In Whose Interests

1004
145287

Any organisation’s plan for a top-down review of development would ordinarily be welcome news. Self evaluation, or even better independent evaluation is an ongoing process amongst professionals, individually and collectively alike. In the case of the SFA however a healthy scepticism is required. We are after all dealing with people who are the poster boys for self-interest and short-termism.

The SFA had previously commissioned a thorough review of the game (decades ago) by Rinus Michels, the inventor of “Total Football” and his report was largely ignored, partly because it implied criticism of the then current regime, and partly because it would cost money. A “Total Shambles”.

Henry McLeish also famously recommended (again after being commissioned to do so by the SFA) a more balanced approach to governance between the SFA and SPFL. This would have required a blazer or two having less say in the running of the game – and was therefore ignored.

Mark Wotte, the prominent Dutch coach hired as performance director at Hampden also suggested during his tenure that, in order to improve technique, more ball time should be provided for players in games.

He recommended seven a side competitions as the norm for u-15s (less players – more participation).

To accommodate this, club infrastructures would have required expensive upgrading, and coaches in clubs, not responsive to new ideas lobbied hard for the status quo.

The upshot is that we carried on with the same eleven-a-side games where many players hardly got a kick.
And in this classic Einsteinean definition of insanity, no overall improvements were to be found in the national team’s fortunes.

No wonder Wotte fled the scene in 2014 after three years.

Of course the details are debatable and subjective, but experience tells us;
Anything that
a) costs money or
b) upsets old boys’ networks
has a tendency to be hidden out of sight.

The recent “announcement” is merely a reaction to a couple of poor results, caused in part by inaction in the wake of previous reports’ recommendations.

An increasing number of observers of our game refer to an inferior mindset amongst players in Scotland, that we accept losing as the norm.

Hardly surprising that such a mindset is prevalent amongst professionals.
They must despair at the chronic self-interest, ineptitude and fecklessness of the “leaders” of our sport – an organisation that appointed Gordon Smith as CE (think about that for a minute) based on who his pals were, where McGregor and Petrie can become senior officers – “because it’s his turn!” – despite being unqualified squares in a round ball game, and where fairy-tales take precedence over reality.

As long as the blazers have a seat on the SFA bus, nothing will change.

1004 COMMENTS


  1. I think (I'm not a lawyer) that Mr. Persey wants to see proof from TRFC that the directions he issued in his last findings (payment of fees to SDIR, suspension of the Elite deal to sell replica jerseys etc., etc.) have been complied with.

    I understand from a rapid Googling that these hearings usually last only a short time. This one is booked for all day. Read into that what you will…

    View Comment

  2. The judge also held that Rangers company secretary James Blair was ‘untruthful’ in his dealings with Sports Direct.
    He also claimed Blair provided ‘unconvincing’ evidence.
    ……………………
    In any other club this guy would be out the door by now.

    View Comment

  3. Re : Cluster One @ 19.43 1 Oct

    Did anyone notice on that Sun link provided by C1 above re Ashley there was a story in the sidelines announcing the death of Gary Withey at the age of 55 – a key figure in the Collyer Bristow part of the Sevco story – sounds like a sad end of a guy who probably wished he'd never met Craig Whyte .

    View Comment

  4. naegreetin 1st October 2019 at 20:18
    re Ashley there was a story in the sidelines announcing the death of Gary Withey at the age of 55 – a key figure in the Collyer Bristow part of the Sevco story – sounds like a sad end of a guy who probably wished he’d never met Craig Whyte .
    ………………….
    Good spot. Only 55 RIP I don’t expect his years with the ibrox saga were a joy.

    View Comment

  5. In essence his services involved releasing the Ticketus monies to complete the purchase rather than the other way around, a decision which cost his employers insurers the thick end of £24m providing ample flesh for the BDO forensic team for years to come and creating vindication in the (false) impression amongst bears that the final result was somehow positive cash wise.

    View Comment

  6. RIFC has just notified Companies House that they have issued another 34,904,703 shares at 20p a share.

    https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/SC437060/filing-history

    That will raise £6.98m.  I don't know if it is new cash or another loan conversion,

    I have no idea who has purchased them, but the new shares are over and above the previous loan note conversion.

    You might wonder if the new shares have been issued to cover the costs of the SDI settlement.

    View Comment

  7. The RIFC announcement represents an increase of 16.22% in the previous RIFC share capital with the new shares now representing 13.95% of the total shares issued.

    Depending on who has purchased them, it means that others will be diluted further, e.g. Club 1872 held 10.7% just over a year ago, which has been diluted progressively to 5.5% today.

    View Comment

  8. A check on the RIFC share information page shows that the new shares have gone to existing investors.

    Here is the current list

    Shareholder   Shares held   % 
    New Oasis Asset Limited   66,672,893   26.655%
    Douglas Park   36,000,000   14.39%
    George Alexander Taylor   24, 074, 998   9.625%
    Borita Investments Limited   16,111,955   6.44%
    Barry Scott   13,895,000   5.55%
    Club 1872   13,702,838   5.48%
    George Letham   12,247,516   4.90%
    John Bennett   8,300,000   3.32%   
    New Trace Limited   7,500,000   3.00%

    The previous list had:

    New Oasis Asset Limited   56,223,584   26.12%
    Douglas Park 30,000,000   13.94%
    George Taylor   17,574,998   8.17%
    George Letham   12,274,516   5.70%
    Barry Scott   12,420,000   5.77%
    John Bennett   5,300,000   2.46%
    Club 1872 Shares   13,732,254   6.38%
    Borita Investments Limited   11,132,500   5.17%
    New Trace Limited   7,500,000   3.48%

    View Comment

  9. Forgive my ignorance when it comes to stocks and shares, but can a company issue as many shares as it likes, or is there a limit? Sevco seem to issue more and more every year, or so it seems!

    I'm amazed too, at all of these businessmen continuing to pour money into a company that has lost money every year since it was formed.

    View Comment

  10. The approximate investment figures for the latest share issue are as follows

    NOAL (King) £2.09m
    Douglas Park £1.2M
    George Taylor £1.3m
    Barry Scott £295k   (£45k of that may be a conversion of the balance of his previous loan)
    John Bennett £600k
    Borita (Wolhardt) £995k
    Unspecified £500k (equivalent to 1% of the club's shares)

    View Comment

  11. NOAL- 10449309 – £2,089,861

    Douglas Park- 6000000 – £1,200,000

    George Taylor – 6500000 – £1,300,000

    George Letham – No Change

    Barry Scott – 1475000 – £295,000

    John Bennet – 3000000 – £ 600,000

    Club 1872 –  (-) 29416  – (-)£5883

    Borita  – 4979455 – £995,891

    New Trace – No Change

    I suspect it is debt for equity rather than new cash as club 1872 would have had their pockets dipped by King . What is strange is the timing ( with regards to the SDI court case) and why it wasn't done along with the earlier debt/equity exchange. Also noticed that club 1872 have sold £5883 worth of shares . If it is new cash then why were they not prepared to invest earlier rather than go to Close for a loan ? 

    View Comment

  12. Great updates there eJ.

     

    I don't know what the remaining loan notes position was, but on the face of it, it looks like a conversion perhaps because;

    – who would actually pay 20p a share cash?

     [Plus, no mention of any discount offered.]

    &

    – it was a requirement to 'improve' or window dress the B/S, and mibbees to address some of the Auditor's risk concerns around the 2018/19 accounts due at the end of the month?

    View Comment

  13. StevieBC 2nd October 2019 at 14:28

    I don't know what the remaining loan notes position was, but on the face of it, it looks like a conversion perhaps because;

    – who would actually pay 20p a share cash?

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

    At the time of the last conversion between June and August, the only remaining "investor debt" was the £45k outstanding to Barry Scott.

    The £6.98m raised looks like new money, either to fund day to day operations or to meet forthcoming liabilities, (SDI? payment of transfer installments?)

    We might get a better idea once the accounts are published in the next few weeks (last year's accounts were issued on 31 October), although you may have to look at the Post Balance Sheet date activity or Related Party transactions to work out the current position.

    View Comment

  14. Timtim 2nd October 2019 at 13:38
    Also noticed that club 1872 have sold £5883 worth of shares .
    ………….
    Why would an organisation who’s remit was to gather as many shares as possible to gain a seat on the board and have a voice now be selling shares?

    View Comment

  15. "SDI has now made allegations about a sports clothing company, the Elite Group, Rangers had made an agreement with – and more allegations about Rangers."

    https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/scotland/mike-ashleys-latest-court-fight-with-rangers-arouses-judges-concern/

    Be interesting to know what the new allegations are , can anyone remember if the Elite group are indemnified by TRFC , I seem to remember somebody was in this saga . If they are then that just adds to the final bill .

    View Comment

  16. Cluster One 2nd October 2019 at 17:33

    Timtim 2nd October 2019 at 13:38
    Also noticed that club 1872 have sold £5883 worth of shares .
    ………….
    Why would an organisation who’s remit was to gather as many shares as possible to gain a seat on the board and have a voice now be selling shares?

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

    I would doubt if they have actually sold some shares. It may be that some shares that were proxied to them have been "returned" to the owner.

    There could also be something in their original setup where some shares beneficially owned by an individual, through "Buy Rangers", "Rangers First" or other organisation have been returned, e.g. on the death of the "owner". 

    View Comment

  17. https://www.eveningexpress.co.uk/news/scotland/mike-ashleys-latest-court-fight-with-rangers-arouses-judges-concern/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
    …………………….
    Judge Persey oversaw a preliminary hearing in that latest stage of the litigation at the High Court in London on Wednesday.

    He is due to oversee a further hearing on January 17.
    A judge has raised concern after Sports Direct owner Mike Ashley and Rangers became involved in another High Court fight relating to kit deals.

    View Comment

  18. Timtim 2nd October 2019 at 17:44
    Be interesting to know what the new allegations are , can anyone remember if the Elite group are indemnified by TRFC , I seem to remember somebody was in this saga . If they are then that just adds to the final bill .
    …………………
    The full terms of the Elite Agreement were not before me, but I am told that it grants Elite a set of non-exclusive rights which duplicate, and do not exceed, the non-exclusive rights matched by Sports Direct in July 2018. I was told that there were 9 principal differences between it and the offer of Elite which Sports Direct had matched in July. The Elite Agreement made no mention of the exclusive rights which were included in the matched offer. The payment mechanism was different, the governing law was different, the reporting obligations were different and the payment dates were different. Significantly, the Elite Agreement contained a warranty by Rangers that it has “all necessary rights to grant [Elite] the rights in this Agreement”, and granted Elite an indemnity against suit by SDIR (which is specifically named) in relation to the agreement.
    ………………….
    https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Comm/2018/2772.html

    View Comment

  19. ICT is the latest club in financial difficulties.

    https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/we-re-in-the-second-tier-and-we-can-t-afford-it-inverness-ct-beg-shareholders-for-cash-amid-administration-fears-and-800k-losses-each-year-1-5016583

    Inverness Caledonian Thistle are begging shareholders for urgent help as chief executive Scot Gardiner admitted the club can't afford to be in Scottish football's second tier.

    The Caley Jags are losing around £800,000 each year in the Championship and last week saw the departure of chairman Graham Rae and director Alan McPhee and, along with them, funding provided by the Muirfield Mills group, which has provided more than £1 million of investment since 2012.

    Inverness are debt-free but are struggling for money and are due to hold an extraordinary general meeting this evening, according to the Daily Mail.

    Gardiner is expected to ask shareholders to stump up cash to help stave off the threat of administration but admitted the 2014/15 Scottish Cup winners are in a worrying position.

    He told the Mail: "We need working capital. Our revenues are through the floor in the Championship.

    "We are in the second tier, and we can't afford it.

    "We have been speaking to some of the big shareholders appealing to them to help us because we don't have the revenue to continue as we are."

    Insisting that the Highland club had done everything in their power to "steady the ship", the former Hearts chief added: "We need the shareholders to step up now.

    "We have no debt now, no soft loans any more, no bank debt and we own the stadium – but unless we have an investment of cash, we will find ourselves in a precarious position."

    Unfortunately ICT is living beyond its means and has previously relied on cash injections from its shareholders/backers. That is not sustainable unless the backers give a long term commitment.

    Local rivals Ross County currently has that commitment from Roy Macgregor, so is currently in a better position.

    The simple alternatives for the ICT Board are either to find another benefactor, or to cut their spending to match their income. If that means going part time then it shouldn't be discounted, even if it means that their aspirations for premiership status are curtailed.

     

    View Comment

  20. Mrs C and I jetted in to Newark airport on Monday., on our way to visit number one (chronologically) son in Pennsylvania.

    I came away without a plug adapter , had no time to buy one in Newark airport, so have been incommunicado until yesterday (Wednesday) when Amazon delivered my order at 3.00 pm.

    Last night I only had time to read myself up to date because we were socially engaged until very late.

    It's good to be back!

    But we're having to dash out now to get to another part of the State for lunch with friends.

     

     

    View Comment

  21. Welcome back John "parvenu"  Clark – you'll have caught up with the correspondence from those nice guys @ followfollow trying to besmirch your good name – they all hate you , we don't care !

    View Comment

  22. https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-confirm-summer-transfer-drive-20396421

    "Now Ibrox chiefs have confirmed that almost £7million in loans to RIFC was converted into share capital to help fund "player activity".

    So it was a debt for equity swap but it was new debt of 7m in loans that has gone on 10m for 2 players and not raised in order to pay SDI. In essence it means that shareholders who have had their holding cut are paying a fair percentage of the transfer fees .

    View Comment

  23. Timtim 3rd October 2019 at 17:39

            So it was a debt for equity swap but it was new debt of 7m in loans that has gone on 10m for 2 players and not raised in order to pay SDI.

         —————————————————————————

        I assume TT,  that the "Investors", knew it was for players, and didn't foolishly cough in the mistaken belief it was to sort out Big Micky. 

        Be funny as France though. cool

    View Comment

  24. @CO 18.53

    mail That hadn't occurred to me but you really can't rule it out when dealing with King and the fact their DoF left to spend more time with his family almost immediately afterwards. You could have struck a wee nugget there .

    View Comment

  25. naegreetin 3rd October 2019 at 15:23

    '.. Welcome back John "parvenu"  Clark –  they all hate you , we don't care ! '

    ++++++++++++++++

    Thank you, naegreetin.

    No,they do not 'hate' me personally, I'm sure.

    What they hate is the fact that in so far as Wavetower might  be described as having been the 'holding company' of RFC of 1872, it was not Wavetower that suffered Administration and were put into Liquidation , but Rangers of 1872. [ which was renamed 'RFC  2012 ' in a pathetic, childish and transparent attempt by the Director of SevcoScotland  and the directors of RIFC plc to deceive the loyal support and prospective investors]

    They hate the fact that their Rangers of 1872 lost its membership of the SPL and in consequence lost any entitlement to participate in professional football

    They hate that CG's new creation had to beg for admission even into the lowest level of the then SFL.

    And I suspect that they hate SDM for saving his own other businesses by selling RFC of 1872 to CW while he sailed off happily with his escutcheon untarnished, having got shot of a shockingly large burden of debt by selling it and the club with it, for a pound!

    And I further suspect that the more intelligent and intellectually honest among them will wonder how in hell they landed with Dave King and  varying bunches of absolute chancers on the board of RIFC plc . This Board has allowed the finances of the RFC Ltd to fall into the ridiculous, utterly unbusinesslike situation of having to rely on loans from directors and other major shareholders, loans which cannot be repaid in hard cash, but only by asking the lending shareholders to accept shares rather than cash. And, as we have now just discovered, not just once but again very, very recently.

    No, they don't 'hate' me: the real objects of their hate  are the factual truth and those who ran the RFC 2012 (or the Rangers of 1872) and those who run TRFC who lied to Press, the public, shareholders  and ,most grievously, hid the Truth from  their dedicated fans.

    In so doing they  insulted the memory and spat in the eye of all the 'Rangers ' fans from those who followed the 4 young men on Glasgow Green to those who hailed CW as deliverer and saviour when the cowardly SDM bailed out to protect his own interests.

    I did not Liquidate the Rangers of my grandfather's time:their own supposed people did!

    In my view, such hatred as they have would more profitably be channelled into

    facing up to the Truth,

    acknowledging that the old Rangers died as Gretna died,

    that no 'new owner' had brought the club out of Administration by settling (as Hearts heroically did) with their creditors,

    accepting that they have no claim to continuity of title to the glories of the dead Rangers' sporting success,

    and by working to rid the Board of RIFC plc of the members who are even now causing all kinds of harm to their new club.

    An untruth is an untruth no matter how many people deny that it is an untruth. [I have referred previously to Galileo Galilei's  'eppure si muove': neither Pope, Emperor or King (Ha!), huff and puff as they might ,could change the truth that the earth goes round the sun!]

    In the same way, not the SFA, not the SPFL, not the ASA, not the old geezers  on the (now equally defunct)  BBC Trust, not 'Sportsound' , not UEFA, not the ECA, not the DR, 'Scotsman',etc etc can alter the absolute stone certain fact that RFC of 1872 ( otherwise known as RFC 2012) died the death of Liquidation and are in the same case as Gretna…evn if their faces turn blue with all their huffing and puffing!

    View Comment

  26. Re the recent share issue in TRFC some media outlets are referring to this as a “windfall”. You may have noticed the squirrels 🐿 🐿 🐿 in your garden collecting the windfall. Everybody does it at this time of the year. 

    View Comment

  27. 'Timtim 3rd October 2019 at 17:39

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-confirm-summer-transfer-drive-20396421

    "Now Ibrox chiefs have confirmed that almost £7million in loans to RIFC was converted into share capital to help fund "player activity".

    So it was a debt for equity swap but it was new debt of 7m in loans that has gone on 10m for 2 players and not raised in order to pay SDI. In essence it means that shareholders who have had their holding cut are paying a fair percentage of the transfer.'

    ############################################

    Am I reading this correctly?

    TRFC borrowed £7m from RIFC to buy (perhaps not buy, but secure?) players. RIFC borrowed it from investors, who now have been repaid with (probably) worthless equity.

    This occurred at a time of year when TRFC should have been reasonably cash-rich from season-ticket activity. 

    How much does TRFC now owe RIFC? 

    View Comment

  28. John Clark 04th October at 03:38

    I don't often post –

    John! What a great reply – I will print and stick to my locker.  I couldn't have put the last 8 years historical accounts of the club(s) that have played as Ibrox any more succinctly my self – accurate, honest and . . . beautiful!! Bravo!!

    View Comment

  29. Actually, to be fair, I think Traynor has put some thought into the spin of the c.£7M loans to shares conversion – "to fund transfer activity" as reported across the SMSM.

    My [cynical] thinking was that the bears' reaction might be;

     

    £7M = Ryan Kent transfer fee = oh, ok that's good then.

     

    But, this total is supposedly for the whole deal, including wages over the length of his contract.  So perhaps the actual transfer fee was nearer £2M, [and nearer to his original  £1.7M valuation online].

    First payment is typically 40% = £800K cash now.

     

    So, the Ryan Kent transfer has bugger all to do with the timing – and the 'quantum' – of the conversion from debt to equity.

     

    It could be as simple as the cash was swallowed up by working capital needs, I.e. to keep the lights on.

    IMO, it's just window dressing of the Balance Sheet: to switch debt down to Shareholders' Equity by the same amount, and improve some ratios measuring risk.

     

    Regardless, no amount of financial tweaking detracts from the fact that the RIFC business model remains unsustainable.

    View Comment

  30. 'StevieBC 4th October 2019 at 14:20

    …It could be as simple as the cash was swallowed up by working capital needs, I.e. to keep the lights on…'

    ##############################

    I've just had a quick look & TRFC's last non-season-ticket match at Ibrox was on 12.03.19, when Aberdeen knocked them out of the Scottish Cup in a replayed QF.

    No (perhaps hotly anticipated) semi-final or final income after that & money may have been tight by the end of the season. Obviously, it's better to have internal borrowing at 0% than external at x% in those circumstances.

    Also, I wonder how much of the £7m was spent paying for Stewart Robertson's much-vaunted close-season improvements at Ibrox?  It's a lot 'sexier' to say that the money went on Kent & Helander than on infrastructure spending, isn't it?

    View Comment

  31. Jingso.Jimsie 4th October 2019 at 11:21
    StevieBC 4th October 2019 at 14:20
    …………………
    The thing is this business plan can’t go on. Even the most deluded at ibrox must see the chance of any champions league income pouring into ibrox is slim and the chance to recoupe any money loaned on the sale of an over hyped player valuation can come crashing down with minutes left on the clock during a europa game.
    Even the one’s at club 72 must now be wondering after the sales drive has dried up and the promises have been broken, what is the point of donations every month to see it go down the drain, would be better off buying a replica kit to put money into the ibrox club….Oh! wait a minute maybe not.
    Anyway at some point even the most deluded down ibrox way must realise something has got to give.

    View Comment

  32. At some point they will wake up and smell the covfefe , probably on the morning they are reading that the new holding company is going the same way is the old holding company. Any time anyone tried to stand up and speak out about David Murray they were set upon , he was a knight of the realm, an ambassador of the business world , a multi millionaire and of course a real rangers* man. A similar  mantra followed Craig Whyte and of course Dave King despite the evidence that was freely available that undermined the credentials bestowed on them by our Press Poodles. Anyone who ventures onto the forums can witness anyone not singing from the hymn book quickly rebuked and brought into line , threads not in line with groupthink are quickly removed and dissenters silenced. King has the rank of 5* general and coups within the British military are rare , the cannon fodder troop in every week and pay their mess bill , the Warrant Officers like Dingwall and the Struth Sons direct the  operations of the rank and file leaving the Commissioned elite to sup from the loving cup unmolested . When offered the choice of the red pill or the blue pill then there is only one decision to make , staying plugged into the Matrix where no club* died , where titles are untainted and they can still go for 55 is of greater comfort than the cold reality of truthism. The Greatest club* in the World is the great Rangers* dream because you have to be asleep to believe it (George Carlin) 

    View Comment

  33. A wee thought on the latest round of firefighting at Ibrox.

    Seems to me that it's a mixture of bad, and good, news for the bears. Bad in that it shows a further input of capital was required even earlier in the season than at any time in their short history, but good news (for the bears) because, to me, it indicates that the directors are still prepared to put money in when the need arises.

    It may, or may not, indicate that these (quite?) wealthy directors are off their collective rocker, but I tend to doubt they'd be putting up more money if they didn't intend to put up even more as it inevitably becomes necessary. However much they are allowing themselves to be blinded from reality by King, they must surely be aware that this latest round of lost capital will not be the last and, as they will undoubtedly be better aware of the current Ibrox financial picture than we are, they must believe that, at some point, things will get better or they would almost certainly have pulled the plug before putting more money in.

    This money has been put in at a time when they all knew of the likelihood of a big bill arriving from SDI and probably more from Elite and who knows who else, yet they've still put their money in. They must be prepared to put more in before the season's out, for it will most certainly be required.

    I think we base a lot of our assumptions on the premise that wealthy people have enough sense to realise when an investment has gone wrong and they are only throwing good money after bad. Maybe not all do. I do think that some of them, at least, are incandescent at the thought of Celtic winning ten in a row and are prepared to throw their every last penny into a basket case to stop it happening. Even if that means ruining themselves and/or TRFC.

    Perhaps the money will stop once ten in a row is achieved…or prevented!

    View Comment

  34. I see that the proceedings in the Court of Session yesterday produced more evidence that the worldwide renown and esteem of our press is in rude health.

    In the course of the hearing James Doleman tweeted the entirely accurate report that as of the previous night our Prime Minister was now telling the Court that he would comply with the Act compelling him to seek an extension if no deal could be made with the EU.

    Meanwhile, the BBC's Politics Live programme showed James Doleman's tweet and before any discussion one guest, Tom Newton Dunn, Political Editor of The Sun, gave us the benefit of his expertise by stating that James Doleman, or "this chap" as he referred to him, was "not a completely bona fide recognised journalist working for a national newspaper organisation. I would take that with a pinch of salt".

    Who to believe?

    James Doleman; who has produced many reports oftimes when our gallant MSM would prefer no mention of the subject matter at all?

    Tom Newton Dunn; who works for The Sun and worked there throughout the malignant phone-hacking era?

    I'm not sure that Tom Newton Dunn knows what "bona fide" means and if I'm right I don't know what light the BBC thought he could have shone on a case invoking the Nobile Officium and which would end with the Court making Avizandum.

    While thinking about who has or hasn't got the bona fides, or maybe it's sufficient bona fides, to have the temerity to tweet or post something that has just been said in Court a couple of feet away it's a rum thought that someone sitting four hundred miles away and hasn't heard a word can be given equal or greater credence.

    If Tom Newton Dunn's view is in any way credible where does that leave John Clark and EasyJambo? All that time; expense; paper; ink; typing; proofreading; posting…

    Sorry boys, nae bona fides. By the way.

    Before I reached a conclusion I noticed that The Sun was in the news again. Turns out the Duke of Sussex, or as The Sun would probably have it "that chap Harry", is suing Tom Newton Dunn's newspaper for, shome mishtake shurely, phone-hacking. It seems that The Daily Mirror is also being sued on the same basis. Fun Fact: Before joining the bona fide The Sun Tom Newton Dunn worked at the just as bona fide The Daily Mirror. Not awkward at all.

    Well that sorts out any quandary about credibility. James Doleman, John Clark, EasyJambo et al all day everyday. (I'll leave the rumour that none of the above have ever set foot in a Court and they all plagiarise John James for another day.)

    View Comment

  35. LUGOSI 5th October 2019 at 10:09

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

    I find it breathtaking how Journalists actually believe they have a monopoly on telling the truth. How many times have newspapers and other media outlets been taken to court and lost, because they told harmful lies about people? Lies written by Journalists and lies allowed by their Editors. Until Journalists admit that they have same cross section of liars and downright rank bad yins among them as any other group in society then they don't deserve any respect in my view. The good people that surely exist among them should stop defending the indefensible liars who could not care less if they ruin an innocent person's life, as long as it furthers some corrupt cause they hold dear. 

    View Comment

  36. The power of the Press has always been acknowledged and indeed feared by those intent on skullduggery lest their deeds be exposed to the World. It is no coincidence that one of the first targets in a war is to takeover the national broadcasting services. The Nazis were expert in exploiting the minds of the people through their Minister for Propaganda Joseph Goebbels , the communist regimes in the Soviet Union in China and North Korea have all used it to control the minds of those they control. The West isn't much different , the BBC has come under much criticism , Sky is controlled by Rupert Murdoch and our main sources of information are owned and operated by a handful of rich individuals. We have all seen how the succulent lamb has worked in Scotland . Do you really think they limit that to just sport? Those who stand up and try to tell the truth are not tolerated , we can look at Jim Spence , Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning to see the varying methods they have to control them . Not many people know that the term "conspiracy theorist" was created by the CIA in order to discredit people who ask difficult questions . The Scottish Press weren't that inventive and plumped for the phrase " internet bampots" to serve much the same purpose . If you have ever been called either of these things I salute you as a free thinking and inquisitive individual . One day we may even see the Press tell us the truth about 9/11 but that's for another day and another forum.

    View Comment

  37. Timtim, IIRC Murdoch sold his stake in Sky recently.

     

    But agreed, I think the average punter now realises that the BBC News is nowhere near as good or impartial as we were led to believe.

    This was reinforced a few months ago when Russia Today / Sputnik was fined £400K by OFCOM for its 'misleading' UK reporting of the Salisbury poisonings.  The vast majority of online readers' comments were along the lines of;

    "…so when is the BBC going to be fined for its misleading coverage of…[insert assorted complaints]".

     

    And talking of RT, I can't recommend enough that it is worthwhile watching the news on RT and Al Jazeera English -to get balance.  

    Yes, they are state propaganda outlets, but are more honest than the BBC, IMO, as they don't claim to be impartial and/or independent of government influence.

     

    At least on a weekly basis I see significant stories covered by RT or Al Jazeera…which don't even register on the BBC or other UK – or even USA – news outlets.

     

    I suppose its getting a bit like Woolworths for online news: we have to increasingly pick'n'mix our news sources – and dependant on the nature / geographical location of the news story itself?

    View Comment

  38. upthehoops 5th October 2019 at 15:47
    I find it breathtaking how Journalists actually believe they have a monopoly on telling the truth. How many times have newspapers and other media outlets been taken to court and lost, because they told harmful lies about people?
    ……………….
    Timtim 5th October 2019 at 17:07
    The power of the Press has always been acknowledged and indeed feared by those intent on skullduggery lest their deeds be exposed to the World. It is no coincidence that one of the first targets in a war is to takeover the national broadcasting services.
    StevieBC 5th October 2019 at 18:20
    But agreed, I think the average punter now realises
    …………………..
    Looking back at the ibrox saga these last few days it is interesting to note how the media was manipulated and the manipulation of the media was used in the battle ground of the ibrox saga. (had to use battleground as such war words were often used in the going on’s down ibrox way)
    One days saviour was the next days Devil.
    What i’m getting at is how much is a clickbait or a few more paper sales worth to a journalists these days?
    Has in this digital age the integrity gone? has the honour gone? for a few more likes and a pat on the back, is that what it is all worth now days?
    Are the real journalists of this world no more than a few more likes and a couple of extra followers? If that is all they strive for they have no right to call themselves journalists.

    View Comment

  39. LUGOSI 5th October 2019 at 10:09

    If Tom Newton Dunn's view is in any way credible where does that leave John Clark and EasyJambo? All that time; expense; paper; ink; typing; proofreading; posting…

    Sorry boys, nae bona fides. By the way.

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

    I was actually monitoring James' tweets from Court that morning and also watched the Politics Live show when Dunn questioned James' bona fides.

    I took the opportunity to Direct Message James in Court about what was said on TV. James probably had a few others do likewise, but he did respond to me promptly with a message that read "we have a bit of history :}" and other observations about Dunn. I just told him to keep tweeting as he does with a factual account of the proceedings.

    View Comment

  40. Cluster One 5th October 2019 at 20:43

     

    upthehoops 5th October 2019 at 15:47
    I find it breathtaking how Journalists actually believe they have a monopoly on telling the truth. How many times have newspapers and other media outlets been taken to court and lost, because they told harmful lies about people?
    ……………….
    Timtim 5th October 2019 at 17:07
    The power of the Press has always been acknowledged and indeed feared by those intent on skullduggery lest their deeds be exposed to the World. It is no coincidence that one of the first targets in a war is to takeover the national broadcasting services.
    StevieBC 5th October 2019 at 18:20
    But agreed, I think the average punter now realises
    …………………..
    Looking back at the ibrox saga these last few days it is interesting to note how the media was manipulated and the manipulation of the media was used in the battle ground of the ibrox saga. (had to use battleground as such war words were often used in the going on’s down ibrox way)
    One days saviour was the next days Devil.
    What i’m getting at is how much is a clickbait or a few more paper sales worth to a journalists these days?
    Has in this digital age the integrity gone? has the honour gone? for a few more likes and a pat on the back, is that what it is all worth now days?
    Are the real journalists of this world no more than a few more likes and a couple of extra followers? If that is all they strive for they have no right to call themselves journalists.

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    You make a good point about the manipulation of the media during the Rangers fiasco but in Scotland both the Big Two have played the game off the pitch for decades. Both have large PR budgets which are used for various purposes the main one being to reel in "fans" from way outside there geographical area.

    Other uses have been to destabilise players at clubs they want to sign through "friends" in the media.

    You are maybe too harsh on the "journalists" mainly because they never were journalists. Not in the true sense. The rich owners have them bought and paid for.

    The internet bampots and their dogged pursuit of the truth and desire to expose corruption are the future.

    View Comment

  41. I've just finished reading a book (only published yesterday) called "This Is Our Story" by Ian Murray MP. The book is Ian's account of Hearts financial collapse into administration under Romanov and the rescue of the club by Ann Budge and the Foundation of Hearts.  Ian was chairman of FOH throughout that period.

    The subject matter is close to my heart, as a fan and shareholder of the club, a subscriber to FOH and with my personal interest in the financial aspects and governance of Scottish football

    Auldheid did a review of Stephen O'Donnell's recently published book about Rangers which has a wide appeal. I don't intend to do the same because it is almost exclusively about the internal workings of Hearts and FOH which most people will not be familiar with.

    However, there are three or four references to Rangers demise in the book which were relevant in the context of what might have happened to Hearts.  I will quote one passage which bears comparison with what happened to Rangers and Sevco.

    To put the passage into context, Bryan Jackson (administrator from BDO) was getting frustrated towards the end of the administration period with Hibs fans and a couple of "Walter Mitty bidders" making repeated attempts to scupper any prospect of deal with the Lithuanian authorities by emailing them with spurious claims and offers about the value of Hearts assets. Cash to keep the club afloat was running out, therefore Bryan was forced to consider a "newco" route so approached the SFA.  

    ……. It was so infuriating for Bryan. He was at the end of his tether. He had no choice but to look at a plan B. That led him to contact the Scottish Football Association (SFA) to make a special exemption to the rules on the consequences of setting up a new company. The member club of the SFA was Heart of Midlothian FC as they were currently constituted. If they were to disband and New Heart of Midlothian FC was set up, the membership of the SFA would fall and a new application would be required. That would have to be approved by the other SFA member clubs.

    The consequence would be to start again either at the bottom of the lowest division or, worse still, in the pyramid system outside the 42 member clubs of the top leagues. This rule was tightened after the Rangers situation. Bryan wanted to test the new rule as it was put in place for clubs that couldn't get a CVA concluded and were, as a result, liquidated. The Hearts CVA was done, but Bryan couldn't get hold of the shares. Ours was not like the Rangers situation. It was all done but the Lithuanian authorities were being obstructive and it never looked as if the deal would be concluded.

    The SFA was steadfast that they would not relent on companies transferring their SFA membership to a new company. they probably had a point by Bryan wasn't going to get this far without turning over every stone. He was close to retirement and had never lost a football club. He was damn sure he wasn't going to let Hearts be his last football job and the one that got away.

    View Comment

  42. easyJambo 5th October 2019 at 23:12

    Am I getting this right, EJ, that Ian Murray is saying, quite categorically, that the SFA were steadfast that they would not do for Hearts (any club) what they were prepared to do for Rangers? They were saying that our club could just die because of it's financial stupidity even as they were preparing the ground to 'save' Rangers, whose financial woes went well beyond stupidity and into the realms of illegality. 

    Regardless of the fact that it would have been just as wrong for a continuation of a liquidated Hearts to be dishonestly shoehorned into the league, the SFA were callously treating one club as sacrosanct while imposing the full force of it's rules, the law and the reality of liquidation on another.

    Why am I not in the least surprised?

    View Comment

  43. Bogs Dollox 5th October 2019 at 22:49

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

    Ah…the two sides of the same coin nonsense again. It truly is tiresome. However, you are right that only two clubs control the media in Scotland. Rangers* are one, and the other is whatever other club the media need to use at any given time in order to smear Celtic. 

    View Comment

  44. Allyjambo 6th October 2019 at 09:26

    easyJambo 5th October 2019 at 23:12

    Am I getting this right, EJ, that Ian Murray is saying, quite categorically, that the SFA were steadfast that they would not do for Hearts (any club) what they were prepared to do for Rangers? They were saying that our club could just die because of it's financial stupidity even as they were preparing the ground to 'save' Rangers, whose financial woes went well beyond stupidity and into the realms of illegality. 

    Regardless of the fact that it would have been just as wrong for a continuation of a liquidated Hearts to be dishonestly shoehorned into the league, the SFA were callously treating one club as sacrosanct while imposing the full force of it's rules, the law and the reality of liquidation on another.

    Why am I not in the least surprised?

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

    Ian Murray is saying that if Hearts newco'd then they would have to start at the bottom according to the SFA rules on clubs unable to achieve a CVA.  Bryan Jackson sought the agreement of the SFA to give Hearts an exemption to those rules in their specific circumstances.

    The special circumstance in Hearts case was that Hearts CVA had already been approved by creditors in November 2013 but, because Hearts majority shareholder UBIG was insolvent itself, Bryan Jackson was having difficulty obtaining the transfer of shares from the Lithuanian administrator, as he/she thought that the shares still had some value. 

    There was no way that Ann Budge, FOH or other buyer for Hearts could proceed with a deal to exit administration if an existing shareholder retained 50% ownership of the club.

    It was now April 2014 and money was running out, with a real chance that a deal would not be concluded at all and that Hearts would be liquidated. BJ told the Lithuanians that the shares had no value and that they would get nothing from a liquidation.  An agreement was eventually reached in May 2014 when Ann Budge agreed to pay £100,000 for the shares, allowing the Lithuanian administrator to demonstrate to the UBIG creditors that they had realised some value from their Hearts shares. 

    View Comment

  45. Bogs Dollox 5th October 2019 at 22:49
    You make a good point about the manipulation of the media during the Rangers fiasco but in Scotland both the Big Two have played the game off the pitch for decades. Both have large PR budgets
    ………………
    For a time David Murray had most of the journalists in scotland sucking on the bone of some succulent lamb, Jack Irvine i believe was the media manipulator for a while followed by a jim traynor and a Level 5 PR and the ibrox club also had a partnership with STV. Do you know by any chance who Celtic’s Media PR is?

    View Comment

  46. Bogs Dollox 5th October 2019 at 22:49 You make a good point about the manipulation of the media during the Rangers fiasco but in Scotland both the Big Two have played the game off the pitch for decades. Both have large PR budgets ……………… For a time David Murray had most of the journalists in scotland sucking on the bone of some succulent lamb, Jack Irvine i believe was the media manipulator for a while followed by a jim traynor and a Level 5 PR and the ibrox club also had a partnership with STV. Do you know by any chance who Celtic's Media PR is?

    View Comment

  47. easyJambo 6th October 2019 at 09:51

    Ian Murray is saying that if Hearts newco'd then they would have to start at the bottom according to the SFA rules on clubs unable to achieve a CVA.

    _______________________________________

    I've always been of the understanding that there were copious amounts of SFA rules in 2012 covering clubs entering administration, including those such as Dundee and Livingston who did so twice, but no mention whatsoever in the rules about clubs who went into liquidation, for the patently obvious fact it would have been futile drafting rules regarding clubs which no longer existed.

    I know you're specifically referring to Hearts obtaining a CVA after Rangers failed to achieve one, but are you suggesting there were existing rules covering CVA failure at the time of Rangers' demise, or that they were drafted later? I know that punishments for insolvency increased in 2015 but wasn't aware of earlier changes.

    View Comment

  48. Allyjambo 6th October 2019 at 09:26
    easyJambo 6th October 2019 at 09:51
    …………….
    This from 11 Feb 2014.
    It has also been agreed that, in future, the SPFL Board will have the sole responsibility for adjudication regarding clubs who might face liquidation.

    “It will be down to the board to determine any conditions for a transfer of membership if a club is liquidated and attempts to go down the newco route,” said the source.

    “That may include any new owners posting a bond for security.”

    Hearts, bottom of the Premiership, are optimistic that they will shortly be in a position to exit administration.
    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/scottish-football/10631856/Scottish-football-abandons-plans-to-automatically-relegate-clubs-in-administration.html

    View Comment

  49. Can we just go back to some real basics here.

    Administration is very much a temporary thing, designed to protect a company from it's creditors whilst getting itself sported out. Realistically it should last for weeks or a few months. It is the administrator's duty to get things sorted out as soon as possible. In theory it can last up to a year and in exceptional circumstances it can last for for over a year (with the agreement of the creditors / Court).

    The point is to get the company back out of administration as soon as possible. The three ways are

    1, Paying it's debts in full.

    2, Getting a CVA

    3, Liquidation.

    Talk of what to do if a CVA cannot be achieved is nonsense.

    It's liquidation, that's it. 

    View Comment

  50. Homunculus 6th October 2019 at 12:12

    Indeed, although I don't think there's any confusion about the legal side of administration and CVAs – but as we've clearly witnessed, the law of the land does not stop our football authorities from drafting rules pertaining to the running of their own competitions which appear contrary to that law. 

    The most obvious example of this was our football authorities re-interpretation of what constitutes a club following the death of one of its two largest supported members. They even use a phrase now along the lines of "the meaning of a club can be different according to context", or words to that effect. How convenient!

    Our football authorities have previously explained away the 'make-it-up-as-you-go-along' nature of their differing treatment between the demise of Gretna and that of Rangers by saying it was their competition and they could make and interpret whatever rules they saw fit.  As I've mentioned previously, it is the equivalent of my grandson and his group of mates pretending they are Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Thor etc., as they are undoubtedly allowed to pretend, but that such a claim of being a Super Hero would obviously have no legal standing.

    There is little doubt in my mind that legally, the club currently playing out of Ibrox is not the same as the club founded in 1872 and which went into liquidation in 2012, but our football authorities drafted the five-way agreement in which they became legally obligated to treat them as if they were the same thereafter. Indeed, there would've been no need for the five-way agreement otherwise.

    View Comment

  51. Homunculus 6th October 2019 at 12:12

     

    Talk of what to do if a CVA cannot be achieved is nonsense.

    It's liquidation, that's it.

    —————-

    Totally agree with you, Homunculus, and the point of my post was not to suggest that Hearts, or any other club, should be given the unstinting assistance from the SFA that 'Rangers' were given, but merely to highlight that Rangers/TRFC were given that assistance that was refused to Hearts and would be refused to any other club, though probably not to TRFC, of course.

    In view of what Bryan Jackson had witnessed happen with Rangers/TRFC it would probably have been viewed as somewhat professionally remiss of him to not seek similar assistance in the event of Hearts CVA failing.

    Imagine, though, if we had a proper and impartial MSM some journalist might have picked up on this story and asked why Hearts should be treated differently from Rangers/TRFC. I realise the rules had been changed but it would have surely made an interesting read to compare the SFA's handling and raise questions over such things as why it had never before been deemed necessary to have rules or protocols in place covering the liquidation of a member club. We here know the answer to that, but it would have served the integrity of Scottish football well to have had it aired in a more public/nationwide medium.

    View Comment

  52. Highlander 6th October 2019 at 11:09

    Cluster One 6th October 2019 at 11:19

    ———————————————

    To the best of my knowledge, the only SFA rule in play was the prohibition on the transfer of membership (except at the discretion of the Board).

    The words used in the book are Ian Murray's. It's down to his interpretation or understanding of what he knew or was told about the SFA/SPL rules at the time..

    View Comment

  53. Some good stuff on here today about the time Hearts were in financial difficulty pre-Anne Budge days. Let's be honest though, there is no chance the SFA would protect ANY club in Scotland they way Rangers* were protected in 2012. Why on earth were the people trying to save Hearts putting so much effort in? As we can see after today's results there is an absolute desperation for Rangers* to be champions again*. Does any other civilised nation see such bias towards one club? I doubt it.

    This may be 2019, but in SFA years we still live in the the 1950's, and the media (those people who could never tell a lie, ever), are right behind that stance. 

    View Comment

  54. Highlander 6th October 2019 at 13:33

    '.. the law of the land does not stop our football authorities from drafting rules pertaining to the running of their own competitions which appear contrary to that law.  '

    +++++++++++++++++

    I rather suspect that the law of the land does not allow the holding company of a newly created business whose 'business' is that of a football club to lie to investors that that new football club is in fact a highly successful business which failed to get out of Administration and crashed into Liquidation, but is somehow still operating as the same club.

    The 5-Way Agreement can say what it likes,but it cannot alter truth, no matter how many damned liars may have signed it.

    View Comment

  55. Rangers football club PLC was never unincorporated and as such been joined at the hip by club and company both as one were liquidated end off.

    Cannot provide evidence to show a seperate club and company in an unincorporated entities, creditors were stiffed in a liquidation and fans were given a new shiny switcheroo company to call their own and pretend that Santa really does exist as does the tooth fairy.

    Clue was in the title Rangers football club ltd, Club and Company and still on the gate as a reminder.

    View Comment

  56. There is a reasonable argument to suggest that if RIFC PLC were to go into liquidation, and as part of that it sold TRFC Ltd to someone else then the club would still exist. The club is the subsidiary company and so long as that exists then the club continues. It would simply have changed owners.

    That is what the authorities want us to believe happened to the previous club. However it is incorrect.

    The holding company was Wavetower (as was) and it is the subsidiary, the club, which is being liquidated. Always worth reminding ourselves of that, Rangers was not liquidated, it is being liquidated, it still exists.

    And back to the age old questions, if it was the same club why did it's registration have to be transferred, why did it have to apply to join a league, why did it lose it's share in the SPL etc. 

     

     

    View Comment

  57. The SFA did not recognise them as the same club* when they were drawn to play Forres Mechanics in the 2nd round of the Scottish Cup in 2012 ( Sept 29). The rules are quite clear clubs finishing the previous season in the SPL will join the competition in round 4. The journey has gone from , the club* I sweated blood for has died-we wish the new club* all the best- if the fans want to believe they are the same club* that is a matter for them – I bought those titles for £1 – they can claim those titles – they are the same club* – ha internet bampots eh. The rewriting of history takes time but once they get there those who question it will pay a heavy price. 
    Not all glib and shameless liars live in South Africa

    View Comment

  58. Every silver lining has a cloud…

     

    So, our favourite dead club is top of the SPL.

    The international break provides a couple of weeks of bragging rights to noisily exploit down Govan way.

     

    In fact, it looks 'probable' that TRFC could still be top of the league at the end of this month… when the RIFC audited accounts are expected to be released.

     

    Gerrard, IMO, is in a strong position to publicly demand more transfer funds for January, in order to deliver a title.

     

    The RIFC accounts might suggest otherwise: that spending any extra money – on anything at all – is just not going to happen.

     

    So, what does King do?

    What does Gerrard do?

    …and what would any newly appointed Director of Football do?

    indecision

    View Comment

  59. I've been reliably informed that the RIFC accounts are going to be publicly released by King on Tuesday the 31st, which happens to be Halloween.

     

    Reason being that;

     

    – the financial results are going to be very scary

    &

    – King will be able to wear a Joker's mask at the press conference.

     

    Mibbees.  enlightened

    View Comment

  60. upthehoops 6th October 2019 at 09:37

    Bogs Dollox 5th October 2019 at 22:49

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

    Ah…the two sides of the same coin nonsense again.  That wasn't my point.

     

    It truly is tiresome. However, you are right that only two clubs control the media in Scotland.

    I didn't say that. I merely pointed out that both have large PR budgets and seek to influence the media to improve their standing and image in Scottish football. The other clubs don't have that luxury.

    Rangers* are one, and the other is whatever other club the media need to use at any given time in order to smear Celtic. 

    Again, I didn't say Rangers or Celtic controlled the media simply because they don't and it would be unreasonable to believe otherwise. They do however have a very strong influence through their placemen, cheerleaders and supporters/sympathisers in the media.

    View Comment

  61. Cluster One 6th October 2019 at 10:07

     

    Bogs Dollox 5th October 2019 at 22:49
    You make a good point about the manipulation of the media during the Rangers fiasco but in Scotland both the Big Two have played the game off the pitch for decades. Both have large PR budgets
    ………………
    For a time David Murray had most of the journalists in scotland sucking on the bone of some succulent lamb, Jack Irvine i believe was the media manipulator for a while followed by a jim traynor and a Level 5 PR and the ibrox club also had a partnership with STV. Do you know by any chance who Celtic’s Media PR is?

    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Their internal PR Dept and Hollicom.

    View Comment

Comments are closed.