The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !

Avatar By

From the Financial Times “Small Talk” column- New balls Bless Rangers, the …

Comment on The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies ! by neepheid.

From the Financial Times “Small Talk” column-

New balls
Bless Rangers, the Glasgow football club, for coming up with an altogether fresh approach to the governance of listed companies. Since floating on Aim in December at 70p a share, apart from losing more than a quarter of its value, it has lost its chief executive, and as of last week its chairman and Phil Cartmell, one of the non-executive directors on the six-man board. Mr Cartmell has been replaced by local businessman and bus operator James Easdale. A perusal of Companies House entries suggests that now just one of the Rangers’ non-executives has significant experience as a main board director of a listed UK company. Gers has also replaced Cenkos as nomad and broker. A spokesman says “it was time for a fresh approach”. Small Talk has seen staler fish at the supermarket.
Kate Burgess is the Financial Times’s small business correspondent Kate.Burgess@FT.com

neepheid Also Commented

The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
Here is the latest from AIM regulation-

We note the contents of your email below. As explained in our acknowledgment to your first e-mail of 24 June 2013, we investigate all allegations of breaches of the AIM Rules but for reasons of confidentiality we are unable to provide you with an update on how we might consider matters. You will appreciate that confidentiality is essential in maintaining the integrity of our work.

AIM Regulation

Here is my previous effort, to which the above is a “reply”-

to AIM
Thank you for your email. Here is the relevant extract from your rule 18:

18. An AIM company must prepare a half-yearly report in respect of the six month period from
the end of the financial period for which financial information has been disclosed in its
admission document

This company (RIFC PLC) disclosed in its admission document financial information for the period to 31 August 2012. It is surely undeniable that under Rule 18, the company is required to prepare a half-yearly report to 28 February 2013. Or are you in fact denying that Rule 18 requires such a report? If so, please explain to me in simple terms how the very clear requirements of Rule 18 have been complied with in this case.

I am, of course aware that the company produced interim accounts for the period to 31 December 2012. Accounts to 31 December 2012 do not meet the requirements of Rule 18. A company can produce accounts monthly or even weekly if it so chooses. But this company can only comply with Rule 18 by preparing a report to 28 February 2013.

The whole point of Rule 18 is to ensure that investors receive reports at 6 monthly intervals, no longer. In this particular case, you seem relaxed about the company not submitting any report to shareholders for over 9 months, since the annual accounts to 30 June 2013 do not have to be published until 31 December. That is, I have to say, a completely unacceptable position.It cannot be open to a company listed on any regulated market just to determine its own timetable for publication, in clear contravention of the market’s published rules.

You are responsible for ensuring that companies listed on the AIM market comply with the rules of that market. I have highlighted a clear breach of those rules by a member company. I want to know what you propose doing to enforce the rules. In the event that I suffer financial loss as a result of this clear compliance failure, I can assure you that I will be seeking legal advice- and advising others affected to do likewise.

Yours faithfully

Looks like I’ve hit the buffers, but if I decide to reply, I’ll post it here.


The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
Neepheid
Thank´s but who said what is quoted in JB´s post of 10:04 ?
Could you or other please c&p the article in full.
++++++++++++++++++++++
The quote is from Malcolm Murray’s open letter to the fans last week, which was published in all the Scottish papers. I’ve run out of access on the FT sight now, so can’t cut and paste the full article

+++++++++++++++++++++
Sorry, got my quotes mixed up. If the quote is this- ““His departure is fuelling fears that Rangers is once again entering a period of instability of the kind that led to its administration and liquidation last year and its plunge into the bottom tier of the Scottish game.” then that is from the body of the article, written by Roger Blitz, the FT Leisure Industry correspondent. Apologies for any confusion caused.


The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
greenockjack says:
July 15, 2013 at 10:47 am
0 2 Rate This

Neepheid
Thank´s but who said what is quoted in JB´s post of 10:04 ?
Could you or other please c&p the article in full.
++++++++++++++++++++++
The quote is from Malcolm Murray’s open letter to the fans last week, which was published in all the Scottish papers. I’ve run out of access on the FT sight now, so can’t cut and paste the full article


Recent Comments by neepheid

The Case for a New SFA.
Warburton recruits another of the Brentford backroom boys-

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-make-another-hire-appoint-6661188

Looks like “Moneyball” is coming to Scotland with this one. And is there anyone left at Brentford- apart from former Ibrox Wonderkid Lewis Macleod?


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
http://www.scotzine.com/2014/02/is-dave-kings-scaremongering-part-of-a-long-term-plan-to-buy-club-on-cheap/

Just saw this after my previous post. It sort of ties in with my own thoughts on where this is going.


Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
I see that the RIFC share price has been on an upward trend for a few weeks now, it has reached 30p today from a low of 24p, admittedly on thin trading.

Am I being too cynical in thinking that the share price reflects the improved chances of RIFC getting rid of TRFC once and for all, while retaining the properties? If that can be done, and soon, then the shares look cheap at 30p. If it isn’t done, then all the future holds for the shares is dilution, as cash calls are made to keep TRFC afloat.

I think the market believes the football side is about to be ditched. I can’t make sense of a rising share price otherwise.


Podcast Episode 2 – Stuart Cosgrove
The Wallace statement just confirms for me that in business terms he is a lightweight, and that he is totally out of his depth in the Ibrox snakepit. Loads of words to say nothing- why not take the opportunity to answer King’s questions? The fact that he doesn’t confirm that the properties are unencumbered, for example, just invites the conclusion that they are, in fact, encumbered. To my simple way of thinking, anyway.


Podcast Episode 2 – Stuart Cosgrove
andy graham (@andygraham66) says:
Thursday, February 27, 2014 at 14:10

Sorry, I have just found the link within your post. Here it is anyway-

http://www.unionoffans.org/statements/2014/2/27/union-of-fans-statement-270214


About the author

Avatar