Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[NAE NOOKIE]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Scene:

Duff and Phelps Insolvency Practice

Cast:

Paul Clark of Duff and Phelps played by Michael Palin

Irate Customer played by John Cleese

The sketch:

An irate customer enters the insolvency practise

Irate customer: 'Ello, I wish to register a complaint.

(Clark does not respond.)

Irate customer: 'Ello, Miss?

Clark: What do you mean "miss"?

Irate customer: I'm sorry, I have a cold. I wish to make a complaint!

Clark: We're closin' for lunch.

Irate customer: Never mind that, my lad. I wish to complain about this football club what I purchased not half an hour ago from this very insolvency practice.

Clark: Oh yes, the, uh, the Bigotted Blue...What's,uh...What's wrong with it?

Irate customer: I'll tell you what's wrong with it, my lad. 'it's bust, that's what's wrong with it!

Clark: No, no, 'e's uh,...it's debt free.

Irate customer: Look, matey, I know a bankrupt club when I see one, and I'm looking at one right now.

(Irate customer brandishes portfolio of bank statements and documents)

Irate customer: As soon as a took the club home some guy in a bowler hat from HMRC demanded £70 million. Then some ticket tout said he was looking for most of our ticket money for the next four years. Finally some spiv came around saying he was the real owner of the club.

Clark: No no it's not bust, it's recovering'! Remarkable club, the Bigotted Blue, idn'it, ay? Beautiful away strip!

Irate customer: The away strip don't enter into it. It's totally insolvent.

Clark: Nononono, no, no! it's emerging from administration!

Irate customer: All right then, if it's recovering', I'll check it's bank balance! (shouting at the cage) 'Ello, Mister Broxi Bear! I've got a lovely cash injection for you if you show any sign of life...

(Clark hits the nudges the portfolio)

Owner: There, it moved!

Irate customer: No, he didn't, that was you hitting the portfolio!

Clark: I never!!

Irate customer: Yes, you did!

Clark: I never, never did anything...

Irate customer: (yelling and hitting the portfolio repeatedly) 'ELLO BROXI!!!!! Testing! Testing! Testing! Testing! This is your financial health checkl!

(Takes bank statement out of the portfolio and thumps it on the counter. Throws it up in the air and watches it fall to the floor and bounce up and down.)

Irate customer: Now that's what I call an insolvent club.

Clark: No, no.....No, it's got a short-term cash flow problem!

Irate customer: A short-term cash flow problem?!?

Clark: Yeah! You spent all the bank balance by payin' the wage bill, just as it was moving into profitability! Bigotted Blues eun of of cash easily, major.

Irate customer: Um...now look...now look, mate, I've definitely 'ad enough of this. That club is definitely bust, and when I purchased it not 'alf an hour ago, you assured me that its total lack of cash was due to it bein' tired and ****ged out following a prolonged title celebration party.

Clark: Well, he's...he's, ah...probably pining for the Boyne.

Irate customer: PININ' for the BOYNE?!?!?!? What kind of talk is that?, look, why was the bank account empty the moment I got 'im home?

Clark: The Bigotted Blue prefers running with limited financial reserves! Remarkable club, id'nit, squire? Lovely home strip!

Irate customent: Look, I took the liberty of examining the clubs' books when I got it home, and I discovered the only reason that it was still in the League was that it had been NAILED there.

(pause)

Clark: Well, o'course it was nailed there! If I hadn't nailed that bird down, it would have been out of the SPL, and legged in to the English Premier League and the Champions' League Group stages. VOOM! Feeweeweewee!

Irate customer: "VOOM"?!? Mate, this club wouldn't "voom" if you put four million volts through it! 'it's bleedin' demised!

Clark: No no! 'it's recovering!

Irate customer: 'it's not recovering'! 'it's passed on! This club is no more! It has ceased to be! 'It's expired and gone to meet its maker! 'it's a stiff! Bereft of life, 'it rests in peace! If you hadn't nailed 'im to the SPL 'it'd be pushing up the daisies! 'Is metabolic processes are now 'istory! 'it's off the twig! 'it's kicked the bucket, 'it's shuffled off 'is mortal coil, run down the curtain and joined the bleedin' choir invisibile!! THIS IS AN EX-CLUB!! If you hadn't cooked the books it would be in oblivion with Third Lanark, Aidrieonians and Gretna.

(pause)

Clark: Well, I'd better replace it, then. (he takes a quick peek behind the counter) Sorry squire, I've had a look 'round the back of the shop, and uh, we're right out of Blues.

Irate customent: I see. I see, I get the picture. Have you not got any Paranoid Greens?

Clark: No we've got no Greens at the moment.

(pause)

We're expecting a Manky Maroon in any day now

Irate customer: Pray, does it win things?

Clark: Nnnnot really.

Irate customer: WELL IT'S HARDLY A BLOODY REPLACEMENT, IS IT?!!???!!?

[johnrebus]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm staying out of it all.

Actually, I think the question was whether the Ticketus agreement should be considered a sale of "goods", whereby T already own the tickets despite the fact that they don't physically exist yet - a bit like wine en primeur I think - or an agreement to produce future goods - gimme £1,000 and I'll tarmac yer drive next month.

If it was the former there was nothing RFC could do to get the goods back short of repaying the whole sum, which we know they couldn't do. On the other hand, if RFC liquidated T were stuffed because the goods became worthless - thet's the investment risk, although I would surmise from the wording of the judgement that the tickets were for 'home games at Ibrox' rather than 'Rangers FC home games' so they'd be safe enough in the emergence of a phoenix company.

The judge appears to have decided on the latter, so it becomes more like a contract for future services and, as we already know, the administrators have the right to tear those up and T then become ordinary creditors to be considered with the others in a CVA. T's defence here seems to be that it cannot be in the interests of all of the creditors to introduce a massive new one, thereby diluting everyone's claim to a payout. The counter argument is that the business can be sold for more without the burden of the deferred income having been received pre-administration.

On a side issue, Para 16 in the judgement makes the point I alluded to in an earlier life - the lending of money by RFC to Wavetower was illegal because it was effectively financing the purchase of it's own shares. I was beginning to doubt my own sanity on that one because no-one else seems to have picked up on it.

But isn't that how the Glaziers bought Man Utd?

Whats the difference?

[down-the-slope]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But isn't that how the Glaziers bought Man Utd?

Whats the difference?

Nope they borrowed money from the market to buy Man U...This case is the club lending money to a 3rd party to buy shares in the club...

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

But isn't that how the Glaziers bought Man Utd?

Whats the difference?

As DTS says, they borrowed money externally in the first instance and used a very complicated finance structure to shift the debt back to the club. I remember seeing a diagram of the structure and almost understanding how it worked, but I wouldn't have a hope in hell of reproducing it now.

However, if Wee Craig had used another of his companies to lend money to Wavetower so they could buy RFC and (completely independently of course ) 'handle' RFC's future ST money there's a second layer built up which makes the financing of own shares rather less obvious. I'm not sure why he didn't do that unless he thought he just wouldn't get caught.

[down-the-slope]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As DTS says, they borrowed money externally in the first instance and used a very complicated finance structure to shift the debt back to the club. I remember seeing a diagram of the structure and almost understanding how it worked, but I wouldn't have a hope in hell of reproducing it now.

However, if Wee Craig had used another of his companies to lend money to Wavetower so they could buy RFC and (completely independently of course ) 'handle' RFC's future ST money there's a second layer built up which makes the financing of own shares rather less obvious. I'm not sure why he didn't do that unless he thought he just wouldn't get caught.

Indeed Cav...reckon he reached that point where individuals start to beleive they are made of Teflon...its why criminals get caught..they take more and more risks and think they are invincible.

Its also the case that sometimes the more brazen / big / obvious the scam the more often its got away with...

Just got to hope that UEFA want to use this as part of their drive for financial fair play / good governance

[Don Giovanni]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Irate customer: As soon as a took the club home some guy in a bowler hat from HMRC demanded £70 million. Then some ticket tout said he was looking for most of our ticket money for the next four years. Finally some spiv came around saying he was the real owner of the club.

Belter

Thought the quoted snippet above was right on the money (as it were).

[Seveno]

Can I respectfully suggest to our two accountancy experts, Cav and Cwg, that they are missing the point of the Ticketus involvement in the consortium bid.

Quiet simply, if they become joint owners of the club then they are effectively owing the money to themselves. Hey presto, all economic worries are gone in an instant.

Didn't you guys study Yamanomics ?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As DTS says, they borrowed money externally in the first instance and used a very complicated finance structure to shift the debt back to the club. I remember seeing a diagram of the structure and almost understanding how it worked, but I wouldn't have a hope in hell of reproducing it now.

However, if Wee Craig had used another of his companies to lend money to Wavetower so they could buy RFC and (completely independently of course ) 'handle' RFC's future ST money there's a second layer built up which makes the financing of own shares rather less obvious. I'm not sure why he didn't do that unless he thought he just wouldn't get caught.

It all goes back to my theory that he was gambling on getting CL money. If it hadn't been for Malmo, his plan was on the way to working. Nobody would have noticed because nobody would really have cared.

On the financing of own shares, it looks like you're being proved right on that. Or, at least, that's the line the admins are using in order to get CW out. I bow to you on that.... .... but don't tell ANYONE I have kow-towed to an auditor!!!

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can I respectfully suggest to our two accountancy experts, Cav and Cwg, that they are missing the point of the Ticketus involvement in the consortium bid.

Quiet simply, if they become joint owners of the club then they are effectively owing the money to themselves. Hey presto, all economic worries are gone in an instant.

Didn't you guys study Yamanomics ?

***ake.... you're right. 130-odd pages... as ever, it's the simple truth that wins out again.

[CropleyWasGod]

Thought I would add my own praise to JGL for his dramatisation.

Superb, mate.... that alone makes this thread one for the vaults.

[blindsummit]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

***ake.... you're right. 130-odd pages... as ever, it's the simple truth that wins out again.

i think I suggested this strategy about 100 pages ago.........

[joe breezy]

http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...questions/1010

Right – let me make two things absolutely clear at the outset.

First, I am writing this imagining that one or two people outside Glasgow use the internet, so I might make some observations familiar to Clydeside surfers.
Second, this arises from my continuing investigation into Rangers which is still in early stages. That is to say, I am not investigating Celtic. If I were, rest assured RFC Bears – they’d get just the same treatment.
I’d expected the paranoia, insults, spin etc – hey – this is “fitba” after all and I welcome it good, bad and ugly, from fans within and without Glasgow. Indeed I’ve gone out and asked for it.
What I didn’t expect were the insults (and in at least one case a direct physical threat) not from fans but from Scottish journalists.
Sarajevo, Mogadishu, Kabul, Islamabad, Tripoli, Baghdad…I could bore you with more – in none of these places have I ever got this interesting reaction from local journalists.
Only in Glasgow.
So something’s up. Something’s different.
Something about asking questions about RFC clearly angers some in the Glasgow media in a way I’ve never seen in 25 years of global reporting.
Equally, a number of fine Glasgow journalists have been incredibly helpful, encouraging and agree there has been something deeply wrong for far too long in the culture of reporting RFC.
They know who they are, male and female, working in papers, radio and broadcasting and every single one has encouraged me to dig around in an area many cannot, will not or are prevented from, exploring.
I refer of course to “succulent lamb”. Graham Spiers, seasoned football writer in Glasgow was there the day it happened.
He and other reporters dined with Sir David Murray – then RFC owner, in the Channel Islands. Murray – as ever – was talking big on the Rangers dream-theme, laying out plans for the club that seemed to go well beyond the mere limit of the sky.
There duly appeared copy praising the “succulent lamb” that was eaten – the “fine red” that was drunk.
The food and drink were taken – so was this man’s dream of Rangers – all without much question in some quarters.
I make and imply no criticism at all of the reporters present – what intrigues as an outsider is how many people years later around Glasgow happily talk about “succulent lamb” journalism.
Let Graham explain – he was actually there, after all: “Succulent lamb journalism means a culture – and I hold my hand up here too – a culture of sycophantic, unquestioning, puff journalism that went on around Rangers generally and Sir David Murray particularly.”
Of course you’ll see it to some degree across sport, across football. But it was, many Glasgow journalists say, more damaging here.
“Look,” says Graham Spiers, “you are making a pact with the devil if you like. You get thrown the best scraps. You get something for the back page or whatever. But there’s a tacit deal. You don’t dig too deep. You don’t cause any trouble.”
So Big Dave’s dream was shouted across Glasgow. Fans loved it. It shifted papers. Everyone (in blue) wanted in, needed to believe.
So it went on – year after year. On one side the directors at Scotland’s football “governing” bodies didn’t ask much. On the other, large sections of Glasgow football journalism declined to delve.
How else to explain Ibrox’s boom to spectacular bust?
How else to deal with the fact that when Craig Whyte took over it was stories of a “billionaire” with “off the scale riches” that were pumped out?
Ten minutes on Google or in Companies House could’ve ended that. But no. It was dreamland the fans wanted, dreamland much of the media bought into and a club already financially crippled was about to be further injured.
Legions of fans sold out again, as it would turn out.
Succulent lamb culture has permeated to a degree that, as one prominent Glasgow tabloid journalist put it: “The press -a really critical check and balance in the normal way of things, had been more or less destroyed in Glasgow.”
So are things any better today? Is succulent lamb off the menu – replaced with humble pie?
I leave it to others to judge if that succulent lamb cozy Glasgow football culture has really gone away.

[Baker9]

Clark: Well, he's...he's, ah...probably pining for the Boyne.

Love it all, but that one cracked me up!

[grunt]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...questions/1010

Thanks for posting this Joe, it's very interesting.
If you don't mind, I'd like to repost it with the apostrophes fixed - it merits reading...

Right – let me make two things absolutely clear at the outset.
First, I am writing this imagining that one or two people outside Glasgow use the internet, so I might make some observations familiar to Clydeside surfers.

Second, this arises from my continuing investigation into Rangers which is still in early stages. That is to say, I am not investigating Celtic. If I were, rest assured RFC Bears – they’d get just the same treatment. I’d expected the paranoia, insults, spin etc – hey – this is “fitba” after all and I welcome it good, bad and ugly, from fans within and without Glasgow. Indeed I’ve gone out and asked for it.

What I didn’t expect were the insults (and in at least one case a direct physical threat) not from fans but from Scottish journalists.
Sarajevo, Mogadishu, Kabul, Islamabad, Tripoli, Baghdad…I could bore you with more – in none of these places have I ever got this interesting reaction from local journalists.

Only in Glasgow.

So something’s up. Something’s different.

Something about asking questions about RFC clearly angers some in the Glasgow media in a way I’ve never seen in 25 years of global reporting. Equally, a number of fine Glasgow journalists have been incredibly helpful, encouraging and agree there has been something deeply wrong for far too long in the culture of reporting RFC. They know who they are, male and female, working in papers, radio and broadcasting and every single one has encouraged me to dig around in an area many cannot, will not or are prevented from, exploring.

I refer of course to “succulent lamb”. Graham Spiers, seasoned football writer in Glasgow was there the day it happened. He and other reporters dined with Sir David Murray – then RFC owner, in the Channel Islands. Murray – as ever – was talking big on the Rangers dream-theme, laying out plans for the club that seemed to go well beyond the mere limit of the sky. There duly appeared copy praising the “succulent lamb” that was eaten – the “fine red” that was drunk. The food and drink were taken – so was this man’s dream of Rangers – all without much question in some quarters. I make and imply no criticism at all of the reporters present – what intrigues as an outsider is how many people years later around Glasgow happily talk about “succulent lamb” journalism.

Let Graham explain – he was actually there, after all: “Succulent lamb journalism means a culture – and I hold my hand up here too – a culture of sycophantic, unquestioning, puff journalism that went on around Rangers generally and Sir David Murray particularly.”
Of course you’ll see it to some degree across sport, across football. But it was, many Glasgow journalists say, more damaging here.
“Look,” says Graham Spiers, “you are making a pact with the devil if you like. You get thrown the best scraps. You get something for the back page or whatever. But there’s a tacit deal. You don’t dig too deep. You don’t cause any trouble.”

So Big Dave’s dream was shouted across Glasgow. Fans loved it. It shifted papers. Everyone (in blue) wanted in, needed to believe.
So it went on – year after year. On one side the directors at Scotland’s football “governing” bodies didn’t ask much. On the other, large sections of Glasgow football journalism declined to delve.

How else to explain Ibrox’s boom to spectacular bust?
How else to deal with the fact that when Craig Whyte took over it was stories of a “billionaire” with “off the scale riches” that were pumped out?

Ten minutes on Google or in Companies House could’ve ended that. But no. It was dreamland the fans wanted, dreamland much of the media bought into and a club already financially crippled was about to be further injured. Legions of fans sold out again, as it would turn out.
Succulent lamb culture has permeated to a degree that, as one prominent Glasgow tabloid journalist put it: “The press -a really critical check and balance in the normal way of things, had been more or less destroyed in Glasgow.”

So are things any better today? Is succulent lamb off the menu – replaced with humble pie?
I leave it to others to judge if that succulent lamb cozy Glasgow football culture has really gone away.

[grunt]

Some techy legal stuff here about the judgement. It's over my head, but you guys will understand it...

http://loveandgarbage.wordpress.com/...-and-ticketus/

[joe breezy]

[QUOTE=grunt;3158494]Thanks for posting this Joe, it's very interesting.
If you don't mind, I'd like to repost it with the apostrophes fixed - it merits reading...

Thanks, I did it from my iPhone, not sure why it didn't work properly, shows the Scottish media up for what they are...

[CropleyWasGod]

[QUOTE=joe breezy;3158608]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Thanks for posting this Joe, it's very interesting.
If you don't mind, I'd like to repost it with the apostrophes fixed - it merits reading...

Thanks, I did it from my iPhone, not sure why it didn't work properly, shows the Scottish media up for what they are...

Excellent Joe, thank you.

That said, it's significant that one journalist did break ranks. Keith Jackson, much reviled on here for good reason, claims that he was asking questions about the CW takeover last summer. Why did he do it? Was he perhaps not one of the "succulent lamb" journos, and hence took the hump?

I'm intrigued as to why he did it. But also grateful that he did. If he hadn't, and CW's scam hadn't been torpedoed by Malmo, would we be any the wiser?

[PatHead]

Odd thing about Keith Jackson is he had access to the "exclusives" up to not long ago which seemed to be the preserve of the lamb club. Wonder if, like Graham Spiers, he just eventually grew a pair. By the way these are serious allegations and I would love to know if BBC will investigate if any of their impartial journalists were involved.

On a seperate note I notice that Kennedy's bid has been put on hold

[StevieC]

Listened to Tom English and Chick on the radio after the game .. they made my blood boil with their defence of Rangers and how it was a foregone conclusion they'd still be in the SPL regardless of whether liquidated or not!

Apparently entry to SPL is down to a 6 man committee, headed by Doncaster, and that Doncaster, the Celtic member and A N Other would be all that was needed for Rangers to get the green light for SPL status.

It was asked why it was viewed as "rebel 10" and not "rebel 2" (based on them continually touting themselves for moves) and it was met with ridicule and sarcasm by the "chuckle brothers"!
The weegie lovin' media really are going all out with their OF love-in.

[greenginger]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Listened to Tom English and Chick on the radio after the game .. they made my blood boil with their defence of Rangers and how it was a foregone conclusion they'd still be in the SPL regardless of whether liquidated or not!

Apparently entry to SPL is down to a 6 man committee, headed by Doncaster, and that Doncaster, the Celtic member and A N Other would be all that was needed for Rangers to get the green light for SPL status.

It was asked why it was viewed as "rebel 10" and not "rebel 2" (based on them continually touting themselves for moves) and it was met with ridicule and sarcasm by the "chuckle brothers"!
The weegie lovin' media really are going all out with their OF love-in.

If the Huns are liquidated I'm sure it is Clause 14 of the SPL Articles of Association that apply. The Liquidated member's share goes to whoever is awarded it by decision of the whole SPL " in General Meeting passing a Qualified Resolution " to that effect.

That's what the rules say and an 83% majority has to be in favour.

Also under that Clause 14 a SPL member in administration can also be voted out of the League by the passing of a Qualified Resolution except in this case 90% have to vote for it.

[essexhibee]

Gonna be absolute carnage when Celtic win the title tommorow at Ibrox. Lennon said they won't gloat though...hmm aye right.

[SteveHFC]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Gonna be absolute carnage if Celtic win the title tommorow at Ibrox. Lennon said they won't gloat though...hmm aye right.

Sorted that for you

[essexhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Sorted that for you

think its written for Celtic to do it after killie beat well today. I don't think they'll slip up the chance to win it on their biggest rivals patch.

[Hibrandenburg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

think its written for Celtic to do it after killie beat well today. I don't think they'll slip up the chance to win it on their biggest rivals patch.

They'll do it in 1st gear.

[lapsedhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Gonna be absolute carnage when Celtic win the title tommorow at Ibrox. Lennon said they won't gloat though...hmm aye right.

Shirley Sky can just instruct Celtc not to win, thereby preventing all the aggro?

[Jim44]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...questions/1010

Right – let me make two things absolutely clear at the outset.

First, I am writing this imagining that one or two people outside Glasgow use the internet, so I might make some observations familiar to Clydeside surfers.
Second, this arises from my continuing investigation into Rangers which is still in early stages. That is to say, I am not investigating Celtic. If I were, rest assured RFC Bears – they’d get just the same treatment.V
I’d expected the paranoia, insults, spin etc – hey – this is “fitba” after all and I welcome it good, bad and ugly, from fans within and without Glasgow. Indeed I’ve gone out and asked for it.
What I didn’t expect were the insults (and in at least one case a direct physical threat) not from fans but from Scottish journalists.
Sarajevo, Mogadishu, Kabul, Islamabad, Tripoli, Baghdad…I could bore you with more – in none of these places have I ever got this interesting reaction from local journalists.
Only in Glasgow.
So something’s up. Something’s different.
Something about asking questions about RFC clearly angers some in the Glasgow media in a way I’ve never seen in 25 years of global reporting.
Equally, a number of fine Glasgow journalists have been incredibly helpful, encouraging and agree there has been something deeply wrong for far too long in the culture of reporting RFC.
They know who they are, male and female, working in papers, radio and broadcasting and every single one has encouraged me to dig around in an area many cannot, will not or are prevented from, exploring.
I refer of course to “succulent lamb”. Graham Spiers, seasoned football writer in Glasgow was there the day it happened.
He and other reporters dined with Sir David Murray – then RFC owner, in the Channel Islands. Murray – as ever – was talking big on the Rangers dream-theme, laying out plans for the club that seemed to go well beyond the mere limit of the sky.
There duly appeared copy praising the “succulent lamb” that was eaten – the “fine red” that was drunk.
The food and drink were taken – so was this man’s dream of Rangers – all without much question in some quarters.
I make and imply no criticism at all of the reporters present – what intrigues as an outsider is how many people years later around Glasgow happily talk about “succulent lamb” journalism.
Let Graham explain – he was actually there, after all: “Succulent lamb journalism means a culture – and I hold my hand up here too – a culture of sycophantic, unquestioning, puff journalism that went on around Rangers generally and Sir David Murray particularly.”
Of course you’ll see it to some degree across sport, across football. But it was, many Glasgow journalists say, more damaging here.
“Look,” says Graham Spiers, “you are making a pact with the devil if you like. You get thrown the best scraps. You get something for the back page or whatever. But there’s a tacit deal. You don’t dig too deep. You don’t cause any trouble.”
So Big Dave’s dream was shouted across Glasgow. Fans loved it. It shifted papers. Everyone (in blue) wanted in, needed to believe.
So it went on – year after year. On one side the directors at Scotland’s football “governing” bodies didn’t ask much. On the other, large sections of Glasgow football journalism declined to delve.
How else to explain Ibrox’s boom to spectacular bust?
How else to deal with the fact that when Craig Whyte took over it was stories of a “billionaire” with “off the scale riches” that were pumped out?
Ten minutes on Google or in Companies House could’ve ended that. But no. It was dreamland the fans wanted, dreamland much of the media bought into and a club already financially crippled was about to be further injured.
Legions of fans sold out again, as it would turn out.
Succulent lamb culture has permeated to a degree that, as one prominent Glasgow tabloid journalist put it: “The press -a really critical check and balance in the normal way of things, had been more or less destroyed in Glasgow.”
So are things any better today? Is succulent lamb off the menu – replaced with humble pie?
I leave it to others to judge if that succulent lamb cozy Glasgow football culture has really gone away.

Good stuff. Wouldn't surprise me if Thomson woke up to find a tartan wrapped horse's head under the sheets.

[killie-hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Odd thing about Keith Jackson is he had access to the "exclusives" up to not long ago which seemed to be the preserve of the lamb club. Wonder if, like Graham Spiers, he just eventually grew a pair. By the way these are serious allegations and I would love to know if BBC will investigate if any of their impartial journalists were involved.

On a seperate note I notice that Kennedy's bid has been put on hold

It seems like five or six years since Graham Spiers was banned from Ibrox. He then based himself in England with the Times.
Can anyone remember the specific reason for the ban?

[green glory]

Does anyone know who the journalists are who've threatened Alex Thomson?

[Ozyhibby]

Jackson only turned when whyte came in. He wouldn't have dared go against Murray.

[hibs0666]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Shirley Sky can just instruct Celtc not to win, thereby preventing all the aggro?

The huns showed what pride in the jersey is all about and blew the tims away today.