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

Good Evening.

As we ponder the historic vote to create a new Governing body to oversee Scottish League football, I cannot help but wonder what brilliant minds will be employed in the drawing up of its constitution, rules, memorandum and articles of association?

Clearly, Messrs Doncaster, Longmuir and even Mr Regan as the CEO of the SFA will be spending many hours with those dreaded folk known simply as “ The Lawyers” in an attempt to get the whole thing up and running and written down in the course of a few short weeks.

In truth, that scares me.

It scares me because legal documentation written up in a hurry or in a rush is seldom perfect and often needs amendment—especially when the errors start to show! The old adage of beware of the busy fool sadly applies.

It also scares me because the existing rules under which the game is governed are not, in my humble opinion, particularly well written and seem to differ in certain material respects from those of UEFA. Even then, adopting the wording and the approach of other bodies is not necessarily the way to go.

I am all in favour of some original thought– and that most precious and unusual of commodities known as common sense and plain English.

Further, the various licensing and compliance rules are clearly in need of an overhaul as they have of late produced what can only be best described as a lack of clarity when studied for the purposes of interpretation. Either that or those doing the studying and interpreting are afflicted with what might be described as tortuous or even tortured legal and administrative minds.

If it is not by now clear that the notion of self-certification on financial and other essential disclosure criteria necessary to obtain a footballing licence (whether European or domestic) is a total non-starter — then those in charge of the game are truly bonkers.

Whilst no governing body can wholly control the actions of a member club, or those who run a club, surely provisions can be inserted into any constitution or set of rules that allows and brings about greater vigilance and scrutiny than we have at present—all of course designed to do nothing other than alert the authorities as early as possible if matters are not being conducted properly or fairly.

However, the main change that would make a difference to most of the folk involved in the Scottish game – namely the fans— would be to have the new rules incorporate a measure which allowed football fans themselves to be represented on any executive or committee.

Clearly, this would be a somewhat revolutionary step and would be fought against tooth and nail by some for no reason other than that it has simply not been done before—especially as the league body is there to regulate the affairs of a number of limited companies all of whom have shareholders to account to and the clubs themselves would presumably be the shareholders in the new SPFL Ltd.

Then again to my knowledge Neil Doncaster is not a shareholder in The SPL ltd– is he?

I can hear the argument that a fan representative on a league body might not be impartial, might be unprofessional, might be biased, might lack knowledge or experience, and have their own agenda and so on—just like many chairmen and chief executive officers who already sit on the committees of the existing league bodies.

Remember too that the SFA until relatively recently had disciplinary committees made up almost exclusively of referees. I don’t think anyone would argue that the widening of the make up of that committee has been a backward step.

However, we already have fan representation at clubs like St Mirren and Motherwell, and of course there has been an established Tartan Army body for some time now. Clubs other than the two mentioned above have mechanisms whereby they communicate and consult with fans, although they stop short of full fan participation– very often for supposedly insurmountable legal reasons.

As often as not, the fans want a say in the running of their club, but also want to be able to make representations to the governing bodies via their club.

So why not include the fans directly in the new set up for governing the league?

Any fan representative could  be someone proposed by a properly registered fan body such as through official supporters clubs, or could be seconded by the clubs acting in concert with their supporters clubs.

Perhaps a committee of fan representatives could be created, with such a committee having a representative on the various committees of the new league body.

In this way, there would be a fan who could report back to the fan committee and who could represent the interests of the ordinary fan in the street in any of the committees. Equally such a committee of fans could ensure that any behind the scenes discussions on any issue were properly reported, openly discussed, and made public with no fear of hidden agendas, secret meetings, and secret collusive agreements and so forth.

Is any of that unreasonable? Surely many companies consider the views of their biggest customer? This idea is no different.

Surely such a situation would go some way towards establishing some badly needed trust between the governing bodies and the fans themselves?

If necessary, I would not even object to the fan representatives being excluded from having a right to vote on certain matters—as long as they had a full right of audience and a full right of access to all discussions and relative papers which affect the running of the game.

In this way at least there would be openness and transparency.

In short, it would be a move towards what is quaintly referred to as Democracy.

Perhaps, those who run the game at present should consider the life and times of the late great Alexander Hamilton- one of the founding fathers of the United States of America and who played a significant role in helping write the constitution of that country.

Hamilton was a decent and brilliant man in many ways—but he was dead set against Democracy and the liberation of rights for the masses. In fact, he stated that the best that can be hoped for the mass populace is that they be properly armed with a gun and so able to protect themselves against injustice!

Sadly, Hamilton became embroiled in a bitter dispute with the then Vice President of the nation Aaron Burr in July 1804. Hamilton had used his influence and ensured that Burr lost the election to become Governor of New York and had made some withering attacks on the Vice President’s character.

When he refused to apologise, the Vice President took a whacky notion and challenged him to a duel! Even more whacky is the fact that Hamilton accepted the challenge and so the contest took place at Weehawken New Jersey on the morning of 11th July 1804.

The night before, Hamilton wrote a letter which heavily suggested that he would contrive to miss Burr with his shot, and indeed when the pistols fired Hamilton’s bullet struck a branch immediately above Burr’s head.

However, he did not follow the proper procedure for duelling which required a warning from the duellist that they are going to throw their shot away. Hamilton gave no such indication despite the terms of his letter and despite his shot clearly missing his opponent.

Burr however fired and hit Hamilton in the lower abdomen with the result that the former secretary to the treasury and founding father of the constitution died at 2pm on the twelfth of July.

The incident ruined Burr’s career (whilst duelling was still technically legal in New jersey, it had already been outlawed in various other states).

In any event, in Hamilton’s time full and open democracy in the United States of America would have met with many cries of outrage and bitter opposition. Yet, today, the descendants of slaves and everyone from all social standings, all ethnic minorities and every social background has the constitutional right to vote and seek entry to corridors of power.

In that light, is it really asking too much to allow football fans to have a say and a presence in the running of a game they pay so much to support?

 

4,181 thoughts on “The SPFL— the case for revolution, evolution and a case of the Hamilton Whackies !


  1. paulmac2 says: June 27, 2013 at 8:05 am

    Did Hearts ever get paid the transfer fees for Wallace and Templeton?
    =============================
    The last £500,000 instalment of the Wallace transfer fee wasn’t due until July 2013, but such was Hearts desperate need for cash, they agreed to a discount of £100,000 for early repayment in February.

    I’m not sure about the repayment terms re the Templeton fee, but Hearts haven’t made any similar moves for early repayment, so I assume that the fee has been paid in full.


  2. Exiled Celt says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:41 am

    Where does it say he authorized the sale? He gave IA proxy right to vote for him for name change only.
    —————————————————————————————————————————————–
    The statement sent out to shareholders by Duff & Phelps specifically stated that the sale was to Sevco Scotland. As Whyte had a vote, he obviously would have gotten one himself.
    Statement here, sent out on the 5th July 2012;
    “We have written to all shareholders of The Rangers Football Club plc (in administration) to provide notice of a general meeting of the Company to be held at Ibrox Stadium on July 31.

    “The resolution to be put forward at that meeting is to change the name of the Company to RFC 2012 plc and there will be no other business on the day.

    “This is a procedural measure in order for Sevco Scotland Limited – which acquired the business and assets of the Company from the administrators on June 14 – to change its name simultaneously to The Rangers Football Club Limited.”

    Why would Whyte vote on anything after seeing this, if he didn’t agree with it? It doesn’t make sense to me.


  3. Bawsman says:
    June 27, 2013 at 8:26 am

    The SFA at the end of the day had more interest in Rangers in their new guise playing football and showed no concern really for the other creditors that were shafted. Pay your football debts and we’ll let you back in, stuff everybody else. Should the creditors not have had a say in that ?


  4. Danish Pastry says:
    June 27, 2013 at 7:28 am

    “…Hearts season ticket drive and list the prices. Tut tut. What’s sports jounalism coming to? He missed a trick there, unlike Michael Grant in the Herald (last paragraph) 🙂 ”
    ———————–
    Yes that was an informative piece in the Herald. Ticket prices and a contact telephone number. I suppose it saves on much needed advertising space.

    To be fair to Tom English, his conscience seems to be kicking in. A lack of conscience is something that has starkly characterised much of these affairs. The media culpability is shocking and a poignant lesson not just for football but for all journalism.

    TSFM. Keeping journalism honest and highlighting where it is propaganda.

    Scotland needs a strong TSFM.


  5. ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:08 am

    There really is a festering pile of deceit at the heart of the 5-way Agreement and Scottish Football will never be able to move forward until it is exposed and the ‘guilty’ men are removed from office
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    One thing is certain about the 5 way agreement- Charles Green is sitting in France with a copy in his pocket (and another copy with his lawyer, no doubt). Which goes a long way to explaining the kid glove treatment he received from our “authorities”. Those guys are absolutely bricking it in case CG decides to push his personal nuclear button. And it would be truly nuclear, I’m sure of that. Wasn’t Regan “Mr Transparency” when he got the job? Show us the agreement then! I really do hope that CF has a copy too. If you have a copy, Charlotte, put it out quickly, please.


  6. Matteo Galy – Neither you nor anyone else other than CG and CW know exactly if this was CW being duped or if the pair of them were in on it to cover up a load of nonsense – I am pretty sure there was a plan to have Sevco Scotland take the assets from Sevco5088 – if you go by that premise then the above statement is ok – the old club is changing its name and the new club is changing its name – however the vehicle as described by CG himself did not need a name change.


  7. Matteo Galy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:15 am
    ———————————————————————————————————-

    “This is a procedural measure”

    “This is a procedural measure in order for Sevco Scotland Limited – which acquired the business and assets of the Company from the administrators on June 14 – to change its name simultaneously to The Rangers Football Club Limited.”


  8. A couple of updates on Hearts that haven’t been mentioned on here.
    First, BDO have set a closing date for offers of 12th July. That suggest that the offer already received from the Gordon McKie consortium must at least be in the ballpark of an acceptable proposal as viewed by the administrators.

    It has been confirmed that Wonga (Hearts shirt sponsors) have brought forward payment to the club of sums due later in the season. It will obviously assist with any immediate cash flow concerns, but I’m sure that the payments will have been factored into any monthly forecasts going forward.


  9. Really enjoying the blog today. Seems it’s back on track, well done all.


  10. My post of 9.59 a.m. above refers.
    —-
    Here is the reply from Michael Grant to my email :
    ” John,

    Be reassured.

    Michael ”

    Charlotte…….could there..?… No, too ridiculous even in these fevered days.


  11. Matteo Galy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:34 am

    “If I’ve got this wrong then feel free to correct me, but from my untrained eye it looks as though Whyte’s claims that the sale to Sevco Scotland was illegal are nonsense.”
    ———————
    You had me going there for a while Matt. With all the similarities in names it is easy to get confused and I did.

    “…change the name of Rangers FC PLC to RFC 2012 PLC, which was carried out at general meeting in July 2012 with Duff & Phelps.”

    This was RFC(IL) not Sevco. Here is their Companies House entry.

    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC004276

    I think Charlotte was reaffirming the links with Green even if the smokescreen of a proxy vote might have obscured them.

    You switched on my brain there. It has been a bit sleepy recently. I’d rather read a comment that was honestly wide of the mark rather than scrolling past stuff that is just intended to be a turn off.

    Keep on thinking.


  12. Matteo Galy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:34 am
    ————————————-

    says ….
    Had a look back at previous posts from yesterday and came across this one from Charlotte that didn’t get any responses.
    According to this, if I’m reading it correctly, Craig Whyte authorised the sale of the assets to Sevco Scotland and also voted to change the name of Rangers FC PLC to RFC 2012 PLC, which was carried out at general meeting in July 2012 with Duff & Phelps.
    If I’ve got this wrong then feel free to correct me, but from my untrained eye it looks as though Whyte’s claims that the sale to Sevco Scotland was illegal are nonsense.
    ————————————————————————————-

    @Matteo …..
    Correct on all points ….. except IMO the last statement ….

    CW authorisation …… listen again to CF tapes …. CG explains need for Scottish Comp to CW, and he verbally aclkowledges …… CW asks if Patrick (FFW) is handling docs ….
    We have never yet seen the (what I have previously called) … The Patrick Docs …… crucial IMO

    On CW involvement crucial even afetr CVA failure ….. Confirmed by CG on STV interview …. one of his nuggets (as Eco rightly reminded us earlier) …
    Also confirmed on CF audio tapes again by CG ….. and then immediately by CW on same tape … but he was more concerned about debenture control …..
    Stated on same tape CW required for name change ….. of oldco …. a criucual step ….

    On the last point …. I will have a stab at this ….

    On the same day that Sevco Scotland was incorporated (29th MAy 2012), On same day CG signed a resolution Disapplying pre-emption rights. but did NOT lodge it at Companies House until 5th Dec ….

    Further the accompanying sh01 forms were not lodged until 7th Dec ….. but docs at companies house show actually signed on 29th May ……

    Form SH01, rules are that must send the form to Companies House no later than one month after the date of the first allotment …… failure to do so is a criminal offence and all directors liable …. maybe CG simply forgot to send or it slipped his mind ….. ! Not suggesting for even a moment it was deliberate act …. !

    But there is potential wiggle room here for shenanigans ….. was this how CG duped CW ….. possibly ?

    Also interesting from a post above …..
    Oldco Rangers were fined by SFA for failures under the Companies Act ….. will they do so again with the Newco Rangers ….. They have after all set the precedent ……. #Justice

    Rather rushed this post as busy …. so apols if any mistakes ….


  13. Anyone on here know the difference between ‘…stringing him along to get shares…’ and ‘fraud’?


  14. john clarke says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:59 am
    ———————————–
    Nice of him to reply but the main point is less whether he’s on the payroll and more why did he devote a full paragraph to free advertising? Those were not his words but words supplied to him by Jim Traynor

    That is simply not acceptable. Can you imagine reading such a paragraph in the Guardian or Telegraph?

    No and that tells you everything that is wrong with the media in this country.

    Newspaper interviews with players are often finished off with “So and so was appearing at Hampden to publicise the forthcoming match with….” – that was the case yesterday with Neil Lennon’s words on Wanyama where it mentioned it was speaking at the launch of the Stilian Petrov game but that was all.

    It didn’t go on to give prices, deadline day, website and phone numbers for tickets.

    In short, there remains in this “best little country in the world” one rule for writing about anything connected with Rangers and one rule for all of the other clubs.

    One Scotland, many rules……

    54 (hours till the season ticket deadline) 🙂


  15. easyJambo says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:49 am

    “It has been confirmed that Wonga (Hearts shirt sponsors) have brought forward payment to the club of sums due later in the season.”
    ———————
    I note your tone of optimism EJ and am pleased if you can glean some hope from the current situation. I am however perturbed about the above line from your post which lead to a wider observation.

    In all the financial shenanigans within and outwith football there has been an ongoing drive to the bottom. The fat cats that got rich out of the boom are also mopping up during the bust. Perhaps in less straightened financial times Herats may have thought twice about accepting a pay day loans company as a sponsor, as indeed other clubs already have. However desperate times call for desperate measures and expediency is king.

    When we get carried away with ourselves there is a danger at some point that the music will stop and we will get shafted.


  16. briggsbhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:17 am
    2 0 i
    Rate This

    Bawsman says:
    June 27, 2013 at 8:26 am

    The SFA at the end of the day had more interest in Rangers in their new guise playing football and showed no concern really for the other creditors that were shafted. Pay your football debts and we’ll let you back in, stuff everybody else. Should the creditors not have had a say in that ?

    —————————————————
    I certainly do agree ALL the creditors should have had a say.

    I live my life by looking at things with a basic instinct of what ‘right & wrong’ is, then making decisions accordingly.

    I think it is patently wrong that some creditors are left hanging with nothing whilst others are paid in full.

    Then again, by any standard, ‘right & wrong’ in this whole mess has meant nothing.


  17. Matteo Galy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:15 am

    The statement sent out to shareholders by Duff & Phelps specifically stated that the sale was to Sevco Scotland. As Whyte had a vote, he obviously would have gotten one himself.

    Statement here, sent out on the 5th July 2012; “We have written to all shareholders of The Rangers Football Club plc (in administration) to provide notice of a general meeting of the Company to be held at Ibrox Stadium on July 31.

    “The resolution to be put forward at that meeting is to change the name of the Company to RFC 2012 plc and there will be no other business on the day.

    “This is a procedural measure in order for Sevco Scotland Limited – which acquired the business and assets of the Company from the administrators on June 14 – to change its name simultaneously to The Rangers Football Club Limited.”

    Why would Whyte vote on anything after seeing this, if he didn’t agree with it? It doesn’t make sense to me.
    ======================================================================
    The only way this makes sense IMO is if Whyte had, or thought he had, control/leverage with Sevco Scotland. Otherwise he wouldn’t have co-operated if he thought Sevco 5088 had been totally edged out the picture and I don’t think he was daft enough to be blindsided by Green. Of course perhaps he was conned by Ahmad and didn’t realize that Imran and Green were an inseparable 2-man tag team.

    But there was lots of confusion over the reports of the meeting last June as journos conflated the two separate meetings as if the the two name changes took place at one meeting. They didn’t because the switch of The Rangers Football Club plc to RFC 2012 plc took place under the auspices of D&P.

    Whereas the name change of Sevco Scotland to TRFCL involved a private Ltd company and a vote of the shareholder/s and there was probably no actual meeting but just a question of a ‘paper’ vote. But that’s another story and some insights are covered at:

    http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/08/04/fun-with-forms-could-sevcos-change-of-name-to-rangers-be-invalid/

    http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/08/04/another-sevcorangers-mystery-the-phantom-egm/


  18. Exiled Celt says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:43 am

    Seems plausible, if that’s possible in this whole charade! It seems nothing is black and white and there is a helluva lot more digging to be done to try and get any semblance of the truth.
    ———————————————————————————————————————————————
    ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:08 am

    Getting hold of this 5 way agreement would no doubt be the game changer.
    If I remember correctly, Charlotte said she was going to publish it a while back, but hasn’t done so for whatever reason.


  19. On the pay day loans topic, I understand Newcastle United have undertaken the same sponsorship. Seems their owner Mike Ashley ‘might’ have a finger in the pie of two major Scottish Football Clubs. We need to be wary that in any downsizing of Scottish Football there is no opportunity for individuals to gain multiple stakes in clubs that might undermine sporting intergrity.


  20. Cheers for all the replies.
    If you don’t understand something, it’s always best to ask and I’m just trying to make sense of it all!


  21. Matteo Galy says:

    June 27, 2013 at 11:21 am
    Exiled Celt says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:43 am

    Seems plausible, if that’s possible in this whole charade! It seems nothing is black and white and there is a helluva lot more digging to be done to try and get any semblance of the truth.
    ———————————————————————————————————————————————
    ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:08 am

    Getting hold of this 5 way agreement would no doubt be the game changer.
    If I remember correctly, Charlotte said she was going to publish it a while back, but hasn’t done so for whatever reason.

    ******

    Wrong on that count too – CF had the same copy we already had which is a draft – am seeing a pattern here now in your posts………..fishing line anyone?


  22. slimshady61 says:
    June 27, 2013 at 11:16 am
    “….the main point is less whether he’s on the payroll and more why did he devote a full paragraph to free advertising? Those were not his words but words supplied to him by Jim Traynor.”
    —–
    I take your point, of course, but you may remember that Greg Cameron of the ‘Herald’ ,in an earlier email correspondence, pointed out to me that in an article he had written there appeared text that not only had he NOT written, but had not even seen before he read the paper.

    I think the editorial/sub-editorial staff ought perhaps to be the ones to direct our fire at.

    And perhaps just as the Herald chiefs have ensured that no damaging investigative reporting is done, so also they insist that at every opportunity support is given to a part of ‘the fabric of society’ that they belong to.


  23. newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 11:10 am

    the accompanying sh01 forms were not lodged until 7th Dec ….. but docs at companies house show actually signed on 29th May …… Form SH01, rules are that must send the form to Companies House no later than one month after the date of the first allotment …… failure to do so is a criminal offence and all directors liable …. maybe CG simply forgot to send or it slipped his mind ….. ! Not suggesting for even a moment it was deliberate act …
    ===================================================================

    Well I’m not so sure about the ‘deliberate’ act as it would appear that numerous requests from Companies House, including registered letters, were ignored. So make of that what you will 🙂

    But history seems to be repeating because the Annual Return for TRFCL was due on 26/06/13 and is now overdue. This is quite significant IMO as it has been obvious that since the last SHO2 was submitted late on 2/12/12 by TRFCL – followed by the flotation of RIFC Plc – that the shareholding of TRFCL had most likely changed because of the 1-for-1 swap of the original investor shares in TRFCL to RIFC Plc.

    So depending on the actual date of the swap, which can’t be later than 20/12/12 then an additional SH0 form should have been submitted within 30 days.

    That is now 6 months overdue and the Annual Return is now overdue as well and of course there is more info contained in the Annual Report than on the SH0 form. I wonder why so tardy they surely can’t have anything to hide wrt shareholding – can they?


  24. So did the Jelivic money go walk about, or is it accounted for? His contract…….. some peepil making a song and dance about the zombie situation yet the word “Glasgow” seems to be missing from the contract, but “The” is not. Seems they have never known what they were called anyway so what’s to debate, their deid, club, company, identity and reputation.

    Can we have a thread devoted to the zombie topic, as I may be missing stuff when I have to scroll past, stopping only occasionally to TD said posts. And another thing, blah blah blah,

    aye their still deid.


  25. To clarify, why not ” Rangers Football Club”. Or “Rangers”. Or “Glasgow Rangers”. Or even “The Glasgow Rangers”. ” The Rangers Football Club”, that is what they are called now. I think. Who cares really, probably change again anyway.

    TDeed myself, as I was on zombie ground, and may have contributed to the confuse the readers “club”.


  26. Matteo Galy says:

    June 27, 2013 at 10:15 am
    Exiled Celt says:
    June 27, 2013 at 9:41 am

    Where does it say he authorized the sale? He gave IA proxy right to vote for him for name change only.
    —————————————————————————————————————————————–
    The statement sent out to shareholders by Duff & Phelps specifically stated that the sale was to Sevco Scotland. As Whyte had a vote, he obviously would have gotten one himself.
    Statement here, sent out on the 5th July 2012;
    “We have written to all shareholders of The Rangers Football Club plc (in administration) to provide notice of a general meeting of the Company to be held at Ibrox Stadium on July 31.

    “The resolution to be put forward at that meeting is to change the name of the Company to RFC 2012 plc and there will be no other business on the day.

    “This is a procedural measure in order for Sevco Scotland Limited – which acquired the business and assets of the Company from the administrators on June 14 – to change its name simultaneously to The Rangers Football Club Limited.”

    Why would Whyte vote on anything after seeing this, if he didn’t agree with it? It doesn’t make sense to me.
    _____________________________________________________
    I may have got it wrong here, but doesn’t the fact that the statement went out on 5th July, and the acquisition date of the business by Sevco Scotland is stated as 14 June kind of negate your argument? Doesn’t this indicate that the transfer of assets to Sevco Scotland was already a done deal? I don’t see how receiving notification after the event can make Whyte’s claims a nonsense!
    Note the following:

    “The resolution to be put forward at that meeting is to change the name of the Company to RFC 2012 plc and there will be no other business on the day.”

    Where does it say the intention to change the name of ‘Sevco Scotland Limited’ to ‘The Rangers FC plc’ was mentioned in the notice to shareholders? Not only does it not say this, but it also says “no other business on the day” (other than changing the name of ‘oldco’).
    What you have quoted doesn’t appear, to me, to be taken verbatim from the notice to shareholders but is, in fact, a statement from Duff and Phelps, for public consumption, and a part of their modus operandi of deception. Besides, why would the shareholders of Rangers FC plc have a vote in the business of a completely new company, or even be informed that that company is changing it’s name?


  27. ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 11:50 am
    ———————————–
    But history seems to be repeating ….
    they surely can’t have anything to hide wrt shareholding – can they? …..
    ————————————-

    Sorry to string these two together ……… But …. !
    Surely not ….. ?

    Surely the SFA must step in at some point …. even to clarify ?
    Further to the shareholding question …..

    Remember that CG has apparently satified the SFA on the names behind the Inst Investors ….
    CG named Alessandro Celano as the Blue Pitch Holdings connection …..

    Can anyone remember any connection to Nova resources ….
    Nova Resources would link CG with Chris Morgan (Shareholder) with Rafat Ali Rizvi ….

    But cannot find where (or if) I read of a link or connection …. ?


  28. what about the “for the avoidance of doubt” statement – to sevco 5088 and then to sevco scotland


  29. Allyjambo says:
    June 27, 2013 at 12:26 pm
    ——————————————————————————

    Well said.

    Duff & Phelps = Crooks


  30. davythelotion says:
    June 27, 2013 at 11:16 am

    “Anyone on here know the difference between ‘…stringing him along to get shares…’ and ‘fraud’?
    ——————–
    That is what CW’s legal action intends to determine.


  31. Mr. Christopher Andrew Morgan, Chris has been Director of Nova Resources Limited since May 11, 2012.
    Mr. Morgan serves on the board of a number of investment companies and acts as a consultant, addressing the needs and requirements of an assortment of high net worth individuals, as well as providing legal and investigatory services and management to various multi-million dollar corporate litigations and criminal investigations.

    He has served with the Metropolitan Police and the National Criminal Intelligence Service where he received a number of Commendations.

    He serves at BDC 1-5, Albert Abela Corporation, Neos Interactive Limited, RCJ Developers LLP, Rhein Parklands Limited, Bond London Limited, Leo Investments Limited, TCJ Investments Limited, Pam Field Investments Ltd, Bright Shield Assets Management Limited, Asia Credit Corporation Limited and Asia Carbon Investments Limited. He served at Abela Hellas Catering Services S.A. and AJMA Services (UK) Limited.


  32. Exiled Celt says:
    June 27, 2013 at 11:32 am

    Wrong on that count too – CF had the same copy we already had which is a draft – am seeing a pattern here now in your posts………..fishing line anyone?
    ——————————————————————————————————————————————
    Apparently I’m not the only one who’s wrong.
    No ‘fishing’ here, I’ve no interest in all that kinda stuff and there is no ‘pattern’ to my posts as far as I’m aware.
    If you want to see something that isn’t there, be my guest.


  33. ForresDee says:
    June 27, 2013 at 8:36 am

    =========================
    The football creditor rule needs to be repealed, if clubs going bust effects other clubs, then tighter financial rules would have to be urgently applied to protect all clubs. That could only be a good thing!

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

    Does the football creditors rule apply in Scotland.

    The Scottish footballing authorities did create and artificial preference, but I don’t think that particular rule exists.

    Either way, HMRC hate things like that. As part of the Enterprise Act HMCE and IR (as were) lost their preference. They are not happy about other people creating their own, and in the case of Scottish football / Rangers totally inventing one.

    They will never look favourably on football clubs in administration while this carries on. In England they are fighting it through the courts.


  34. Exiled Celt says:
    June 27, 2013 at 11:32 am

    “…CF had the same copy we already had which is a draft…”
    ——————-
    Exiled, I could be wrong but I don’t think Charlotte has published a copy of the 5 way agreement. I went looking for one amongst her releases previously and didn’t locate it. Neepheid and borrussiabeefburger kindly put me in touch with their versions. Not sure of the provenance, perhaps they can remind us. I’ll attach borrusia’s large print version for information. You’ll see the link to it at the top of the page under his logo.

    http://borussiabeefburg.wordpress.com/2013/01/29/scotland-vague-and-obscure/

    As you say it is a draft, though I’ve not reviewed the comment you were replying to.


  35. Nova Resources Limited
    600 North Bridge Road
    No 12-06/07
    Parkview Square
    Singapore, 188778
    Phone: 65 6236 2984
    http://www.novaresourceslimited.com

    Nova Resources Limited does not have significant operations. It focuses on building up businesses, or identifying and acquiring quoted and unquoted businesses that are involved in providing services and facilities to support, assist, and serve the natural resources industries primarily in exploration, mining, and extraction of resources. The company was formerly known as Tembusu Investments Limited and changed its name to Nova Resources Limited in January 2012. Nova Resources Limited was incorporated in 2007 and is based in Singapore. Nova Resources Limited is a subsidiary of Shine Link Limited.
    ——————————————————————————————————-

    Nova Resources Ltd
    Board Changes
    RNS Number : 5511D
    Nova Resources Limited
    17 May 2012

    Nova Resources Limited

    (“Nova” or “the Company”)

    Board Changes

    Resignation of director

    The Directors of Nova Resources Limited (AIM: NOVA.L) announce the resignation of Mr Charles Green, non-executive director and Chairman, with immediate effect. Mr Green is leaving to pursue other business interests; however the Board wishes to thank him for his valuable contribution to the Company and wishes him well for the future.

    The Directors are actively seeking to appoint a replacement to Mr Green in due course. In the meantime, Mr Chan Fook Meng, Chief Executive Officer of Nova, will also act as interim Chairman.

    Enquiries:

    Nova Resources Limited

    Fook-Meng Chan, Chief Executive Officer

    Tel: + 65 6236 2985


  36. Gaz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 12:51 pm
    0 0 Rate This

    ForresDee says:
    June 27, 2013 at 8:36 am

    =========================
    The football creditor rule needs to be repealed, if clubs going bust effects other clubs, then tighter financial rules would have to be urgently applied to protect all clubs. That could only be a good thing!

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

    Does the football creditors rule apply in Scotland.

    The Scottish footballing authorities did create and artificial preference, but I don’t think that particular rule exists.

    Either way, HMRC hate things like that. As part of the Enterprise Act HMCE and IR (as were) lost their preference. They are not happy about other people creating their own, and in the case of Scottish football / Rangers totally inventing one.

    They will never look favourably on football clubs in administration while this carries on. In England they are fighting it through the courts.
    ================================

    Yes it does, Dundee only finished paying off the football creditors (mostly players) from our second admin in Jan/Feb this year. We were in a strange situation where we were paying for players who were initially released to save the club money. But having released the registration they weren’t able to re-sign for the club even though we had to pay out the contract.


  37. newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    Can anyone remember any connection to Nova resources ….
    Nova Resources would link CG with Chris Morgan (Shareholder) with Rafat Ali Rizvi ….

    But cannot find where (or if) I read of a link or connection …. ?
    ————————————————————————————————-

    ‘Sam says’ has done the formal links just above but then there is that wonderful secretly taped conversation with CW, Ahmad and Stockbridge which CF put the audio up for – very entertaining.


  38. Thank goodness, no orange to be seen in T’Rangers new strips.
    However all three now on sale as predicted in time for the Glesga Fair.
    Young Mr Stockbridge better have brokered a good deal becasue they still need all the cash they can get.

    Have to say I quite like the look of the away strip.


  39. Charlotte Fakeovers says:
    June 26, 2013 at 1:07 pm

    “Let’s just blow that Charles Green claim to smithereens. Craig Whyte was always a key player in this game. His shares were absolutely vital to the end game. As part of the deal, Craig permitted Imran to vote by proxy on his behalf with matters relating to the Rangers name change to RFC 2012 plc.

    Without that smokescreen, it may have been impossible to carry on with the ‘Rangers’ brand and the current reincarnations would most certainly not have been permitted to share a similar name to the organisation in administration.

    It stank then, it still does.”
    ——————–
    Note the salient text :

    ” Craig permitted Imran to vote by proxy on his behalf with matters relating to the Rangers name change to RFC 2012 plc.”

    Then Google ‘RFC 2012 plc’. Result :

    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC004276

    This is not Sevco. She was not talking about Sevco. The discussion on Sevco 5088/Scotland is interesting but it is nothing to do with Charlotte’s comment (reproduced in full above – ‘for the avoidance of doubt’).

    Charlotte was talking about oldco (are we alloed to say that?).


  40. Charlotte Fakeovers says:
    June 26, 2013 at 1:07 pm

    “Let’s just blow that Charles Green claim to smithereens. Craig Whyte was always a key player in this game. His shares were absolutely vital to the end game. As part of the deal, Craig permitted Imran to vote by proxy on his behalf with matters relating to the Rangers name change to RFC 2012 plc.

    Without that smokescreen, it may have been impossible to carry on with the ‘Rangers’ brand and the current reincarnations would most certainly not have been permitted to share a similar name to the organisation in administration.

    It stank then, it still does.”
    ——————–
    Note the salient text :

    ” Craig permitted Imran to vote by proxy on his behalf with matters relating to the Rangers name change to RFC 2012 plc.”

    Then Google ‘RFC 2012 plc’. Result :

    http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC004276

    This is not Sevco. She was not talking about Sevco. The discussion on Sevco 5088/Scotland is interesting but it is nothing to do with Charlotte’s comment (reproduced in full above – ‘for the avoidance of doubt’).

    Charlotte was talking about oldco (are we allowed to say that?).


  41. Sam says:
    June 27, 2013 at 12:58 pm
    ————————————–
    The important link here is Tembusu Investments Limited …… thats the Rafat Ali Rizvi link.
    We know Rizvi is linked to CG and I|A through CF tape and docs provided. ….. We know that £5.5m was recieved by IA and they discussed share division …..
    So where was it squirreled ……
    Blue Pitch Holdings looks a likely place but cannot prove it ….. just a gut feeling

    Morgan has only £400k invested but he does link to Nova

    But no Nova link to Blue Pitch Holding that I am aware (other than somewhere I seem to recall someone suggesting a possible) ….


  42. I wrote to the AIM compliance people by email on Monday. I asked why there has as yet been no 6 month report from RIFC, although by my reckoning a report for the 6 months to 28/2/2013 was due by 31/05/2013. I’ve had no reply.

    I know that at least one other poster raised the matter with AIM. Does anyone know what’s going on here? I suspect that this just might be the real story. I wonder what the institutional investors make of this apparent compliance failure?


  43. newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 12:33 pm

    Remember that CG has apparently satified the SFA on the names behind the Inst Investors ….
    CG named Alessandro Celano as the Blue Pitch Holdings connection …..
    ———————————————————————————————————

    Well he says he satisfied the SFA but who did he name? Did he name the actual investors or the front-man representing the investment vehicle used and I believe it to have been the latter.

    And that takes us to another point in that I think that the only ones who the SFA did a fit & proper ‘test’ on was the original consortium investors in TRFCL and not the clients of the Institutional ones who placed £17 million shares at flotation in RIFC Plc.

    You’re right that Celano was named by Green as representing Blue Pitch Holdings but that was later changed to Moussami the lawyer from Lebanon I think. There have always been three separate theories as to who the clients of Blue Pitch Holdings actually are. It certainly is an investment vehicle but I don’t know that anyone has ever determined whether it is composed of Middle Eastern investors, Singaporean investors or possibly Zeus investors.

    One thing I am virtually certain about is that none of the individual investors will be known or have been disclosed to the SFA. And that goes for the other blind trusts, investment vehicles and offshore companies IMO.

    Obviously we also don’t know who the individual clients of the 4/5 Institutional Investors who together invested £17 million at flotation but the separate Institutional Investors are known and are subject to AIM Rules. That wasn’t the case with the original consortium investors.


  44. Take on a whole country.
    What could go wrong………………

    Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/13)

    Subject Matter
    Banking enterprise

    Date Registered
    May 19, 2011

    Date of Constitution of Tribunal
    Constituted: September 21, 2011

    Composition of Tribunal

    President: Gavan GRIFFITH (Australian)

    Arbitrators: Joan DONOGHUE (U.S.)

    Muthucumaraswamy SORNARAJAH (Australian)

    Party Representatives

    Claimant(s) Respondent(s)
    Dentons, London, U.K. KarimSyah, Jakarta, Indonesia

    Status of Proceeding (View Procedural Details)
    Pending (the Tribunal holds a hearing on jurisdiction in Singapore on January 22 – 24, 2013)
    Rafat Ali Rizvi v. Republic of Indonesia (ICSID Case No. ARB/11/13)

    Original Arbitration Proceeding

    Development
    May 19, 2011

    The Secretary-General registers a request for the institution of arbitration proceedings.
    September 21, 2011

    The Tribunal is constituted in accordance with Article 37(2)(a) of the ICSID Convention. Its members are: Gavan Griffith (Australian), President, appointed by agreement of the Parties; Joan Donoghue (U.S.), appointed by the Claimant; and Muthucumaraswamy Sornarajah (Australian), appointed by the Respondent.
    October 18, 2011

    The Respondent files preliminary objections pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5).
    October 25, 2011

    The Tribunal holds a first session by telephone conference.
    November 30, 2011

    The Claimant files observations on the Respondent’s preliminary objections.
    January 09, 2012

    The Respondent files further observations on its preliminary objections.
    January 30, 2012

    The Claimant files further observations on the Respondent’s preliminary objections.
    February 20, 2012 – February 21, 2012

    The Tribunal holds a hearing on the Respondent’s preliminary objections pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5) in Auckland, New Zealand.
    April 04, 2012

    The Tribunal issues a decision on the Respondent’s preliminary objections pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5).
    April 18, 2012

    The Respondent files a request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question.
    May 08, 2012

    The Tribunal issues a decision on the Respondent’s application for the security for costs.
    May 18, 2012

    The Claimant files observations on the request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question.
    May 28, 2012

    The Respondent files a reply on the request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question.
    June 08, 2012

    The Claimant files a rejoinder on the request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question.
    June 22, 2012

    The Tribunal issues a decision on the Respondent’s request to address the objections to jurisdiction as a preliminary question; as a result, the proceeding on the merits is suspended.
    August 30, 2012

    The Respondent files objections to jurisdiction.
    November 01, 2012

    The Claimant files a counter-memorial on jurisdiction.
    November 22, 2012

    The Respondent files a reply on jurisdiction.
    December 13, 2012

    The Claimant files a rejoinder on jurisdiction.
    January 22, 2013 – January 24, 2013

    The Tribunal holds a hearing on jurisdiction in Singapore.


  45. Orlit Enterprises is run by the Singapore-based businessman Chan Fook Meng. He is a former business associate of the current Rangers chief executive Charles Green.

    Mr Green is a former chairman of Mr Chan’s company, Nova Enterprises. That company is also linked to current Rangers finance director Brian Stockbridge, who was an advisor during his time at the stockbrokers Allenby Capital when it was called Tembusu Investments Ltd.


  46. Castofthousands says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:21 pm
    ———————————–
    This is not Sevco. She was not talking about Sevco. The discussion on Sevco 5088/Scotland is interesting but it is nothing to do with Charlotte’s comment (reproduced in full above – ‘for the avoidance of doubt’).

    Charlotte was talking about oldco (are we alloed to say that?).
    ———————————————————————————–
    I thought it was quite clear …….
    But ….. It has everything to do with Sevco (either one) …..
    It allowed Sevco Scotland to be renamed to current Newco name
    But my understanding is that Craig’s original plan was for Sevco 5088 to be renamed … and be the continuation …..
    CG blew that one to pieces by suggesting that a Scottish Comp was required …./ CW bought into it ….. I mentioned before …. that this was the moment the Switcheroo plan by CG was triggered ….. And it’s all caught on tape … LOL


  47. Castofthousands says:
    June 27, 2013 at 12:56 pm

    You’re correct, Charlotte has never published the 5 way agreement though she claims to have a copy of it.
    She hasn’t published the draft agreement either.


  48. Enquiries:

    Nova Resources Limited

    Fook-Meng Chan, Chief Executive Officer

    Tel: + 65 6236 2985


  49. There may be trouble ahead…….

    Moves to ratify Scottish football’s new single league body have been delayed after SFL clubs failed to reach an immediate decision on merging with the Scottish Premier League.

    Representative from 30 clubs arrived early at Hampden on Thursday and were expected to rubber stamp the creation of the Scottish Professional Football League (SPFL)

    However SFL sides, including Annan Athletic, have now expressed doubts over the financial implications of the new set-up after studying due diligence.

    SFL officials failed to reach a consensus at a morning meeting and will reconvene for further talks at 4pm.

    STV understands senior SPL sources remain confident the SPFL will be created on Thursday. The top flight’s 12 member clubs held their own separate meeting at the national stadium and are still waiting at the league’s offices as they await word from their SFL counterparts.

    First Division clubs had threatened to resign from the SFL if the plans weren’t approved, with Raith Rovers secretary Eric Drysdale saying he had no concerns over the new body, even if all 42 clubs don’t decide to join.

    The proposals would see the current 12-10-10-10 league structure retained with a play-off introduced between the side finishing second bottom of the top flight competing with teams finishing second, third and fourth in the second tier.

    A new financial redistribution model would be introduced in addition to a new governance model.

    Earlier this month SFL chief executive David Longmuir hailed the “reluctant heroes” who voted through a plan to merge the body with the SPL.

    On the same day, SFL president Jim Ballantyne said the SFL had been a “casualty” of the process and said it was unclear as yet if the move would help Scottish football move forward.


  50. neepheid says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:38 pm
    ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:33 pm

    This is the best I can find on Bluepitch.

    http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/07/14/who-are-the-mysterious-sevcorangers-investors-some-answers-guest-post-by-ecojon/#more-1529
    ————————————————————————————–

    At the time it was a pretty good piece although things have moved on since then. And before I am accused of dissing ecojon I should point out that on Paul’s Blog I actually am ecojon as some on here are aware.

    However as to moving on, the important thing about Naqvi is that both myself and ecojon 🙂 think that Naqvi was the original major and perhaps only investor in Blue Pitch Holdings with approx £4 million invested. However it appears that most if not all of the original consortium investors were in for the short term and would get their cash back plus a nice interest payment.

    But it appears that cash was becoming a problem and in order to get to the flotation jackpot apparently original consortium investors were being told they weren’t getting their cash back but instead shares or debentures payable at a later date. The tale is that Naqvi told Green to get stuffed, demanded his money and pulled out of Blue Pitch.

    In a curious echo of this Green made a statement that Naqvi was an investor in RIFC Plc at the time he was trying to drum-up Institutional Investors for the RIFC Plc flotation placement. He then had to make the most cringing apology that although Naqvi was a personal friend that he wasn’t investing in RIFC Plc as it was outwith his core investment strategy or geography or whatever – I’m going from memory but the statement should still be there on Rangers official site.

    I doubt if any of the Institutional Investors ever saw that statement which probably never saw the light of day in the SMSM either – just imagine a really wealth guy in control of billions in funds doesn’t want to invest in his pal’s new biz opportunity . Need I say more.

    In view of Naqvi’s middle eastern interests there is a strong possibility that he knew Green either from the Panceltica housing debacle or a previous medical clinic debacle but I truly hae ma doots that Naqvi, who has enormous financial clout, would view Green as a personal friend.


  51. newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:44 pm
    ————————————————————————————–

    Imagine the consequence of the effect, changing the entity company law jurisdiction from English Law to Scottish Law.


  52. If SFL knock back SPFL proposals – can we realistically expect to see 1st division clubs resign and join SPL2? Is there time to approve the changes?

    All things considered, should we really put our faith in the SPL running the game any better than it has managed with the top teams?

    and, onto our pet theme….where would this leave Sevco currents and it’s bulging squad of players aged over 21?


  53. ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:14 pm

    In a curious echo of this Green made a statement that Naqvi was an investor in RIFC Plc at the time he was trying to drum-up Institutional Investors for the RIFC Plc flotation placement. He then had to make the most cringing apology that although Naqvi was a personal friend that he wasn’t investing in RIFC Plc as it was outwith his core investment strategy or geography or whatever – I’m going from memory but the statement should still be there on Rangers official site.
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Here it is-

    http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/2451-charles-green-statement

    “A lot of attention has focused on investment funds which have taken a shareholding in the Club to date.
    “For example, I would like to clarify that in the case of Blue Pitch Holdings, the legal beneficiary is Mazen Houssami and not Arif Naqvi of Abraaj Capital.
    “Mr Naqvi is a personal friend of mine and I approached him early on in the process about a shareholding but he has not proceeded on the basis that the investment fell outside the core geography he invests in.”


  54. Sam says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:47 pm
    Enquiries:

    Nova Resources Limited

    Fook-Meng Chan, Chief Executive Officer

    Tel: + 65 6236 2985
    ============================================
    WRT Orlit,
    was it not reported that one of its directors was the wife of a Mr Rafat Ali Rizvi?.


  55. Sam says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:47 pm
    ————————————
    I keep getting drawn to that person …. I’m missing the connect …. help ! … having a dumb moment !

    Eco …. well done on research …… does #68 still post (you will know who I mean)


  56. Sam says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:15 pm

    newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:44 pm
    ————————————————————————————–
    Imagine the consequence of the effect, changing the entity company law jurisdiction from English Law to Scottish Law.
    ———————————————————————————-

    I haven’t a shred of evidence on this and have been hoping that CF might produce something. But I have assumed for a long time that a major reason the English company Sevco 5088 had to be ditched in favour of the Scottish Sevco Scotland was that it allowed Ticketus to be stiffed.

    Under English Law jurisdiction Ticketus still owned the seat income even for a newco Rangers but under Scots Law it didn’t. Sometimes simple solutions are the ones that are what happens rather than complex conspiracies.

    However, even if CF has this material she might not release it depending on her agenda and who might be pulling her strings. Because the evience, if it exists, could possibly lead to criminal charges if a conspiracy was involved to defraud Ticketus. I hasten to add I have no evidence of this or I would, of course, contact the cops to allow them to investigate and ascertain the actual facts.


  57. torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    Charlotte Fakeovers ‏@CharlotteFakes 8m

    Much ado about nothing support from @LorrainHerbison 1. http://www.scribd.com/doc/150358640/Lorraine-Herbison … then listen to 2. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-16912365
    ===============================================================================

    Oh dear pass me the sick bag – the intrepid, fearless and courageous Scottish journalist at work – I think not!


  58. newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:36 pm

    You’ve stumped me 🙂


  59. Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

    June 27, 2013 at 2:21 pm
    ‘and, onto our pet theme….where would this leave Sevco currents and it’s bulging squad of players aged over 21?’
    ____________________________________________-
    Was wondering about that myself, NTHM. You’d expect everything to return to the status quo, after all, nothing has actually changed yet… except TRFC have indulged in signing players they can’t register and are over 21! They will no doubt come up with an excuse to change the relevant rule, possibly along the lines ‘…TRFC have been led to believe there would be no such limitation, and so we have decided to suspend/remove this rule that has made it impossible for many other SFL teams to increase their squad over the years to levels they can’t possibly afford!’ 🙂 Of course, that could always be countered by saying that TRFC have a registration embargo, so no new players are registered yet, and if they’ve entered into this signing spree, and have gone over their quota of over 21 year old players as a result, then it’s their own fault for jumping the gun and acting on what was merely a proposal! They will probably have to put out a call for Sandy Bryson!


  60. ecobhoy says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:38 pm
    ———————————————————————————

    Well done.
    Good post.


  61. Palacio67 says:
    June 27, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    http://saynotothesameclub.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/letter-to-the-scottish-football-association/
    A very well written piece, the author asks us all to get writing in support.
    ————————————————————————————————
    He has certainly laid out his argument very clearly. I have fired off a shortened version to Regan by snail mail but I’m not holding my breath.

    Dear Sir,
    The Rangers Football Club : Old Club or New Club
    If the Scottish Football Association recognises The Rangers F.C. to be the club founded in 1872, would you please explain to me of the basis for this, and how it relates to Scots law and UEFA statute.
    Yours faithfully,


  62. newtz says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:36 pm
    I keep getting drawn to that person …. I’m missing the connect …. help ! … having a dumb moment !
    ————————————————————————————————————————-

    Orlit Enterprises is run by the Singapore-based businessman Chan Fook Meng. He is a former business associate of the current Rangers chief executive Charles Green.

    Mr Green is a former chairman of Mr Chan’s company, Nova Enterprises. That company is also linked to current Rangers finance director Brian Stockbridge, who was an advisor during his time at the stockbrokers Allenby Capital when it was called Tembusu Investments Ltd.

    ———————————————————————————————————————
    Newtz,

    Fookin hell;

    Chan FooK Meng = Fook Meng Chan = Orlit = Nova = Tembusu = Allenby = RAR = CG = BS = IA = CM = yer fooked!


  63. neepheid says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:25 pm
    ———————————
    Mazen Houssami, Alessandro Celano …. so which one …. He has mentioned both ??? …. or none …. is whoever he named to SFA just a cover ?

    On Naqvi …. thats a direct link …. but rumoured that he ran from the deal when he discovered who else was involved …. ! (Rizvi ?)
    ————————————————-
    torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:29 pm
    ————————————————
    Is that the link then ….. can anyone confirm it …… if link between (any) inst Inv and Rizvi can be confirmed than there is no way the lid can be kept closed …. ! …. It becomes an International Scandal on the Nuclear scale …. !

    Eco …. will PM you tonight with #68 ref (don’t want to advertise)


  64. neepheid says:
    June 27, 2013 at 2:25 pm

    http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/2451-charles-green-statement

    “A lot of attention has focused on investment funds which have taken a shareholding in the Club to date.
    “For example, I would like to clarify that in the case of Blue Pitch Holdings, the legal beneficiary is Mazen Houssami and not Arif Naqvi of Abraaj Capital. “Mr Naqvi is a personal friend of mine and I approached him early on in the process about a shareholding but he has not proceeded on the basis that the investment fell outside the core geography he invests in.”
    —————————————————————————————————

    It’s a clever statement – because the info I have is that Naqvi didn’t have a shareholding and didn’t want one according to my sources although I am certain that any investment he made in the original consortium would have been backed by some kind of property security probably over Ibrox.

    And the really interesting point is why does Green makes the point that Naqvi isn’t the legal beneficiary of Blue Pitch Holdings. He is so keen to deflect any connection between Blue Pitch and Naqvi that it reinforces what I was told which is basically that when Naqvi tells someone to jump they jump and don’t delay by asking ‘How High’.

    And what is a ‘legal beneficiary’ anyway – does it have a special legal meaning? I have wondered whether it’s one of Charlie’s usual dictionary mangles coming from ‘beneficiary’ which can be a person or a legal entity and not necessarily the actual investor IMO.

    And there has never been a real explanation as to the switch from Celano to Moussami. And I wonder was Blue Pitch actually Rizvi’s ‘front’ and perhaps Naqvi was never involved but innocently dragged in by Charles talking-up his sales pitch?

    We don’t even know how Green became involved if you listen to him because he tells two tales neither of which might be accurate. To recap he says he was introduced to Zeus by Ahmad but has also stated that he was phoned on the morning after Rangers went into admin in February 2012 by a Singaporean investor and I think he sometimes broadens this to a family investing.

    Of course Rizvi has connections there and so does Morgan who in the early descriptions of him as an investor apparently represents family trusts. I know I know all fragments some of which don’t yet join-up but I believe all are relevant.


  65. upthehoops says:
    June 27, 2013 at 7:21 am

    Castofthousands says:
    June 27, 2013 at 10:34 am

    Before we get carried away showering Tom English with praise for basically doing his job and writing an article which is in the main factually accurate for once, I think it should be noted that he takes very great care to leave SDM entirely out of the picture by crafting a piece that links all RDC’s misdemeanours at Craig Whyte’s door.

    At one point English writes – “The Judicial panel report collared many of the directors at Ibrox and held them accountable in varying degrees for not doing enough – or anything at all –…”…. and you think “Here it comes…” only for the statement to peter out in the inevitable cop out – “… to raise the alarm with the authorities, despite being suspicious of what Whyte was up to.”

    i.e. Just another subtle variation on the Craig Whyte lone gunman myth

    Succulent lamb is still very much a part of Tom’s regular diet


  66. Sam says:

    June 27, 2013 at 3:05 pm
    ————————————
    Fookin ‘ell …………

    You have just blown me away ……………….
    I’m Speechless ……..


  67. Sorry Charlotte …. did you say something ? ( … LOL) …. but your thunder has just been stolen by good olde fashion digging ….. could do with some comment though on this (at some time …)

    I still dizzy ……… and think through again

Comments are closed.