Fergus McCann v David Murray

1062
115404

How Celtic Turned the Tables on their Glasgow Rivals by Stephen O Donnell:
A Review by Auldheid.

Stephen’s previous publication, Tangled Up In Blue provided a detailed history of the rise and fall of Glasgow Rangers FC PLC from 1872 until their demise in 2012. Clearly a lot of research had been done to cover the period in such detail and his follow up publication Fergus McCann v David Murray etc carries on with that tradition. It is a smorgasbord of a book with many different issues succulently served up in its 350 pages.

It tells of events under David Murray’s tenure at Ibrox which began in November 1988 and ended in May 2011 when he left Craig Whyte holding the rope that became a noose just under a year later in April 2012 when Whyte was found guilty of bringing Scottish football into disrepute whilst Murray claimed he was duped.

Readers of the book will come to the conclusion that if anyone did the duping it was David Murray and it wasn’t just Craig Whyte he duped but Scotland’s national game. If ever Murray were to be tried for crimes against Scottish football then this book would be cited as evidence.

It was against the background of David Murray’s tenure at Rangers that Fergus McCann first arrived on the scene in April 1989 with proposals to inject £17M of New Capital into Celtic that the Celtic Board rejected as per minutes:

Proposals put forward by Fergus McCann to provide finance for various capital expenditures were unanimously rejected by the Directors’; and then again in August of the same year: ‘Mr McCann’s latest proposals were discussed and it was hoped that this was a final discussion on the subject. Latest proposals were rejected by Directors.
Fergus later returned to the fray and the chapter on how he was successful in ousting the Board in 1994 is an informative read, particularly if in that period single parenting cares took precedence over caring for Celtic.

I was amused reading the tale of discontent aimed at the old Board after a Ne’erday 4-2 defeat to Rangers in January 1994 when a bemused Walter Smith was watching the hostility aimed at the Celtic Directors box, one fan in the main stand screamed at him, ‘What are you looking at, it’s got fuck all to do with you.”

For me anyway there were a few “not a lot of people know that” moments like that in the book.
The contrast between Fergus McCann’s and David Murray’s style was immediately evident, but the impact of Fergus’s shorter tenure from 1994 to 1999 became more than evident after McCann left and the author does not miss the role servile journalists played and hit the wall for turning Celtic supporters against McCann during his tenure, whilst they dined on Murray’s succulent lamb. A role that in the end helped bring about Rangers end, but not the culture of servility when covering the activity of Rangers FC PLC successor club from 2012.

Sky TV get it in the neck too and if David Murray played the part of Colonel Mustard in killing Scottish football through his financial recklessness and duplicity, Sky are the lead pipe whose toxicity still dictates the nature of the current state of play.( I said it was a Smorgasbord)

Fergus kind of did what it said on the tin. In his case a tin of nippy sweeties, but it was interesting to read about his early years when even then he was described as “a cheeky upstart” but his “idiosyncrasies” and appearance under a bunnet, disguised a sharp if impatient business mind where for him getting straight to the point was akin to procrastination.

So too has Murray’s early years been covered including his rejected attempt to buy Ayr Utd, a rejection by Ayr Directors, who considered Murray was too hot headed and most volatile, that infuriated him.

Their conclusion that he was trying to get Ayr United on the cheap with only £125k of his own money involved was an indicator of his strategy of using other people’s money to invest and not his own. Other people including unsuspecting taxpayers to a tune of £50 million or so.

As you follow the narrative of both Fergus McCann and David Murray and the events that surrounded them, you end up wondering how so many could have been fooled for so long by one guy, but when you have the Scottish media in your pocket it was difficult to separate fact from fiction during the tenure of both. You also wonder how Murray remains a Knight of the Realm since.

Luckily for Celtic Fergus knew business fact from PR fiction and avoided the illusion in which Celtic’s main rivals continue to struggle to this day.

The great pity is that few, if any of the Scottish main stream media will even give this book a mention, because if you don’t write about it, it never happened, except it did and this book is proof.

I therefore recommend anyone interested in the future of our game buys it and asks, is it not now time to revisit the purpose of Scottish football?

Auldheid

1062 COMMENTS

  1. Mickey Edwards 5th October 2020 at 13:05

    Homunculus

    "Anyway, as you said this isn't really about Scottish football. "

    Neither are blank pages.

    ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

    Except of course when it is the "SFA's handbook of honest governance" indecision 

  2. It is not clear whether the new shares have raised cash or repaid loans. We will have to wait for the accounts for that information.  The new shares represent around 14% of the enlarged capital.

    The "share information" page on the TRFC website hasn't been updated as yet with the effects of the share issue.

  3. Falkirk awarded a 3-0 victory , with Kilmarnock's request for a postponement denied.

    A pragmatic decision which must have required the grudging consent of Kilmarnock because the Board were not empowered by the SPFL membership to make such a decision.

    Possibly also may indicate that Kilmarnock pled guilty to some breach or other of the covid protocols?

     

  4. John Clark 5th October 2020 at 18:35

    A pragmatic decision which must have required the grudging consent of Kilmarnock because the Board were not empowered by the SPFL membership to make such a decision.

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

    That referred to the league competition, not to the Betfred Cup. Indeed the SPFL had previously intimated that 3-0 defeats would been awarded against defaulting clubs who were unable to play their Betfred Cup ties because of Covid.

    https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-statement-46963

  5. The SPFL is basically just doing what they said they were going to do. 

    "If a club is unable or unwilling to field a team in a Betfred Cup Round 1 group stage tie, or fails to provide sufficient negative test results, the club concerned will forfeit the match (on the basis of a 3-0 defeat)."

  6. easyJambo 5th October 2020 at 16:38

    It is not clear whether the new shares have raised cash or repaid loans."…

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    The latest  trade shown via J P Jenkins is

    "..18.00GBp                         714                                   20/12/2019

    Would JP Jenkins necessarily  have been involved if it was just a debt for equity  loan repayment(s)

    Or perhaps Stuart Gibson has come through on his promise?

     

  7. Just a footnote to RIFC share ownership, I note for the first time that Alastair Johnston holds 2,499,940 shares (equivalent to £500k).  It hasn’t been reported previously in RIFC accounts, so I can only assume that he acquired them at the time of the previous share issues in September and November 2019.  He may have paid cash or had a loan converted at that point. 

  8. One thing that can be ruled out is Dave King accepting shares for his 5m loan as that would push him well over the 30% limit and trigger a new offer , something I'm sure he would avoid like the plague . His own company  https://za.investing.com/equities/micromega-holdings-ltd-chart has been showing some strange activity, a massive spike in June (on low volume) has all but evaporated and if it was a head fake to attract new investment then it seems to have failed . King remains in financial trouble and he could well have called in his loan hence the cash raised at Ibrox . I suspect the auditors were refusing to sign off the accounts unless substantial cash was raised and faced with losing everything the Board has gone all in , kicked the can down the road and will be relying on a Galactico being sold in the January transfer window. What's the definition of insanity again ? I am astonished that in this environment that they have managed to raise that amount . The alternative that it was a debt for equity swap would leave us questioning who had debt? I cannot imagine that Mike Ashley or Close Bros would be interested in worthless shares rather than the cash they are owed . The annual accounts will be more interesting than usual this year.

  9. easyJambo 5th October 2020 at 16:38

    “..It is not clear whether the new shares have raised cash or repaid loans.”

    Timtim 5th October 2020 at 21:28
    “”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Looking more closely at the form SH01(ef)  filed with Companies House today , I see that ‘no shares were allotted other than for cash’.[I’ve never paid attention to that rubric before!
    Presumably that means ( from what I have read elsewhere) that the issue in question actually did raise new cash, and was not in repayment/part repayment of loans?

     

  10. John Clark 5th October 2020 at 21:48

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

    I think that probably relates to trades where the shares are paid for in other ways, for example shares in another company.

    Debt for equity is surely a cash sale, as you are reducing the cash you have to pay out by doing it. The same effect as bringing cash in. 

    Just my guess though, I'm happy to be corrected. 

  11. I'm just more confused at this new share issue.  crying

    On the face of it, I'd agree that it would seem that this activity is related to auditor concerns.

    I'm more curious now to see the RIFC 19/20 Accounts due at the end of this month.

  12. Homunculus 5th October 2020 at 22:23

    '..Just my guess though, I'm happy to be corrected. '

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    My 'reading' thus far has only ben this:

    "Issuing shares for consideration other than cash

    A company can issue shares for consideration other than cash. Common examples include issuing shares in return for property, assets the company needs or (e.g. in a takeover) shares in another company. CA 2006, sec582(1)provides that shares allotted by a company, and any premium on them, may be paid up in money or money's worth (including goodwill and know-how). If shares are issued for non-cash consideration, this must be stated on the return of allotments sent to Companies House (Form SH01) and details of the consideration must be supplied."

    https://www.companylawclub.co.uk/issuing-shares-for-consideration-other-than-cash

    What I draw from that is it  that if shares are issued for other than cash, the fact has to be recorded on the SH01(ef)

    But I'm still very much in infant class when it comes to trying to get some proper understanding of what people like CW and certain football club people have a basic  instinct and intuition for!

  13. A couple of things stand out to me on the recent SH01.

     

    "(including bonus shares)" which may indicate a proportion of the share allocation were not bought but given free as a bonus, e.g. buy one get one free.

     

    Also, "Non-Redeemable", why buy shares you cannot then later sell?

     

    Unless perhaps the purchaser is after the underlying assets??? Which again begs the question; who has bought them?

     

    As usual, time will tell

  14. normanbatesmumfc 6th October 2020 at 10:59

    '..Also, "Non-Redeemable", why buy shares you cannot then later sell?'

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    I think the 'non-redeemable refers to the company not having agreed that it will or may to buy them back from the shareholder at a future date.

    The shareholder can still sell them in the ordinary way, I think. And they appear to be useful if Liquidation happens.

    But, hell's bells, trying to make sense of all the different kinds of shares is difficult.

    No wonder there's plenty of scope for shysters and conmen in the world of business.

  15. easyJambo 5th October 2020 at 19:45

    Just a footnote to RIFC share ownership, I note for the first time that Alastair Johnston holds 2,499,940 shares (equivalent to £500k).
    ……………….
    Now Mr king said at his last AGM that he would rather hold shares in a club than a holding company, and that they had a working group working on it.
    Mr Alastair Johnston the last time i looked was a person of significant control in that company.Mr Alastair Johnston has never been passed as a fit and proper person to be involved with the ibrox club since 2012, how would that go with the SFA if his shares are transfered from the holding company to the club?

  16. easyJambo 5th October 2020 at 16:38
    The “share information” page on the TRFC website hasn’t been updated as yet with the effects of the share issue.
    ………………..
    3 pages of not much information Oct 5, 2020.

  17. Forfar has now fallen foul of the Covid testing regime and has had to forfeit their game tonight against Dundee, with a 3-0 win awarded to Dundee.

    Never mind, Neil Doncaster is heading the Betfred scoring charts with two hat tricks to his name already. mail

  18.  

    Cluster One  6th October at 17:51

     

    Mr Mac Giolla bháin makes reference to paying off Dave King which is supported imho by the cryptic reference to exchange controls vis-a-vis what?? by Mr Low.

  19. The last few share allotments have all had "bonus shares , this time around there were 30.2m /42.2m  . 

    which begs the question how much was converted/raised was it 6.04m or 8.4m . The suggestion that King lends 5m and is repaid 8.4m just 1 year later seems fanciful , even Close would offer better rates than that (approx 65% APR) however to get 6m back from a 5m loan would equate to 20% which would seem "Closer" to the mark . I hope that is as clear as mud

  20. So now Edouard has tested positive. It will be interesting to see how Celtic and the SPFL handle that one. 

    Now I wonder who Celtic are due to play in their next game? Will it go ahead if Celtic don’t have GPS tracking on his contacts and Test and Protect say that the whole squad has to self isolate.

    Testing itself could be an issue given the international break if players are away, even with Scotland. 

  21. easyJambo 6th October 2020 at 23:32

    So now Edouard has tested positive. It will be interesting to see how Celtic and the SPFL handle that one. 

    ==========%%%===========

    Ask Peter !

     

    I note that Peter took a step back from the frontline when it came pushing the Scottish games case for a return for fans and/or bailout at the weekend past. Two of his friends, Doncaster (SPFL) and Mulraney (SFA) appeared on live radio to deliver a significant broadside to those in government.

    I think that over time, national governments are increasingly going to devolve more interpretation/implementation around Covid policy to more localised political administrations and where possible, to governing bodies in charge of X, Y or Z, eg. SFA/SPFL.

     

    ps. I hope Edouard gets well soon.

     

     

     

     

     

     

  22. RC

    I’m sure French Eddy and, of course, your ‘bromancer’ Peter, will be delighted with your expression of good wishes.

    Forgive my cynicism here, but your ‘sincerity’ sounds a bit like Joe Biden, and the mainstream media in the US, wishing Trump good health. 

    My apologies if you meant that you hoped he wouldn’t miss the upcoming game v SEVCO.

  23. IMO, the virtual radio silence around the RIFC share issue speaks volumes!

    Issuing c.£8.5M of new shares is a pretty big deal for any Scottish club.

    But, no mention on the TRFC website and nothing in the SMSM so far, (unless I’ve missed it?).

    On the face of it: you would think that a significant share issue – and during these tough times – would be trumpeted loudly by both TRFC and the SPFL?

    The silence does suggest that the upcoming RIFC financials might be more desperate than usual?

    And, this non-reporting does raise the other query: if our fellow Internet Bampot Easyjambo hadn’t highlighted this Companies House update – would anybody know about it today? 

    Well, you wouldn’t hear about it in the SMSM – including the BBC and Tom English, (who apparently “craves” journalistic honesty!)

    enlightened

     

  24. If only they had taken the £15m for Alfred on offer from more than 100 clubs. 

    Maybe then they wouldn't be scrambling around issuing confetti

    I can't see Dave taking shares in return for his loan. But who knows. Desperate times; Desperate measures.

    It could be new money because they won't get a going concern sign off without it and then the accounts would have to be drawn up on a "break up basis".

    But who has that kind of money and is willing to more or less write it off with an economic crisis on the horizon?

     

     

     

     

  25. StevieBC 7th October 2020 at 11:33

    '..IMO, the virtual radio silence around the RIFC share issue speaks volumes!'

    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    I ,years ago now, criticised the 'business' reporters of the BBC  before now for their (his?)absolute failure to report on the whole  mucky, mucky business of the collapse of RFC of 1872 and its liquidation . To the shame of individual staff of the BBC Lips were zipped to the detriment , I believe speaking for myself of their professional integrity as 'journalists'.

    And of course lips those lips  have have remained  zipped as far as exposure and full truth telling about the absolute business disgrace of SDM and the whole bunch of subsequent chancers from CW down to the latest 'investor' looking to make money  on the back of a sports lie that claims  that their business enterprise set up in 2012 is something that it is not.

    No surprises then that the financial doings of RFC plc are not at all critically questioned  any more now than in 2011/12.

    There is a deep deep desperation in the  media and in Scottish Football  to maintain the double myth – that TRFC is RFC of  1872 and that it is as rich as Croesus Murray claimed RFC of 1872 to have been – up to the point where his disgraceful boasting was exposed as being based on untruths.

  26. ……. and now Covid hits the Scotland squad, with Stuart Armstrong positive and Kieran Tierney and Ryan Christie self isolating for 14 days. All three will miss Thursday’s game.

  27. Bogs Dollox 7th October 2020 at 13:04

    If only they had taken the £15m for Alfred on offer from more than 100 clubs…

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

    BD, to be fair, it was only 34 clubs,

    …or is it 36 today if we include 'PSG via Qatar'?  indecision 

    And as far as covid goes: it's already proving problematic to safeguard players domestically.

    Adding international games, (& European games), to the mix must multiply the risk of players/squads being infected?

    Shirley, protection of domestic leagues must be the number one priority for all clubs in Europe and globally…?

  28. StevieBC 7th October 2020 at 15:43

    Shirley, protection of domestic leagues must be the number one priority for all clubs in Europe and globally…?

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

    It is still unclear what the latest two week suspension in the 5 most affected Health Board areas, of adult contact sports, means for football. Professional sports are exempted.

    Does that just mean the elite league (Premiership), or is the whole of the SPFL deemed as professional, or does professional extend to semi-professional clubs in the SPFL, pyramid and junior clubs?

    There are serious questions to be asked of the JRG if it is the Premiership and no-one else.  After all the SFA’s PMGB has representations form the lower leagues of the SPFL, the Highland and Lowland Leagues.

    If they have protected the Premiership because of their testing regime but have sacrificed all other football, then competitions such as the Betfred Cup should be scrapped, and the start of the Championship, L1, L2, LL, EOS, WOS etc. delayed still further.

    It will be ironic in the extreme if the only league allowed to continue is the one with the most cases. 

     

  29. easyJambo 7th October 2020 at 14:56

    ……. and now Covid hits the Scotland squad, with Stuart Armstrong positive and Kieran Tierney and Ryan Christie self isolating for 14 days. All three will miss Thursday’s game.

    ===========%%%============

    After Peter spoke to his friends at the SPFL and somehow, by a slice of incredible luck (effectively a 4/1 shot,..see below*), Celtic managed to land the date they wanted for the first Old Firm match, I’m sure there was a smile, a nod and a wink shared amongst friends on the 6th floor at Hampden.

     

    “The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men,……. Gang aft agley”

    Robert Burns

     

    That said, much can still happen in 10 days……..

     

    ps. Best of wishes for the health of the individuals involved re.Covid news.

    As for Scotland, the Robertson/Tierney conundrum is gone for the time being. Hopefully, at least IMO, it will mean a conventional back four.

     

    • The week before the fixtures came out, Iain Blair said on live radio (BBCS / Sportsound)  that there were four possible dates for the first OF match of the season.
  30. reasonablechap 7th October 2020 at 16:09

    Oh ye of great wisdom and an intimate knowledge of the inner workings of your pal Peter’s brain , will Edouard have to isolate for 14 days in France prior to returning to 14 days isolation here ?  Will Peter shut down Scottish football over this period in the interests of sporting integrity and basic fairness ?

    And what Ian Blair actually said was that there were “around” 4 possible dates .

    But league secretary Blair has now insisted it would have been impossible for the SPFL to accommodate the request.

    Speaking on BBC Sportsound, he said: “It wouldn’t have been possible for us to do it.

    “The first one has to be somewhere between round one and round 11 and when you look at international and European dates there are only around four dates you can put it in . ”

    So , could have been three , coulds have been five . Why did your pal Peter insist that it was to be a choice of four dates , and how did he select them (criteria )?

  31. As for the perceived sleekitness of the media in not comprehensively covering the issue of shares at Ibrox as headline news…….It’s certainly more newsworthy than other recent avenues of a dark light blue conspiracy on here, such as Andy Halliday appearing so much in the media and the colour of Rangers socks….!

    ….it’s almost as though there is a pandemic ripping through the sport, a transfer window slamming shut and an upcoming Euros21 play-off semi-final for Scotland competing for coverage.

    When more detail becomes public, there might be something worth discussing.

  32. Ha!

    The Internet Bampots are fully aware that the Ibrox club manages the SMSM sports pages e.g. via daily copy/paste instructions.  The interminable Morelos 'transfer' saga is just one pathetic example.

    More significantly, the Ibrox club manages the SMSM by dictating which topics are NOT allowed to be reported.  We all witnessed this in 2011/12 WRT to Rangers' impending financial implosion, and more recently WRT the shocking Castore fiasco – ripping off supporters – has been glossed over.

    Now, this site is being 'directed' as to which topics are 'news worthy' and suitable for discussion – and which topics are not!

    SFM 'is open to all' and ad hominem attacks don't add anything to the debate… so I'll just leave it there.

  33. Rangers chairman Douglas Park has revealed that his side's funding gap of £10 million – highlighted by Dave King at the club’s last AGM – has already been filled. (from May 2020)

    Maybe the reason the Press have been quiet on the new shares is because it was merely a debt for equity swap from last seasons shortfall and reason enough not to publish any interim accounts . No point trumpeting about money that has already been spent when there is still a queue of people waiting for their slice of the pie . That's Memorial Walls, Close leasing, Mike Ashley,deferred wages, outstanding transfer payments and issues with Hummel Elite and possibly Castore still to be addressed . Did I miss anyone? well probably . I'm still not sure if they have sorted out the problems with the roof . King did acknowledge they were an issue last year . The financial problems haven't gone away , if anything they will have got worse without any match day income especially from euro ties and the inability to raid the collecting tins from armed forces day . In normal times £8.4m raised from selling shares would have been a large talking point so it is strange why zero mention has been made. More detail needed? as we know details and facts are not a requirement for the media to spin a positive story especially when the alternative is a possible move to PSG via the Middle East according to an unnamed source .

  34. I am occasionally reminded by Mrs C that I'm a throwback to the male chauvinistic generation of my old man. "You're just like your father" is a sentence that has occasionally passed her lips in tones that do not signify that it's a favourable comparison!

    I have never been a Tam Cowan of some years ago ( when Tam was 'disciplined' by the BBC for being politically incorrect for objecting to Fir Park allowing women's fitba'), but I've never been more than indifferent to it in the same general kind of way that I'm indifferent to Cricket or Rugby League : no harm to it , but doesn't do anything for me ( although I was pleased at the national team's  achievements a few years ago).

    But when listening to Leeanne  Crichton on Sportsound tonight I believed I was listening to the next regular host of BBC Sportsound when Richard Gordon retires to pursue an acting career- (he's 60 now, and has, I believe,  a hankering for amdram!)

    Leeanne  was superb in discussing the options for Clarke following the covid problem coming on top of the already late injury problems he faces vis-a-vis the game against Israel tomorrow. broken heart She was, it seemed to me ,far better at analysis, diagnosis, and prescription than any of the chaps. Very well prepared , highly articulate, good-humoured, and brave enough to defend and hold to her opinions, and made the guys reel back a little. 

    I believe that if something happened to Steve Clarke before tomorrow's game, Leeanne could take immediate charge of the team selection, and fire the team up to give the performance of their lives. 

    And she was equally good alongside  Richard at tonight's game between St Mirren v Partick Thistle.(What a result, btw)

    I have not been paid for this endorsement, and, of course, I admit that I have ,on a personal level, all the time in the world for Richard Gordon going back long before the liquidation of Rangers of 1872 ..

  35. Statement O’Clock at Parkhead…..

    Full statement at …..http://www.celticfc.net/news/18629

    It begins…….

    FOLLOWING today’s news regarding Ryan Christie, he has reiterated his adherence to all relevant protocols while on International duty.

    In light of this, Celtic confirmed today that it aims to open dialogue with the Scottish Government and other authorities to fully understand the self-isolation procedures for those players who continue to deliver negative test results, as Ryan has.

     

    Sounds like Celtic want to self isolate from the rules.

  36. JC totally agree, and no I bet you're not related to Leeanne Crichton.  

    I was singing her praises here last season: I had watched the BBC TV Sportscene Results programme on a Saturday afternoon.  Hadn't seen the programme in years so didn't recognise the host, or the two pundits – one of whom I later found out was Leeanne Crichton.

    Very impressive and – obviously – knew her stuff.

  37. StevieBC 7th October 2020 at 22:20

    ‘..JC totally agree, and no I bet you’re not related to Leeanne Crichton’

    “””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””

    Absolutely not, but maybe I woudn’t mind being related to such a talented person.

    In an idle moment today I looked into the UEFA website to see where Lord FFSFoulkes was with his review of football in Europe, which I mentioned  at the tail end of August or thenabouts.

    I couldn’t navigate my way to the relevant page , and found myself exploring the membership of the various UEFA committees. 

    What I found about Scotland’s representation on committees was this:

    Ethics and Disciplinary Committee: Neil Doncaster

    National Associations Committee: co-opted member, Alan Macrae

    Referees’ Committee: Hugh Dallas (deputy chairman)

    National Teams’ Committee: Rod Petrie

    Youth and Amateur Football Committee :Ian Maxwell

    (There are other Committees on which Malky McKay , Andrew Niven , Dr John McLean, and Chris Rawlings serve; but I know nothing of any of them except Dr McLean who appears to have done a wonderful job on the medical side of trying to get football alive again)

    But, objectively speaking, looking at Scotland’s reps in UEFA, doesn’t ones heart sink?

    Maxwell, Macrae, Doncaster, Petrie and Dallas?

    What price sporting int

     

  38. ‘LORD TYRE – T Sadler, Clerk

     Tuesday 7th October’

    That was what the Rolls of Court said.

    And, in the words of a wonderful character in Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey/Maturin series, I say “Balls and bang me ar.e’ !

    There was I, up at the crack of dawn (relatively speaking) to make sure I could get the ‘virtual hearing ‘on the phone.

    Damn the bit of it! 
    Tuesday was not the 7th.

    Some level of inefficiency, my lords, in the SCTS, which I humbly pray may be corrected! 

    FFS! 

  39. And in relation to the recent RIFC plc share allotment, I have to say that RIFC plc does not appear to have a website on which one can find info about its directors and major shareholders 

    I have asked Companies House about this. They should be able to say. 

     

  40. John Clark  

    And in relation to the recent RIFC plc share allotment, I have to say that RIFC plc does not appear to have a website on which one can find info about its directors and major shareholders 

    I have asked Companies House about this

    =========%%%==========

    A penny for what the Companies House folk say when they receive another e-mail from you !

    Free Tip: Before you send your next missive,…try harder looking for what you claim not to exist.

    It’s on the club website. One click away, at the bottom of the page

    https://www.rangers.co.uk/investor-information/3xiJwTahGEhZWGZAUcKMy1

  41. The most influential and powerful political operator in Scottish football appears to be confused.

    Here is an extract from the Celtic statement of 11/08/2020…

    “…We have led the way in working with the football authorities and Scottish Government to establish the most rigorous, effective protocols and working practices, which ultimately led to the resumption of football. We could have done no more in this area….”

    http://www.celticfc.net/news/18417

    Yesterday Celtic released another statement (link in recent post) part of which contradicted their previous.

    “…Celtic confirmed today that it aims to open dialogue with the Scottish Government and other authorities to fully understand the self-isolation procedures for those players who continue to deliver negative test results, as Ryan has….”

     

    The truth would appear to me moreso that there is no confusion, Peter doesn’t do confused. It’s more a case of self-interest and putting the availability of players in front of public health.

    Last Saturday on radio, Peter’s friends at the governing bodies made a very public case, putting pressure on government to ease restrictions for fans being allowed into stadiums and/or a government bailout of sorts for the game. Fair enough.

    But this latest push regards a players availability, that Peter is very much a part of, appears to me to be well out of order given the context.

    Public health very much trumps a footballers availability for a game.

     

    Oh, Peter….when you are next leading the way regards working with the authorities in establishing ‘the roolz’,….pay attention, so you as you fully understand them.

  42. reasonablechap 8th October 2020 at 01:48

    "…It’s on the club website. One click away, at the bottom of the page"

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    No, that's a link to the website of The Rangers Football Club Ltd, company number 425159, not to the plc that is its parent company.

    RIFC plc is not the parent company of the liquidated RFC of 1872.

  43. John

    This is your post that I replied to…

    “And in relation to the recent RIFC plc share allotment, I have to say that RIFC plc does not appear to have a website on which one can find info about its directors and major shareholders 

    I have asked Companies House about this…”

     

    The following is the first paragraph from the link I provided…

    “This is the area of the Rangers website for information about Rangers International Football Club PLC, the holding company of The Rangers Football Club Limited.” 

     

    I’ll leave it there, but please let us know what Companies House come back to you with mail
     

     

  44. If King has taken a debt for equity deal then it would push his holding to over 35% and trigger a new offer so I think we can rule that out . If Park has converted a loan it would take his holding to 26% giving him that crucial 25% that gives him extra powers. Whoever has the new shares and I expect them to be split among a handful of Board members then if it excludes King then King' shareholding drops to 22% and he loses that control on issues that require a 75% vote. I believe the current share deal would need King's permission and he's not the type to give something away without getting something back. Of course if it was a choice between giving up his control and an administration then he wouldn't have much of a choice. So to sum up , Directors agreed to fund the shortfall in the short term and would be repaid from incoming transfer fees from the sale of Morelos/Kent/Tavernier /Kamara or whatever superstar the Press could drum up interest in . When it became obvious that no such sales were happening then converting the loans to equity was the only option to satisfy the auditors. The January window is now crucial hence the Press not letting up on their advertising campaign.

  45. Timtim 8th October 2020 at 10:59

    The Qatar window is open until the 25th apparently.

    https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-transfer-news/alfredo-morelos-given-rangers-transfer-22803117

    This is a funny wee quote.

     

    Morelos is understood to have turned down a potential £13m move to the Gulf state during the summer, at a time when Lille and a host of other European big spenders were monitoring his situation at Rangers.

     

    Not Rangers, Morelos turned it down. Are we supposed to take it that Rangers were willing to accept it.

    This is a good bit as well

     

    But the Qatari interest has remained strong throughout and Al Duhail believe they may be able to tempt him to move to Doha with the extra lure of a potential fast-track move to Paris Saint-Germain through an established link-up between the ownerships of both clubs.

     

    I wonder who he is going to partner, or indeed replace, Neymar or Mbappé. 

  46. I meant to say, where is the figure of £8m for 40m RIFC PLC shares coming from.

    The PLC is de-listed, the shares aren't traded on a market, so why are people saying they have a specific value. 

    Unless it is fulfilling an existing agreement, where the price of 20p per share was part of the deal.

    It's entirely possible that people are just making it up of course. 

    Continually issuing shares, to pay off loans, which were required to keep the business afloat cannot really be described as a sustainable business model. 

  47. Those Directors converting their loans to shares have accepted the figure of 20p , this gives the illusion that the market cap of that company is valued at 60m which all helps to balance the books where the reality is the shares are worth far far less thus the company is worth far far less and is actually trading while insolvent. On a properly regulated market this wouldn't happen which is one of the reasons King removed them from such scrutiny and no NOMAD would be associated with them . King remains a person of significant control and is cold shouldered by the City which continues to limit their ability to raise funds .

  48. It's Russian Roulette in the boardroom , in order to have any future and attract outside investment then they need to get rid of King completely and the only way to do so is to buy him out . At the current rate of 20p it will take just over 13m to be rid of him . The value of the club* is very much like the club* itself , an illusion of something else entirely. King is in no position to write off his holding , he is no billionaire , his wealth is not off the radar in fact at the moment he needs every penny he can get to keep his own business afloat . Let's face it , every business is suffering at the moment and investors are more interested in the return of capital than the return on capital . Football has always been a casino where investment is more likely lost than gained . Douglas Park has his own business issues and there must come a time when he can no longer afford to fund this basket case of a company at the expense of his own. If the recent issue was just to cover the funding of the shortfall then King's loan of 5m plus interest is still outstanding . 

  49. Timtim 8th October 2020 at 12:23

    King remains a person of significant control and is cold shouldered by the City which continues to limit their ability to raise funds .

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

    That observation is an interesting one in relation to the recent share issue.

    PSCs are normally notified to Companies House when a person exceeds 25% of the share capital in a company and again should they drop below that figure.

    Prior to the share issue King (via New Oasis) held 25.58% of the shares in RIFC. He also had an interest in Laird which was intimated as providing a funding facility.

    If New Oasis was not involved in any way in the recent share issue, then it's holding would be diluted to 22.01%, thus King would no longer be a PSC. The absence of such a notification could suggest that New Oasis has maintained a shareholding in excess of 25%.  However, it could equally be explained just by a delay in submitting the form.

    Had all the shares gone to New Oasis, then they would hold 35.96% of RIFC, thus prompting another general share offer, which would fall foul of the Takeover Panel's cold shoulder sanction. That seems an unlikely possibility.

    I'd suggest that we all need to be patient and see what unfolds.

  50. ( Heavy weather made of the game tonight, but happily the penalty shoot-out ended well) 

    On the subject of PSCs, I note that Alastair Johnston was clocked as a PSC in 2017,presumably because he had 25% of the shares.

    There has not since then been any CH notice of ‘cessation of Alastair Johnston as a PSC’ , as far as I can find.

    However, on the wee bit of TRFC Ltd’s website (if one scrolls down far enough to find a reference to RIFC plc!) there is found this ,in the bit relating to the directors of RIFC plc:

    “Directors shareholding interests are as follows:

    …Alastair Johnston holds 2 499 940 ordinary shares .”

    I am no arithmetician and can be quite clumsy using my keyboard calculator, but that number as a percentage of 302 881 982 (total number of shares in issue) seems to be only 0.825384%.

    On that basis, how could Johnston be a PSC? 

    Clearly there ‘musht be some mishtake’! 

    By Companies House? who only react to what they have been told?

    or by Jimmy Don Blair as company secretary for both RIFC plc and TRFC Ltd? 

    What is Johnston’s shareholding, one wonders?

    And why do RIFC plc/TRFC Ltd seem to have such difficulties with the everyday paperwork that other, much more complex , enterprises handle with ease?

    Well, given that one is dealing with a plc that claims to be the holding company of a football club that is legally in Liquidation perhaps one ought not to be surprised that their handling of ‘official’ paperwork gives its directors and secretary problems that  other holding companies do not encounter!

    Yes, that must be it.broken heart

    It’s an old axiom: the initial falsehood is easy enough, but the consequential chain of falsehoods necessary to sustain that original  falsehood pretty soon gets to be difficult to sustain!

    Every word of every public statement made has to be carefully guarded, and as little as possible committed to print, and a fire-fighting exercise has to be set up to try to snuff the flames of truth! 

    Of course such fire-fighting is as ineffective as the fire-fighting of the Blackett and Webb rubber company volunteers in the quite wonderful ‘Singapore Grip’ tv serial!

    Truth actually prevails, one way or another, whether this year, next year, or in five, ten, fifteen years or whatever.

    In the meantime,  those inclined to lie, for commercial, money-making reasons, are rather to be pitied.

     

     

     

  51. https://www.rangers.co.uk/investor-information/3xiJwTahGEhZWGZAUcKMy1

    Also from the Evening Times

    https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/news/18782930.stuart-gibson-makes-5million-investment-rangers-part-8million-ibrox-share-issue/?ref=twtrec

    SCOTTISH businessman Stuart Gibson has made a £5million investment in Rangers to become the fourth largest shareholder at Ibrox.

    Documents lodged at Companies House earlier this week showed that £8million worth of shares in RIFC plc had been allocated and Gibson is the main money man behind the transaction.

    Gibson – who was born in Paisley and now operates in the Far East- previously provided a £1million loan to Rangers and has now stumped up a further £4million in cash to secure an 8.27 per cent stake in the Light Blues during the latest Ibrox share issue.

    The property tycoon is the founder of the Redwood Group and is currently the co-CEO of ESR, a leading real estate firm that operates in China, Japan, South Korea, Singapore, Australia and India.

    His significant Ibrox investment comes as George Taylor, Douglas Park and George Letham also put more money into their boyhood heroes to further strengthen Rangers’ financial position.

    More to follow.

  52. From the above information about the new share issue:

    Stuart Gibson 25,000,000 – £5m – (£1m dfe swap)

    George Taylor 7,500,000 – £1.5m

    Douglas Park 3,500,000 – £700k

    George Letham 2,500,000 – £500k

    Unspecified others 3,750,000 – £750k

    Total – 42,250,000 – £8.45m

    We don’t know if the Concert Party members (GL, GT, DP) have done a DFE swap.  If so, King may have had his loan(s) repaid in cash as he was limited in his ability to increase his equity stake.

    The cash raised from Gibson may be used to repay loans or fill any shortfall in working capital.

    Given the continued “closed door” games with no immediate prospect of large numbers of fans in stadiums, it would not surprise me if Celtic also sought to raise cash from a share issue before the end of the year.

  53. Again, forgive my ignorance, but has what he paid for the shares been made public.

    Knowing how many shares he bought, directly from the club is one thing. Knowing how much he paid is another.

  54. Homunculus 9th October 2020 at 14:11

    Again, forgive my ignorance, but has what he paid for the shares been made public.

    Knowing how many shares he bought, directly from the club is one thing. Knowing how much he paid is another.

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

    The form submitted to Companies House regarding the new share issue states that the price paid was 20p a share.

  55. Thanks for that ej, 

    I take it they just used the figure which was agreed in the debt for equity swaps.

  56. easyJambo 9th October 2020 at 14:26

    "..The form submitted to Companies House regarding the new share issue states that the price paid was 20p a share"

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Ha,ha, eJ:  calculating  8.27% of 302881982 (total number of shares) would give Gibson's share holding as 25045339 , and using £5m as the price he paid, I calculate the share price he paid as 19.9614… But I suppose they rounded up?

    Gibson must have got a hefty cut of the proceeds of ESR Cayman Ltd's sale of its interest in ESR Australia Logistics Partnership to Empire2.. or some such.

    It's a wonder to me what a highly successful businessman thinks he might gain by investing in any football club, let alone a dangerously impoverished one (even before covid-19). 

    £5M is a helluva price to pay for a vanity kick!

  57.  John

    ..However, on the wee bit of TRFC Ltd’s website (if one scrolls down far enough to find a reference to RIFC plc!) there is found this ,in the bit relating to the directors of RIFC plc:.."

    =========%%%=========

    Moral of the story being that intrepid investigators should look a little harder before firing off missives of complaint to Companies House.

     

    Bit like the general clamour on here against the MSM for not mounting the latest Blue Prism speculation bus on the recent share issue. As I said, when relevant factual detail becomes public on this matter is when the media might be more likely to cover it, at a time when many issues are competing for space.

    I'm no defender of the MSM and there are many, many faults and issues, just not in this particular case. For examples of issues…. what hasn't been covered by the MSM as much as it merits of late is the Julian Assange trial. This touches on many angles that are actually important for our future. Meanwhile the Blue Prism has looked at conspiracies involving Andy Halliday getting too much time in the media and the colour of Rangers socks.

    That makes me chuckle because I recall something that made me laugh the other day. It was a Celtic fan (Frank IIRC) on Clyde Superscoreboad having a go at the said Mr.Halliday. Within his discourse on live radio he mentions "the Old Firm" but suddenly remembers that this isn't allowed anymore within the Sevcosis community and attempts to retract angry

    Apart from the humour to it, it also serves paints a realistic picture as to how many actually think when the guard is dropped.

     

     

     

  58. So ,(just to annoy folk !) , I went out to watch the football last night and , as I'd suggested , we were all papped out at halftime in extra time , and then had to rattle home to catch up on BBC highlights . I'm as thick as mince but even I could see that coming .

    reasonablechap

    I'm reading through your post as slowly as I can and have reached the bit where you claim to know that Celtic asked for, and got , a specific date for the first meeting of the cheeks this season , but with no links to where this information is available . I get the impression that PL is living in  your noggin rent free . Obsessed ,preoccupied , bedevilled and tormented ?

  59. reasonablechap 9th October 2020 at 15:33

    ".Moral of the story being that intrepid investigators should look a little harder before firing off missives of complaint to Companies House"

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    Perhaps my email to  CH was intended to raise a question as to why RIFC plc as the parent company does not have its own website? 

    Given that there appears to be a requirement on plcs   to have certain basic finance data maintained on a website (so that investors/potential investors can easily find up to the minute information)  one would have thought that the Board of the holding company  would have ensured that they complied with that requirement by having their own website, instead of piggy-backing on the webpages of their subsidiary!

    I mean, who would think of looking for info about 'RIFC plc' on the website of 'The Rangers Football Club Ltd'?

    I might just be checking that the Regulatory authorities are happy that the RIFC plc Board are not at the madam.

  60. Paddy @ 18.01

    Re RC

    This guy has already been 'sussed out' by quite a few on here.

    The Lawell Syndrome (obsession,  paranoia etc) is a strain of the argumentative personality disorder he clearly suffers from.

    I no longer comment on the content of his contributions – ever since he 'called me out' on being party to twisting the truth – apparently I targeted him re his bitter, delusional views on asterisk SPFL title for 2019/20.

    Watch out Paddy, Stevie BC et al (and especially the man currently 'in the spotlight', JC ) as you , variously, have had the audacity to challenge him vigorously. You may become the latest manifestations of his condition.

    On the other hand – Pedro could do with a break!

    He gies me a laff and serves as an antidote to covid restrictions!.

  61. And for the sake of completeness, I have just had a reply from the BBC Complaints Team to my recent letter expressing dissatisfaction with the reply to my first letter.

    The gist of it :

    " .. We appreciate that you feel strongly about this matter and are sorry to learn that you were not satisfied with our earlier response.

    We raised your further concerns with the senior management who have nothing to add to the response you've already received……

    …if however you are still dissatisfied you can contact the BBC's Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) The ECU is stage 2 of the BBC's complaints process.

    If you wish to contact the ECU please write to it directly within 20 working days of receiving this reply. Please explain to it why you believe there may have been a potential breach of standards or other significant issue for it to investigate. You can write to……"

    With a nod to bect67's post of 20.39 above, heaven forfend that I should be like an 'RC', but that letter is like a red rag to a really mad bull!broken heart

    I look forward to composing a courteous, calmly  reasoned but very brief letter to the ECU.

  62. bect67 9th October 2020 at 20:39

    '..a strain of the argumentative personality disorder he clearly suffers from.'

    """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

    If I can come back to your post, bect67, I would say that probably none of us would wish harm upon or want to add to the difficulties of anyone who may not be wholly in charge of himself by reason of clinical disorder!

    But, of course, 'RC' is wholly in charge of himself, and is not some poor disordered person suffering as a human being in the mental anguish and pain of an 'obsession'

    I may be wrong of course, but your man ( in the various blog personalities he has adopted) is in as difficult a situation in 2020 as he has been  at any time since 2012, trying to defend an indefensible position!

    He has learned to try sweet words and a touch of humour and a 'recognition' that the SMSM is not entirely to be trusted , but the mask slips from time to time!

    Who's the PR guy at Ibrox now? 

    I'll do him/her  the honour of saying that he/she is Star War years  better than 'Jabba'! ( who, we must fondly remember, one time told the truth about the consequences of Liquidation!)

    But being better at being dishonourable is no great recommendation.

     

     

     

  63. Re comments about what constitutes the “pro game” in Scotland 

    https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/scottish-fa-statement-on-new-government-guidelines/

    Please note, Scottish Government have advised of an exemption for professional sport. This covers teams who take part in the following competitions – Scottish Professional Football League, Highland League, Lowland League, SWF PL 1 & 2, West of Scotland Leagues, East of Scotland Leagues, South of Scotland League, North Caledonian League and SJFA Leagues. These competitions can continue in line with relevant guidance and protocols. This exemption also covers Scotland National Team fixtures at Men’s A, SWNT and Under-21 level.

    That’s a very broad interpretation. And only the top league is obligated to test. 
     

    in other news Scottish Rugby have announced that the club season is pushed back to at least January 2021. Clubs in the 5 health board areas have been rolled back to non contact training 

  64. dom16 10th October 2020 at 08:16

    That’s a very broad interpretation. And only the top league is obligated to test. 

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

    It is a pragmatic interpretation as almost all the clubs in those leagues pay their players and no doubt have their earnings taxed. Some “part time” players in the EOSFL (e.g. Linlithgow) and WOSFL (e.g. Auchinleck) will earn as much as their equivalents in the lower reaches of the SPFL.  They shouldn’t be treated any differently. As far as I’m aware the Covid virus does not recognise what league you are playing in, just as it doesn’t just come out after 10pm to infect late night drinkers. 

    Incidentally, the new WOSFL (ex West Juniors) polled all its members over the last week about a start date for the league and also offered the option of clubs sitting out the season.

    The results of the vote were announced this morning with a vote of 36-31 in favour of starting the leagues in 2 weeks time. However, 14 of those clubs indicated their preference to sit out the season.  If all 14 do indeed go into abeyance for the season, then I can see some of those clubs folding all together.  

    It’s pleasing to note that the LL, EOSFL and SOSFL all start their league this weekend without fans. It is encouraging that some clubs are actually live streaming their games, some for free (as a pilot) and some charging a small fee.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.