Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?


Addendum to my last post – Novo played 179 games …

Comment on Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show? by easyJambo.

Addendum to my last post – Novo played 179 games for Rangers between 2004 and 2010 according to his Wiki entry.

easyJambo Also Commented

Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?
Agrajag says: Sunday, November 25, 2012 at 09:58

What would remain though is the 5 players with guaranteed bonuses. If we take one of them as Mr Ferguson, on c£2m, plus another four on say c£1m each (on average) that would be £6m. So around £3m tax. However you need to add interest and penalties to that. Given the total non-compliance the penalties could be as much as 100%, with interest being the same depending on when these players were actually paid.
The five players were identified as Messrs Selby, Inverness, Doncaster, Barrow and Furness

Ferguson has previously been identified as Mr Ipswich so is not one of the five.

There are few clues to the identities of the five, other than Mr Inverness, who is more than likely to be Nacho Novo (EBT £1.2M). Other snippets include Mr Selby who received £460K per annum via the EBT. Mr Barrow is only identified as a foreign player. Mr Furness was identified as the last player to benefit from the Equity trust in March 2006. There is no information on Mr Doncaster.

Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?
albabhoy says: Friday, November 23, 2012 at 20:10
Here’s another one from just a couple of weeks ago re Annan’s U20 side in the youth cup and a refreshingly honest admission and action from Annan’s chairman


Wednesday 14th November 2012

Annan Athletic have been dismissed from the Scottish FA Youth Cup after admitting an error with the registration of three players who played in their 2-1 success over Montrose in the last Round.

The Third Division side held their hands up to the SFA upon learning that 3 youngsters from their under-16 side had not been properly registered to play in the under-20 tournament and rather than get involved in a lengthy debate they have stepped aside to allow Montrose time to prepare for their match against Dunfermline in the Round Four.

Chairman Henry McClelland said, “There has been an administrative error on our part that we have admitted to. It is a really sore blow for the boys and the club but something that we will learn from and it will not happen again.”

“We could have appealed but that would not have been the right thing to do as we had made a mistake and it would not have been fair to keep Montrose hanging around.”

Why the Beast of Armageddon Failed to Show?
Elgin v TRFC postponed by Grampian Police as Elgin was believed to have sold too many tickets.

What a nonsense, and doesn’t reflect well on the home team.


Recent Comments by easyJambo

Fergus McCann v David Murray
Given that the blog has reverted to its seemingly inescapable time warp relating to events of 8-10 years ago, it is appropriate to mark the 10th anniversary of an event that set the ball rolling in contributing to
the sale of RFC for £1, its financial collapse and subsequent consequences of administration, 
liquidation, as well as Res 12. 

That event was HMRC's success in the Aberdeen Asset Management FTTT, the decision for which was published on 29 October 2010

RFC, who operated a similar Discounted Option tax avoidance scheme, had actually been presented with a Tax assessment as early as September 2007, which they appealed.  Their appeal was put on hold pending the outcome of the AAM case. Following the decision, HMRC issued RFC with a new offer to settle the following month.

The rest, as they say, is history and "in the past it must remain".  No matter how many times the blog returns to the events of 8-10 years ago, no-one in the football authorities or in the SMSM is listening, nor are they likely to change their mind now.

I believe that it is now time to move on. Not to forget what happened, but to move on all the same.

That is what I plan to do.

Fergus McCann v David Murray
bect67 26th October 2020 at 20:05

Probably an unfair question, but could you venture an opinion (for the less financially astute members of our community e.g. me!) as to what the comparable returns for TRFC might look like – assuming, in a break from their 8-year old tradition (?) that these be ‘unpockled’?


You are correct. It is an unfair question mail, but we should get sight of the accounts in the next month or so.

We know they had a forecast £10m shortfall in last year’s accounts. That was almost certainly reduced by their unbudgeted extra EL revenue.  We also know that DK provided a £5m loan facility. We can also state with some certainty that Park, Letham and Taylor plus Gibson provided additional funding which has since been converted to equity in the recent share issue.

They will show a loss, albeit that it will have been covered by the loans/share issue. How much is still outstanding is anyone’s guess.   

They have operated with year on year losses, but despite the doom mongers forecasts they have found a way to remain afloat and grow their business, improving the strength of their squad and on-field performances year on year.

They may forecast further shortfalls for this current year, perhaps with yet another share issue, but there is nothing to suggest that their business plan is failing.  Indeed, they appear to be getting stronger on and off the park.  Their new merchandising deal appears to be working and bringing in additional revenue (I don’t know if SD walked away, with or without cash, or declined to make a matching offer).  They have also sold out their 46,500 ST allocation, meaning that their match day revenue will be as high as it can be in the circumstances.

Covid restrictions will still impact them, but I do think that they are in as good a shape as most other Premiership clubs to come out the other side relatively unscathed. 

Fergus McCann v David Murray
The fall in Celtic’s revenue is across all areas.

Football Operations down £7.5m
Merchandising down £3m
Multimedia and other Commercial activities down £2.7m

This current season could be even more challenging with the increased liabilities and reduced income. The club has also increased its revolving credit facility from £2m to £13m (still unused) just in case.

Fergus McCann v David Murray
Current liabilities  2020 2019 

Trade and other payables     20,744     13,957

Lease liabilities    604       –

Borrowings  1,364     1,364

Provisions    5,942      3,479

Deferred income    21,275    25,614

Totals                    49,929     44,414

Looking at the above figures I was trying to work out the ongoing liabilities for deferred wages.  I don’t know if it will be included in the £6.8m increase in Trade and Other Payables, or in the £2.5m increase in Provisions.

The drop in deferred income suggests a fall of £4.2m in Season Ticket revenue.

Fergus McCann v David Murray
The previous post should read "cash in the bank down"


About the author