UEFA Club Licensing. – To Comply or not to Comply ?
On 16 April 2018 The UEFA Club Financial Control Body (CFCB) adjudicatory chamber took decisions in the cases of four clubs that had been referred to it by the CFCB chief investigator, concerning the non-fulfilment of the club licensing criteria defined in the UEFA Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Regulations.
Such criteria must be complied with by the clubs in order to be granted the licence required to enter the UEFA club competitions.
The cases of two clubs::
Olympique des Alpes SA (Sion Switzerland )
and
FC Irtysh (Kazakhstan)
are of particular interest to those following the events under which the SFA awarded a UEFA License to Rangers FC in 2011 currently under investigation by the SFA Compliance Officer because
- The case documentation tell us how UEFA wish national associations to apply UEFA FFP rules
- The cases tell us what might have happened to Rangers FC in 2012 had they not gone into liquidation and as a consequence avoided the same type of sanctions that UEFA applied to Sion and Irtysh.
FC Sion (Olympique des Alpes SA)
Here we are told how the Swiss FL and then the UEFA CFCB acted in respect of FC Sion in 2017 where a misleading statement was made in the Sion UEFA licensing application.
Full details can be read at
but this is a summary.
In April 2017 the Swiss FL (SFL) granted a licence to Sion FC but indicated that a Disciplinary case was pending.
In July 2017 the CFCB, as part of their licence auditing programme, carried out a compliance audit on 3 clubs to determine if licences had been properly awarded. Sion was one of those clubs.
The subsequent audit by Deloitte LLP discovered Sion had an overdue payable on a player, amounting to €950,000, owed to another football club (FC Sochaux ) at 31st March 2017 as a result of a transfer undertaken by Sion before 31st December 2016, although the €950,000 was paid in early June 2017.
Deloitte produced a draft report of their findings that was passed to SFL and Sion for comment on factual accuracy and comment on the findings. Sion responded quickly enabling Deloitte to present a final report to the CFCB Investigation Unit. In response to the Deloitte final report Sion stated:
“il apparaît aujourd’hui qu’il existait bel et bien un engagement impayé découlant d’une activité de transfert. Ce point est admis” translated as
“it now appears that there was indeed an outstanding commitment arising from transfer activity. This is admitted”
What emerged as the investigation proceeded was that the Swiss FL Licensing Committee, after granting the license in April and as a result of a Sochaux complaint of non-payment to FIFA, had reason to refer Sion’s application to their Disciplinary Commission in May 2017 with regard to the submission of potentially misleading information by FC Sion to the SFL on 7th April 2017 as part of its licensing documentation.
Sion had declared
“Written confirmation: no overdue payables arising from transfer activities”, signed by the Club’s president, stating that as at 31 March 2017 there were no overdue payables towards other football clubs. In particular, the Club indicated that the case between FC Sion and FC Sochaux regarding the transfer of the player Ishmael Yartey was still under dispute.
The SFL Disciplinary Commission came to the conclusion that FC Sion had no intention to mislead the SFL, but indeed submitted some incorrect licensing documentation; the SFL Disciplinary Commission further confirmed that the total amount of €950,000 had been paid by the Club to FC Sochaux on 7 June 2017. Because of the inaccurate information submitted, the SFL Disciplinary Commission decided to impose a fine of CHF 8,000 on the Club.
Whilst this satisfied the SFL Disciplinary process the CFCB deemed it not enough to justify the granting of the licence as UEFA intended their FFP rules to be applied.
Sion provided the CFCB with a number of reasons on the basis of which no sanction should be imposed. In particular, the Club admitted that there was an overdue payable as at 31 March 2017, but stated that the mistake in the document dated 7 April 2017 was the result of a misinterpretation by the club’s responsible person for dealing with the licence (the “Club’s licence manager”), who is not a lawyer. The Club affirmed that it never had the intention to conceal the information and had provisioned the amount due for payment and that, in any case, it has already been sanctioned by the SFL for providing the wrong information.
The CFCB Investigation Unit accepted that the Sion application, although inaccurate, was a one off misrepresentation and not a forgery, (as in intended to deceive ) but that nevertheless an overdue payable did exist at 31st March and a licence should not have been granted.
Based on their findings, the CFCB Chief Investigator decided to refer the case to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber and suggested a disciplinary measure to be imposed on FC Sion by the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber, such measure consisting of a fine of €235,000, corresponding to the UEFA Revenues the Club gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
The CFCB Investigatory Chamber submitted that it was appropriate to impose a fine corresponding to all the UEFA revenues the Club gained by participating in the competition considering the fact that FC Sion should not have been admitted to the competition for failing to meet one of its admission criteria.
The Adjudicatory Chambers took all the circumstances (see paras 91 to 120 at http://tiny.cc/i8sxsy ) into consideration and reached the following key decisions.
- FC Sion failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 49(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the SFL not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Sion breached Articles 13(1) and 43(1)(i) of the CL&FFP Regulations. (Documents complete and correct)
- To exclude FC Sion from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next two (2) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19 and 2019/20).
- To impose a fine of two hundred and thirty five thousand Euros (€235,000) on FC Sion.
- FC Sion is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
It is now public knowledge that an actual liability of tax due before 31stDecember 2010 towards HMRC, was admitted by Rangers FC before 31st March 2011.
This liability was described as “potential” in Rangers Interim accounts audited by Grant Thornton.
“Note 1: The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. A provision for interest of £0.9m has also been included within the interest charge.”
The English Oxford Dictionary definition of potential is:
Having or showing the capacity to develop into something in the future.
Which was not true as the liability had already been “developed” so could not be potential.
This was repeated by Chairman Alistair Johnson in his covering Interim Accounts statement
“The exceptional item reflects a provision for a potential tax liability in relation to a Discounted Option Scheme associated with player contributions between 1999 and 2003. “ where he also added
“Discussions are continuing with HMRC to establish a resolution to the assessments raised.”
This could be taken as disputing the liability but In fact the resolution to the assessments raised would have been payment of the actual liability, something that never happened.
In the Sion case it was accepted the misleading statement was a one off misrepresentation, but at the monitoring stages at June 2011 in Ranger’s case the status of the liability continued to be misrepresented and in September the continuing discussions reason was repeated, along with a claim of an instalment paid whose veracity is highly questionable.
The Swiss FL Licensing Committee did at least refer the case to their Disciplinary Committee when they realised a misleading statement might have been made. The SFA however in August 2011, when Sherriff Officers called at Ibrox for payment of the overdue tax , did no such thing and pulled up the drawbridge for six years, one that the Compliance Officer is now finally charged with lowering.
The case of FC Irtysh of Kazakhstan is set out in full at http://tiny.cc/y9sxsy and is a bit more straightforward but is nevertheless useful to compare with events in 2011 in Scotland.
Unlike Rangers FC , FC Irtysh properly disclosed that they had an overdue payable to the Kazakhstan tax authorities at the monitoring point at 30th June 2017. This caused the CFCB Investigatory Unit to seek further information with regard to the position at 31st March
It transpired that Irtysh had declared an overdue payable at 31st March but cited their financial position (awaiting sponsor money) as a reason for non payment to the Kazakhstan FA who accepted it and granted the licence. The outstanding tax was paid in September 2107.
The outcome of the CFCB Investigation was a case put to the CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber who agreed with the CFCB Investigation Unit that a licence should not have been granted and recommended that Irtysh be fined the equivalent of the UEFA prize money, (that had been withheld in any case whilst CFCB investigated.)
The CFCB Adjudicatory Chamber however decided that a fine was not sufficient in sporting deterrent terms and ruled that:
- FC Irtysh failed to satisfy the requirements of Article 50bis(1) of the CL&FFP Regulations and it obtained the licence issued by the FFK not in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- To withhold four hundred and forty thousand Euros (€440,000) corresponding to the UEFA revenues FC Irtysh gained by participating in the 2017/2018 UEFA Europa League.
- To exclude FC Irtysh from participating in the next UEFA club competition for which it would otherwise qualify in the next three (3) seasons (i.e. the 2018/19, 2019/20 and 2020/21 seasons). This sanction is deferred for a probationary period of (3) three years. This exclusion must be enforced in case the Club participates again in a UEFA club competition having not fulfilled the licence criteria required to obtain the UEFA licence in accordance with the CL&FFP Regulations.
- FC Irtysh is to pay three thousand Euros (€3,000) towards the costs of these proceedings. “
The deferral was because unlike Rangers FC, FC Irtysh had properly disclosed to the licensor the correct & accurate financial information required, so the exclusion was deferred for a probationary period of (3) years.
Comment in respect of the award of a UEFA Licence in 2011 to Rangers FC.
From the foregoing it could be deduced that had Rangers FC qualified for the Champions League (or European League) and not gone bust as a result and so not entered liquidation BUT it became public knowledge by 2012 that a licence had been wrongly and possibly fraudulently granted then
- Rangers would have been fined the equivalent of their earnings from their participation in the UEFA competitions in 2011
- At least a two year ban from UEFA Competitions would have been imposed, but more likely three in view of repeated incorrect statements.
- The consequences of both would have been as damaging for Rangers survival as the real life consequences of losing to Malmo and Maribor in the qualifying rounds of the Champions and European Leagues.
Karma eh!
Interestingly in the UEFA COMPLIANCE AND INVESTIGATION ACTIVITY REPORT 2015 – 2017 , the CFCB investigatory chamber recommended that both the Kazakhstan FA and Swiss FA as licensors
“pay particular attention to the adequate disclosure of the outstanding amounts payable towards other football clubs, in respect of employees and towards social/tax authorities, which must be disclosed separately;
Would the same recommendation apply to the Scottish FA with regard to their performance in 2011 and will the SFA responses thereafter to shareholders in a member club be examined for compliance with best governance practice by the SFA Compliance Officer investigating the processing of the UEFA Licence in 2011?
This would be a welcome step in fully restoring trust in the SFA.
Paddy, sorry I meant to answer the other night. Given the last sentence which kind of reads like a sort of threat, I’m most certainly not going to share the names of the people who siad/retweeted it though I’m sure anyone who knows there way about social media would be able to find the comments which appeared on 2nd July on Twitter and a popular rangers forum.
PORTBHOY 18.08
Just to be clear, i found it strange that Rangers fans were referred to as “huns” from 1961 as i can clearly remember them chanting “go home you huns” to German teams over a decade later. A bit like Celtic fans singing a song that includes a derogatory term associated with themselves.
Boab, I’m not sure, I was only adding to the conversation. Perhaps our Jambo friends can comment on your findings though I know plenty of people sing the song you reference(that’s not me condoning it just pointing it out)
Dundee for example also sing it using “Arab blood”. I don’t think they get called huns.
The chaps on follow follow are discussing the June share issue and someone has posted this.
“Originally it was stated it would be done by the end of June. No real rush given we are cash rich at the moment but clearly being held up by something.”
Predicted losses of £3m this year, no share issue yet and no sign of it, no shirt sales yet and no sign of them, players bought but no significant sales, it looks like some contracts are being bought out.
Currently being “cash rich” has to be the most positive spin anyone has ever put on anything.
TLM2 20.16
I know two of the ITK posters you refer to with one in particular being very well informed.
Most Hearts fans who still insist on singing the song use “We are the Gorgie boys” and “up to our knees in Hibees Sh1te” Although, at Tynecastle. the song tends to peter out as quickly as it starts…… not always, but mostly.
However, there remains a small by stubborn group, of mainly youngsters with one or two older guys that should know better, whose affinity for all things Rangers sees them decorate themselves with Union flags and sing the same words as their like minded bigots.
The group probably varies in numbers from around 40 up to 100 or so. The generally limit their bile to away games of for the visit of Celtic. There were a few instances of their behaviour at away games or on public transport hitting the local press last season.
Ann Budge has tended to come down hard on those Hearts fans misbehaving at Tynecastle but seems powerless to act against those at away games unless they are arrested.
I note that a “singing section” has been reinstated in the Roseburn Stand for this season (Cat B games only plus Aberdeen). This is where I expect they will congregate if they do go to home games, but I’m sure they will be watched.
Despite Ann Budge’s alacrity when dealing with Hearts fans, she sticks with the usual police line of being unable to deal with large numbers of visiting fans who spout their own bile.
Only word to describe that is “deluded” Homunculus.
Unless “cash rich” is the new description of “heading towards a car crash.”
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 4, 2018 at 20:41
“Originally it was stated it would be done by the end of June. No real rush given we are cash rich at the moment but clearly being held up by something.”
—————
Cash rich that they needed a loan from close Brothers.
Sometimes you have to wonder if the spivs ever read The chaps on follow follow and thought, I could make a killing here
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 4, 2018 at 21:18
===============================
I’m assuming he meant they were “cash rich” because in his estimation they will have shed loads of season ticket money in but won’t have spent it all yet.
It is rather a simplistic, short term view of how a business should operate, and does kind of mask the fact that they will also be “turnover poor”.
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 4, 2018 at 21:24
1
0 Rate This
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 4, 2018 at 21:18===============================
I’m assuming he meant they were “cash rich” because in his estimation they will have shed loads of season ticket money in but won’t have spent it all yet.
—————
Must be a couple of court cases that will take care of that shed loads of season ticket money
HomunculusAugust 4, 2018 at 21:24
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 4, 2018 at 21:18===============================I’m assuming he meant they were “cash rich” because in his estimation they will have shed loads of season ticket money in but won’t have spent it all yet.It is rather a simplistic, short term view of how a business should operate, and does kind of mask the fact that they will also be “turnover poor”.
_____________
I think until recently (by that I mean since 2011/12ish) supporters, everywhere, have misunderstood how football clubs are financed and viewed a club’s budget (though mostly unaware of the idea of a budget) as, take in x amount, and have x amount to spend on players, completely forgetting about, or underestimating greatly, every other expense there is in running a football club.
That changed, though, for most, with the demise of Rangers, and, to a lesser extent, Hearts’ administration. Suddenly supporters were aware of the pitfalls of overspending and started to discuss their own club’s income and expenses and to understand how it works.
I know from reading Hearts supporters websites that there is a greater understanding amongst all but a few that Hearts just dare not overspend and I am sure it is obvious to supporters of most clubs, too, though, from time to time, they will ‘demand’ that their club spends more money on players – but will quickly be put right by the more financially savvy, or by realistic club messages to the supporters.
Somehow, despite the total collapse of Rangers, brought about by the supporters demands to be the biggest and best, better than Celtic and everyone else, they have, in the main, learned nothing. In a strange way, that might be helping TRFC survive past the point it would otherwise have hit administration, because the supporters can’t grasp what’s happening, and when the call goes out to buy STs, they respond in a way they might not if the true financial picture was apparent to them.
The club posts disastrous results, yet they believe King when he tells them they must not worry about the year on year losses for they are part of a loss making strategy (a quite preposterous idea), confirming that they, ‘Rangers’, can, and must, spend, spend, spend. There is absolutely no realisation that the money taken in from STs represents the bulk of the income that has to finance the club through to the next season’s ST sales.
CLUSTER ONE
AUGUST 4, 2018 at 21:56
================================
In excess of £500k in legal costs for an unwinnable battle against Sports Direct can’t have helped very much.
It would be interesting to see what the final deal actually is. Given the circumstances it would not surprise me if the terms were more favourable to SD than to Rangers.
Yes they settled out of Court, but Rangers are having to pay SD’s legal costs, now why is that. It must at least suggest that SD had the upper hand, should it actually get into Court.
Homunculus August 4, 2018 at 22:28
———————————–
I’ve seen plenty comment on the £500k cost to TRFC and what it means for future contracts.
However, there was one line the the reporting of Justice Millet’s comments that hasn’t been discussed at any length.
Judge Richard Millett made a ruling in Mr Ashley’s favour and decided the litigation could continue.
“litigation could continue”. That suggests to me that we are not finished with the courtroom in this latest spat.
“Wonga does a King!
Managed to persuade its shareholders to invest (£10M)”
Just heard that on BBC Radio news.(Not that exactly, of course,but just the news that it was in trouble and had to seek funding)
I have to say I didn’t know they were trouble, and I’m glad to hear that they are.
I also have to say that I rate the types who run loan businesses as being down at the same end of the ‘human life’ spectrum as guys like King, and CW and CG, and the guys who signed the 5-Way Agreement: they have a level of existence that, lacking moral principle and understanding of Truth, is hardly fit to be called human.
And the shareholders of Wonga seem to be as gullible as the shareholders of RIFC plc!
May Wonga’s troubles end in Liquidation, and may the Wonga-types in Scottish Football governance be brought, figuratively , to justice: and, with persistence, to actual Justice!, as in criminal charges.
LM2
Sounds like a threat ? Please explain .
EASYJAMBOAUGUST 4, 2018 at 23:08
Homunculus August 4, 2018 at 22:28———————————–I’ve seen plenty comment on the £500k cost to TRFC and what it means for future contracts.
However, there was one line the the reporting of Justice Millet’s comments that hasn’t been discussed at any length. Judge Richard Millett made a ruling in Mr Ashley’s favour and decided the litigation could continue.
“litigation could continue”. That suggests to me that we are not finished with the courtroom in this latest spat.
————————————————–
It sounds like Judge Millet has left it open-ended, subject to agreement being reached over the new contract.
It is a painfully weak negotiating position for Sevco. “Agree on the new offered terms, or find yourself back in court…Oh, and it’s a “guilty” by the way”.
Uncle Mick will be slapping King’s clackers with a wooden spoon. ….IMO.
Technically, I suppose Ashley could take the naming rights of Murray Park thingy, and call it anything he fancies. Details were never released for the deal, but some believe it was thrown in as a freebie sweetener…..A quid could swing it.
easyJamboAugust 4, 2018 at 23:08
‘..Judge Richard Millett made a ruling in Mr Ashley’s favour and decided the litigation could continue.’
______________________
I wonder ( not being able to find an actual ‘judgment’ by Judge Millett , only the press reports) whether the judge merely affirmed that SDI had an arguable case, and it was up to ‘Rangers’ to decide whether to continue their action?
The fact that they appear to have conceded and abandoned their case, and have accepted the judge’s rulings on the costs, might suggest that they have listened to their legal advisers, and settled, rather than risk a full-on legal battle with even more costs.
A settlement precludes the possibility of an ‘appeal’, I suppose.
The matter is ended. They are yoked to SDI for as long as SDI wish.
Or am I completely misreading the situation?
Meanwhile, what of hummel?
I know that at least one person ( not I) wrote to hummel (should it be a capital ‘H’?) to suggest that they might do a wee bit of research into TRFC Ltd/RIFC plc as any kind of business partner.
Maybe they should have paid heed!
I thought Willie Miller’s rant at Seco’s lack of respect for other clubs today was long overdue and quite out of place on the BBC. I was with him right up to the point when he choked on the word ‘liquidation’ and said ‘administration’ instead. He almost told it how it is, almost! To be fair to him though, I know he wanted to say it. How much better would he now feel, if he had?
ARMCHAIRSUPPORTER
Michael Stewart weighs in with “Charlies claims are ludicrous and disrespectful”. Billy Dodds “sounds like Charlie is trying to get a move to Rangers”. All this for expressing an opinion.
An ex-player, who last played for us in 2009 says Rangers have “a chance of winning the league” and this results in Willie Miller accusing “former players and the club in general lacking humility and being disrespectful towards other clubs”
How dare someone say anything positive about Rangers on RS.
CORRUPT OFFICIAL
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 00:07
================================
I tend to agree with that. Given that they did not actually say a deal had been agreed, just that they did not wish the matter to proceed to the agreed hearing, then there is the distinct possibility that they may not finalise the deal and Court is still possible. I think the Judge just said “grow up and get on with it”.
However as I said earlier, given that Rangers agreed to pay SD’s costs as part of the out of Court settlement I would suggest SD still have the upper hand. Which again is unsurprising. King’s management by hubris and bullying may have met a superior hubristic bully.
On Murray Park, Hummel may not be best pleased if the name is changed, as they seem to have been given those naming rights just now.
JOHN CLARKAUGUST 5, 2018 at 00:09
Thats my understanding as well. It was gross stupidity even considering taking it to court. It was clear as day in the contract. Amateur hour yet again.
Yip.
This one is a yes and no for me. It will depend on what the renewal clause is in the contract negotiated with the new retailer as SD will need to match that as a material term. If that clause gives the new retailer a guaranteed renewal on certain conditions then that of course gives SD the same option. If however it isnt written by amateurs and is a proper commercial renewal clause then SD would only last the length of the new contract as a guarantee.
Unaffected.
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 4, 2018 at 22:28
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 4, 2018 at 21:56================================
In excess of £500k in legal costs for an unwinnable battle against Sports Direct can’t have helped very much.
—————–
£700K suggests Phil.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/05/no-shortage-of-problems-for-sevco/#more-12135
——————-
It would be interesting to see what the final deal actually is. Given the circumstances it would not surprise me if the terms were more favourable to SD than to Rangers.
———-
There may be a confidentiality clause. But then again as you say,the terms could be more favourable to SD than to The Rangers.
The ibrox folk will not want the terms out there,but after all the hassle they have given Ashley would he release the terms and give king another slap down.He could then sit back and watch the ibrox fans bay for blood.
Just how ruthless could Ashley be,Yes they settled out of Court, but Rangers are having to pay SD’s legal costs,
What else will the rangers board and king have to do to keep the terms quite.Ashley has the upper hand no matter which way he wants to ragdoll king.
Will the ibrox fans sit back if this deal is no better than the last deal or even worse,or will they sit back as a homage to 2012 and do nothing and hope for another dawn of Blue knights and the promise of moonbeams and Billionares.
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 5, 2018 at 08:47
There may be a confidentiality clause. But then again as you say,the terms could be more favourable to SD than to The Rangers.The ibrox folk will not want the terms out there,but after all the hassle they have given Ashley would he release the terms and give king another slap down.He could then sit back and watch the ibrox fans bay for blood.Just how ruthless could Ashley be,Yes they settled out of Court, but Rangers are having to pay SD’s legal costs,What else will the rangers board and king have to do to keep the terms quite.Ashley has the upper hand no matter which way he wants to ragdoll king.Will the ibrox fans sit back if this deal is no better than the last deal or even worse,or will they sit back as a homage to 2012 and do nothing and hope for another dawn of Blue knights and the promise of moonbeams and Billionares.
__________________________________________
SD need to match the terms of the deal negotiated with the “new retailer”
As bad as the Board are and as much as i deride them, i dont believe the new deal will be worse than the current one, though i do caveat that by saying, nothing would surprise me.
As for Phils usual guesswork not emanating from anyone in “Shirebrook” around additional secret clauses etc, then for these to exist, they would need to have existed on the proposed new deal otherwise its not a matched deal.
For what its worth, my spidey senses say that SD are just taking the mickey here and will end up walking away. This could be one last FU to King from Ashley by delaying as long as possible. Thats a wait and see job though. You could say its a “developing story”
ALLYJAMBOAUGUST 4, 2018 at 22:05
=========================
I too get very frustrated at those who sit and write down on the back of a fag packet how much a football club has to spend on players, and there are as many in the mainstream media who are guilty of it as there are fans. I feel my club suffers very unfairly from this and much of it is caused by mainstream media sh*t stirring, often in columns written by ex-Celtic players. I am willing to guess that those columns may be ghost written and that the personal agenda of the journalist doing it will tend to shine through. Extended contracts for existing players cost big money but that is always ignored, as is the money spent improving the infrastructure at the club. What is also ignored is that if you can get a £15m Centre Half to come to Scotland it is likely a 4 year contract will run to another £12-15m in wages. Deep down the media know that but if they can cause hassle and get fans to think the same way then it is job done. Meanwhile they will happily accept that Rangers are spending whatever figure they tell them they are and then repeat it as fact.
Ever since the dark days before the Fergus McCann takeover it has been plain that Celtic can only spend what it earns, or if it borrows then it has to be at a sustainable level. Every other Scottish club bar one is in exactly the same position. Then again no other Scottish club has the backing from the authorities, media and politicians that ‘Rangers’ has. They know they can operate in a reckless manner as long as they like, in the safe knowledge that their perceived importance to Scottish society means the ‘club’ will never be allowed to die. Any other Scottish club would be left to go under without a hint of protest. I have absolutely no doubt about that.
THELAWMAN2
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 08:39
This one is a yes and no for me. It will depend on what the renewal clause is in the contract negotiated with the new retailer as SD will need to match that as a material term. If that clause gives the new retailer a guaranteed renewal on certain conditions then that of course gives SD the same option. If however it isnt written by amateurs and is a proper commercial renewal clause then SD would only last the length of the new contract as a guarantee.
===================================
Unless you have seen the SD contract with Rangers which predates the potential contract with JD you really don’t have any way of knowing that. Neither do I. I can confirm I have seen neither.
A lot of what people are saying is based on assumption and what the SD contract with Rangers “would have said” which then goes on to become fact. Which people base further assumptions on.
Simple answer in my view, few people know what SD would have to match in any new contract and few people now which part of the SD deal with Rangers survive matching the new contract. Bearing in mind they are almost certainly working under English law rather than Scottish here and that SD very much had the upper hand when their renewed deal with Rangers was put in place. Oh and that SD’s lawyers were almost certainly experts in the field. I have no knowledge on which external professional advisers Rangers used for these deals, if any. Maybe they relied on their own existing lawyers.
We simply don’t know, so there is no real justification in your positive spin that it is a one-off, and that SD’s rights from the original contract are only as long as JD’s proposed contract with Rangers. It is just as likely that the original agreement as reported stands. That it is in perpetuity unless SD choose not to match a third party bid.
I await your insider knowledge from an un-named source and from your own extensive acquisitions history. I have neither.
Media watch…… Stephen Nolan on bbc 5 live last night, he had a very honest and revealing interview with Angela Haggerty, detailing her on-line and personal experiences since editing Downfall for Phil.
This was national radio, although very late on a Saturday night, and maybe got the story to a much wider audience, well done the BBC and to Angela for her bravery. Maybe explains why Willie Miller choked on the L word.
from 1:37:00 ish
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bcghp3
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 5, 2018 at 09:04
Parts of the SD contract were disclosed in the first hearing. One of the matching elements was the material terms which included:
“5.5.3 the duration of the agreement between Rangers and the third party.”
Not in this case though as the part of the contract was disclosed in the judgement.
My assumption would be James Blairs firm, though i have no concrete evidence. Keeps it in the family so to speak.
Where was that “reported” ? I havent seen it “reported” anywhere other than 1 guy on his blog misreading what the Judge said in paragraph 41 before changing his view to another clause when it was pointed out that para 41 was conditional on para 40. Is this what you mean by “reported” ?
Nothing from me on this one. Out of professional courtesy, i would never ask such a question to put him in a position to not answer, not that i would expect him to answer.
Big Pink/Tris.
How soon do you think the Mute feature is likely to be available?
For me, the site is becoming unreadable due to the tolerance being shown to one or two, in my opinion, deliberately disruptive contributors.
And unfortunately, I feel I must add, the readiness of others to engage with them.
I find I am increasing just skim-reading the site and am ever closer to giving up on what has been one of the best resources available in the pursuit of non-bias in the administration of Scottish Football.
A thought for the day.
“When a donkey brays, there is no need to bray back.”
Sometimes you have to just laugh at the smsm (well all the time) and in tying themselves in knots trying to please the ibrox clientele.
Today Davie Provan in his one page article.
First article..
Right now european football is a bonus for a club who haven’t played in that arena for seven years.
Next article.
When rangers went bust six years ago.kyle lafferty had a choice.The striker could sign to play for charles Green in scottish footballs bottom division,effectively giving up his Northern Ireland international careerfor the privilege.
Or he could become a free agent able to negotiate a bumper deal for himself and his family with swiss outfit sion.
It was a no- brainer.
———-
Something i believe Mr provan lacks in just saying the truth
CLUSTER ONE
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 09:56
====================================
I take it he was softening up the more intransigent element who consider Lafferty a “traitor” (but not McGregor) for his potential return to Ibrox.
I’s amusing to me that Lee Walace (who did join the new club and give up his international career) is now being treated as a bit of a pariah by an element of the support.
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 5, 2018 at 08:55
SD need to match the terms of the deal negotiated with the “new retailer”
————-
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 5, 2018 at 09:04
Unless you have seen the SD contract with Rangers which predates the potential contract with JD you really don’t have any way of knowing that. Neither do I. I can confirm I have seen neither.
——————
The thing that has been playing on my mind.
Would a new retailer not have to match better terms than SD? and what if it was not.King was desperate to get rid of Ashley he could have signed anything,spun it as a masterstroke then further down the line the truth may have come out.
Even if a new retailer just matched SD terms SD could just match their own original terms with nothing lost.And how would a new retailer know what SD terms were as there would be a confidentiality clause.
A new retailer without knowing the terms of the SD deal could offer less,and if all SD have to do is match that they are laughing
CLUSTER ONE
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:15
====================================
Even more basic, why would anyone else go to the expense of formulating a bid if they knew the details were going to be provided to SD, who only had to match that deal to get the deal instead.
I genuinely don’t see why anyone would do that.
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:15
King was desperate to get rid of Ashley he could have signed anything,spun it as a masterstroke then further down the line the truth may have come out.
__________________________________________________________
I have to say that as i read my previous comments back after it was past the point of editing, the very scenario you paint above crossed my mind.
Its frightening that i would not be surprised if it ever came out.
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 5, 2018 at 08:55
For what its worth, my spidey senses say that SD are just taking the mickey here and will end up walking away. This could be one last FU to King from Ashley by delaying as long as possible. That’s a wait and see job though. You could say its a “developing story”
————————————————————————————-
How much does it cost for a bucket of wishful thinking Lawman?…I would say that is two buckets worth right there.
So a shrewd and ruthless business man, who adores making money, was only dragging King through court for the craic?…At a cost of over half a million pounds, with no guarantee of having it returned?
A businessman, who has practically been given carte blanch to write a new contract by the judge, is going to walk away from a potential earner giggling, “I was only kidding Dave”……..Really?
Maybe that developing story, will extend to Ashley saying, “You keep the money Dave, It will help out with the ring-fenced UK escrow account.”
The bottom line is that whatever the terms of the new contract (if agreement is reached) , they will be staunchly secret. The only conditions you will ever hear about, will be the “lie” conditions, because Ashley will have something to say about anyone who utters truths…..It should be right up King’s street.
His first lie will be, “This is more favourable to us!”
Fortunately he has a gullible audience.
https://twitter.com/bbcsportsound/status/1026029393116889088?s=21
I fear we’ve been here before but this is taking the hype to a new level.
Following on from my last post and pure speculation, some thing like this.
“Hello my friend,yes it’s me. Do me a favour offer that ibrox club a retail deal with these terms I will match it as these are the term i want anyway,and somewhere down the line i will throw you a bone. got that.good, speak to you later,how about golf next week”
EX LUDOAUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:21
0
0 Rate This
https://twitter.com/bbcsportsound/status/1026029393116889088?s=21I fear we’ve been here before but this is taking the hype to a new level.
All this talk about about Micks solid contract, …
Has anyone else heard anything, …
Darn…forgot to include article
second time lucky
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:20
————
Thanks for the honest reply.
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:19
1
0 Rate This
CLUSTER ONEAUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:15====================================
Even more basic, why would anyone else go to the expense of formulating a bid if they knew the details were going to be provided to SD, who only had to match that deal to get the deal instead.
I genuinely don’t see why anyone would do that.
————-
He still has them by the shirt and curlies
CORRUPT OFFICIALAUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:20
I think we should all know by now that Ashley does what he wants. Unlike King, he is rich enough to play about. Not withstanding that though, he would have known there was no risk. A blind man reading that contract could tell Rangers didnt comply once the details came out.
Well it depends really on what the deal is surely. What if the deal was going to be a loss for the new retailer ? What if Ashley didnt agree with the new terms because they were crazy ? Would he as a businessman walk into that and match it ? Baring in mind though its hypothetical and just an inkling of course.
Do we know the exact terms of Celtic or Aberdeen or Hearts contracts with retailers or sponsors ? Does anyone publicly reveal contracts ? Not just in Sport. In any business ?
I dont get the mentality from football fans that think they have the right to know the detail behind their clubs or other clubs contracts. Its commercially sensitive and blooming well should be staunchly secret.
I dont disagree with that. It will be Spin City and the usual BS from King.
EX LUDO
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:21
===================================
That beggars belief, he can’t actually believe that.
These are the same people who have Brendan Rodgers leaving for pretty much anyone in the EPL. However Gerrard would be picky about who he would go to in England. Before he has even managed his first SPFL game.
Mental stuff.
Latest by phil.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2018/08/05/no-shortage-of-problems-for-sevco/
Homunculus, Cluster One,
Warburton Mk2. You would expect better from the BBC…….then again.
I’m hoping Willie Miller is going to be on the commentary team at Pittodrie today. It will be interesting to note if his comments will be muted today. Nice to think he could speak his mind?
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 5, 2018 at 10:36
Do we know the exact terms of Celtic or Aberdeen or Hearts contracts with retailers or sponsors ? Does anyone publicly reveal contracts ? Not just in Sport. In any business ?
————————————————————————-
Totally agree, but they are not in court greetin’ about it. Sevco and SD are, ergo they are unhappy.
As all court indicators are pointing at a result for Ashley, common sense dictates that they will be unhappier upon conclusion.
But that won’t sell any jerseys to the fans. There would appear to be some sort of boycott clause inserted, which, if jerseys don’t sell, seems like another bum-biter, and possibly another condition under which Sevco would be forced to cough for unsold stock (or something similar).
Stock sales as things stand, are non existent, and this must be peak sales time.
The gurgling of wonga circling the drain must be a hellish cacophony to sit in the bloo-room and listen to….Pretty demoralising I would imagine.
Ex LudoAugust 5, 2018 at 10:21
https://twitter.com/bbcsportsound/status/1026029393116889088?s=21I fear we’ve been here before but this is taking the hype to a new level.
_______________________
Brilliant. What a combination, Chick Young and Alex Miller, not a biased bone within the two bodies. I could go on about the ridiculous suggestion that Gerrard would only leave TRFC to go to Man Utd, Liverpool or Arsenal, but I’ll just stick to saying that Gerrard’s hardly been in the job five minutes, and the usual suspects are talking about him leaving already! Question is, are they just bigging him up, or preparing for his departure?
With today’s game between Aberdeen and an ibrox club, will the fans have to sit with a two season old ibrox team replica kit on? Pretty demoralising I would imagine.
Ex LudoAugust 5, 2018 at 11:22
Homunculus, Cluster One,Warburton Mk2. You would expect better from the BBC…….then again.I’m hoping Willie Miller is going to be on the commentary team at Pittodrie today. It will be interesting to note if his comments will be muted today. Nice to think he could speak his mind?
________________
When the BBC won’t let a television giant like Sir David Attenborough speak his own mind, and they do seem to have successfully stopped him, I doubt a relative minnow (by comparison to one of broadcasting’s true greats) will dare to put his head all that far above the parapet.
AllyJambo,
SG’s departure? Now that would be a story. Nothing less than a victory for his team today will put his jaiket on a shoogly peg right away.
BBC Radio Scotland would be a lost cause if it wasn’t for Willie Miller and Michael Stewart. Why they (BBC) surround themselves with biased idiots is anyone’s guess.
Even Tom English And Pat Bonner are poor because they try too hard to be neutral. Why? most others don’t let it bother them. Certainly not the producers.
But what can we do? If you want to hear a live match commentary there is no choice. Whenever I listen to a Celtic game I also watch the live updates on CQN, that way I can get a balanced view. Believe me, if Celtic are poor, the folk on CQN don’t hold back.
CORRUPT OFFICIAL
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 11:26
===============================
To be fair I think Celtic are entirely happy with the deals they have and don’t exactly keep them secret, without going into a lot of detail.
For example the deal with Defabet has just been extended for 5 years (to end of 2025 now) in what Celtic describe as “The biggest ever shirt sponsorship deal in Scottish football history.”
In addition the deal with New Balance was reputed to be worth £30m over 5 years and improved on the previous deal with Nike.
HomunculusAugust 5, 2018 at 09:04
‘..I have no knowledge on which external professional advisers Rangers used for these deals, if any. ‘
____________________
I think this chap McCormick, QC argued the toss over the amount of fees TRFC Ltd have to pay! His own ‘chambers’ puff him up as a dab hand. But not even a dab hand QC could expect to do much with such pig’s ear of case to argue!
on this link:
https://elyplace.com/barrister/william-mccormick-qc/
CLUSTER ONE
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 11:31
=====================================
Surely orange colored fakes will be the order of the day (pun intended).
Ex LudoAugust 5, 2018 at 11:53
AllyJambo,SG’s departure? Now that would be a story. Nothing less than a victory for his team today will put his jaiket on a shoogly peg right away.
_____________
To be honest, ExL, I’m not suggesting there is a likelihood that he’s off any time soon, just that it’s possible (though maybe only from a naughty perspective
) that level5 have pushed this story via one of their most puppety of puppets to start the preparation for a before the end of season (perhaps Xmas) departure. Just in case.
Of course, the article could just have been published to meet the necessary ‘Rangers’ feel good factor matchday quota, and there was nothing left that fits the feasibility model.
Just by the by, there are one or two things about McInnes that sort of annoy me: another one has just been added! I’ve just listened to him using ‘noo’ for ‘knew’ !Where did he pick that up?
Anyway, it’ll be a bad day for him if he fails to win v TRFC Ltd for a fourth time in a row!
Serious questions would have to be asked, I would imagine.
Spurs must be fuming.
Third in the EPL and the Liverpool under 18 coach, who went to Scotland and hasn’t managed Rangers in their first SPFL game yet, wouldn’t even consider them as his next club.
So third in the league, one of the top strikers in the World with various other top level players, new stadium, turnover to June 2017 of £300m with profits of £40m and the new Rangers manager wouldn’t even consider them.
HOMUNCULUSAUGUST 5, 2018 at 12:18
Of course the reason why the BBC love pundits like Chic Young could be the old idea that people love to hate him. So he is good for ratings.
(We hate Chic as a pundit not as a person).
A bit like Roy Greenslade’s opinion that nowadays people like Katie Hopkins shifts papers.
That kind of attitude at the BBC just equates them with tabloid ethics. It’s all well and good on programmes like Off The Ball, which is entertainment based, but Sportsound? Where there should be a lot more hard hitting reporting and questioning – and no covering up. Very poor for a national broadcaster.
Ironically I think if they were to do their jobs properly their ratings would go through the roof. It would be a ‘can’t miss’ show.
Its nonsense to suggest Gerrards jacket will be on a shoogly nail if we lose today. There were 20 possible ties for Rangers this weekend and the absolute worst one possible was Away to Aberdeen. A team that has finished 2nd, 4 years on the trot and have drawn twice with the team that finished 7th in English Premiership.
Im the first to say he has to get it right quick but today will most certainly not be the shoogly nail time.
Alex Miller a few moments ago. Celtic Park capacity 70,000! Ibrox 55,000/56,000!
Tells you everything about him.
Chic Young did not correct him!
Tells you everything about him.
THELAWMAN2
AUGUST 5, 2018 at 12:48
=====================================
Your team could lose 5-0 today and the same against Celtic in a few weeks and his job would be safe.
The club can’t afford to pay him off and it can’t afford to replace him with anyone decent.
You couldn’t offer Derek McInnes good enough terms to leave Aberdeen. With no disrespect to either Aberdeen or their manager.
AllyJambo,
I like the term “feasibility model” and appreciate your suggestion was tongue in cheek however if there isn’t instant success then the bears both on and off the BBC won’t be happy.
THELAWMAN2AUGUST 5, 2018 at 12:48
, But I agree with you, he will get a bit of time………………..
Its nonsense to suggest Gerrards jacket will be on a shoogly nail if we lose today.
———————————————————————————–
Not so much nonsense if you consider that it may be Gerrard holding the claw-hammer?
No much mind. ….If disgruntlement does set in, it will escalate fairly steeply.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/16399039.demolished-stadium-greek-economic-crisis-dropping-down-the-leagues-silverware-drought-can-aek-athens-secure-fairy-tale-en/#comments-anchor
scottish newspaper writing about fairytale ending for a greek team,who just happen to be playing celtic,a scottish team.
as someone else said,only in scotland
Aberdeen looking ok for a draw now that sevco are down to 10.
Incredible decision all the same. Aberdeen boy barges into Morelos purposely not once but twice, linesman diesnt even put his flag up, which he should have, and Clancy sends the player off without going over and having a chat.
I get they are mic’d up and all that but for such a major decision, surely its worth taking 60 seconds over.
I hate Morelos petulance and think he is a total liability by the way but that wasnt a red.
Balls denial of a clear goal scoring opportunity however……….
Them refs eh.
Totally of Tangent but has Bryson been in touch with the Masons. This must be a wind up!
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/freemasons-could-break-male-rule-13033623
Imperfectly registered Mason.
Well Well Well maybe not then 10 man sevco 1 up.
Mercdoc,
Now that really was a theft.
Shug, you called it right at 13.16 – A draw!
I think Stevie G has just caught Rangers-itis.
Have to say I am very disappointed in him. Thought he was a cut above that post match car crash interview.
Reading Phil’s latest and trying to set the potential outcome into the financial context as it is known, I’m constantly bemused by the gravity-defying ability of RIFC/TRFC to survive when any other organisation/company would have been carted away to the knackers yard ages ago.
Having said that there could well be a perfect storm brewing with legal costs, limited retail revenue, a possible JDS claim, player pay-offs, transfer fee installments, the DCK TOP court case and the Close loan repayment all looming.
Negotiating a way through that minefield will require skill and dexterity. After the shambles of the retail deal one wonders if that is too big an ask and if luck is finally going to run out?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.