Over the past couple of years, we have built a healthy, vibrant and influential community which recognises the need to counter the corporate propaganda spouted by the mainstream media on behalf of the football authorities.
The media have, not entirely but in the main, been hostage to the patronage of those in charge of the club/media links, and to the narrow demographic of their readership. Despite a continuing rejection of the media’s position by that readership (in terms of year on year slump in sales) there is an obstinate refusal to see what is by now inevitable – the death of the print media. The lamb metaphor in fact ironically moving to the slaughter.
The football authorities in Scotland, once the country that gave the world the beautiful game, are rigid with fear that their own world will fall apart – because they are wedded to the idea that only one football match actually matters. To that end they will do whatever it takes to ensure that it continues. They have long since dispensed with the notion that football is an interdependent industry, and incredibly, even those who are not participants in that match follow like sheep towards the abattoir.
The argument is no longer that one club cheated and got away with it. The debate that we need to have is one about what is paramount in the eyes of the clubs and the media . Is it the inegrity of sporting endeavour, or box-office?
For out part, independent sites like this have accelerated the print media’s demise, and there have been temporary successes in persuading the clubs to uphold the spirit of sport. However our role has up to now been to cast a spotlight on the inaccuracies, inconsistencies and downright lies that routinely pass for news. News that is imagined up by PR agencies and dutifully copied by the lazy pretend-journalists who betray no thought whatsoever during the process.
Despite our successes, it really is not enough. We have the means at our disposal to do more, but do more we need to change ourselves, because the authorities sure as hell aren’t gonna.
We need to provide meaningful insight into the game that removes the Old Firm prism from the light path. We need to provide news that has covered all of the angles. We need to entertain, inform and energise fans of sport and all clubs.
We need to do that from a wholly independent perspective. None of this refusing to tell the truth about club allegiances. There is no reason why intelligent men and women can’t be objective in spite of their own allegiances (although the corollary absolutely holds true). Our experience of the MSM in this country is that the lack of arms-length principles in the media has corrupted it to such an extent that they barely recognise truth and objectivity. We need to be firm on those arms-length principles.
In order to do that we have put together a plan (with enough room to manoeuvre if required) as follows;
We will rebrand and re-launch as the Independent Sports Monitor. We have acquired the domains isMonitor.co.uk and IndependentSportsMonitor.co.uk, and those will be the main urls after the re-launch, hopefully later in the summer.
The change in name reflects the reality of our current debate which is not always confined to Scotland or football. It will also give us the option in future of applying the success of our model to other sports and jurisdictions through partner sites and blogs. This should also help in our efforts to raise funds in the future. However any expansion outwith the domain of Scottish football is some time away, and will depend on the success we have with the core model.
Our mission statement will be;
- ISM will seek to build a community of sports fans whose overarching aim is the integrity of competition in the sport.
- ISM will, without favour, seek to find objective truths on the conduct and administration of sport. We will avoid building relationships with individuals or organisations which would bring us into conflict with that.
- ISM will provide a platform for the views of ALL fans, and guarantee that those views will be heard in a mutually respectful environment.
- ISM will also endeavour to inform and entertain members on a wide range of topics related to our shared love of sport.
- ISM will seek to represent the views of sports fans to sporting authorities and hold the authorities to account.
We have estimated our (modest) costs to expand our role as per recent discussions. The expanded role will take the form of a new Internet Radio Channel where we hope to provide 24/7 content by the end of the year. It will also see a greater news role where we will engage directly with clubs and authorities to seek answers to our questions directly. And we will seek to contact the best fan sites across Scotland with a view to showcasing their content.
We have identified individuals who we want to work (initially on a part time basis) towards our objectives, we have identified premises where we want to conduct our business, and we hope to move into those premises during this summer.
To finance these plans there are a couple of stages;
- Initially (as soon as possible) we need to pay accommodation and hosting costs for the first year. To do so, we hope to appeal to the community itself. Our aim is to raise around £5000 by the end of August.
- There are salary costs (around £15,000) attached to our first year plan, but these have been underwritten by Big Pink, and equipment costs (est. £3000). These will be reimbursed if the advertising campaign we recently started bears any fruit (we will not know about that for a few months).
- It will not be too discouraging if we make losses in the first couple of years, so if necessary we will seek crowd-funding to finance our plans if the resources of the community itself prove inadequate to smooth a path to break-even point.
Our first year may be a perilous hand-to-mouth existence, but I am certain the journey will be an exciting and enjoyable one. We will also need to search our community resources for contacts at clubs; players, officials, ex-players, local journalists etc. Please get in touch if you have any in at your club.
We also hope to tap into the expertise of our community for advice, comment and analysis of developments, and we will be looking for any aspiring presenters, journalists, sound and video editors, graphic designers (and lots of others) to help us find our feet. Any offers of assistance would be gratefully accepted.
We mustn’t lose sight of why we are doing this. It is because we love our sport, because we want to be able to continue to call it that, and because the disconnect we find in Scottish football, that of the conflicting interests of the fans and the money men, will never be addressed as long as the fans are hopelessly split.
The ultimate goal is to allow sport – not our individual clubs – to triumph over the greed and corporate troglodyte-ism of those people who run it. I am confident that we as a community desperately want to be able to make a difference. That is why I am confident we can achieve our aim of becoming a significant player in the game.
No sooner do we have Jame’s Forrest’s excellent piece re DCK’s finances then up pops FF to tell us he imagines that he does have the funds after all.
==================================================================
I believe my case is it is far too soon to claim he doesn’t,i am not claiming he does as a fact,the evidence suggests it is likely he has the funds.
There is a reason why i am asking for caution,some people are going to look very silly if or when he produces the funds.
What is wrong with waiting,he will have to make a statement about funding in July andwe will find out soon enough.
I fail to see the difference between everyone buying into CW’s off the radar wealth from a journalist and everyone buying into Phil’s claim DK wants out and will not or cannot invest as promised.
mungoboy says:
Member: (103 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 4:13 pm
…
So, imagine he ponies up Edmiston Drive on his white charger with saddlebags filled to the brim with dosh.
First of all, any Bank will want to know its source under moneylaundering legislation…
===================================
Exactly.
And the funding source for any family trust has to be validated via AML & Know Your Customer legislation.
Unless King has set up a trust somewhere exotic and unlikely – like Vanuatu ?
[But he would still have problems moving funds into the UK banking system.]
Or is it that you imagine they used that specific criterion in relation to Dave King. If so is that not a bit unfair on him, if he is subjected to more rigorous tests than others.
===============================================================
He did say he was tested more than any other,and given his role,his investment promises and the precarious finances of Rangers,i would be rather shocked if the SFA did not seek some assurances of his finances.
I am scratching my head at the premise DK promises to invest when he cant,into a business he has no clue about,if true then i suggest a white jacket for DK,he can get it from CW.
Football Fan says:
Member: (130 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 4:08 pm
I am not sure the fairness in ending Rangers history if the cause was the SFA simply botched it up.
To my layman brain,the SPL voted Rangers dead and the SFA voted they are alive,the question is what will UEFA say in a few years time?
___________________________________________________________________________________
The cause of their history ending was not a botch up by the SFA it was the going into liquidation wot dunnit!
Football Fan says:
Member: (129 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 4:20 pm
In your scenario how do you think he will “produce the funds”. I’m only looking for an opinion here, I know you don’t actually know the answer.
I’m not sure, as there are two distinct options.
1, At a rights issue, the problem there is that there hasn’t actually been one announced so it’s unlikely to happen in the very near future. It also means he is commiting his money, as it may be difficult to sell on shares if he wants to later. There is also the problem that I think fans will expect him to underwrite that issue. As discussed before that is potentially commiting a very large sum.
2, Provide loans to the PLC. That way he gets his money back at some stage. However as it would be unsecured he stands to lose most if not all of it in an insolvency event, and if HMRC are owed 25% of the debt at that time then liquidation would be the end result. I suppose the same is true going down th shares route.
It’s quite a tricky one, I was just wondering, since you expect his investment to be made, how you see it happening.
HomunculusHomunculus says:
Member: (45 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:32 am
Bill1903 says:
Member: (71 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 7:52 am
“Most”, did you do some sort of poll. Which demographic did this “most” come from.
I love that sort of post, no back up, no evidence, no argument a simple ” … most suspected anyway.”
Can I just say, and speaking only for myself not some imagined group of people, the thought hadn’t even crossed my mind.
———————–
Blimey touched a nerve there 😀
Sorry my ‘most’ comment was regarding the McMurdo being on Jack Irvines payroll. Something I’ve heard mentioned by quite a few on here and in other forums.
The Phill/The Clumpany stuff was a shock to me and hopefully it will be denied soon.
Unless King has set up a trust somewhere exotic and unlikely – like Vanuatu ?
[But he would still have problems moving funds into the UK banking system.]
==================================================================
Maybe not….
” In recent weeks, King has -rightly -used the judgment to travel overseas to “unfreeze” cash that had been seized in Jersey and Guernsey.
By all accounts, the overseas courts weren’t amused that all this cash had been frozen more than a decade earlier, yet King hadn’t pleaded to the numerous criminal charges he faced.”
=====================================================================
http://thegremlin.co.za/plettenberg-bay-news/wordpress/2013/03/25/cocky-npa-left-red-faced-by-dave-king/
Interesting that he managed to unfreeze accounts in Jersey and Guernsey.
RANGERS Chairman Dave King has paid a glowing tribute to supporters after season-ticket renewal figures for Season 2015/16 reached a remarkable 21,500.
The Ticket Centre has been inundated with renewal forms since the Chairman outlined his vision for the Club and the new management team of Mark Warburton and David Weir were unveiled.
Rangers fans have been quick to respond by renewing in impressive numbers, no doubt encouraged by the signing of players like Danny Wilson and Rob Kiernan. The management team is working round the clock to recruit more players capable of boosting Rangers’ drive back to the top.
The deadline for season ticket renewals passed yesterday and the general public sale will open just as soon as all renewals and seat transfers have been dealt with.
Hitting the 21,500 mark in just under three weeks is well ahead of initial estimates and Mr King thanked the fans for their support saying: ‘It has been really encouraging for the new board to witness this phenomenal response from the Club’s supporters in advance of what is going to be the most significant season for the team in recent years.
“This early uptake confirms the remarkable strength of feeling Rangers fans have for their Club.
“We have already had significant improvements in the Club’s fortunes off the pitch and we now look forward to a similar outcome on the pitch this season.”
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/9554-season-tickets-pass-20k
___________
since the Chairman outlined his vision for the Club
I must have missed that bit 🙁
Anyone interested here is a blog by Paul McConville with some complex stuff,what i did notice is Ben Nevis( The Trust) owed over 200 million in tax,and must have a fortune in it to owe this amount.
https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/09/27/south-africas-tax-authorities-v-dave-king-now-in-the-high-court-in-london/
I noticed the frozen accounts in Jersey and Guernsey were frozen for tax reasons,nothing about breaking foreign exchange controls.
Doesn’t seem to be any obstacle to using these accounts,and now we know why DK said the settlement actually increases his ability to invest in Rangers.
James Forrest
Great article and like that from Barca supports what Neepheid and I said recently in that it is not that King doesn’t have money but he can’t get it out of the foreign exchange controls of RSA.
If all his money was repatriated to SA then it is in Rand and so it’s GBP or USD value fluctuates daily(and of late devalues as well in forex terms). Also to get forex out of SA needs documents for the banking system and approvals even if it $1000 for personal travel.
As I said before I am sure King knew this all along and perhaps the 3B’s were duped and/or thought promotion would bring the promised land. However with that dream
shattered, share issue looking unlikely, stadium needing expensive repairs, and playing staff needing improvement what we are seeing is perhaps not a surprise. Yes they should have been bringing in youth all along but perhaps reality has struck home.
For now it remains to be seen if anyone does put up some cash to keep lights on until, let’s say, October (if season tickets cover them to that point) but time is running out and if Warburton can’t gel a team together by the time they go to Easter Road then the bears (those who cant see what Ryan sees) might get the wake up call they need if, in the words of old Norwegian commentator, the get one hell of a beating.
July will no doubt be another interesting month with more PR spin, more inaction for our administrators, more blogs and the odd Sevco signing from the Isthmian League.
Scottish Football needs a strong East Fife and Arbroath.
RANGERS Chairman Dave King has paid a glowing tribute to supporters after season-ticket renewal figures for Season 2015/16 reached a remarkable 21,500.
===================================================================
Exciting times,and i think the Rangers fans deserve some plaudits for their faith and loyalty.
The ST renewal figure is encouraging, running at approx. 90%. However, these renewals are by fans who did not participate in the boycott last season. The bigger challenge will be to attract back those who stayed away last season.
The ST renewal figure is encouraging, running at approx. 90%. However, these renewals are by fans who did not participate in the boycott last season. The bigger challenge will be to attract back those who stayed away last season.
===================================================================
Since the renewal percentage only reflects those who did not boycott last year,i find it difficult to believe those who boycotted for DK will not buy a SB.
I expect the percentage take up to be even higher and one of the two major obstacles seems ready to vanish,now we await DK and his 4 children to see how much from Jersey and Guernsey they wish to invest.
Family trusts are usually set up proportionately,his daughter is seemingly worth 50 million and there are 3 other children.
Makes you wonder how much the trust is worth.
One must not assume that those who did not buy season tickets last year were acting in concert with DCK perhaps the boycott was small and others simply did walking away. The 90% is no guide to the potential outcome from others. We shall see but I guess it will be painted as a triumph either way
perhaps the boycott was small and others simply did walking away.
===========================================================
I am sure there are boycott figures around that would dispute ” small “,and all the reasons for walking away on and off the park are gone.
There will be a few who left for personal reasons,but they will easily be replaced by thousands of new converts to the new regime.
Football Fan says:
Member: (136 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 6:39 pm
I expect the percentage take up to be even higher and one of the two major obstacles seems ready to vanish,now we await DK and his 4 children to see how much from Jersey and Guernsey they wish to invest.
Family trusts are usually set up proportionately,his daughter is seemingly worth 50 million and there are 3 other children.
Makes you wonder how much the trust is worth.
=========================
http://www.biznews.com/interviews/2013/09/01/dave-kings-first-interview-after-his-r706m-settlement-with-sa-revenue-services/
That reads to me like the family money is no longer in the Channel Islands, but in a South African Trust. No matter how much is in that trust, it won’t be leaving South Africa, not to be thrown away on a vanity project, that’s for sure.
As I said above it will be how many of the 12,000 or so boycotters from last season return to the fold who will determine the final total of ST sales and the club’s income.
I estimate that the average income per ST will be around £265 (net of VAT) for this season, following an increase of 5% across the board, so the ST income at various sales levels will be as follows:
25,000 – £6.6M
27,500 – £7,3M
30,000 – £8.0M
32,500 – £8.6M
35,000 – £9.3M
37,500 – £9.9M
40,000 – £10.6M
42,500 – £11.3M
45,000 – £11.9M
The last income figures they reported were for 2013/14 (SFL Div 2) when they had 36,039 ST sales earning £7.7M at an average £214 per ST (net of VAT)
Last season, following the boycott, they reported final ST sales of 24,589, but with an average price increase of around 18% for the Championship season. That would have grossed them around £6.1M at a £250 average.
Had they matched the previous season’s sales figures, then they would have netted £9M, which means that the King inspired boycott actually cost the club £2.9M.
That is real cash straight off the bottom line and is a far more significant loss to the club than a diminished share of the retail pot.
easyJambo says:
Member: (678 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 7:13 pm
Based on a calculation I posted the other night your average figure for season tickets seems about right.
So in essence, the first 30,000 sold would cover the outstanding loans to King, the other shareholders and Ashley.
Wow, just wow!
It means a lot of assets that were previously held in offshore trusts
=====================================================================
I don’t believe he said ” all “,again we just have to guess what ” a lot ” means,and the only evidence we have is DK’s statement to the effect the settlement enhances his investment potential.
This suggests the balance is ” a lot “.
edit: I think we must assume the trust legally bought the shares without breaching foreign exchange controls,makes you wonder how much of the balance if not all they can legally invest in Rangers.
Football Fan says:
July 1, 2015 at 6:47 pm
….some would describe it as even staunch.
————————————————
It always interests me to see the use of the word ‘staunch’ by the Rangers support – always in the sense of being ‘zealously loyal’ to something (the club? The board? The company perhaps?), but somehow never in the sense of ‘stemming the flow’, even as untold millions of pounds continue to flow in an outward direction.
neepheidneepheid says:
Member: (659 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 7:08 pm
Loving this common thread of transparency
Had they matched the previous season’s sales figures, then they would have netted £9M, which means that the King inspired boycott actually cost the club £2.9M.
=============================================================
I believe he asked them not to boycott but pay at the gates,in effect it should have cost the club nothing.
How much did it cost in real terms when MA removed the facility,the facility Phil informed us had been spent,it caused mayhem and could be viewed as the main cause of most of the mayhem and financial insecurity.
Football Fan says:
Member: (138 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 7:20 pm
It means a lot of assets that were previously held in offshore trusts
=====================================================================
I don’t believe he said ” all “,again we just have to guess what ” a lot ” means,and the only evidence we have is DK’s statement to the effect the settlement enhances his investment potential.
This suggests the balance is ” a lot “.
edit: I think we must assume the trust legally bought the shares without breaching foreign exchange controls,makes you wonder how much of the balance if not all they can legally invest in Rangers.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
I hate to be pedantic, but he says a “a lot of assets”, not “a lot of the assets”, so any on normal construction, that means that the “offshore” assets have been repatriated- and that there were a lot of them.
I can see no basis whatsoever for your assumption that the offshore trusts did not break exchange control regulations. Surely the fact that the assets were required to be repatriated indicates the opposite?
Homunculus says:
“So in essence, the first 30,000 sold would cover the outstanding loans to King, the other shareholders and Ashley.”
It doesn’t look like the RRM intend to pay Ashley his £5m back any time soon. Assuming they pay themselves off though, if they sell 37,500 say, they would have £6.6m plus walk-ups and bits and pieces to see them through. Not enough to last until Xmas.
Still, I’m sure appropriate guarantees have been given to the authorities.
andy says:
Member: (59 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 5:42 pm
…
Mr King thanked the fans for their support saying:
‘It has been really encouraging for the new board to witness this phenomenal response from the Club’s supporters in advance of what is going to be the most significant season for the team in recent years.
“This early uptake confirms the remarkable strength of feeling Rangers fans have for their Club.
“We have already had significant improvements in the Club’s fortunes off the pitch and we now look forward to a similar outcome on the pitch this season.”
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/9554-season-tickets-pass-20k
=============================================================================
In the interests of accuracy: King is not quoted as saying that ST sales are 21,500.
[Neither is the CEO for that matter.]
But now that King has resurfaced to thank the bears for putting their hands in their own pockets, now would seem an opportune time to break open his kids’ piggy bank/trust for the benefit of RIFC/TRFC – and loudly communicate this display of confidence to the loyal fans ?
Or maybe a smaller scale display of unity: has King bought ST’s for himself and his very generous kids yet ? 😯
I hate to be pedantic, but he says a “a lot of assets”, not “a lot of the assets”, so any on normal construction, that means that the “offshore” assets have been repatriated- and that there were a lot of them.
==================================================================
You are not being pedantic,i disagree with your interpretation,what we both can agree on is he neither said ” all assets ” nor ” all the assets”.
My disagreement is reinforced by his subsequent statement that the settlement( a lot of assets returned) improved his investment potential,which contradicts your version.Another point being if all assets were returned then what did the trust buy the shares with?
I can see no basis whatsoever for your assumption that the offshore trusts did not break exchange control regulations. Surely the fact that the assets were required to be repatriated indicates the opposite?
=================================================================
If i made this assumption it was born from ignorance,i was not aware he had to return a lot of assets,my position is the balance of assets is substantial and can be legally invested in Rangers.
The term ” a lot of assets ” is really a very vague terms,he didn’t even say the majority of assets.
Football Fan
Just watching Friends at the moment and I’m reminded of the line “Monica pigeons learn faster then you”.
Your unbelievable optimism still willfully ignores the track record of the ‘glib and shameless taxcheating on the board of liquidated Rangers’ person who you’re betting all your chips on. Even the quality of the new signings should be a pointer about where things are headed which is down a much more realistic route and talk about family trusts filled with millions is just silly.
Your unbelievable optimism still willfully ignores the track record of the ‘[..] taxcheating on the board of liquidated Rangers’ person who you’re betting all your chips on
====================================================================
I am quietly optimistic but not certain,and i have no chips in this hand,unlike you, which may explain your absolute negativity.
Even if Rangers have learned their lesson,DK et al have to bail them out for previous losses and this years losses,that is what he meant by over investing this year,i don’t think DK is under any illusions nor do i think he is clinically insane.
Football Fan says:
July 1, 2015 at 7:30 pm
I believe he asked them not to boycott but pay at the gates,in effect it should have cost the club nothing.
————————————————
Yet at the time it was widely reported in terms of a request for a ‘boycott’ of season tickets, other means of paying (eg a pooled trust) being secondary strategies.
Rangers: Dave King urges fans’ boycott of season tickets
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26358424
THE former Ibrox director has responded to a statement made by Rangers chairman David Somers and called on fans to boycott matches
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/dave-king-calls-rangers-fans-4654370
And so on in other outlets.
In an article entitled ‘Rangers: Dave King urges fans to starve club of cash’, the BBC quoted King
“I truly hope that those fans that continue to blindly support the club (for the right reasons) finally realise that 140 years of the club’s history will be irretrievably lost unless they withhold their financial support for the current regime at matchdays…”
Perhaps the subtleties of his underlying message of trying not to cost the club anything was lost somewhere along the line by his PR team in their communications with the press?
Football Fan says:
Member: (141 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 7:49 pm
To be fair he can only really invest assets in Rangers if those assets are in effect cash. If it’s shares in another PLC, a vinyard in South Africa, a private jet or an expensive painting he can’t really invest them in a PLC.
Perhaps is a fine word particularly when speculating. Any response to prove the speculation right or wrong should have better than the possibility of there being figures which, although inherently untrustworthy give a definitive answer. Not only that it would be a bold claim to say with no evidence that there is no good reason for walking away. I can think of many plausible reasons for walking away not least of which is that one has seen the truth. Or one might think that it is not right to give money to of otherwise associate oneself with a criminal convicted of numerous offences. Indeed the drip drip drip of self contradictions might cause even the most staunch to become scunnered. It all remains to be seen.
Football Fan says:
Member: (143 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 8:27 pm
I don’t think anyone other than you has suggested he may be a “loonball”.
He is a liar and a fraudster, that doesn’t mean he is not in full control of his faculties.
TheClumpany says:
Member: (96 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 8:27 pm
Good Evening.
In case of interest, here’s a short piece on Scottish football journalists and PR firms…
https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/07/01/reinforced-perceptions/
Enjoy the rest of the evening.
=======================================
The churnalists have proved, repeatedly, that they cannot or will not adapt, so their print industry circulations continue to fall off a cliff.
And who would pay good money to read their dross behind a paywall in future ?
The ‘keyboard clatterers’, [(c) Jim Traynor], have more to offer longterm – and are already way ahead of the print media dinosaurs covering Scottish football.
. I can think of many plausible reasons for walking away not least of which is that one has seen the truth.
==============================================================
Truth is perhaps not the finest choice of words to use when speculating about the speculations of Rangers fans.
Or one might think that it is not right to give money to of otherwise associate oneself with a criminal convicted of numerous offences.
=============================================================
Since the balance of those yet to buy SB’s are in effect DK supporters,i doubt they view their association with him to be nothing but beneficial,his criminality didn’t bother them a year ago and it is implausible to believe they have changed their mind.
Untruth ALERT :
——————————
Football Fan says:
July 1, 2015 at 4:08 pm
I am not sure the fairness in ending Rangers history if the cause was the SFA simply botched it up.
To my layman brain,the SPL voted Rangers dead and the SFA voted they are alive,the question is what will UEFA say in a few years time?
——————————-
I know this was back a bit in the thread and is OC/NC territory – but c’mon!
nobody in football voted RFC dead or alive, (other than the creditors of RFC rejecting the CVA)
Any votes by member clubs of SPL or SFA were on the details of the admission of the successor club to Scottish football.
Everything that has befallen “rangers” over the last few years is entirely self inflicted.
You cannot wax lyrical about exchange rate controls in RSA one moment then throw out the layman excuse to repeat the victimised lie.
Anyway here’s a completely unrelated picture.
Football Fan says:
Member: (145 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 8:44 pm
I certainly can’t, I have never said he has no cash. He may have bucket loads.
What is clear though is that to date no matter what he has said he hasn’t really been living up to the hype he put out there to get the supporters backing him.
What has he actually put into Rangers. He bought the shares from someone else, so none went to the club. He said he wouldn’t do that, and would only buy into an issue but that’s another story.
He has provided a loan, so he will be getting that back. In fact he might even get it back once the season money has actually been paid, I don’t know the details.
So far it’s really pretty much all talk from Dave King.
So he may well have cash, lot’s of it. However so far he has only talked about putting it into the club.
I may be exposing my *rse to the banjo again, but my interpretation of Kingspeak was that he and his cohorts would match the input from the fans, with him personally putting in half of the required amount ie 1/4 of the total . No ?
Also, the TRFC supporter in my house is waiting for the game against Hibs in the Petrofac to assess the quality of the team before deciding whether or not to buy a ST.
DK knew about the retail contract and the massive losses before he planned the takeover.
DK knew how much was needed and he knew how much his fellow investors were committed to before the takeover.
DK knows what he can legally invest.
Conclusion,if DK has no cash to invest then he is into public humiliation and shame,and his behavior since and now would be classified as crazy as a bag of snakes.
Bayview Gold
I see someone has given you a thumbs down. i would have given you a thousand thumbs up for that pic alone ☺
Anyway, back to lurking. Hopefully this post wont generate a reply from our resident fan.
Football Fan says:
Member: (143 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 8:27 pm
The bottom line is if he has no cash then he is a complete and utter loonall that has hoodwinked Peter amongst others.
===========================
I take it by “Peter” you refer to Lawell, the Celtic CEO? (no friend of mine, by the way) If so, what does he have to do with the size of King’s wallet? He was part of a panel which adjudicated on King’s fitness to be involved in Scottish football. So far as I know, that panel looked at King’s criminal record and his track record as a director, not whether he had pots of money or not.
If King has fooled anyone, then it’s the Scottish press (who have a 5 star record of gullibility regarding all things “Rangers”), and King’s “co-investors”, the 3 Bears and the season ticket holders.
Of course he might produce the promised £30m in a few days time, at which point Keith Jackson’s head will undoubtedly explode with joy, and all will be well in a world where the natural order has been restored. Or maybe not.
Come on boys and girls, you are still rising to his bait!
I won’t engage with him to even ‘thumbs down’ him. Please disregard him and let us concentrate on the real story of that shambles of a club, whose liquidation was going to cause civil unrest.
Having said that, he/she does spend a lot of time on here (far more than me), so there must be quite a lot of money in it for him/her.
So he may well have cash, lot’s of it. However so far he has only talked about putting it into the club.
================================
I concur,we are in total agreement,there is no debate on this issue.
Haywire says:
Member: (40 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:01 pm
Liquidation did cause some issues, particularly for individuals who possibly became confused by the whole thing.
Jim Traynor for example. Who I believe is currently running Level 5, I think the Clumpany made reference to that company in the piece he linked to earlier.
imho – DCK is simply attempting(ed) his own ham-fisted version of a leveraged buyout, (not exactly but similar) in taking control of a business using little capital of his own. There will be no significant funding from him as the window has passed, his actions and his promises have not aligned at any point.
He is simply following the master
in his plan. “promise, deflect, blame, victim, promise, plead, rally, one last push, rosy future, promise, hope – repeat as necessary” you get the picture.
I am only conflicted in the reasoning – he is either genuine in his desire to run and ‘own’ TRFC and is hoping it can stumble along on fumes until the glory days return (sic) or he is looking for payback by drawing cash out (
) for his lost £20M
TBH – I am leaning towards the former but who knows?
Bayview Gold says:
Member: (41 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:12 pm
I think he made certain assumptions, which he got wrong. The main one being that the club would get promoted. That it would currently be a Premiership team, rather than a Championship one.
So club promoted, sell 45,000 season tickets at Premiership prices. Say net £355 average (made up number) would be about £16m.
Share issue raising £15m, as the Football Fan suggested. Fans are buying into the rebuilding.
Increased revenue from TV, sponsorships, matchday income etc. Maybe even do a deal with Ashley as Rangers are now in the top division and worth getting behind. At least you have something to sell it on now.
Keep costs at reduced levels and the business is actually able to survive. The support are understanding because they are buying into the rebuild and willing to accept second best for a couple of seasons. They give the club some leeway.
It works.
However like Ally McCoist destroying any chance Craig Whyte had due to onfield incompetence he did the same for Dave King. Third in the second tier of Scottish football with his players and budgets. Extraordinary.
Football Fan says:
Member: (150 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:19 pm
So far as I know, that panel looked at King’s criminal record and his track record as a director, not whether he had pots of money or not.
=============================================================
The SFA were given pelters for not checking out CW’s financial status …
=============================================
In retrospect, by the Rangers support who would have been apoplectic if the SFA had done anything to stop their new billionaire saviour stop taking over and buying success in Scottish football.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IL3a2LHEqqw
Homunculus says:
July 1, 2015 at 9:23 pm
Yes I agree – good post.
Just an observation but when every second or third post on the forum is from the same poster then the content can lose its usual diversity and at the same time focus can be driven in a particular direction, not necessarily one that progresses the debate or analysis if happenings in our national game.
Is it worth considering capping the number of posts any individual can make on the blog within say a 12 hour period?
Just throwing it out there for discussion.
Football Fan says:
Member: (151 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:19 pm
The SFA were given pelters for not checking out CW’s financial status,it was no secret Rangers were close to insolvency when DK took over.
=================
The SFA were given pelters for Whyte’s history of disqualification as a director. The amount of money available to Whyte was no business of the SFA in respect of their “fit and proper” regime.
The fact that the SFA gave RFC a licence despite them having no money is a separate issue altogether.
An honest pauper of unimpeachable character could not be challenged by the SFA if a member was prepared to appoint him as a director. There are no provisions under which they could do so. There is absolutely no “means test” for being involved in Scottish football- even I would qualify.
Matty Roth says:
Member: (194 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:36 pm
Forgive the irony of me being someone who replies to this.
However I totally agree and have thumbed you accordingly.
Getting a bit bored with Football Fan. Wasn’t there a proposal back in RTC days to limit the number of posts that an individual could post in 24hrs?
neepheid says:
Member: (662 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 8:57 pm
Football Fan says:
Member: (143 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 8:27 pm
The bottom line is if he has no cash then he is a complete and utter loonall that has hoodwinked Peter amongst others.
===========================
I take it by “Peter” you refer to Lawell, the Celtic CEO? (no friend of mine, by the way) If so, what does he have to do with the size of King’s wallet? He was part of a panel which adjudicated on King’s fitness to be involved in Scottish football. So far as I know, that panel looked at King’s criminal record and his track record as a director, not whether he had pots of money or not.
If King has fooled anyone, then it’s the Scottish press (who have a 5 star record of gullibility regarding all things “Rangers”), and King’s “co-investors”, the 3 Bears and the season ticket holders.
Of course he might produce the promised £30m in a few days time, at which point Keith Jackson’s head will undoubtedly explode with joy, and all will be well in a world where the natural order has been restored. Or maybe not.
9 1 Rate This
==========================================
Actually given the lack of transparency around the King FPP decision I don’t think we can say if Lawell or any others on the professional game board were involved in this decision. We simply do not know who decided what or why. Or did I miss something?
Homunculus says:
Member: (53 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:44 pm
Matty Roth says:
Member: (194 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:36 pm
Forgive the irony of me being someone who replies to this.
However I totally agree and have thumbed you accordingly.
0 0 Rate This
=========================
Let me just say that its not any particular poster that requires to be limited IMO, but a general thing for the overall health of the discussion forum. There have been many periods and many diff posters who have found themselves replying to or attempting to reply to almost every point made.
The result is usually a lot of circular argument and a lot of opinion and not a lot of much else.
Its just my opinion but I wonder if a capping system might help reduce that from happening so much.
However, i do acknowledge there may be downsides. For one thing we don’t want to stifle discussion on the forum altogether (perhaps make the limit fairly high).
And for another we do occasionally find someone really gets the bit between their teeth and they become genuinely prolific for a period. Although I think in this case what we usually see is lengthy and very detailed in depth posts rather than lost of the same opinion, same questions repeated over and over.
It’s like the loudmouth at a party who doesn’t know when to shut up. Eventually the room emptys. Is that the agenda here?
New possibility about the Clumpany ( if he is PMG does that mean he should be called ‘ flumps”- of sticky marshmallow fame) Are you Jimenez Traynor? You did get multiple adverts for TRFC
Season tickets in your latest piece. I tried to shorten the name James but got that vaguely South American name and am trying to avoid the kind of stuff more suitable to Donald ‘I am the evidence’ Trump.
Bayview Gold says:
Member: (42 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:12 pm
This my thoughts on it exactly, leveraged buy out. If he gets the retail contract changed, a few more fans through the gates and into the top division, the shares he picked up for buttons due to his shennanigans become worth a lot more. I think he’s taking a punt on this. This sort of pump n dump thing is his bread n butter.
He’s the type of guy that wouldn’t part with a single Rand if he didn’t have to, his aggressive tax avoidance shows this. So 20 million or so soft investment doesn’t seem his style.
As for the ST sales, doesn’t really surprise me. This is the hardcore support who bought their ST’s despite all the nonsense of last summer, all the negative press and prompting from fan reps. 90% renewal isn’t a huge surprise from this group. What’ll be interesting is how many of 12,000 missing fans did so because they wanted DK in and how many were just fed up with up everything.
As a matter of interest…..was it not possible for non ST holders purchase a season ticket before today? Would seem a bit silly if that was the case??
Never ending or beginning.
On an ever spinning reel.
Football Fan says:
Member: (154 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:50 pm
Just an observation but when every second or third post on the forum is from the same poster then the content can lose its usual diversity and at the same time focus can be driven in a particular direction, not necessarily one that progresses the debate or analysis if happenings in our national game.
========================================
I have no objection,most of my posts are actually replies to posters addressing me,it is not my fault my diversity is popular.
I am away until Tuesday so hopefully you can get the rule change for my return.
1 3 Rate This
==============================================
FF, you are quite correct in that your posts are very much in reply to others and many folks clearly do want to discourse with you!
My observation isn’t based on your own level of posting alone FF, so please don’t take it personally. Over the period we have often hit periods where a great deal of the discussion focuses around one poster.
And as for implementing a rule change!!
I would be very very surprised if a simple suggestion from myself was acted upon with any such hastiness.
I’m just chucking it out there for others to chew over and consider if it can maintain some sort of balance.
casper999 says:
Member: (10 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 9:56 pm
It’s like the loudmouth at a party who doesn’t know when to shut up. Eventually the room emptys. Is that the agenda here?
7 0 Rate This
=======================
My final post tonight.
I think its actually a little unfair if this is directed at FF Casper. This is a forum after all and if posters share opinions or analysis honestly and openly that is fair enough I think.
We have had some other quite prolific posters in the past and I don’t recall all of them being castigated as “loud mouths” or similar, so we have to extend the same courtesy to all posters regardless of whether we agree or disagree with the content of what they post surely.
My suggestion is only that regardless of the opinions espoused it might be worth considering if a post limit is a good thing or if it has too many drawbacks. Just something for discussion I think.
I guess that if I don’t want to read essentially the same post from the same person several times over the course of the same day then I guess others might feel the same. Its absolutely not the content that is at issue IMO.
If I’ve misunderstood you casper then I apologise.
I am fairly confident, that King will not invest one thin dime until he absolutely has to, and that cash will not be his
Investment will only come when the season ticket cash has run out, or Ashley really puts the squeeze on
No prizes for spotting the inaccuracy in this snippet from “The Scotsman”. They should try to keep up, it’s really not that difficult.
“Celtic will compensate St Mirren for the use of the ground (and shop) but that doesn’t pacify some angry Buddies’ fans who don’t want to see the colours and name of a Scottish Premiership rival splashed across their stadium.”
“Scottish Premiership rival.”
Indeed.
(no disrespect to St Mirren or their fans intended)
Football Fan says:
Member: (156 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 10:07 pm
Ease up on the personal attacks folks,your cognitive bias is slipping,this blog can be filled on a daily basis with posts from Eco or mcfc and not a peep.
tut…tut…tut,try and think what all inclusive means and do not address me if you do not want a reply.
1 0 Rate This
======================================================
A bit of an overeaction to be honest.
I haven’t seen Eco on here for quite some time but I think the same thing about when he was at his most prolific as well. Ie I enjoyed the long in depth posts he was so good at but not so much the battles he occassionally got caught up in trying to argue the toss with every single oncomer.
Personally I’m quite happy for you to post from now to eternity and stick to your views and opinions, it adds something different to the blog.
Its just not so interesting to read the blog when someone is trying to respond to every query or question thrown at them.
Not sure if your other remarks are aimed at me but I’m going to let them pass anyway.
Problems looming
Uefa have today released the rules governing FFP, which in turn governs entitlement to a European competition licence.
There are a couple of area’s which should be understood.
A club is in breach if it has a going concern warning on the accounts. Rangers has a going concern warning and therefore , should they qualify via a cup win this season they will be in breach of the qualifying criteria.
There is the opportunity for a club in breach to prove to the licensing body ( The SFA) that despite the Auditors having issued a going concern warning, the club would be able to see out the season.
That however brings problem 2 for Rangers. The use of short term loans or loans of indeterminate length do not count for working capital purposes, and therefore have to be disounted from any plans to convince the SFA that the Auditors were wrong to issue the going concern warning. Therefore Rangers really only have the option of increasing equity ( not really possible without a listing and in any event requires 75% shareholder approval to properly widen the scope beyond existing shareholders) or Rangers could enter into long term loan agreements with lenders ( again not really possible without assets to offer as security)
The third challenge is that the level of scrutiny and reporting required to prove to The SFA and Uefa that the Auditors were wrong , is much greater than that required by AIM. Quarterly reporting and budgeted cash flow being two criteria that will present problems. There is also no opportunity to revalue assets , in the way that Murray and Green did previously.
In short unless somewhere around £30 Million is introduced as fresh equity, then its difficult to see how Rangers will be eligible for a European competition licence. The reluctance to commit to equity ( which has little to no clout in an insolvency ( unlike debt) ) is likely to be a significant obstacle
Matty RothMatty Roth says:
Member: (199 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 10:24 pm
I haven’t seen Eco on here for ….
———
I felt many of eco’s posts could have been edited into one paragraph. I’m afraid I bypassed almost every one of his increasingly self-indulgent posts in the end. It took the concept of verbosity to a new level. Our current obsessive, who seems a familiar reincarnation (perhaps he tuped over?), needs professional help, imo. Juvenile and best ignored.
Evening Barca,
I think the investors would prefer equity shares but this may not be possible without buying up 10% of the opponents shares.
The alternative is an existing shareholders share issue and if needs be a long term loan to replace the 8 million in short term loans.
The fact these conditions have come out persuades me the SFA may have sought some financial assurances from DK as part of the FPP.
Danish Pastry says:
Blog Writer: (1266 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 10:41 pm
Matty RothMatty Roth says:
Member: (199 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 10:24 pm
I haven’t seen Eco on here for ….
———
I felt many of eco’s posts could have been edited into one paragraph. I’m afraid I bypassed almost every one of his increasingly self-indulgent posts in the end. It took the concept of verbosity to a new level. Our current obsessive, who seems a familar reincarnation (perhaps he tuped over?), needs professional help, imo. Juvenile and best ignored.
0 0 Rate This
============================================
Without really wanting to pick in individuals, if we take Eco as an example, I never really minded the length and detail of his posts. It makes for variety and depth. As you say its easy to pass by anything you don’t have the inclination to read.
What I find more of a problem to me as a casual reader of the blog was when more and more posts were made and the whole blog was swamped almost. That leaves little variety to read.
Barcabhoy says: July 1, 2015 at 10:29 pm
======================
A question re a “Going Concern Warning”. Do the new rules reflect the difference between an Auditor’s “qualified opinion” regarding a going concern and an “Emphasis of Matter” re a going concern?
The RIFC/TRFC accounts are not “qualified” as such, but the Auditors have used the “Emphasis of Matter” terminology instead.
Am I not right in saying DeLoittes have resigned as Rangers’ auditors. Does anyone know who is doing the June 2015 accounts.
I note that Paul Murray announced to the stock exchange on 31 March 2015, at the release of the interim results.
Paul Murray, Interim Chairman of Rangers, commented
“These results are historical and relate to a period before the new Board took office. I wish to draw shareholders’ attention to the fact that these interim results have been reviewed by Jeffreys Henry LLP. I have been informed by Deloitte, the existing auditor, that they informed the previous Board of their intention to resign following the June 2014 audit. The previous Board chose not to announce this nor did they find a replacement for Deloitte. With limited time to have these results reviewed the Board asked Jeffreys Henry to perform the exercise as Independent Reporting Accountants, not auditors. They have previously carried out work for the Club and therefore know the finance functions well. The Board will make a further announcement on this subject once we have found a replacement firm for Deloitte.
Once again, for completeness, I should probably post what he was actually commenting on.
31 March 2015
Rangers International Football Club plc
(“Rangers” or the “Company”)
Interim Results
Rangers International Football Club plc (AIM:RFC), the holding company for the Scottish football Club ‘Rangers’, is pleased to announce interim results for the six month period to 31 December 2014.
Operational Highlights
· Season ticket sales of 24,589 at period-end
· Average home league attendance of 32,321 during the period; thirteenth highest UK football attendance
· Semi-finalist for QTS Scottish League Cup and Petrofac Training Cup
· Currently placed 3rd in Championship and in play-off spot
Financial Highlights
· Revenue of £13.1m
· Operating expenses of £16.1m
· Profit on disposal of player registrations of £0.2m
· Loss before finance costs of £2.6m
· Finance leases of £0.7m at 31 December 2014
completely OT, (no connection to any ongoing discussions)
As it was a slow news night, I was digging around the BG picture archives (darts teams from the 70’s section) and found a pic from the Bayview Bar darts team 1978,
I know we like reminiscing at times so wondering if any of my fellow fifers can spot any old neebs here? think the guy in the back row looks familiar.
Scottish Football needs a strong East Fife Darts League!
Auldheid says:
Blog Writer: (467 comments)
July 1, 2015 at 4:04 pm
HirsutePursuit says:
Member: (90 comments)
June 30, 2015 at 10:13 pm
========================================
A lot to cover; but I’ll do my best.
If Sevco’s membership of the SFL had lapsed on 27th July it would have had to re-apply to join the league and a vote taken at another EGM. Since we know of no such application/EGM/vote I think we have to assume that its membership, if granted on the 13th, continued beyond the 14 day period.
In fact, had its membership of the SFL lapsed, the club would not have even been eligible to take part in the Ramsden cup tie against Brechin City.
Rule 3 of that competition tells us:
So, of course, if the club was not a member of the SFL or any other league, it couldn’t have taken part in the competition.
I don’t see anything in the SFL rules that the application for full or associate SFA membership had to be made via article 6. The only stipulation was that the application (by whatever means) had to be submitted within a 14 day period. Since the opportunity to be granted full membership existed via article 14, that was the route the new club chose to take.
However, SFA Article 6.1 does come into play.
Note that it is the club that is admitted as registered member – not the “owner and operator” or “holding company” or some such thing. Anyhoo, Sevco Scotland Ltd was admitted to the SFL on 13th July and consequently should have been “admitted as a registered member automatically” – the SFA membership.
So the Joint Statement issued on the 27th July makes little sense on a number of levels.
“A conditional membership will be issued to Sevco Scotland Ltd today, allowing Sunday’s Ramsdens Cup tie against Brechin City to go ahead.”
* The SFA does not issue registered membership – SFA membership is conferred automatically by way of its admittance into the SFL
* Neither SFA Associate membership nor SFA Full membership was required to participate in the SFL and/or Ramsden Cup – only that an application for either SFA membership grade had been made within the 14 day period. The application to transfer Rangers status as full member would have satisfied that requirement.
There was – as far as I can see – no need for the SFA to “issue” any membership category to allow the Brechin game to go ahead.
So I believe the conditional membership is a complete fiction. It doesn’t exist in the real world; but it does signify the SFAs approval that Sevco was allowed to use the Rangers brand in accordance with SFA Article 10.3:
Sevco was a registered member and Rangers was a club in full membership.
Simply put, if the SFA had not signalled approval, Sevco could not have entered the Ramsden Cup using the Rangers FC brand.
Is it just me, or do others see similarities between ‘Comical Ali’ and our friend the football fan?
BG @ 11.29pm
I know there’s no problem on here but I wonder if it’s a good idea to put pictures up.
I was reading the content of a link that was posted; Rangers Supporters Loyal?
A poster on RSL showed some good knowledge by advising how the Sports Direct deal was structured and how voting rights are skewed in SD’s favour. The poster credited the AIM sharechat as the source of this information. However I rarely if ever read the sharechat (or whatever its called) site but I understood the deal structuring referred to. The reason being that it has been discussed of SFM in fine detail over a period of months and years. I suspect the information available on sharechat came originally from SFM.
Basically SFM has effectively become the Scottish Football media. Whoever is reporting whatever story, if they venture into sports governance or media spin then they are outwith their comfort zone. There is the danger they will be contradicted by SFM and when the final evaluation is made there is only one winner in that contest.
Having recently read a text on conjurors and illusionists, it struck me that many of the tricks employed by charlatans to fool people have been visited on RFC fans. This does not mean that Ranger’s fans are particularly gullible, just that their travails have allowed the exercise to be viewed in full colour HD 3D. We are all gullible; and this is very upsetting.
We think the newspapers and media in general should print the truth or a reasonable version of it. How very quaint. This might be seen as naive unless you are living in the days of medieval chivalry. The newspapers do not print the truth. They print what certain elements of their readership wish to read; a reinforcement of their own personal values. It has nothing to do with truth. Truth is an illusion.
I can get upset only for so long with a media that corrupts its output to suit certain predetermined agenda. After that I simply discount the information sources that appear to be questionable. Ranger’s fans have unwittingly become a litmus test for this process of identifying acidic content. I’m sure any group of football fans could have their heads turned by a fawning media. It provides self justification in a world that is almost devoid of tangible meaning. Why wouldn’t you listen to all those compliments and hope/wish/assume they were true. The messenger that brings good news is rarely executed. Even when it turns out later on that their information was worthless, they might be forgiven on the basis that their heart is in the right place.
SFM has a proven ability to dig to the roots of even the most complex stories and do it in such a manner that puts many professional journalists to shame.
Professional journalists are currently losing the war. They don’t know whether to stick or twist. Should they embrace the new innovation of the blogosphere or should they retreat back into their trenches behind well defined and long standing defensive lines. Might I suggest that one or two (Mr. Spiers and Mr. English) have decided to plow their own furrow through the waste of no-man’s land. Although their output will be considered far from radical, they have been willing to cut themselves off from (though perhaps not entirely) their natural supporter base and are prepared to litter their football narratives with some indigestible ‘facts’.
You simply cannot take any media piece at face value. At best you may be able to decipher its underlying agenda and thus construe the ‘real’ reason for an article or story. That is the only value to be had I suspect.
So whether Dave King has got millions to spend is not a decision of the media. Nothing reported via this route can be believed.
The only way to wash out the truth is to put it in the SFM bio wash and let it get tossed about for a while until all the agitation results in some debris being rinsed free.
If the traditional media are disconcerted by such an effective process then why should you be so surprised?