70p.
Now putting the Rangers hat back on, there is even more reason to be cynical about this offer. Post float, the public will only have 20% of shares. 34% are being offered privately to institutional investors (banks, pension funds, etc) and the other 46% will remain with the original investors. My experience with listed companies is that this provides no democracy at all. Institutional investors don’t get active and more or less just always support the existing directors. If they are unhappy investors, they just sell-out.
—————-
Gawd almighty, so L&G et al buy shares at 70p which are probably worth 30p, and expect to make money for their policyholders as well as pay their own wages. They must be expecting one holl of a dividend.
The job of Head of Communications at Whitstheirname FC will be so much harder now that James Traynor has left the Record and the BBC.
Here’s a wee story that may help some understand.
There was a bus with 12 people a driver and a tour guide who organised things. The individuals onboard were from every part of Scotland and and they all wore different tops. On this bus they would play games such as cards and the guide and the driver were there to ensure fair play. Each individual was required to pay their way, share in the cots of deisel, road tolls and pay tax on the earnings made, you could even buy cards from opposing players. It was expected that you paid your debts and if you were raising the anti you had to have the funds to cover it. Those who were best at the game got to sit in the best seat at the front of the coach and those that were hopeless at the end of the trip got let off. At the start of any new journey there was always and eager individual ready to fill that seat of that person getting off.
One day near the end of the tour it transpired that one individuals who sat up the front in the prime seat had not being paying his dues. In fact he had been bluffing all the time and he owed everybody money. This sent shockwaves throughout the bus, as this was a well respected person, there was turmoil. The driver and the tour guide loved this person so they were very sad indeed when all this came to light. The other 11 guys on the bus looked at the rules and expected the driver and tour guide to implement them, the individual had to be relegated to the back of the bus. He was relagated for the rest of the tour and his spending curbed and the tour thankfully came to the end. This shamed individual got off the bus but seemed to show little remorse for his actions. He felt he had done what he needed to do, to be a winner regardless of how he did it. Everybody was after him for money owed when he got off the bus, the hope was that he would be helped out by pals and he could get back on the bus for the next tour. He would start on the back seat and work his way to the front on this luxury coach. His pals howevr deserted him in his hour of need as his debts were so bad.
Well help ma boad jings and crivens does this deceitful person not die, his debts were many and under the pressure of it all he had collapsed and died, leaving this trail of debt. Bizarelly someone came along and bought his clothing, his suitcase, his house and his ticket for the bus at a car boot sale. The bus was due to leave on its next tour and bizarelly this person came along and claimed to be the same person and wanted to get on the bus. He claimed debts had been paid and he was that person and everything was fine. The driver and the guide thought as he looked and dressed as the previous individual, he stayed in the same house and had bought his bus ticket ,he surely should be allowed on. The 11 said NO, this was a wolf in sheeps clothing, this is against the rules of fair play, it was morally wrong, he must join the queue at the back of the bus stop and wait his turn to get back on, he is not the same person. Even those who ran a European bus tour said he could not join them as he was not the same person. Sadly ever since then this person has been threatning those on the bus and trying to disrupt it. He is claiming and telling everyone that he was thrown off the bus and that he was treated badly. The reality of course is he was not thrown off the bus, that person had got off and died. So if you haven’t been on the bus you cannot get on it but unfortunately this person does not see it that way and keep trying to disrupt the tour.
A sad tale indeed and somehow it would be better for all if the impersonator died or owned up that he isn’t the same person and that he is sorry for causing such an upset. Maybe then he can finally get back on the coach.
If it is the case that there was a game cancelled at Ibrox in the past due to the presence of asbestos then its possible that Strathclyde Police and/or the environmental health department at Glasgow City Council hold information to that effect. That information may be recoverable via an information request which requires a response under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.
Can anyone confirm the game in question and the date(s)?
dedeideoprofundis says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 17:08
—————-
Gawd almighty, so L&G et al buy shares at 70p which are probably worth 30p, and expect to make money for their policyholders as well as pay their own wages. They must be expecting one holl of a dividend.
__________________________________________
Making money is equally about reducing tax as it is about earning.
Remember!!!
Capital losses can help cut your tax bills.
Traynor getting a bit of a pasting from Tom English and Stuart Cosgrove on Beeb.
With regard to the question of Asbestos at the Debt Dome
As far as I am aware, as long as you do no work that disturbs the material, then you are under no obligation to deal with it
You do however have to be aware of its existence, and make anyone working within the building aware of it
briggsbhoy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 17:45
There was a bus with 12 people a driver and a tour guide who organised thing
……………….
Brilliant BB
there once was a trucculent bam
who feasted on succulent lamb
he was daves man in print
till chuck took the hint
and hired him to sell his flim flam
martybhoy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 18:12
goosygoosy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 18:25
Cheers, Ticket(b)us, I like it.
For me what people tend to forget is that Rangers did play in the SPL to the end of the season. In the close season they went bust therefore rules applied or not as the case me be they automatically forfitted their place. Nobody kicked them out, it was the wolf in the sheeps clothing that turned up that was. Sheep! there’s another anology in there 🙂
jeez who doesnt like a limerick?
hiya jim.
With Traynor’s appointment at ‘The Rangers’ confirmed today how do we, the bampots, now assess his conduct during this whole affair?
More importantly how to the media themselves view this. Is there a more balanced view of the basics of this story required from them.
Is it time to ask why most of the pundits have either played for old Rangers, or have connections to them, and why they constantly toe the club’s party line?
Dodds, Fergusson, Hately, Derek Johnstone are given free reign to spout utter nonsense. I once remember DJ refusing to discuss the ‘boozegate’ issue on radio because he would have had to give an opinion criticising a Rangers player. On the night this was laughed off. This is the level of professionalism within our media; guys paid to be pundits but are only interested in discussing issues within a tight spectrum. This should be unacceptable.
With Traynor’s position confirmed today every one of his writings and utterances on this subject, certainly over the last few months, must now be viewed in a not so flattering light.
Will questions be asked of him as to when he was first approached and asked to attend an interview? This should certainly be the very least we expect as licence payers and will give us an insight into whether Traynor really was acting independently or if he was working on the inside.
Perhaps the media in this country should now consider giving a platform to the ‘reality view’ of this story and allow it to breathe the free air.
Who knows it might even increase circulation and allow an adult debate to occur on this story.
Media the next move is yours. Do you remain behind the story slagging off everyone not on the same page or do you now, after months, take a long hard look in the mirror and change.
Long Time Lurker says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 17:4
Can anyone confirm the game in question and the date(s)?
—————–
There was a game v St Mirren cancelled 18th december 2010. Could that have been the one?
Congratulations to Jim Traynor in his appointment to Sevco.Clearly man and new club were made for one another.
The Judicial Panel and Process
The Scottish FA is responsible for administering disciplinary procedures for its member clubs. This is essential in protecting the integrity and reputation of the game at all levels, while also providing guidelines of acceptable behaviour for clubs. As part of our new strategic plan, the disciplinary procedures were radically overhauled to provide greater efficiency, accountability and transparency.
The evolution of the game necessitated such widespread changes to our disciplinary rules and the implementation of a FastTrack process has already proven to be successful. The appointment of the first-ever compliance officer, Vincent Lunny, has ensured greater focus and legal enforceability of the disciplinary rules.
Equally, the creation of a Judicial Panel cab rank system has ensured independence of decision-making and a diversity of skills on each panel. These changes are based on two key principles:
Principle 1 – Economic and expeditious justice. The objective of the Protocol is to secure the Determination of disciplinary proceedings arising in respect of Association Football and that decisions are made economically and expeditiously in a fair manner. Tribunals appointed from the Judicial Panel may impose reasonable procedural requirements on Parties to ensure that matters are dealt with economically and expeditiously.
Principle 2 – Decision making in a civil and footballing context. Whilst adhering to the general principles of fairness, and where appropriate, with consideration of underlying principles of law, those submitting to this Protocol acknowledge that these provisions relate to the Determination of matters arising from any breach of the Articles and/or the Disciplinary Rules, which govern the operation of Association Football in Scotland in a civil context, and that Tribunals may make appropriate Determinations in that civil and footballing context.
.take from the sfa website do you think they will act against sevco on their stance of not the ticket allocation
Lord Wobbly says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 14:52
“Rangers FC as we know them are dead. It’s all over. They are about to shut down for ever but not a single person among the game’s hierarchy was open for comment.
And that just about sums it up for Rangers, the club the rest of the Scottish game came to detest.”
… “They’ll slip into liquidation within the next couple of weeks with a new company emerging but 140 years of history, triumph and tears, will have ended.”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/james-traynor-spl-will-not-be-able-1129166
======
I’m really looking forward to hearing what Mr T says he actually meant by that … 🙂
How did the Wake go today?
Wiz there 3 chairs for the deceased?
As for asbestos, it’s a thing I have to deal with sometimes – though usually the HSE take the lead on it.
I believe that as long as it’s not disturbed then it’s not a very big deal. Very much depends on what kind of asbestos material is involvred.
Stuff like bonded asbestos roofing sheets are not a problem – many farm buildings still have them on. However, when they do get removed, they must be disposed of to an authorised facility, and can not be re-used e.g. to re-roof another shed.
Therefore, any FOI requests may be best directed to HSE. Local authority probably were never very interested (Planning, maybe), and SEPA couldn’t care less until it comes to the disposal stage.
martybhoy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 19:52
‘You’re right, of course.
I wouldn’t suggest that the betrayal of principle of ,say, a mere sports hack, bears any comparison to that of those two medical men.
That was, indeed, a tad hyperbolic.
I should just have observed that it is a bit unprofessional for a journalist secretly to abandon neutrality and objectivity on a matter of public interest while using a position of influence ( which you and I as taxpayers pay for) to propagate a distorted, one-sided view of affairs in favour of an organisation which has offered him some inducement.
Not that any journalist would ever stoop to behaving in such a way.Heaven forfend that I should suggest such a thing.
TW (@tartanwulver) says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 10:29
I’m no accountant, but perhaps those who are could give an interpretation of the financial reporting? My layman’s view of the info is that the main boosts to income from the company’s start to 31st August 2012 come from p49 ‘non-recurring items’ of £17m or so which note 6 gives as ‘release of negative goodwill’, and p50 ‘gains on property revaluation’ of £33m or so. So (if I’m reading that properly, which may not be the case) that’s £50m+ of items which are no doubt standard and in line with good accounting practice, but are nevertheless theoretical. Perhaps other money can be borrowed against them, in which case they may have a ‘real money’ effect?
==========================================================================
TW…you are spt on re the “…realease of negative goodwill” and “…gains on property revaluation” items, both amounting to £50m…and both items virtually buried in a mass of “notes to the accounts”…followed by “notes within notes to the accounts”. Two items of massive one-off relevance and backed by absolutely nothing, be it tangible assets or quality future revenue streams.
I have just returned from a day out with a former City stockbroker and I showed him the “prospectus”…and I have never seen him laugh so much in all the years I have known him.
“…and you Scots are supposed to be canny…who on earth will put a penny into this fairy tale?” was his final remark.
Tommy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 16:59
goosygoosy says:
Saturday, December 8, 2012 at 16:07
Re: your comments on asbestos in Ibrox.
========================================
The burst pipes and asbestos rings true because asbestos used to be the favourite material to lag steam and hot pipes so if you has a burst then your going to have exposed asbestos and then probs doing the repair. I can’t remember the actual abestos type names now but the one used for lagging ha a high carcinogenic factor.
I don’t know whether asbestos lagging was used in cold pipes but there’s a good chance it was basically because they would be using it with hot pipes and back then insulation values weren’t really understood the way they are now – so even if it wasn’t a great cold pipe insulator it would get used IMHO.
Asbestos
Should have said that asbestos was also heavily used to lag exposed steelwork to protect it from fire as naked steel, without protection, twists and buckles and causes structural collapse and there’s a helluva lot of steelwork framing if fitba stadiums.
Post concerning possible postponement of the NY Derby in 2011 at:
http://celticfanzone.net/strathclyde-police-pass-ibrox-park-fit-safe-for-new-years-derby-game1/
“Following the damage at Ibrox from the recent thaw and burst pipes which caused the postponement of an SPL match the plumbers trying to repair the pipes combined with electricians doing some re-wiring then found asbestos in the old building …”
Sounds like pipe lagging could be the prime suspect. Asbestos lagging is one of the worst types, because it’s highly prone to degrading. I wouldn’t like to be in a building with old asbestos-lagged pipes. Not at all – not even for 5 minutes, thanks.
Further to a post I made earlier today, I’ve fired much of that post onto a wee blog I’ve been doing, with a link to a Glasgow Herald newspaper report of the period http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=GGgVawPscysC&dat=19671108&printsec=frontpage&hl=en and go to page 11.
The blog is largely filled with information from http://historicwarriors.comuv.com/index_files/page0053.htm
Anyway, it shows that the MSM have, for a long time, been quite a bit in favour of slanting reports in certain direction! ‘Rangers win fight to reorganise the Scottish Football league’ we are informed on 8th November 1967, yet that wasn’t really true, was it?
From the Morning Star:
Waistcoat Walter said: “Rangers exists in my head and in my heart and I’ll go through the rest of my life believing the titles and cups we won over the course of the last 140 years stay on the club’s record.
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/news/content/view/full/126960
——
Indeed, the titles and cups – at least, those which were fairly won – will stay on the Club’s record.
A record which, as confirmed by the TRFC Director of Communication, came to an end in the summer.
So, presumably there will be some kind of detailed impartial analysis in the two main Sunday papers of The Rangers share offer. It is of course big news and a story of national interest in Scotland.
Do you think I should look in the business or the sport section for this?
Maybe i’ll need to wait till the Monday edition of the FT, although their reporters initial assessment was not good. That was pre the prospectus of course.
Loving the magical money out of thin air on the revaluation of the fixed assets in the Rangers prospectus.
Thats straight out of the Moonbeam playbook.
Banker: ‘We cant lent you any more money, you have nothing to secure the debt against’
Minty: ‘If I have someone say Ibrox and Murray park are worth £121M can I borrow more money?’
Banker: ‘How much would you like?’
Truly masters of the universe.