Phantom Bud

Mogwai at the Barrowlands tonight was absolutely fucking brilliant.

Aye it was 11-3 to Anderson in 180s and 14-13 to Thornton in the first match. I had pretty big bets on over 40.5 over the two matches and Anderson over 10.5; both sneaked over the line with Anderson's final maximum.

Paddy Power had the line at 43.5% for the last couple of weeks so I'm not surprised Ladbrokes have now moved theirs. I still think it's a good bet, would be very surprised if Yes polls under 45%.

Ladbrokes still offering odds of 10/11 on Yes getting over 42.5% of the vote.

The description matched the trousers Gerry was wearing that night right down to the buttons on the hips. Point I was making though is it's interesting how the media and last night's Crimewatch are so selective in the facts they report - at no point last night was it mentioned that Smith thought the man was Gerry, that the cadaver dogs found the scent of a dead body in the flat and car, that Kate refused to answer 48 police questions, etc. So much publicity but the public doesnt get to hear the full story.

Strange that the Met are going with e-fits based on descriptions given by the Smith family from Ireland but not mentioning that Martin Smith was 60-80% sure the man he saw carrying the child was Gerry McCann: "I hereby declare that this statement is true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence I will be liable to prosecution if i state in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true. I would like to state that the statement I made on 26th May 2007 in Portugal is correct. The description of the individual that I saw on 3rd May 2007 carrying a child is as follows. He was average build, 5 foot 10' in height, brown hair cut short, aged 40 years approximately. Wearing beige trousers and darkish top maybe a jacket or blazer. He had a full head of hair with a tight cut. This individual was alone. I saw Gerard McCann (sic) going down the plane stairs carrying one of his children on 9th September 2007 BBC news at 10 PM, I have been shown the video clip by Sergeant Hogan which I recognise. A clip I have seen before on the Internet. In relation to the video clips of Gerard McCann and the person I saw on 3rd May 2007 when I saw the BBC news at 10 PM on 9th September 2007 something struck me that it could have been the same person. It was the way Gerard McCann turned his head down which was similar to what the individual did on 3rd May 2007 when we met him. It may have been the way he was carrying the child either. I would be 60-80% sure that it was Gerard McCann that I met that night carrying a child. I am basing that on his mannerism in the way he carried the child off the plane. After seeing the BBC news at 10 PM, footage on the 9th September 2007 I contacted Leicestershire police with this information. During that time I spoke to all my family members who were with me on the night of 3rd May 2007 about this and the only one who felt the same way as me was my wife. She had seen the video clip of Gerard McCann walking down the stairs of the plane earlier that day. We did not discuss this until some days later. This statement has been read over to me and is correct.

There is no evidence whatsoever that she was abducted by a stranger. There is evidence from the cadaver dogs to suggest that she died in the apartment. Kate McCann refused to answer 48 questions put to her by the Portuguese police. She acknowledged that her silence could harm the chances of finding Madeleine: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7542939.stm The Madeleine Fund is a ltd company not a charity. It is true that is funds their mortgage. The McCanns and their tapas pals have changed their stories about what happened that night several times. The latest revelations on the changes to the previously accepted timeline appear to suggest they've changed their accounts again. The McCanns made very public announcements saying they would be happy to take lie detector tests but then refused to do so. The McCanns and the rest of the Tapas 9 all refused to take part in a reconstruction of the events of the night Madeleine went missing - they said it would serve no purpose and they were too busy. Massive cover-up IMO.

Thought Morton were good today. Well organised, worked very hard and didn't look to have many weak links other than the keeper (who was better than ours). Big centre forward will score a lot of goals in the 1st and McLaughlin is still solid at the back. Just backed them at 8/1 for the 1st division. St Mirren were a shambles, need two or three players before the end of the transfer window or it'll be a long hard season.

I don't think this has been posted here yet - "How Are Sevco Affording Sandaza?", an excellent analysis of Sevco's finances by the Saint In Asia: http://saintinasia.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/how-are-sevco-affording-sandaza/

Rangers Tax Case has come out of retirement: Digging The Hole Ever Deeper 08/08/2012 49 Votes This week has seen strident denials from David Murray that Rangers have done anything wrong in paying 83 employees through the Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust (MGMRT). According to Murray: “No rules were breached or circumvented, and I reject and resent any suggestion that anything was done which amounted to cheating.” This blog-post will provide an illustrative example that demonstrates just how absurdly untrue Murray’s claim really is. First a quick recap of the rules. For the MGMRT, an Employee Benefit Trust (EBT), to be operated legally for tax purposes, money is deposited in the trust by the employer. Thereafter, the employer must have no control or involvement in the disbursement of funds. Employees can then apply to the trust for loans. The loans must be discretionary i.e. contractual obligations or wages (of any kind) cannot be paid tax-free through an EBT. Any payment through an EBT for wages or other contractual obligations would be liable to tax. Paying wages or other obligations through an EBT without deducting PAYE & National Insurance is a breach of UK tax law and is illegal. HMRC has investigated Rangers’ use of the MGMRT EBT and found it to be a sham designed to avoid due PAYE & NIC. The Rangers FC plc (In Administration) appealed this determination and this appeal was heard by the now infamous First Tier Tribunal (Tax). Rangers FC (the oldco) was able to pay higher wages to sign and retain better quality players during the decade in which the scheme operated. In fact, had Rangers paid staff the same take home wage, the club would have had to find an extra £49m to pay tax on these wages legally. This much we have discussed many times. The next rule in question is that of the Scottish Premier League (SPL). The SPL requires that all payments to registered players are declared in the contractual documents submitted to the league (and to the SFA). The combination of illegally using an EBT scheme to obtain a £49m advantage in paying for players and violating SPL rules on declaring payments to players is premeditated financial doping. The reason for not declaring the EBT payments in player contracts is that doing so would have caused the EBT scheme to fail immediately. Players and their agents are no fools and wisely would not trust the nods and winks of the shifty wide-boy types attracted to football club ownership. They insisted that promised payments were documented. These additional documents- side-letters, second-contracts… call them what you will- blow Rangers’ and Murray’s claims of innocence out of the water. In a previous post, this blog attempted to help the SPL’s investigation team to establish a prima facie case against Rangers. Obviously, we have no way of knowing if this was helpful in moving this case along, but it might help the media and anyone investigating the case against Rangers if we provide a road-map to just one example of what really happened. Please note that this example has been selected for its clarity rather than the importance of the player. Many of the cases, especially the earlier ones when Rangers tended to be more concerned with obscuring their actions, are quite complex. The SPL’s investigators should ensure that they see the documentation referenced below. Gavin Rae signed a three and a half-year contract with Rangers on 1 January 2004. This contract- the official one filed with the SFA & SPL- lists an annual wage of £260,000. Curiously, the contract does not mention appearance money or bonuses. On the very same day, 1 January 2004, Rangers provided Gavin Rae with a letter that said that money would be deposited in a sub-trust of the Murray Group Management Remuneration Trust on his behalf. These amounts total £336,000. The letter also said that Rae would receive £1,000 as an appearance fee for every competitive first-team game played. From February 2004 to July 2007, Rae received five payments totalling £336,000. He also received the following amounts through the EBT for appearances: £11,000 (2003/04); £8,000 (2005/06); £20,000 (2006/07). The appearance money matches his first team appearances for Rangers. This side letter torpedoes the argument that these payments were not contractual. (A simple guide to contract formation under Scots Law can be found here. Short version: these letters constitute a contract under Scots Law). This letter, and the others like it, demonstrate that Rangers used the EBT scheme to pay wages (appearance money) and contractual obligations related to employment. This is just one fragment of the masses of evidence that demonstrate that Rangers were “at it”. The task for the SPL’s investigators is simple in this case. Obtain Gavin Rae’s contract as submitted to the SFA & SPL. Next, they should demand to see Gavin Rae’s side letter. After that, the task is to review the actual payments. There will be a match between promises and payments. Repeat for each of the 82 other employees of Rangers FC (now In Administration) who benefited from the trust scheme. The current PR campaign from Murray, and other senior Rangers’ personnel who were beneficiaries of the EBT scheme, is designed to reverse any sense of inevitability regarding amending the sporting record to reflect the cheating that took place between 2001-2011. All Scottish football fans- Rangers fans included- were cheated during these years. Do not believe the spin and dissembling from those who did most to damage Rangers FC and Scottish football.

06 August 2012 09:21 A move to liquidate Craig Whyte’s parent company that owns 'oldco' Rangers has been suspended. The Registrar of Companies lodged its intention to dissolve Rangers FC Group Ltd last month. It had made the decision as the company that owned an 85% stake in what was The Rangers Football Club plc had not been active or trading for 12 months. However, the attempt to dissolve the parent company, which was formerly known as Wavetower, has been stopped after an "objection to the striking off has been received by the Registrar", a document lodged with Companies House has revealed. It is unclear if Mr Whyte has lodged the objection to the striking off, while should the Registrar decide the action is once again raised by the registrar a further public notice will be published. Rangers FC Group Ltd was used by Mr Whyte to take over The Rangers FC plc in May 2011, when he bought a majority stake in the club for £1 from Sir David Murray. The company, which is registered in London, is currently the subject of litigation from club administrators Duff and Phelps, who are pursuing the businessman and his former lawyers Collyer Bristow for more than £25m. Last week the Sevco consortium that purchased Rangers’ assets completed the name change of the club’s business operations. The newco’, formerly Sevco Scotland Ltd, has been changed to The Rangers Football Club Ltd, while the oldco, incorporated in 1899, has had its name changed to RFC 2012 Ltd. Liberty Capital The group company is wholly owned by Liberty Capital Limited, the British Virgin Islands registered business entity owned by Mr Whyte, which has stakes or links in the majority of his dealings. Mr Whyte’s business associate Philip Betts was a director of the parent company, as well as of the oldco in the nine months before administrators were called in. Andrew Ellis, who subsequently claimed he was duped by Mr Whyte in his takeover of the Ibrox club, is the only other director of Rangers FC Group alongside the 41-year-old. In March, Mr Whyte used the parent company in an attempt to strengthen his hold on the assets of the club through assigning a debenture to Liberty Corporate Ltd, a dormant company owned by him, of which his father Thomas Whyte is the sole director. Liberty Corporate Ltd was granted a fixed and floating charge over Rangers FC Group, while it already had a floating charge over all of the assets of the club as a result of the purchase from Sir David. The former Rangers owners' shares in the club did not come to have any bearing on the sale process as a company voluntary arrangement (CVA) deal with creditors was rejected last month, after HM Revenue and Customs found it contradicted their public policies on non-payment of taxes. Subsequently, the assets of the club were sold to the Sevco consortium led by former Sheffield United chief executive Charles Green in a £5.5m deal, which also covered Duff and Phelps £2.8m legal fees. Independent insolvency firm BDO will be appointed to liquidate the oldco at a future date, although so far no day has been set for this to take place. At the time of the asset sale in June, Duff and Phelps said they expected to remain in place as administrators for between six to ten weeks. Ticketus In a document released last month, the administrators confirmed there were "no provisions" within their power that would have resulted in Mr Whyte being compelled to deliver his shares to any prospective new owner, which contrasts with their claim during the bidding process that his position was "irrelevant". The administrators also revealed in the document that the legal battle among themselves, Mr Whyte and the lawyer who advised him on the takeover, Gary Withey, is not likely to reach English courts until late next year. Originally, the case was scheduled to be held in October, but since then Mr Withey has applied to join the civil action against Mr Whyte, while Collyer Bristow has also lodged claims against him, as well as Liberty Capital and Merchant Turnaround plc - another company linked to the businessman who has not returned to Ibrox since administrators were appointed on February 14. According to Duff and Phelps, the case is expected to go ahead in the summer or autumn of next year. London ticketing firm Ticketus are also pursuing Mr Whyte over the Rangers takeover. The businessman effectively funded his buyout using a £25.3m deal with the company for future Ibrox season ticket sales that he used to wipe out the club’s £18m debt to Lloyds Banking Group. After a Court of Session ruling, the deal between the oldco and Ticketus was torn up by administrators because Lord Hodge found that they would be able to do so if it was in the overall interest of the creditors. The Crown Office has previously confirmed it has ordered Strathclyde Police to pursue an investigation into alleged criminality surrounding Mr Whyte’s takeover of Rangers after they received documents from Duff and Phelps.

TV contract awaits SFA membership approval Published on 27 July 2012 Michael Grant CONTRACTS will be signed with Sky and ESPN to show 65 matches per season from the Scottish Premier League and Irn-Bru Third Division if Rangers newco's Scottish Football Association membership is approved later today. Sky will have the rights to 30 games, starting with Celtic versus Aberdeen at Parkhead next Saturday lunchtime, then Rangers newco's opening third division encounter at Peterhead on August 11. ESPN would have 35 live games and the first would be Dundee United versus Hibernian on Sunday, August 5. Herald Sport understands that a deal involving the SPL, Scottish Football League and the two broadcasters – and including rights for 15 of the newco's league games per season – will preserve most of the value of the existing £16m-a-season television agreement for the current campaign. That will spare top-flight clubs from the most severe repercussions some had feared from at least three years without the Ibrox club. The television deal is agreed in principle but cannot be signed until Sevco Scotland Ltd's application for the transfer of Rangers' SFA membership is approved. That needs to happen before the club can play its first match at Brechin City in the Ramsdens Cup on Sunday afternoon. In theory, approval could be given at any time up until kick-off, but practicalities and exchanges of documents essentially mean it has to be done today. But all five parties – Sevco Scotland, the oldco Rangers, the SFA, SPL and SFL – were understood to believe the discussions were almost there last night and that there will be a satisfactory conclusion, and the signing of contracts, later today. Representatives from Charles Green's newco regime held further negotiations with Neil Doncaster, the SPL chief executive, yesterday. A major obstacle has been the SPL's view that accepting any potential punishment from its ongoing investigation into undisclosed payments to players via Employment Benefit Trusts – alleged to have happened over several years of the oldco Rangers – should be accepted by Sevco as a condition of membership. Manager Ally McCoist and some others at Ibrox have vigorously opposed any acceptance that the club could be stripped of league titles if a guilty verdict is returned. BBC Alba will have live coverage of Rangers' tie at Brechin and yesterday the channel was continuing to plan as though the match would go ahead. As for the longer-term deal involving Sky and ESPN, the companies will discuss how the SPL and third division coverage is shared in the weeks and months ahead. "It will be up to the broadcasters to decide how the games are carved up," said a source at one SPL club.

I don't believe he really thought they'd get a CVA agreed or that he thought he'd be able to sell on the oldco players or that he thought they'd be playing in the SPL ... so I don't believe he really wants SFA membership either.

So Traynor is now predicting that the SFL could run a parallel top flight league and take European spots from the SPL: "The SFA would probably be unable to resist a wish by the SFL and Rangers to stand alone and demand European places because they couldn't rule in favour of, say, eight or nine SPL clubs against 30 in the SFL. After all, haven't the SPL been insisting the voice of the majority must be heard?" Ridiculous stuff - is he now going the way of Leggo and completely losing his marbles?

Here is Traynor's latest 'exclusive': What's the bid idea? By jim Traynor on Jul 23, 12 07:34 AM in WITH only days to go before Rangers begin life all over again there should be a sense of anticipation sweeping through a club which has been disgraced, discredited and dumped in the game's basement. At least they still have a pulse but 10 weeks after Charles Green agreed an exclusivity deal with Rangers' administrators, uncertainty and anxiety continue to stalk the corridors of Ibrox and Murray Park. And I believe concern over the new club's finances has prompted Brian Kennedy to make a £5.6million bid for a controlling interest. Rangers sources insist that bid, more than Green and his partners from Zeus paid for the entire package, was made on June 25 and although rejected, my information is it remains on the table. It is also understood from within Ibrox that there is growing concern over Rangers' future because Green's business plan was based on his club starting in the First Division at worst. One of the main planks of his model was a rush by fans to buy season tickets but so far no one has been trampled in the stampede to the box office. Yet, Green's own "Financial Offering", the document sent out to potential investors, made reference to raising as much as £15m through season tickets. There is still a wide credibility gap between Green and Rangers supporters. They remain unconvinced by the Yorkshireman and his people and so it seems do investors, even though an English sports agency said last week they want to pay £1m for a 10 per cent share. They didn't have to muscle their way to the front of a queue either, even though Green insisted from day one that attracting investors and money wouldn't be a problem. It was also written in his document that as much as £30m of working capital would be brought in by the middle of July and Rangers fans might want to ask where that money is. Green would say his plan was dependent on gaining control of the club through a CVA but even so, surely a handful, a few even, out of all the investors - I think, Charles, you may have mentioned 20 - he said were lined up might have gone ahead regardless. But where are they? Where's the money Charles? And is there enough to keep Rangers going long enough to survive the season? The truth is Rangers' financial woes are far from over but any cash-flow problems could be solved if Green accepted Kennedy's offer which remains live. Kennedy, of course, tried to get Rangers on his own, and then by riding with the Blue Knights, but while they and others were left behind when Green made his blindside run, the English-based Scottish millionaire kept up to speed with developments. He continued to monitor the situation very closely and our sources believe his offer to be substantial and fair. The deal is Kennedy would gain 51 per cent of the club in return for his money which would be used as working capital rather than to fill anyone's pockets and, within two years, Green's investors would get back the amounts they put in, with 10 per cent interest on top. It is understood Kennedy was reluctant to turn his back because he fears Rangers could slide back into administration, or worse. That's why he's willing to boost resources by injecting more than the purchase price paid by Green's group while still offering them the chance to get their money back, and then some. The bid was dismissed when Green believed Rangers would start in the SPL or, at worst, the First Division but our information suggests attitudes within the controlling group might be softening now they are in the Third. Understandably, there is acute concern that despite a series of charm offensives, season tickets have not been sold in great numbers. But there are one or two within Ibrox who are beginning to wonder if the fans would be tempted to pile in with Kennedy on board. Anger has also been simmering among the Rangers support because their club doesn't have a powerful voice at the game's top tables. They are asking why Green and club chairman Malcolm Murray haven't been more vociferous in defending Rangers against sanctions but with Kennedy and his management team in place that could be another problem solved. The SFA, who hit Rangers with a £160,000 fine and a 12-month registration ban, and SFL have said they won't be pushing to have any of their trophies won by Rangers during the EBT years erased from the records. The SPL, however, have yet to tell their own agitators it might be time to focus on more important issues, like staying alive. Kennedy might have delivered that message long ago and he'd probably be warning that if the SPL remain entrenched over the issue of titles they might push Rangers to the point where they are happy to stay in the SFL, rather than return to a league which has made it very clear they couldn't accept them. The rift could become permanent if the SPL insist on further sanctions which would push Rangers even closer to their new neighbours. In fact, the notion of the SFL and Rangers forming a stand-alone system, which would prevent promotion to the SPL has, I believe, been discussed informally and some think it has merit and possibilities. There are only two massive clubs in Scotland, even if one of them, Rangers, are on their knees. But they will get back to their feet and if they remained in the SFL the game's poor relations could very quickly become the stronger and richer of the two leagues. Naturally, the SPL would laugh at the very idea yet if, because of diminishing TV and sponsorship deals, they lose a few clubs they'd be reduced to Celtic, the game's main power, but perhaps only seven or eight impoverished others. Those clubs could be even less of an attraction to telly companies than now. On the other hand, SFL clubs would benefit from deals of their own because they now have one of the big two in their pack. And having already lost everything, Rangers have nothing left to risk. The SFL, and Rangers, might never have a better chance to grow, while the SPL, who left the others behind in 1998 to set up on their own, would become weaker. The SFA would probably be unable to resist a wish by the SFL and Rangers to stand alone and demand European places because they couldn't rule in favour of, say, eight or nine SPL clubs against 30 in the SFL. After all, haven't the SPL been insisting the voice of the majority must be heard? First, Rangers have to stay alive and if Green needs the fans to back him through season-ticket sales he just might sell a few more by doing a deal with Kennedy. And Ally McCoist might be told for the first time how much he has to spend on his project: Rebuilding Rangers.