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.
Smugas says:
Member: (862 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 11:38 am
It was always my understanding that King invested in one of Murrays companies (something like Murray Sports Limited), that company in turn owned shares in Rangers.
Even if that entitled him to be considered a shareholder in Rangers it would still make him just that, a shareholder. Surely they are only considered after the actual creditors are dealt with.
Has he somehow convinced BDO that he was in fact a creditor, is he claiming that he was conned and the business actually owes him his money back.
If so then that ranks up there with the most outrageous things in this whole disgrace. One of the Directors and major shareholders who destroyed the business is now to be treated as a £20m creditor and get £1.3m or whatever which should actually go to the real creditors.
If he has done this and BDO allowed it then that is totally shameful. One of the main culprits (who also happens to be a convicted criminal) getting a substantial payment from the creditors pot, and victims payout being reduced by that amount. Unbelievable.
Allyjambo on July 4, 2015 at 10:17 am says
____________________
Allyjambo
Great post. Short of someone somehow producing a big pile of cash at Sevco, the board need to level with the fans, put in place a sustainable and (initially) austere, moonbeam-free operation, and try and make friends with Mr Ashley.
It really is that straightforward (in theory, if not necessarily execution!).
But the current Board keep on using fanciful rhetoric, getting the fans’ hopes up, and circling the wagons against Mr Ashley.
Backed to the hilt by a cheerleading media…
Something has to give. And possibly sooner rather than later…
Matty Roth says:
Member: (201 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 8:58 am
Fisiani says:
Member: (39 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 6:54 am
Scotland needs ICT , St Johnstone and Aberdeen to qualify for the group stages of the Europa League to raise our coefficient which will be divided by 4, I reckon if all 4 Scottish teams can reach the group stages for the next three years then we could have 2 teams in the Champions League.
3 0 Rate This
=======================
There is little likelyhood of 4 teams reaching the group stages of Euro competition.
Europa league qualifying is greatly underestimated in this country I think, its not easy with teams from scotland playing typically 3 qualifying rounds, or 2 rounds for 1 team.
The clubs face unknown but very determined sides from all over europe in the first round or two then start to meet seeded teams that are often well funded and likely more than a match for our teams.
And to make it harder we play these qualifying games before our season even starts. Not a week before but weeks before.
Over a 3 year period I’m not even convinced Celtic would qualify for Europa league stage 3 times out of 3 (if they were required to play the same qualifiers as St J, Afc and ICT will be).
______________________________________________________________________________
I would be stunned if any of our represenatives, including my team, were to make the group stages.
Whilst I expect us to dispose of the Macedonians at home and we might well overcome Rijeka in the 2nd qualifying round (all before our season starts) and pick up their seeding for the 3rd round. So far so doable.
However, if we, or any other Scottish team, were so fortunate as to reach the fourth (and final) qualifying round we are likely to come up against the likes of Dortmund, Southampton, West Ham, Bilbao, etc. It would be a tough ask and require a fortuitous draw.
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1046 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 10:17 am
Couldn’t agree more AJ & yet as I have commented on here previously, most of closest friends and family are Rangers fans of over 35 years standing. Most are or have been shareholders & small investors, and at a family gathering last week, we were blethering about football in general & TRFC in particular.
For what it counts, there was no REAL appreciation of the current financial health of the club, even though one of my mates is an Accountant. There was a reluctance, an unwillingness to acknowledge or accede to the idea, that DCK is maybe just the latest in a long line of spivs there to con them out of their money, in the guise of being a season ticket holder?
Certainly amongst my friends & family, all of whom are sane & decent, there is still this palpable sense of denial, that if we cross our fingers & close our eyes, it’ll all go away & everything will be as before…..
On the subject of DCK, all admitted that they still expected to see the colour of his money,one saying that he will wait until he sees how much the fans put up & then DCK will double this.
Now, if my friends are representative of the main body of the Kirk, I honestly fear for them this season, if the good ship Sevco runs aground again, because until SOMEONE grabs a hold of that business & gets it living within its means, then on current evidence, that’s exactly where it’s going.
And that’s the difference between the Hearts fans & the TRFC ones. A willingness to confront & deal with the reality of the situation. An action plan backed by clear thinking and unanimity between all the supporters & custodians of the club.
TRFC are trillions of light years away from this and no amount of SMSM propaganda or PR companies ain’t gonna change this!!
AllyjamboAllyjambo says:
Member: (1045 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 10:17 am
…a) Instantly start to initiate austerity, cease signing new players and accept that there is a likelihood of no promotion for possibly two or more seasons. Then, approach Mike Ashley to invite him back into the fold, with any board departures he requires, with a determination to follow his plans to the letter. This while making it clear to the support that it is the only/best option and that Kingco were wrong/misguided all along. SFA problems exist, but only if it wasn’t ‘Rangers’!
————-
Great post Ally. Not sure the mentality is there for such common sense. Had a look at that SoS post someone linked to and what a lot of tribal animostity from the various factions. Since no one has the sense or vision to create a proper newco totally independent of the Ibrox mess the fans seem doomed to an endless round of infighting while being exposed to selfish vested interests.
Surprised no one seems to link Imran or Charles with the posts on the BM & Ninja blogs. They still have an interest in seeing Ashley back in control, especially if the RRM regime isn’t paying the onerous 😯
PS I can see Mullen’s name has disappeared from the ET article. All Derek Rae’s own words now, obviously.
TheClumpany says:
Member: (101 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 12:23 pm
Cheers Clumps.
I think this is do or die season, if they make it through this one, they will survive and grow slowly. If King stays, and they survive, it will be because he’s managed to put a substantial sum together (probably not his own) but I really doubt he could spend it wisely enough (unless it is that £20-30m) to see the club through. I think the club’s best, probably only, chance to survive is if Ashley returns in some form. If Ashley pulls out, demanding his money back, then I can see no hope for any fan buy-out, as the mountain (of debt) to climb would be too great. Their only chance would be if Ashley showed a humane side to his character and somehow helped them out by turning the £5m into a long term loan and easing the onerous RR contract. As it would be for the fans, who will buy his merchandise, he might do that (just a guess though), but I can’t see him doing it for anyone else who isn’t one of his own people.
Time, I think, for the bears to grab the nettle (no thistles down Govan way) and force King to put up, or make way for someone with a genuine plan (if there is that someone) that doesn’t include unrealistic promises of glory!
Homunculus,
To be clear I am not in any way defending Kings claim. In fact i’ll further dispute it’s validity by reminding the board of its funding source, the Withey insurance payout. There is no question that that came about in complete isolation to the everyday actions of the face painter. Whether king can claim the same level of “it wisnae me” I’m not nearly so confident.
I was coming at it more from the angle of Clumps summary about 12.00 time. How can “rangers” get from A to B whilst keeping king/3Bs on board because they want to and Ashley on board because they have to, whilst also building on the entirely groundless rumours that King might not be the generous benefactor so many want him to be.
Smugas says:
Member: (863 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 1:21 pm
I can’t even understand King’s claim if BDO have accepted it. I find the idea absolutely outrageous.
If they allow him a claim of £20m, and I can’t even see the basis, that means he will get more than HMRC (all of us).
So the country get less than the convicted criminal who was on the board of the club. HMRC must question this surely.
Marek Hanousek hat trick so far. There’s yer striker right there Celtic.
On 31st. March, 2015. RIFC PLC announced that the Auditors had intimated their intention to resign. Paul Murray said “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.”
He went on to say “The Board will make a further announcement on this subject once we have found a replacement firm for Deloitte.”
It is now July 2015. The year end was 30th June. Have RIFC PLC appointed a new auditor, if so why no announcement. Will it be announced at the same time as the new NOMAD.
What will RIFC PLC do if they cannot produce audited accounts. How much will it cost for them to do that.
Scottish football deserves to know, before the new season starts.
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12299859.html
Homunculus says:
Member: (67 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 1:52 pm
I wonder if the SFA have thought to ask for the name of their auditors? I’m sure that the production of annual accounts is rather important when it comes to SFA/SPFL licenses and such, and without an auditor…
Of course, they’ve maybe acquired one, and have just forgotten, yet again, to announce what they said they’d announce! Things like the appointment of new auditors are easy to overlook when you’re busy signing world class players.
More seriously, though, if they haven’t appointed new auditors, why are the SFA/SPFL allowing them to register new players, when, by definition, they won’t be able to produce the required annual accounts? Maybe if any TRFC supporters are looking in they might like to chase this small problem (if there is no auditor) up, just to reassure himself of the existence of auditors and so one less problem!
Maybe Mr Regan should do likewise 🙄
Homunculus says:
Member: (68 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 2:06 pm
Might actually explain why no announcement of the name of an auditor has been made. I don’t know if it’s allowable, but perhaps they have appointed auditors who wish to remain anonymous to the public! Assuming the letter is genuine, that is, though it might be a more comforting reason for Deloittes resignation than if they were leaving because of the state of the accounts. Comforting to the bears that is, not any potential auditors.
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1049 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 2:11 pm
They might want to update the official website a bit as well.
Anyone looking at that might think that a rights issue would be no problem. Which I suspect it might not be if you have no NOMAD, no auditor and no audited accounts.
I would also agree with you that the above should raise some questions with the Scottish footballing authorities, particularly with the concerns raised by the resigned auditors.
How can anyone say that they are in a position to guarantee seeing the season out.
Homunculus, this doc is dated 19 June 2015. A year after they originally intimated their intention to resign. A fake, surely?
weejoe says:
Member: (2 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 2:33 pm
No idea, Joe. That’s why I said I couldn’t confirm it.
To be honest all that would do is try to change the perceived reason for their resignation.
I do see where you are coming from with that though.
Which is the more palatable threats to the auditors, or the auditors resigning for other reasons.
We live in interesting times.
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1049 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 2:11 pm
More seriously, though, if they haven’t appointed new auditors, why are the SFA/SPFL allowing them to register new players, when, by definition, they won’t be able to produce the required annual accounts?
============================================
In 2012 the SFA made a clear statement that rules put in place to ensure correct governance of the game do not apply to the club from Ibrox. They waived aside rules which should have meant any new Rangers having to start again in the same way the new Gretna had to. Not content with that, the SFA then attempted to force the new Rangers straight into the top tier of Scottish football. Only fan power prevented it happening. I hold no hope of the SFA applying whatever rules exist in terms of audited accounts and registering players. SFA rules seem to exist only for 41 of 42 senior clubs.
upthehoops says:
Member: (766 comments)
Substitute Clubs for SFA and I’d agree with you.
When Ogilvie was put forward as the sole nominee for the Presidency, the clubs had a Golden Opportunity to signal their rejection of the policies/culture of the SFA. By accepting his nomination, without any sort of protest or even a single abstention, the clubs signalled their support for everything that had been done.
Excuse my ignorance as a layman, but what role does a club’s auditor perform aside from the annual/bi-annual checking/signing off annual accounts etc? Otherwise, the absence of an auditor would only be felt on those particular occasions, would it not? Not sure when our next accounts are due, tho I’d imagine some folk on here could tell me! ☺
Had a brief check of SFA and SPFL Rules & can’t see direct reference to requirements re a club’s auditor.
scapaflow says:
Member: (1268 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 3:23 pm
upthehoops says:
Member: (766 comments)
Substitute Clubs for SFA and I’d agree with you.
When Ogilvie was put forward as the sole nominee for the Presidency, the clubs had a Golden Opportunity to signal their rejection of the policies/culture of the SFA. By accepting his nomination, without any sort of protest or even a single abstention, the clubs signalled their support for everything that had been done.
=========================================
Yes you have a real point there about Ogilvie, although in terms of the SFA I don’t think we can blame the clubs for everything. After all, Governments don’t have a referendum for every decision they make.
burghGer says:
Member: (2 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 3:38 pm
The PLC’s reporting year has just finished, so accounts should be getting prepared and an auditor will need to audit them.
The last accounting period for which accounts have been filed is for June 2014, those were filed on 9th January 2015.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/part/16/chapter/3/crossheading/duties-and-rights-of-auditors
Duties and rights of auditors
498Duties of auditor
(1)A company’s auditor, in preparing his report, must carry out such investigations as will enable him to form an opinion as to—
(a)whether adequate accounting records have been kept by the company and returns adequate for their audit have been received from branches not visited by him, and
(b)whether the company’s individual accounts are in agreement with the accounting records and returns, and
(c)in the case of a quoted company, whether the auditable part of the company’s directors’ remuneration report is in agreement with the accounting records and returns.
(2)If the auditor is of the opinion—
(a)that adequate accounting records have not been kept, or that returns adequate for their audit have not been received from branches not visited by him, or
(b)that the company’s individual accounts are not in agreement with the accounting records and returns, or
(c)in the case of a quoted company, that the auditable part of its directors’ remuneration report is not in agreement with the accounting records and returns,
the auditor shall state that fact in his report.
(3)If the auditor fails to obtain all the information and explanations which, to the best of his knowledge and belief, are necessary for the purposes of his audit, he shall state that fact in his report.
(4)If—
(a)the requirements of regulations under section 412 (disclosure of directors’ benefits: remuneration, pensions and compensation for loss of office) are not complied with in the annual accounts, or
(b)in the case of a quoted company, the requirements of regulations under section 421 as to information forming the auditable part of the directors’ remuneration report are not complied with in that report,
the auditor must include in his report, so far as he is reasonably able to do so, a statement giving the required particulars.
[F1(5)If the directors of the company—
(a)have prepared accounts in accordance with the small companies regime, or
(b)have taken advantage of small companies exemption in preparing the directors’ report,
and in the auditor’s opinion they were not entitled to do so, the auditor shall state that fact in his report.]
burghGer says:
Member: (2 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 3:38 pm
Welcome to SFM, burghGer.
The club’s auditors more or less do only produce the annual and interim report and accounts, an extremely vital function, and an expensive one, for any company. In fact, no company can function without auditors. TRFC’s accounts are due at 30th June and the auditors should already have started to prepare them, especially for a company in the state RIFC/TRFC is in.
Others will no doubt be able to provide a more definitive answer with regards to the football requirements but fully audited accounts are required for the issuing of such piffling administration functions as a license to play in Scottish, and European, football. Come to think about it, no accounts, no license, no football! Well, that’s the rules anyway.
OT
If Rangers do find a NOMAD (That wants to give them devotion, Sorry couldn’t resist) and have a share issue. What assets do they have, how much money spent in Court. As a wise man said, ‘What are they buying into?’ Paul says it so much better!
https://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/12/17/why-rangers-share-issue-might-be-useful-for-an-alienation-rainy-day/#more-2769
That share issue money has gone, does the rest still ring true? BDO challenge etc?
As far as I can see, the company that owns the assets of the ethereal entity, don’t own (at the moment) any real assets!
I’m very confused!
The time limit for filing the audited accounts of a Public Company is 6 months after the year end, so for RIFC that is 31 December. Now that RIFC has been delisted, I don’t think there is any requirement for interim accounts to be published.
Maybe Dave King will placate the fans by explaining that he would rather work without an auditor anyway.
Well after Deloitte did walking / running away…would be surprised if any of the other Big 4 would take on RIFC/TRFC.
And don’t know if King could afford them either.
Maybe King would prefer to go down the Bernie Madoff route and engage cheaper, unknown auditors with 3 employees ?
StevieBC says:
Member: (765 comments)
I’ll keep an eye out for a new CA partnership of King, William & Oranje
I’ll get ma coat
neepheid says:
Member: (667 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 5:11 pm
The time limit for filing the audited accounts of a Public Company is 6 months after the year end, so for RIFC that is 31 December. Now that RIFC has been delisted, I don’t think there is any requirement for interim accounts to be published.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Listed or not they’re still a plc
Is there not a requirement for TRFC to produce audited minutes, the same as their competitor clubs ?
zerotolerance1903 says:
Member: (33 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 7:02 pm
neepheid says:
Member: (667 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 5:11 pm
The time limit for filing the audited accounts of a Public Company is 6 months after the year end, so for RIFC that is 31 December. Now that RIFC has been delisted, I don’t think there is any requirement for interim accounts to be published.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Listed or not they’re still a plc
=========
That’s why the time limit is 6 months, rather than 9 for a private company.
Interim accounts are a requirement of the exchanges, not a requirement of the Company’s Acts, so a PLC which is not listed on an exchange is no longer required to produce interim accounts.
A couple of interesting tweets from ‘tommy yes’ to Clumps. Can’t comment on the likely veracity of the claims, but interesting, very interesting, if true. Read from bottom up.
@TheClumpany two folk walked out on Sevco yesterday just wouldn’t say who ? He more or less said they are gubbed ? interesting convo
@TheClumpany I had an interesting conversation to a well connected sevconian today in work confirming king offering shares and also saying..
paddy malarkey says:
Member: (43 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 7:28 pm
Is there not a requirement for TRFC to produce audited minutes, the same as their competitor clubs ?
Apologies – accounts . 😳
paddy malarkey says:
Member: (44 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 8:40 pm
paddy malarkey says:
Member: (43 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 7:28 pm
Is there not a requirement for TRFC to produce audited minutes, the same as their competitor clubs ?
=======================
Yes, like all private companies, TRFC have to produce audited accounts 9 months after their year end, so by 31 March for the year to 30 June.
What Rangers fans like myself want to hear is a deal has been struck to remove the parasite Ashley from our club. To be fair to king he was clear from the start that cleansing the club of sports direct wasnt one of his priorities. As its happened, the merchandising boycott has continued among many bears & although season tickets aren’t being picketed, the former is unacceptable enough. Hard to see a solution at the moment to this latest self-imposed hurdle placed in the way of our return to the top. Bring on the football I say! ?
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1051 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 8:37 pm
A couple of interesting tweets from ‘tommy yes’ to Clumps. Can’t comment on the likely veracity of the claims, but interesting, very interesting, if true. Read from bottom up.
@TheClumpany two folk walked out on Sevco yesterday just wouldn’t say who ? He more or less said they are gubbed interesting convo
——————————
Could that be Gordon Durie or Jim HENRY or a Masseur the SMSM report as being Axed,Or is it two more unknowns?
burghGer says:
Member: (3 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 9:16 pm
That’s the point, there has to be some sort of deal. Just asking Mike Ashley to leave and give up a lot of money is not going to work.
I don’t think your new board, or indeed an element of the support, have helped very much either. Too much publicly humiliating him and his colleagues. Disrupting the activities in his shops. Calling him things like a “parasite”.
These things might have seemed like a wizard wheeze at the time, but ultimately I really don’t think they have helped.
Homunculus says:
Member: (73 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 9:32 pm
He is a parasite – the definition couldn’t fit him any better. His presence is vile, I don’t blame fans for their anger. Reality is not all problems have straightforward solutions, and ashley’s presence at Glasgow Rangers is not going away fast.
Im sure I’m not alone in having a vast array of former jerseys so if it comes to dusting off those relics of the glory days, so be it ?
The lionbrand initiative has been a success as far as I’m concerned. Personally think the current Jersey is the worst since one from the old tore Andre flo era so not fussed at leaving that well alone!
burghGer says:
Member: (4 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 9:45 pm
If you think puerile expressions of anger like those employed by Craig Houston, Sandy Chugg and their followers are the best way forward for the club then carry on. If you think Dave King and his followers throwing Mike Ashley’s men off the board rather than trying to compromise and reach some sort of agreement is going to work I have to disagree.
Me, I think an awful lot of what has happened is at best counter-productive and at worst antagonistic. Please carry on though, Mike Ashley holding the new club to ransom causes me no hardship whatsoever. Neither does the PLC having to pay an awful lot of money to buy him out.
Though where that money is going to come from is something of a mystery.
burghGer says:
Member: (3 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 9:16 pm
What Rangers fans like myself want to hear is a deal has been struck to remove the parasite Ashley from our club. To be fair to king he was clear from the start that cleansing the club of sports direct wasnt one of his priorities.
====================
I truly don’t understand why it wasn’t one of King’s priorities. The Rangers Retail situation will cripple the club for the next seven years. Why hasn’t King at least given notice of termination yet? Why hasn’t he repaid Ashley yet? Why has he been slagging off the very man whom he surely must deal with at some stage?
Those are all mysteries. I can only explain them in terms of King being an attention seeker with no real cash available. I think Ashley maybe shares that view.
I saw some nonsense from an insider on some forum (exposingtherhats?), saying that King has tons of money, but it will be mid October (conveniently after the close of the transfer window) before he can access it.
Well let’s put it simply. If I have £30m locked up in a 6 month term account, then I can easily access £25m tomorrow. I just use my £30m as collateral. And if exchange control is a problem today, why won’t it be a problem in October?
With King, it’s all jam tomorrow, but margarine (or dry breid) today.But I might be totally wrong. Maybe that £30m cheque is in the post as we speak.
burghGer says:
Member: (4 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 9:45 pm
I actually have some sympathy, in as much as I think Ashley is bad news for football as a whole. If he were involved in a club I supported, I’d want him gone.
Trouble is the guys you are following are way, way out of their league. For better or worse, Ashley is holding all the aces, whilst, RIFC is left holding a couple of Jokers, and the proverbial bag.
Truly, the current situation is a lose/lose proposition for you.
Imagine it were the WWE at TRFC yes Warbiurton Weir Exit
Mr Ashley lent the money to keep the lights on there in return for which he was given security and rights to more of RRL profits for a limited time. That is not parasitism but business. Had there been RRM with sufficient cash available without major pauchling between jurisdictions it might have been different.
We all live in different worlds some more peculiar than others. In my world I cannot understand why the TRFC support is blind to the reality of their situation. It is only through the good offices of people here that I know that this lack of analytical understanding exists. The SMSM can’t be taken seriously – or am in wrong again? PT Barnum must be around somewhere or huckstering descendants.
Jimlarkin
I don’t defend Murray’s EBTs, whether “legal” or not. I don’t defend whyte’s antics, whether criminal (I hope they prove) or not. I don’t know any Rangers fans who do. Straight down the line is where the club must be or lessons we’ve learned from past “custodians” will have been wasted.
The Sunday Herald appears to be going with the Deloitte story:
https://mobile.twitter.com/newsundayherald/status/617447936188940288
The topic of EBT’s resurfaced yesterday and whilst this subject matter has been picked over in detail over the years, perhaps it is worth making a summary for any new blog readers. My ‘expertise’ on these matters comes entirely from RTC/SFM and I know there will be those contributors who have a better grasp of the subject than myself. However perhaps my superficial treatment of the topic will be more digestible that an in depth analysis.
Set up : Rangers sought a tax efficient manner of remunerating members of their playing staff. They (via David Murray) paid money into a trust and advised players that they could ‘borrow’ money from this trust and thus enhance their contractual earnings. The loans were designed in such a way that effectively they did not have to be repaid by the recipient. That’s it in brief without the detail.
The players, though happy to take advantage of the ‘loan’ facility were concerned that the payments appeared discretionary. To assuage these concerns Rangers (RFC(IL)) arranged for ‘side letters’ to be issued which effectively stated that loan payments would be guaranteed rather than be discretionary. The existence of these side letters infringed the player registration regulations that require that all details of a players contract are registered with the governing bodies. These side letters were kept secret from the governing bodies of the sport and most importantly from HMRC.
When I first encountered this issue it seemed fairly cut and dried. Although my speciality is engineering I had done some light reading concerning contract law for a particular job I was doing and this made the issue clear. If you give a man money (or benefit in kind, like use of a company vehicle) and in return that man is expected to perform prescribed tasks for you, then you have a contract of employment. It does not even have to be written down. Individuals executing work in return for payment will find that their activities fall within the remit of contractual law.
The EBT (Employee Benefit Trust) was meant to obscure the contractual payment but the side letters short circuited this obfuscation. Whilst the payment were made at the discretion of the trustees there was no distinct contractual link. However the existence of side letters showed this not to be a scheme of tax efficiency but one effectively of tax avoidance.
HMRC took an interest. It was their duty to do so. There was a lot of documentation concerning this scheme and the unregulated nature of payments within football had brought the sport to the attention of the tax authorities. They wished to stamp out abuses of their rules within the wealthy footballing industry.
The side letters had Rangers banged to rights. They had been able to access higher quality players because effectively a portion of the wages of those players was tax free. Therefore Rangers could offer enhanced wages since the tax that should have been paid on a portion of them wasn’t. All fairly clear cut. Enter the lawyers.
David Murray’s company hired some expensive lawyers to fight the case. Although to the layman it was fairly obvious what was going on, these skilled wordsmiths sought to sow doubt in the mind of the presiding judge. The payment route was fairly complex and Ranger’s lawyers argued that the payments were in fact discretionary, despite the existence of side letters.
Justice is blind but those with the more skilled advocates often find decisions fall in their favour.
I spent one day at the Upper Tier Tribunal at which arguments were heard as to whether the EBT scheme was in fact subject to tax. If Rangers lost the argument a very large tax bill would fall due. Even in my brief encounter with the proceedings and my subsequent reading of John Clark’s verbatim record of the whole proceedings, it was clear that the whole process lacked clarity. In fact it was tortuous. Even with a SFM briefing my powers of comprehension were tested to the point of unconsciousness. It was truly dreary. No wonder those lawyers are so highly paid. Anyone performing such a mind numbing and largely pointless task deserves compensation for the empty lives they are forced to lead.
Anyway, the Judge blinked. The Rangers QC was a well respected establishment figure and the Judge probably didn’t want to ruin his career by pursuing a common sense decision. HMRC failed to make their case but they are currently appealing the latest decision.
Now all this doesn’t really matter except that the potential for a huge tax bill effectively made Rangers as a business unsellable. Thus the shenanigans we have witnessed were played out like a rich pageant.
So that’s EBT’s in summary. The side letters misregistration thingy was dealt with by Lord Nimmo Smith’s tribunal which is another drama that only the most creative could have contrived.
I’m not seeking to reignite the EBT debate. However it pans out the damage to Rangers has already been done and pursuing tax against businesses that are effectively bankrupt is a non-story.
bfbpuzzled
Ashley loaned money he had already extracted from the club in reality
The club needed the money because Ashley and others have been financially screwing it for years in deals that they all agreed between themselves none of which benefitted the club despite being designed and agreed by the custodians of the club.
There are layers upon layers of onerous contracts and they are all beneficial to parasites at the expense of the club and ergo the fans – the one and only source of money
burghGer says:
Member: (5 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 10:49 pm
‘..I don’t defend Murray’s EBTs, whether “legal” or not…… Straight down the line is where the club must be or lessons we’ve learned from past “custodians” will have been wasted.’
________
‘Straight down the line is where the club must be’ necessarily requires an acknowledgement that the present TRFC is the successor of Sevco5088, and in no way entitled to the name, titles or legitimate honours sportingly won, in accordance with all the rules that govern our game, that the Rangers of old, still in existence but languishing in Liquidation,may have been entitled to.
Until the Football Authorities publicly rescind their endorsement of the Big Lie they foisted on us all, there can be no faith in the integrity of our game.
Let the record books show that ‘RFC-as-was’ died in ignominy at the cheating hands of SDM.
And that a new club was founded in 2012.
We might then be prepared to ‘move on’, while still expressing our disgust at the lying and cheating of the boards of the Football Authorities (on one of which sat at least one conflicted president)which cobbled up the 5-Way agreement and sought to frighten the rest of the SFA membership by hysterical predictions of ‘Armageddon’.
We might be prepared to move on.
To consider the question of the the ‘rigging’ of the LNS enquiry, with its absurdities, and the question of whether the SFA lied to UEFA about the social taxes indebtedness of RFC-as-was.
Let’s get all that honestly and comprehensively out in the open, and dealt with appropriately.
And then we can all proceed straight down the line of Sporting Integrity and honest-to-God decency, enjoying the unrigged sport that we thought we had before the knighted megalomaniac and his struck-off lawyer pornographer introduced their vile cheating.
Its alright calling ashley a parasite and wanting him out of your club but without his money it is highly likely your club would have suffered another insolvency event last season Not to mention the goals and assists the Newcastle loanee contributed which perhaps ensured a play off place
burghGer says:
Member: (5 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 10:49 pm
I doubt many of us would disagree with your dislike of Mike Ashley and his business methods, though they are, as far as we are aware, perfectly legal. He has also told TRFC’s supporters no lies nor made any unfulfilled promises. There can be no doubt, either, that if he was still pulling the strings at your club then the lights would stay on indefinitely, but promises of CL glory might not be on the agenda, never mind getting a sniff of it in reality, and preventing Celtic’s ten in a row would be in other clubs’ hands.
Dave King has not done one thing, not one, to suggest he has the wherewithall, either financially or ability wise, to right this floundering behemoth. But please, do us all a favour, and get all your fellow supporters to back him all the way, because on all the evidence, absolutely all of it, King is far closer to Whyte and Green in the parasite stakes, than Ashley is, by a long mile.
Remember, at every turn, it’s the men you’ve cheared the loudest who’ve led you to the sorry state you are in now! And every man you have cheared has told you lies, big and many lies.
Parasites live off the blood of other creatures. King lives off other peoples money. While Ashley uses his own money to take advantage of other peoples weaknesses and failings. Ashley is not a nice man, but if he is a parasite, King is an even greater one!
Seems that RIFC have sent copies of the Deloitte letter to shareholders with a covering letter saying it the other regime did it and then ran away
John Clark says:
Member: (941 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 11:31 pm
‘Straight down the line is where the club must be’ necessarily requires an acknowledgement that the present TRFC is the successor of Sevco5088, and in no way entitled to the name, titles or legitimate honours sportingly won…
__________
The club has actually been in accordance with the authorities on that issue. I’d direct your ire at them if I were you.
bfbpuzzled says:
Member: (209 comments)
July 4, 2015 at 11:59 pm
I think this letter from Deloittes is a godsend for the board, they can point the finger and say, ‘see, it wisnae us, they were happy with the accounts (what’s one more lie?)…and we cannae be blamed if they bears couldnae tell their CAs from their RCs during last years Orange Walks’.
OC/NC alert! Aooo! Aooo! Dive! Dive! Dive! (Watched too many submarine war films as a kid 🙄 )
Allyjambo,
Problem with the king/parasite thing is how is he personally gaining, financially, from his involvement with Rangers?
urghGer on July 5, 2015 at 12:35 am
Allyjambo,
Problem with the king/parasite thing is how is he personally gaining, financially, from his involvement with Rangers?
=—————————————-
Think back to how it is alleged Mr Whyte planned to make money.
You have a business with apparently valuable assets but with debts and liabilities that make the net value of the company something less than zero .
Administration allows you to reduce the debt burden; but liquidation gets rid of those pesky onerous contracts.
With ND already signalling his willingness to welcome a Sevco 2 (or Rangers 3) a prepack sale might have looked like an interesting proposition before MA took ownership of the club’s name and security over most of the tangible assets.
Plan A may have been to make some money. Plan B might be to get out of Dodge .
burghGer says:
Member: (7 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 12:35 am
I wasn’t referring to his TRFC dealings. Check out his business method, pump and dump, I think they call it! Well that’s one of his methods. He basically persuades people to give him money on the strength of his promises (there’s that word again) and then makes a profit for himself often leaving his fellow investors out of pocket. Inevitably, his own investment in the ‘plan’ is somewhat out of proportion to the profit he makes.
On not making a profit from TRFC; he forced the price of shares down with his ST boycott and anti-board campaign before, eventually, buying shares in RIFC. The price has since gone up – though thanks to King, there’s virtually no market for them, but if he does find a buyer, he’d no doubt turn a profit.
You see, that’s what he does, he only risks other people’s money. Are you intending to let him risk yours?
burghGer says:
Member: (7 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 12:11 am
Good afterevening burghGer.
You’re getting it large tonight .I’ve got a sense that you’re of an age as my daughter (25) and it wasn’t her fault either .
SDM is/was a businessman who took a business decision with the intention of using a bit of accounting jiggery-pokery to disadvantage ,not just his main , but all of his business rivals at little or no cost to himself . He took advantage of the ban on English clubs in European competition by attracting the best of their international team to play in Scotland using everybody else’s bar the club’s money to finance this . Rangers fans revelled in the glory that he b(r)ought. He tried to eliminate or ,at least diminish his main market rival, as befits a committed businessman .It took its toll on the rest of the players in the game and almost killed my team, The Mighty Jags, but we tightened our belts, made sacrifices and managed to survive . We neither asked for, nor expected any special dispensation from the football authorities because we had got ourselves in the hole by being daft, by trying to compete with others using the same dubious practices .We could have a roll call of the admins that affected Scottish football because of the business models adopted by clubs ,attempting to keep their fans onside by walking the walk rather than biting the bullet and admitting that they couldn’t compete and expecting their fans to accept mediocrity or worse fo their cash .Unfortunately for Rangers fans, it was all artifice , and RFC perished along with the likes of Barings Bank A new club was formed from retrieved assets and, in order to avoid social unrest(Stewart Regan-ask him)an attempt was made to shoehorn it into the top division but a rare occurrence of bravery saw the fans of the other teams reject this option and the new team were admitted at the lowest professional level. Fans of other clubs probably were to an extent “kicking you when you were down ” (copyright A McCoist)but were also getting some sort of recompense for decades of unfair treatment (perceived or otherwise)meted out to them – every dog shall have its day . What is left of Rangers is in the hands of businessmen who paid money for it . The Real Rangers Men stood in the shadows and let this happen .The “onerous contracts” are just business contracts that are beneficial to the people who were willing to invest the seed money. Mr King should maybe utilise his fabled £30 million in buying out Mike Ashley and the other “parasites” and restoring what’s left of the club to the supporters . He would get his reward in the fullness of time .This is not a lecture, more an expression of concern about your lack of awareness and hopefully you will accept it with mote grace than my daughter who as I’ve stated, was blameless in this . The second word was “off”. I blame her upbringing .She still stays at home .
RSL take aim at exposingtherhats blogger and John James pops up with another epistle. Interesting times indeed
I see the Herald is doing it’s part in the propaganda war, bigging up the Warbuton revolution.
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/rangers-keeper-wes-foderingham-sets-sights-on-england-and-a-very-special-reunion.131003182?
Rangers keeper Wes Foderingham sets sights on England and a very special reunion
Foderingham made no bones about the fact he hopes to be playing Champions League football at Rangers within the period covered by the three-year deal he signed on Friday.
If that wasn’t quite ambitious enough, his desire to earn inter- national recognition has been made equally clear.
===================================================
I’m not sure which is more likely for the lad, playing in the CL within the next 3 seasons or making it into the England squad.
Can we just look at the 24 year old’s career for a second
Fulham
Bomley (loan)
Crystal Palace
Bromley (Loan)
Boreham Wood (Loan)
Histon (Loan)
Swindon Town (Loan)
Swindon Town
Released
Rangers.
Now being entirely clear, I am not having a go at the player. He could be a decent goalkeeper, he could be a wonderful person, that is not my point. My point is twofold.
1, The record you see above does not really tie in with someone who is likely to be wearing the three Lions at senior level. It is a position with quite a lot of competition and I am sure the number of people ahead of him is quite large. Playing in the SPFL is not going to accelerate his international ambitions.
2, There is little to suggest that he and his new team are likely to be playing in the Champions League within the next three seasons. They are a championship side, who finished third last year, who let something like 11 players leave and haven’t done a lot so far to replace them.
I could be wrong on both counts of course, however I would venture that, on a balance of probabilities the Herald are doing little more than assisting in a propaganda campaign.
Homunculus @ 07:25
I have to agree with you that if these are the true club and player aspirations, Champion’s League football and England squad, then there is substantial degree of optimism or delusion (or drugs/alcohol) involved.
I would suggest Wes’ aims should be more get into the TRFC side and play regularly. His new club’s aim should be to get promotion from the Scottish Championship. Neither of these look certain.
The author of this article, Gary Keown, would appear to have a very low opinion of the intelligence of his readers.
The whole piece is quite sad.
Classic from John James:
Imagine how fortunate you would feel when you were appointed to the board of RIFC with little more than a good head of hair to your name?
Morning all.
I.don’t know how these thing work but would it be normal for a letter like the Deloittes resignation letter to be unsigned by an individual.
It’s just signed Deloitte & Co.
I thought this strange and the thought that it may be fake did cross my mind.Would a name(like the RIFC letter to shareholders Co Secretary on theirs)not be the norm?.
Homunculus
Cammy Bell must be feeling secure in reading that article,not.
Nuclear Sheep says:
Member: (17 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 8:02 am
I think if you look at the actual quotes they are much more along the lines of what one would expect someone to say in these circumstances.
“You can never give up on England, though. You have always got to aspire to be the best you can be and that is the top level. I don’t know what level I can get to. I don’t know just how much potential there is left in me. I have to work hard and see where that takes me.”
As I say, the interesting thing is how the Herald spun the “story”. It only reinforces the reason for places like this are required. We do not have sports reporting, we have outlets for press releases and reporters as lazy propagandists who choose not to do their own investigations, draw their own conclusions or write their own stories.
Something else which has confused me. I have read in various places that Chris Graham was a director of Rangers, though I have not actually been able to find any evidence of this. Other than him sitting in the box wearing a club tie.
I think the reality of the situation was that Mr Graham was there for such a short time before the board had to sack him for sectarianism that there wasn’t even enough time to actually make him a director.
Not bad going.
Another conspiracy theory.
How’s about the Deloittes letter being a late attempt by the RIFC board to register Deloittes resignation.
This was public knowledge 4 months ago yet no official notices(as stated in the letter) were ever published.
This,to me,could be a not so clever attempt to belatedly put the record straight.
Deloittes,if they wish to do so,could of course comfirm or deny whether the leter is genuine or not.
I also wonder if it’s just coincidence that this letter has appeared soon after pictures showing Deloittes still listed as Auditors and WH Ireland still Nomads on Rangers website,even though all other financial pages had been updated.
Maybe someone decided something had to be done?.
Homunculous,
Graham was sacked for a satirical – albeit somewhat vulgar – charlie-hebdo-esque effort, directed at a well known, highly contemptable, hate preacher, in which 50% of the protagonists were… Jar Jar Binks (a character from a Star Wars movie, for the less culturally sophisticated amongst you ?)
Not what I would bracket as “sectarianism”, I must say.. ?
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
Member: (148 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 8:07 am
Morning all.
I.don’t know how these thing work but would it be normal for a letter like the Deloittes resignation letter to be unsigned by an individual.
It’s just signed Deloitte & Co.
I thought this strange and the thought that it may be fake did cross my mind.Would a name(like the RIFC letter to shareholders Co Secretary on theirs)not be the norm?.
_______________________________________________
Yes, in such matters partners sign on behalf of the firm. Audit report would also be signed Deloitte & Co.
With regards Dave King, & comparisons to whyte & green, I’d say this. Unlike those two I think DK is truly intent on doing what is best for Rangers. This purpose isn’t simply ascertained from one or two puff pieces in the SMSM, its borne out from 15 years of involvement with Rangers where not a single person who has crossed his path in that time is in any doubt of the man’s commitment to restoring the club.
That doesn’t mean I trust his ability to perform that restoration, in terms of having the resources at his disposal to do it. That is as much a function of the disgraceful, disadvantageous path the Sports Direct puppets were able to lead us along. But if another more credible candidate emerges I’d have no qualms with changing alliegance.
But where is that candidate? Who is the alternative? Until that question is answered I will continue, albeit with some healthy scepticism, to back King.
The bottom line is that Dave King said he had a NOMAD in place, no NOMAD was forthcoming and the PLC was delisted.
Paul Murray said in March that they knew the Auditor was resigning and they would make an announcement with regards the appointment of a new one. It’s July, the financial year has ended and no such announcement has been made.
The new board has singularly failed in making two appointments which would be considered essential in the operation of a PLC and ensuring it’s corporate governance.
It’s a total and utter farce, and blaming the old board really doesn’t make sense. There has been plenty of time to make both appointments, if anyone was willing to take them on.
That’s without even discussing the financial mess.
zerotolerance1903 says:
Member: (34 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 8:54 am
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
Member: (148 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 8:07 am
Morning all.
I.don’t know how these thing work but would it be normal for a letter like the Deloittes resignation letter to be unsigned by an individual.
It’s just signed Deloitte & Co.
I thought this strange and the thought that it may be fake did cross my mind.Would a name(like the RIFC letter to shareholders Co Secretary on theirs)not be the norm?.
_______________________________________________
Yes, in such matters partners sign on behalf of the firm. Audit report would also be signed Deloitte & Co.
======================================
Cheers,
Like I say,I’m not an expert on these things.It just doesn’t look right,though it may well be.
Any letter I’ve ever received from an accountant,lawyer,etc has the company name in big letters across the top.
I’d have thought this would have said DELOITTES LLP.
It just says Deloittes.
Maybe I’m looking for things that aren’t there.It doesn’t explain the 4 month delay though,unless it has actually taken Deloittes 4 months to send a letter.
Why is this coming out now?.
Simple answer is people are asking,now the financial year is over,who’s going to carry out the audit?.
The board don’t know so a wee letter to all concerned saying they’re working on it(should have been for the past 4 months) and will make an announcement whenever,kicks the problem down the road,knowing that hardly anyone in the MSM will ask any questions.Neither will the SFA/SPFL.
Paddy malarkey
One crucial point RRM did not sit in the shadows and let it happen as you state.
They were never ever ever going to get their hands on the assets. There is a court case pending and god willing it may see some justice served but whether that leads to a review of contracts given out by spivs to other spivs on the back of underhand deals, I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Re an auditor
The guy that recently jumped from Motherwell FC finance side to the RIFC has the audit skills required and also contacts who he can try and use,could be the working on the audit in the background.
I haven’t seen the Rangers letter so can’t comment on whether it looks legit, however here’s another Deloitte resignation letter for comparison.
http://www.compass-group.com/documents/Deloitte_Statement_of_Circumstances_CGPLC.pdf
yourhavingalaugh says:
Member: (307 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 9:38 am
I’m not really sure what you mean by “…could be the working on the audit in the background.”
If you mean he could be helping prepare the accounts, I doubt that’s what Stewart Robertson was brought in for, but even if it was, how would that help the situation with regards the PLC not having an auditor.
Sorry if I am picking you up wrong here.
zerotolerance1903 says:
Member: (35 comments)
July 5, 2015 at 9:49 am
I haven’t seen the Rangers letter so can’t comment on whether it looks legit, however here’s another Deloitte resignation letter for comparison.
http://www.compass-group.com/documents/Deloitte_Statement_of_Circumstances_CGPLC.pdf
———————————————
Cheers.
Looks the same.only difference is green dot is black but that could just be photocopying.