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

By

Just to say I don’t really feel I have the …

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

Just to say I don’t really feel I have the abilities or techie nous to contribute to the current investigations, but I am following avidly. All power to your keyboards guys and gals. Go get em!

Oh, and Kate Burgess doesn’t sound like a remotely timmy name! I was at least expecting a Mc…something or other 👿

Smugas Also Commented

The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
July 11, 2013 at 12:54 pm

And that is where performance on the field comes in. They literally now cannot afford to lose.


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

Thereins the rub for the current inhabitents of the marble stair case. Financially it’s a basket case (and again I find myself using the term self inflicted) but its winning and breaking world records left, right and centre. The spivs problem and well they know it is what response if the good bus RFC starts to falter in a footballing sense. On the plus side they can still play their ‘Tesco’ card and force another flotation, but on the down side it will confirm to the supposed Rangers men waiting in the wings that they will actually, god forbid, need to put in some of their dosh if they wish to regain the levels that many are expecting.

Hoopy7

I would be appalled if the Rangers men waiting in the wings (see above) didn’t give a flying symphony if both Green and Whte ended up at Her Majesty and most of D wing’s pleasure leaving the pieces of RFC available for a song. Its not like that was a plan from the start. No siree. Not on the SFA’s watch.


The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !
To be fair I’m seeing a lot of comments about the SFA/SFL going out of their way to accomodate sevco. A part of me feels that this assistance is correct, but only insofar as it is the same level of support they should provide to any of the 42 senior teams falling on hard times – and that is not to infer bias against the junior teams either incidentally.

Where the issue becomes clouded is when the extreme circumstances kick in. One side argues going the extra mile for what I will summarily term “public order” issues, the other equally correctly cites that the extreme circumstances were entirely self inflicted (and carried a degree of reward that was consequently deprived to competitors). The powers that be have tried to settle somewhere in the middle (and to be clear my view is if the battle ground is the atlantic the middle they have gone for is somewhere around manhatten island but I digress). That they have also tried to achieve this in a cloak of secrecy, comfortable in the wall of silence from the MSM whilst flying a flag for supposed transparency is the reason that football in this country will never recover to levels once seen and borne high by us all.


Recent Comments by Smugas

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
In fairness to the pundits.   To a man Tonight (considering the chopped off derby goal) they could not understand why the tele evidence instantly available to anyone with a phone couldn’t be used in that scenario.  


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
In simplistic terms, as far as the recipients were concerned, the monies were paid in net.  I.e. as far as they were concerned all tax payable had been deducted and paid. Billy Dodds said as much on the radio as I recall.  What SDM said in one of the hearings was that they took the monies that would otherwise have been deducted and forwarded for tax added it to the payment to the player.  Hence a player who would have received £60 wages and in addition had deducted £40 in cash to give a £100 total from any other club would have received the whole £100 from oldco.  This gave rise to the famous quote about “buying players they couldn’t otherwise afford.”

so the answer to your question is…both!

The reason for the confusion of course is because the players had side letters explaining all this but sssshhhhh, they’re secret.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
So, square the circle.

1/  King told to make offer.  No guarantee of level of take up especially given that…
2/  Future security of club predicated on King Loan.
3/  King saying he can’t afford to make offer so would presumably have to resign.
4/  Potential that him resigning causes share loss (ignoring imminent dilution).  One would think that might tempt a few more to his offer. 
4/  Also small matter that regardless of whether he resigns or not, whether he offers and whether they take up his offer, the future security of the club is still predicated on his loan.
5/  If he’s not a director can he trust the board with his extended loan, especially given that…
6/  In case you haven’t spotted it this is a loss making business.  Extending that loan doesn’t staunch the flow it simply pours more in the top to be leaked.  Staunching the flow requires more profitable surroundings (a new CL bucket).  But that needs investment and then…..

Ok you get the rest!
 


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
FWIW I still don’t see any advantage to them in ‘eventing.’  Threatening to ‘event.’  Yes for sure. That’ll get all the Christmas coppers rattling in the buckets  since whilst they may look down their nose at a credible challenge for 2nd it would still be a great result for them and give them European access.  Interestingly of course so does 3rd (4th?).  As clubs like Aberdeen know its actually bloody expensive in relative terms being the plucky loser.  But I fear crowd indifference would kick in.  Aberdeen losing 2000 fans by accepting 3rd is no biggie.  Rangers losing 20,000 is a different barrel of kippers.  

The no-event assumption has two core requirements of course.

1/  All parties keep speaking to each other, ignore individual rationality and act instead for the greater good of the club (don’t start) particularly in view of….
2/  Somebody, somewhere has to pony up to keep the loss making bus on the road else it grinds to a halt in the race to the top.  Shouting and screaming and stamping their foot that its all so unfair unless all the other buses are told to stop too is unlikely to get a sympathetic hearing.  Well, not from the fans anyway…. 


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Homunculus @ 12.38

My thoughts exactly.  The AGM stuff to me made sense to a/ get a hold of 1872’s ‘new’ money with zero repayment clause and b/ to tidy up the balance sheet with a view to a euro licence (listed you will recall as essential to the clumpany’s future well being) which will surely be scrutinised like never before.  It makes no sense for the creditors to do it (unless a billionaire has flown in off the radar offering more per share for their quantum than a simple loan repayment would yield i.e. parity*) and it makes even less sense to allow a situation where the creditors can individually decide whether to do so given the fragility of the underlying company(ies).  Particularly given the reputation of some of the principle creditors.  

* parity insofar as they’d get their money back.  It is not enough to promise growth on their shares in some future dream complete with CL soundtrack if achieving said dream is literally costing you money in the meantime in terms of shareholder calls. RBS being the most recent example to spring to mind.  


About the author