Why We Need to Change

ByTrisidium

Why We Need to Change

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;

  1. ISM will seek to build a community of sports fans whose overarching aim is the integrity of competition in the sport.
  2. 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.
  3. ISM will provide a platform for the views of ALL fans, and guarantee that those views will be heard in a mutually respectful environment.
  4. ISM will also endeavour to inform and entertain members on a wide range of topics related to our shared love of sport.
  5. 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;

  1. 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.
  2. 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).
  3. 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.

 

About the author

Trisidium administrator

Trisidium is a Dunblane businessman with a keen interest in Scottish Football. He is a Celtic fan, although the demands of modern-day parenting have seen him less at games and more as a taxi service for his kids.

3,978 Comments so far

tykebhoyPosted on1:35 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Somebody asked if the loaning of the two Spurs “starlets” was an indication that Mike Ashley wasn’t playing ball. Well further proof if it were needed is that of the 5 loan players last season 1 (Streete) has already left NUFC and 1 (Ferguson) has already been loaned elsewhere. The other 3 (Vukic, Birigirmana and Mbabu) are all available to leave NUFC http://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/newcastle-united-transfers-magpies-could-9845188 Could be another test of DCK’s warchest if Warburton wanted to sign the only one that made any real impact.

View Comment

jimboPosted on2:13 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Prohibby, good to hear your take on the Scott Allan issue, I hope your view is typical of most other Hibees, that is, no ill feeling between the clubs or the fans.

Last January I actually felt very sorry for the Dundee Utd. fans, it must have been gut wrenching to see your two best players moving to your rivals in the league and cups. (I know I’m a big softy!) Thankfully I don’t think the ire of the Utd. fans were so much against Celtic but their own board.

If only all transfers could be carried out without the angst and rancour which surrounded the potential transfer of SA to Ibrox. Whipped up to a frenzy by the Scottish media.

View Comment

ProhibbyPosted on2:42 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Thanks Jimbo, I appreciate your sentiments. All else being equal, I would have preferred to see Allan remain at ER. But, with the prospects of a war of attrition waged to unsettle him on behalf of TRFC, I think Hibs are doing the wise thing here. Personally, I have a lot of time for McGeoch and feel he is likely to be a much more influential player for Hibs than Allen would have been allowed to be with all the ‘hoo-hah’. To be honest, I’m more concerned about our weaknesses in defence and in goal!

View Comment

wottpiPosted on2:48 pm - Aug 14, 2015


So is it now the case that in addition to their own scouting staff Celtic can also rely on Stevie in IT and the MSM to identify young talent who profess to be happy trying to purse their footballing career in Scotland.

If Deila believes the guy is the right fit then they can outgun anyone else and pick and choose who they want. 🙂

View Comment

neepheidPosted on3:20 pm - Aug 14, 2015


wottpi says:
Member: (704 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 2:48 pm

If Deila believes the guy is the right fit then they can outgun anyone else and pick and choose who they want. 🙂

===================

Just you wait until King finds that warchest key. “I’m sure it was on the sideboard, but maybe I left it on the hall table, oh wait a minute—- wine cellar, maybe?”

View Comment

bobferrisPosted on3:22 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Airdrieonians Wikipedia only gives honours won from 2002 onwards. I would doubt any Airdrieonians document/programme etc would list anything won by Clydebank. The Sky Sports yearbook, formerly the Rothmans, doesn’t list anything before 2002. Is there an official SFA position on this sort of thing?

Any liquidated club in Scotland, from Third Lanark onwards at least, has seen the club pay the price of a name change. Well, all except one of course! Gretna became Gretna 2008 for instance. Down south they seem to be more lax. Middlesbrough were still Middlesbrough after their 1986 liquidation and kept their history, albeit their main successes have all came since liquidation. They were “re-born” in 1986 and from 1986 – 2007 had the year on the club badge. It’s now back to their original founding date of 1876.

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on3:29 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Rangers International Football Club Stockmarket Re-float –up to £20 million to be raised

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/rifc-stockmarket-re-float-20m-the-target/

http://www.shareprophets.com/views/14274/rangers-international-football-club-stockmarket-re-float-up-to-20-million-to-be-raised

As you can see these have joint “ownership”

Addittional reporting by Tom Winnifrith

By Tom Winnifrith & Phil Mac Giolla Bháin | Friday 14 August

View Comment

alzipratuPosted on3:29 pm - Aug 14, 2015


HomunculusHomunculus on August 14, 2015 at 10:06 am
Smugas says:
Member: (902 comments)

August 14, 2015 at 9:44 am

I agree

Rangers is being liquidated (it hasn’t actually died yet as most people seem to suggest, it still exists only it is being operated by BDO who are in the process of liquidating it’s assets with a view to winding it up).

Meanwhile a new club has been formed. It’s official title is The Rangers FC, however it is known to it’s fans, and referred to by a lot of others, as Rangers. This is no different from other clubs’ supporters, and other people, referring to a football club by a shortened version of the official name. Let’s say for example Hearts or Hibs, I don’t think anyone would object to those.

However me, or anyone else, calling them Rangers does not change the simple fact. It is a different club.

***********
I’m sorry, but point of order which is actually very crucial and, indeed, fundamental to the discussion: BDO are NOT in process of liquidating Rangers” assets. Rangers’ assets (ground, badges, and training facility) were purchased by a fine Yorkshire gentlemen. Subsequently (by virtue of 5WA?) self-same person acquired registration of football players but I don’t think any fee was paid (the infamous loan agreement just before the Brechin game refers).

BDO are liquidating the company which involves securing the maximum it can from debtors in order to maximise payment to creditors in strict hierarchy as set down in law. Those debtors (in this particular case) include debts owed via due legal processes, eg Withey/Collyer Bristow and (potentially) D&P, Whyte, etc which is why BDO pursued the Collyer Bristow case. In many cases, liquidators would also seek to sell remaining assets but – in this instance – the assets were hived off in an agreement to purchase pre-dating the failed CVA (although I’m not convinced we’ve heard the last of that little sleight of hand).

At no stage was a Rangers “brand” purchased after Wavetower bought the whole shooting match for a shiny pound coin. Indeed, had Sevco 5088 or Sevco Scotland purchased the brand then they would have been purchasing the goodwill as this is an integral and intrinsic element of the brand inter alia. One can only purchase the brand/goodwill through a purchase of the company shares or through a CVA. Goodwill cannot be purchased from a failed CVA.

In other words, le duc de normandie merely purchased the tangible/physical assets. That he was allowed to get away with calling them the very same name as the club being liquidated is a separate matter and one for several authorities and organisations to answer including the Scottish government, the SFA, HMRC, BIS, SPL and SFL. The reality is that the entire thing has been a sham from start to finish, but facts are still facts.

The strength of this blog – and that of rtc beforehand – is the level of factual accuracy and dissection. As soon as you start to accept untruths (whether for convenience or to appease RFC/RIFC fans), the blog loses its authority and legitimacy.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on3:46 pm - Aug 14, 2015


alzipratu says:
Member: (23 comments)

August 14, 2015 at 3:29 pm

The fact that the administrators disposed of the majority of the assets prior to BDO taking over as liquidator isn’t really the point. That just means that those assets were not available to BDO when they took over. The assets had been realised, albeit for what was probably gratuitous alienation.

I agree that happened, I agree it was a disgrace and a con and that it cheated the creditors, I agree that it should not have happened, I have said that often enough. It was absolutely disgraceful and possibly criminal the way the administrators dealt with the situation.

However it doesn’t really change the fact that the liquidator is (amongst other things, however I wasn’t writing a treatise on the subject) liquidating what assets were left.

“BDO are liquidating the company which involves securing the maximum it can from debtors …” your words.

Debts are an asset, the liquidators are realising those debts. They are liquidating the assets.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on3:59 pm - Aug 14, 2015


woodstein says:
Member: (142 comments)

August 14, 2015 at 3:29 pm

If RIFC PLC intend raising £20m then surely they will require a general meeting.

Currently they have permission to sell 40m new shares, from the last AGM, so that would be 50p each to raise the £20m.

However the last time I looked shares were changing hands for about 27p.

Why would anyone pay 50p per share when they could buy them at substantially less, provided they have someone willing to sell.

I’m aafraid the £20m target doesn’t make sense to me.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on4:22 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Homunculus says:
Member: (203 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 3:59 pm

Isn’t the removal of voting rights from the Easdale proxy, an attempt to clear the path for an EGM?

View Comment

SmugasPosted on4:33 pm - Aug 14, 2015


OK, bite sized chunks.

So they want to float for £20m but aren’t sure if they have the voting muscle to do so, but appear hell bent on doing it anyway;

They want to float for £20m hoping that original investors from just 3 years ago all of whom are either locked in (by the heart strings or otherwise)at half the value or have, ahem, left won’t notice, or miss both their original investment or their new one;

They want to float for £20m just because they feel they need to ‘galvanise’ a disappointed support. And that’s the massively fractured support by the way;

They are probably correct that they’ll need £20m simply because a quick check without even bonnet lifting or 120 day review indicates they are losing money hand over fist;

They don’t have an underwriter which is just as well because history shows that when they do, the investors are, ahem, washing their hair that evening, and leave the underwriter to provide the financial clout they so desire;

And finally…

The guy they want to head this up has more than a little history with share pump and dump scandals worldwide.

OK, does anyone think they know what could possibly go wrong?

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on4:35 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Homunculus says:
Member: (203 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 3:59 pm

————————————————–
I agree, but guess that is why the 1st pararaph ends “A few uncertainties remain.”

Slightly understated?

It is more interesting that this has appeared under the tag line “By Tom Winnifrith & Phil Mac Giolla Bháin” ?

Also just read

scapaflow says:
Member: (1397 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 4:22 pm

Was this the preparation?

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on5:00 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Re Scott Allan

From Hibs perspective

Once it became inevitable that the player would not stay for the final year of his contract then the following seems to have been the plan

Sign John McGinn cost £130 K

Sell Allan receive £275 K

+ Dylan McGeoch

+ Liam Henderson for a year

Wages

McGinn probably on similar to Scott Robinson from last season

McGeoch probably similar to Scott Allan

Henderson ? Depends on what Celtic pick up

Therefore from Hibs perspective you get McGinn, McGeoch and Henderson + £145 K in return for Allan

Seems like very good business regardless of Allans excellent season in 2014/15

From Celtic’s perspective

You get someone with plenty of potential , who is 3 years further developed than Henderson. You get Henderson a year of game time at a good club, with a coach your trust and like in a location you can easily keep tabs on.

Seems like a win/win all round.

Given all of the optimism about Rangers is really based on a good 50 minutes against a Hibs team which was missing 6 of it’s likely first choice X1 , I think the jury should still be out for quite some time on Warburton’s transformational talents.

However don’t hold your breath for the MSM going down that route. That type of sensible critical analysis is reserved for the managers of other clubs. Rangers managers get a free pass to genius at the first hint of doing something better than bang average

View Comment

DuplesisIIPosted on5:29 pm - Aug 14, 2015


alzipratu says:
Member: (23 comments)

August 14, 2015 at 3:29 pm

Says:

“At no stage was a Rangers “brand” purchased after Wavetower bought the whole shooting match for a shiny pound coin. Indeed, had Sevco 5088 or Sevco Scotland purchased the brand then they would have been purchasing the goodwill as this is an integral and intrinsic element of the brand inter alia. One can only purchase the brand/goodwill through a purchase of the company shares or through a CVA. Goodwill cannot be purchased from a failed CVA.

In other words, le duc de normandie merely purchased the tangible/physical assets. That he was allowed to get away with calling them the very same name as the club being liquidated is a separate matter and one for several authorities and organisations to answer including the Scottish government, the SFA, HMRC, BIS, SPL and SFL. The reality is that the entire thing has been a sham from start to finish, but facts are still facts.”

**************************************************

Actually, Goodwill is just an intangible asset and can be bought from a company in insolvency like any other intangible asset (and was in the case of the sale from RFC PLC to Sevco (Scotland).)

When you think about the purpose of insolvency, why should it be otherwise? Allowing Goodwill to be sold potentially increases the sums available for the creditors of the insolvent company.

The principle problem with goodwill in a liquidation situation is how it’s to be valued. The goodwill often – in effect – dissipates, since the “good name” of the business is tarnished by what has happened. It may only be seen as having a nominal value therefore.

Where the business or parts of the business can be salvaged however, Goodwill can still be a relatively valuable asset which can raise funds in the liquidation.

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on5:31 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Smugas says:
Member: (903 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 9:44 am

“Good luck maintaining other fans interest if that’s the case.”
———————————
That’s the crux of the issue. We’re talking about a business discontinuity that may have bestowed a sporting advantage. The aim of any rule and punishment as vividly described by Auldheid, is to prevent the infringement occuring. The sporting rub here is that natural justice does not appear to have been fully serviced by events.

If, in the context of a sporting rivalry, one contender does injury to themselves in the enactment of their exertions then that incident should naturally disadvantage them in some way. Logically it must.

However if an entity continuity is claimed over and above a business continuity then there is no need to examine in too much detail what the consequences of that business discontinuity is. It is not necessary to account for the sporting implications of damaging your own business. Certainly there are sanctions, though these are either underdeveloped or have been partially applied.

However the association of achievements with a brand is deeply ingrained. Certainly the sporting aficionados will forever have knowledge of the nuances that occurred in sporting history. However the wider collective consciousness will lose sight of these distinctions as time passes.

Is this acceptable?

To disrespect someone’s name is to lose any real chance of communicating with them sensibly. Of course events of the last few years will mean that the ‘New Club’ or ‘Deid Club’ or ‘Zombie Club’ will have to endure the fallout of the consequences for many years to come. However to refer to ‘Rangers’ as ‘Rangers’ is a choice that need not be a chink in the iron curtain. The posts are inconsistent on this point as is perhaps wider footballing opinion. I do not think that to turn the deid club mantra into dogma will serve useful cause in the long run. Posters must feel free to adopt their own policy and I am happy that they should do so. To give latitude brings with it the expectation of receiving latitude.

So I think Rangers cheated and got away with it.

I think Rangers are called Rangers.

I think Rangers will reclaim their history and might one day grow to accept themselves that their business discontinuity was a bit more serious than even they were willing to admit at the time.

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on5:46 pm - Aug 14, 2015


alzipratu says: August 14, 2015 at 3:29 pm

I’m sorry, but point of order which is actually very crucial and, indeed, fundamental to the discussion: BDO are NOT in process of liquidating Rangers” assets. Rangers’ assets (ground, badges, and training facility) were purchased by a fine Yorkshire gentlemen. Subsequently (by virtue of 5WA?) self-same person acquired registration of football players but I don’t think any fee was paid (the infamous loan agreement just before the Brechin game refers).

BDO are liquidating the company which involves securing the maximum it can from debtors in order to maximise payment to creditors in strict hierarchy as set down in law. Those debtors (in this particular case) include debts owed via due legal processes, eg Withey/Collyer Bristow and (potentially) D&P, Whyte, etc which is why BDO pursued the Collyer Bristow case. In many cases, liquidators would also seek to sell remaining assets but – in this instance – the assets were hived off in an agreement to purchase pre-dating the failed CVA (although I’m not convinced we’ve heard the last of that little sleight of hand).

At no stage was a Rangers “brand” purchased after Wavetower bought the whole shooting match for a shiny pound coin. Indeed, had Sevco 5088 or Sevco Scotland purchased the brand then they would have been purchasing the goodwill as this is an integral and intrinsic element of the brand inter alia. One can only purchase the brand/goodwill through a purchase of the company shares or through a CVA. Goodwill cannot be purchased from a failed CVA.

In other words, le duc de normandie merely purchased the tangible/physical assets. That he was allowed to get away with calling them the very same name as the club being liquidated is a separate matter and one for several authorities and organisations to answer including the Scottish government, the SFA, HMRC, BIS, SPL and SFL. The reality is that the entire thing has been a sham from start to finish, but facts are still facts.

The strength of this blog – and that of rtc beforehand – is the level of factual accuracy and dissection. As soon as you start to accept untruths (whether for convenience or to appease RFC/RIFC fans), the blog loses its authority and legitimacy.
=======================
I am reassured that you put so much faith in facts.

However, I’d suggest that you review the D&P creditors reports that provide a breakdown of the asset realisations.

Contrary to your recollection, £2,749,990 was paid for player contracts and registrations.

The Creditors Reports also note that £1 was paid for goodwill as part of the business and asset sale.

That goodwill was soon turned into “negative goodwill” by Charles Green. From the 2013 RIFC accounts, the “Brand” was given a “Fair Value Adjustment” of £16.042M, which formed the largest element of the £22.915M Negative Goodwill, which produced a paper profit of £1.192M in the first year of TRFC/RIFC’s operation.

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:01 pm - Aug 14, 2015


I asked the other day whether we could find out what exactly are the criminal charges faced by certain gentlemen. I realised that I was acting like some SMSM football hack by not myself asking the people best placed to give an answer.

So I emailed the Procurator Fiscal’s office to ask them could I be told what the charges were, or would I have to wait until the trial.

A nice wee email came back: sorry,rules about data confidentiality etc etc.
I felt like writing back to remark that unless the first court appearance was in private, any member of the public who might have been there would, of course, have heard what the charges were, and could have told everybody he subsequently met.

But what the hell…. we’ll know sooner or later, unless the charges were to be mysteriously dropped!

View Comment

CastofthousandsPosted on6:01 pm - Aug 14, 2015


alzipratu says:
Member: (23 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 3:29 pm

” One can only purchase the brand/goodwill through a purchase of the company shares or through a CVA. Goodwill cannot be purchased from a failed CVA.”
—————————————-
I get the impression you are comfortable with making that statement which makes it all the more remarkable.

That does cast doubt on brand continuity but Hirsute Pursuit made the point earlier that when you purchase the business and assets then this brings with it ownership of the brand. In the Rangers case, given your interjection, such brand continuity may not have survived.

I still think Rangers fans will call themselves Rangers since the nuances of a business contract are not easily rendered as an opposition football chant.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on6:11 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Very interesting comments in this page (finally, the inane JC stooshie put to bed). Some of the thoughts about the deceased club and the newco are almost amusing to read, since the current top clash over here in Pastryland, FC Midtjylland v FC Copenhagen, is between two clubs both of whom are mergers of two other clubs (who did not go into admin or liquidate). Both of these new clubs are live on telly right now (0-0 and good crowd) make no issue of the fact that they were formed in 1999 and 1992, respectively. This is in spite of the fact that each of the actual merged clubs have long and, in some cases, quite impressive histories. No claims are made to former honours.

Being a new club isn’t something that bothers either Midtjylland or Copenhagen. To be honest, they seem quite proud of their new status. Being cynical, I’d say the controlling clique at the Scottish newco that obsessses about things like 1690 probably has issues about history and identity that need attending to.

By the way, having watched Malmö a couple oftimes recently I’d say these two teams are inferior. Tricky tie coming up for the Scottish Champions, even trickier getting a ticket, but general sale for second leg starts Monday.

This concludes the voting of the Danish jury.

PS Hoopy7, a John Clark groupie, haha, but not the worst type of groupie 🙂

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:27 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Danish Pastry says:
Blog Writer: (1354 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 6:11 pm
‘…FC Midtjylland .’
__________
DP,I very much enjoy your observations on Danish football, but always have to do what my wife does when she comes across a foreign character’s name in a story- makes no attempt to sound it out but substitutes ‘Smith’ or ‘Jones’ or some such.

I prithee, would you add a wee pronunciation guide for some of the club names, then I can avoid being like those insulting commentators on Radio Scotland who make fun of foreign players’ names and do not even try to pronounce them properly. 😀

View Comment

John ClarkPosted on6:47 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Reading PmcG’s little piece about share floatation and ISDX made me turn to wiki, where I came across this little excerpt, in which that favourite word of Chick Young in describing King’s South African criminal record -‘settled’ is used.

“In June 2012 ICAP acquired Plus Stock Exchange plc and relaunched it as the ICAP Securities and Derivatives Exchange (ISDX),…..
….In September 2013, ICAP settled allegations that they had manipulated the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR). The United States Department of Justice charged three former employees, and ICAP paid $65 million to the U.S.’s Commodity Futures Trading Commission and £14 million ($22 million) to Britain’s Financial Conduct Authority.”

No mention of the words ‘glib’ and ‘shameless’, though.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on7:04 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Barcabhoy,

From the media point of view it would be fair to say the optimism is over hyped. From a Rangers fans point of view, and I’ve discussed this with a few people I know who all hold a similar view, the optimism is based on the enormous turnaround in style and quality of play in a short time. Even if we don’t get promoted this year, for the first time in a long time it is actually enjoyable to watch the team so that has picked up a lot of spirits.

Off the field is a different matter.

Good analysis of the Scott Allan situation also I’d have to say. One additional point is that Hibs don’t have to countenance selling to a promotion rival which is also fair.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on7:33 pm - Aug 14, 2015


John Clark,

I still remember Midtjylland from a football focus feature on them a few years ago when they played an English club for the first time. It’s pronounced Mit Ji Land.

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:46 pm - Aug 14, 2015


John Clark says:
Member: (1098 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 6:27 pm

‘…FC Midtjylland .’
__________

Now I don’t think there’s anything wrong with an English phonetic pronunciation of a foreign word. But since you ask, Midtjylland is locally pronounced ‘Mitt-you-land’ (and it translates as Middle Jutland). By the way, Malmö is pronounced ‘Mal-moo’, the Swedish ö being an ‘oo’ (as in ‘too’). FC Copenhagen is locally FC København (coo-ben-ha-wyn). The city was one of the many towns designated in the Middle Ages as ‘købsteder’ — commerce towns (køb = buy). So København was the commerce centre by the harbour (havn).

Next week, how to order Danish pastry 🙂

View Comment

Danish PastryPosted on7:54 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Speaking of pronunciation, a belter fae “Jum Spence’:

Jum Spence ‏@jum_spence
Celtuc signin sumbudy fur MUNY aund no fae Utd? Dud Laweel huv ae haun doon hus suttee aund fun ah few tennurs?

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on7:59 pm - Aug 14, 2015


I’m wondering how the SMSM will deal with the thorny problem of Hibs denying ‘Rangers loving’ Scott Allan the opportunity to play for his beloved TRFC should he, as seems likely, sign for Celtic. Many of their number were quite upset that Hibs didn’t put the player’s desire to play for the Ibrox club ahead of their own best interests, how very dare they!

Clearly, Allan’s love of all ‘Rangers’ has led him to the decision to move closer to Ibrox by joining Celtic, a clever way to deal with his heartbreak caused by the self-serving attitude of the club that gave him the chance to re-launch his career and sought to receive adequate recompense while not strengthening an imediate rival.

I just wonder if the emotional damage Hibs caused him by refusing to allow him to join his heroes will ever be healed. On the other hand, I wonder if any of the hacks, who lambasted Hibs for not letting the poor wee lamb go to his chosen club, will now congratulate them on keeping to the agreement they (Hibs) supposedly made by selling him to a genuinely ‘bigger’ club.

View Comment

wottpiPosted on8:30 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Allyjambo says:
August 14, 2015 at 7:59 pm

Not worth worrying about, they will change their tune, sell their own granny and eat their own bairns if they thought it helped sell papers. However as per the recent financial results for Johnson Press, the rise of the SNP and Labour’s current trials and tribulations re Jeremy Corbyn they have yet to realise that more and more people are no longer listening to or being guided by a few folk in grey suits.

While there is a lot of nonsense out there, used in the right manner social media is changing how we look at ourselves and the powers that be. The papers and the opinion makers of old are on the way out. Spin it how they will, folk are beginning to wise up.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on8:56 pm - Aug 14, 2015


John Clark says:
Member: (1098 comments)

August 14, 2015 at 11:35 am

Who do you think said this:”We know that FIFA needs reform.There needs to be transparency and openness around how decisions are made”?

Would you believe it was none other than the CEO of the SFA? ( as quoted in ‘The Scotsman’ today).
========================
AS long as its not probing questions from Res12 solicitors asking how decisions were made, Regan is all for transparency.

His hypocrisy knows no bounds.

View Comment

AuldheidPosted on9:13 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Smugas says:
Member: (903 comments)

August 14, 2015 at 9:38 am

Up until now the self certification approach to this has, by and large, worked. But I think its highly optimistic, not least given the CL money stakes now on offer, to assume that it was a one-off if matters are to go entirely unchecked.

====================
You have no idea how spot on you are with this.

Not wanting to change the self certification process that all evidence suggests was breached in 2011, is one of the reasons the SFA are unwilling to allow examination of the process that year.

To do so would be to admit self certification no longer works in modern professional football, when the temptation to lie by the licensee club and not check fully by the licensor national association is too great to resist.

View Comment

HirsutePursuitPosted on9:54 pm - Aug 14, 2015


This is what the SPFL currently say about Airdrie:
http://spfl.co.uk/clubs/airdrieonians/

And what the SFL said before them:
https://web.archive.org/web/20130623022418/http://www.scottishfootballleague.com/club/airdrie-united

In both cases the 2nd Div title – won when they operated as Clydebank – are/were listed. Bizarrely, despite listing the league title in 1976, the SPFL say they were founded in 2002.

Unofficially, Airdrie are happy to accept the 2002 founding date; but there is no doubt that the correct date is technically 1965
http://companycheck.co.uk/company/SC042250

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on10:20 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Given that we’re still £1333 from target fund raising, any chance of a fund raising night? Book a venue, have a quiz / raffle / piss up and raise a load of cash at the same time? While anonymity on here is good I’m sure a bunch of us would like to get together and be introduced properly. (I’d still probably use an alias!) But could raise a fair wedge I think? If there’s support for this then mods I’d be happy to put my money where my mouth is and organise it, PM me if you like.

View Comment

ProhibbyPosted on10:56 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Allyjambo says:
August 14, 2015 at 7:59 pm

“…….. On the other hand, I wonder if any of the hacks, who lambasted Hibs for not letting the poor wee lamb go to his chosen club, will now congratulate them on keeping to the agreement they (Hibs) supposedly made by selling him to a genuinely ‘bigger’ club.”
………………….

I like the “lamb” references, Ally. These guys know a lamb that has been well and truly basted when they smell one. Now tell me, are Celtic a bigger club than Rotherham then – or were you meaning somebody else?

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on11:01 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Prohibby – Rotherham are five letters bigger than Celtic.

View Comment

scapaflowPosted on11:04 pm - Aug 14, 2015


Prohibby says:
Member: (68 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 10:56 pm

Now Hibby & AJ you’re from a city that doesn’t even like football! :mrgreen: Sorry I’ve just read the biggest pile of mince in the Record. It must be one of the copy boy’s fanzine efforts published by mistake, surely?

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on12:59 am - Aug 15, 2015


Tris is on holiday for the next few days, so I will do the funding update.

Funds:
80% of the way through the campaign and we have 80% of the target. There are two weeks left, and I feel quite confident that we will get there.

Premises:
Sadly the Emirates deal has fallen through. We had been offered a perfect solution and we had shaken on the deal. However the landlord changed the location of the premises and we were offered an alternative that was never going to be suitable. Tris’s opinion is that they engineered a back-out for themselves when they realised who and what we were about. I have no way of knowing, but it is extremely disappointing as we had actually started the process of moving our equipment.
It won’t be the last setback we suffer I suppose, but if I am honest, it was a real blow to morale.

Ads:
I think the great ad experiment may have to be ended. The amount we are earning is so meagre that in my opinion it isn’t worth the inconvenience. Ad blockers are being used widely too, which is just folk voting with their feet. I think we will keep it going for another few weeks, but there is an alternative which Tris is investigating, and which may be a better solution.

Anyway, thanks to everyone who has thrown some of their hard-earned in our direction. There are a few people who work very hard for this blog, and their morale is raised considerably when they see the faith that you put in all of us. Thanks for that.

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on1:09 am - Aug 15, 2015


Midtjylland is where we used to put the rubbish ‘roon the back in Budhill in the early 60s. Raking through the Midtjylland hardware and climbing the washhouses was de rigeur in those gaps between catching pieces that your mammy threw doon 🙂

Ah’ll get ma duffel coat 🙂

View Comment

ProhibbyPosted on1:10 am - Aug 15, 2015


scapaflow says:
August 14, 2015 at 11:04 pm
Prohibby says:
Member: (68 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 10:56 pm

Now Hibby & AJ you’re from a city that doesn’t even like football! :mrgreen: Sorry I’ve just read the biggest pile of mince in the Record. It must be one of the copy boy’s fanzine efforts published by mistake, surely?
……………..
Just read it, Scapa. Whata lotta….. Somebody is obviously hurting – as well as hating!

View Comment

Big PinkPosted on1:14 am - Aug 15, 2015


Ryan,

Tris has gone away for a few days to de-stress, and you want to lay that on him in the morning when he gets his iPhone out?

🙂

Seriously though, it is a sound idea. I just don’t know how it would work?

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on8:15 am - Aug 15, 2015


On the possible share issue.

Before anyone gets too sceptical about the likelihood of a further successful share issue it might be worth casting your mind back to the first one – IIRC there was much doubt on here as to whether that would even get off the ground and yet it ended up netting £22m.

First time out the supporters pitched in with £5m and I’d expect a larger take up this time – to be frank I suspect that many Rangers fans would have sussed out exactly what Charles Green was and have kept their money in their wallets first time out – King may not be perfect 😀 but he’s no Charles Green.

As to how much they need to raise that might depend on how badly they want to pay MA back – I recall that the loan has no term so they may well want to leave Mike dangling (and hope it helps bring him to a negotiating position on the SD loan?)

Finally a share issue should come as no great surprise – after all they need money at some point this season and its unlikely there’s any other source to hand.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on8:32 am - Aug 15, 2015


If I remember correctly the target for the RIFC share issue was £25m.

It allegedly raised c£22m, with costs way above what one would normally expect from such a venture.

I have never understood why people consider that such a great success.

View Comment

parttimearabPosted on8:44 am - Aug 15, 2015


Homunculus says:
Member: (204 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 8:32 am
If I remember correctly the target for the RIFC share issue was £25m.

It allegedly raised c£22m, with costs way above what one would normally expect from such a venture.

I have never understood why people consider that such a great success.
==============
On the whole a share issue raising any money at all where the business is loss making, has no cash in the bank, no assets that can be readily converted to cash, and no prospect of returning a dividend to shareholders can be considered a miracle, never mind a success.

Plainly the tax advantages and (I suspect) the misguided view that the shares would broadly hold their value suckered in the institutions (for whom the actual sums were loose change in any case) – but, IMO, the fan response was impressive if, it could be argued, somewhat naive.

View Comment

HomunculusPosted on8:54 am - Aug 15, 2015


If you think the fans response was impressive fair enough. I think it was, like the response to the previous club’s share issue, pathetic.

500m fans Worldwide raising £5m. That averages out at 1p each.

In more serious points, a share issue which raises far less than it’s target and has expenses far greater than one would normally expect is by no reasonable measure a success. No matter what the PLC and the media may want people to believe.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on9:36 am - Aug 15, 2015


Prohibby says:
Member: (69 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 10:56 pm

I never bought into the claims that Hibs had agreed to sell Allan to a ‘bigger’ club. They may well have said something along the lines of, ‘we won’t stand in your way if a bigger club makes an acceptable offer’, which I would imagine will be a line most clubs use when trying to entice a player viewed as being of better quality than the club’s position might normally induce. Besides, a written or verbal contract would always have to define ‘bigger club’ for it to hold any water, in any court. A description of ‘bigger club’ is, after all, in the eye of the beholder, and, like a comparison of Rotherham and Celtic, impossible to define as they play in different leagues. One club being massive in a small league, while the other, moderate in a huge league.

For the record, I’d say Celtic are infinitely ‘bigger’ than Rotherham, as were Rangers FC. TRFC, however, certainly have a bigger support than Rotherham, but in financial terms, and as a potential employer for the length of any contract, the English club would win hands down!

View Comment

armchairsupporterPosted on9:41 am - Aug 15, 2015


Great story from the BBC (I know) about Larson.

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/33211785

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on10:00 am - Aug 15, 2015


Big Pink,

The way I envisaged it was to book a venue and then at the door where people come in have a wee table with a black marker and a bunch of sticky labels, so that when people come in they can label themselves with their blog name (if they wish).

Even city centre venues at the weekend can be booked at extremely low cost, and once you get a few beers flowing and the begging bowls / prize money opportunities going round the cash raised would do the job. Could even sort out a guest speaker.

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on10:01 am - Aug 15, 2015


Big Pink,

On the premises issue, while that is very unfortunate, I’m curious about your statement that they pulled the plug when they realised who you were and what you were about. What do you think would make them unhappy about that?

View Comment

redlichtiePosted on10:07 am - Aug 15, 2015


Ryan – re the guest speaker : please, please make it DCK with a Q&A afterwards!

Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath and a clever ICT.

View Comment

BarcabhoyPosted on10:32 am - Aug 15, 2015


RyanGoslingRyanGosling says:
Member: (210 comments)
August 14, 2015 at 7:04 pm
Barcabhoy,

From the media point of view it would be fair to say the optimism is over hyped. From a Rangers fans point of view, and I’ve discussed this with a few people I know who all hold a similar view, the optimism is based on the enormous turnaround in style and quality of play in a short time. Even if we don’t get promoted this year, for the first time in a long time it is actually enjoyable to watch the team so that has picked up a lot of spirits.

———————

Ryan,

I understand the enthusiasm coming from Rangers supporters, but as Ronny found out last year after a couple of poor results in CL qualifying, it doesn’t take much for enthusiasm to turn to grumbling.

Ronny had the talent, the nerve, the squad and the board support necessary to turn it around. So far the jury is out whether Warburton has any of that. The hype around him is reminiscent of Paul le Guen, and whilst I doubt Warburton will have to deal with a player revolt, he has yet to face any kind of serious challenge.

If he survives through a Scottish winter, lousy pitches and possibly cup games against higher tier clubs then he will deserve credit . All of these challenges though it seems to me will require a stronger squad than he has at present.

View Comment

jimboPosted on10:40 am - Aug 15, 2015


Ryan, think that’s a great idea. A couple of nights out a year could raise quite a bit of money if enough came along.

Also, regards Warburton, no one knows yet how successful he will be but at least he is doing what should have happened 3 years ago.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on10:47 am - Aug 15, 2015


Re the night oot!

Why did I immediately think of the Syrian refugees having braved the channel from Turkey to Greece being asked to come along to our new processing centre…..on a boat!!!

sorry

View Comment

jimmciPosted on11:01 am - Aug 15, 2015


I missed the radio shows last night so was curious to hear their take on the Scott Allan move to Celtic thinking it would be the main story.
Just put on the BBC Sportsound podcast and it did not get a mention, not a single word….
Then I noticed it only lasted 27mins rather than the usual hour.
Did anyone hear the “live” version, was story covered? If so and it was edited out thus raises some very curious editorial policy issues, IMO.
If not covered it’s an even bigger surprise.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on11:02 am - Aug 15, 2015


Great idea Ryan,I will immediately start to try out some watering holes in the city centre and report back my findings,now where’s my cash card.

View Comment

upthehoopsPosted on11:11 am - Aug 15, 2015


jimmci says:
Member: (95 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 11:01 am
=================================

The Scott Allan story was covered on Sportsound. Sadly a platform was given to Graham Spiers to continue the line that Celtic are ‘at it’ and ‘meddling’. For all Spiers admirable qualities in speaking out against bigotry within the Scottish game, in my view he can be rather pathetic at times as well. I’m guessing in his view Celtic have no right to go after players that Rangers also want. It seems since Spiers ‘ban’ from Ibrox was announced he has become even more vocal in his football leanings. If Celtic are annoying him and other hacks I have no real complaint, but I don’t like him being paid public money to spout such partisan views, unless the BBC offer some balance, which they rarely do.

View Comment

SmugasPosted on11:13 am - Aug 15, 2015


Jimmici.

No it was covered – hibs sell player to Celtic for cash plus players. Seems a good deal for selling club and presumably the buyer sees something else they wouldn’t have made the offer. What more needs to be said, especially after two days of wall to wall nonsense on the subject?

Oh and Celtic have bigger problems up front and aren’t good enough for Malmoo (thanks DP) apparently.

Oh, and for all the other fans the final 5 minutes was that Caley needn’t bother turning up, Motherwell are much better (no justification) but will get beaten by Aberdeen (no justification) Dundee look good because of Hartley and killie are off the mark thanks to their thoroughly undeserved point. Oh and Macnamara looks haunted, is haunted but in the expert opinion of Spiers “will be ok” (no justification).

View Comment

easyJamboPosted on11:23 am - Aug 15, 2015


Re the share issue and comments from Phil and Tom Winnifrith – If the intention is to raise £20M and at the same time dilute Ashley’s holding to 3%, then it would require the number of shares in circulation to be trebled, i.e. issue around 160M new shares. The price would be about 12.5p a share (the recent purchase of 586K shares by Rangers First was at 27.73p).

It will of course require another EGM to authorise such a large issue to non shareholders, with a 75% vote required. King has already taken steps to prevent some of the dissenting voices from voting which would help him reach the 75% figure, but I suspect that King’s action could well be challenged in court when the time comes.

View Comment

jimmciPosted on11:31 am - Aug 15, 2015


I agree with Smugas that the allan saga has had more coverage than it probably deśerves but was simply curious that the podcast made no mention of the story and was wondering if it had been discussed. Given that it was I guess my point may now be more related to BBC editorial decisions rather than the matter, per se.

View Comment

neepheidPosted on12:01 pm - Aug 15, 2015


easyJambo says:
Member: (728 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 11:23 am

Re the share issue and comments from Phil and Tom Winnifrith – If the intention is to raise £20M and at the same time dilute Ashley’s holding to 3%, then it would require the number of shares in circulation to be trebled, i.e. issue around 160M new shares. The price would be about 12.5p a share (the recent purchase of 586K shares by Rangers First was at 27.73p).

==========================

You might want to visit RSL and check the comments on there regarding King’s plans for a share issue.

The “John James” take on this is that King and the Three Bears will have their holdings converted to Preference Shares carrying 2 or more votes each. In this way they can keep voting control of the company while others (such as the fans) cough up cash for new shares while being effectively diluted. I’m not sure whether that would require a 75% vote, but I’m guessing so. According to “John James” that is why King has disenfranchised Easdale’s proxies, and he also alleges that King has pulled this stunt previously in South Africa.

I don’t know how much credence to give this, since recent JJ stuff on RSL has been pretty unreliable, but it’s an interesting scenario.

If the minority shareholders vote for anything like that, then the turkeys will really have voted for Christmas. However the fan groups, who now control a fair sized block of shares, seem to have been bought and sold for brogues and blazers, which gives Kingco a flying start on the road to 75%.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:08 pm - Aug 15, 2015


upthehoops says:
Member: (828 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 11:11 am

The Scott Allan story was covered on Sportsound. Sadly a platform was given to Graham Spiers to continue the line that Celtic are ‘at it’ and ‘meddling’. For all Spiers admirable qualities in speaking out against bigotry within the Scottish game, in my view he can be rather pathetic at times as well. I’m guessing in his view Celtic have no right to go after players that Rangers also want. It seems since Spiers ‘ban’ from Ibrox was announced he has become even more vocal in his football leanings. If Celtic are annoying him and other hacks I have no real complaint, but I don’t like him being paid public money to spout such partisan views, unless the BBC offer some balance, which they rarely do.
_____________________________

I can’t come up with a word to describe how I see Graham Speirs, other than ‘two faced’, though that’s not quite it, but I even get the feeling he manages to show both at the same time. His recent self-publicised visit to Ibrox at the first opportunity is a case in point. On the one hand he appeared to be saying (for the benefit of non-bears) ‘see, you can’t ban me!’ but on the other it was a message to his fellow bears that he was indeed one of them, and feels comfortable amongst them despite the apparent animosity shown by some towards him.

I think he tries to be some sort of journalistic ‘Trojan Horse’ by being quite ‘brave’ with his criticism of the less savoury elements, and so creating the veneer of a serious journalist, of non-succulent variety, while all the time sowing the same old biased tripe that Level5 would wish to see.

I’d like to see him try to explain away the idea that Celtic want, or need, TRFC back in the top tier, while, at the same time, they are, according to him, taking steps to make that return less likely!

View Comment

Nuclear SheepPosted on12:08 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Simplistically, but in hard turnover of cash, Celtic are roughly 3 times bigger than Rotherham, but Rotherham are twice as big as Aberdeen.

View Comment

yourhavingalaughPosted on12:16 pm - Aug 15, 2015


I see King is attempting to ride the waves of lack of cash on the backs of the supporters and like the scorpion that promised its victim that it would not sting and did ,can they trust the convicted one of not doing the same to them,I know where my money would be on.its obvious he is setting his stall out as only he knows how to.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on12:50 pm - Aug 15, 2015


neepheid says:
Member: (727 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 12:01 pm

I’ve read that preference shares theory of John James before, probably in one of his posts, and found it interesting, though there’s no actual proof or anything to suggest a grounding for the theory. It does, though, fit the MO of people like King, who seem adept at gaining ownership or control over companies at very little expense to themselves. Whatever the mechanics, I’m certain the end product of King’s plans is to see him in charge of TRFC at little, or no, cost.

It is also notable that this next move has come after a period of complete silence on the Ashley front, and I am beginning to wonder if some consensus has been reached between the two camps, such as, Kingco will no longer make things difficult for SD (discourage boycotts etc) and SD/Ashley accept what they have and wait patiently for the share sale to take place, after which they are repaid in full.

In the end, King will have his power at Ibrox, and the appearance of the man who tamed Ashley, while SD have a very lucrative deal that nets them millions and Mike Ashley doesn’t give a damn what a bunch of moronic punters in ‘Rangers’ tops think about him.

Will £20m less Ashley’s £5m be enough to take TRFC to where the bears think they should be? Will King’s scheming, and no doubt questionable dealings (in some cases), lead to an end to the other onerous contracts? Only time will tell. But it’s a feature of this ‘Rangers saga’ that keeps coming back; just when we think they are goosed, something turns up to keep the lights on…until the next time they look goosed!

They will do well to raise £20m, but they might just do it again. But not so long ago King was talking of £40-50m to take them to where they could challenge Celtic. £15m (if they do repay Ashley) might barely see them through to next season. So how much will they need to raise by Xmas 2016?

On the other hand, if the establishment really have given Dave King a clean bill of health, and opened up the British dodgy dealing scene to him, he might already have what he wanted!

View Comment

woodsteinPosted on1:02 pm - Aug 15, 2015


yourhavingalaugh says:
Member: (326 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 12:16 pm
—————————————
Shhh. don’t mention scorpions! 😯

http://www.news24.com/xArchive/Archive/Tycoon-arrested-gets-R1m-bail-20020613

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on1:18 pm - Aug 15, 2015


How forgetful we can all be at times. My last post, I forgot to add (subtract?) in the £3m of directors’ loans. Will that be included in the £20m? Or will it be £20m raised and the £3m turned into shares over and above that?

That £3m will have to be handled in one of four ways:

Raise £20m and pay back SD and the directors’ loans – a total of £8m.

Raise £20m, pay back SD, and leave a debt of £3m outstanding in the accounts.

Raise £17m turning the loans into shares to total £20m, and pay back SD.

Raise £20m and turn the loans into shares making the amount raised, on paper, £23m, then pay back SD.

Of course, I’m assuming the SD loan will be repaid and not treated as a holistic figment of Dave King’s imagination, to lie in the accounts until, one day…

View Comment

Caveat EmptorPosted on2:23 pm - Aug 15, 2015


The notion of ‘institutional investors’ taking a punt using chump change could be argued but, who in their right mind, having completed due diligence on the entity attempting to raise funds, would commit what is essentially ‘other people’s money’, with which they have a duty to be custodians of, to an investment which offers an immediate devaluation and no prospect of a dividend. However, nothing should surprise us with this saga.
As for the ‘RRM’ who held onto their wallets when Charlie was on the prowl and see DCK as the credible alternative, well, not too sure if there will be too many of them. Still, as above, wouldn’t be shocked.
Ryan, all for a get together / fund raiser. As for logistics, how about PM’s detailing venue, due care to be taken for obvious reasons.

View Comment

bfbpuzzledPosted on2:42 pm - Aug 15, 2015


The OPM share issue will be further reduced in net va.ue by various fees costs of EGM and other Middle men’s charges IIRC the previous fees were burdensome for the IPOD. Now that the track record and future prospects are in play the marketing cost might be particularly high.

someone mentioned the city centre in true SFM style I ask which one?

View Comment

Corrupt officialPosted on2:54 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Ryan G.
Great idea! Although my own postings are meagre and mainly flippant, there are a great many excellent posters here (which makes the blog IMO) and the opportunity to shake their hand for their analytical skills and knowledge, would be a pleasure. Yourself included btw. I am sure many fringe posters and lurkers alike would too.
I will b in Scotland next week incidently for a couple of weeks, though i doubt it would happen that fast, but may I be so bold as to suggest that before you book a venue, do a head count and perhaps even a general location survey of willing participants.
You may have a roadshow on your hands. 😆
A ba’ heid with eyeholes cut (and a bevvy hole)stamped with the SFM logo could be included in ticket pricing…..Not because of any security fears at the venue, but it would be a good publicity tool for delivering complaints/petitions/questions to Hampden in, providing an anonymous visible presence.

View Comment

AllyjamboPosted on2:56 pm - Aug 15, 2015


bfbpuzzled says:
Member: (254 comments)
August 15, 2015 at 2:42 pm

someone mentioned the city centre in true SFM style I ask which one?
_________________________________

Might I suggest Manchester? Neutral ground and has one or two pubs…oh, and is a 40 minute train ride from my abode 😀

View Comment

paddy malarkeyPosted on4:04 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Allyjambo says:
Member: (1160 comments)

August 15, 2015 at 1:18 pm

Half time – think we deserve to be well ahead .

Would it not be possible that MA exchanges his loan for shares also ? If so, would he still hold sway over the assets ?

View Comment

RyanGoslingPosted on4:15 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Allyjambo I’m still banned from Manchester I’m afraid.

(For the complete avoidance of doubt, that was a joke!)

Seems to be a reasonable amount of interest in a fund raising bash. Would really need to be sure of upwards of 30 people interested in attending to have any chance of raising money, obviously friends and family could be brought along but if such an event were to happen I’d be really keen to primarily mingle with fellow TSFMers.

My guess is that Glasgow or Edinburgh would be the most populous locations of blog participants but personally I’d be open to any and all location suggestions. Apart from Manchester. Bad memories.

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on6:14 pm - Aug 15, 2015


RyanGosling says:
Member: (211 comments)

August 15, 2015 at 4:15 pm

Ryan. This is an excellent idea. As an infrequent poster I would love to attend such an event and help raise the cash SFM needs to move to the next level.

View Comment

Carfins FinestPosted on6:16 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Ryan. Coming from Carfin as I do I could ask for use of the Grotto for a venue if that would be helpful.

Tongue firmly in cheek.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on8:05 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Carfins Finest, I have sent you a PM.

View Comment

jean7brodiePosted on8:08 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Ryan, I think a meet up is a great idea. I am just wondering if I’ll need to wear a nametag!!!!!!!!!!!! 🙁 Where is Brenda?????

View Comment

BrendaPosted on8:41 pm - Aug 15, 2015


Hello Jean 😉 I’m still here x more of a reader than I writer these days …… Lost track of all that was going on for a while but still a follower 😀

View Comment

Comments are closed.