HirsutePursuit says: April 6, 2014 at 12:00 am So, the Club Members – The Scottish Football Monitor

HirsutePursuit says: April 6, 2014 at 12:00 am So, the Club Members …

Comment on An Honest Game? Convince Us. by neepheid.

HirsutePursuit says:
April 6, 2014 at 12:00 am

So, the Club Members “formed into a Company” and each were allotted a “fully paid up £5 Proprietary share”.
Now I hate to be pedantic (although according to Mrs Neepheid I just love it) , but that isn’t what the memorandum says. It is the subscribers who formed into a company. Those subscribers may, or may not, have been an identical set of individuals to the list of members of the club on the day the company was incorporated. I note that only 7 subscribers shares were issued. I do not believe for a moment that the club at that point had only 7 members, so I can reasonably assume that the subscribers are the members of the committee and not the whole membership.

From the articles it is clear that there was a preceding agreement to issue a single share to each club member. I have no doubt that the first piece of business carried out by the new company was to fulfil that agreement by the issue of a share to each club member. But at the point of formation of the company, there was clearly no identity between the club membership and the company shareholders. And although there was an agreement that the company would issue a share to each club member, there is nothing to stop shares being issued to others as well. In fact that is envisaged in the Articles- “Each holder of shares of the company (proprietary or otherwise) up to the value of £15 – – -)

Which simply reinforces the point made by Campbellsmoney. The company is not an “incorporation” of the club in any legal sense. The company is a completely separate legal entity.

neepheid Also Commented

An Honest Game? Convince Us.
FIFA says:
April 5, 2014 at 8:47 am
4 0 Rate This

I find it extremely strange that the President of our Football Association has not held a press conference to talk up our game to the fans he represents ,particuarly with the improvement our national side has made up the rankings
Ogilvie will not “talk up” the game, because to do so would imply that Scottish Football is doing fine with his beloved team in the third tier. To Ogilvie, that is against the natural order of things, and until the old order is fully restored he will be saying nothing positive about football in Scotland, unless it is some sickening words of praise for Ally and the boys as he hands over the Ramsdens Cup.

We must remember that Ogilvie, Regan, Doncaster and Longmuir assured us that Scottish football could not possibly survive without a “Rangers” in the top flight, strutting their stuff in time honoured fashion. To admit now that Scottish football is doing just fine would make them look like a bunch of complete idiots- oh, hang on a minute…

An Honest Game? Convince Us.
canamalar says:
April 4, 2014 at 2:01 pm
0 0 Rate This

Aye but supporters also believe they are members of the club and in campbellsmoney’s analogy of the bowling club, that is likely to be true.
A “Club” must have members to be recognised as such, without a membership it is simply a company that applies to all affiliated clubs so I suppose they could all say more than just a club, eh.
They aren’t members of the club, because there is nothing for them to be members of. You only become a member of a club by paying a subscription, after being invited in, usually. Without members a club can’t exist. Without a club, there are no members. Once a company takes over from a club, there is no club (in the technical sense) and no members in any sense. There are only shareholders. If anybody actually has a club membership of Celtic, or Rangers, or Aberdeen, just photograph the card and post a link on here. It must be a very old document.

An Honest Game? Convince Us.
canamalar says:
April 4, 2014 at 12:08 pm
0 1 Rate This

So we’er back to square one then, the club became a company and the distinction disappeared ?
A club without members cant be a club can it ?
Well that’s how I view it. Once a company takes over, the club (in the technical or legal sense) ceases to exist.

But as I have said many times, we are back to semantics. The word “club” is used to mean different things in many different contexts. A supporter talks of the “club” he supports, whether it is structured as a members’ club, a partnership, a limited company, or a PLC. The fact is, most people just don’t care, because in most contexts, it is of no importance to them whatsoever.

Recent Comments by neepheid

Is Regan a DIDDY?
This is worth a read on the Morelos transfer saga- apologies if already posted.


Is Regan a DIDDY?
I see that Sir Walter is being touted for the Scotland manager vacancy. I can fully understand why the deadly duo of Jack and Jackson are pushing this so hard.
TRFC are (as always) in some financial difficulty, despite having a squad containing galacticos in the £8m bracket. They need to get the paper value of that squad even higher, to encourage the Real Rangers Men to come forward with donations (sorry, loans). Their children’s inheritance will seem so much safer if the club has some valuable tradeable assets on its books.
This is where Walter comes in. A few international caps can do wonders for the value of even the most pitiful dumpling. Just watch, as caps are doled out to every player in the TRFC squad who has a Scottish qualification. Look on in wonder as TRFC squad value is doubled or trebled in a matter of months.
That’s the plan, folks. Desperate men, desperate measures, and all that. Shame about the better players edged out of the Scotland reckoning, an even bigger shame for the Tartan Army, who will see any prospects of Euro/World Cup qualification go up in smoke.
By the way, I agree entirely with Homunculus regarding JJ’s latest. Whether true or not, it is a disgraceful piece. 

The Elephant in the Room
From Twitter. This made me laugh on a cold winter morning


The Elephant in the Room
I may be wrong but I understand the loans to be viewed as money taken from the company
I may be wrong but I understand the loans to be viewed as money taken from the company –HMRC Guide  https://www.gov.uk/directors-loans 1. OverviewA director’s loan is when you (or other close family members) get money from your company that isn’t:a salary, dividend or expense repaymentmoney you’ve previously paid into or loaned the company– please advise?
That HMRC advice relates to the common situation where directors borrow money from their company. Here RIFC (or TRFC?) has borrowed money from its directors.

The Elephant in the Room
A number of “internet ballots” suggested at the very start that this was a long drawn out plan for which SDM acquires the club back again debt free at a future date. With his cohorts Murray and Johnston effectively now calling the shots with Kings ‘cold shoulder’, this scenario doesn’t seem quite as far fetched as people once thought. 
I suggested on here back in 2012 that SDM was still lurking in the background pending a return, and got pelters for my trouble. Probably rightly. 
However 2012 is a long time ago. Would he have had the patience to sit it out that long, while watching the dismal saga of “the journey” unfold? 
He does have the money to buy out King. But why would he? He’s not a Real Rangers Man in the usual sense. Maybe he wants to make amends for what he sees as a stain on his reputation? Do very rich people even think like that?
Whatever his intentions, the current Board lineup at Ibrox bears an uncanny resemblance to the old regime. Coincidence? Maybe, maybe not. Nothing would surprise me now.
I see JJ is blogging this morning (on Phil’s coat tails as usual) regarding an imminent pre-pack administration, aimed at getting King out. I just can’t see how that works. Apart from anything else, surely King could block such a move? I’ve never heard of a pre-pack being implemented in the face of opposition from the largest shareholder. And isn’t club 1872 in the King camp?
This has the look of a classic stand-off between King and the rest of the Board. Money is urgently needed to keep the club going, so who will blink first? And what happens if no one blinks? In that case it has to be an unplanned administration. That would be a disaster. On the face of it, such an administration would be unfunded, and the administrator would have no choice but to cease trading, lock up the premises and put everything up for sale. 
I can’t see that happening, personally. Someone will blink, and cough up just enough to keep things going for now. But that’s hardly a business plan.
As for the horrors of the cold shoulder? We must wait and see. I’m not sure that it will be the game changer that many seem to think. King may have to resign, and he might be found in contempt of court, but his shareholding will remain, which is the real block to progress.  
The best answer for the club is for someone to buy King out, probably as part of an agreed pre-pack administration. That surely must happen soon, or the club is going to go backwards. Who has the inclination, and more importantly the money? SDM? Ashley? Kennedy? A.N. Other? Not the current Board, though, that seems pretty certain.

SSL Certificates