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

Avatar Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

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?

 

About the author

Avatar

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

Boot wearing football, sport & total nonsense fan-- Gourmet, Bon Viveur and eedgit! - Oh and I write a bit occasionally!

4,181 Comments so far

Avatar

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on1:26 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Castofthousands says:
July 8, 2013 at 12:31 pm

I can see it both ways. Take the deal before it is off the table – makes sense.

However, the other side of the coin is this. SPL TV would have been a “real” alternative to Sky, and Sky may have made an improved offer rather than risk losing SPL football. The current deal with is believed to be worth £15M a year is laughable. It would not have been hard to get a bit more money out of them, surely?

I remember Charlotte posting something about standing down a media advisory / negotiation specialist. Was that related to the SPL / Sky negotiations? if so, the SPL obviously didn’t seek to do the best deal they could. Looks to me like they took Sky’s first offer. I think this highlights how shameful some of the recently reported bonus / pay rises are.

View Comment

Gaz

GazPosted on1:34 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Ticketus, administration, contracts, Scotland rather than England and stuff

Court of Session opinion

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2012CSOH55.html

Extract (Note, he mentions how this may shock English Lawyers)

[60] The court can intervene in an application under para 74 of Schedule B1 if an administrator’s decision is based on a wrong application of the law or is conspicuously unfair to a particular creditor: re C E King Ltd [2000] 2 BCLC 297. But that may not assist. In Scots insolvency law, a contracting party who has paid in advance for an asset does not thereby acquire an equitable right in the thing and is treated as an unsecured creditor: see paragraph [30] above. This may shock English lawyers who are used to equity stepping in to protect contractual expectations in some such circumstances. But no unfairness arises in an insolvency when unsecured creditors are treated equally in accordance with their rights.

[61] I was also referred to several legal texts, namely Lightman and Moss, “The Law of Administrators and Receivers of Companies” (5th ed.) at paras 12.50-12.52 and 25.002 – 25.004, Goode, “Principles of Corporate Insolvency Law” (4th ed.) at paras 11.25 and 11.102, “Pennington’s Corporate Insolvency Law” (2nd ed.) at pp. 366 and 393-4, Tolley’s “Insolvency Law” at [A5238], “Palmer’s Company Law” (25th ed.) Vol 3, at para 14.086, “Gore-Browne on Companies” para 52.32, and Fletcher, Higham & Trower, “Corporate Administrations and Rescue Procedures” (2nd ed.) at paras 6.4 and 6.5. Although the authors of those texts have presented the law in different ways from what I have written in this opinion, I consider that their presentations are wholly compatible with what I have said.

[62] I therefore summarise my views as follows: (i) an administrator must perform his functions in the interests of the company’s creditors as a whole (subject to the qualification in paragraph 3(4) of Schedule B 1 which is not relevant in this case); (ii) where the company in administration is insolvent, an administrator may have to decline to perform a contractual obligation of the company in pursuit of the statutory objective or objectives in his proposals if that is in the interests of the company’s creditors as a whole; (iii) should he do so, the court would not, absent exceptional circumstances, force the company to perform those contractual obligations to the detriment of the creditors as a whole; (iv) the court has power to interfere under paragraph 74 of Schedule B1 if the administrator’s decision is conspicuously unfair to a particular contractor or creditor; but (v) treating unsecured creditors in accordance with their legal rights in an insolvency would not of itself involve such unfairness.

Conclusion

[63] I conclude that the legal nature of the rights which Ticketus has in the Ibrox stadium, the season tickets for that stadium and the proceeds of future sales of the season tickets are purely personal contractual rights. In relation to the second alternative direction I refer the administrators to my discussion in paragraphs [38] to [62] above.

View Comment

Avatar

MarkybhoyPosted on1:34 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Finloch says:
July 8, 2013 at 5:58 am

No doubt.
My contention is this; while SDM and GM are the overlords of the piece their minions were many aswell as scattered widely.
We have seen and heard evidence from all quarters bar the support that certain information was widely known by those that needed to know, kind of thing. Couple that knowledge with the anodyne press releases and the Columbo head tells you there’s a boys club in attendance and you’re no allowed in! In fact, who telt you lot is often the inference made.

View Comment

Avatar

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on1:48 pm - Jul 8, 2013


beatipacificiscotia says:
July 8, 2013 at 1:26 pm
0 0 Rate This

Castofthousands says:
July 8, 2013 at 12:31 pm

I can see it both ways. Take the deal before it is off the table – makes sense.

However, the other side of the coin is this. SPL TV would have been a “real” alternative to Sky, and Sky may have made an improved offer rather than risk losing SPL football. The current deal with is believed to be worth £15M a year is laughable. It would not have been hard to get a bit more money out of them, surely?

I remember Charlotte posting something about standing down a media advisory / negotiation specialist. Was that related to the SPL / Sky negotiations? if so, the SPL obviously didn’t seek to do the best deal they could. Looks to me like they took Sky’s first offer. I think this highlights how shameful some of the recently reported bonus / pay rises are.

———————————————————————–

To be honest, makes sense.

SPL TV would be an almost non starter without the Rangers fanbase subbing up to watch Rangers games.

So, get the money in the bank while you can

Then, with a new deal in place, you buy yourself time to investigate the SPL TV possibilities – with or without a Rangers in the set up.

Of Course, the new SPFL set up could put the possibility of an SPFL TV on the table with the Sevco fanbase interested in watching their own team.

Rather than rush the decision to implement an SPFL TV, they now have a few years to think it over.

Look at the recent league merge/”restructuring”

the McLeish report looked at this for years and proposed a top 10 set up. Yet, when RFC died, they were throwing out 12-12-12/16-10-16 proposals with an unprecedented drive for quick and immediate change. But had these set ups been properly investigated? Or was it a desperate attempt to shoehorn in a cash cow?

IMO, we have a great opportunity to restructure the scottish game right now. Why not look into SPFL TV.

It could be a tiered subscription model…….

a basic “highlights” subscription – where users can view Mon-Fri evening, it would be highlights/goals of all games, some post match interviews, a bit of punditry, maybe even a “spotlight” on a club or player that week – say £10 a month

then a premium sub which would include weekend viewing for LIVE games.

games could be scheduled for 12, 2 and 4pm on a sat and sunday – all shown LIVE on the channel. All available as a subscription – £30 for a month or on a PPV basis – £10 for the day.

All monies would be split on a rather complicated and convoluted process lacking in transparency and consistency – hahahaha, just kidding, but you know, you wouldn’t put it past them!!

No, all monies to be split based on some criteria to be agreed – such as

League finishing position
number of domestic players in squad
number of under 21’s in squad
Clubs running at a loss would have their share of monies withheld until they brought themselves back into the black.
Clubs qualifying for European competition could have a portion of their share held in reserve – to cover unforeseen circumstances where the league might have to help them (or another club) out financially – every few years that pot of cash can go into the general prize money fund.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Time for us to do this TV deal ourselves – or at least convince Sky that we COULD do it ourselves. Who knows, maybe BT might be interested in such a deal and bundling up the basic sub in their broadband packages and allow the premium service to be PPV

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on2:07 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Markybhoy says:
July 8, 2013 at 3:37 am
2 26 Rate This

The Oxford Dictionary: Definition of Pantomime: an absurdly exaggerated piece of behaviour.

john clarke says:
July 7, 2013 at 9:37 am

Your point exhibits perfectly the difference between us. While many on here (including myself) laugh at the numbnuts who are contented to identify CW as the arch villain, you do likewise with SDM.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Markybhoy has had “a bit of a doin” on this one judging by the TD count. But I think he’s just trying to point out that this whole saga is not down to just one bad man, however we may view SDM. The “insertion” of Sevco into the Scottish game last summer required a great deal more than just the usual string pulling by the “Rangers men”.

Clearly (to me at least) the clubs who form the membership of the SFA, SPL and SFL were complicit in the whole grubby charade. If anyone requires evidence of that complicity, just look back a mere four weeks to the coronation of the saintly Ogilvie as SFA president, opposed by not one single club, great or small, out of 42. I have been banging on about this ever since, no doubt boring you all to death in the process, but just think about it- not one single club out of 42 expresses publicly any reservations whatsoever about the re-election of this admittedly conflicted individual. Not one. That, I’m afraid to say, points to a malaise in the game that goes much deeper than Sir David Murray. When we demonise him, we risk letting a lot of others off the hook.

Go after Murray by all means. I posted almost a year ago that I believed that he was still behind the scenes at Ibrox. (I got a lot of criticism back then for suggesting that, by the way) If anyone can prove it, if the evidence can be found, then it might even become a criminal matter. But in truth, that’s just a sideshow for this forum.

The SFA/SPL/SFL are the real concern. Shennanigans at the SFA predate the Murray years, as many here have already pointed out. It is the SFA stable that needs clearing out. Sevco/TRFC/RIFC will fail or survive, it is amusing to watch in a sense, but just a sideshow. What is fundamental is the governance of the game in Scotland. Will the clubs now clean out the SFA midden? Well look who is sitting on top of that midden today, courtesy of those very clubs (all of them, no exceptions). I can hold out no hope at all.

View Comment

Avatar

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on2:16 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
July 8, 2013 at 1:48 pm

An interesting take on this, and I wouldn’t say you are wrong. An SPFL could be an all-Scotland solution that will include any of the lower league games that there would be some interest in – such as every Rangers game, Fife derbies, Partick Thistle / Morton, Hearts games (?), etc. Would the SPFL TV also include League Cup games?

The timing may be better now than then.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on2:36 pm - Jul 8, 2013


I hadn’t realised that Cenkos was about to part company with RIFC Plc and see the possibility raised By Phil at http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/sevco-and-cenkos/

I was also reminded by another issue in the post as to how much was raised by the Rangers Flotation and tbh although I have seen many similar remarks I have never seen any evidence of a shortfall on what has previously been declared.

But as well all know this is a story where often all is not what it seems to be so if anyone has any ideas on the matter it might be worth looking at them as the answer could be critical to Rangers cash flow and the impact that any further insolvency event might have on Scottish Football.

When Cenkos was hired by Rangers as their Nomad and to place the Institutional Shareholding it seemed it was going to be a longish-term relationship.

For placing the 24,242,857 shares which raised £17M approx it looks like Cenkos Securities earned a £250K fee plus 5% commission on the aggregate placing price which I take to be £0.85M approx. The net cash raised on the placed shares has been estimated at £15M approx.

Additionally Cenkos were guaranteed warrants for 5 years allowing them to purchase RIFC Plc shares on each anniversary of the flotation date commencing 19 December 2013. The total number of warants would equal 1% of the Enlarged Share Capital price and the price payable calculated at the 70p placing price plus 10% premium. Perhaps Cenkos thought that as the last 2 million shares issued in TRFCL went at £1 a piece then the shares would be a soaraway success. They did reach 94p in January this year but have steadily fallen since then to 52p at present and many predicting a 35-40p price before big transfers/purchases take place.

Seems to me that pre-flotation Cenkos appeared to believe the RIFC Plc shareprice would continue to rise for at least 6 years but I doubt if they would want to exercise their warrant this year although funny things can happen with share prices when there is a battle for control of a company for whatever reason.

As well as the placement earnings Cenkos also has a Nomad and brokerage role with RIFC Plc and is paid £70K per annum for those services with a 3 month termination notice period by either side.

Returning to the money raised by the flotation we have the net £15M in the placed Institutional Investor shares and then the disappointing fan offer shares which were expected to raised £10M but ended-up with only 7,437,999 shares sold at 70p = £5.2M. The actual net amount is difficult to determine as I don’t know what costs related to the fan offer sale.

But the maximum probable flotation amount would appear to be £20.2M net unless anyone has a different take on it.

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on2:53 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Just been told this morning that the company that I work for are winding up. A fire at the factory back in April, the inability to generate additional funds and insufficient payout from Insurers means the major shareholders are calling it a day. My pay off has been generous and from what I understand their intention is to close it down properly and ensure all outstanding debts are paid. The company brand name and equipment is being sold off if a buyer can be found. If someone buys the latter are they the same company ? I for one won’t feel any affinity with them. Thinking of starting a charity collection donations greatly accepted 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

briggsbhoyPosted on2:55 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Anybody know any spivs with spare cash or somebody else’s who could rescue us at the 11th hour 🙂

View Comment

Avatar

FinlochPosted on3:02 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Neepheid, Markybhoy

We are probably saying the same things

All roads lead to SDM, not because he was some kind of malevolent creator with a vision but because his control of the establishment core of our game in the twenty years or so before he “sold” his “precious” to a pal’s son has pretty much framed what has been, is and will be happening to our game
He bought a club which already was fully in control of the game at all levels with influence everywhere and total power.
He wisely maintained that and cultivated the generals and footsoldiers that he and his establishment and ambitions needed.
it was never sudden and more an evolution rather than a revolution
Nobody noticed
And critically he had sufficient time to become the key architect of where we now are.

So SDM had and still has influence right through our game and many feel a debt of honour to him and his team.
In fact I believe his influence remains right through from CO through his wee pal JT to the Edinburgh establishment
I.e.administrative, media, political and social though our countries social economic links with the blue team.

When SDM realised his ambitious spending and tax avoidance tricks were leading to an inevitable event I genuinely believe that he was convinced by the people in the right positions that a brief insolvency event would be finagled.
Hence the arrival of CW and the £1 transaction.

What has happened since has been off piste and off plan with CW and his pals turning “rogue” and doing what they do best.
SDM and his pals across the game and in the media too have been frantically trying to save SDMs legacy and the clubs future while combatting these rogue elements who smelt a bigger feast than they had originally been offered.

So I believe all roads here still lead to SDM and his influential pals.

And just like the Liverpool fans it will take a while for the truth to out.

View Comment

Avatar

SamPosted on3:36 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Gaz says:
July 8, 2013 at 1:34 pm
——————————————————————
Duff & Duffers, David Grier – :slamb: 🙄

[6] Ticketus operates a business of buying and selling tickets for, among others, sporting events. The two contracts with Ticketus, which I discuss below, in summary involve the sale by Rangers to Ticketus of season tickets and an agency arrangement by which Ticketus is to receive the income flow from the sale of the season tickets.

On or about 9 May 2011 Ticketus paid £20,300,912 for the first tranche of the season tickets which covered the seasons 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. On or about 21 September 2011 Ticketus paid a further £5,075,213 for the second tranche of season tickets, which covered the seasons 2013-2014 and 2014-2015.

I am informed that the expected income flow from the sale of the season tickets is likely to represent about 60% of the cash flow of Rangers in those seasons.

Accordingly, the sale of that income flow is likely to have a significant effect on what interested parties may bid for the majority shareholding in Rangers or for that company’s business and assets.

[16] The administrators’ legal advisers have challenged the enforceability of the STA. It envisaged that Rangers would use the payment for the first tranche STA tickets to effect the repayment of its debt of about £18 million to Bank of Scotland plc.

It was also proposed that Rangers would lend £16 million to Wavetower Limited (now called The Rangers FC Group Limited) to enable that debt to be repaid and that the bank’s debt and its securities would be assigned to Wavetower Limited (Schedule 19). The administrators’ legal advisers have asserted that the STA is illegal on the ground that it was an agreement for the giving indirectly by Rangers of financial assistance for the acquisition of its shares contrary to section 678 of the Companies Act 2006.

The existence of this challenge is not however relevant to the directions which I have to give as I must assume at this stage that the Ticketus agreements are valid.

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on3:38 pm - Jul 8, 2013


I think one of my great fears is that SDM arises (phoenix-like?) as one of the ‘True Gers Men’ who will shortly step forward to ‘save’ the club after the ‘punishments’ and ‘fly kicks’ of the recent past.

The MSM will lap up the new dining privileges placed in front of them and hail the new boss (same as the old boss).

Shorn of previous crippling debt from the tax cases, and with a paternal (but unknown) stadium ownership, RFC Mk. II will head back where they belong at the summit of Scottish football. Carpets will be lumpy but quickly forgotten about.

Can it happen? With everything else that has gone their way nothing would surprise me.

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on3:43 pm - Jul 8, 2013


ecobhoy says:
July 8, 2013 at 2:36 pm

I was also reminded by another issue in the post as to how much was raised by the Rangers Flotation and tbh although I have seen many similar remarks I have never seen any evidence of a shortfall on what has previously been declared.

But as well all know this is a story where often all is not what it seems to be so if anyone has any ideas on the matter it might be worth looking at them as the answer could be critical to Rangers cash flow and the impact that any further insolvency event might have on Scottish Football.
++++++++++++++++++++++
Cash flow is all that matters for a company without access to any line of credit. The interim accounts for the 7 month period to 31 December 2012 are the most recent, and most reliable information that we have. At 31 December, there was just over £21m in the bank. That was after the IPO.

http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/296

The same accounts show operating expenses of £15.7m for the 6 month, 2 week trading period. That is £2.4m per month. Another £5m (minimum) was spent in January in buying property and paying off oldco football debts.

So, since 31/12/2012, at least £20m has been spent on operating expenses and properties/debt repayments. How much money came in between 31/12/2012 and 30/06/2013? Ten home games, so optimistically maybe £2m?

That means £3m in the bank at 30 June, excluding pay-offs to Green, Pinsent Masons, players who have been released, staff who have been made redundant. The wage bill has yet to be significantly reduced, so outgoings will remain at over £2m per month. Maximum season ticket take is around £8m, although I’m guessing nothing like that has been received yet. But let’s assume £8m ST money received by 31 July, plus £3m in the bank today, less £2.4m for July’s operating expenses, that leaves around £9m in the bank at 31 July. Which means insolvency by Christmas, unless a very good samaritan comes along.

View Comment

Avatar

TSFMPosted on4:00 pm - Jul 8, 2013


For anyone having difficulty with the smiley buttons, you can add the wee lamb smiley with

:slamb:

I’ve changed the star ratings to lambs as well 🙂

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on4:47 pm - Jul 8, 2013


:slamb:

View Comment

jean7brodie

jean7brodiePosted on4:49 pm - Jul 8, 2013


oops!! just checking! 😕

View Comment

Avatar

SamPosted on5:06 pm - Jul 8, 2013


‘Lord’ Hodge = This clown is the master of spin…………………..
Not so much Court Officer but Court Jester 😆

[4] When the initial appointment of the administrators was discovered to be invalid, Rangers applied to the court for a retrospective appointment and by interlocutor dated 19 March 2012 the court appointed the Noters as administrators of Rangers with effect from 14 February 2012, which was the date of their purported appointment.

In its petition for the making of an administration order Rangers referred to a debt of over £9 million due to HMRC and stated that as at 14 February 2012 it was unable to pay its debts as they fell due for payment.

When seeking the retrospective administration order on 19 March Mr Sellar QC for Rangers confirmed that that inability remained.

[5] In the petition seeking the administration order it was stated that the purposes of the administration are (a) rescuing Rangers as a going concern, or (b) achieving a better result for Rangers’ creditors as a whole than would be likely if it were wound up without first being in administration.

To achieve either of those purposes the administrators consider that two options are realistically open to them, namely (i) a subscription of new shares in Rangers and a sale of the present majority shareholding combined with a company voluntary arrangement between Rangers and its creditors (“a CVA”) under Part 1 of the 1986 Act or (ii) a sale of the business and assets of Rangers, again combined with a CVA.

View Comment

Avatar

FIFAPosted on5:13 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Reading the guff thats being printed ,particuarly in the Glasgow evening times relating to The Rangers latest signings and how they are off the radar talent before a ball is kicked in earnest these guys will have a value of ,well ,off the radar,they will rake in millions come the January window,watch this space.

View Comment

Avatar

tic6709Posted on5:18 pm - Jul 8, 2013


(‘:slamb:’) Jus

View Comment

Avatar

HirsutePursuitPosted on5:41 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Duplesis
————-
To use blockquotes see:

http://wordpress.org/support/topic/ltpgt-tag-before-ltblockquotegt

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on5:41 pm - Jul 8, 2013


neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 3:43 pm

Which means insolvency by Christmas, unless a very good samaritan comes along.
===================================================================

As you know I’ve thought for some time that December/January 2014 without another share sales or Sugar Bear really could be crunch time.

But there is now the mention about Cenko possibly walking away. The directors and key employees of RIFC Plc are locked-in for 12 months until this December but: ‘The Locked-in Shareholders have also agreed for a further period of 6 months to only dispose of an interest in Ordinary Shares following consultation with the Company’s broker and provided such disposal is effected through the Company’s broker and in such manner as the broker may reasonably require with a view to maintenance of an orderly market in the Ordinary Shares.’

Now should there be a wish to divest a lot of shares come this December would that be easier or harder depending on whether Cenkos was retained or let go as the broker – being as Cenkos were the ones who got those involved to sign the agreement in the first place?

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on5:53 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Re Cenkos ‘walking away’ and the comments by ecobhoy regarding the extended shareholder lock-in period they set up – did Cenkos jump or were they pushed?

Is this a rerun of what happened with the original Trustees for the EBTs?

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

Avatar

SamPosted on6:18 pm - Jul 8, 2013


ecobhoy says:
July 8, 2013 at 5:41 pm
——————————————————————-

‘other than in limited circumstances such as’

‘or in the event of a takeover of the company.’

Sam says:
June 29, 2013 at 9:35 am

Company Rangers Int F.C. PLC
TIDM RFC
Headline Share Transfer Agreement
Released 11:20 05-Jun-2013
Number 3537G11

RNS Number : 3537G
Rangers Int. Football Club PLC
05 June 2013



Rangers International Football Club plc

(“Rangers”, the “Company” or “Club”)

Share Transfer Agreement

The Company announces that under an agreement entered into by Charles Green, the former CEO of the Company, with Laxey Partners Ltd (“Laxey”)

‘on 19 October 2012′,

Mr Green has agreed to transfer 714,285 shares owned by him to Laxey, once free to effect a transfer. Under the terms of the lock-in agreement entered into by Mr Green with the Company on 7 December 2012, Mr Green is prevented from transferring shares before 7 December 2013,

without the consent of Cenkos Securities plc other than in limited circumstances such as to
connected persons,
a family trust
or in the event of a takeover of the company.

View Comment

Avatar

FIFAPosted on6:28 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Question ,We know another share issue is needed to fuel the bus beyond xmas ,and Ally will want to spend a large portion on buying fuds ,sorry duds,apologies again bloody typo’s ,that should read diddies to see him along ,he must be dying to spend a war chest ,he is always talking about battles and wars etc ,ok to the question ,how much would they need to bring in to accomodate any spending and then have some money left to buy petrol for the bus.

View Comment

Avatar

upthehoopsPosted on6:53 pm - Jul 8, 2013


YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
July 8, 2013 at 5:13 pm
=============================
Serious question – do they effectively get to write their own columns for the Evening Times? It appears they have been able to write their own columns in the Daily Record via Mark Hately, so it’s not beyond the realms of possibility.

View Comment

scottc

scottcPosted on6:55 pm - Jul 8, 2013


neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 3:43 pm
… Which means insolvency by Christmas, unless a very good samaritan comes along.

YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
July 8, 2013 at 6:28 pm
Question ,We know another share issue is needed to fuel the bus beyond xmas ,and Ally will want to spend a large portion on buying …

YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
July 8, 2013 at 5:13 pm

Reading the guff that’s being printed , … ,they will rake in millions come the January window,watch this space.

:slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:

Maybe that is the plan. Sign on a lot of players now with a view to selling them in January to provide funds to make it through to May. But then, these new players will not be allowed to play in August so it could be a difficult start to life in the new division and if they have to sell in January, they may struggle towards the end of the season as well. What a disaster if they don’t manage to reach the next division. 🙂

(Just testing the blockquotes, so may not work)

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on7:25 pm - Jul 8, 2013


YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
July 8, 2013 at 6:28 pm
2 1 Rate This

,how much would they need to bring in to accomodate any spending and then have some money left to buy petrol for the bus.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
If, as seems likely, they are flat broke by Christmas, then on current spending they will need another £15m or so just to get to the end of June 2014, when another lot of season ticket money comes in. Plus Ally’s “warchest”, say £10m. So they need £25m to get to June 2014.

In my humble opinion (and I’ve been wrong before) there isn’t a chance of them raising £25m by selling yet more shares. What they need is a very rich “rangers man”. But if he exists, where was he 12 months ago? And why invest now, when he can just wait for it all to go pop again, then pick up the pieces cheap.

I certainly can’t see the fans coming up with more than they did last time, about £7m I believe. Even they will smell a rat if asked to dig deep less than 12 months after the IPO. And even if they did come good for £7m again, that really makes no difference, except to kick the can down the road a bit.

This company is in very serious trouble. Which might explain the deafening silence from the Boardroom.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on7:28 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Sam says:
July 8, 2013 at 6:18 pm
————————————————————————————–

Sam – I’m afraid I seldom take what Rangers states at face value and to see what the full context of the relevant lock-in and tie-in is you have to look beyond the PR press release to the AIM Prospectus which states:

12.2.4 Lock in agreements

‘Lock-in agreements entered into between each of the Locked-in Shareholders, the Company
and Cenkos Securities dated 7 December 2012 pursuant to which the Locked-in Shareholders
have agreed not to dispose of any interest in Ordinary Shares for the period of 12 months
following Admission, except pursuant to acceptance of a general, partial or tender offer made
to acquire the whole or part of the issued share capital of the Company, an intervening court
order or in the event of the death of the shareholder.

‘The Locked-in Shareholders have also agreed for a further period of 6 months to only dispose of an interest in Ordinary Shares following consultation with the Company’s broker and provided such disposal is effected
through the Company’s broker and in such manner as the broker may reasonably require with a view to maintenance of an orderly market in the Ordinary Shares.’

So you can probably the see the importance of the broker in this and the fact that Cenkos who arranged it all might be going could be important.

View Comment

Gaz

GazPosted on7:30 pm - Jul 8, 2013


YOURHAVINGALAUGH says:
July 8, 2013 at 5:13 pm

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

Would these be the players who Rangers will be able to register on 1st September, and play as trialists before then because they are out of contract and couldn’t get any better offers elsewhere.

Those World Beaters who will be worth a fortune come January.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on7:32 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Sam says:
July 8, 2013 at 6:18 pm

I should have added that if the Prospectus hasn’t been followed that raises further issues and I’ll drop a line to AIM tomorrow and ask them if the additional 6 months orderly market tie is still in place and, if not, what they make of the ignoring of the AIM Prospectus.

View Comment

Gaz

GazPosted on7:37 pm - Jul 8, 2013


neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 7:25 pm

£5m from the fans I think

The IPO target was £27m.

£17m came from “institutional investors”.

£10m was “set aside” for the fans to buy.

The IPO raised £22m

View Comment

Avatar

slimshady61Posted on7:39 pm - Jul 8, 2013


redlichtie says:
July 8, 2013 at 3:38 pm
————————————–
I wouldn’t worry about David Murray coming back into Scottish football under any guise. There are a several reasons for this.

First of all, all the evidence is that he is pretty illiquid. His MIH business is still treading water with bank holding warrants that would enable it to take an even greater stake if he doesn’t keep up the payments. The cost of the FTT has still to be met by MIH and there is the potential MIH cost of losing the UTT.

His shares therefore are untradeable and most of his other assets are bricks and mortar, mainly sitting at historically low valuations in a buyer’s market.

Secondly, I think he would have no desire to come back; although we all consider he has got off very lightly so far, he probably doesn’t feel that way because being treated like an ordinary person is alien to him – someone used to being treated like a superstar, mixing with the rich and beautiful (Joanna Lumley – aye, right). Certainly he would have no interest in running Rangers if the dice can’t be loaded as they used to be.

Finally there is the question of whether the SFA/SPFL would consider him a fit and proper person. They might want to, but as has been alluded to on here, the end result of the BDO investigation might have some surprising results. The current thinking has been that CW is in the hot seat, with CG not far behind, and DM just (sadly) duped.

The real world isn’t like that; there would have been no CW and no CG without DM; also if the tone of questioning of CW by BDO, as revealed by CF, is genuine, then in my mind that thought process is leading towards leaving some if not the major part of the blame in the liquidation (=death) of Rangers at the door of David Murray. What we haven’t heard yet, but what undoubtedly exist, are recordings of conversations with DM or his Charlotte Square advisers; those, when they emerge, will be highly damaging.

To paraphrase you, redlichtie, Scottish football needs a weak David Murray, and on that front, there is I believe good news.

54 (loaded dice) to 0

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on7:42 pm - Jul 8, 2013


IMO the IPO prospectus is a bit like a political party modern manifesto .
Promise what your target audience want to hear then spend every day afterwards trying to find a way round what you have promised and if Bryson’s view on player registration was accepted then the Sevco prospectus should be breeze for the spivs .
Also don’t get all TDs crazy stating rules ,if there is one thing we have learned on here ,it is that rules do not apply to certain peepil

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on7:46 pm - Jul 8, 2013


neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 7:25 pm

And why invest now, when he can just wait for it all to go pop again, then pick up the pieces cheap.
=========================================================================

The danger with waiting until it all goes pop is that you can’t be sure what will happen to the property assets – there’s more chance of securing them by stepping in and doing an all-inclusive but obviously more costly deal.

Btw last time the fans raised £5.2M when it was thought they would manage £10M and that was the amount of share set aside.

View Comment

Avatar

FIFAPosted on7:50 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Gym Traynor will have his work cut out next season to come up with some new world records in his PR ,or maybe there will be ,but for all the wrong reasons,example ,The big bus has again broken its land speed record for going and returning from an away game ,the mystery masked driver ,[who is he,we demand to know] drives like a man possesed.,hmmm,this silver haired masked maruader has previous I am told for handling new coaches and has no issues handling this one,I am told Gym is planning a guess who raffle through out the season with tickets priced at 10gbp per guess the winners will be told just before the end of the season where they will then be entered into a new double cross bar challenge,the winner will get to keep both cross bars as there will no longer be a use for them at this ground ,go for it Gym.and come next June people will ask ,well some, where did all the raffle money go to.Well seen its quite out there.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on7:55 pm - Jul 8, 2013


jonnyod says:
July 8, 2013 at 7:42 pm

If there is one thing we have learned on here ,it is that rules do not apply to certain peepil
==================================================================

That might be the case but all the more reason to document when the rules are ignored IMO.

View Comment

Avatar

ollielogiePosted on8:02 pm - Jul 8, 2013


YOURHAVINGALAUGH on July 8, 2013 at 6:28 pm……………….

“Buy petrol for the bus…”

An involuntary laugh out moment – thanks for that! 😀

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on8:09 pm - Jul 8, 2013


ecobhoy says:
July 8, 2013 at 7:46 pm

Btw last time the fans raised £5.2M when it was thought they would manage £10M and that was the amount of share set aside.
++++++++++++
All the more reason why there won’t be a second share issue. For a company spending £2m+ every month, £5m is just chickenfeed. So where’s the rangers man with £50m to burn? Because it will cost all of that to get TRFC into the SPL. And then what? Yet more owner’s money required to be competitive, with no guarantee of CL football at the end of it.

There is no business case for trading out of this, since the only value is in the properties, and the football side is just a bottomless money pit.. I still think that TRFC will be given away, leaving RIFC holding the properties. But then the outlook for TRFC becomes even worse, with rent added to all the existing outgoings. It is just not a viable business until access to CL money is achieved. But when? Ten years? And who can afford to fund them until then? I would suggest no sane person. And insane people tend to be skint.

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on8:30 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Still a bit confused about the future outcomes wrt TRFC.

If, as many here suspect, TRFC has insufficient funds to see out next season – then presumably the SFA and the MSM are also fully aware of this risk.

I just can’t see any Sugar Daddy, [including Dave King], turning up at any point in the future to save the day.

And what I’m still trying to get my head round is why Sir Walter chose to become Chairman – when many thought he was actually going to resign ? He has a duty of care to his shareholders, so like it or not he is tied into the future fun and games with assorted spivs down Govan way.

However, if he had in fact resigned, he could have been a powerful voice to persuade the SFA, [& MSM], to publicly acknowledge that TRFC was financially unsustainable – and that TRFC was not deserving of a license for next season. Meanwhile Sir Walter could have attracted some financial backers to propose a ‘new economical’ TRFC playing out of a temporary home, e.g. Hampden ?

If McCoist jumped ship to join Smith they could have attracted the support to the new / real Rangers ?
With their contacts, they could have cobbled together a squad.

A sticking point would be McCoist and Smith accepting perhaps a 90%+ salary drop !

If TRFC hits the buffers, then by their very participation Smith and McCoist will be ‘tainted’ along with the spivs – so who would be the saviours for the next iteration of the Govan club ?

And are Smith and McCoist just hanging around to extract as much personal, financial benefit from the club – and when the cash does finally run out they will simply walk away permanently ?

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on8:40 pm - Jul 8, 2013


StevieBC says:
July 8, 2013 at 8:30 pm

And are Smith and McCoist just hanging around to extract as much personal, financial benefit from the club – and when the cash does finally run out they will simply walk away permanently ?

+++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer to that is a clear and emphatic yes. They will carry on milking the cow while it’s dying on its back with its legs in the air. They will only walk away once it’s dry as a bone. That is what passes for “dignity” down Ibrox way these days.

View Comment

Caveat Emptor

Caveat EmptorPosted on9:08 pm - Jul 8, 2013


On signing players now to exploit a sell-on value in January is just about as nuts a business plan as I have ever heard. And I’ve heard a few crackers!
With the notable exception of Jean Alain Boumsong, and we all know what was behind that ‘transfer’, it just doesn’t happen.
Consider the attendant risks. Player ‘A’ is a haddy. Player ‘B’ gets injured. Player ‘C’ is no way no how gonna give up his lucrative TRFC deal. Naebody wants any of them!!
Even if you sell on all of these guys, how do you expect to achieve your stated aim, progression through the leagues, back to your rightful etc, etc.
Imagine if you will that you are on the board of any football club and your management team came to you with this ‘cunning plan’. P45’s and butterfly nets would be my first thoughts!!

View Comment

Gaz

GazPosted on9:14 pm - Jul 8, 2013


neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 8:09 pm

Agreed.

I have yet to see anything done which would look like the new club moving towards being a viable business.

The options are cutting costs, increasing income, or a mixture of both. However it has to be enough to move from net monthly losses to breaking even or actual gains.

Otherwise money has to keep being provided, with their credit / banking issues where will that be coming from and for how long.

I can only see RIFC and TRFC separating at some point.

View Comment

Avatar

jonnyodPosted on9:26 pm - Jul 8, 2013


ecobhoy
Agreed we should record all rule bending /breaking /amending regards this saga .
StevieBC
I am of the opinion that all money taken in since CG was put in place and including a sizable chunk (if not all of this seasons STs has been syphoned off to pay back the big losers who don’t do walking away from the old clubs creditor list .
Wattie and Teflon Murray are still there to start the rallying call when the gullible will be persuaded to dig deep once again to put Sevco in the hands of real (old ragers men ).

View Comment

Avatar

Not The Huddle MalcontentPosted on9:29 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Caveat Emptor says:
July 8, 2013 at 9:08 pm

add to that, if Sevco then have a fire sale with admin/liquidation looming, what player would move for a fee knowing a move under freedom was coming their way

and what club would offer more than £20 for a player from a club desperate for cash?

View Comment

Avatar

whulliePosted on9:43 pm - Jul 8, 2013


🙂 Kinda like entry number 19, particularly some of the details in brackets.

http://billsportsmaps.com/?category_name=scotland

View Comment

Avatar

iamacantPosted on10:14 pm - Jul 8, 2013


whullie says:
July 8, 2013 at 9:43 pm

Kinda like entry number 19, particularly some of the details in brackets.

http://billsportsmaps.com/?category_name=scotland
——————————————————————————————————————-
They weren’t relegated to the Scottish fourth division, they applied to join the SFL.

View Comment

Avatar

ianagainPosted on10:23 pm - Jul 8, 2013


So I’m Nick Law. Just arrived from the ‘well. Expecting my wonderful new of the radar salary in September. Busboys turn up I’m back on my ‘well money.

Do I stay?

View Comment

Avatar

BangordubPosted on11:00 pm - Jul 8, 2013


I don’t mean to ask a stupid question but given the clouds of smoke I actually can’t remember. Did the famous “Crossbar £1M challenge” actually happen?

View Comment

Avatar

whulliePosted on11:06 pm - Jul 8, 2013


iamacant says:
July 8, 2013 at 10:14 pm

They weren’t relegated to the Scottish fourth division, they applied to join the SFL.
————————————————————————————————————-
I am in complete agreement IAC, hence the use of the word “some” wrt to the details in brackets.

View Comment

Shooperb

ShooperbPosted on11:16 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Not The Huddle Malcontent says:

July 8, 2013 at 9:29 pm

What, you mean like their spiritual predecessors did to Dundee with Gavin Rae and Khizanishvili? The ironing is delicious!

Actually, TRFC sort of have the right idea, although they appear to be copying it from Celtic – buy low (or sign on a bosman), give them a chance to strut their stuff in a high profile environment, and sell high. Only one flaw in that plan – Celtic’s bargains are strutting their stuff in the Champions league, whilst TRFC’s are doing theirs against Brechin etc. How many teams are going to offer serious money (in fact, ANY money) for players who’ve proved themselves against plumbers and teachers?

Oh, and just for the hell of it – :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on11:47 pm - Jul 8, 2013


Just as a matter of curiosity, has anyone seen any confirmation that Cenkos are soon to be out? There was a 3-months notice arrangement.
I’ve been in and out of various websites looking for some sign of a statement, or press release from either Cenkos or Daniel Stewart, or RIFC ,to no avail.

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on11:59 pm - Jul 8, 2013


neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 3:43 pm
………………………………..

You haven’t included walk ups and any extended cup run that would increase revenue. Granted it may or may not be significant..however I would still expect to see further heavy cost cutting…McCoist taking a hefty hair cut would be a start..

View Comment

Avatar

davythelotionPosted on12:00 am - Jul 9, 2013


As the outgoings increase and the income + savings//IPO decrease, the only thing open to TRIFC is to either have another share issue or find an investor (a genuine investor as opposed to a share buyer like Mr Prior).
The problem is, no one with any sense will buy shares
An investor would have to be prepared to lose north of £60M to get to break – even.
The well of stupidity is running dry. ST renewals are over ten months, even RM realise the futility of the ‘dignified silence’

View Comment

Avatar

SouthernExilePosted on12:12 am - Jul 9, 2013


john clarke says:
July 8, 2013 at 11:47 pM

Just as a matter of curiosity, has anyone seen any confirmation that Cenkos are soon to be out? There was a 3-months notice arrangement.
————————————————
It remains a kite flown by PMG.

View Comment

Avatar

paulmac2Posted on12:33 am - Jul 9, 2013


Panorama did a piece tonight on Donald Trump and Alex Salmond…

Salmond got an absolute pasting in the documentary for his questionable behaviour….HMRC suddenly sprang to mind…don’t know why?

View Comment

Avatar

john clarkePosted on12:41 am - Jul 9, 2013


SouthernExile says:
July 9, 2013 at 12:12 am
‘..It remains a kite flown by PMG.’
——–
If it’s true, the significance of it could only be that Cenkos are pulling out because they feel they cannot much longer report honestly to AIM that RIFC is actually worthy of a continued listing because they are being so extraordinarily mismanaged.

That is, changing Nomad/Broker would not have been RIFC’s decision.
I say this because, it seems to me, there would be no particular advantage to the spivs in having another NOMAD/Broker .

Because the twelve-month ‘shareholder lock-in’ could not be rescinded by a new NOMAD/Broker, no matter what previous connection there may have been between, say, Stockbridge and any head honcho of Daniel Stewart PLC.
Of course, if RIFC chose to dispense with the services of Cenkos, they may still have had some other dodgy reason for doing so.
Without seeing some kind of statement from any party it’s going to be difficult to know.

View Comment

peterjung

peterjungPosted on1:30 am - Jul 9, 2013


Anyone know what has happened with the SFA “investigating” the links between Green and Whyte?

RhebelRhebel on twitter posted a link to an article on the Telegraph website however this seems to be dated as May 11?

Has the @ScottishFA ditched their investigation in Craig Whyte's links with Charlie Green and the Sevco takeover? http://t.co/DCvEZgCihn— RhebelRhebel (@RhebelRhebel) July 8, 2013

I note this quote from Regan in the Article

“We should get some specific answers on those. We have seen the scope of the Pinsent Mason report, it is very detailed and thorough. We expect to see quite a lot of detail when it comes back in the near future.

So as of at least May 11 Regan admits that he has not even saw any result of this “independent” (stop laughing at the back please) investigation…he has saw the “scope”….well big deal …

The rest of the quotes in that article are rather shocking from a supposedly neutral at the head of the sport’s governing body….. here’s a few:

“You have got to feel for the fans, given what they have had to endure for the last 18 months or so. They thought they had a new dawn with Messrs Green and Ahmad coming in and it has turned sour on them again. You have to feel sorry for them.
“We’re all just hoping the board can get it sorted out and get them back on an even keel again.”
“I can’t believe after 12 months we are still talking about Rangers, the machinations in the boardroom and what may or may not have been the case. I’d thought for the fans’ sake that it would be a bright new dawn.
“To be fair to the club, I think men like Ally McCoist and Walter Smith also thought we would have moved on.
Sure thing Stewart…let’s just move on then shall we?

So…back to the original question…does anyone know the latest position from the SFA on Green Whyte links?

View Comment

StevieBC

StevieBCPosted on4:33 am - Jul 9, 2013


So, would anyone like to enter a competition to win “VIP tickets” for an evening with “stars of a legendary show” ?

Stars. Legendary.

…but don’t get too excited… :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/4996800/Vote-for-the-best-SPL-Goal-goal.html

View Comment

Avatar

Carfins Finest.Posted on7:17 am - Jul 9, 2013


Oh Dear.

Douglas Fraser‏@BBCDouglasF8m
Ex-chairman of #Rangers Malcolm Murray leaves the board, as does Phil Cartmell, the company announces. #rfc

View Comment

Avatar

Carfins Finest.Posted on7:33 am - Jul 9, 2013


Here’s the resignation announcement from RFC http://www.investegate.co.uk/rangers-int-f-c–plc–rfc-/rns/directorate-changes/201307090700118598I/

View Comment

Avatar

Rohan LightfootPosted on7:35 am - Jul 9, 2013


Directorate Changes

The Board of Rangers International Football Club plc has announced non-executive directors Malcolm Murray and Phil Cartmell have left the board.

Walter Smith, Chairman of Rangers, said: “Both Malcolm and Phil have made important and valuable contributions to the Club. The last year has presented the Club with a number of challenges and it has been beneficial to have two highly experienced non-executive directors such as Malcolm and Phil offering assistance.

“On behalf of the board I would like to thank them for their considerable efforts in helping to rebuild Rangers. Both men have other significant business interests and we wish them well in their future endeavours.”

For further information please contact:

Rangers International Football Club plc

Craig Mather, CEO
Brian Stockbridge, FD
Tel: 0141 580 8647

Cenkos Securities plc
Tel: 020 7397 8900
Stephen Keys, Adrian Hargrave, Max Hartley (Corporate Finance)
Russell Kerr (Corporate Broking)

Newgate Threadneedle
Tel: 020 7148 6143
Graham Herring / John Coles / Roddy Watt / Fiona Conroy

View Comment

Avatar

rougvielovesthejunglePosted on8:04 am - Jul 9, 2013


So there must have been an EGM after all and once again Yorkie gets his way and Cartmell and Murray step down as Phil suggested might be the case the other day.

Worrying times for the Sevco fans as it looks like the spivs are very much still pulling the strings!

View Comment

Avatar

twopandaPosted on8:16 am - Jul 9, 2013


Directorate Changes
“Both Malcolm and Phil have made important and valuable contributions to the Club. The last year has presented the Club with a number of challenges and it has been beneficial to have two highly experienced non-executive directors such as Malcolm and Phil offering assistance.
_
If they`ve made important valuable contributions and been beneficial – why force them out?
Seems they were only `offering assistance`
Gobblygook

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on8:32 am - Jul 9, 2013


paulmac2 says:
July 8, 2013 at 11:59 pm
5 0 Rate This

neepheid says:
July 8, 2013 at 3:43 pm
………………………………..

You haven’t included walk ups and any extended cup run that would increase revenue. Granted it may or may not be significant..however I would still expect to see further heavy cost cutting…McCoist taking a hefty hair cut would be a start..
+++++++++++++++
To get to my figure of current cash, I allowed for walk up income from 10 home games at £200,000 each- pure guesswork, of course, but I think it’s a generous estimate. If my calculation of £9m at 31 July is broadly correct, and they are still spending £2.4m per month, then they will be bust by January, if we say 12 home games before Christmas at 200k giving £2.4m income and 4 cup games at £500k giving another £2m, so adding that to the £9m gives £13.4m, which will be spent by mid January. If they fail in the cups, or even get away draws at small grounds, then the money will be gone by Christmas. Relying on cup runs to stave off insolvency must make for sleepless nights if you are responsible for the money side. And remember the highly paid manager’s “previous” in cup competitions!

Of course I’ve assumed that all the season ticket money is paid up front. In reality, a lot of the money will be paid in instalments. I’ve always paid up front, so I don’t know much about other ways of paying. Is it done through some sort of financing company, who gives the club money up front, and collect the instalments? Or is it the club which simply collects the instalments as they come in?

View Comment

Avatar

Exiled CeltPosted on8:37 am - Jul 9, 2013


Perhaps this loss of dignity was the final straw (having trouble with the summer chinos it seems!)

http://willievass.photoshelter.com/gallery-image/070713-Brora-Rangers-v-Rangers/G0000Thp2sgDgZLc/I0000y2vu59FDn3I/C0000RuSYb5vZE60

View Comment

Avatar

slimshady61Posted on8:44 am - Jul 9, 2013


john clarke says:
July 9, 2013 at 12:41 am
————————————
JC, remember advisers don’t always resign for policy disagreements or questionable mores on the part of the client. Sometimes it’s just that their fees don’t get paid on time……or at all.

Exiled Celt, things are not always what they seem. Apparently Malcolm Murray’s trousers got torn during the first half of the game, on the poor/dangerous wooden seats at Brora. Rumour has it he borrowed a spare pair from David Leggat at half time

54 (degrees) to 0 (stains)

View Comment

Avatar

neepheidPosted on8:49 am - Jul 9, 2013


rougvielovesthejungle says:
July 9, 2013 at 8:04 am
5 0 Rate This

So there must have been an EGM after all and once again Yorkie gets his way and Cartmell and Murray step down as Phil suggested might be the case the other day.

++++++++++++++
There was no EGM, that could only happen if every shareholder was first given notice of the time date and place. It would all have been announced on AIM also. Looks like Green has got his revenge on Murray, the Board have just given in to the inevitable, since Green commands enough votes to win easily. An EGM would just have been an expensive waste of time.

We just have to wait for the replacements to be named now. It is clear that Green will get his own men in place now. The fact that Walter can sit as puppet chairman on the same Board as Easdale while Charles Green pulls his strings just shows us all the true price of “dignity”- it’s whatever Walter is getting paid.

View Comment

Avatar

davythelotionPosted on9:01 am - Jul 9, 2013


CG is getting his nuts in line.
New board announce that due to irregularities, the real financial picture is not as it seems.
Then
Walter is compelled to ‘dispense’ with Ally’s contract
Then
Walter resigns for personal reasons
Then
Administration 2.0
Then
Carcass sold to ‘real rangers man’
CG et al walk away with bulging pockets.

View Comment

Avatar

ForresDeePosted on9:38 am - Jul 9, 2013


davythelotion says:
July 9, 2013 at 9:01 am

That sounds like a plan!

View Comment

Avatar

redlichtiePosted on9:44 am - Jul 9, 2013


The Board announcement begins :

“Rangers International Football Club plc (“Rangers”, the “Company” or “Club”)”

Are these words synonymous by any chance? They seem to be implying that is the case…..

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on9:55 am - Jul 9, 2013


Bangordub says:
July 8, 2013 at 11:00 pm

I don’t mean to ask a stupid question but given the clouds of smoke I actually can’t remember. Did the famous “Crossbar £1M challenge” actually happen?
==================================================
Yip and wasn’t won. All in all it was a very curious competition in the way it was organised and I pointed out some of the flaws in a lightly tongue-in-cheek way:

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/05/06/red-card-warning-for-rangers-1-million-competition-by-ecojon/

View Comment

Avatar

slimshady61Posted on9:57 am - Jul 9, 2013


ecobhoy says:
July 9, 2013 at 9:55 am
———————————
Looks like some of them can’t hit a urinal from less than 12 inches never mind a crossbar from 50 yards

Another stain on the corpse’s reputation

View Comment

Avatar

slimshady61Posted on9:59 am - Jul 9, 2013


This is the sort of publicity money can’t buy – http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/pictures-lifes-beach-rangers-players-2039599

Seems like they are waiting for a saviour….

Someone needs to tell them “He’s not a saviour, he’s a very naughty bus operator”

View Comment

Avatar

torrejohnbhoyPosted on10:05 am - Jul 9, 2013


davythelotion says:
July 9, 2013 at 9:01 am
———————————————————————————–
Hope said”good Rangers man” has a minimum of £60m to burn cause that’s what he’s gonna need!

View Comment

Avatar

ecobhoyPosted on10:19 am - Jul 9, 2013


slimshady61 says:
July 9, 2013 at 9:59 am

Seems like they are waiting for a saviour …. Someone needs to tell them “He’s not a saviour, he’s a very naughty bus operator”
==================================================================
Now that Green appears to be back in the driving seat I wonder if the new team coach will be replaced by a tarted-up Easdale double-decker ❓

View Comment

Comments are closed.