Mr Alastair James Johnston warned the dignified world in 2011 that Craig Whyte “might not be able to pay our bills”.
Of course, he was correct.
Despite the ripping yarns about “wealth off the radar” the little guy in the cheap suit wasn’t a billionaire.
In the aftermath of the Craig Whyte trial, the North American based businessman stated that the putative billionaire should have been charged with “…the murder of an institution…”
Perhaps this chastening experience is what is making Mr Johnston challenge Mr David Cunningham King and his grandiose schemes.
Johnston is clearly the driving force behind the pro-Murty faction.
If that grouping wins through, then it will be a victory for financial common sense.
You may recall that Lord Cardigan had stated that there was no place for such a mindset around the boardroom tale at Ibrox.
If Murty is installed, then it will be based on cutting the budget and promoting what he can from the youth ranks.
The key concept will be sustainability.
Since the new club was created it has never been run on that basis.
There was the great cash burn of 2013 and since then it has been emergency loans that have kept the lights on.
There was only one period, from October 2014 until March 2015, that the sustainability agenda was pursued with vigour.
Since the Off-Licence Putsch put Mr David Cunningham King in power it has been debt financing via Other People’s Money (OPM).
The braggadocio apropos being in clover has intoxicated the home crowd at Ibrox.
It helps to convince The People that the debt-financed glory days can return to the stadium that John Brown played for.
However, it is a chimera.
It was very much a case of the OPM of the masses and it is The People themselves, in the main, who are bankrolling the operation.
The shortfall has been met by a few directors, but they’re maxed out.
Consequently, Alistair Johnston knows that this debt financing cannot end well.
The austerity or insolvency questions remain extant at Ibrox.
If you have been with me on this journey since 2009 you will know that The People scoff at the very idea of financial trouble at the Big House.
Consequently, their anguish in 2012 was so delicious.
Since the basket of assets was turned into a new club Sevco has been a basket case.
Indeed several senior business analysts in the Square Mile have stated to me that they are amazed that the current entity at Ibrox has survived thus far.
If Murty is appointed, then it is “simply the second best” that is the new tune at Ibrox.
The only unknowable then is how many of the current customer base will continue to follow follow because it will be cold in Celtic’s shadow.
TALLY HO Dave ,
For the love of the common man “The braggaddiocio apropos being in clover has…….” ff’s Phil , Dictionary time.
Would the T O P chase up the other concert party members if King refuses to carry out the 20p share offer? They ‘re as culpable as him.
At the risk of stating the blindingly obvious, doesn’t every football club require external finance to survive?
It used to be common for football clubs to run at a loss, supported by loans, benefactors, sale of grounds, etc. But then this became unsustainable – some clubs went to the wall and others managed to arrange creditor agreements to reduce the debt. In recent years, almost all clubs have run at a sustainable level. Sadly, Rangers did not get the memo. And nor was the memo in the basket of assets that Sevco bought.
That’s what I thought too.Dermot personally funded the moves for both Keanes did he not?
Two hilarious articles in a row, Phil, ‘Churchillian optics’, the ‘quasi equity’ mojo, and the ‘OPM of the masses’ all had me laughing out loud.
Given the stark reality of being second, third or fourth best, do you think they’ll soon be swapping Tina Turner for Tins A Tuna to keep up those ‘world class’ food standards or will it be the Peña’s arcade all round ..?
Phil; The piece that has me confused is how they got the auditors to sign off on the accounts based on the premise that NOAL, and only NOAL, would provide the needed shortfall funding on a go-forward basis.
First issue is that NOAL is a foreign registered limited partnership (BVI). To the best of my knowledge, they are not subject to British financial laws and so there is no way to actually force them to fund anything. Secondly, as a tax haven investment vehicle I would be very surprised if the entity is audited in any way, meaning that any financial representations made would be based on someone simply saying that they are worth X. Problem again comes when if they were asked to provide loan funding they either a) don’t have it or b) choose not to fund and then you are back to my first point above.
The second issue is that they appear to be relying on King to be honest and forthright about NOAL’s worth and their willingness to fund. (aye, right!) Again you run into the issue that King lives in South Africa and is, just like NOAL, out of reach of anyone. This trust in whatever King has promised/told them flies in the face of both the recent COS court case testimony as well as his convictions in South Africa. Yet the auditors appear to have done just that!
Any chance you get Rugger guy to opine on what responsibility an auditor has to fulfill when an entire business entity they are signing-off on for an audit for appears to rely on uncertain and/or unenforceable investment from foreign sources. This (along with everything Sevco related) just doesn’t seem to make any sense.
I thought King is NOAL and NOAL is King.
Depends on whether you believe King’s lawyer testifying to the Court of Session that his client has no control over NOAL and that King is skint.
An excellent point there.
Given uk accounting standards, were these standards met with this “promise” situation from a proven habitual liar? Possibly not!
Big House or Brighthouse Finance , either way they are Goosed – plucked and ready to be devoured! A few Roasted Tatties & plenty of Carrots are available to supplement the main course – what a Festive Dinner lies ahead !
They require external finance in order to continue.
That is undeniable, even if a Fenian in Donegal is the messenger.
Phil,it seems that a select few in the blue room seem to have a stranglehold on who appoints the previous/next manager,surly in the business world,this rocks a very unsteady boat.Is there a United show of force in the blue room or are some protecting their investments and are willing to stand quietly aside while others dictate what happens,is there a fear factor,I have never met a successful business man who was not very vocal.