The SFA & Rangers Arbitration + Prospectus Angles by Ecojon

I thought as the cash-handover date approached, I would do a quick look at the Prospectus and make some points which I have no doubt won’t change anyone’s already-held opinions.

There are many difficult to spot ‘fudges’ in the Prospectus which make it almost impossible for a potential investor to come to a balanced and informed investment decision. As usual, it would appear MSM isn’t capable of recognising them or has collectively turned a blind eye.

However, these issues may well be played-out IMO at a later date in other fora depending on what actually happens at Ibrox.

One truly significant thing which is missing from the Prospectus is Charlie’s steadfast refusal to join the SPL. In fact, the Prospectus has quite a few positive references about Rangers going to the SPL.

I would have thought that investors, especially institutional ones, might be a tad perturbed at Green’s position on learning of it just as they might also become unsettled at the financial implications of SPL boycotts in Cup Games over the next few years and then eventually at SPL away games.

The decision to boycott the SPL Commission in September and again next month is impossible to understand given the importance to Rangers of the issues being decided. They say they will robustly challenge any adverse decisions legally. Well I wish them luck but I wonder how much sympathy an Appeal Court will allow following their foolish, petulant and childish refusal to take part in the proceedings. To be fair it may well be that Chico has a change of heart before the January meeting after the share money is counted and stored in the warchests. We will see.

I personally don’t think the Scottish Media generally has covered itself in much glory in it duty to provide balanced and objective reporting on the Prospectus or the Rangers saga in general and this failure has helped create an embittered and entrenched support which tends to see itself surrounded by mortal enemies.

But perhaps the real nadir for any kind of questioning, let alone investigative journalism, is the Rangers and the Players’ Union tale and understanding what lies behind the PR smokescreen currently emanating from burnt succulent lamb at Hampden & Ibrox.

I refer specifically to the AIM Prospectus Page 105 section 11.3 – re Alan McGregor, Kyle Lafferty, Sone Aluko, Steven Naismith, Steven Whittaker and Jamie Ness.

‘Rangers’ commenced arbitration proceedings under Article 99 of the SFA Articles of Association on 5 July 2012 claiming the players had unilaterally terminated their contracts of employment in an unlawful manner. I have no idea what compensation would be payable if ‘Rangers’ won at arbitration but Coisty mentioned £30 million worth of players had walked so it’s a potentially significant sum.

Let’s ignore the morality of D&P throwing another £30 million into the newco Rangers £5.5 million pot for the moment and any compensation payable not going to the ordinary creditors.

The big arbitration problem ‘Rangers’ faced in its ‘The Rangers FC Ltd’ legal persona was that it wasn’t a member of the SFA at the time. So a tawdry deal was done by the SFA and presumably D&P (although there could also have been Green input as he was wearing two hats around that time). So, let’s claim a 3-way agreement – Amazing how afterwards nobody involved agrees to these agreements  😦

The upshot was RFC 2012 Plc (IA) was allowed to ‘front’ the arbitration proceedings and let them proceed on the basis that any compensation award went to ‘The Rangers FC Ltd’ because RFC 2012 Plc (IA) had stated it had no financial interest in the outcome. How can an entity with no financial interest be allowed to take arbitration proceedings on behalf of another body which is not a member of the SFA?

There is also the question of whether BDO has given permission for RFC 2012 Plc, which is now in liquidation, to continue to ‘front’ the arbitration proceedings. Or has it outlived the SFA purpose, been cast aside, and replaced by ‘The Rangers Football Club Ltd’. Well that wasn’t the case a week ago when the AIM Prospectus was issued but, as we know, the SFA can move quickly when it suits its purpose.

Just for the record – Up until 31/07/2012, ‘RFC 2012 Plc’ used to be ‘The Rangers FC Plc’ which was incorporated in 1899. ‘The Rangers FC Ltd’ changed its name on 31/07/2012 from Sevco Scotland Ltd which was incorporated on 29/05/2012.

Then we have the left-siding ‘ASDFGHJKL Ltd’ which was ‘RFC 2012 Ltd’ up until 31/07/2012 but had previously been ‘RFC 0712 Ltd’ up until 22/06/2012 just 24 hours after incorporation.

I’m sure everyone will be relieved to hear that ‘ASDFGHJKL Ltd’ had its first Gazette Notice for voluntary strike-off listed on 14/12/2012.

Of course there would be no show without ‘Punch’ in the shape of  ‘Rangers International FC Ltd’ and again there will be much relief that “Cardigan”, if not quite getting his spurs, did take office officially as a NED on 14/12/2012 as did Messrs Hart, Cartmell, Murray & Smart.  And with Chico and Stockbridge as execs, it looks as though the gang’s all here, and it ain’t half hot Mum.

The whole sorry saga over the arbitration points to rottenness and a lack of transparency at the heart of Scottish Football and if it isn’t exposed and dealt with well there really is little hope for the game which will slowly die IMO as the fans walk away and no one is left to boycott.

It’s time the SFA realised that fans do have a right to know and it will have to open-up better lines of communication to them.

Posted by Ecojon

Advertisements

71 Comments

Filed under Charles Green, Football Governance, Guest Posts, Rangers

71 responses to “The SFA & Rangers Arbitration + Prospectus Angles by Ecojon

  1. mick

    fantastic read and balanced article nice to see you keeping going with the truth and facts of it all ,if green was any other CO he would have had the book thrown at him by now, also the media should highlight that rfc newco were give help to join div 3 rather than junior football for 3 years due to no accounts ,we are the victims not them as we have to put up with there dramas each week thanks to the sfa bending every rule for them ,also after all the dramas they are still as blinkered as ever with the msm and we all know on here green is as bad as whyte and murray time will show the true green and the true extent of his and ticketus and whytes sham scam call it what you want keep up the good work ecojon as a feel were in for a lively end to the winter and need blogs like this to highlight the truthful facts the msm are trying to hide from the newco and the rest of the soccer world

    • gary brown

      Im not legal minded at all in these matters but it appears to me that the SFA has broken the rules and made up other ones that just dont exist to allow a new team to join sfa 3.surely they should be taken to task for this,something really stinks here. maybe the suits finances should be looked into .its just not on ,they made the rules so they have got to abide by them,they seem to be bending over backwards to accomodate one club that broke every rule in the book and now try to put the blame on everyone else……WHY…..Gary.

      • mick

        well said gary am intermidate myself in law but after reading pauls blog and all the posts by commentors it has opened up my mind to the rule bending and favours to save rfc and as you say the suits are crooks and it would be nice to see there bank statements and what they own else were we need transparacy before we can move on ,pauls blog is to educate via his thoughts on it all so stick around as there is a long way to go in all this

        • gary brown

          thank you mick,pauls blogs are brill,only wish i was capable of understanding all this cos believe me i would leave no stone upturned.i just cant understand why sfa have not done green for constantly bringing the game into disrepute,he,s doing everything he can to bring down scottish football.WHY is he getting away with it ,nobody else would

  2. mick

    From KDS – here is the whos who of the FTT

    Alright, here’s the ready reckoner – see if your favourite hun is written up in the FTT(T) document! There is some doubt over anyone with a question mark, but that’s a best guess.

    THE BOARDROOM AND PALS
    Red – MIH Goon – Former Chartered Tax Advisor
    Yellow – MIH Goon
    Turquoise – Tax advisor at PWC, advised Klos
    Green – Colin Mitchell – MIH Goon
    Grey – Blair Morgan – Agent/Solicitor to McCann, G. Rae
    Crimson – Trustee
    Silver – Jorge Lera – Agent to Novo
    Blue – Donald Wilson – MIH Goon
    Black – David Murray – Sub-Trust (ST) #1
    N/A – Graeme Souness – ST #2 (not mentioned in the document, but we haven’t forgotten you, Graeme)
    Violet – Alex McLeish – ST #29
    Burford – John Greig – ST #40
    Indigo – John McClelland – ST #46
    Magenta – Andrew Dickson (It’s not Alastair Johnston, as the dates don’t match)
    Scarlet – Martin Bain
    Elgin – Campbell Ogilvie (Dates/roles match, non-player with EBT)

    PLAYERS
    Eversham – Stefan Klos – ST #? (A ton of evidence)
    Ipswich – Barry Ferguson – ST #? (As above)
    Winchester – Fernando Ricksen – ST # ? (Dutch, termination of contract discussed)
    Coventry – Arthur Numan/Lorenzo Amoruso? – ST #5 (v. early number, sought indemnity, which is common amongst foreigners, esp Dutch)
    Purple – Neil McCann – ST #13 (works in media, client of Blair Morgan, even the departure date from Rangers to another club (Soton) fits)
    Gold – Vidmar? – ST #15 (didn’t access EBT funds, Assistant with an age group national team – about the only candidate that fits)
    Skegness – ? – ST #38 (no further info, and no numbers around his number to try and work out an era)
    Ely – Tore Andre Flo – ST # 43 (ton of evidence)
    Norwich – Dan Eggen – ST #47 (dates match, small sum, signed from Spanish club, though not sure why his number is out of order in the chronology)
    Newark – Bert Konterman? – ST #52 (Dutch lawyer, paid to leave. Aside from being paid to leave, interchangeable with the next person)
    Lichfield – Ronald de Boer? – ST #56 (Dutch, but not paid to leave – doubt the huns would have had to give him a top-up to join a rich Qatari club)
    York – Kevin Muscat? – ST # 61 (fits the chronology, paid a large %age through the trust, matching with Muscat’s 1m for 1 season, paid to leave)
    Manchester – Egil Ostenstad/Paolo Vanoli – ST # 62 (paid 20k to leave – most likely Egil)
    Berwick – Jean Alain Boumsong – ST #63 (documents seized by police (!) paid to leave)
    Bristol – Jesper Christensen – ST #64 (Foreigner, sought indemnity, trust established to pay him to “return to” [Denmark] (par 107 of judgement))
    Cardiff – Gavin Rae – ST #65 (Agent is Blair Morgan, so most likely a Scot, paid a large %age through trust)
    Inverness – Nacho Novo – ST #72 (Ton of evidence)
    Selby – Dado Prso – ST #73 (Paid a large %age through trust, paid bonus through trust, sums match amount listed by BBC, ST # fits chronology)
    Dundee – Zurab Khizanishvilli – ST #76 (Foreigner, indemnity, paid large % through trust, sums match amount listed by BBC, ST # fits chronology)
    Newport – Alex Rae – ST #79 (Dates match, fits chronology, sums match)
    Carlile – ? – ST #81 (Paid part wages through EBT)
    Whitehaven – ? – ST #82 (Paid part wages through EBT)
    Birmingham – Marvin Andrews – ST #87 (Paid large % through trust, fits chronology)
    Bath – Sotirios Kyrgiakos? – ST #88 (Higher profile player, paid large %age through trust, fits chronology, paid to leave)
    Glastonbury – Thomas Buffel – ST #91 (Dutch lawyer (by this point all the Dutchmen were exhausted, and Buffel was ex-Feijenoord), fits chronology)
    Doncaster – Julien Rodriguez/Olivier Bernard – ST #92 (Paid wage+CL bonus through trust, fits chronology, process of elimination)
    Dorchester – Alan Hutton?/Peter Lovenkrands? – ST #95 (Paid CL bonus through trust – Hutton/Lovenkrands are tough to fit anywhere, TBH)
    Warwick – Bob Malcolm? – ST #96 (Most likely old “FTP”, given he was the only one to have a trust opened for a CL bonus and then be paid to leave)
    Hampstead/Highbury – ST #97-98 (Un-used, most likely opened for the likes of Hemdani and Fanfan, but these players were paid bonus through payroll)
    Camden/Islington/Kensington/Balham/Brixton – Chris Burke, Federico Nieto, Ian Murray, Steven Smith, Kris Boyd ST # 103-108 (these guys were eligible for CL bonuses and we know they had EBTs for small sums. I suspect Boyd’s contract was upgraded in 05-06 and then EBT funds were then thrown in on top of the bonus money, giving Boyd a larger sum)
    Beverley – ? – ST +109
    Maidstone – Sasa Papac – ST # 112 (One of the last 2 trusts still active late in the piece)
    Guildford – Steven Davis – ST #113 (as above)

    To be continued…………

    for any1 intrested in a post what could you do with this

    • ecojon

      Who was ‘The Fixer’ then?

    • JohnBhoy

      Violet is Alex McLeish? Well, I never!

      [Paul, I know The Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination against cross-dressers, and quite rightly so, but you know Ally’s views on unions.]

    • The tribunal decided to maintain anonymity and whether posted elsewhere or not, i don’t thnink it’s a good idea to start adding names, even though most are pretty well obvious. Would be interested to hear Paul’s take. I believe he has commented previously on similiar instances – just can’t find the post.

  3. Spot on. We no longer trust the SFA and we require trust restoring steps to be taken. The question is what are they and how do we make it happen?

    • mick

      maybe we need our mature academics to create a campagin to out them and place people like turnbull hutton and fans reps being involved at top level @auldheid a not for profit board voluntary run by academic fans who love soccer no wage involved that would free millions in wages up for grass rots am sure there are lots of mature academic scotsmen and from any country would love to get involved in something like this

    • ecojon

      @ Auldheid

      That’s the difficulty and I watch what TSFM is attempting. Personally I think we need to get through to the SFA that fans in general are no longer prepared to just have their ‘news’ filtered and processed by MSM.

      But whatever is decided it must be something which is achieveable and it can’t cost too much and it can’t be totally open access which in itself would cause probs.

      An answer might be to have live podcasts of all SFA press conferences and also ‘talking heads’ on day to day issues which might come-up.

      There is a chance some money could be made providing content for the local geographic TB channel model that is being rolled-out although STV seems the favourite for the Glasgow licence – don’t forget they are also partners with Rangers and I have no doubt that Rangers will be selling content to TV to be shown on the Glasgow channel as will all sorts of other sports and organisations with good visual message.

      Back to the present, the SFA need also to be more proactive about rebutting comments from journos using ‘sources’. That’s another difficult area because the SFA like all organisations are tempted to ‘leak’ stories to sympathetic journos to get their side across in any controversial situations.

      So as well as deciding what we want SFA or indeed SPL and SFL to do – how do we even make sure that we have a fair and representative opinion pool to draw from.

      It is a huge task and is imposible to tackle in one go. So we must decide on the overall plan and work on bits that can be achieved and slowly the bigger picture will take shape – not easy and not quick I’m afraid and I feel time is starting to really press.

      • I think there is a way to get our message across and I’m working on it. It depends on all representative supporter groups/trusts /associations acting as one but independently.

        This is difficult but not impossible (I have a story to tell on that some day).

        • ecojon

          @Auldheid

          Traditional print media is dying – I reckon the Scotsman is hanging on by its fingernails and The Herald by its fingers. The Record is also struggling badly circulation-wise.

          If it was easy Auldheid someone would have already done it 🙂 It has to be done but the football authorities won’t play unless they can see a gain as well and that could be a problem given the diverse and fragmented nature of football fans – even when they support the same club. And then there i the internet anarchy factor a well.

          Lots of thought and wise heads required.

        • lordmac

          put a pair of hand cuffs on the door at hampden then phone the daily record, the sun, the herald tell them you intend to form a working party to get them removed from office and you want enquiry have your freind put it on you tube.

  4. mick

    theres drama agian today montrose have told the truth and the bears are in a up roar about a truthful factual page in todays programme boycott is the cry agian well done to montrose for telling the truth about the newest club in scotland cliaming to be rfc and for not opting for the msm script that jabba and green have made up to fleece the bears

  5. overtimexxy45

    Great article

  6. Budweiser

    ecojon
    You have been asked to find a charles green success story by some on here. Sorry but I can’t help in finding a successful tale for investors or companies, although there may well be some.
    Charles is however a success in aims flotations. Panceltica is a good case in point – £250 odd million raised – and that was without the pre ipo. Didn’t really matter , the investors lost everything. Charles has had many more ‘successful’ flotations.mostly as the ‘face’ of the company, then , job done, he moves on. Whether the company fails or not,Charles will have his dosh
    He certainly has a nice little earner at Ibrox,and again, whatever happens to the company,good or bad, he will move on,probably to retirement .Unless he sees another opportunity. And let’s face it , he is a sublime opportunist.

    • ecojon

      @ Budweiser

      I certainly did try and I did find something which I ran the other day as a chico good news story. It was so good I can’t remember what it was about – but all the regular Bears on here got the invitation to make a suggestion and so far there has been none.

      Perhaps they are facing the same problem that I did 🙂

      I would never take it away from him that he is good at what he does – he is a firt class operator. My concern about him is what wreckage will be left behind and that is still my worry.

    • gary brown

      but he should remember something,anybody that goes against the (peepul)or does them any bad turns are in danger of being shot or bombed or some other nasty end. SO BEWARE CHICO.

  7. Mick

    You have truly outdone yourself. 5 comments so far. Are you planning more?

  8. mick

    for any1 wanting to thank montrose for there integritial stance today you can buy yourself or friend or family a gift here also there is a donation link and forum

    http://montroseclubshop.co.uk/

    yes vi its me myself and i

  9. Having now read this article twice, I am left with the thought – what is there in it that is new and hasn’t been examined on the blog before. Please Paul, give us a post soon or we will all just keep going over the same ground again and again.

  10. mick

    I’m sure everyone will be relieved to hear that ‘ASDFGHJKL Ltd’ had its first Gazette Notice for voluntary strike-off listed on 14/12/2012.

    @ vi theres something we dident know so its well worth a read and comment it was not mentioned in the media but is now archived via ecojons post so in future if it pops up we have a referance for it its vital all info the msm dont mention is stored some were for future posts it may be relevent or not only time will tell

  11. Robert

    The Investor’s Chronicle view (see http://www.investorschronicle.co.uk/2012/12/13/shares/news-and-analysis/rangers-to-debut-on-aim-Cfp9SvZqxYCJG1VyljMyYI/article.html ) is:

    There are some reasons to think this football IPO might buck the trend of awful performance by football investments. For one thing, the assets – which include Ibrox (the club’s stadium), the Murray Park training facility, the players and the brand – add up to around £100m. Moreover, by next May – when totting up the money from pre-IPO fundraising, the Aim listing and expected season ticket sales – RIFC could be sitting on a net cash pile of £50m. The IPO, however, gives RIFC a market cap of £50m. One to watch.

    • ecojon

      @ Robert

      I did read the Rangers Press Release in the Investors Chronicle.

      Quite a strange line to take about bucking the IPO trend. There used to be nearly 40 UK football clubs which had been floated. All but 2 fled that fund raising model – they are Arsenal and Celtic and Arsenal shares aren’t really traded publicly anyway. Celtic shares tend to be fairly static so not much movement there, in relative terms, either.

      I really wonder why Rangers want to have a share flotation to end-up with a £50 million warchest next May – that line is nonsense and shows that the writer hasn’t actually read the Propectus although he is not alone in the media.

      If you want to read a bit more about the probs with share capital funding search guest posts under my name as I have written 3 separate articles on it.

      Share tipsters in my experience rate slightly worse in the success stakes than racing tipsters 🙂

      If you want to find balance on the reporting of the same story have a look at the FT article which I poted a link to yesterday as well as the Investors Chronicle article as I am a great believer in studying both sides.

  12. GWG

    1st class piece of observation my friend, there are many, many questions to ponder on though I doubt very much that the “demics” on here will want to go into. I haven’t read the comments yet but I have no doubt it will be the same denials that the same “demics” will frivolously endeavour to gloss over.
    Well done!!

  13. i see the self appointed ” greatest fans in the world ” , the green seat brigade could not even sell out their midden when at the same time GIVING thousands of tickets away , you could not make it up !!! RANGERS, THE ONLY SHOW IN TOWN !

    • mick

      carson who mentioned bums on seats and full houses its not an issue celtic are in the dosh and thats the bottom line we ” greatest fans in the world ” messi likes us so there you go

  14. ecojon

    @ GWG

    Bet you thought you would catch me out with ‘demic’ 🙂

    I had to think for a sec but I have a great interest in Ancient Greece and the memory penny dropped as I reached for the dictionary 🙂

  15. Carson, meethinks your jealous of Celtic football club’s history and success. Go on admit it! After all your wee sevco team are really no at the races eh!
    When I grow up I don’t wan’t to be like you.

  16. messi likes us so there you go !! did he get a free ticket then ? and jealous of what ? offended by everything ashamed of nothing ! as i have said have a wee look under the boardroom carpet ,and after that read what the European Clubs Association states about sevco . chin chin old bhoys.

    • If the ECA are so supportive why are you not playing in Europe? Oh thats right the ECA are a group of clubs promoting self interest, often to the detriment of the game.
      UEFA on the other hand are the ones who decide if the same Rangers as the one that went into oblivion can play in their competitions and -gasp- they decided it was not the same club as it could not provide three years historical accounts to prove that they were. I’d sue UEFA if I were CG.

      But if that makes you happy ECA luvs ya.

      • ecojon

        @Auldheid

        And the traditions continue! They bring out a flotation Prospectus which only covers 3 months of financial figures from end of May till end of August when they could have provided 6 months to the end of November. I wonder what financial picture that would painted for potential investors?

    • carson, adam et al.

      there is one thing alone which will prove that The rangers, Rangers international, rangers fc are the same “club”.

      if they are the same – they will pay all the debt THEY owe.
      if they do not pay the debt, there is a reason for not paying it.

      the reason being – they are not the same club.

      is that easy for you to understand?

      • Adam

        Did Dundee pay all their debt ? Are they the same club ?

        Did Motherwell pay all their debt ? Are they the same club ?

        Did Leeds pay all their debt ? Are they the same club ?

        • carl31

          Did Rangers pay all their debt? Are they the same club?

          Suppose it depends on what you mean by ‘club’.

          • None of the above clubs were forced into liquidation and ceased trading as the same entity. They paid what debt they could, Rangers dodged it by being liquidated. It was a debt dodging device that worked, the side effects were no longer being the same trading entity.

          • ecojon

            @ carl31

            I think that is the knub of the question and it would appear the answer change depending on what rules are being applied and the interpretation of those rules.

            To me the real problem is that Rangers takes the bit it like from each definitions and dicards the bits it doesn’t like. So, for me, the controversy can only be finally settled if Rangers accept a fixed position.

            But we all know chico won’t do that because it would means giving the fans a few unpalatable home truths and that could lose seat & share sales.

  17. mick

    carson your so what a bout ya and for that reason am out lol

  18. JimBhoy

    Anybody without hate for anything and maybe a wee bit sad for dead kids wanna just fuk fitba. your beliefs. breathe without fukin greetin… like me

    • comon michael my old son its just a bubble , dont go in the cream puff i was only havin a giraffe ! why dont you go calm down and have a cuppa tea and a bun ? or maybe a couple of mick jaggers? chin chin .

    • CONDOLENCES TO ALL ,HARD TO TAKE IN , AND CAN NOT BEGIN TO THINK WHAT THE FAMILIES ARE GOING THROUGH , SADLY , VERY SADLY I THINK THE AMERICAN PEOPLE HAVE NOT SEEN THE LAST OF THIS .REST IN PEACE WEE ONES .

    • JohnBhoy

      JimBhoy, carson doesn’t mean anything by it, just banter. See his later commendable comment.

  19. JimBhoy

    if one of my kids died no sure i would be here

    • no place for guns in any society , they are not toys , this must be the last .time for the American congress/senate to grow a pair.

      • Budweiser

        carson
        Not often I agree with you. Maybe this will be America’s ‘Dunblane’. Although the NRA are such powerful lobby in the states, that perhaps the best outcome we can hope for , is a dilution of the gun laws.eg a banning of assault rifles. This might not seem like a lot to us in Europe, but in American terms, it would be huge.Hopefully it would be the first crack in the dam and lead on to more meaningful measures.Today I listened to an American anti- gun campaigner give figures on death by gunshot in various countries. I don’t remember the exact figures but ALL the figures for countries in europe, japan,etc were like 48; 35; 23 etc. in the USA the same year the figures for gunshot wounds were 10,000.

  20. carl31

    Events in Connetticut give a sense of perspective and issues often discussed on these pages pale into insignificance.

  21. mick

    sad news at xmas a was just reading about the boy that did the shooting his profile his mum took him out of school and educated him herself he was classed as a genius and from a well to do broken family the fact he was took from school must have been a major factor this must have enstalled hate in him agianst the school system also he was kind of excluded from society when took from school although there is not 1 thing to pinpoint what americia has to do is study his life and see what can be picked out to make sure similiar cases dont happen agian the lads brother works for the accountants Ernst & Young.the marriage seperation and the took out of school must have filled him will hate and triggered him to do it a just hope americia 1 day changes its gun laws as it is not normal for guns to be as freely avialable as beer

  22. mick

    flicking throw all my usual bampottery sites billynowell has a new song a think its well 1 of his best just hot of the cyber press

  23. ecojon

    I hate to say this but, despite Obama’s moving speech, I see little actually changing especially when you hear the gun lobby ‘take’ on it that if guns weren’t banned from schools then the Connecticut tragedy would never have happened because the murderer would have been frightened to die.

    Seems to me that few mass killers – especially shooters – have much fear of death as they are usually so screwed up mentally.

    America isn’t faced with just a very powerful Gun Lobby but the ‘gun culture’ is ingrained in a significant section of society and in a way reflects all of what is worst about American foreign policy. But we must never forget the compassionate, giving side of America as well.

    I just feel that evil will continue to triumph for a helluva long time when it comes to a basic twisting of Constitutional Rights and I don’t see where the change will come from as it seems evident that the mounting body count of slaughtered children counts for little in the face of people who demand to retain their legal right to own and carry guns.

    We are all left virtually helpless with our prayers and thoughts for the innocents and their families & friends who will never ever be able to celebrate Christmas again without sadness.

    It’s also a wake-up call for everyone to love and value their children and do all you can to keep them safe and see them grow up as happy, balanced and compasionate human beings.

    Perhaps that is the actual message of Hope we all need to be able to cling to as a means of not only getting through this shocking and senseless mass murder but to find a path to a better society.

    It means not locking this experience away in a mental box until it is overtaken by an even greater atrocity. And it means building the local grass roots movement in America which can sweep aside the power of the US PR Lobby which reigns supreme with the financial muscle to make or break even Presidents.

  24. ecojon

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/timing-the-only-issue.19685936

    Dodds piece on the Flotation is basically what I would expect from him.

    But there’s an echo in what he says about possible fan input on the Ibrox Board which translates across to posts above with Auldheid about Scottish fans and the SFA.

    Dodds doesn’t actually mention it but a major problem with fan representation on the Ranger Board is how Board Member will be elected or elected as there are currently fiercely competing adversaries – each with different backing groups – going for it.

    So, if it’s a difficult decision for Rangers fans, how much more difficult it will be for Scottish football fans to decide who will take their message to the SFA especially if a route is proposed outwith the current ‘channels’.

    And of course we still have the major problem of determining what message should be carried from the fans and whether that message is truly representative of their wishes and opinions.

    One thing Scottish fans do not need or deserve is a carpet-bagger who starts to get too comfortable when their feet are firmly planted on the carpet under the Hampden boardroom table.

    • Ecojohn

      You rightly point out the dangers/issues but that should not stop an attempt being made to get accountability from the SFA.

      The perfect way may never be found but if a way that works or even makes progress is found no matter how imperfect, it is surely worth attempting?

      watch theTSFM space.

  25. Adam

    December 16, 2012 at 12:49 am

    Leeds were liquidated.
    ==================
    In true panto tradition.

    Oh no they were’nt.Yet another Rangers myth to keep them on the side of right.

    Here is the Leeds Utd situation as set out on CQN. It appears that under the smoke a CVA was agreed and that is why Leeds were not liquidated and why Rangers were.

    Under a CVA creditors get part of their money back on agreement under liquidation they get what the liquidators can retrieve from the carcase of the liquidated company.

    In The Rangers case, unless BDO find something objectionable about the purchase of Rangers assets , The Rangers pay NOTHING to creditors. The way it has been done is simply a device to enable the over reaching entity that is Rangers to avoid liability to its many creditors which is fair enough, but to then say it is the same company/club/entity is just taking the piss from creditors and tax payers alike. That is why Montrose got it right in their match programme and as msm attempts to rewrite history fail, history will eventually show the truth. Debt dodgers to the bitter end.

    From CQN 4 April 2012.
    I see Leeds United are being held up as a model for Rangers to liquidate and emerge as a new club. Leeds United’s circumstances are highly unlikely to bear any relationship with those at Rangers unless Duff and Phelps can agree a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement.

    Leeds United AFC Ltd entered administration in the control of KPMG Restructuring on 4 May 2007 and on the same day were sold to a new company Leeds United Football Club Ltd subject to a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) being agreed. Both Leeds United AFC Ltd and Leeds United FC Ltd were controlled by Ken Bates.

    A CVA requires 75% of creditors (by value) to vote to accept a reduced percentage of the money they are owed. The company was forced to act as HMRC, who were owed in excess of £6m, had issued a winding up petition which was due to expire on 25 June 2007.

    Before creditors voted on the CVA several other bidders came forward with offers for the club, however, the vote, on 1 June 2007, returned 75.02% of creditors accepting the CVA offer (75.20% after a recount).

    Creditors can challenge a CVA within 28 days of the vote. On the 28th day, 3 July 2007, HMRC challenged. With the CVA subject to a challenge, KPMG asked for further offers for the company to be submitted by 9 July 2007. Despite the extended offer period, the administrators still accepted the offer from Ken Bates Leeds United FC Ltd.

    With a CVA agreed, subject to challenge, the Football League transferred Leeds United AFC’s league share to Leeds United FC Ltd under its “exceptional circumstances” provision. The League imposed a 15 point penalty on the club for the 2007-08 season for failing to satisfy the outstanding legal challenge in time, necessitating the ‘exceptional circumstances’ rule.

    HMRC withdrew their objection to the CVA the following month. Leeds United subsequently appealed against their 15 point penalty citing a CVA had been agreed and that the league programme does not allow time for spurious challenges to be dealt with. The Football League refused the appeal.

    Believing Football League procedures were at fault, not their own behaviour, Leeds United served the League with a High Court writ to challenge the points deduction, however, both parties agreed to abide by the findings of an arbitration panel hearing.

    The arbitration panel found against Leeds United citing the following two reasons:

    A director of Leeds United FC signed an earlier agreement not to commence any proceedings against the League.

    Leeds United waited 7 months before commencing the action, which brought unnecessary sporting consequences on other promotion chasing clubs, specifically Doncaster Rovers, who would no longer be in an automatic promotion spot if Leeds’ 15 points were restored.

    In summary:

    Leeds United AFC Ltd’s administrators achieved the necessary 75% support for a CVA.

    They withstood the challenge from HMRC, paid creditors and concluded the transfer of assets, including League share, to Leeds United FC Ltd, according to the terms of the CVA before winding up the old company. No loose ends were left.

    This is not a Liquidator’s Charter. Provisions in football only exist to transfer a League share from one company to another if creditors are satisfied, either by being paid in full or, as with Leeds United, with 75% agreeing to accept a diminished amount.

    http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=8535

    yer a wee rascal Adam 🙂

    • COYBIG

      @Auldheid

      I hope that auld heid is on broad shoulders because you’re going to need it when the Marching on Together, who’s a ‘Leeds fan’ sees that post. According to him, there was no CVA but it’s still the same Club. And that’s the bottom line, why? Because the Leeds fans said so. Or was it that Stone Cold Steve Austin guy from the WWF? Ah, who cares, you’ve shown there was no liquidation of Leeds so there’s no need.

  26. lawheid

    Don’t know if this the best post to comment on but having read the prospectus, there are a few things that either bother me or perplex me about it –

    1. The Deeds – On page 77, Part XI, DM Hall didn’t have the opportunity to inspect the Title Deeds to Ibrox and Murray Park but assumed that there isn’t anything wrong with properties that would impact adversely on their value. But how could they think that when they themselves haven’t seen the deeds?

    2. “The Same Club” – In Part X of the Prospectus (p68) and elsewhere in the Prospectus, the lie that the newco Rangers that plays in SFL3 is the same one as the oldco Rangers that played in the SPL last season is mentioned. Who exactly are they trying to fool?

    3. FFW – Part XIII, page 92 – The Share Capital of RIFC seems to be registered in the name of FFW Secretaries Ltd, initially as 1 £1 ordinary subscriber share (unpaid) then divided into 100 1p ordinary shares. Is FFW Secretaries Ltd a subsidiary of FFW (Field Fisher Waterhouse LLP), who provide legal advise to RIFC on English Law? If so, would this not be a conflict of interest?

    4. Japan – Page 1 – Does anyone have any idea as to why RIFC would not want the Prospectus to be distributed to Japan specifically?

    5. BDO – There is no mention whatsoever of the APA (Asset Purchase Agreement) being called into question by BDO, the liquidators of Oldco. Can BDO, if they find something not right with the APA entered between Green and D&P, void the APA and thus allow the assets to return back to Oldco?

    6. Shareholders – Part 1, p5, B6 and Part XIII, p103, 5.2 – Who exactly are in these organisations?

    Hargreave Hale Limited 4,949,000 8.58%
    Artemis Investment Management LLP 4,286,000 7.43%
    Blue Pitch Holding 4,000,000 6.94%
    Margarita Funds Holding Trust 2,600,000 4.51%
    Cazenove Capital Management Limited 2,450,000 4.25%
    Legal & General Investment Management Limited 2,000,000 3.47%
    Insight Investment Management (Global) Limited 1,900,000 3.30%

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s