The Real Battle Begins?

Avatar ByTrisidium

The Real Battle Begins?

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.

About the author

Avatar

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,018 Comments so far

Avatar

easternexpatPosted on6:56 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Easy Jambo

Mr Green, can you confirm that TRFC are the true owners of Murray Park and will it be renamed, as you proposed early in your tenure?

View Comment

valentinesclown

valentinesclownPosted on7:09 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Easy Jambo

Mr Green if you could change your surname to sell shares would you?

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on7:21 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Mr Green’s statement:

“The Rangers Football Club believes the players’ objections were incompetent …”

… blah blah blah edited out …

“Also, a number of former players have already signed agreements with the Club waiving any right to participate in this claim.”

——

If TRFC believed objections were “incompetent” (i.e. players had no right to object), then why on earth did they get players to sign away the rights to raise such objections that they never had?

My sense of smell seems to be failing me – I can’t make out whether the odour is of haddock or Melton Mowbray’s finest.

View Comment

Avatar

easyJamboPosted on7:25 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Please direct your questions to the Scotland Tonight facebook page, not to me 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on7:25 pm - Dec 11, 2012


I am not a Facebook user, but i believe someone needs to ask the right question re: Ibrox. Any question with wriggle room will be wriggled out of.

Maybe, “Who is the legal owner of Ibrox Stadium and Murray Park?”

Also, how about “Which Euro 2012 players were likely to sign for TRFC, and have TRFC been tapping Ryan Fraser while he’s still in contract at Aberdeen?”

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on7:26 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Me: “If TRFC believed objections were “incompetent” (i.e. players had no right to object), then why on earth did they get players to sign away the rights to raise such objections that they never had?”

Bit ambiguous. Of course, I meant rights they never had, not objections they never had. 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

ordinaryfanPosted on7:30 pm - Dec 11, 2012


You would have thought the presenters/journalists at STV would have more than enough to ask Chuckles themselves. Obviously not.

View Comment

Avatar

billyj1Posted on7:34 pm - Dec 11, 2012


You are wasting your time sending in any questions to STV. The whole thing will be prescripted to aid and abet the share issue. There will be no difficult questions, merely a platform for Green to spout more rubbish.

View Comment

Avatar

campsiejoePosted on8:09 pm - Dec 11, 2012


wjohnston1 @19:34

I am just waiting for one of the members of the MSM to ask Charlie the immortal question :-

“Charlie, why are you so good”

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on8:12 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Easy Jambo

Mr Green, is it true that some supporters groups have asked you to consider a name change by deed poll? It’s been rumoured that fans would like to see you with a more quintessentially British name such as Charles Saxe-Coburg-Gotha.

🙂

View Comment

Avatar

nowoldandgrumpyPosted on8:17 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Surely they will get George Osborne on as well so Chuckie can give him some tips. Though George does not need any help fleecing those that can least afford it.

View Comment

Avatar

youtawknabootPosted on8:30 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 18:48
Charles Green will be live in the #scotnight studio at 10.30pm tonight. Send us questions you want to put to the Rangers CEO
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Q:1
Mr Green,do you still hold the track & field record at your old school.
Q:2
Why were you sooo fast.

Jim White SSN

View Comment

Avatar

youtawknabootPosted on8:33 pm - Dec 11, 2012


campsiejoe says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 20:09
Apols cj..refreshed & read your post..after posting my own 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

goosyPosted on8:41 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Craig Whyte sold 4yrs of RFC STs to Ticketus for £24.5m through his wholly owned co Wavetower later renamed RFCG. He used £18m to clear the RFC debt to LBG by purchasing the LBG floating charge security over Ibrox and MP. This meant RFC owed RFCG £18m instead of owing £18m to LBG
Whyte purchased RFC for £1 prior to the date when he took over the £18m debt owed by RFC to LBG. The money transfers from Ticketus to RFCG lawyers, Collyer Bristow and onwards to LBG were synchronised to ensure RFCG legally owned RFC when Whyte made the ST deal with Ticketus
This strongly suggests RFCGs floating charge over RFC was legal then and is still legal.
In late 2011 RFCG borrowed an undisclosed sum from Close Leading. As security Whyte gave Close Leasing a repayment priority that ranked higher than his own RFCG floating charge in the event of RFC being liquidated.
In April 2012 another Whyte co called Liberty Corporate (sole director Whytes Dad Thomas Whyte) took out a floating charge over RFCG. This means that in the event of RFCG being liquidated the RFC floating charge over RFC would pass from RFCG to Liberty Corporate
In July 2012 RFCG applied for winding up or liquidation. This application was opposed in Aug 2012 and remains in that state. It is not known who opposed this application.
On 25 Sept 2012 Liberty Corporate applied for winding up or liquidation. This application was opposed on 6 Dec 2012 and remains in that state. It is not known who opposed this application.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
What can we deduce from the above?
Firstly
The RFCG floating charge was alive and well in July 2012 otherwise there would be no rush by Whyte to liquidate RFCG and pass the charge to Liberty Corporate He had other reasons for wanting RFCG liquidated like burying accounts and records of its dealings with RFC and Ticketus
Secondly
The RFCG floating charge was alive and well on 25 Sept 2012 otherwise there would be no rush to liquidate Liberty Corporate and pass the charge to yet another 3rd party company
Ah ha you say
Maybe the £18m floating charge was dead and buried when BDO took over at end Aug and that’s why these 2 cos are being wound up.?
Not so
If this floating charge had been cancelled in some way then BDO are obliged to register a discharge at Companies House. Likewise the Close Leasing floating charge continues until BDO register its discharge
Part of the puzzle could be solved if we knew the names on the latest list of Creditors and how much each of them is claiming. We now know Ticketus are definitely on the list but since they had a 4 yr. deal with RFC they could have opted to be a Creditor simply for the outstanding ST monies due to be paid in July 2012. They could have done a deal with Green on the balance of their ST debt. If Whyte and his £27.5m floating charge are on the BDO Creditors List then he is unlikely to get anything back once Close Leasing, D&P and BDO are paid. Unless of course he swopped his floating charge for shares in RIFC

View Comment

bawsman

bawsmanPosted on8:43 pm - Dec 11, 2012


youtawknaboot says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 20:30

Q:1
Mr Green,do you still hold the track & field record at your old school.
Q:2
Why were you sooo fast.

Jim White SSN

——————————————————————-

Probably cause he needed to be mate 😉

View Comment

Avatar

cowanpetePosted on8:43 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Subject change….

The Press are talking about “Celtic asking for their fixtures to be rescheduled” – even though apparently CFC have not in fact requested this.
However I am of the belief that CFC have in fact weakened their case if they DO make this request by postponing an SPL match in August so they could play a friendly.

View Comment

Avatar

youtawknabootPosted on8:57 pm - Dec 11, 2012


No fear….J.T will be in situ, of this you can be 100% certain.Filtering out the difficult questions for you..you know, the pesky tinternet blogger ones which will require truthful & straight forward answers.

View Comment

Avatar

SeniorPosted on8:57 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Charles on SSN. ” parents of two players of the 67 said to me that they are outraged that their 28/30 year old sons are taking a claim against Oldco. The parents, he suggests, should go around to the office of PFA and grab someone by the throat”
He appears to be in big trouble regarding these 67 players contracts being altered without them being legally informed.
He states that he went into the dressing room at St Johnston and told them, between jokes, that their jobs are in a tenuous position. Must be a big dressing room at St Johnston!
Rumour has it again the SPL do not regard it as a serious breach of the rules a team having 50 subs in the dressing room.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:05 pm - Dec 11, 2012


A PUZZLE

Chico is the only director of Sevco 5088 Ltd but the company isn’t mentioned on the Prospectus as a company he has a directorship in as is required by AIM Regulation. But he isn’t required to declare a directorship in companies in the RFCL Group or the Rangers Group. See note below.

However the relevant section of the Propectus for subsidiary companies doesn’t mention Sevco 5088 Ltd. Could it be a Holding Company rather than a subsidiary?

Or has chico just forgotten Sevco 5088 Ltd?

NOTE:
7. Directorships and Partnerships
Save as set out below, neither any Director nor any Key Employee referred to in paragraph 2.4 above has held any directorships of any company, other than in relation to companies in the RFCL Group or the Rangers Group, or been a partner in a partnership at any time in the five years prior to the date of this document.

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on9:49 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Senior says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 20:57

Charles on SSN. ” parents of two players of the 67 said to me that they are outraged that their 28/30 year old sons are taking a claim against Oldco. The parents, he suggests, should go around to the office of PFA and grab someone by the throat”

——

Firstly, I’m glad my boss wasn’t speaking to my mum and dad about my work when I was 28/30 years old.

Secondly, surely the CEO of an SFA member club should not be advocating such behaviour by the parents of his obviusly spoiled brats, or anyone else who may be stupid enough to take the hint and act on his comment?

Are the SFA listening? (Gollum with his fingers in his lugs, shaking his head and going “not listening, not listening!” comes to mind.)

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on9:59 pm - Dec 11, 2012


cowanpete says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 20:43
TD 10

… CFC have in fact weakened their case …
——

Thou shalt not seek to criticise Celtic, nor sayeth thou any thing which casteth them not in a positive light. Doeth thou this and thou shalt be mightily smitten with thumbs down. Expecteth thou no reply explaining this thy just punishment, being that thou art a supporter of a diddy team.

🙂

View Comment

Avatar

liveinhopPosted on10:07 pm - Dec 11, 2012


sevcos scottish cup hopes took a major hit tonight as motherwell crashed out the cup

View Comment

Avatar

The GlenPosted on10:09 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Re my post at 17:29 in connection with ownership of the assets of RFC – are the thumbs down because people don’t think it’s true, or because people don’t want it to be true?

Genuine question, not trolling. Honest!

View Comment

Avatar

ordinaryfanPosted on10:16 pm - Dec 11, 2012


angus1983 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 21:59
4 2 Rate This
cowanpete says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 20:43
TD 10

… CFC have in fact weakened their case …
——

Thou shalt not seek to criticise Celtic, nor sayeth thou any thing which casteth them not in a positive light. Doeth thou this and thou shalt be mightily smitten with thumbs down. Expecteth thou no reply explaining this thy just punishment, being that thou art a supporter of a diddy team.

…..

I gave it a thumbs down because it was a silly comment.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on10:28 pm - Dec 11, 2012


wondering if the time will ever come that Green will show the title deeds on TV the same way Obama had to produce his birth certificate to prove to doubters he was born an American.
Maybe Traynor has decided Scotland Tonight will be that time??

View Comment

Avatar

bobferrisPosted on10:47 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Saw a little nugget on SSN that said Rangers have sold 37,000 season tickets for NEXT season already. Haven’t seen this mentioned anywhere. So their fans have, in the middle of a recession and in the run up to Christmas, already shelled out for football they won’t see for another 9 months. They really are the greatest supporters around/biggest mugs around *delete as appropriate.

View Comment

Avatar

youtawknabootPosted on10:52 pm - Dec 11, 2012


wottpi says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 22:28
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey ….there’s more chance of Charlie flashin the title deeds to the white house…
than the deeds to the big house..

View Comment

Avatar

Flocculent ApoideaPosted on10:57 pm - Dec 11, 2012


“Some players have stayed when they need not have”
Charles Green, October 2012

To me, that reads as meaning the others all refused to transfer to the newco, as that was their right. They had a few of hours between Sevco being granted a form of membership to become a football club and their playing their first game at Brechin. As a professional footballer, why TUPE to a non-club?
Anyone in the media want to highlight this?

View Comment

Avatar

nostarsandbarredPosted on10:58 pm - Dec 11, 2012


youtawknaboot…

Is that a typo ? did you mean the Whyte house ?

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on11:00 pm - Dec 11, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 22:09

Re my post at 17:29 in connection with ownership of the assets of RFC – are the thumbs down because people don’t think it’s true, or because people don’t want it to be true?
——

I’d say there’s a percentage of people who don’t want it to be true, and a higher percentage of people who think it isn’t true.

The reasoning being that there is no transparency. All any TRFC spokesman needs to do is say “Look, here are the title deeds, now shut up about it.” Even just show them to Bomber Broon, and it’d soon become common knowledge.

You have to admit that it’s a little strange that at no point has ownership been made clear. Normally, I’d say “who cares” – but being as the value of these assets appears to be built into the prospectus (which is itself a little cagey about the issue) then I’d think it would be fairly important.

View Comment

Avatar

youtawknabootPosted on11:01 pm - Dec 11, 2012


5starsorbehindbars says:

I did 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on11:01 pm - Dec 11, 2012


… fairly important to those considering investing, at least.

View Comment

Avatar

Billy BoycePosted on11:02 pm - Dec 11, 2012


summary of tonight’s hard hitting interview by John MacKay:

“Sir charles, why are you so good?”

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on11:05 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Plenty for us to get our teeth into with that interview. I’ll start. “This witch hunt to strip titles.” Eh no. I’ve said all along that I’ll be disappointed if you only get titles stripped. Results and consequences Chuckie. Results and consequences.

That said, I am of course prepared to be disappointed.

View Comment

Avatar

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on11:09 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Wonder how much chuckles had to pay for that advertising slot on tonights “news” programme

oh wait, wonder if STV tupe’d over to remain THE rangers media partner.

also, didn’t the number “67” in relation to the unnamed players taking action against the club come from his own prospectus – a number which he went on to rubbish claiming the club only had 51 players to transfer over?

View Comment

Avatar

billyj1Posted on11:10 pm - Dec 11, 2012


I posted earlier tonight suggesting that anyone thinking of sending in a question to STV was wasting their time because I thought that the content would have been prescripted. I possibly got a bit of that wrong. Not only was it prescripted, it looked to me as though it was prerecorded.. On another point even in an interview lasting no more than 10 minutes Mr Green managed to trip himself up. When asked what would happen to the shares that were left if the fans dont take up the offer to purchase he first of all stated that they would be handed back to the Institutional investors who were over subscribed. He then went on to say if there were any left he would buy them. Which is it Charlie boy?

View Comment

Avatar

doontheslopePosted on11:12 pm - Dec 11, 2012


The Ghost interviewer, “But, Charles, the SPL clubs didn’t kick you out of the league.”

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on11:13 pm - Dec 11, 2012


wottpi says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 22:28

wondering if the time will ever come that Green will show the title deeds on TV the same way Obama had to produce his birth certificate to prove to doubters he was born an American.
Maybe Traynor has decided Scotland Tonight will be that time??
===============================================================

The doubters still didn’t believe Obama and claimed it was a fake.

Thought chico was looking down tonight. Why wasn’t he asked what the discounted price to the institutional investors was as I don’t think they’ll be paying 70p a share.

And what about the original investors how many of them are locked-in.

And he’s still havering-on about having £8 million up hi sleeve from the institutions if the fans don’t buy as the isue was oversubscribed. Just wait foe another world record on shares sold. Last time he declared that Sheffield was a British record for oversubscription in footie shares.

And his shares at 1p a time – don’t the masses need to know?

But a change on SPL – looks as though he’ll join if they don’t take away any titles. So is this going to be the fix – titles are left and Rangers returns to SPL?

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on11:14 pm - Dec 11, 2012


thanks again for coming in charles…do you know the people involved in blue pitch holding and are they as nice as you.
yes and yes.

where can i sign up for my shares please?

thanks again for coming in.

View Comment

Avatar

The GlenPosted on11:19 pm - Dec 11, 2012


angus1983 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 23:00

Thanks for your reply Angus.

I agree with all of your comments – why no spokesman for the “Club” has never came out and produced the evidence, I don’t know. It does seem strange. But this whole affair is almost beyond strange.

I have read many posts on TSFM where folks are seemingly happy to write to/email various governing bodies to ask for details of many different things concerning The Rangers Football Club, but I have yet to read a comment from anyone who has actually written to the Land Register to ask “who owns Ibrox Stadium etc”. it would only take 10 minutes of their time to find out. No FOI is required. It’s all there for anyone to see.

Maybe it’s not the answer folks want?

As an aside, I enjoy your posts questioning what seems to be the status quo here.

Not The Status Quo, obv.

What an band, back in the day.

View Comment

Avatar

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on11:19 pm - Dec 11, 2012


wjohnston1 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 23:10
0 0 Rate This
I posted earlier tonight suggesting that anyone thinking of sending in a question to STV was wasting their time because I thought that the content would have been prescripted. I possibly got a bit of that wrong. Not only was it prescripted, it looked to me as though it was prerecorded.. On another point even in an interview lasting no more than 10 minutes Mr Green managed to trip himself up. When asked what would happen to the shares that were left if the fans dont take up the offer to purchase he first of all stated that they would be handed back to the Institutional investors who were over subscribed. He then went on to say if there were any left he would buy them. Which is it Charlie boy?

———————————————————————

you know, i was wondering that…..and i was thinking……the prospectus states these investors have PLEDGED to invest

Could it be that they have agreed to UNDERWRITE up to that amount?

so basically, if the bears don’t buy in at all, he’s raised £17M from the institutions (pinch of salt with that number btw)

however, if the bears buy in 100%, then the fans will have the shares and these institutional investors won’t be parting with a penny.

Could the institutions have been offered a cheaper deal to underwrite a number of shares – so, for example, any not taken by the bears can be snapped up at, oh, 35p by the institutions – and in return for that exposure, maybe they get a 10% payment if the full allocation is taken?

interesting that months ago Chuckles was claiming fans had pledged 17M, then he’s claiming that institutions have pledged 17M

you think he’s expecting all the supporters pledges to come in and the institutions don’t need to part with a penny?

and his consortium will have a majority shareholding in the company and enough cash to repay their initial investment – plus a return on investment

chuckles and co then sell their majority sake to blueknights/cardigan/other rangers type for…oh, 5 or 6M and the fans have a good share in the club with a rangers man in top at ibrox playing football…..

then the fun really begins

View Comment

Avatar

tomtomPosted on11:30 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Chuck is beginning to sound like the guy in your street who only got a game because he owned the football.

“They’re my cups and titles, I bought them and when I leave I’m taking them with me”

View Comment

Avatar

doontheslopePosted on11:34 pm - Dec 11, 2012


Not the Huddle

You nailed it, my friend. Charles Green put in the prospectus that 67 players were taking action against Rangers. That is where the information came from, Charles Green.

He came on television and ridiculed that figure, as if it was so called, ‘Rangers haters’ who fancifully came up with it.

Tam Cowan/Stuart Cosgrove, please rip this guy a new one, ffs.

View Comment

Avatar

paulsatimPosted on11:51 pm - Dec 11, 2012


For those who missed CG, Courtesy AMAC on CM

http://youtu.be/mvsdch0bDJo

Sendspace download for overseas posters
http://www.sendspace.com/file/fuxg8p

View Comment

Avatar

doontheslopePosted on12:01 am - Dec 12, 2012


Jeez, that interview is better than I originally gave it credit for.

Interviewer, quizzing Green about the institutional investors, asks, “Who are these people?”

Lol.

View Comment

Avatar

borussiabeefburgPosted on12:05 am - Dec 12, 2012


Been out tonight, an old ex-Rangers friend of mine, now living in London and a season ticket holder at Old Trafford is home for a week, so we were out in Stirling for a few pints. Thus missed Green on telly.

Pleased to see my friend, and miss the programme, and my old pal never mentioned Scottish football.

Does that about sum the situation up?

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on12:10 am - Dec 12, 2012


Just watched the latest CG public address ,we may regret him saying that if the gullible don,t buy the shares ,he will buy them himself .I think the last time that was said ,us the taxpayers ended up footing the bill .
Also it said that the sevco fans only have till next week to buy shares ,with the prospectus only being revealed last week ,is this normal .One week to digest a 140 page legal document before parting with £500 min .

View Comment

Avatar

ordinaryfanPosted on12:18 am - Dec 12, 2012


Titles won’t leave Ibrox because Charles Green bought them and he owns them. Can’t argue with that logic.
Charles Green struggled here with a scripted interview. He is just a Craig Whyte without the Jitters.

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on12:28 am - Dec 12, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 23:19
3 3 Rate This
angus1983 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 23:00

…. But this whole affair is almost beyond strange.

I have read many posts on TSFM where folks are seemingly happy to write to/email various governing bodies to ask for details of many different things concerning The Rangers Football Club, but I have yet to read a comment from anyone who has actually written to the Land Register to ask “who owns Ibrox Stadium etc”. it would only take 10 minutes of their time to find out. No FOI is required. It’s all there for anyone to see.
—————

You’d think it would be simple to discover glenn, but maybe it’s not who owns what that’s important, as what conditions there may on that ownership. Wasn’t this what the quote from the prospectus was hinting at?

‘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.’

For all his bluster and salesman talk, Green does come across as though he is into this up to his neck. He must have staked quite a lot on this working out.

View Comment

Avatar

BunionPosted on12:38 am - Dec 12, 2012


ordinaryfan says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:18

And on that basis I reckon we should petition the Scottish Government to put funds aside to purchase a couple of World Cup championships from Italy and Spain, and a Euro championship from Greece – quite sure given current economic circumstances they’ll be open to offers.

Heck! Why are we even worrying about qualifying for international and European tournaments if they are open to the highest bidders!?

Bought the titles? Pah! Would love to see SFA/SPL/EUFA/FIFA responses to that claim.

Makes a complete and utter mockery of the sporting merit of the competitions if allowed to stand.

View Comment

Avatar

doontheslopePosted on12:39 am - Dec 12, 2012


ordinaryfan

“He is Craig Whyte without the jitters.”
—————————————————

Lol. Compare and contrast Green’s interview, with the last known public appearance by SDM, where he is visibly ill at ease.

Green hardly flinches. This man is cold, not cool.

At one point he slowly raises his hands, and I looked for the merest semblence of the Charlie Drakes. Not a jitter!

View Comment

Avatar

The GlenPosted on12:59 am - Dec 12, 2012


Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:28

In Scotland it is very simple to discover who is the registered owner of a property – as to what conditions are placed on that ownership, that is more difficult.

But many folks have posed the question as to “who owns Ibrox” – I am only going on my information.

“Free from encumbrances” is open to question. Only Leases of 20+ years and securities would be disclosed in the land registry.

All it takes is one person to contact the land register, to confirm who is the registered owner, then post it here. Pretty simple.

I have “outed” myself as a fan of a team who play in Govan (albeit from a distance, both metaphorically and literally, like yourself) but I would like to see some fairness in any discussion.

Hopefully the ever increasing thumbs down on my posts is not because of that.

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on1:04 am - Dec 12, 2012


One thing the interviewer did say though was that 9m to be allocated for Ibrokes (repairs and such ) this does seem a rather high figure .

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on1:10 am - Dec 12, 2012


Living in Surrey I did not have access to the STV interview…Having just listened to the interview kindly provided by Paulsatim…I am amazed at some of his claims…

Step forward the FTT point…

Charles Green…’we saw last week the tax tribunal come out in our favour’….really…so the tax amount that is yet to be paid outwith the appeal to the upper tier will be paid by The Rangers Football Club Limited and Mr. Green

You heard it here first folks Charlie will be paying any outstanding tax from the FTT!

Next up…Dundee Utd…

What a piss poor attempt at trying to assemble an answer….but again he stated his fans wanted a boycott and he has done what his fans wanted….so again it’s official Charlie is asking for a Boycott against a member club of the SFA…but conveniently avoided a similar discussion on Celtic…

Stripping of titles…

A witch hunt….erm…no…they are investigating whether rules were broken…if they were titles are removed…The …’I bought them’… crap he spouted is so outrageously funny I had to pause the recording until I had full control of my chuckle box…

The shares..

If they don’t buy them he will give the shares back to the institutional investors….theres an interesting comment…followed by I will buy if they don’t buy them…and here was me thinking there was 500 million fans ready to step up to the plate….confidnce seems to have diminished…so the investors buy the shares for a penny and sell the shares to the fans for 70p

Lastly

The SFA have checked all the names behind the Companies….for the fit and proper test? Really…THAT WOULD BE A FIRST….that will be the same organisation who decided Craig Whyte was fit and proper…and that Dave King was fit and proper…

His body language was uncomfortable…his presentation was guarded…in short it wasn’t great…but a right good laugh that he is allowed onto programmes like that and talk utter garbage…without challenge…

View Comment

Rob Penman

Rob PenmanPosted on1:35 am - Dec 12, 2012


A number of years ago, whilst compiling a database of football statistics going back over 100 years, I was advised to be careful about what I wanted to do with the data when finished. Apparently, Scottish football statistics are ‘owned’ by the SFA. I was very surprised because I was not aware that anyone could own statistics. I assumed that they were just out there to be used.

Anyway, my point is this, at the end of the interview, Mr. Green says “[the titles] won’t leave while I’m there, because I bought them, I own them, they’re part of the history and they will stay there”. I assume he means therefore, the actual physical trophies, flags, cups etc. that currently reside in the Ibrox trophy room. Yes, he probably does own them and I doubt very much if the football authorities, in the event of Oldco being stripped of titles, would raid the trophy room to have them removed.

The SFA’s job will be to simply alter the statistics, which they [the SFA] own, to show that the titles were negated. Mr. Green will get to keep the trinkets, which as he says, he bought and paid for but they will be of curious historical value only because the make reference to titles that do not exist. I suppose in much the same way as a double headed coin, interesting in its rarity value, but worthless as legal tender.

View Comment

Avatar

olemungobhoyPosted on1:43 am - Dec 12, 2012


So how is anyone gonna make money out of this farrago ?

Consider ………not one of Charlie Bhoy’s investors has put a penny into “Rangers International” they will only be required to do so when “Rangers International” achieves a listing on AIM.

Consider further…………. The Prospectus details what their individual shareholdings will be IF “Rangers International ” achieves a listing on AIM. So what price per share did these investors pay for the share allocations mentioned in the Prospectus ? Who knows……………. it’s not detailled in the Prospectus

Consider even further ………..Charlie Bhoy and his directors are locked in to their shareholdings (directors for 12 months/Charlie for 6 months) but his “institutional investors” are not . So I am an “institutional investor ” with “pledges” for x thousand /million shares at a discounted price of …ooh let’s say 30 p what do I do on the opening day of trading when I get my shares and thepublicy offered shares are on offer at 70p ehhhhhh………….eh……………………….I take my profit by selling my shares and so do all the other institutional investors ………………………and the share price plummets !!! Cui bono ?

Is Charlie Green about to set another world record – the largest number of people who have been persuaded to buy pigs in a poke in the run up to Christmas —-time will tell

View Comment

Avatar

Humble PiePosted on2:19 am - Dec 12, 2012


Lada for sale £500 or nearest offer.

Much -loved Lada Niva SFL3 (replica of 1872 model with new Sevco 5088 engine), Blue with red stripes and white vinyl roof, 1100cc, 54,000 miles, Fool service History, 3 owners with previous, 5 months MOT, Definitely no Tax.

Reluctant Sale – Great Xmas present – No tyre kickers.

Tel: 0800 140 1872 and ask for Charles.

View Comment

Avatar

TaysiderPosted on8:10 am - Dec 12, 2012


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/changing-landscape-is-not-aimed-at-helping-rangers-insists-rod-petrie-1-2686416

HIBERNIAN chairman Rod Petrie is adamant there is no way the future of Scottish football will be carved up to help speed Rangers’ return to the top flight. ….

“A softer financial landing takes away the threat to the very survival of a club through relegation. Neither plan is being advanced as a mechanism to provide for the accelerated promotion of Rangers. There have been constructive discussions of late and more discussions are planned for the weeks ahead. Your club will continue to play its part in these discussions at the top table of Scottish football.”

Good statement from Rod Petrie IMHO. Two major flaws with the current SPL set up; 1) the very limited scope for promotion and relegation to the SPL with no play offs, just one relegation slot and 2) the financial “cliff” that spells disaster for any relegated team and therefore motivates teams to preserve that limited scope out of fear of increasing the risk of relegation. The SPL 12/12 proposal together with adequate financial re-distribution to “smooth out” the cliff would address those issues.

Greater scope for promotion would aid Rangers once in the First Division, but fair enough on the basis that the same rules would apply to all teams seeking promotion and the changes deal with the existing issues (as above).

View Comment

Avatar

Danish PastryPosted on8:13 am - Dec 12, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:59
17 0 Rate This
Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:28

…. Hopefully the ever increasing thumbs down on my posts is not because of that.
———–

Yes, hopefully not. I agree fairness, no matter what shirt people support, must be central to any Scottish Football Monitor.

But you summed it up well with your ‘stranger than strange’ comment. When many owners are trying to offload their clubs Green is jumping in at the deep end of club ownership. He’s obviously seen some kind of money-making opportunity. When you look at the valuation figures he’s throwing around now, it must have been, in part at least, because of the absolute giveaway price he paid for the club in the first place. And perhaps there are monied people who are willing to invest in his project on the back of an emotional commitment? Stranger things have happened.

Though you do wonder about how he planned to be gone within a year with a tidy profit. He’s admitted a few tmes that his initial timetable has changed. Now there’s £9m repairs, building new bars, wages, running costs, blimey, if he pulls it off a lot of other clubs will be trying to figure out how he did it. The ugly part is that it appears he will say almost anything to keep fans onside. He no doubt reckons he won’t be hanging around long enough to live with the consequences of that.

View Comment

Avatar

stevensanphPosted on8:15 am - Dec 12, 2012


re: the stadium being owned. I agree the prospectus is unambiguous in that TRFC OWN the stadium. But what actually do they own? Do they own the freehold? Or do they own a leasehold? Maybe they just own a long term lease on the stadium, or maybe they own the freehold, but with conditions attached against it. The only people who know aren’t telling though…

The first thing I learnt when looking for investment (and yes, I have been involved in many private corporate investments) was to make sure your prospectus answered any of the doubts investors might have. One of the biggest of those will be the ownership of any assets. As no proof has been shown of what exactly they own, I take that as something is being hidden, and for that reason alone I would walk away.

View Comment

Avatar

bemused77Posted on8:26 am - Dec 12, 2012


paulmac2 says:
Monday, December 10, 2012 at 17:31
58 1 Rate This
exiledcelt says:
Monday, December 10, 2012 at 13:17
—————————————–

I am led to believe this is the case Exiled.

My mum God bless her ………pops off to the Bingo every Sunday and Wednesday and meets up with a few friends.

……………..

Rotund chap…”that’s the problem wi you rangers haters…you don’t know the facts”….eyes down…silence and off they go again…game won..

My ma…”oh a know the facts son…you’re a phanny and he’s takin you and anybody else daft enough fur a ride”…
——————————————–

Absolutely brilliant – any chance of a guest piece from Mum to clear this all up in a oner? I bet she’s never even heard of Occam’s Razor. (Wan of’ thae fancy gillette ones nae doot.)

The authors of the various bits of the far from cheap, and not exactly on time, prospectus will have asked the simple questions – who owns what, where’s the asbestos reggie, any auditor been within a mile of these accounts and the negative goodwillery.

For their professional indemnity insurance alone they will have wanted to include simple clear statements of fact. All they seem to have got was “Uhhm, dunno” or some such erudite flannel.

Simple really, live in hope and buy your shares in dunnoco, or listen to mum – she usually knows best!

View Comment

Avatar

angus1983Posted on8:39 am - Dec 12, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 23:19

… but I have yet to read a comment from anyone who has actually written to the Land Register to ask “who owns Ibrox Stadium etc”. it would only take 10 minutes of their time to find out. No FOI is required. It’s all there for anyone to see.

True, but I think someone with experience of such things posted reasons why that wouldn’t be so easy recently. In my work, our legal dept often get info from LR and I think it costs them a fair amount each time. I’d have thought someone would have done it by now though – from either side of the fence.


Not The Status Quo, obv.

What an band, back in the day.

Ah yes, but you see I never believed today’s TSQ were really SQ anymore. 😉 Although Lancaster and Coghlan are back for a tour next year, which is promising. The new rhythm section aren’t a patch on the original. Too many notes, and they don’t whack their instruments hard enough (oo-er). 🙂 I’ve seen both versions of the band a few times – the Oldco were light years ahead in the heads-down, no-nonsense boogie stakes. Also, Parfitt is now sporting a short back and sides. Eeek.

PS You risk a visit from the Grammar Police. “an band”? 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

redetinPosted on9:05 am - Dec 12, 2012


According to Phil Mac GB back in January…

“With over £750m loans at state [sic] – secured against assets such as Ibrox Stadium and MIH’s property and steel inventory, the bank could be forced to acknowledge write downs of £300-400m.”

and

“The Rangers owner has borrowed massively against assets, including Ibrox Stadium that have been grossly over-valued”

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/page/2/?s=murray+international+holdings

Will Lloyds Bank have given up their interest in the Ibrox asset?

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on9:05 am - Dec 12, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Tuesday, December 11, 2012 at 23:19
============================================
theglen – Good to see you posting but the Status Quo comment meant a thumbs down. Do you have any evidence to support your decision put your mortgage on Sevco owning Ibrox and Murray Park – have you been in touch with the Land Register?

View Comment

Tartawulver

TartawulverPosted on9:20 am - Dec 12, 2012


As it to reinforce why who owns the stadium can be very important in the way these things can pan out, here’s an example come along right on time

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20665933

View Comment

Avatar

borussiabeefburgPosted on9:21 am - Dec 12, 2012


On a different track, but perhaps worth us ‘monitoring’ all the same: I note that the Arbroath chairman was quoted the other day as follows- “Rangers will be coming twice next season so that’s extra revenue again. Folk are saying it’s all bad news at the moment, but from our perspective, it’s been nothing but good news.”

How does he know that Arbroath will be playing Rangers twice next season at Gayfield? Presently, the Red Lichties are 5th, just outside the play-off positions, but on the same points as third placed Brechin. Arbroath, though, are ten behind Alloa, who in the overall system are 24th.

2 x 12 = 24

Have I got my sums wrong?

View Comment

Avatar

The GlenPosted on9:27 am - Dec 12, 2012


angus1983 says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 08:39

I saw the original SQ at the Apollo. Goodness what a gig. Also saw the first tribute SQ there (when Pete Kircher came off the bench to replace Coghlan). After that I had no wish to see anyone other than Lancaster sing “Backwater”. Bloody tribute acts.
—————–
blu says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 09:05

I know a man who has. 🙂

Apologies for the further references to Quo!

View Comment

Avatar

jimlarkinPosted on9:41 am - Dec 12, 2012


with reference to portsmouth avoiding “liquidation”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20665933

why bother? what is the issue?

if you can be liquidated and start afresh, “debt free” with the hope of getting “back” to where you were, what is the problem?

surely it’s actually a very good thing.
you can ditch the debt, start planning for next season’s new signings, keep the “istory” and march on without a care in the world, as portsmouth will be the same “club”.

– – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –

on a different subject, chuckles last night on stv, claimed that these days, it would cost you £9,000,000 to get the drawings done – for a new stadium !!

[did he not pick up 3 properties for £3,000,000]

View Comment

Avatar

bluPosted on9:41 am - Dec 12, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 09:27

I know a man who has.
=============================================================
Who is this man? I want to know who this man is!

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on9:55 am - Dec 12, 2012


The trouble is the Sevco fans do not really have any option but to believe CG and IMO this is what CG will be banking on (although him saying that if the hordes do not buy the shares he will may just come back to haunt him) .I said I expected him to launch his share issue in the wake of the dual contracts issue ,has the delay in LNS inquiry scuppered that plan ,could he have delayed the issue or was he too far down the road to delay any longer .I noticed his eagerness to repeat his witch hunt /stripped titles mantra ,none of which has anything at all to do with Sevco and has no effect on him or his backers .

Maybe he needs the money more than we think ,no matter what he says running Sevco is a very costly business ,even more so when in Div 3 .The fans have helped ease that burden but full houses paying a fraction of SPL prices to run a £7m per year team and who knows how much to run the whole operation is a very risky position (long term ) .

I may be wrong but I get the impression he and his backers are looking to get out ASAP and the only the fans offer an escape route with any sort of return .If I were a sevco fan ,I may just put my £500 aside as I think he/she will be asked for another wee investment pretty soon once Charlie and his bhoys take their leave .

View Comment

Avatar

secularfootballfanPosted on9:59 am - Dec 12, 2012


ordinaryfan on Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:18
“Titles won’t leave Ibrox because Charles Green bought them and he owns them. Can’t argue with that logic.”

My understanding was always that the awarding institution owns the titles (as they still do with the cups) hence why stripping of titles is a feasible punishment. If Chucky thinks he’s bought the titles, he’d be better chasing D&P for misselling.

Wait – no – he owns all that “because he bought the history”…

View Comment

Avatar

SeniorPosted on10:27 am - Dec 12, 2012


Bobferris.

Saw a little nugget on SSN that said Rangers have sold 37,000 season tickets for NEXT season already.
________________________________________
Allowing for the normal interjection by the Missus “Your tea is ready” always at the moment I want to see or hear something on the telly. I think SSN referred to 2012/2013 season, which is this season – I think!

View Comment

Avatar

SmugasPosted on10:42 am - Dec 12, 2012


The portsmouth example though potentially shows up the most likely future of t’rangers in my opinion.

This share issue will provide funds to right the ship and pay off the spivs and to give them time to negotiate the sale of the now ambitious and very progressive club on the brink of europe etc etc to ‘Rangers Men.’ Paul Murray turns up wearing Walter’s cardigan with a wallet full of rand and says right-oh bearz we’re back, no-one likes us etc etc etc oh and by the way can we just have another wee whip round to buy back our stadium or the games a bogey.

The tesco card hasn’t really been played to its full effect yet, again imho.

View Comment

Avatar

manandboyPosted on10:44 am - Dec 12, 2012


The Green’s Playhouse was an entertainment complex comprising a cinema, ballroom, tea rooms, and other facilities. The Playhouse was at 126 Renfield Street, Glasgow, Scotland, commissioned by George Green Ltd, designed by architect John Fairweather, and built by the Cinema Building Company. Opened in 1927, the Playhouse operated until the 1970s, a decline in audience numbers in the 1960s necessitated diversification as a music venue until closure in 1973. The building continued in use as The Apollo, after being acquired by Unicorn Leisure on a lease-holding arrangement, until final closure in 1985, with subsequent demolition in 1987. (Wikipedia)

I’m sure most of you will know where this is going . . . . . .

Now located down Govan way, the new Green’s Playhouse is up and running. Well, kind of.

Like the old Playhouse in Renfield St., the new one offers it’s customers a special experience.

We know the one, where we pay to go in and sit in the dark for a few hours and watch a movie and more depicting another world – a fantasy world, on the screen.

Caught up in the movie, we are transported via imagination to the world of make believe.

Reality is suspended and for a little while we forget about real life outside – including our real problems.

I’m referring especially to life after the global financial crash of 2008 and the Time of Austerity – now forecast to run till 2018 – and beyond?

By the time it’s over, most of us I suspect will be acquainted with Grim & Dire only too well.

But, to return, caught up in the film, time passes, though we barely notice.

Then the film comes to an end and we rise to our feet with the crowd and make for the exits and then comes that moment which is the point of this piece – we step out of the cinema and into the street and we experience a change in our awareness. It’s unmistakeable.

We are back to reality!

Down Edmiston Drive, the crowd are still in Green’s Playhouse, the movie still running, reality suspended, and everyone inside is caught up in believing what Charlie is projecting on the screen.

Everyone that is, except Charlie. Cheeky, Charlie.

Soon, however, when the Sevco film is over and Charlie sells up and scarpers, Attila’s hordes will have that ‘wake up to reality’ feeling. Oh dear.

After that, it will be declining audiences leading to eventual closure and finally demolition.

Just like the old Greens Playhouse.

View Comment

Avatar

wottpiPosted on11:03 am - Dec 12, 2012


theglen2012 says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:59

Danish Pastry says:
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 00:28

In Scotland it is very simple to discover who is the registered owner of a property – as to what conditions are placed on that ownership, that is more difficult.

But many folks have posed the question as to “who owns Ibrox” – I am only going on my information.

“Free from encumbrances” is open to question. Only Leases of 20+ years and securities would be disclosed in the land registry.

All it takes is one person to contact the land register, to confirm who is the registered owner, then post it here. Pretty simple.

I have “outed” myself as a fan of a team who play in Govan (albeit from a distance, both metaphorically and literally, like yourself) but I would like to see some fairness in any discussion.

Hopefully the ever increasing thumbs down on my posts is not because of that.

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

Rather than us amateurs doing it maybe the investigative journalists, who have a budget and contacts for such things, could do it and resolve that matter once and for all?

As it is clearly a matter for much debate perhaps Rangers new Director of Communications and PR could just put the matter to bed by telling us all the situation (I am sure he must have asked Charles about this so he can do his job properly) and we could all move on?

And please remember that the the Title Deeds issue was raised by one of their own Bomber Brown – therefore if a loyal servant of the club was concenred is it any wonder internet bampots wants to ask similar questions.

As usual the MSM are not wanting to ask the difficult questions, or even some of the easy ones.

View Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.