Their Master’s Voice

Bybroganrogantrevinoandhogan

Their Master’s Voice

Good Afternoon.

As virtually anyone on the internet who follows Scottish Football has come to realise, there is a reasoned and determined attempt at ignoring the content of the Charlotte Fakeovers files on the part of the mainstream print media— and indeed by the broadcast journo’s to an extent.

There is widespread speculation that the accessing of the information provided by Charlotte the Harlot was not all above board and the reluctance of the journalists to mention or comment on the documents, so far published on the internet, is often explained away by the lawyers allegedly advising that the content is tainted and so on.

That indeed might or might not be the case, and only the editors, lawyers, journalists and so on will truly know what their stance is on the revelations. Some will want the whole thing suppressed and others will be desperate to get into print, but thus far are frustrated in any attempt to do so.

However, as the documents do appear on the net only to be quickly followed by file disappearances and so on, there is an ever burning question which must be asked and thrown open to debate and argument.

The issue is not just how independent are the Sports Press in Scotland, but whether or not the relationship between certain sections of the press and Rangers or The Rangers is in fact lawful and deserving of football sanctions.

There is no doubt that many big businesses, local authorities and Governments use the services of PR firms and the likes to get information out to the public and to put their slant on any given situation. That is fair enough.

However, in recent days we have seen the release of documentation which, if accurate and true, shows that a leading Scottish PR company were specifically employed to place stories with the press which were designed to damage the reputation of, to embarrass or cause problems for certain other teams and personnel involved in Scottish Football.

Again I stress that all of this is subject to the caveat that what Charlotte is publishing may or may not be real and accurate. However, if what has been produced is in fact the genuine correspondence between the club and its professional advisers then that correspondence needs to be looked at.

The SFA and indeed the SPFL are the bodies that lay down rules which govern the conduct of clubs and their officers and employees.

So looking at these regulations let me just repeat some of them here:

Fisrt the rules of what was the SPL and which I presume are the rules of the SPFL:

A3.1 In all matters and transactions relating to the League and Company each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the Company with the utmost good faith.

A3.2 No Club, either by itself or its Club Officials, shall by any means whatsoever unfairly criticise, disparage, belittle or discredit any other Club, the Company or the League or in either case any such other Cub or the Company’s directors, officers, employees or agents (which shall, for the avoidance of doubt, exclude supporters).

The SFA handbook at article 5 places obligations on members to observe the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship in accordance with the rules of fair play, and to refrain from engaging in any activity which would constitute a breach of sections 1, 2 and 6 the Bribery Act 2010.

The details of the Bribery act can be found here:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/23/section/2

Basically, I think these rules mean that you cannot criticise belittle or try to damage the reputation of a club outwith the rules of the games and must at all times behave with integrity, in a sporting manner and with THE UTMOST GOOD FAITH!

The details,as released by Charlotte, show that there is at best a conflict of interests at times with various parties being both employed by the club and paid by radio stations or newspapers to comment on matters relating to all aspects of Scottish Football. As a member of the PR staff at Ibrox presumably such employees are paid to tow a certain party line when commenting in the media and so throw a spin on any given set of facts and circumstances that suits whoever is in control of Ibrox.

Further, it has been suggested that certain individuals acting in this way can also represent the views of for example Walter Smith — and so act as their mouthpiece if necessary.

Such practices may be unpleasant and undesirable but not necessarily against the laws of the game. It would just mean that the newspapers and broadcasters concerned cannot be regarded as independent or objective in their comments or views — they are merely towing an employers line. In short they are HMV— His Masters Voice!

Equally, we have seen supposedly independent journalists and editors referred to in such a way that it is clear they are being asked to spin news a certain way for whatever reason — including the suggestion that if they do not comply then some kind of action will be taken which the parties concerned would rather avoid — such as private matters becoming public.

However, of far greater interest is the suggestion that where necessary the newspapers or whoever will be used to spread negative stories about another club, its employees, directors or whoever.

Such a position may well amount to a breach of articles 3.1 and 3,2 of the SPL ( now SPFL rules) and against the principals set out in the SFA handbook.

Both the SFA and the SPL ( SPFL) has a press office and legal officers.

Both grant rights to broadcasters and journalists, and allow members of the press access to their officers and officials.

Both bodies are free to set out what is acceptable conduct on the part of clubs in this area…… and what is not!

Without even alluding to the detail of the Charlotte revelations, or needing to enquire into the details of the Charlotte documents, I would have thought that the governing bodies would be capable of issuing a formal reminder, to all clubs currently playing at any level in Scottish football, of the content of these rules and that any breach of the rules will not be tolerated.

Of course the matter becomes more convoluted if any officers of the SFA or SPL were involved in the employment of any PR companies or agencies on behalf of a member club and engaged in briefing any such agency about what to say when it comes to the affairs of other clubs. Surely you cannot have an executive officer of a governing body who is in any way linked to the employment of an agency which breaks rules on behalf of a member club?

However, few of these people ever appear on the airwaves to answer questions on a personal basis, and very few expose themselves to questions from the public.

However, many of the commentators and journalists named in the Charlotte documents are regulars on the airwaves and could, in theory, be asked whether or not they are no more than “Their master’s voice” as would appear to be the case if the Charlotte documents are in fact genuine.

If the Scottish Footballing Public are to be entrusted with the truth — and why shouldn’t they in this era of open and transparent football governance– then I think they are entitled to enquire direct whether or not the journalists, players, ex players,managers directors, broadcasters and governing body officials believe in articles 3.1 and 3.2 of the SPFL rules and article 5 of the SFA handbook?

Oh– and maybe the same people could provide some practical examples of what they would consider to be breaches of these rules and what the appropriate sanctions might be?

Specifically– do the actions mentioned in the Charlotte documents ( if true ) fall within the football rules or not?

Or do the SFA and SPFL just ignore placed press releases and comments?

It would be interesting to know.

 

About the author

broganrogantrevinoandhogan author

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

1,328 Comments so far

Danish PastryPosted on4:37 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 4:24 pm
0 0 Rate This

@Drew Peacock,

” Your worry free scenarios assume the assets can be purchased and ignores CW’s claim on them.”

CW’s claims on the assets do not worry me, his sanity worries me.
———-

Oh, I don’t know. Seems pretty bright to me, a chancer maybe, but bright. If he’s anything to do with the Fakes tweets and docs, he knows how to hit back at those he feels have conned him.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on4:38 pm - Aug 2, 2013


The blog of the man with the wee white bricks
=====================================

When Green first appeared on the scene last year, Leggat’s blog was openly hostile to the ‘snakeoil salesman’.

Then a few months later it all changed: Green was being feted on the blog as the saviour of The Rangers – right up until his boardroom exit.

Today it’s back to referring to Green again as the ‘snakeoil salesman’.

I wish Traynor would make up his mind about Green – I am getting very confused… 😉

View Comment

rebuswadPosted on4:42 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@Steerpike
Right and wrong do matter, the trick is to establish what is right and wrong, the only thing you have established is it is wrong for there to be no downside.
———-
Paraphrasing and misdirection of MSM proportions, well done 😉

I said it’s wrong to not see the downside of the scenario.
Not that its wrong for there to be no downside.

But you knew I meant that, you’re not daft. Or perhaps unless its spelled out to you you really cannot see a downside, which would be sad for someone of your intelligence.

View Comment

jockybhoyPosted on4:45 pm - Aug 2, 2013


[John Reid anecdotes – OT]

View Comment

auchinstarryPosted on4:56 pm - Aug 2, 2013


We must remember that Mr Whyte with the questionable sanity, was appointed/chosen by Murray as the right man to lead the club.
What does that say about Murray’s sanity? Or was Whyte, as has been suggested many times on here, just the Patsy? Perfectly placed in office by the “Duperoo” which he alluded to.
As I have said of Murray previously, there is more than one type of Psychopath. 🙄

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on5:01 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Mail on line

Rangers manager Ally McCoist has added his voice to calls for clarification from the Scottish Football Association after Hearts escaped a fine for going into administration.
——————————————————————————–
Like Mr Mather and his rants yesterday they have no shame or integrity in any of their actions, just fuel the fire. He knows why oldco were treated different concerning administration, we all know, the SMSM know but it is only us who are dealing and openly admitting that there is a newco in Scotland. Good to see Charlie is back, Walter will be over the moon with that as well.

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on5:11 pm - Aug 2, 2013


A scary thought: can you imagine what ‘soundbites’ Green might offer the MSM if he is still at TRFC if/when the Govan club meets Celtic e.g. in a cup game ?

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on5:13 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Richard Wilson ‏@timomouse 3m Requisition of General Meeting!!!
Screenshot of the Rangers news for those who can’t access pic.twitter.com/U0Ql2tCwP5

View Comment

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on5:13 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 3:59 pm

Immorality and pragmatism can sometimes go hand-in-hand.

I don’t think you have a clear idea of the risks. I, like you, don’t believe there is a scenario that will result that means Rangers cease to exist. However, I don’t share your view that their is there it will end well regardless. There is an option where Rangers become fundamentaly damaged as a business. Losing you major assets would be disastrous for Rangers, and a distinct possiblity. That may be losing ownership, which would be bad enough. A likely outcome is to lose ownership of Ibrox and lose Murray Park entirely.

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on5:14 pm - Aug 2, 2013


THE Board of Rangers confirms that, on 1 August 2013, it received a notice requisitioning a General Meeting of shareholders (the “Requisition”)

The Requisition puts forward resolutions for the removal of Craig Mather, Brian Stockbridge and Bryan Smart as directors of the Company and the appointment of Paul Murray and Frank Blin as directors of the Company.
The Board is verifying whether the Requisition is properly constituted and further announcements will be made as appropriate.

View Comment

rantinrobinPosted on5:15 pm - Aug 2, 2013


And for our next act:

Blue Knights re-enter the fray.The return of Paul Murray on his shining steed?

View Comment

wottpiPosted on5:17 pm - Aug 2, 2013


valentinesclown says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:01 pm

Wottpi on line

TSFM posters have added their voice to the calls for clarifications from T’Rangers football club as to who on God’s Earth gave Ally McCoist a £750k a year salary and kept on paying it.
============================================================================

Anyway not to worry, we know that Charles and Ally get on like a house on fire and with Greens extensive career in football and athletics he knows a good manager when he sees one.

I’m guessing that Ally may well be out the door before getting a chance to splash more cash in January.

Anyone got the odds for that one?

View Comment

fara1968Posted on5:20 pm - Aug 2, 2013


[John Reid – OT]

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on5:22 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@Jockybhoy

” so no, no and no then? Rangers “fans have the power to dictate policy” but don’t? That is yet another difference between the 2 clubs…”

I am afraid it is a difference you have just invented, my statement related to the present and your comments and my responses relate to the past, you seem to have decided to amalgamate them all into one pot to fabricate a non existent difference, but hey it is Friday, no harm no foul.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on5:23 pm - Aug 2, 2013


paulsatim says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:13 pm

James Doleman says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:14 pm

View Comment

StevieBCPosted on5:24 pm - Aug 2, 2013


James Doleman says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:14 pm

The Requisition puts forward resolutions for the removal of Craig Mather, Brian Stockbridge and Bryan Smart as directors of the Company …
=============================
So, in a ‘normal’ plc would the Chairman not try and smooth the way with major shareholders ?
Or has the battle already been lost ?
Is it for Lord Cardigan to now publicly state that he will resign if these resolutions are passed ?

[OT – still can’t believe he didn’t get a ‘real’ peerage when Haughey got one – must be ‘different treatment’ for TRFC. 🙄 The Honours System must be next on the TRFC Boycott List…]

View Comment

wottpiPosted on5:30 pm - Aug 2, 2013


More Johhny Nash on the Juke Box

So was it Paul Murray and crew who were buying up shares the other week?
I take it Frank Blin the ex PWC guy?
Was Kieran Prior a Trojan Horse?
Remember a while back there was news of Nicola Murray’s media firm Vicast Ltd being toploaded with ex Rangers directors?

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on5:33 pm - Aug 2, 2013


wottpi says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:23 pm

Favourite comedy movie! 😆

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on5:34 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Profile of Frank Blin, retired from PWC in June

http://www.business7.co.uk/insider-magazine/latest-news/2012/03/07/the-big-profile-frank-blin-pwc-influential-innovator-in-search-of-new-challenges-106408-23778231/

Nice of him and Mr Murray to wait until season tickets sold before making their move.

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on5:35 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@rebuswad,

” But you knew I meant that, you’re not daft. Or perhaps unless its spelled out to you you really cannot see a downside, which would be sad for someone of your intelligence.”

I gave 3 scenarios, the only downside would be the short term investors determined to make a quick buck at the expense of its customer base, due to our current credit rating no creditors would be harmed in the process. I see nothing wrong in accepting the situation as it is.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on5:37 pm - Aug 2, 2013


StevieBC says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:24 pm

[OT – still can’t believe he didn’t get a ‘real’ peerage when Haughey got one – must be ‘different treatment’ for TRFC. 🙄 The Honours System must be next on the TRFC Boycott List…]

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

cue rage @peerage

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on5:40 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Paulo Notini ‏@pmcn888 4m
With all this Sevco scandal I’m surprised The Serious Fraud Office hasn’t been called in to shut the whole operation down,this is beyond SFA
Retweeted by Paulie Walnuts

Edgar Blamm ‏@EdgarBlamm 3m
@TheTributeAct @Pmacgiollabhain WATP = We’re All Taking Prozac. #PoorThings

😆 😆

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on5:43 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Shares down again, now 40.5p.

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on5:46 pm - Aug 2, 2013


” Oh, I don’t know. Seems pretty bright to me, a chancer maybe, but bright. If he’s anything to do with the Fakes tweets and docs, he knows how to hit back at those he feels have conned him.”

CW orchestrated an insolvency but failed to insure his liabilities were secured, he lost 18 million in 10 months, this almost qualifies him for a Darwin Award. Here is a clue, if CW had any real claim then his case would not be plastered all over the internet like some demented gossip columnist, he would be waiving it in front of the court steps.

There are some who believe a man can own assets others have paid for, I am not one of them.

View Comment

rantinrobinPosted on5:50 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike ,I salute your indefatigability Sir!

View Comment

OldcobrokemyheartbycheatingPosted on5:51 pm - Aug 2, 2013


What a day the storm cloud’s grow larger over Govan, I can’t make sense of it all, far too much happening. Even the crackpot Leggat’s back least we will have plenty to take apart on here. I’m away for a wee listen to this, seem’s appropriate.

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on5:55 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@beat,

” I don’t think you have a clear idea of the risks.”

I think you mean I interpret the scant evidence with extreme skepticism, taking into account we both suffer from cognitive bias we will have to wait and see, in the real world those that pay for the assets tend to own them, at no point was it ever mentioned CW agreed to pay for the assets, at best he was part of the brokering team.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on5:55 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:46 pm

Hear what you say and agree that the CW claims on ownership are all very ropey.

However if there was something in it (and nothing would surprise me in this saga), then as opposed to heading directly to court, I believe it would all come down to timing.
Even more so now, given the news of the new turmoil that appears to have developed yesterday and today.

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on5:57 pm - Aug 2, 2013


“Steerpike ,I salute your indefatigability Sir! 2

I am not Saddam Hussein….George. lol

View Comment

RiddriePosted on5:58 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 2:25

Since I do not attach my life to my football club I will not apologize on their behalf………..It is up to my club to apologize for their own actions… just as it is not my place to apologize for the neanderthal bigots that infest my club. I apologize for my own actions not the actions of others.
———————————————————————————–

Pigs might fly…but then again…

View Comment

newtzPosted on6:04 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@Steerpike

Re CW claim …
You would confirm I am sure though that on March 21, 2012, CW registered a debenture document with Companies House giveing Mr Whyte’s company Liberty Corporate Ltd a new fixed and floating charge over Rangers FC Group – the parent company that owns the football club….

Liberty Corporate sole shareholder is Liberty Capital Limited, which is owned by Mr Whyte and registered to the British Virgin Islands. His father, Thomas Whyte, is the sole director of Liberty Corporate.

Of course, the charge is valid as long as the debt follows it.

Step 1 …

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on6:07 pm - Aug 2, 2013


” Nice of him and Mr Murray to wait until season tickets sold before making their move.”

Good evening James,

It seems the battle for Ibrox now begins in earnest, 34,000 season tickets and rising, it is all very exciting stuff, I love boardroom battles, share price dropping, maybe time for the carpetbaggers to cut and run.

View Comment

valentinesclownPosted on6:15 pm - Aug 2, 2013


From Paul McConville

http://t.co/uk9QgVV5WO

Here we go again?

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on6:17 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@newtz

I have read some of your evidence and I like your eccentric sleuth style( no offense) but I disagree with most of your conclusions.

” Of course, the charge is valid as long as the debt follows it. ”

The charge is valid when the court declares it valid, his original claim was turfed out as drivel, making up a new charge a month after the company’s administration sounds completely bonkers to me, is the date correct ?

View Comment

rebuswadPosted on6:24 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@steerpike

I gave 3 scenarios, the only downside would be the short term investors determined to make a quick buck at the expense of its customer base, due to our current credit rating no creditors would be harmed in the process. I see nothing wrong in accepting the situation as it is.
——-

I quoted scenario 2 as having a downside. A CVA would be devastating to many of the creditors affected.

But the effect on others does not enter your thinking or many other Rangers fans I know.
As I stated earlier this is part of a major reason many do not want to see the new Rangers prosper.
Right and wrong don’t matter, only Rangers.

View Comment

RiddriePosted on6:24 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 2:46 pm

You will have to excuse my blatant cynicism, like everyone else I am a product of my genes and environment, in a nutshell there are 3 potential scenarios:

1. Rangers run out of cash and the investors have to stump up more cash or off to administration we go, and they lose most of their capital.

Investors would have to stump up more cash?
Surely nobody would be that stupid, although with Rangers fans you can never be sure.

—————————————————————————————————————————–
2. Rangers goes into administration, loses 10 or 15 points, still wins the division and a fan consortium buys it back through a CVA.

Again, investors after the first admin and subsequent liquidation have lost so much cash who’d be stupid enough to buy the club after a second insolvency event?
—————————————————————————————————————————————————-
3. Rangers does not run out of cash.

They’re losing £1mill per month and still spending freely, so I think it likely they will run out of money. Its only a matter of when.
————————————————————————————————————————————————-

I really do not see a down side.

Everybody loves an optimist.
—————————————————-

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on6:25 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Talk on Twitter of a group of London based shareholders being behind the call for an EGM, Mr Prior perhaps?

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on6:34 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@rebuswad,

” I quoted scenario 2 as having a downside. A CVA would be devastating to many of the creditors affected.”

Sorry, must have missed you identifying scenario 2, it is my belief there would be no creditors, I do not believe anyone is giving Rangers credit and the word ” devastating ” is too hysterical, anyone who has given Rangers credit under the current circumstances cannot need the money, it is a high risk venture. Sensible business people do not give credit that would devastate them, not if they want to stay in business for more than 10 months.

You are obviously more moral and sensitive than my good self, I blame my atheism.

View Comment

RiddriePosted on6:35 pm - Aug 2, 2013


blu says:
August 2, 2013 at 3:22 pm

36

0

Rate This

Alistair on the apparent contradictions between the treatment of Hearts and RFC:

“I will be honest with you, I don’t really know the full situation. I know we were fined £50,000 and I think that was for going into administration. …”

Mendacity or stupidity?
————————————————————————————————————————————————–

The following will clear up any ‘misunderstanding’ of the “apparent contradictions between the treatment of Hearts and RFC”:

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2013/08/02/craig-mather-shows-he-can-talk-as-much-rubbish-for-rangers-as-messrs-green-and-whyte/

View Comment

James DolemanPosted on6:38 pm - Aug 2, 2013


According to BBC Charles Green planning to “take control of club”

View Comment

twopandaPosted on6:41 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Spiv-wars – not losing a trick to squeeze every last cent from working folk
SFA Board – a truly dreadful abrogation of responsibilities – resign now in shame and disgrace

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on6:42 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@Carntyne

I will not reply to comments that contain insults, please try and be civil.

View Comment

helpmaboabPosted on6:43 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Question for Steerpike. RTC and TSFM have been running for some time.Why so long to input your point of view?

View Comment

rebuswadPosted on6:50 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@steerpike How can you have a CVA and therefore debt without credit to be paid ? This would not necessarily be arranged credit, unpaid bills would also be credit due.

If you would allow me to reword, would you accept that a CVA would have a downside for many of the creditors affected ?

And it’s not the atheism , I’m with you on that one.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on6:51 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Just a quick point before i open a beer or two.

I notice that the talk of Green’s return seemed to be discussed on by T’Rangers’ internet bampots and bloggers.

The Paul Murray news came out of the blue with little or no forewarning .

Where exactly do the MSM fit into this other than to tell us and then incompetently report on stuff we already know!!

View Comment

Caveat EmptorPosted on6:57 pm - Aug 2, 2013


http://t.co/fYr2bZPJCV
***************
And so the endgame begins? Cannae wait!! Chick’s back. The Blue Knights appear to be saddling the chargers. Ally ‘to be honest’ (if he says that once more) still husnae a clue. Sir Wattie shaking the head.
Cabals, consortia, share fall, blood on the marble staircase, need more players, roof falling in (literally!), SFA squirrel viewing, battle lines being drawn, alliances cemented, et tu Carlo?
We live in interesting times.

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on7:00 pm - Aug 2, 2013


30 May 2013 : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/10090146/Walter-Smith-named-Rangers-chairman-as-club-seeks-stability-after-boardroom-battles.html

“The Rangers International Football Club plc today announced that Walter Smith has been appointed Non-Executive Chairman of the Board,”

“The Board believes that the new chairman will bring stability, experience and a wealth of knowledge to the club.”

Comment : Aye right!

“It is a great honour to be asked to take up this position and it goes without saying that I feel proud as well as humble,” he said. “However, no one should believe that I see my role as a passive one.

“That hasn’t been my way in the past and it won’t be my way in the future.”

Comment : On with the show! 🙂

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on7:00 pm - Aug 2, 2013


tony gordon ‏@gordon_tony 5m
Hearing that Sir David Murray has secured funding for a complete takeover at Ibrox from Barings Bank.

Big Stuart 1888 ‏@white_italy 3m
@gordon_tony Frank Blin has a company that are based at Charlotte Sq. That’a also where David Murray runs his empire from!!

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on7:04 pm - Aug 2, 2013


blu says:
August 2, 2013 at 3:22 pm

Alistair on the apparent contradictions between the treatment of Hearts and RFC:

“I will be honest with you, I don’t really know the full situation. I know we were fined £50,000 and I think that was for going into administration. …”

Mendacity or stupidity?
————————————————————————————-
Yes. Both.

Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.

View Comment

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on7:07 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:55 pm

I made no mention of Craig Whyte, I’m referring to the security held over Murray Park and Ibrox by the the current round of investors. Do your research, the information is in the public domain.

Your club is heading for oblivion without the right support from the right (moneyed) people. The news today that the right people are trying to oust the current board should be encouraging for Rangers fans. I would suggest their success is your only real hope.

View Comment

iamacantPosted on7:11 pm - Aug 2, 2013


beatipacificiscotia says:
August 2, 2013 at 7:07 pm

“Your club is heading for oblivion without the right support from the right (moneyed) people”
———————————————————————————————————————————–

Is Paul Murray a fit and proper person? I’ll bet CO approves his nomination.

View Comment

newtzPosted on7:13 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:August 2, 2013 at 6:17 pm

The charge is valid when the court declares it valid
———–
Not aware of any challenge …. still on Comp’s House (MG01) … and yep, date is correct
However, whist the security does not depend entirely on registration for its validity, proper recording is vital so as to protect the lender’s security.

The debenture document secures the charge over Rangers FC Group Ltd, the ultimate parent company of oldco Rangers in the form of a debenture over its present and future assets.
 
A section in the MG01 outlining the short particulars of the property mortgaged or charged, states: “Fixed and floating charges over the undertaking of all property and assets present and future, including goodwill book debts uncalled capital, buildings, fixtures, fixed plant and machinery”.
 
The form was signed by Craig Whyte, as a signature required by Companies House “must be signed by a person with an interest in the registration of the charge”.
 
The certificate of security states the Registrar of companies for England and Wales “certifies that the debenture dated March 21 2012, created by The Rangers FC Group Ltd for securing all monies due or to become due from the company to Liberty Corporate Ltd on any account whatsoever”.

Step 1 …

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on7:25 pm - Aug 2, 2013


” If you would allow me to reword, would you accept that a CVA would have a downside for many of the creditors affected ? ”

It is highly unlikely, the newco’s assets would more than cover the creditors, they would get all their money back, unfortunately the creditors of the oldco did suffer which is not something I take lightly and I feel the same about anyone who suffers from an insolvency event, I do have a heart just no soul.

View Comment

tcup 2012Posted on7:28 pm - Aug 2, 2013


With IBROX inplodeing again 😯

Will any of the so called me signings happen ?
What side will Ally/Walter come dwn on ?
Who will foot the bill for repairs ?
How far will the share price drop?
How many season ticket holders will cancel their direct debets?
Will the SFA pop their heads out or Just baton down the hatches?

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on7:33 pm - Aug 2, 2013


“Not aware of any challenge …. still on Comp’s House (MG01) … and yep, date is correct
However, whist the security does not depend entirely on registration for its validity, proper recording is vital so as to protect the lender’s security.”

newtz, I think you may find there is a world of difference between registering a floating charge and the charge being upheld, if it has not been challenged it is because it has not been submitted to any court, wonder why ?

p.s. I knew Frank Blin some 25 years ago, guess what his speciality used to be……insolvency, Rangers are bringing in the big guns to thrash all the carpetbaggers.

View Comment

paulsatimPosted on7:40 pm - Aug 2, 2013


TheTributeAct ‏@TheTributeAct 28m
Scottish media in yet another stunning failure to see a transparent truth.
Thank you Scottish media. 🙂
==========================
Barcabhoy ‏@Barcabhoy1 23m
@TheTributeAct they dont want to deviate from the sales pitch for tickets. A week ago I posted they would need to return to shareholders
==================================
TheTributeAct ‏@TheTributeAct 22m
@Barcabhoy1 To be fair, we have all (you included) been saying that this business was unsustainable since the interims came out.
==========================
Barcabhoy ‏@Barcabhoy1 8m
@TheTributeAct yes, losses widely commented on by bampots, and more recently need for further shareholder funding if survival is reality
===========================
11:31 AM – 2 Aug 13 · Details
TheTributeAct ‏@TheTributeAct 5m
@Barcabhoy1 Can’t see anyone being stupid enough to throw more equity in. Only funding avail will be short term debt to control admin.

Barcabhoy ‏@Barcabhoy1 3m
@TheTributeAct Administration only makes sense if their are creditors to burn. Who and how much are critical to that plan

View Comment

phill450Posted on7:49 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@Steerpike

“it is my belief there would be no creditors, I do not believe anyone is giving Rangers credit”

– anyone on a contract of employment from Rangers are potential “creditors” (and it appears there are rather a lot of them, at above market rates)

View Comment

newtzPosted on7:51 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:August 2, 2013 at 7:33 pm
————–
Ok, I’m all ears Steerpike ….. we have yet to hear the case for the floating charge being invalid.
Remember that on CF audio, CG agreed that the debenture had value.

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on8:07 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@newtz

” Ok, I’m all ears Steerpike ….. we have yet to hear the case for the floating charge being invalid.”

I gave you the case against it, he hasn’t done anything with it, if I had a valid floating charge then I would be running up the court steps with it, plus I have never heard of anyone registering a floating charge over assets he does not own, he gave up his ownership when he picked up the phone to D&P in February 2012.

View Comment

Drew PeacockPosted on8:10 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 7:33 pm

“Not aware of any challenge …. still on Comp’s House (MG01) … and yep, date is correct
However, whist the security does not depend entirely on registration for its validity, proper recording is vital so as to protect the lender’s security.”

newtz, I think you may find there is a world of difference between registering a floating charge and the charge being upheld, if it has not been challenged it is because it has not been submitted to any court, wonder why ?

p.s. I knew Frank Blin some 25 years ago, guess what his speciality used to be……insolvency, Rangers are bringing in the big guns to thrash all the carpetbaggers.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If the charge was valid it would have been played by now unless it is the insurance policy for CW.

What do you mean when you say “Rangers” are bringing in the Big Guns? Do you mean close associates of SDM? Am I the only one who thinks the name Frank Blin is the ideal name for a hit man? A bit like Snake Bliskin.

View Comment

phill450Posted on8:13 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Also, on the matter of Rangers having no access to credit,

it’s understandable Oldco having no access since they were up to their eyes in debt,

but Newco apparently have no debt, cash in the bank, and realisable assets – unless of course someone else already has claims against these assets?

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:16 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:

August 2, 2013 at 7:33 pmp.s. I knew Frank Blin some 25 years ago, guess what his speciality used to be……insolvency, Rangers are bringing in the big guns to thrash all the carpetbaggers.
_________________________________________________________________________________

Steerpike, I apologise for some of the abuse and ill-mannered taunts you have been subjected to. The mods have taken steps to weed them out.

Despite your off-message remarks and the occasional bit of sarcasm (and your worryingly sympathetic position on DM), I think you have forced many on here to have re-examine their own viewpoints. Even although most will not have altered theirs significantly, it is always good to be forced to defend your views through a dialectic.

Having said that, my understanding of the current situation is that “Rangers” ARE the carpetbaggers of whom you speak, who I assume are not engaging any kind of weaponry to turn on themselves.

So who exactly is it who are bringing in the big guns? Should we infer (and this is not sarcasm) that you regard another group, not currently working out of Ibrox as the “Real Rangers”?

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on8:17 pm - Aug 2, 2013


” I made no mention of Craig Whyte, I’m referring to the security held over Murray Park and Ibrox by the the current round of investors. Do your research, the information is in the public domain.”

@beat,

I would be interested in a link detailing the security, if it exists it does give them some leverage but as the first sale proved, nowhere near their investment, they will do a deal, they are not interested in some feud that is going to shred their investment and profit margins, it is a game of poker, they have Kings and we have Aces.

How many people seemingly own these assets for goodness sake ??

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on8:22 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@Drew

” What do you mean when you say “Rangers” are bringing in the Big Guns? Do you mean close associates of SDM? Am I the only one who thinks the name Frank Blin is the ideal name for a hit man? A bit like Snake Bliskin. ”

Frank was the mother of all insolvency practitioners, he will ring circles round Whyte and Green.

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:25 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:

August 2, 2013 at 8:22 pm @Drew

” What do you mean when you say “Rangers” are bringing in the Big Guns? Do you mean close associates of SDM? Am I the only one who thinks the name Frank Blin is the ideal name for a hit man? A bit like Snake Bliskin. ”

Frank was the mother of all insolvency practitioners, he will ring circles round Whyte and Green.
_________________________________________________________________________________-

and that is the mother of all sidesteps :mrgreen:

View Comment

rebuswadPosted on8:28 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@steerpike
It is highly unlikely, the newco’s assets would more than cover the creditors, they would get all their money back, unfortunately the creditors of the oldco did suffer which is not something I take lightly and I feel the same about anyone who suffers from an insolvency event, I do have a heart just no soul.
——-
I think a 100p in the the pound payout to all creditors would be highly unlikely from a sale of unsecured assets owned by the club. There is certainly a high risk of that being the case. But that’s not your, or Rangers main concern. Paying your dues should feature high on the priority list, especially when the same group of people have a history of not doing so with others suffering. The fact that it doesn’t demonstrates a disregard for others which is not an attractive trait.

Glad you have a heart, keep working on the soul, you’ll get there. And keep posting, keeps the site interesting.

View Comment

beatipacificiscotiaPosted on8:32 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 8:17 pm

How many people own the assets?

Craig Whyte may think it is him.

If not, there are details on Charlotte Fakes of an agreement to secure Murray Park against loans for money used to acquire Rangers’ assets from D&P. These were the original investors – the money behind Charles Green & Co. I’d be surprised if they didn’t go further and also have some security over Ibrox too. I don’t have the link to hand, but I’m sure someone more resourceful than me does.

View Comment

pau1mart1nPosted on8:36 pm - Aug 2, 2013


p.s. I knew Frank Blin some 25 years ago, guess what his speciality used to be……insolvency, Rangers are bringing in the big guns to thrash all the carpetbaggers.

should that not say “Walter swoops for Scotland’s top insolvency ace as Gers go to WAR with carpetbaggers”

View Comment

newtzPosted on8:40 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:August 2, 2013 at 8:07 pm
————————————-

Sorry Steerpike, with respect I disagree ……. Look harder at CW’s MO… it’s quite consistant ….. I thought you were going to follow through with the question on the date of the registration of the MG01 …… like I said …. consistant !

and we never got beyond step 1 …… that;s for another time !

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on8:41 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike says:
August 2, 2013 at 5:46 pm
3 7 Rate This

” Oh, I don’t know. Seems pretty bright to me, a chancer maybe, but bright. If he’s anything to do with the Fakes tweets and docs, he knows how to hit back at those he feels have conned him.”

CW orchestrated an insolvency but failed to insure his liabilities were secured, he lost 18 million in 10 months, this almost qualifies him for a Darwin Award. Here is a clue, if CW had any real claim then his case would not be plastered all over the internet like some demented gossip columnist, he would be waiving it in front of the court steps.

There are some who believe a man can own assets others have paid for, I am not one of them.
———–

Why did he orchestrate the insolvency? Was he put up to it? Was it an offer he couldn’t refuse? A favour for a family friend? Why was Jack Irvine apparently cleaning Whyte’s Google history years before? I am not convinced Whyte is now irrelevant. If nothing else, he knows much of the nuts and bolts of the plan to shed the debt. For all we know he may have struck a deal with the authorities to spill the beans. On the other hand, he may well be in ‘the stickiest situation since Sticky the stick insect got stuck on a sticky bun’ (Edmund Backadder) and be editing diverse audio clips as we speak …

View Comment

TSFMPosted on8:41 pm - Aug 2, 2013


Steerpike,
When BDO were appointed to liquidate Rangers, many people were hopeful that they would “sort out” the spivs. To date that hasn’t happened. Given their “outside the building” status, one would have thought that if they had been able to set a fire under the spivs, they would have.

If Frank Blin is appointed to the board, what could he bring to the party (given that setting a fire could be self-destructive for him in his role as a RIFC director) that BDO could not?

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on9:18 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@TSFM

” So who exactly is it who are bringing in the big guns? Should we infer (and this is not sarcasm) that you regard another group, not currently working out of Ibrox as the “Real Rangers”? ”

In my opinion there are two camps with two different austerity strategies, a bit like the coalition and Labour, one is short term and one long term, the former ultimately puts most of the pain on the fan base( the masses), and the latter on the investors( the elite). Charles Green and his like minded allies are quite prepared to force through their policies and risk a battle with disgruntled fans, he has done it before. He believes he can blackmail the fans to be loyal while he makes cuts that will prevent Rangers competing at a reasonable level for many more years. In their view they can make more money with less risk by not trying to compete with Celtic and then selling up.
I have my business hat on and I think this strategy is flawed, I believe the Rangers support will vanish out of sheer apathy if there is no chance of any success in cups or competing against Celtic within a reasonable timescale. When someone is talking about halving the budget at MP from 10 to 5 million then you know they are not interested in the long term future of Rangers, when I heard him promising huge potential short term profits then I knew he was talking brutal cuts, Celtic cannot make huge profits in the domestic market and they are run like a proper business.
. I am not against cuts per se but in my opinion the club cannot cut its basic infrastructure without long term damage, and the fans will desert in the long term. Celtic are experiencing apathy with far higher standards and prospects, to suggest 45,000 Rangers fans will turn up for the next 4-5 years with no prospect of any success and lets be frank poor quality football, does not understand the link between economics and sociology. CG doesn’t care, he will be long gone with his millions stuffed down his pants.

I am for a long term strategy because I am a fan and because I believe it is the only plan that will work.

View Comment

davythelotionPosted on9:29 pm - Aug 2, 2013


As rolls back into town as a ‘consultant’ (an impartial expert in their field), it raises the following issues:
Can you be impartial when you own 7%?
Who is the chucklemeister’s employer?
Will chuck have to recuse himself when anything is being discussed which may compromise him financially?
As a consultant, has he been involved in the decision to reactivate the GM?
Was Mather’s ‘statement’ an attempt to out-chuck chuckles?
Who will find the black hole in the finances?
Is there going to be another share issue?
Has chuckles promise to sell to the easdales been based on a price of 70p PS or the current PS?
Will chuckles as the part owner of Garrion Security be able to offer a ‘mates rate’ deal to TRFC?
Will TRIFC insist that any need for funds for upgrading stands is met from an increased indebtedness between the football club and the holding company?
Will CW take cash or cheque?

View Comment

SteerpikePosted on9:43 pm - Aug 2, 2013


@newtz

” with respect I disagree ……. Look harder at CW’s MO… it’s quite consistant …”

You are more than entitled to disagree, every time I do look at CW he has consistently flopped on his face.

View Comment

Drew PeacockPosted on9:46 pm - Aug 2, 2013


davythelotion says:
August 2, 2013 at 9:29 pm

Is there going to be another share issue? – Yes

Has promise to sell to the easdales been based on a price of 70p PS or the current PS? – Could be and it ain’t there.

View Comment

Comments are closed.