Comment on JPP: Perverting Justice? by StevieBC.

    Cluster One 14th October 2018 at 10:09 JD Sports web site…..The retailer say's it is no longer advertising the Hummel strips online because they don't want to risk overselling them. =============================

    SORRY to anyone who now has their tea all over the screenmail


    Yes, CO I had to read that quote a few times.

    Looks like JD has a similarly p!sh PR rep to TRFC.

    Next statement will be rushed out on Friday at 5pm;


    "Due to huge demand, JD Sports outlets across the West of Scotland will be closed during the day, until new TRFC stock arrives."


    StevieBC Also Commented

    JPP: Perverting Justice?
    Unless I have picked it up wrong…

    Phil's latest is suggesting that RIFC is considering issuing a Corporate Bond.

    Off the cuff: I think this is simply a non-starter.

    Corporate Bond issuers are sold, highly reputable organisations, with strong cashflow like Apple, GE (in the past), etc.

    Yes, the Bonds typically pay higher than bank rate, but risk is low for Bond buyers, with lower initiation costs for the Bond issuer.

    RIFC has no such reputation WRT financial management and cashflow.  With 'going concern' red flags, who would even buy an RIFC Bond? (Bears aside.)

    And with all their poor corporate reputation, Shirley the FCA would take an interest?

    JPP: Perverting Justice?
    Extracted from the DR, but assuming it is an accurate, direct quote from McLeish;

    "…We had one or two sniffs around the goals without being tremendously dangerous. There was a lot for me to take out of the game. After that horrible result [losing 2-1 to Israel/sic] it was a wee bit of a lift. [losing 1-3 at home to Portugal/sic]

    But McLeish’s record in his second term in office has now suffered another black mark. It now reads played eight, lost six, won two…"


    McLeish might be a crap manager, but he has been dealing with the sports media as player and manager for 30+ years.

    That quote above reflects – IMO – his inability to deal with the media today.

    It is worrying for him, and worrying for any player who wants to play for Scotland… but who has serious reservations about McLeish's competency.

    For example: Robertson being managed daily by Klopp, played in the Champions League Final in May…then having to play for McLeish?  

    JPP: Perverting Justice?
    Whilst IMHO it seems pointless looking back, (cheating aside),

    If I suddenly realized that my own team I had supported for years was a sham…

    And I had conveniently forgotten the social aberrations of this team for the preceding 100+ years…

    I would be embarrassed.

    I would be angry.

    I would feel stoopid!

    I would wise up.

    I would have ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with said team in future.

    I wouldn't waste my time on social media trying to justify being a supporter of – never mind being associated with – such a deviant club.

    Pre-internet, I was probably happy in my ignorance of Scottish football politics.

    In 2018 everybody who supports a Scottish senior football club is informed.  If not, then they don't want to be informed.

    So, my point is;

    RFC effectively died in 2012.

    No favours should have been made for its b@stard, Frankenstein offspring.

    Scottish suffered before 2012.

    It has suffered since 2012.

    All because of one dishonest, perennially cheating team from Ibrox.  The PC Brigade seem to have avoided anything connected to the social cesspit of Ibrox.

    I would personally prefer a financially poorer, less TV attractive, less sponsor appealing football league…but one which was transparently honest.

    The idiots at Hampden have to be wheeled away first though…

    Recent Comments by StevieBC

    In Whose Interests
    Bogs Dollox, I suppose time will tell just how far reaching the Cold Shoulder effects will be in practice.


    But the salient point, IMO, is that every FCA regulated organisation has to recognise the decision on King's trustworthiness – and WRT to any potential, new dealings with King, they would have to take into consideration the TOP decision.

    In Whose Interests
    Despite the SMSM's disinterest, I'll make a stab at the practical implications of King's 'Cold Shoulder'.

    [Disclaimer: I last worked in Financial Services about 9 years ago, so anyone with current input please feel free to correct / add.]


    1) Impact on King.

    Whilst being an SA resident, King jets into the UK frequently, so I'm assuming that King will 'probably' retain some personal and/or business bank accounts in the UK.  He may have e.g. UK credit cards, insurances, property, and he may have an accountancy or legal practice he uses for his personal and business needs in the UK.


    All those current UK services he receives as a customer of an FCA registered organisation are now obligated to take note of the Cold Shoulder decision – and take any appropriate action.


    In stark contrast to the SMSM: the Cold Shoulder is indeed a biggie for any/all FCA registered businesses.  They cannot ignore it as that would mean they are not compliant with regulations and that their internal controls are deficient – and that would probably result in a painful and costly FCA investigation and hefty fine.


    As King is only the 4th recipient in 50 years, FCA companies won't have a dedicated reporting system for 'Cold Shouldering'.  I would expect that King could be flagged up on the IT systems of ALL his current FCA regulated, UK service providers as a Politically Exposed Person, [PEP].


    To manage Anti Money Laundering, [AML], legislation, PEP's are identified typically as someone who maybe holds a senior government position in an overseas country – and could be the recipient of monies from dubious sources for dubious reasons.  A PEP is potentially high risk, and is monitored.


    So, for example, if King has a personal RBS account and he walked into a branch in the near future, to ask for a new service like a mortgage, loan, credit card limit increase, etc., I expect he will be declined, as "the computer says no".  His account at the bank will already be red flagged to deny any new business.

    Separately, RBS and ALL his FCA regulated service providers will have to make a decision: to maintain or close his accounts.

    It would seem though that the Cold Shoulder detail is fairly explicit: they have to reject his business.  Practically, I would guess he would be given a reasonable notice period to take his business elsewhere.


    When King then walks into e.g. a Barclays bank branch to open a new bank account to receive his rejected RBS business, the bank is obliged to complete their due diligence, [Know Your Customer, KYC], to comply with AML legislation.  King will be later informed by Barclays that "the computer says no" – and his application to open an account was denied.


    This process will be repeated with any bank, insurance company, and probably with his preferred accountants or lawyers.

    He could have difficulties if he wanted to buy or sell a UK residential property, UK listed shares, etc.

    For the next 4 years he will have a major problem operating in the UK.  And after his 4 years are up? Why would any FCA business take the risk of accepting King as a new customer?


    Effectively for King, the 4 years ban could become a lifetime ban in the UK, IMO.


    2) Impact on RIFC/TRFC.


    I believe Metro Bank is the only bank RIFC/TRFC has business with.  I'm assuming that as King lives in SA he is not a regular bank signatory for signing off cheques, payment runs, bank instructions, etc.  However, as he operates at Ibrox effectively as an Executive  Chairman he might be registered as a signatory with Metro Bank.  At the least, Metro will have some initial documentation with King acting as 'Authoriser' on behalf of RIFC / TRFC.

    So, Metro Bank would also be obliged to record on their IT system / Risk controls that their Ibrox business customer is controlled – and Chaired – by a high risk, 'PEP-type' individual.

    Again, Metro Bank would have to make a decision.  Again, I would expect the Bank to notify RIFC that banking facilities could be withdrawn, e.g. within X months.

    The wiggle room could be that IF King steps down as Chairman AND sells down his controlling stake, Metro might retain the account.  But this seems unlikely, IMO, as King would be expected to do this within a very short timeframe – and in good faith.


    If King hangs about Ibrox like a bad smell…

    He 'may' eventually step down as Chairman in the short-term but he'll probably still hold his controlling share stake for longer.

    I would suggest that if King remains the largest shareholder, Metro would have no choice but to close RIFC/TRFC accounts.

    Subsequently, RIFC/TRFC could have exactly the same problems King would encounter when trying to open a new bank account with ANY other UK bank.  A lack of banking facilities could be an insurmountable risk to RIFC/TRFC.


    …and perhaps that could be King's leverage, and his own nuclear option: pay me off or I'll take you all down with me?


    Whatever is really going on behind the scenes at Ibrox, time is of the essence.

    …and they STILL have the 2018/19 accounts to publish!

    In Whose Interests
    Well, I don't know what all the fuss was about on SFM recently.


    If you got all your news from the SMSM, it would appear that King's extraordinary 'Cold Shoulder' was simply a source of mild embarrassment at Ibrox on Friday.

    So far today, there's not a peep online about it: it's history.


    Whereas the Internet Bampots have 1,001 follow up questions about the immediate and longer-term repercussions for;


    – King himself, his Chairmanship and his ability to provide future finance to TRFC


    – RIFC going concerns and the risks to the 'Rangers' brand and business partnering opportunities in future


    – the SFA and the responsibilities of its relatively new senior post holders Maxwell and Petrie WRT governance


    – the Scottish game as a whole, and the negativity this City decision has brought with regards to 'bringing the game into disrepute'.



    Even if King is only the 4th person in the last 50 years – from across the whole of UK business – to receive the 'Cold Shoulder'…it's no biggie for the obedient SMSM!


    In Whose Interests
    Now that the spotlight is focused squarely on King,


    it's interesting to see stories in the SMSM today 'linking' Gerrard to Beskitas.

    And just last week it was also 'revealed' he was / is being considered for the Leeds job.



    In Whose Interests
    As a sporting nation…  


    are we still good at the ice curling…? wink


    I'll get my brush.