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.
Assuming King has jetted back to the relative safety of SA…
The BBC could provide a public service and send a reporter and cameraman out to SA to ‘doorstep’ King at his home or in a public place, to put the question to him;
“Did you really offer your RIFC shares to Mike Ashley ?”
Just to capture King’s reaction would be a priceless TV moment.
And that really is one heck of a scoop that Phil secured.
[No denial from King, so I’m assuming it to be true.]
StevieBC says:
June 24, 2015 at 3:31 am
Assuming King has jetted back to the relative safety of SA
————————————————————-
Perhaps news media could call his withdrawal ‘Kexit’? That seems to be the current snappy way to title up a story (not yet quite as annoying as the rush to add ‘-gate’ to any story about political scandal).
Mind you, there are some definite similarities between the Greek financial situation and the Rangers one. The Ibroxians are making a one-club stand against austerity, that’s for sure!
If we assume that the Rangers are contracted to pay a set cost for a minimum number of replica shirts per season, I can understand from the MA/SD point of view that it protects them against any attempt by the Ibrox fans to boycott shirt sales, as that would only starve the Rangers of funds.
But from the Rangers’ point of view – assuming that on an arranged date each year, the club pay the set amount to offset however many thousand shirts remain unsold, do they actually get the shirts? Is there a stable block in Normandy, or an industrial unit at Johannesburg airport that is bursting at the seams with 100000 five-starred shirts, various sizes?
So Phil’s story was correct. Who knew?
The Scots Daily Mail still finds a positive spin in that King went to re-negotiate the retail contracts. But if that’s the case, why the need for secrecy? After all, the board included Resolution 2 at the GM for that very purpose. Indeed, King met Ashley before the result was known! How’s that for pre-emptive action from this new dynamic board (see, I can do spin too, and I’ll bet I’m cheaper than Level5 🙂 ).
I’m looking forward to how the rest of the SMSM (including the BBC) will now cover this. Or will they simply ignore it?
Fisiani on June 24, 2015 at 2:06 am
… see any sign of good news.
———-
That would be the signings of good news 🙂
Seems odd it’s all Davie Weir, Wilson, Eustace, exciting plans and rebuilding but with no obvious source of funding other than 3Bs using their life savings.
It’s a pity Phil doesn’t post so much here, I suppose he was made to feel unwelcome by a few posters. Question for me is: who is spinning what and to whom? Now an actual meeting has been established (SoS will make interesting reading now) was it a solo DK run with bags packed and taxi meter running outside, a board initiative, a real attempt to offload shares or what The Mail is inferring — an attempt to renegotiate begging-bowl style (possibly hushed up to save face). Did Level5 feed The Mail?
I tend to believe Phil’s version more than that of The Mail, but they could both contain elements of the same story. Phil trusts his sources but do they trust their sources?
What does King have to trade with Ashley for a re-negotiated merchandise deal?
a) Ibrox as secret security (well maybe)
b) Future ST money a la Ticketus
c) King’s endosement of Ashley and SD as the good guys
d) King’s influence at the SFA to fix the 10% share ownership issue
e) King’s reputation as a straight down the line kinda guy who will see Ashley OK in the long term if he bends a little now
StevieBC says:
Member: (743 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 3:31 am
Assuming King has jetted back to the relative safety of SA…
The BBC could provide a public service and send a reporter and cameraman out to SA to ‘doorstep’ King at his home or in a public place, to put the question to him;
“Did you really offer your RIFC shares to Mike Ashley ?”
Just to capture King’s reaction would be a priceless TV moment.
And that really is one heck of a scoop that Phil secured.
[No denial from King, so I’m assuming it to be true.]
_________________________________________________________
I would imagine that the only thing that would in anyway inhibit DCK from issuing an outright denial in such ‘doorstepping’ circumstances would be if he has any awareness of Phil’s hints that a recording of the meeting exists. And even then, it may cause him to pause and reflect, but probably wouldn’t actually stop him:
I predict something like the following sequence of events:
1. DCK flatly denies offering MASH his shares.
2. Irrefutable evidence of DCK offering his shares to MASH emerges, with the clear implication that ergo – DCK was lying.
3. DCK counters this, by stating the he was, in fact, lying to MASH when he offered the shares, and not to the bears when he suggested he was not looking to dispose of his holding. This subterfuge was necessary, and done as a ploy to try and fool MASH into revealing his true motives to DCK, and in an effort to secure a better retail agreement for his beloved ranjurs.
4. The King supporting bear faction laps this up, ably assisted by Level5PR acting at RIFC expense.
5. DCK then dumps his shares to anyone gullible enough to take them off him, at the first opportunity to do so, and probably just before they become completely worthless, as RIFC files for insolvency.
It’s a funny old game. Stenography, I mean. For no apparent reason, both the Evening Times and the Herald elected to dust off the SDM-era cliché “jetting in” when reporting on the Eustace (AKA the Poundstretchers Alex Rae) and his high-stakes contract negotiations with Sevco.
On a very similar note: Danish, I think you’re spot on about Level 5 attempting damage-limitation on King’s solo mission by planting a story that is marginally less embarrassing than Phil’s mortifying (and still-uncontested) version of events. One suspects that the Wizard of Baws is still living in 1995, and reckons none of us can see him as he yanks frantically away at his wee levers. Still, as long as Mr. Trainer has a decent stock of printer cartridges and A4, he can keep dashing off those invoices to Sevco’s efficient, well-staffed accounting department. Oh–what’s that you say…
Phil’s source is in the Ashley camp, so I’m thinking that no deal was struck at the meeting. Otherwise why undermine King by leaking news of the meeting to Phil.
Phil did get a hard time on here for a while but having met him and chatted with him for a short time I got the impression he has broad shoulders. God knows he would need them given the level of abuse leveled at him over the last few years. If truth be told when things are quiet he has a tendency to throw a number of darts at the board and hope one or two of them stick.
However when things start hotting up he can usually be relied upon to get it right more often than not.
Good Morning.
Good to see the Mail ‘catching up’ on the “King meets Ashley” story. Although there is absolutely NO substance in it whatsoever! It simply says the meeting happened to discuss the retail contracts. It then outlines how the commercial deal is heavily-weighted in Sports Direct’s ‘favour.
Surely it cannot be the case that the Sevco PR operation is facing up to the reality of the meeting having happened, and is trying to break it to the fans as gently as possible?!
Here are some further thoughts!
https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/06/24/shhhh-its-a-secret/
And on a much more trivial note, I had a small chuckle yesterday when I read a tweet from the Daily Record’s Racing Tipster (yes – really!) suggesting that other fans were nervous about Sevco dragging themselves “off their knees”…
https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/06/23/nervous-giggling/
Enjoy the rest of the day!
Steveplustax says:
June 24, 2015 at 10:28 am
It’s a funny old game. Stenography, I mean. For no apparent reason, both the Evening Times and the Herald elected to dust off the SDM-era cliché “jetting in” when reporting on the Eustace (AKA the Poundstretchers Alex Rae) and his high-stakes contract negotiations with Sevco.
—————————————————-
I imagine it as a drinking game for the PR chaps, each employee quaffing a shot of Jack Daniels (soft drinks available on request) for whatever bon mot they can get the stenographers to print.
Rangers Media discussing the King / Ashley meeting. None of them seem keen to mention anything that appears in Phil’s blog for fear of being labelled a…whatever it is. But finally it can be discussed, which must be a relief to those who have known about it for a few days. They seem happy that King has bravely taken the game to Ashley. Ah well.
I never really visit the forums of other teams except to gauge opinion on players my own team might be trying to sign. However I checked out the above through curiosity. There is quite a surprising amount of hostility and scepticism towards King. The poster Guardian in particular seems to have it nailed. I wonder how many in the support think along the same lines.
Arithmetic, Arithmetic, Arithmetic
Yes the three As are the only reality in business. And the three As say that the only financial model that has the faintest chance of long term success at Ibrox is Ashley controlling the whole shooting match, running it on an absolute shoe string, supported by short term loans from Ashley offset by the value to Ashley of un-boycotted merchandise sales and advertising space.
The RRM and the SFA may be edging towards this reality now that the latest and last available Messiah has turned out to be just another boastful, naughty boy. As usual the MSM seem oblivious to developments – until informed by press release.
Can those who have resisted reason for so long finally grasp the three As? Can they sanitise the necessary and numerous volte-face they must make for the people to understand as true Rangersness?
Can all this be done to reach an amicable settlement with Ashley before he gets bored and walks away? The certain alternative is the other three As – Administration, Armageddon, Amateur league.
Jungle Jim says:
Member: (19 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 10:30 am
Phil’s source is in the Ashley camp, so I’m thinking that no deal was struck at the meeting. Otherwise why undermine King by leaking news of the meeting to Phil.
_____________________________________________
Devil’s advocate and playing the impartial observer analyst here:
Q.What is the likely impact of PMcG revelations?
A.Potential to create (further) disharmony between the 3B and King factions of the board.
Q.Why leak it? i.e. Why not just Let the bus crash in the fullness of time?
2 possible answers:
(a) To counter the level5PR and boost MASH reputation while exemplifying King’s dubious character
(b) To create a backlash against King at board level, and encourage a penitential 3B back towards the Ashley fold, as the only game in town (now that the messiah has turned out to be a very naughty boy) with TRFC support meekly in tow.
King and Murray thrown under the bus. MASH and easedales rehabilitated in the eyes of the bears. MASH can then put up his shirt prices to recover the costs to them of RIFCs off road adventure to the land of the King, whilst suing the bejesus out of anyone in anyway connected with King who still has a shirt of their own to lose (such people will probably be few and far between) .
Resin_lab_dog says:
Member: (493 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 12:01 pm
===============================================
a) discredit King as devious and potless
b) see if the three bears can see sense without King
c) do a deal – see 3 As above – or walk away
On a), given the MSM’s usual sharpness – Ashley may need to put the video of the London meeting on YouTube – with sub-titles and explanatory notes.
The situation with MA & DK reminds me of Watergate where the Nixon administration was out to get Patrick Gray, head of the FBI. You will probably remember the famous quote from John Ehrlichman that “we want this guy twisting – slowly twisting in the wind.”
MA has control of the IP/badges, security over most other assets, a loan that cannot apparently be easily repaid (with a dire need for further funds), a retail deal that is one of those ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ arrangements and no other saviour in sight.
Legal steps against individual directors and a potential ring fencing of ST income are rumoured.
That is one heck of a hand.
Unless there is some Miracle on Edmiston Drive about to make an appearance I think that matters are now so grim that the RIFC Board will soon buckle under the strain.
Directors with reputations to maintain will not wish to be associated with what could be a cataclysmic insolvency event. If the Chairman has indeed been flying solo that could be the flashpoint that brings things tumbling down.
The delay in MA/SD acting after the EGM is probably down to waiting to see if an implosion will take place without further pressure needing to be applied.
Where is there evidence of a single MSM journalist enlisting the help of his/her financial colleagues to paint a picture of what is really going on? Bears are clearly totally in the dark.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath, East Fife and others like them who live within their means.
Good to see the site blossoming and hats off to all concerned.
My reading of the situation based on available evidence is not as dramatic as some, i expect a major share issue sooner rather than later, and MA/DK will come to a mutual arrangement.
I simply cannot believe the claims made by Phil on this occasion because it actually makes no sense and he provides no evidence.
Anyway good luck with the site.
Long time lurker, just have a question that no one seems to have discussed.
Knowing legally trained people post here, perhaps they could clarify.
I have always believed that Contracts (Sports Direct in this case) can be voided for several reasons.
For instance:
Transactions that may be deemed voidable include: contracts concluded by undue influence; contracts by a person acting in breach of a fiduciary duty (for example, a contract entered into on behalf of a company by a director with a conflict of interests); some contracts by insolvents; some contracts by intoxicated persons where the level of intoxication suffered does not fully remove the power of rational consent; certain contracts entered into by error or misrepresentation.
As an accountant I recall they should conform as “at arms length” and be non Related Party.
What puzzles me is why the new Directors who have a fiduciary duty to shareholders, do not pursue the ability to Void the Contract as apposed to the details of the Contract? Seems to me you could use several of the above reasons to claim the contract is voidable?
Maybe us simpletons cannot think at their level…or there is more to this than we know?
Mmmmm
Phil says Mike Ashley is waiting to present an invoice to RIFC Plc for last season’s unsold replica kit. Redlicthie is richtie. It is ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ for Mr Ashley.
Charles Green obviously set this up, presumably in return for Mike Ashley’s help at make-or-break time. Allegedly, Charles Green may still enjoy some financial advantage from the deal. But it’s an abysmal deal for TRFC, utterly abysmal.
Mike, Charles and chums clearly only care about money. TRFC is only a means to make money for them, so of course they would hatch plans like this and steer it through whatever legal and boardroom rubber-stamping it needed. But what on earth was Walter Smith doing during his nine months as a director of RIFC plc in 2012 and 2013 not to pick up on this, not to object, not to warn supporters and some chosen journalists? Was he asleep on the job?
I have limited Marketing experience so maybe another Bampot could explain better.
Although brands typically don’t appear on a Balance Sheet, we do know that brands have an intrinsic value, which can increase or decrease.
E.g. Apple and Coca Cola are rather valuable brands.
What about the SFA and SPFL brands ?
And to be more specific have the SFA & SPFL brands been significantly devalued by the shambles at Ibrox over the last 3 years ?
We have seen how the SPFL has – allegedly – struggled to secure a league sponsor.
But would/should the SFA & SPFL management routinely assess their brand value / devaluation – or am I talking mince again ? 😕
I’ve taken advantage of Companies House’s new free document service to have a look at the last five years accounts of the two Ticketus companies that helped finance Whyte’s purchase of the club.
I’ve noted that the two companies, Ticketus LLP and Ticketus 2 LLP had cash resources available to them of £70.3M and £70.0M at the end of July 2010. That suggests to me that there was NO influx of funds specifically to fund the Rangers purchase.
Ticketus LLP reported an exceptional item of £5.576M for 2012 in relation to Rangers insolvency, but with an expectation that the Season Tickets they had bought were worth £10.1M.
Ticketus 2 LLP reported an exceptional item of £12.108M for 2012 in relation to Rangers insolvency, but with an expectation that the Season Tickets they had bought were worth £16.6M.
Ticketus 2 LLP reported as a Post Balance Sheet Event in their 2011 accounts that: “Following year end a company with which the LLP trades went into administration. Included in stock (note 6) is an amount of £12,108,126 related to the purchase of tickets from this company for resale by the LLP. The members expect that due to the nature of the guarantees that the LLP has in place relating to these trades, this amount will be recovered in full”.
That expectation was missing from subsequent accounts. Both companies only reported that they were seeking to recover funds from the Liquidated company, with claims of £10.1M and £16.6M respectively.
Both companies also reported having been awarded £7M and £11.4M respectively by a court (I assume from the Craig Whyte judgement), but have reported a zero value on these amounts (i.e. they don’t expect to see the money).
Both companies appear to have been buying and selling tickets over the last few years and would have made profits had they not been involved with Rangers. Both companies appear to be winding down their activities and have refunded most of their cash back to their members.
Here is a document with a few of the key numbers:
StevieBC says:
Member: (744 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 3:33 pm
====================
Doesn’t the brand appear on the Balance sheet as part of the intangible assets?
Apple and Coca Cola are dependent on the sales of their branded products either through their own outlets or via third party retailers. Other Cola’s and Technology products are available in those third party retailers so they need a strong brand.
While it is in theory SPFL or SFA matches that we pay to see via the home club we are paying to see the football. That third party retailer can’t offer us another brand of football so there is a monopoly. The brands have been tainted in the eyes of us bampots but still not enough for the majority of us to abandon the product because we see a bigger disconnection/disjoin due to it being our club’s football we are wanting to see. That said some contributors to the site have stated they have stopped paying for the football because of the SPFL/SFA’s shenanigans
Balance sheet devaluation doesn’t really matter they are Private Ltd Companies (at least the SPFL is). I also don’t think the SFPL devaluation has anything to do with the reasons for not finding a league sponsor. It was the inability of Doncaster to “big up” the product without TRFC in the top division and that’s mainly because he failed to see that he could do the former without the latter.
At StevieBC 3.33pm
Brand value is not recognised on a Company Balance Sheet – Unless it is purchased.
This is shown as Goodwill (the Value the Company paid over the Value of the Assets of the purchased Company).
In essence you can show brand value if you purchase it, not if you internally generate it. Accountants like to deal in historical transactions (that have a clear price paid, allowing a box to be ticked), dealing with an object that has never been purchased ie Intangible Assets….well that is open to Subjectivity -how can an auditor tick a box saying he has seen an Invoice!
It must seem strange to the Ashley camp that they are leaking top quality tabloid gossip of deceit and duplicity at a club that dominates the tabloids – yet none of them want to know – let alone run with the story. Ashley must be scratching his head once again at the bizarre eco system he has invested in. It must be just another small step towards “I’ve had enough of these clowns – hell mend them – I take back everything I said about those lovely Geordie chaps and their strange ways”.
OutsideLookingIn says:
Member: (2 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 4:33 pm
At StevieBC 3.33pm
Brand value is not recognised on a Company Balance Sheet – Unless it is purchased.
This is shown as Goodwill (the Value the Company paid over the Value of the Assets of the purchased Company)…
[& tykebhoy]
======================================
Thanks, but my query is not financial accounting related, but specifically Marketing related.
Just curious to see if there would be active brand management/valuation from a Marketing perspective, i.e. would the SFA or SPFL have an estimate of how much brand value has been eroded in the last 3 years or so.
RIFC currently have the “Brand” valued at £16.057M. It was given that “fair value” following the purchase of the assets of the Oldco. You may recall its value being included as “Negative Goodwill”, which produced a paper profit of £1.192M for the Newco in their first year of operation, despite an Operating Loss of £14.361M
Esteban says:
Member: (104 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 3:18 pm
Phil says Mike Ashley is waiting to present an invoice to RIFC Plc for last season’s unsold replica kit. Redlicthie is richtie. It is ‘heads I win, tails you lose’ for Mr Ashley.
Charles Green obviously set this up, presumably in return for Mike Ashley’s help at make-or-break time. Allegedly, Charles Green may still enjoy some financial advantage from the deal. But it’s an abysmal deal for TRFC, utterly abysmal.
Mike, Charles and chums clearly only care about money. TRFC is only a means to make money for them, so of course they would hatch plans like this and steer it through whatever legal and boardroom rubber-stamping it needed. But what on earth was Walter Smith doing during his nine months as a director of RIFC plc in 2012 and 2013 not to pick up on this, not to object, not to warn supporters and some chosen journalists? Was he asleep on the job?
_________________________________________________________________________________
Genuine question, but is this such an unusual contract condition?
Presumably this payment arises as a result of overordering by the Sevco, under what circumstances would one reasonably expect this risk to be taken by Sports Direct if Sevco are controlling the ordered numbers?
AFAIK the unusual term in the contract is the 7 year notice period and, potentially, the 51/49 profit split (ignoring the loan), albeit this may have been justifiable at the time.
So Ronny Deila was asked about Danny Wilson today, but Danny Wilson was not asked about Celtic yesterday. Does any other club in the world have such a hold on their media as Rangers do?
upthehoops says:
Member: (750 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 7:56 pm
So Ronny Deila was asked about Danny Wilson today, but Danny Wilson was not asked about Celtic yesterday. Does any other club in the world have such a hold on their media as Rangers do?
———————————————————-
No. Only in Scotland can a media have such a hold on any entity that plays out of Govan. History of media coverage concerning all teams from Ibrox past and present tells us so
easyJambo says:
Member: (666 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 5:44 pm
RIFC currently have the “Brand” valued at £16.057M. It was given that “fair value” following the purchase of the assets of the Oldco. You may recall its value being included as “Negative Goodwill”, which produced a paper profit of £1.192M for the Newco in their first year of operation, despite an Operating Loss of £14.361M
________________________________________________________________________
Sometimes small statements of fact show the absurdity of this whole charade.
I actually laughed out aloud at your summary of the accounts, only because it beggars belief that they were signed off! If it looks like-, smells like-, tastes like-….then it probably is.
So a “fair value”…can’t even type that with a straight face, was calculated to be £16million. Yet was sold for £5.5million…. Yet Joe Public is meant to believe this is a true “at arms length” transaction.
Negative Goodwill – the gift that just keeps giving. Please correct me (I haven’t actually read their published accounts) if I’m wrong, so instead of writing off Goodwill through the profit and loss over a period. They actually boost the profit and loss every year? Genius….unless the next auditors carry out an Impairment test!
I personally believe people will be prosecuted over this fiasco…do I think it will be the real culprits…….well that’s a whole other topic.
upthehoops says:
Member: (750 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 7:56 pm
So Ronny Deila was asked about Danny Wilson today, but Danny Wilson was not asked about Celtic yesterday. Does any other club in the world have such a hold on their media as Rangers do?
11 1 Rate This
=================
I thought Danny was asked about interest from Celtic and declined to comment saying something like “i don’t want to talk about celtic”. Or did I imagine that?
I may well have this wrong as I pay little or indeed no attention whatsoever to press conferences for new signings for teams other than my own.
Interviews with players are almost always a load of boring twaddle anyway.
Danny Wilson WAS asked about Celtic
zerotolerance1903 says:
Member: (21 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 6:06 pm
—
Sports Direct chooses its stock and the volume of each stock-keep unit it wants to have in inventory. Inventory costs money (usually), so companies like Mike Ashley’s need to plan carefully and analyse accurately what’s selling well so that they can order more stock in time and what’s not so that they can avoid their shelves becoming clogged up with clobber the punters don’t want to buy.
Dell’s model is a textbook case-study because the consumer hands money over to Dell before Dell sources any product from suppliers and is, therefore, in theory never out of pocket on inventory. But Dell is an exception. Everyone else has to try to take the most educated punt they can on what to order, for how much and when to arrange delivery. That’s the retail business.
If you could just order huge volumes of things and then bill the company behind each item if it doesn’t sell, a monkey could become a retail billionaire. Majestic don’t get to tell Concha Y Toro: “Sorry, amigos, there were 100 cases of your 2014 Cabernet Sauvignon that we couldn’t shift before year-end so here’s an invoice for £8000.”
You offer some reasons why Mike’s contract is onerous, but this is another.
In trying to make sense of the goings on at Ibrox I am reminded of a scene in Catch 22 involving a guy wrapped up in bandages or the soldier in white]:
“Sewn into the bandages over the insides of both elbows were zippered lips through which he was fed clear fluid from a clear jar. A silent zinc pipe rose from the cement on his groin and was coupled to a slim rubber hose that carried waste from his kidneys and dripped it efficiently into a clear, stoppered jar on the floor. When the jar on the floor was full, the jar feeding his elbow was empty, and the two were simply switched quickly so that stuff could drip back into him. (1.19)”
Somewhere later in that text I remember someone musing why don’t they cut out the middle man and just fill and refill the two jars with the same contents?
The guy in white in this case being TRFC. In that scenario MA goes direct to the TRFC support and offers them gear at a discount reflecting what MA saves not having to keep the guy in white alive, if indeed he is alive, which many dispute.
One thing seems clear, with each passing day business at Ibrox becomes as absurd and crazy as Catch 22.
Is that the answer? Its all Catch 22?
To partially paraphrase
King would be crazy to” take on TRFC and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane he had to take them on. If took them on he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to.
“Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause of Catch-22 and let out a respectful whistle.”
easyJambo says:
Member: (666 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 3:59 pm
________
Thank you for clearing up one of the great mysteries for me in all this: who put the money up to fund a basket case etc…
When I read up on EIS’s I understood that individuals invested in specific companies, the nature of which they had been informed of, at least in general terms. As Ticketus LLP and Ticketus2LLP had accumulated funds from many investors this makes more sense, although they made a hell of a jump in turnover to 2011 and IIRC the Rangers deal was by far their biggest in football ticketing.
This really makes the question one of who signed the deal for Ticketus and on what basis. Paul McConville’s blog would be the place to look in the first instance I suppose, but this might all be getting a bit close to current legal business to go into here.
zerotolerance1903 says:
Member: (21 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 6:06 pm
—
Sorry, I just saw your point about “over-ordering by the Sevco”.
I see what you mean but think it would still be unusual because surely football clubs would not risk outsourcing the retailing of merchandise with that risk hanging over their heads. Or if they did, they would need to carry out their own ordering, sales analysis and re-ordering operations, which is very skilled work.
Retailers (JJB before Sports Direct) have sold these deals to successive Ibrox clubs. The JJB one worked out well for Rangers because they took a pile of cash up front and then went bust. With Mike, it’s not quite working out like that. I maintain that it’s an atrocious deal for TRFC and that even Mike could not have ‘sold’ that to any board. It has to be a stitch-up.
OutsideLookingIn says:
Member: (3 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 8:32 pm
easyJambo says:
Member: (666 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 5:44 pm
Negative Goodwill – the gift that just keeps giving.
I personally believe people will be prosecuted over this fiasco…
===================================================================================
OutsideLookingin…like yourself, I have never read the published statutory accounts of any of the recent entities trading under RIFC/TRFC (I have left it to Easyjambo to explain in words of one syllable, what nonsense was being spouted!)
However, at the time there was a great deal of derision heaped upon the “negative goodwill” resulting from a few ridiculous transactions and some gross overvaluation of effectively delapidated assets, in particular a football “stadium” in serious need of repair and modernisation.
Sadly, I cannot see anyone even being questioned let alone charged, let alone imprisoned over this whole omnishambles
Finally, a bit OT but relevant to “brand accounting”, Professor Stewart Hamilton (RIP) informed us at our final CA classes many moons ago that the Coca-Cola trademark was carried in the accounts at $1 (one dollar!) on the basis it was simply impossible to value…and he was a rabid Jambo…and a fine teacher to boot!
re the radio show, when it was announced I must admit I was a bit sceptical, but I have thoroughly enjoyed both shows so far. (a healthy EFFC mention tonight didn’t harm that)
Thanks to all who played a part in putting this together.
Any plans to start to dissect some of the thornier issues? (but please not the OC/NC one 😀 )
One thought I also had (if logistics and costs allowed) was to increase engagement across those who may not be TSFM aware or twitterati would be to periodically go on-the-road, and host the show at different locations possibly in partnership with teams supporters clubs.
Great and thanks again to Jim Craig for being an entertaining guest.
Scottish football needs a strong East Fife anecdote from Jim Craig.
The Shirt Off Your Back
Having to pay SD full “retail” price for unsold stock is taking the piss. Is SD even selling them for “retail” or is it the usual 30% off, 50% off, 70% off? It places all the risk on the club and none on SD. It may actually be in SD’s interests to not try too hard to sell the stock. In any sane deal you’d pay the manufacturing cost plus handling costs for the unsold units and take possession of the stock. The current terms are ones you’d only accept if you were absolutely desperate OR if your mates were supplying the stock and you didn’t give a flying fxxk for the club’s finances – and maybe some of the onerous cash would head in your direction via some circuitous route or via quid pro quo to avoid a paper trail.
Great fun tonight with Jim and Ian. Podcast now available at the usual stockists – and here 🙂
powered by podcast garden
Matty Roth at 8:34pm
======================
I did not hear or read a single comment that Danny Wilson was asked about Celtic. I am happy to be proved wrong though. My point is the media somehow seem to be trying to make a case that Wilson chose to go to Rangers over Celtic. Celtic have had to issue a statement re the matter tonight. Interestingly Al Lamont of BBC has said on Twitter he had a line removed from his article which he did not write, which said Wilson ‘possibly’ chose Rangers over Celtic. Anyway, I’m sure there are many on here who couldn’t care less!
mcfc says:
Member: (1422 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 9:41 pm
The Shirt Off Your Back
Having to pay SD full “retail” price for unsold stock is taking the piss. Is SD even selling them for “retail” or is it the usual 30% off, 50% off, 70% off? It places all the risk on the club and none on SD. It may actually be in SD’s interests to not try too hard to sell the stock. In any sane deal you’d pay the manufacturing cost plus handling costs for the unsold units and take possession of the stock. The current terms are ones you’d only accept if you were absolutely desperate OR if your mates were supplying the stock and you didn’t give a flying fxxk for the club’s finances – and maybe some of the onerous cash would head in your direction via some circuitous route or via quid pro quo to avoid a paper trail.
_________________________________________________________
EXCEPT:
RIFC decide how many to order? (an incentive to get this right! – they failed)
and if the ‘full retail value’ is paid by RIFC to RRL and not directly to SD (otherwise why would RIFC be getting the invoice?) then it actually looks pretty equitable to me. Assuming it is RRL who are squeezing RIFC not SD.
At the time the deal was set up RIFC owned 50% of RRL. It follows that if RIFC paid full retail to RRL, they would (prior to the loan agreement) have effectively got 50% back via an RRL dividend. This would cover off any premium RIFC paid over more usual deals. So it is reasonably equitable if that is the basis. And it encourages RIFC to push sales (rather than boycotts).
Of course, now they will only get 25% back until they repay the £5m crisis loan. All the more reason for them to do so. If they can. It makes it look ever more like MASH was not too keen to give them this money and wanted to give them every incentive to pay it back.
The SD deal looks canny. MASH has protected himself in the event of an insolvency.
MASH has protected himself in the event of a shirts boycott.
He has given every incentive to RIFC to give him his money back, when many have taken a bath after advancing cash to the Ibrox institution with their predeliction to do as they please and ignore the established rules and conventionally observed niceties of both sport and business.
It looks to me like he had them sized up from the get go, and was going to make sure at every turn that one way or another that they were going to pay their bills and honour contracts they entered into with him. (So unlike the SDM days!). If there was a any failure, it was going to be Ibrox outfit left holding the baby this time, not some other poor suckers.
And isn’t it about time someone did this to them?
The ‘lesson in how to run a business properly’ was thrown in gratis, I should think.
Re the SD/RR contract i believe that the real onerous part is that Rangers need to pay full retail value for any unsold stock
So if Ashley procures 1000 tops for £10 each from a child labour sweat shop and prices them at £50 each (full retail!!) then immediately follows his normal discount model and reduces the tops to £30 and sells half of them at a £20 profit which he splits roughly 50/50 with Rangers each getting £10 x 500 = £5,000.
Then Rangers need to pay him £50 x 500 (£25K) for the unsold shirts leaving Rangers £20k down and Ashley £45k up (£5k on the sold shirts and £40k on the unsold shirts) then you can see how ludicrous this deal is. Multiply this by all Rangers merchandise in vast quantities and you get your answer to why Ashley stays involved and riles the fans. The less we buy the more he makes.
It’s safe to assume that there will be minimum order values tied into the contract so DK does not have the option to order nothing and like a maintenance contract that costs an alleged £272k per month (3.3m) a year for doing nothing it’s clear that the fans are being financially raped.
Like the majority of fans of all teams i work hard for my money and just want to support my team with my son. Ashley and his ilk are a disgrace IMO
upthehoops says:
Member: (751 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 7:56 pm
So Ronny Deila was asked about Danny Wilson today, but Danny Wilson was not asked about Celtic yesterday. Does any other club in the world have such a hold on their media as Rangers do?
————————————–
From todays Metro:
“Celtic boss Ronny Deila previously admitted that Wilson was a potential transfer target. But the player said “I don’t want to talk about that. I’m here now”.
From that I take it he was asked about the Celtic interest.
Esteban says:
Member: (106 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 9:19 pm
zerotolerance1903 says:
Member: (21 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 6:06 pm
—
Sorry, I just saw your point about “over-ordering by the Sevco”.
I see what you mean but think it would still be unusual because surely football clubs would not risk outsourcing the retailing of merchandise with that risk hanging over their heads. Or if they did, they would need to carry out their own ordering, sales analysis and re-ordering operations, which is very skilled work.
Retailers (JJB before Sports Direct) have sold these deals to successive Ibrox clubs. The JJB one worked out well for Rangers because they took a pile of cash up front and then went bust. With Mike, it’s not quite working out like that. I maintain that it’s an atrocious deal for TRFC and that even Mike could not have ‘sold’ that to any board. It has to be a stitch-up.
_________________________________________________________________________________
Resin_lab_dog has already answered this better than I might have.
Various reports of the situation indicate that Sevco ordered a volume of stock well above what was recommended by Sports Direct and, if true, it seems fair that the burden for this falls on RIFC.
As resin states it is Rangers Retail Ltd (which was 51% owned by RIFC) that this deal is with and the bill comes from them.
I’ve just finished listening to the podcast, with guests ianagain and Jim Craig.Another hour of relaxation with people whose verbal company is as enjoyable as the written company of the posters on this blog.
Very well done, indeed, and many thanks.
The reference to the Real Madrid-Eintracht game occasioned a wave of nostalgia to wash over me.
I was in Italy at the time, so didn’t see the game.But a friend did, and when he came back to Italy he just couldn’t shut up about it.He waxed lyrical for months about the splendid football and the brilliance of the players and the impact that the game had on our fathers’ generation of Scottish football supporters, which was basically one of stunned delight.
And I remember 1960 as the year I went on my first overseas trip and missed the whole Hampden Real-Eintracht experience!
upthehoops says:
Member: (751 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 9:58 pm
Matty Roth at 8:34pm
======================
I did not hear or read a single comment that Danny Wilson was asked about Celtic. I am happy to be proved wrong though. My point is the media somehow seem to be trying to make a case that Wilson chose to go to Rangers over Celtic. Celtic have had to issue a statement re the matter tonight. Interestingly Al Lamont of BBC has said on Twitter he had a line removed from his article which he did not write, which said Wilson ‘possibly’ chose Rangers over Celtic. Anyway, I’m sure there are many on here who couldn’t care less!
15 3 Rate This
===============
UTH, don’t get me wrong, I care about the bizarre and often ludicrous way our sports journalists behave and the not very well hidden agenda being followed. I just can’t say for sure if I heard what I think I heard Wilson say – because I don’t really pay much attention to those sort of press conferences/interviews with players.
And I do take your central point about the apparent difference in treatment of one club from another.
I’m pretty sure this difference does extend beyond Celtic as well and most other Scottish clubs get the sh… erm, dirty end of the stick too.
If you doubt that – just think about the ridiculous amount of press coverage given to Aberdeen removing a toaster from Pittodrie back in the day.
I don’t suppose any super dooper news outlet has splashed the actual ” great player” ” destroyed them” news that wee Lionel Ainsworth Has resigned for the Well for 2 years.
Or that Well ladies duplicated the boys efforts by winning 6 -2 in the SWL League cup final against – Oh you know.
Well done Motherwell girls really been difficult for them. Very proud of you all.
ianagain,
and we let you go before any mention of Lisbon 🙂
Seriously though, I hope the content of the programme tonight would cause anyone thinking about rushing in with “pro-sellik bias” allegations to bite their tongue.
Jim Craig has a great academic interest in all aspects of the game, and I think he showed that tonight.
Raised £500 this week since we launched the campaign. So we are making great progress with 10% of our target for special projects achieved with two months to go.
Thanks to everyone who has given their support.
boywithoutanaitch says:
Member: (9 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 10:24 pm
_____________________________________________________
Have you ever been on a distillery tour?
Have you noticed that – even with the money off voucher – it costs more to buy the malt in the distillery after the tour than in the tesco round the corner?
Its called multi level marketing.
MASH is an expert at this.
RIFC have never even heard of it, although some credit for managing different pricing structures within the ground.
Point is, RIFC expected their brand value to sustain a premium through official merchandising outlets. The bears were supposed to buy from the megastore and airport shop for love of the club. RIFC may have believed it.
SD never did.
If RIFC (because of their indomitable ambition) overestimated the willingness of their loyal following to pay through the nose in the top channel for the same gear that Mike was free to push at a discount to any oik with sunburnt shoulders that needed covered up, what sympathy do they deserve?
The extent to which SD covered their bahookies on this (wisely as it turns out) and the extent to which RIFC left their male appendages flapping in the breeze shows simply that SD had a ‘more realistic’ assessment of what was likely to happen and negotiated accordingly.
Whereas RIFC had a ‘deluded’ assessment of what was likely to happen and erm… negotiated acoordingly.
Both parties got what they desreved imo.
RIFC are where they are because of stupidity and arrogance on their part.
MASH and SD are where they because of diligence and hard headedness on their part.
Happens every day.
RIFC are a bunch of molly coddled over privileged mummies boys – hitherto protected from the harsh realities of life by patronage and special treatment- suddenly swaggering confidently into a grown man’s game, full of battle scarred cynics like MASH.
MASH is a different breed.
His troubles ended the day he had made enough money to secure the services of a decent lawyer whom he could trust.
RIFC are full of themselves, their possibility and their potential, and more than ready to educate that staid old ‘real world’ on the new reality that has befallen it, (and boy it better be ready to be impressed) !
Getting off with learning tough lessons the hard way is the best outcome they should ever really have hoped for.
Big Pink says:
Moderator: (304 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 12:42 am
ianagain,
and we let you go before any mention of Lisbon 🙂
Seriously though, I hope the content of the programme tonight would cause anyone thinking about rushing in with “pro-sellik bias” allegations to bite their tongue.
Jim Craig has a great academic interest in all aspects of the game, and I think he showed that
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
AYE
Lets face it Lisbon Lions Big Pinks, chat to they kind o guys every day of my life. 😎
Pink
It was fun. I would encourage anyone else to do
it.
Go on Jean
Auldheid says:
Blog Writer: (456 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 9:12 pm
___________________________________________
That’s a helluva catch that catch 22! 😀
One of my favourite books of all time.
Thanks for drawing a picture and colouring it in!
I bet their are quite a few decent TRFC fans that also appreciate the work of Joseph Heller out there?
They’ll be the ones with the wry smiles I guess. Or else turning out on medal parade bollock naked. One of the 2 definitely.
Esteban says:
Member: (106 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 3:18 pm
But what on earth was Walter Smith doing during his nine months as a director of RIFC plc in 2012 and 2013 ….
________________________________________________________
Hypnotising the bears back into a state of complacency. Which he did.
The clever question is not ‘what was he doing’ it is ‘how did they persuade him to do it?’
Stupidity? Conspiracy? Naivete? Complicity?
Given the lack of raosting that messrs Smith and McCoist have endured thus far in scottish media, I am mionded towards complicity.
essexbeancounter says:
Member: (212 comments)
June 24, 2015 at 9:22 pm
However, at the time there was a great deal of derision heaped upon the “negative goodwill” resulting from a few ridiculous transactions and some gross overvaluation of effectively delapidated assets, in particular a football “stadium” in serious need of repair and modernisation.
Sadly, I cannot see anyone even being questioned let alone charged, let alone imprisoned over this whole omnishambles
Finally, a bit OT but relevant to “brand accounting”, Professor Stewart Hamilton (RIP) informed us at our final CA classes many moons ago that the Coca-Cola trademark was carried in the accounts at $1 (one dollar!) on the basis it was simply impossible to value…and he was a rabid Jambo…and a fine teacher to boot!
———————————————————————-
essexbeancounter,
To clarify, I believe individuals will be prosecuted due to their actions in the time period starting – Rangers liquidation (possibly pre) to the present. Not isolated to the Financial statements discussed (although how much was based on “The Opinions of the Directors” – rather than hard facts would make interesting reading.)
Just for clarity to others it is the “Directors” legal responsibility to provide a “true and fair view” and sign them off as such not the Auditors.
Let me be very clear, I am not stating there were any false representations, just pointing out that if this happened it is the directors who are liable not the auditors.
I digress, prosecutions (hopefully) will be via The Bribery Act 2010.
Lets not forget the Duff and Phelps arrests via this route (hope I am allowed to state this). Logic dictates bribery involves two parties, in my mind Duff and Phelps are only one party…. gathering evidence takes time…..
Surely the authorities cannot blindly ignore this? It would be an embarrassment to Scotland if people get away with this, they are taking money from the gullible and lining their own pockets.
There has to be some sort of deterrent to others from copying this model.
Sorry for the rant, personally I detest Directors who abuse Accounts and The Companies Act to their benefit and detriment of others.
OT to essex- Personally (for me) Brand accounting is dangerous and is nothing more than a directors excuse to boost the balance sheet. Revaluing assets is bad enough!
I could name plenty big “Brands” who have liquidated, being allowed to enter a paper transaction would not have saved them. In fact it may have led to more Creditors being out of pocket as the Balance Sheet “looked healthy”.
Surely if your brand meant anything it would be reflected in your sales?
Matty Roth says:
Member: (189 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 12:18 am
UTH, don’t get me wrong, I care about the bizarre and often ludicrous way our sports journalists behave and the not very well hidden agenda being followed. I just can’t say for sure if I heard what I think I heard Wilson say – because I don’t really pay much attention to those sort of press conferences/interviews with players.
And I do take your central point about the apparent difference in treatment of one club from another.
I’m pretty sure this difference does extend beyond Celtic as well and most other Scottish clubs get the sh… erm, dirty end of the stick too.
If you doubt that – just think about the ridiculous amount of press coverage given to Aberdeen removing a toaster from Pittodrie back in the day.
——————————
I don’t doubt it at all Matty, and I well remember the toaster event you refer to. Ultimately the aim seems to be to portray Rangers as bigger, better, and grander than anyone else. Celtic are probably more in the focus for that as demeaning Celtic has in their view the same result as bigging up Rangers. I smile every time I read a comment which attempts to portray Paul Murray as some kind of major player in the business world. Then I look at the quality of people on my own club’s board of directors and wonder why their business pedigree is never mentioned, but I guess I’ve just answered my own question. It doesn’t stop there though. There are some serious players in the boardrooms of Scottish football, or as major investors in clubs. Were some of these people to be involved with Rangers, we would never stop hearing or reading about them. I think the fact Mark Warburton can’t be mentioned without the phrase ‘former city trader’ added says it all. I’m guessing the likes of Stewart Milne, Tom Farmer, Anne Budge and Dermot Desmond are far too busy ensuring their clubs live within their means to bother much about it.
What Do Artists Do All Day?
As a self diagnosed philistine of the “My kids could do better than that” school, I’ve been fascinated by this BBC series. How can educated people think this is real work, with any value to society, and be so committed to its importance. It’s entirely off my radar as a proper job for grown ups. Well they can and they do and a rare few get rich and famous in the process. I’m looking forward to the follow up series “What Do MSM Journalists Do All Day?”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rjr1d
The toaster was not just a toaster I recall that it was setting off fire alarms and costing hundreds of pounds every time. In effect it was the opposite of move along nothing to see here. A largish cost was portrayed as trivial diddiness. Were it other clubs it would be painted as persecution draining precious funds
With all recent talk starting with someone that may become toast and now the infamous Aberdeen toaster,the similarities are there,alarm bells going off,costing loads of money etc,is there more to come on the toaster story.
mcfc says:
Member: (1423 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 9:10 am
… I’m looking forward to the follow up series “What Do MSM Journalists Do All Day?”
_____________________________________________________
Open inbox. ctrl+C. ctrl+V.
There’s barely a trailer in that, let alone a series I am afraid.
bfbpuzzled says:
Member: (194 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 9:19 am
The toaster was not just a toaster I recall that it was setting off fire alarms and costing hundreds of pounds every time. In effect it was the opposite of move along nothing to see here. A largish cost was portrayed as trivial diddiness. Were it other clubs it would be painted as persecution draining precious funds
_________________________________________________________________________________
Yes. Toaster in player’s lounge was removed because it kept setting off the fire alarm. Fire brigade were (understandably) getting peeved and AFC were getting or were going to start get billed for the call outs.
Headline in Herald – Aberdeen on breadline as savings include club toaster 🙄
Interestingly enough the Club’s Chief Executive is quoted, in the same article, as saying “We have to run within our means or end up in liquidation”.
http://t.co/qvjGZcXgkJ
“Leeds United owner Massimo Cellino could face Football League ban following tax evasion fine”
Compare and contrast? But let’s wait and see whether the FA actually do anything. I think they probably will, since I get the impression they want Cellino to go away.
Did the dave king recieving a payment from BDO ever get resolved.
According to rfc2012s(old club) accounts a demerger took place and that Murray Sports Limited was the new holding company for RFC.
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC004276/filing-history?page=5
Click on 30th june 1999 and scroll down to general.
An unkind but perhaps not unrealistic spin that could also be put on the Murray Park document saga is that RIFC didn’t know that they couldn’t grant security over that asset and had to be prompted by Sports Scotland to get the paperwork in order to protect their interest. Did any MSM hack think of asking them about that?
And why the concern anyway about MA selling MP? DK and his 2 or 3 Bs have given undertakings have they not that they will be funding the journey whatever it may take?
BTW, imagine not knowing the exact ownership or legal status of assets under their control! Goodness, where might that end?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
TheClumpany says:
Member: (83 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 10:12 am
=========================================
Clump – now that the EGM-gate meeting has been admitted, King & Ashley must have talked about something, so let’s feed the masses something complicated and irrelevant – to lull them back to sleep.
I think PMG is playing the classic scoop game here – release enough embarrasing stuff to force a contrived response to explain those specific undeniable facts – but only them. Then release a bit more stuff to make that response look devious, misleading and ridiculous – which it usualy is. Repeat.
This is the preserve of real journalists with trusted sources and hard information. No wonder the MSM don’t recognise what is happening .
TRFC’s pre-season programme now shaping up :
“Arbroath have arranged a final friendly for the pre season schedule and will play a Rangers XI at Murray Park on Friday the 17th of July with a 7pm kick off.”
Scottish Football needs us diddy teams to support each other.
PS At Murray Park?
ianagain says:
Member: (605 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 1:26 am
Pink
It was fun. I would encourage anyone else to do
it.
Go on Jean
___________________________________________________
😆 😆
PMSL.
The result of me taking part in any podcast would be everyone demanding a return of their donations!!!!!!
Spin is essential when truth is too hard too handle. DK pleading with MA is spun as negotiating. The Bears are gullible. Successful negotiation would be front page news. Does anyone doubt the accuracy of Phil’s latest three blogs? Do the intelligent Bears realise the full implications? DK is a busted flush.Ashley is the only option in town. The only one with money. But he would need control, total control. Ashley does not care about the calibre of a team only the advertising and sportwear sales he can generate. A monumental clash of expectations. The Bears unrealistically expect Champions League. Ashley would settle for top 6 in the Premiership. Dilemma- accept mediocrity or settle for liquidation. Directors are liable if a company trades whilst insolvent. No wonder DK is planning to jump ship-again.
Fisiani says:
Member: (36 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 10:47 am
==========================================================
Yes, the bears are still led to believe they can select whatever they want from reality’s a la carte menu – world domination with RRM and no austerity please and easy on the crippling debt and I’m allergic to unbreakable onerous contracts. Make mine a lobster vindaloo with extra truffles and ocelot sweetbreads. What do you mean, KFC don’t do vindaloo?
Fisiani on June 25, 2015 at 10:47 am
———–
I would have thought the SFA/SPFL would have wanted proof of DK funds before allowng a character of his reputation anywhere near a club. No doubt they have checked and double checked this time after Whyte, Green. Nae bother, etc…uh…er :irony:
redlichtie says:
Member: (244 comments)
June 25, 2015 at 10:42 am
TRFC’s pre-season programme now shaping up :
“Arbroath have arranged a final friendly for the pre season schedule and will play a Rangers XI at Murray Park on Friday the 17th of July with a 7pm kick off.”
Scottish Football needs us diddy teams to support each other.
PS At Murray Park?
_____________________________________________
I think we should move to quash now a spurious and unfounded rumour that they have to pay some mystery off shore investor a sizeable chunk of cash whenever Ibrox stadium (which they clearly own) is used for footballing purposes. Such spurious allegations are not even worth a denial, which explains the lack of any official public disclosures in this area. :irony:
Clearly, if such an arrangement existed, I am sure that DCK’s much vaunted transparency would dictate that its existence was disclosed to stakeholders of the enterprise. :irony:
So far be it from me to entertain any suggestion that – while they still own the freehold on the property – they may have sold on the rights to play football there, to someone else, and then licenced those rights back for payment of a royalty upon each exercise of those rights. :irony:
So any speculation that playing Arbroath at MP instead of Ibrox could therefore represent a significant cash saving is unworthy of us :irony: .
Not that they need to save cash anyway, you understand. :irony:
As mentioned earlier by theclumpany the headline below from the Dandy (aka the evening times)
Warburton can revolutionise Rangers and spark Scottish football.
Really beggars belief in many levels the arrogance of this piece. This kind of reporting makes all fans outside Govan despair even more with this club and it goes without saying it ridicules our press even more (if this is possible). We know fans from Ibrox want to belief the hype but ffs there comes a time when they even must say, really revolutionise Scottish football? If these fans actually buy into this (by purchasing st as a result of this article) Mr (I will not spend a penny) King will be delighted. It never ended well before and now with rrm at the helm it looks like not ending well again. Scottish football is in a very good place at present and the national team is a good example of this. This Govan team has had the chance to change over the past 3 years and did not. Now we are led to believe that they somehow can change Scottish football for the better. I would say you could not make this up but it did appear in the Dandy so obviously it can be made up.
Scotland needs a strong comic editor.