Comment on Bad Money? by John Clark.

    easyJambo 11th July 2019 at 20:39

    '..the majority shareholding in our Club by Bydand Sports LLC (Mr Ron Gordon).'


    Just out of interest and to broaden my general knowledge (such as it is) of these ,I spent a few minutes trying to find info about Bydand Sports LLC. 

    Possibly most of you know that there isn't a USA-wide 'Companies House'. Each State seems to have its own sort of version, which provides only minimal information free:there are charges for getting some of the information that our Companies House provides free.

    And possibly most of you may already know that

    "The state of Delaware is the corporate home of over 1,000,000 corporations, limited liability companies, limited partnerships, not for profit corporations and other corporate entities, with hundreds of thousands more added each year. For a state with a small population, this is a lot of companies."

    Being of the cast of mind that I am, thanks to the cynicism that the 'saga' engendered in my innocent heart ,I suspect that that means that Delaware offers some advantages that other States don't, along the lines perhaps of the advantages that Bermuda and the Channel Isles and the Virgin Isles etc  seem to offer to, for example, ex-patriate Scotsmen resident in South Africa.

    Looking up the State of Delaware's   ' Division of Corporations' and searching 'Bydand Sports LLC'  I come across this:

    "File Number:7460293    Incorporation Date / Formation Date:6/10/2019(mm/dd/yyyy)

    Entity Name: BYDAND SPORTS, LLC

    Entity Kind: Limited Liability Company

    Entity Type: General



    Name: CORPORATION SERVICE COMPANY Address:251 LITTLE FALLS DRIVE City:WILMINGTON County:New Castle State:DE Postal Code:19808 Phone:302-636-5401 "

    [I was thrown for a second when I saw the date of formation, before I remembered that those goddam yanks don't know how to write the date!!angry]

    I'm not , of course, suggesting or implying that there is anything untoward about Mr Gordon's use of a USA LLC as his share-purchase vehicle.

    Just that it's more difficult, or costs something, to find out information about his company than it might be to find out about a UK company.

    If I was really, really interested, I suppose I might spend the odd dollar or two.

    And I would imagine that HSL Ltd will already have done so.





    John Clark Also Commented

    Bad Money?
    easyJambo 7th August 2019 at 00:06

    '..then they collectively control 81%, so more than enough to vote through anything they want.#


    I thought I had seen a reference in something from the TOP to the effect that the concert party could not use the additional shares they were allowed to obtain to increase their voting power or some such. I didn't understand it then ( couldn't really see how they could be denied the voting rights attached to the extra shares) and am probably mistaken. . Any recollection?

    Bad Money?
    'Disgraced MP struck off as Solicitor'.(page 13 report in today's print version of 'The Scotsman')

    Why was she struck off?

    Oohhhh? because she had been convicted of lying to the Police/CPS to try to escape a speeding conviction.

    Question: what might happen were a solicitor in Scotland to be publicly belted in a Judgment by a High Court of Chancery Judge for telling an untruth  in  written submission to the Court aimed at misleading the Court? 

    One wonders!

    ( and one wonders again at a little additional piece to the report: the Solicitors Regulation Authority had asked for £22,762 costs of their strike-off action. They were awarded £6,562 -because the Chairman of the Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal had "anxiety about the number of hours that have been claimed" [40 hours]

    Surely our solicitors do not deliberately overclaim ( or lie!) or even make honest mistakes on such a scale in calculating what work they have done?


    Bad Money?
    What is it about people in the world of finance generally and any relationship with factual truth?

    Here is a statement I just came across this morning. It is in the business magazine insider.co.uk on 29/05/19. Ken Symon (reporter) cites it as a quotation from the lips of one Ken Pattullo, of Begbies Traynor (Scotland)LLP:

    " “The huge waves caused by Rangers’ administration and subsequent journey through the tables have now settled down, [my italics] and to some degree have contributed to benefiting and stabilising other clubs.”

    What kind of 'insolvency' practitioner' can Mr Pattullo be, I wonder, if he doesn't know his arm from Liquidation, and fondly imagines either that a liquidated football club can exist in Scottish Football or that a new club founded in 2012 and admitted for the first time to the SFA in 2012 can be the very same club that even now is awaiting final dissolution by Companies House?

    I do not think I will be recommending Begbies Traynor LLP to anyone as any kind of expert company.

    [I'm not gong to waste time checking if there is any relationship between the 'Traynors' or the 'Pattullos', other than a shared capacity to deny a plainly obvious fact:that RFC of 1872 was Liquidated, and did not make any kind of 'journey through the tables'.]

    Honest to God!

    Recent Comments by John Clark

    In Whose Interests
    I jetted in this morning from Newark Airport, after a couple of interesting and enjoyable weeks in Pennsylvania, and it's good to be back in the same time zone.

    Section A3 of the Take-over Code [  the full text of the code is at this link  http://www.thetakeoverpanel.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/code.pdf?v=1Apr2019] describes the companies, the transactions and persons who are covered by the Code.

    My reading of that section is that the cold-shouldering of a director or a company is only in relation to those transactions that are in connection with a take-over bid by one company of another, or by the directors of a company trying to get an increased control of the company by the issue of shares.

    That's disappointing, because I would wish that anyone 'cold-shouldered' should be seen as being an utter pariah, completely excluded from using any financial services in connection with his business or operating in any commercial business whether as owner or director.

    Reading the Code is not easy for people like me who  knows hardly anything about Companies and shares and the 'market' , so I may be wrong in my reading of the Introduction, Section A3.

    But I think that whatever we think, the people who move in that world of business and shares and take-overs crap themselves at the prospect of being 'cold-shouldered'- so it must have some significance as a penalty, branding the person as an untrustworthy person in whose good faith one would be a mug to rely on in any business connection.

    Further, it seems clear to me that  even to sit round the same Boardroom table with a person ordered by the FCA to be 'cold shouldered' would suggest that one is of the same low-life stamp of lying, untrustworthy business man.

    Perhaps the RIFC plc Board members have thicker skins than I?



    In Whose Interests
    Homunculus 13th October 2019 at 21:31

    '.. Maybe Rangers would be as well if things had been done properly.



    All legal truth and sporting truth and practical reality and Liquidation-precedent were on the side of the Governance body.  RFC of 1872 had died, as other football clubs had done, but rather more shamefully and in disgrace.

    But it's certain that few 'old Rangers' fans would have been permanently lost if the SFA had insisted that CG's new creation could not be allowed to make the ridiculous claim that it was the 'old Rangers'.

    There was undoubtedly a partisan desire on the part of the SFA Board strong enough to make it prepared to throw out sporting integrity, truth and common sense and create a monstrous lie under the specious pretence of the  supposed commercial interests of the game!

    The questions raised by the Res12 issue and the refusal to have that thoroughly and independently investigated reinforce the suspicion that the SFA was not only corrupt in the matter of the Liquidation and its consequences, but had already been corrupted by sliding monies to the ailing RFC of 1872, monies to which it was in no way entitled, some time before.

    It is now simply the case that the Governance body simply cannot get itself out of the mess its cowardice and partisanship created.

    It must come clean and face up to the truth openly and honestly, come what may.

    In Whose Interests
    Which is the more grave offence-to break the 'non-statutory' rules of the TOP, as Mr King did, or for a lawyer declared by a judge to have lied in Court?

    The TOP has taken action against King but only after a lengthy period. Will it be a similar length of time before any body (eg the Law Society of Scotland?) or even the Courts take action against the lying lawyer?

    In Whose Interests
    Finloch 11th October 2019 at 17:00

    '.. Our system is broken and we don't seem to have anyone with the wherewithall to see what to do about it ..'


    Yes, Finloch, it's pretty evident that for whatever reason or reasons , Scottish Football in terms of the National team and international competitions, has been on the decline for decades.

    I don't think there are any grounds for believing that before 2012 there was the same fundamental rotteness at the very core of our Sport's Governance body that became evident in the nonsense of the 5-Way Agreement.

    But I think I can safely say that a governance body as rotten and deceitful as the SFA has been since 2012  when it abandoned the very idea of sporting integrity by crediting a brand new club with the sporting achievements of a dead club cannot be trusted to act in the best interests of the Sport it governs.

    Let the SFA come clean,  let the record books and all public reference to TRFC make it clear that that club is NOT RFC of 1872, square up to the sporting truth, and we can all get behind (a newly constituted )Board in the search for remedies to halt the decline and reinvigorate our Sport.

    Fundamentally, who would give a serious  toss about our international standing when domestically we have a rigged game that has nothing to do with 'sport'?

    In Whose Interests
    The mills of the TOP/FCA may not grind exceeding small like those of the Deity, but they grind small enough!

    Reading King's statement makes me really wonder whether the man is all there, mentally,  since to me he seems to be detached from reality.

    Lord forgive me, but I am reminded of some of the stuff the Nazi war criminals like the at least half -mad Rudolf Hess would come out with!

    No shame, no contrition, but self-justification ,self- glorification, .self-vindication and contemptuous dismissal of the opinion of the rest of the sane world.

    I think he needs help!