It has recently been suggested to me quite strongly by two separate Finance Industry experts that no matter the outcomes of the forthcoming criminal trials into the sale of Rangers and the subsequent disposal of the liquidated assets, it is highly unlikely that the sale will be reversed. In fact BDO (the liquidators of Rangers) see the path of least resistance to any remedy (if guilty verdicts are returned) through the professional indemnity insurance held by organisations involved (I am choosing my words carefully here to comply with the rules surrounding the court case).
There is of course still the dispute between the owners of Sevco 5088 and Sevco Scotland to consider (although depending on the outcome of the criminal cases, that may be moot).
On the face of it, all of this is good news for TRFC and Dave King. After all, one of the main problems they have been facing is the uncertainty over the ownership of the assets, and if BDO are swinging in the direction indicated above, King and his board are free to move forward – you would think.
The recent plans to raise cash from the fans is I think a smart one, but it is still a sticking plaster applied to a gunshot wound. Rangers already have a gate income which is the envy of not just most Scottish clubs, but clubs much further afield. Their problem is their astronomical fixed costs, their dilapidated infrastructure, and possible cash outflow through the fabled ‘onerous contracts’.
Even putting in place a severe austerity package (which may be unpalatable to fans being asked to part with their cash to buy off pesky shareholders who don’t share King’s vision) does not remove the need to capitalise urgently to repair the stadium and build a squad capable of competing in Scotland. So they need to raise cash, and they need it quickly – because soft loans cannot be provided forever.
So the share issue route is the obvious way to go, and to do that effectively, a listing on an exchange is required. However our sources in the financial world don’t think it is possible that this could happen with the current regime for the following reasons (not in order of importance);
- They have absolutely no credible business plan to move forward over the next five years – only a commitment to limping on with soft loans;
- The current chairman is a convicted felon;
- Two directors of the new company were directors of the company now in liquidation;
- They have no line of credit;
- They are already in debt to the tune of at least £12m – increasing as I write;
- They are unable to repay that debt;
- There is still a nominal (even if we accept the BDO position above) doubt over the ownership of assets;
- The football team does not play in the top league – and European income isn’t coming soon;
- The company have astronomical fixed costs which are way in excess of their income.
So even if the doubt over the ownership of assets is removed, there isn’t an easily navigable route for TRFC into calmer waters.
My own conclusion is that perhaps the biggest single thing that is holding Rangers back is Dave King. I really don’t know what his motivation is. There is speculation that he has his eyes on the increasing cash-pot and diminishing creditor list at the Oldco. Some Rangers bloggers are suggesting that a land-grab play is taking place. I think the former is far more plausible than the latter, but if we take his RRM credential at face-value, it seems to me that the Rangers-minded thing for him to do would be to reverse himself out of the position he is in.
That might enable the company to raise some of the cash they need to repair the stadium, rebuild the infrastructure within the club (players, management, youth and scouting etc.).
Are King, Taylor and Park really in this so they can indefinitely fork out £10m per year? Will Taylor and Park continue to ally themselves with King if he is the impediment to inward investment that we think he is? Park will most certainly not, and my information, from sources very close to him, is that he is done.
The fractures in KingCo are beginning to appear, and King himself may come under increasing pressure to do what is best for the future of the club, which is to remove himself from the equation and allow those better placed to take it forward.
It is often speculated elsewhere that SFM is a Celtic blog, and even those who give us credit for being a much broader church than that will still insist that we are anti-Rangers, obsessed with Rangers, and out to get Rangers.
The occasional outburst of Schadenfreude from commenters aside (it IS a football forum after all guys) SFM is quite definitely not editorially anti-Rangers.
I think the evidence shows that we are nothing of the kind, and it doesn’t do Rangers any favours to conflate our position on the corrupt nature of the governance of the game with that of the Ibrox club – new or old. Where we do discuss Rangers (as we have in this article), it is with an acknowledgment that the money flying around in football makes all of our clubs vulnerable to the kind of rip-off merchants who have wandered in and out of Ibrox in the past few years.
There are many areas where the SFM consensus is unpalatable to Rangers fans. But protecting all of our clubs and their fans from mismanagement is hopefully not one of them.
Also, despite the many rivalries within the game, Rangers are an important focus (old club or new) for tens of thousands of fans. As such they are of interest to ALL of us who support football in this country. Anyway, I tend to be more obsessive about my own club – and find it rather easier to be objective about others 🙂
My own preference in moving the debate forward is to get the perspective of Rangers fans on these issues. I am ever hopeful that we can have Rangers fans engage with the blog and look for areas where we have common purpose.
Nobody at SFM wants Rangers fans to have no team to support. Nobody here wants the SFA to stay unregulated and unaccountable. Nobody at SFM wants people to make up rules they go along just for the sake of a few quid. I can’t believe that Rangers fans don’t share those values.
I agree that Rangers fans are victims of this affair to a large extent, but the culprits are quite definitely not us at SFM. They need to look closer to home to find them.
What was the important news?
Something’s up.
It would appear that RIFC/TRFC/King have persuaded their acolytes at two different TRFC Supporters associations to buy shares from non-aligned shareholders. They also appear to be trying to do the same with the leaders of the Rangers Fighting Fund.
Now why would they be doing that when two of these associations’ funds were already earmarked to fulfil that very role?
RFF’s funds, on the other hand, were earmarked for a different purpose (and they might have some legal difficulties if they try to change their purpose from ‘saving’ RFC to assisting TRFC by buying shares in the holding company (RIFC) – two completely different legal entities, you see, regardless of what some might say about ‘the club’).
We know that buying ever more existing shares is not going to help TRFC one iota, financially, but it might just give the current board more power to do what they want to do, or more likely, give King more power to do what he wants to do. That might end up helping in the end by allowing the board to get rid of pre-emption rights, but would that be worth the cost, and loss, of these funds that would otherwise be used to buy the new shares?
Also, why, when the chairman recently stated that he intends to take RFC out of liquidation, at great cost, would he be encouraging these associations to spend money on shares of what would then be a defunct company?
If the plan is to do no more than buy up existing shares, regardless of who currently holds these shares, why this move to amalgamate the two funds? Why add an extra layer to the initiative. As things stand, the board could ask the two to up their efforts to buy shares (for whatever reason) without the need for a campaign and vote first. Heavens above, this public manoeuvre has alerted any would be sellers to the fact that there will be a concerted effort to buy their shares, and that will automatically push the price of shares up.
It will push the price up, no matter who might be keen to sell their shares, not just those of the ‘enemy’!
I seem to recall reading of someone renowned for the ‘pump and dump’ method of enhancing his bank balance…
There is, of course, the possibility that somewhere, within the new constitution of a combined association, a clause will be placed to allow the funds to go directly into the hands of someone with ‘the best interests of Rangers’ at heart should the buying up of shares prove to be more difficult than envisaged!
It might be worthwhile for someone like John James to look into where this idea has come from (is it acceptable, proper, or even legal for a company to approach the trustees of a fund in this way?), and to try to get sight of the proposed new constitution and to have it examined by someone well versed in such matters.
Pure speculation of course.
If the Rangers PLC board think they can get 75% of voting rights behind them then it effectively allows them to do what they want. They can pass special resolutions, so for example resolution 9 (from the last EGM) regarding the dis-application of pre-emption rights which failed under the previous regime could be passed. That would allow them to dilute other people’s shares if they chose to.
Buying up existing shares can have a double dunt effect if you buy from the right people. It increases your share holding and at the same time reduces the holding of your “opposition”. So if you buy 5% of the shares there is a 10% swing.
If they have done their maths and think the fan groups can buy enough shares, and it might not be a huge amount, then they may think it’s worthwhile buying up existing shares, in private deals, between specific people.
They can then call an AGM (they can do it any time now, and it must be before the end of December) put in special resolutions to suit themselves and do what they want.
If the same fan groups also have some additional funds which would help keep the business operating then so much the better. Simply borrow the money just now, with the promise of repaying it with equity in the not too distant future. Since the groups were going to buy those shares anyway it’s a win / win. Hiwever these ones are bought as part of an issue and the money goes to the PLC (pre-paid).
They are using the fans groups as a way to cement their total control of the business and to provide short term finance. Selling it as a way forward, all of the people coming together, and a bright new future under Real Rangers Men.
Nice PR work if you can get it. Particularly if you previously said the club was dead.
Many posters on SFM express their dislike for what have been called PR lackies and spin conduits, whose purpose is to influence readers or specific groups in some way but offer misleading information or present skewed versions of the facts.
However it seems that the radar doesn’t fully function for some when the material or angle involved is more or less alligned with their own thoughts. You can understand the logic why this be the case but on closer examination you have to flag this up and qualify any such output. In the case of JJ, I have seen some on here talk of inaccuracies and question his motives, notably ‘easyjambo’, who to my mind is by far the most objective, fact-using poster on SFM.
I seem to remember on SFM, a stage when Bill McMurdo was generally being called a sensible fan who was trying to inform the Rangers support of present and future events. However he was in actual fact a dreaded PR lackie and alongside the RSL (the first PR supporters group?), were exposed and immediately faded from view as PR strategies were reviewed.
Whilst I can understand posters on here being interested to view output from many sources, I find it hypocritical to almost request it from an agenda driven source.
Homunculus 24th October 2015 at 10:44 am
I have no doubt that that is the ‘plan’. Still doesn’t answer why the need to amalgamate the associations and make such a public thing about it? Any non-aligned shareholders now not only know that there are interested purchasers, they can have a good stab at assessing how much money is available for the purchases and bargain accordingly. I presume King reckons he knows likely sellers amongst the target shareholders, so why not approach them in a more stealthy manner and hope to get more shares to the pound than might be the case now?
I realise that this PR exercise might be aimed at increasing the funds available, but does that indicate they are a long way short of enough funds to achieve the required purchases. If not, why not just go ahead (if it’s that straight forward) and buy them if they are available? If it’s so important, and workable, why isn’t King buying up more shares? Or the 3bears? Or these rich RRMs that are apparently waiting in the wings?
Then there’s the question of why encourage supporters to spend their limited cash on shares when King has made such a big thing about buying RFC out of liquidation? Not that I thought there was ever any more than a PR exercise in that, but has King forgot yet another ‘untruth’ he fed the bears?
Just another thought, and looking at it from the ‘other side’. If you were a shareholder wanting to sell your shares in a company, like RIFC, not listed on a stock market, wouldn’t you like to have someone on the ‘inside’ encouraging gullible people to club together to buy those shares and push the price up?
To be clear, Homunculus, I’m not questioning your post, at all, it’s seems perfectly sound to me, I’m just not so sure that it is the sole aim of this latest move, and may be a blind for something else.
It may well not be the sole aim, I’m sure you are correct in that, I am just saying there are obvious benefits to this plan.
1, Rallying point, get all the fans in one place. Sell it as the people all working together rather than against each other. They do like their wagon circling exercises.
2, Easier to control one group, particularly if you give their leaders direct access to the board. They are more likely to be obsequious and follow orders. Even give one a blazer (not a racist though, well at least not someone overtly a racist). One of us on the board, great. Craig Houston, there’s a shout.
3, You really have to have one organisation for that. Otherwise you have to give a seat to loads of different groups. If one group perceives another getting special treatment then they won’t play together.
4, Copy the Hearts model and get as many onside as possible, paying a direct debit monthly and that money going into the club as an income stream. Call it “save Ibrox”, “money for the youth squad”, whatever you want , it’s still a monthly income stream. So short term advantage and long term income.
It’s really all about two things in my opinion.
A, Financial, short term money to survive and long term income stream.
B, Control, the board control the owners of the business and the customers of the business. An interesting model.
Re the whole thing about getting the dead club out of liquidation. That has been discussed to death. I think this play is being made simply because they have nowhere else to go.
They should have done what Hearts did and have a proper, painful administration and gotten things sorted out. Juxtapose the results from the different routes taken.
Blue Grass
Fair point about perceptions of or encouragement of JJ. However don’t we all , including yourself in your post itself, fall into that category? Kind of Russian Doll thinking in that the top visible layer is formed by the one inside and so on.
I’ve corrected JJ’S narrative twice on a matter I have documented evidence of (how CW tried to get access to CL money that would have satisfied HMRC they would be paid the wee tax bill and of positive cash flow over the season) but regarding his other stuff I’m in no position to question and look for the Easy and Ally jambo perspective.
I post this from my latest Russian Doll perspective but having worked hard by involving others in my conclusions based on documents that in fact I’m not finding in this matter what I want to see but what actually took place.
However it is in sharing our individual perspectives, including JJs, we come to a wider understanding of the issues that might be at play and over time can discard those that do not stand the test of time and what comes to light in its passage.
BlueGrass 24th October 2015 at 10:49 am
I have been, and continue to be, sceptical of John James posts, or, at least, his motivation. I do see, however, an antidote to the media circus that surrounds King’s ascent to the Ibrox throne, and, whatever his motivation, if he can encourage the bears to do no more than question the King acolytes and their actions, then, to my mind, he is performing a useful function.
You said:
“Whilst I can understand posters on here being interested to view output from many sources, I find it hypocritical to almost request it from an agenda driven source. ”
I presume what you said above refers to this from my post:
“It might be worthwhile for someone like John James to look into where this idea has come from (is it acceptable, proper, or even legal for a company to approach the trustees of a fund in this way?), and to try to get sight of the proposed new constitution and to have it examined by someone well versed in such matters.”
Can you tell me how it is in anyway hypocritical to suggest that someone ‘look into’ something? Should JJ find and post anything suspicious, surely that would be a good thing, regardless of his motivation, and if he finds nothing wrong, as long as he doesn’t say he did, then no harm done. You could, of course, as a good TRFC supporter, check it out for yourself, I was not aiming my words at JJ alone!
And in this we see what many here have said since the days of RTC. Rangers/TRFC supporters don’t have to like what we say, or even respect us, for their own sake they need to see what’s said and investigate it for themselves, then let others know what they find! So far, with the apparent exception of John James, the only in depth (and misplaced) research they’ve done is to seek to discredit Celtic (land deals nonsense)!
Homunculus
One advantage TRFC fans seem to have over the Celtic fans of my acquaintance is their apparent willingness to be led (at times without asking relevant questions or shouting them down.)
On the other hand most Tims I know are rebels looking for a cause (which can lead to as much cohesion as division) and is the basis of much charitable work. ( Support BRTH in his attempts to raise money for the homeless. The guy is an incorrigible rebel with a heart)
So it makes sense to use that loyalty attitude to form a core around which to unify.
Going back to JJ, it seems to me he does speak from the moral vantage point of not wanting a tax evading criminal at the head of that unified organisation and after SDM, CW, CG and now DK and where JJ’S club now find itself, who can blame him for wanting an injection of morals and ethics and screaming caveat emptor?
Perhaps that (not the Latin 🙂 but the ethics)is why he is suspected by those lacking a moral compass of being a Tim. Not that Tims have a monopoly on morality of course, we all have feet of clay.
But standing back I cannot help compare what has happened to JJs club to the woes of the Pharisees where the letter of the law took precedence over the spirit that created the letters.
Having written that I’m not sure if it has any direct relevance to your sensible post other than the musings of an interested human being watching human beings being human.
Are we not truly incredible or is it unbelievable?
BlueGrass 24th October 2015 at 10:49 am
______________________________________-
Jack, what you are trying to do is cherry pick information from the blog to back up your pre-arrived at conclusion, that we are all looking for a way of doing Rangers down.
The consensus on the blog is not in any way to champion JJ. In fact the levels of scepticism surrounding much of what he says is in line with what other Rangers bloggers deliver.
SFM is a broad church and opinion is varied on many topics – not least this one. Wouldn’t it be nice if you ever came on and found something you can agree on instead of manufacturing arguments based on skewed inormation.
THE Club is delighted that the members of the Rangers Supporters Trust and Rangers First have voted so overwhelmingly in favour of the establishment of a new Fans Group. With positive responses of 99% and 97% respectively, this demonstrates the strength of desire among our supporter base to come together for the benefit of the Club.
We look forward to the proposals being finalised and believe that this will further enhance relationships between the Club and supporters.
Now can someone help here?
The concert party was not a concert party?. as if they were they would have had the most shares, and then would have had to make an offer to all shareholders to buy their shares.
Now are they trying to achieve this with the merger of the fans groups.
Or am i way off track?
And will this be the best way for king to remove himself from the equation.by selling up his shares to the one fan group
Good informative blog, showing SFM doesn’t just bring bad news to the bears
“It has recently been suggested to me quite strongly by two separate Finance Industry experts that no matter the outcomes of the forthcoming criminal trials into the sale of Rangers and the subsequent disposal of the liquidated assets, it is highly unlikely that the sale will be reversed. In fact BDO (the liquidators of Rangers) see the path of least resistance to any remedy (if guilty verdicts are returned) will be through the professional insurance of some of the accused (I am choosing my words carefully here to comply with the rules surrounding the court case).”
I wonder, however, what would happen if, in the event of the trial that must not be named has a result that no one found guilty actually has any insurance (to meet those liabilities) nor assets, that the authorities can get their hands on, would the liquidator then pursue the assets of the old company? It must surely be their duty (to the creditors) to do so, if that remedy exists in law. It has also been discussed on here that in relation to Green’s claim against TRFC/RIFC that, while such insurance might cover the costs of an accused’s defence, if found guilty it doesn’t cover any fines (and one would expect reparation) imposed.
I suspect that legal advice, and perhaps even a judicial hearing, will have to be arranged and paid for before anyone can proceed in the knowledge that no doubt over the ownership is attached to the assets.
BP
Good words, realising that you have to be careful in what you say.
I think what you outlined is merely a reasonable representation of the facts and a measured prediction on what the future holds, depending on the characters involved.
With regards engaging with the full range of support, across as many clubs as possible, it is vital.
One of the things which helps the people we should really be looking at, those who administer the game, is when the fans see each other as enemies. If different clubs’ supporters were to put their difference aside and focus on the central issue of how the game is being run then life would be much more difficult for them.
Keeping the fans against each other if anything helps them.
The one time (most of) the fans got together a few years back and said “No, that is going too far” their plans had to be changed. No agreements or deals behind closed doors could overcome the majority of the club (as instructed by their own support) saying no, that is not how it is going to happen. Claims of “Armageddon” were set aside because some things are just wrong, no matter the consequences.
This place really could be somewhere rivalries can be put aside for the common good. I wish you luck in achieving that.
BP. Good informative post. Thank you for your continued hard work.
I’m afraid that JJ is at the nonsense again. He really should stay away from numbers.
On Celtic, “They consistently buy players at £1m-£3m then sell at £10-£14m.”
When did Celtic sell a player for £14m.
How consistently have they sold players for over £10m.
Even if we take Van Dyke, and assume that the £11.5m price was accurate, that obviously includes VAT, so the actual price the registration would have been sold for is more like £9.6m. That’s ignoring any other costs, agent’s fees etc.
Like I said, he really should stay away from numbers, it does his credibility no favours.
I don’t think you can lump all into the same category. There are lots of sub-categories in what has become an incredibily complex and important part of the ongoing story which may in time be overtaken by the legal process.
The various sub-categories will be formed by many things, including sides, objective or not, honest or not, simple opinion or paid, informed or not, commercially interested or not, etc.
I don’t have a problem with reading or listening to anyone and didn’t tell anyone not to consume any particular source, only to think a little and not sugar-coat something simply because it is more aligned to their own views and I did mention that some on here (including yourself) have made a point of highlighting factual issues re.JJ.
Here is where you could say I fall into the category or I would say sub-category. That being of a seasoned observer and Rangers fan simply highlighting a fairly high profile, agenda driven, social media user. In short, an interested party (fan) with a now educated perception.
What I have had a problem with is those who IMO dishonestly try to pervert opinion for their or their paymasters material gain. I think this has played a very important role in the Rangers saga with one obvious central player from which has been born a counter effort.
Perhaps the subject is worth a blog or podcast on its own so as not to get caught up with other subjects.
.
I thought along with Auldheid and seemingly as it stands, a majority of other posters that the points on perceptions and encouragement of JJ were fair and reasoned. Bear in mind that a TU for me is historically difficult to come by.
I really don’t get the bit about cherry-picking info and pre-arrived conclusions. Yes, I have my opinions, everyone does but I was responding to Allyjambo re. something that had been vexing me for a while.
If you want Rangers supporters on here and to promote varied opinions, then surely we should be allowed to voice our own thoughts which may or may not agree with others, aslong as it is done in a reasonable manner and within the rules.
I might even manage to get to the subject matter of the blog later and would suggest/volunteer to write a blog about the ‘use of PR’.
Homunculus 24th October 2015 at 2:19 pm #I’m afraid that JJ is at the nonsense again. He really should stay away from numbers.
On Celtic, “They consistently buy players at £1m-£3m then sell at £10-£14m.”
When did Celtic sell a player for £14m.
How consistently have they sold players for over £10m.
================================
I don’t recall any £14M sales but Wanyama, Forster and Van Dyke were all reported at over £10M. Healthy fees of around half that amount were also received for Ki and Hooper. Lesser, but still significant fees were received for Matthews and Ledley, neither of whom cost a fee to sign. A few seasons ago McGeady left for £9M having being brought through the ranks.
I guess JJ simply wants to highlight a fairly successful policy by Celtic which Rangers will have to try and emulate given there are no other significant income streams in Scotland. I know Celtic have had some less successful imports but no club get’s every one right.
upthehoops 24th October 2015 at 3:33 pm
I have absolutely no problem with ” … simply wants to highlight a fairly successful policy by Celtic …”
However that is not what he said which was ” “They consistently buy players at £1m-£3m then sell at £10-£14m.”
That is at best misleading. Do Celtic really consistently sell players for £10m – £14m. If we accept how the stories have been reported then Van Dyke, Wanyama and Forster (just) would fit into that category.
Like I said, I have no issue with the basic point, however in my view he spoils that point by what is essentially hyperbole. Back to my original point, it does his credibility no good.
BlueGrass 24th October 2015 at 2:27 pm #
EDIT
“Perhaps the subject is worth a blog or podcast on its own so as not to get caught up with other subjects.”
____________________
Indeed it is Bluegrass and I think the forum should allow you to post such a blog; that the members might better understand and critique your reasoning.
BP..stop calling the poster Jack
Big Pink great article …….as usual . I too would love more Rangers fans to join TSFM …………BUT and it is a big BUT………..until the rangers fans acknowledge that their club did wrong (bigtime) we will never move on. It is well nigh impossible to have any meaningful debate when they are still in denial. There will always be a huge rift between Rangers fans and the rest of Scottish football IMHO …sad but true. All our ammo should be aimed at bringing down the SFA sadly probably without Rangers fans help…………I know this is a bit of a depressing post but I think there will always be that feeling of ” having been cheated ” hanging over the game in Scotland
roddybhoy 24th October 2015 at 6:03 pm
Big Pink great article …….as usual . I too would love more Rangers fans to join TSFM …………BUT and it is a big BUT………..until the rangers fans acknowledge that their club did wrong (bigtime) we will never move on.
___________________
I can understand this persprepective roddybhoy but I do believe there is a growing difference between the Rangers football supporter and the supporter of a cause. I hope there is a financial meltdown or crisis of some sort at Ibrox not because I want to see a football club die but rather that what emerges from the catastrophe is a club that real football fans can claim `ownership’ of,or genuine affinity with.I want to see a football club from Govan competing and winning trophies fair and square.
..but not too often.
There was an interesting post by “Cooper” on the JJ blog, regarding the possibility of RIFC raising capital quickly and cheaply using a process called a “cash box placement”, which gets around a lot of those troublesome Companies Act provisions designed to protect minority shareholders. It is also a process which avoids the need for a prospectus (phew!). No shareholder approval required either (double phew!).
Here’s a link to a site which summarises the process- http://www.financialdirector.co.uk/financial-director/analysis/2273012/boxing-clever-the-rise-of-cash-box-placements
Ignore the stuff about a stock market listing- the scheme works for unlisted companies too.
According to “Cooper”, who appears to be on the side of the Board at Ibrox, he has put this scheme to RIFC, who told him they had considered this option, but decided against. “Cooper” concludes from that response that money isn’t tight.
I would conclude the opposite. In fact I would conclude that what the scheme lacks is someone willing to put the money in. This is not a way of creating free money, just an efficient way of getting available money into the company. You can have as many smart investment schemes as you like, but in the end, someone has to be prepared to lose a few million.
The scheme could of course be used to convert the King/3 Bears unsecured loans to equity, increasing their percentage stake, but not putting an extra penny into the company. It might also be used to soak up any spare cash from the fan groups.
However, is Ashley really going to stand by whistling a happy tune while King dilutes his shareholding down to nothing? I don’t think so. I guess Ashley will want his own interests well protected, and I’m sure he knows how best to do it.
roddybhoy 24th October 2015 at 6:03 pm #
‘… All our ammo should be aimed at bringing down the SFA .’
___________
..and reversing the ‘agreement’ under which the club founded by Charles Green is allowed to be treated as the same club as RFC(IL) and allowed to claim honours and titles which it was not in existence even to compete for, let alone win.
As said before, the principal interest in the happenings over at Ibrox, and in whether the new club survives or goes bust , is ONLY because we fear that if it were to go bust, the already soiled Administrators of our Sport would soil themselves again just as quickly and shamelessly as they did when RFC went bust,in doing similar dirty work inn relation to any further new creation that a future CG-type might whistle up.
I look to any source for facts, analysis, reports, suggestions, and opinions based on such, for hints or indications as to what might transpire and the degree to which anything that does transpire might come about after certain assurances or pledges had been sought, and given, from the SFA/SPFL that ,come what may, there will always be a ‘Rangers’ with an ‘unbroken history’
Were it not for that distrust of our Football Authorities, I would personally have little more interest in the fortunes of a struggling TRFC than I had, say, in the case of Gretna, or, going back a bit, Third Lanark.
Discussing opinions is good. Hearing other people’s opinions is good.
Talking to people whose ‘opinions’ include the ‘opinion’ that facts are to be denied is a waste of time, in the same way that playing cards with people ready to cheat would be a waste of time.
neepheid 24th October 2015 at 6:49 pm
I read that earlier and this bit stuck out for me as proof that Cooper is a true blue, died in the wool, Real Rangers Man:
“RIFC incorporates a new company. Tis best to incorporate the new company in Jersey. Incorporating in Jersey allows UK stamp duty to be avoided in share transactions.”
Once a tax dodger, always a tax dodger. God Save The Queen, just don’t do your bit to fill her treasury!
neepheid 24th October 2015 at 6:49 pm #
‘… using a process called a “cash box placement”, ‘
________
I struggled to remember where I had heard about ‘cash-box placements’, then realised it was while trying to read up on EBTs and tax-liabiity. I had to google a bit, but came across this judgment against Aberdeen Asset Management in the matter of who pays tax on the shares transferred, the Company or the individual.
https://www.ashurst.com/publication-item.aspx?id_Content=9726
So unless “Cooper” is a struck-off pornographer of a solicitor, I doubt if his claim that he put the scheme to RIFC can be true: the old RFC was right into all that tax-avoidance stuff!
The Rangers nil? Who missed the penalty? 23rd October 2015 at 1:13 pm
“I would liked to have had a few moments with the insolvency lawyer”
—————————————————————————————–
I notice there was an insolvency lawyer present at the inaugural SFM get together.
It would be interesting if that person (or anyone else suitably qualified) could provide some professional guidance on a subject that has puzzled me since 2012. Quite separate from the football authorities rules and regulations, I’ve always understood that when a company is liquidated, all of its associated corporate business dies with it. This seems not only logical, but fair. If you were to hazard a guess as to the business carried out by the Rangers Football Club plc, which went into liquidation in 2012, you wouldn’t struggle to come up with ‘football club’ as its raison d’etre, regardless of your opinion as to whether club and company were one and the same.
On the face of it therefore, in pure business terms, there is no ambiguity – Rangers Football Club (the club) died in 2012. Which brings me to the crux of the matter. This being so, why hasn’t there been an official rejection of the perceived/largely accepted notion that the club somehow survived, if insolvency law dictates otherwise, whether that be UK law or Scots law? Can they simply bluff their way through this without challenge using nothing more than lies and blatant propaganda?
I appreciate that, in a legal context, my simplified view might be just that – simple – but it seems that if nobody challenges these things, or if there is any degree of intimidation, nothing is done and the myth eventually becomes accepted ‘fact’.
Is the aforementioned insolvency lawyer able to shed any light on this matter?
John Clark 24th October 2015 at 9:51 pm #
Were it not for that distrust of our Football Authorities, I would personally have little more interest in the fortunes of a struggling TRFC than I had, say, in the case of Gretna, or, going back a bit, Third Lanark.
————————–!-
Sorry John but I’m not in agreement with your emphasis there.
As a football fan I have a keen interest in the fortunes of any struggling club.
In their own way Gretna and Third Lanark were failed by the football authorities and their owners, as were Rangers.
The fans of any club let down in this way deserve a degree of sympathy – and imo the circumstances surrounding their problems deserve the same degree of scrutiny.
In what way were Rangers let down by the football authorities.
It certainly can’t be the new club you are talking about as it is arguable they should even be in senior football in Scotland.
I assume you are talking about the old club, how were they let down by the authorities.
parttimearab 24th October 2015 at 10:37 pm #
‘…In their own way Gretna and Third Lanark were failed by the football authorities and their owners, as were Rangers.’
____________
I probably ( again) expressed myself poorly, parttimearab.
In no way are ordinary football club supporters, as customers, guilty of the sins committed by the owners, majority shareholders, or Boards of their clubs. Or of the sins of those charged with the overall administration of the Sport that is the business of their clubs.
The supporters of Gretna and Third Lanark were not, as far as I know, the victims of Boards or owners who tried to cheat their way to success. And it is, perhaps, true that the Football Authorities might have helped the struggling clubs to stay alive-I don’t know.
But their cases were entirely different from the case of RFC(IL)
in relation to RFC(IL) what SDM did is entirely down to him, and the huge majority of RFC fans are the victims of his cheating which, in the end, brought about the death of their treasured club. And as innocent victims, they do, of course, have my sympathy.
But all the sympathy in the world cannot change the facts.
RFC(IL) died because they cheated.
They did not suffer the proper penalty of that cheating because the Football Authorities went to extraordinary lengths to ensure that they did not.
And those extraordinary lengths went so far as to agreeing with the founder of a new club that no obstacle would be put in the way of fast-track membership of the SFA.
My strictures against the Football Authorities’ approach to the death of Rangers are related to the Authorities’ readiness to ignore their own rules etc to favour someone who said he could keep crowds attending Ibrox, as long as the SFA agreed that the death of RFC would not be recognised.
You rightly point out that the Authorities in place at the time of Third Lanark’s and Gretna’s demise might have done more to help.
I submit that the fact that they did not is a much lesser ‘offence’ than the outrageous readiness to ‘help’ so eagerly exhibited by those who signed the 5-Way Agreement
Off topic in relation to BP’s post but I note a bit of social media activity tonight re a bunch of wee fannies that seem to have attached themselves to Hearts.
Started as a “singing section” but now it looks like they are getting too big for their boots.
Couldn’t make the game today (good result BTW) but the pictures circulating seem to be of some the fuds who I had words with at the Aberdeen game. Daft wee laddies trying to act the hard man.
Hopefully M’s Budge will move quickly on this one before it gets out of hand and gets them tae **** away from Tynie.
Anyone with info on who these ne”er do wells are can contact the Hearts fan reporting service.
http://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/4681
Surely No!
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/658056071857184768
I thought he was off the radar with it.
Corrupt official 25th October 2015 at 12:58 am #
‘… I thought he was off the radar with it. ‘
______
I suspect that that’s a spoof tweet!
If the Scottish Legal Aid Board had arrived at a decision on an application for legal aid on Friday, the Sunday Post would caution have had an ‘exclusive’ knowledge of the fact!
I haven’t checked all of the other papers, of course, but…..caution might be required o stop a whole squirrelling event!
John Clark 24th October 2015 at 11:52 pm #
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
With respect JC, Gretna’s supporters were entirely let down by their board / owner chasing glory by spending far beyond their means. Ask Stuart Cosgrove his views on the matter & (in my experience) he’s fairly unequivocal – Gretna financially doped their way, ultimately to the knacker’s yard. As a result he believes his team, along with all the others Gretna outspent on their ‘journey’, were cheated as they weren’t competing on a level playing field. Does this story sound familiar?!
), cast up as a warning of what happens to badly managed clubs. Except, of course, if you are some sort of intangible, immortal, ethereal entity for whom rules matter not! 
Third Lanark, for me, is just a mythical name from the mists of time ( I was still loupin’ dykes with my dad!
Glad everyone had a smashing time in Perth, hopefully be able to make the next one
BP, Auldheid; I assume my emails to each of you must have been lost in the switcheroo from OB/NB? Blast those pesky servers!!
On Gretna, they spent money they didn’t have in order to buy success. Ultimately they could not pay their bills and the club folded. There is now a new club called Gretna but no-one is claiming a continuous history simply because they have a similar name.
Am I not right in saying that the SPL gave them prize money early in order for them to see out the season. I don’t see what else they could have done.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gretna_F.C.
“Gretna Football Club was a Scottish football club that represented the town of Gretna …”
Now
http://www.gretnafc2008.co.uk/
Looks pretty clear to me. However if the same fans want to follow that club good on them, good for Scottish football and no-one is trying to kid anyone else on.
John Clark 25th October 2015 at 1:47 am
“I suspect that that’s a spoof tweet!”
———————————————————————————–
It also gets a mention here too John. Mail on Sunday.
http://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-scottish-mail-on-sunday/20151025/281960311608193/TextView
Homunculus/JC and others. I’m sure PartimeArab will correct me if I’m wrong but I suspect he means the authorities weren’t letting Gretna and Third Lanark down at the end but before that in letting them get into such a perilous place in the first place. Like another Third Lanark is too far back for me to have a memory on but surely alarm bells should have been ringing when Gretna were spending money like it grew on trees. Were questions asked as to how this would be sustainable? A long to medium term business plan perhaps.
I think this is where PartimeArab is suggesting the authorities failed RFC(IL). At least one person at the SFA must have had some idea that things were ahem delicately balanced down Govan way. Were questions asked? Then there is the period in late 2011 when the authorities were told an insolvency event was looming. Did they look into special measures that would allow transfers outwith the window or other means of cutting the costs of the playing squad which may have eased an administration. No, they concentrated their efforts on ensuring a Govan entity would still be at the top of the pyramid and even failed in that!
Can’t comment on the speculation of two finance industry experts. I suppose it is, like much else, speculation.
I can mention that I was happy to discover that Raith Rovers TV offer one-off match day viewing online. There was nae Scottish fitba on yesterday and Raith Rovers popped up on my twitter feed. So I went off to their website. I enjoy watching Hibs play and Raith are still an unknown quantity for me due to so little TV coverage. A few clicks, a quick uncomplicated registration, and I’d lobbed five quid in the direction of Kirkcaldy via PayPal.
Choosing a match to view without having to buy a year-long subscription is a good thing. Now it seems Raith’s TV and radio are run by volunteers. Technical problems meant the first half was audio only. Still, who would begrudge Raith Rovers £5 considering their services to fitba over the past few years? And many on the chat said they wanted no refund. But the first half was still fun because the audio feed was complimented by the banter on the chat feed. Most of it was good natured and with people all over the globe waiting for the live video. A five-minute server reset at half-time seemed to fix the stream and the match was on.
Oddly enough, the ref had allowed near identical kits. Due to the slightly low-res image it wasn’t always easy to distinguish the teams apart. Can’t fault Raith’s volunteers for that, though. And Hibs do have a splendid away strip which you’d imagine was available. Nae matter, an entertaining half with many a stramash.
Considering how many people were on the chat feed from hither and yon, you’ve got to think a centralised site offering feeds from in-house club channels would be popular. It would save registering with each club. Payment could be one-off per match, paid directly to the club, or via a subscription — with each club getting a fair cut. It needn’t replace clubs’ own TV, just offer it to a wider audience. Modern technology makes this possible. A nice alternative to Sky & BT who are watering and nurturing the EPL while turning Scottish football into a desert.
By the way, I just checked and there are several ‘fitbatv’ domains available, although fitbatv.scot would be a nice portal for any future project 😉
Two question to anyone who thinks that the authorities let Gretna or Rangers down.
1, What could / should they have done.
2, How do you think the supporters of those clubs would have reacted.
It’s all very well suggesting that these clubs were let down by the authorities with hindsight. However how many of the support were up in arms telling their owners they were doing the wrong thing. I’m absolutely certain there would have been some but I don’t remember them being particularly vocal about it.
Were people like Brooks Mileson told by the club’s support that what he was doing was ill-advised. Were the press attacking him for putting the club’s existence at risk. Maybe towards the end when the damage was done, but what about when everything seemed to be going well.
What about Craig Whyte in the initial stages, when he was going to finance the club and it was going to dominate Scottish football and put everyone else in their place. Did the fans fight against that, or did they cheer him through the front doors and up the marble staircase. Did the press investigate him and tell the truth about him.
Sorry for appearing to defend the authorities and they must take some of the blame, but for me the real fault lies elsewhere. With the clubs themselves.
On being failed by the football authorities.
Thanks all (John in particular) for the considered replies above.
It’s difficult to go into specifics where Rangers are concerned due to on going legal matters, but it is my belief that even under existing rules a number of opportunities to, at the least mitigate, the actions of those controlling the club, were passed up.
In general, we have seen numerous instances where clubs have become financially distressed over the years and yes I believe the football authorities have conspicuously failed to deal with the problem.
I take the point that they are limited in what they can do,particularly in regard to the day to day running of clubs but that does not mean they are powerless.
I can suggest the following steps off the top of my head.
1) Greater financial transparency (accounts need to be more detailed for many clubs and made available in the shortest space of time possible).
2) Limits on debt (FFP if you will).
3) Effective sanctions against owners who fail to come up to these standards.
4) Genuine empowerment of fans in the running and governance of clubs.
All I think doable.
Fans make an enormous financial contribution to their clubs and have a level of emotional attachment that needs recognition.
It was not and is not I think acceptable for their loyalty to be flushed down the pan due to the incompetence (or worse) of owners who use limited liability engage in actions without heed to consequences.
causaludendi 25th October 2015 at 2:01 am
BP, Auldheid; I assume my emails to each of you must have been lost in the switcheroo from OB/NB? Blast those pesky servers!! 1121
________________________________
Can you resend causa?
Homunculus 25th October 2015 at 9:27 am
Two question to anyone who thinks that the authorities let Gretna or Rangers down.
1, What could / should they have done.
2, How do you think the supporters of those clubs would have reacted.
_____________________________________________________
In the case of the Gretna cheating issues, as others have suggested, oversight of Brooks Mileson’s scatter-cash ways might have helped. There may have been other indicators.
In the case of Rangers – where to begin?
1. Put a red signal on the EBT line before it became a train-wreck (everyone in Scottish football knew about them – but most clubs steered presciently clear).
2. Performed something other than Keith Jackson due diligence on Craig Whyte’s fit and properness to own a football club (they had the ear of the takeover panel at Rangers throughout)
3. Held the club to account for the non-payment of tax and NI (Res 12 guys can fill in those blanks)
4. Been aware of and done something about the massive conflicts of interest concerning individuals like Andrew Dickson and Campbell Ogilvie who held positions at Rangers and conflicting regulatory positions at the SFA.
I’m guessing that lots of people could add to that hastily compiled list.
Many people who are angry at how Rangers conducted themselves are reluctant to see the blame shared out. However there is little doubt in my mind that had the authorities regulated the game in the fashion of the quasi-legal pantomime frock they wear instead of the Gordon Brown/City of London manner that they did, much of what happened could not have.
That is also why the real focus of this blog is in the role the authorities played in Rangers situation, and particularly in how measures can be put in place to ensure there is no repetition.
parttimearab 25th October 2015 at 10:34 am
_______________________________
Could hardly agree more – with one caveat. Empowerment of fans is anathema to directors of almost all clubs. It is the area where the “special” business relationship with club and fans proclaimed by all is suspended and the “it’s my money – not yours” ethos kicks in.
I just don’t think the clubs can be trusted to provide this.
In any event, influential members of the RFC board sounded klaxons (ironic that word innit Keith?) over Craig Whyte which the SFA chose to ignore. It was clear that Murray’s wish to sell to CW outweighed the evidence presented by Martin Bain et al.
So unless there is a change in the structure of the SFA itself, fan participation is no guarantee that directors of clubs will be held accountable for their actions, and fan participation at board level will be a chocolate fireguard – as it is currently at Ibrox (no personal offence intended to John Gilligan).
Thanks for answering question 1.
Any thoughts on
2, How do you think the supporters of those clubs would have reacted.
Which for me was almost certainly the main factor in little or nothing being done in the case of either Gretna or Rangers.
Obviously I’m talking about the fans of those clubs, not the majority of the support. The ones who actually suffered at the time, through others being allowed to spend clubs to death.
How would the Gretna fans have reacted if Mileson was told he could not put any more money into the club. Would the majority have supported such a move.
How would the Rangers fans have reacted if they were told Whyte was not fit and proper and could not take over and put the tens of millions into their club. How would they have reacted this year if they were told the same about King. Even having been through the same thing before.
Homunculus
As to how fans would have reacted it is in some ways unknowable, and I appreciate there is no guarantee that any reaction would be positive.
The main thing for me is that fans are given both the information to react and the power to do something about it.
At that point if they fail to use the information at their disposal and having been empowered choose to do nothing then they will have made their choices and will live with the consequences.
Big Pink.
I take your point regarding boards and fan empowerment.
That having been said the reliance of clubs on season books and gate receipts (as well as other fan based fundraising activities) suggests that there’s leverage there.
I think the journey that Hearts fans are own in terms of a fan based ownership structure could be the catalyst for change at other clubs, if it’s successful.
Homunculus 25th October 2015 at 11:17 am
How do you think the supporters of those clubs would have reacted.
_______________________________
With respect Homunculus, the question is irrelevant in my view. The SFA aren’t in place to be popular. Their function is to regulate the game in a fair and proper manner which reflects the needs of the many and not the few.
If they ask themselves your question they are in the wrong business. In fact if the question is relevant to the running of football at all, then we should just fold the tents and bugger off to the country.
Whatever checks and balances put in place by governing bodies if a club wants to evade them they will. Rangers(I.L) didn’t want any governance. That is why evidence was shredded, documents withheld, and incorrect and misleading information provided at every opportunity.
There is no point in underestimating the level of bare-faced cheating this club undertook. They would have found a loop-hole, a twist of words, or a shameless denial of the facts to get their own way. That was just in the lead-up to administration prior to entering liquidation.
Until answers are forthcoming, it must be assumed the governing bodies DID help Rangers (I.L) by throwing them a lifebelt Euro tourney. That evidence was deliberately withheld from LNS, That the 5WA was done to favour one club, and one club alone, and in effect, with the rule breaking that took place to give birth to the myth, the governing bodies have cheated as much as the cheating club.
After that, they had the governing bodies in their back hipper, the result of which we are seeing now, where to come clean is to admit complicity. …..From an organisation that can’t admit a whistler made a mistake FFS! I don’t think so!
It is worthwhile pointing out that if what is suspected is true, then the governing bodies acted in conjunction with a group of men who have since been arrested (with the notable exception of one),and indicted on very serious charges.
We have seen many boards come and go in the bloo room, using a vast array of tactics. That is what will be needed to usurp the quango from the 6th floor of Hampden. A coup d’etat. !!! They are going nowhere otherwise……And we need them gone. Scottish fitba needs them gone.
CO
Whilst I understand your cynicism, there still needs to be action taken by the authorities to strengthen their regulatory muscle and put in place measures which avoid conflicts of interest.
If we assume that folk will always find ways to cheat regardless of what we do, then it really is foldy tenty time – and we would all be limited to a role of complaining about it without ever getting things done.
And there would be no need for any regulation – or SFA – at all…. 🙂
I hope we are all more positive than that.
Partially in reply to Homunculus but also a general observation…
According to Wikipedia, since 2013 Celtic have sold three players for a fee of £10m or over (Wanyama, van Dijk, Forster). In 2012 and 2013, Hooper and Ki-Sung Yueng brought in £11.5m between them. Because of a loose use of language on another blog – and allegations about why the language is so loose – we get discussion on SFM about the the word ‘consistently’ which rather deflects from the matter that by selling Ki-Sung Yueng, Hooper, Wanyama, Forster and Van Dijk in the last three years, the club has raised a reported £45.5m.Do Celtic ‘consistently sell players for over £10m’? That depends on what you mean by ‘consistently’. If three times since summer 2013 means ‘consistently’ then yes, if not then no. However Celtic have received significant sums of money from transfers in the last three years and that surely cannot be in dispute. Going back, they also got a tidy sum for McGeady (2010) and in the 1997-2000 period raised serious sums by selling Van Hooijdonk, Di Canio and Viduka.
rabtdog 25th October 2015 at 12:50 pm
I made my comment on JJ’s blog based not on one use of the word “consistently” but based on something I have seen him do on a few occasions.
I like his blog and support what he is trying to do. I think that ultimately it may help some Ranger’s supporters face reality. The business model is untenable and Dave King is not the man to fix it.
However he sometimes let’s himself down when he posts things like that. That does not help the credibility of the blog and it makes it too easy for others to write him off as a “King / Rangers hater”.
That is just my opinion and clearly others feel differently. I have absolutely no issue with that.
But does JJ ‘consistently’ let himself down, or just ‘sometimes’ as you say?
Meanwhile, as I’m poking around in that Wikipedia and transfer fees, it’s interesting that Rangers have raised significantly less in transfer income over the last seven years than their city neighbours. Aside from Jelavic in 2012 (£5.5m) there has been nothing else of note until you go back to 2008 when the club sold Hutton and Cuellar for an aggregate £16.8m. A decade ago, a completely controversy-free transfer, ahem, saw Boumsong head for Newcastle for £8m. Other big money transfer income dates to the 2001-03 period (Van Bronckhorst, Flo, Ferguson, Reyna) while you have to go back more than 20 years for the sale of Trevor Steven (1991) and Duncan Ferguson (1994).
One more point. Leaving Barry Ferguson out of the picture (went to Blackburn in Aug 2003 for £7.5m, bought back in Jan 2005 for £4.5m), and Gazza (bought in summer 1995 for £4.3m), Rangers haven’t paid out anything ‘big’ in the way of a transfer fees since the 1998-2002 period. Then again, who in Scotland does? Celtic haven’t spent more than £4m on a player since they bought Scott Brown in 2007.
Oh there is no doubt about it, Celtic have done really well out of the transfer market. That is a fundamental part of the business model and plenty of players have seen the SPL and now SPFL Premiership as a stepping stone to bigger leagues, for example the EPL.
Celtic put a lot of effort into that particular aspect of the business model, bringing the likes of John Park in to put things in place.
It really is a fundamental part of the way Celtic operates and has been for decades. Thinking of the likes of Dalglish, Nicholas, McLair all moving south and bringing big money to the club.
I have said this before, for me the madness of the David Murray years, and how Celtic followed into that, was a blip for Scottish football. Just now we are really just going back to the way things naturally are. For no other reason than the size of the market and the money available through domestic competition.
I have absolutely no issue with identifying and bringing in new talent, having them for a couple of seasons and developing them, then selling on at a good profit. If they come right through the ranks so much the better.
Random fact from the history of Aberdeen FC.
The first Aberdeen player to win an international cap was Charlie O’Hagan from Buncrana. He played for the Dons from 1906-10 and played for Ireland* 11 times from 1905-09.
O’Hagan died in New York in 1931, aged just 49.
* Ireland as in the pre-independence, pre-partition Ireland where association football was run by the IFA – and I just learned that the Ireland team was selected from all over the island right up until 1950. Learn something every day etc etc…
Going a bit OT again on fitba tv but noticed St Mirren tweeted match day access to their TV for €6.99 for overseas viewers. I wonder how many clubs actually offer a one-off match stream?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34632349
Don’t look south, look west?
Big Pink 25th October 2015 at 12:43 pm.
BP. People, Clubs, organisations will cheat. Of that there is no doubt, but there are gradients. I would suggest that if a sine die event was in reality sine die, they would think twice. As it transpired, legal events took precedent and sine died Rangers, but you wouldn’t think so if you had just arrived on planet earth.
I was not so much pointing out that rules were futile. More that to have them and not enforce them is !. We clearly have a structure and personnel in place not up to the task. However it will prove easier to get rid herpes than this structure and staff.
Without replacing the staff, we will never replace the structure, and vice versa. They need usurped. I will not single out any names, but there are posters on here who i would happily see employed in an SFA organisation. And no doubt others in other walks of life. A lot of lobbying of the clubs would be needed to have them voted in, but it is not impossible.
From there we stand a chance. I wouldn’t worry too much about that silly wee rule stating prior experience is a necessary for application/inclusion. This mob have already provided precedent that rules can be broken for what is considered, “The greater good”.
They don’t have the balls to come out and fight, so we need to go in and get them. There is plenty of ammunition to storm the castle, but someone on the inside would save a lot of time.
What actual specific qualifications does our cricketing CEO possess that makes him any more suitable than some of the posters on here?
Lets select a candidate, push him through our respective clubs, and kick some arse.
We did it with “No to Newco”
Am trying to get my head around what is going on with the approaches from the Ranger’s Board to the various supporters groups to open their wallets and “co-invest”
Both PMG and JJ are reporting on these rumours and there seem to be two threads. Firstly urgent short term financing to help meet payroll and secondly to buy shares from those who oppose the current Board, presumably to finally pass the dis-application of pre-emption rights resolution at the forthcoming AGM.
If the short term financing is required to meet payroll then this really is the last roll of the dice and:
A) Isn’t repeatable
B) Doesn’t get them to the end of the season
Such drastic action is only worthwhile if there is some plan to pull a rabbit out of a hat. This presumably is where the dis-application of pre-emption rights comes in. However, I can’t see Mike Ashley taking this laying down.
I’m trying, trying really hard, to work out a scenario whereby the Board/King stabilise the business financially, (we know the war chest is a thing of myth). So how can this be done? I just don’t get it.
I fear for the fan groups if they hand over and/or spend their money at the behest of the Board/King. They really could get very badly burned.
This ties in with today’s earlier posts about the responsibility of the footballing powers that be.
The first and over-riding priority of any sporting authority should be to ensure the integrity of the competition that they organise. In professional sport this includes the financial stability of the participants.
A sporting authority can freely set it’s rules and articles of association, stipulate minimum criteria for all areas and decide upon the level of reporting and scrutiny that will put in place.
Fans, who might be tempted for emotional reasons to spend/hand over their hard earned for the benefit of their team should be protected from coming into contact from spivs and shysters by the very fact that the authorities would not allow them to have control of such an enterprise in the first place.
All those fans who bought into the IPO were exposed to the operating practices of the then Board.
Proper governance might not be easy but neither is it rocket science. It just takes the will to do it.
Spot on Tincks. However, so long as the same authorities allow themselves ‘discretion’ when applying their rules, there will never be any integrity. Those loopholes have to go
neepheid 25th October 2015 at 2:24 pm #
‘…Don’t look south, look west?’
________
There may be an opportunity to set up a franchise club in the south west………of Glasgow!
Seriously, though, I’ve no idea what is actually meant by ‘franchising’ in general, let alone in football.
In the Manchester City/New York City ‘franchise’ deal, what exactly does Man City get out of it in return for any financial input? Do they ‘own’ NYC football club and its assets? Or is it a shared venture? Does Man City have voting rights on the NASL? Could the name of NYC be changed to be , say, ‘Man City NY’.
Anyone fill me in on the concept and the actualities. And what would be in it for ,say, Celtic?
JC can’t fill you in on the actualite of frranchises but the agreement was such that Lampard could be signed by NYC and play for a chief rival of the club he was signed from. Originally billed as a pre-season deal Lampard stayed at City (the Manc version) beyond the start of the US season. Given said English club had just been found guilty of breaking UEFA fair play rules I couldn’t possibly comment as to whether the NY club were heavily subsidising a Manc club’s teamsheet
evening all. I was at the Perth gathering and thoroughly enjoyed every minute. I was with the aformentioned insolvency lawyer (we had a very pleasant journey too, thanks to Scotrail and one or two small libations !). I have texted him to let him know that Highlander is looking for some input so hopefully he will pick up and post soon.
I don’t believe he had intended to speak up at the gathering and reveal his professional interest but i think he was motivated by the excellent contributions from all who spoke. Cannae help himself as my dear old mum would have said !
Re this talk of Rangers accessing money from supporters groups. How much money will these groups have available, and how long will it keep the wolf from the door? I realise a significant sum of money was raised with the aim of purchasing shares to assist King in his bid to win control, but are they really willing to throw that money into a black hole with the only result being the can gets kicked down the road for another 2-3 months? There will surely be many intelligent people among the Rangers fanbase who have reservations over this proposal. Will their voices be heard over the ‘in King we trust’ brigade who like their seats in and around the Director’s Box?
neepheid 25th October 2015 at 2:24 pm
With regard to the announcement of a ‘Celtic’ like franchise in the second tier of the MLS.
It sounded to me very much like a “Minty Moonbeam” after a catastrophic result.
How does a US Celtic franchise help the Scottish Celtic generate cash?
Given the amount of money available in the US, indeed anywhere other than Scotland, it could be very likely that the US version could end up owning the Scottish club. How that in turn would assist Celtic achieve what they want in getting a secure foothold in European football I don’t know.
There is also the start up costs attached to such a venture. They don’t have a coaching staff, they do not have a scouting system, and the do not have any players. Unless the franchise could be placed in a city with a large immigrant Scottish/Irish expat population and initial access to training facilities and a stadium to play in then this is a non-starter.
Given all that I’ve written above the only possibility is Boston. Notre Dam University and the facilities that they have could be utilised to ‘seed the franchise in’ until it can stand on it’s own two feet financially.
I personally think it is a non-starter as bigger teams with much more financial muscle would be given access before Celtic. At the end of the day I do not see how this assists Celtic or indeed the wider game in our country at all.
tykebhoy 25th October 2015 at 6:37 pm #
‘…can’t fill you in on the actualite of frranchises but the agreement was such that Lampard could be signed by NYC ..’
___________
Thank you, tykebhoy.
So, ‘franchising’ could /would become a back-door way of sports-cheating.
With FIFA, UEFA and even our own wee SFA in the hands of the unprincipled, where will it all end up?
upthehoops 25th October 2015 at 8:05 pm
………There will surely be many intelligent people among the Rangers fan base
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Not many
IMO
The intelligent ones are those who blamed SDM, got over their grief, kept their hands in their pockets and got on with their lives.
GoosyGoosy 25th October 2015 at 8:49 pm
—————————————–
I’m sorry but that’s just wrong. I know plenty of intelligent Rangers supporters who continued to support Rangers, buy season tickets and go to support their club.
I know that it’s a new club, they choose to believe it to be the same one they have always supported, that is a matter for them.
I would guess a lot of people on here are the same as me in that they know people like that.
I know plenty of intelligent Rangers supporters who continued to support Rangers, buy season tickets and go to support their club…they choose to believe it to be the same one they have always supported.
—————————————–
No offence Homunculus but..that’s the funniest non sequitur I have read on this blog.
Coming back to the ‘franchise affair’ ( and what a gripping novel of that title Josephine Tey wrote, in the 50s), the reference to Asia/India prompted me to have a look at the All India Football Federation’s website, and then the stuff about the Hero Indian Super League ( set up in 2013 without a word to me!).
I came across this
http://www.oneindia.com/sports/know-the-franchise-owners-of-indian-super-league-isl-1429893.html
which sort of depressed me.
I noticed that Atletico Madrid is already a bit-player , investor in Atletico de Kolkata ( Calcutta!)
More generally, I was surprised to read that the West Bengal Indian Football Association was set up in 1893 when the British Army Sports Council was in charge ( the ruling committee was composed of ‘Englishmen’, except for one Indian member).
The things this blog makes you do to expand your knowledge! I hardly knew that they played football in India at all, let alone that they have 55 000 seat stadia!
Homunculus 25th October 2015 at 9:42 pm #
‘..I know that it’s a new club, they choose to believe it to be the same one they have always supported, that is a matter for them.’
__________
Indeed it is.
It is the fact that they are encouraged, by the Football Authorities’ propagation of a lie, to believe that fantasy that is deplorable.
(There was a poster some time ago who said that if Celtic had not been rescued by Fergus and had been liquidated , and some other team wearing the hoops had been formed and played their football on Glasgow Green, he would have had the same emotional attachment to it as he had had to the pre-liquidation Celtic. I don’t think he said he would believe that it would have been the same club as the club that won the European Cup. In other words, he was intelligent enough to be able to separate fact from fiction.
There is no problem with supporters of the former RFC sighing nostalgically for the past days of glorious achievement of the club, now dead, which figured so prominently in the Scottish football scene.
There is a problem when they are officially told by the football authorities and the SMSM that nostalgia is out of place, that no death occurred ,and that the Rangers of their youth, young manhood, and old age is still alive!
Only a ‘bear of very little brain’ could actually sincerely believe the ‘official’ lie.
John Clark 25th October 2015 at 11:26 pm
Stewart Regan appears to know a bit about franchises John. Especially in India
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/cricket/twenty20/ipl/7798055/Lalit-Modi-on-a-collision-course-with-ECB-chairman-Giles-Clarke-and-the-courts.html
You may recall this article.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/31168745
PM you.
justshatered 25th October 2015 at 8:29 pm #
‘…..Given all that I’ve written above the only possibility is Boston. Notre Dam University ..’
________
To go completely OT, justhatered, and I having mentioned the word ‘nostalgia’ in an earlier post, your reference to what John Wayne called ‘Notter Dame’ in that wonderful film in which he was ‘coach’ to a failing American college ‘football’ team, has reminded me of the very recent death of Maureen O’Hara.
It happens that there is a nice wee man in my neighbourhood who played the part of a wee boy in the ‘Quiet Man’, in which movie Maureen was superb. We affectionately refer to him as ‘John, the movie star’.
At the ‘ Symposium’ I was able to get the autograph of a Lisbon Lion.( Not for myself, of course, [as everybody says!] but for , ultimately, my granddaughters).
But, any day of the week, I can talk to a man who rubbed shoulders with big John Wayne and Maureen O’Hara and Barry Fitzgerald.
Jim Craig v Maureen O’Hara? No contest.
John Clark 26th October 2015 at 1:36 am
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Going OT too…
Many moons ago, whilst still at school and working as a wine waiter at my local hotel, I had the good fortune to serve a table one dinner dance (held every Saturday night until just a few years ago!) that included Tommy Gemmell. I was obviously in awe of this Scottish footballing legend, made this known to him and managed to get his autograph. After looking after the table all evening I was rewarded with a £10 note as a tip straight from the big mans’ wallet, he was a true gent in every sense of the word!
It wasn’t until the next day I was chastised for not getting him to sign the tenner!
I note there was talk yesterday of the wearer of the magic hat getting geared up for January signings.
As mentioned a few weeks back a good number of players contract’s are up in January along with loan deals ending. Will someone in the MSM be hard working enough to ask if any of these players will be getting new contracts/loan deals.
Surely, given all of last weeks bleating, Spurs will be seeking less heavy agricultural pastures for there starlet.
wottpi, it would appear–judging by his belated questioning of DCK’s investment–that Radar Boy has started down the path of logic that will eventually lead him to asking that very same question!
Out of the 14 players used yesterday v St Mirren
Ball and Zelalum will need their loans renewed.
Contacts are up for Clark, Mackay and Aird in January
Miller and Shiels are out of contact at the end of the season.
So half of yesterdays team might not be there next calendar year or next season.
If you re looking forward then, as developing youngsters, McKay and Aird are probably looking good for a new contract.
However in terms of options and squad size Miller, presumably covering for the on loan Oduwa, was replaced by Clark and Zelalum got pulled 2nd half and replaced by Shiels.
By all accounts on the radio commentary Ball and Keirnan were given a torrid time by the auld heid of 37 year old Steven Thompson, so a step up also required at the back if seasoned and more mobile premiership strikers are to be faced next season.
Those deep pockets need to be plundered!