Gabby

The way Sky / ESPN cash is talked about so much in a lot of todays papers you would honestly think that the clubs would be happy to keep the TV money pouring in and play games without any fans.

With respect, that statement is ridiculous.

Media contracts are the difference between professional leagues and amateur leagues. It is not just the TV cash that goes without a media contract. league sponsorship, clubs sponsorships are also heavilly affected.

It is a matter of finding a balance between the requirements of TV and the best interests of football. The problem is that SPL has sold it as a Rangers/Celtic product instead of an SPL product.

None of the above.

There is 1 very simple reason why this is the case. It is very difficult for SPL clubs to make decisions about expenditure because they have to guess the amount of their largest source of income - TV money.

There is such a large difference in income depending on where you finish on the table. However you have to make expenditure decisions (player contracts mostly) at the start of the season.

This whole thing would be easilly solved if the TV money was distributed evenly.

While each SPL club has 1 equal share, this equality disappears when it comes to voting and income splitting.

As I keep saying (I think February or March was the last time) the SPL clubs need to address this right now. In my opinion this needs to be addressed before league reconstruction. Why? Because it is a good short term fix whereas League reconstruction is going to take time.

You are right, he did not say that. However, the timing of the statement would suggest it is the case.

I have seen the AT blog and I can't for the life of me understand why Kenny made the statement. To me it is saying that he had bought into the information on the email when all the evidence suggested that it wasn't going to happen.

They have had almost 6 months to develop contingency plans for this and they haven't. Disappointing.

Keep in mind that this is not a situation of ICT's making in any way shape or form.

Rangers going into administration and then liquidation was not even the cause.

The cause was the deal made when the SPL was formed back in 1998/99 when the founding clubs sold out to the OF.

Our Board/Chairman are trying desperately to find a way out of this for ICT, one which doesn't involve sending the club to the wall.

I'm not going to make any comment on the statement as I think there's possibly a bit of the jigsaw missing. That missing piece is details of what the SFL rejected in terms of the proposal for change. I don't think they have rejected the "threats or bribery" being pedalled by the press, and the reason I think that is because if it was that then it would have been mentioned in the post meeting press conference....instead, all we saw was Longmuir sidestep questions in regards to it and leaving the press to fill in the gap as they saw fit.

Everything you say is true. However Kenny had a choice about his statement. I would rather a statement that said "this is what we are going to do" rather than "we are all doomed".

And while the situation isn't their fault, they have to take some responsibility for making Plan B and Plan C given they must have known that Rangers going to Div 3 was a possibility.

They may not be responsible for the problems, but the board have been caught with their pants down.

I am a bit disaapointed with Mr Cameron's comments in the Daily Record, but it is the Daily Record.

However, let's assume for the moment they are correct.

Mr Cameron says that they are calling an emergency board meeting to consider the financial implications of Rangers in Div 3. While this in itself is very sensible, my concern is that the meeting should have been called the minute Rangers were excluded from the SPL.

It would appear that Mr Cameron expected Rangers to be in Div 1 next season. So while they voted no to Rangers quoting sporting integrity and the will of the fans, he was expecting SFL clubs to not do the same thing?

Why didn't Mr Cameron make a statement once Rangers were excluded from the SPL outlining how ICT was going to adjust to the new world?

Very disappointed.

This whole "we have the highest per capita attendance in the world" ismeaningless. If anything it shows there is a reduced capacity for growth. It is like saying that Jamaca win the olympics because they win the most medals per capita

Why do they have to quote what cash is generated compared to �0 money.

Rangers is not the only club in Scotland.

Will there still be an interest in watching SPL football on tv, yes.

Will there still be a market for sponsorship, yes.

Will Rangers increase income for the SFL through tv deals, yes

Will Rangers fans enjoy their once in a lifetime tours of the 3rd, 2nd and 1st div grounds, yes

Will the SFL clubs earn more money for a season with Rangers in it, yes. 3,000+ away fans at �15 a pop, increased home fans for the tie,and all the other money making add ons twice a season. compared to 350 fans? in div 3

The hit wont be as bad as people want to admit. They need 15 yes for div 1 from 28 voters or 13 nos and their pooped. A compromise would be div 3 for a season, a new 2 tier SPL, they join the lower tier and assuming they are back in the SPL withing 2 years, I would rather they go through all the leagues but if their only out for one season its a joke.

I will answer them in order:

Yes, however the audience will be reduced by at least 40% so the broadcast contract will be reduced by at least that amount.

Yes, but unlikely at the same level. The League Cup is currently searching for a sponsor I believe.

Yes, but they are starting from a very low base. This will probably be a redistribution of TV money already in the game. ie. SPL offering to provide SFL with a million pounds to broadcast rangers games.

Yes, at first. But it won't last. Attendence at ibrox will be a small fraction of historical attendences once the they realise their 8 players aren't competive even at Div 3. (With current players they would struggle to win promotion from Div 1) How quickly will crowds decline once this become obvious?

Probably, but this will be offset by extra policing costs and the cost of stadium repairs (A cheap shot, sorry)

If sporting integrity and the rules are the things that matter, then it isn't necessary to justify the financial reasons to counter somebody else's poor argument. Whether the Div 3 clubs are finacially better off or not with Rangers is Div 3 simply does not matter. Anyone who makes this argument is no better than Regan and Doncaster

Inverness CT v Rangers - highest watched match after the Old Firm games - what does that tell us....?

Probably tells us that Rangers Fans don't like driving to the Highlands.

However it is worth noting that the audience drops by 62% for the ICT/Celtic game.

And the audience for the Hibs/Motherwell game is less than half of the ICT/Celtic game.

In reality, the numbers are tiny, even by subscription TV standard.

In my blog, this is why I argued that the Sky contract is worth a pittance without Rangers. the audience drops off by more than 60% for games that do not involve the Old firm (excluding Edinburgh derby)

Source: http://www.kilmarnockfc.co.uk/staticFiles/71/72/0,,10291~160369,00.pdf

This is the document the SFL has sent to all clubs as to why Rangers should be in Div 1. Self interest and money motive is alive and well in the SFL.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/108463-in-full-document-sent-to-sfl-clubs-to-put-rangers-into-the-first-division/

Well done ICT unfortuanately I am too far away in Spain to attend regularly, If as suggested by Govan Jaggie a just giving site was set up I would certainly make a donation

Well done Mr C for doing the right thing.

Im starting to get a good feeling for the togetherness and unity of the fans and club for the coming season.

Just Giving takes their cut for the admin and money transfers and is usually covered by the gift aid on your donation but ICT isnt a charity.

Theres loads of ways to give money directly, to ICT.

Buy a Season ticket

The supporters trust http://www.ictsupporterstrust.co.uk/

Buy some shares,

A 'The fans and board unite 25/06/12' brick in the wall,

50/50 raffle.

Centenary club

Club shop

ICT bar

Im sure Caley D can suggest many more.

What ever you do Im sure its appreciated by the club to help them through these difficult times.

I have been messaged by a couple of folk on here and one suggestion mooted was that some of us who are overseas or otherwise not at the TCS on a regular basis could possibly club together and buy 'some' season tickets (quantity obviously depends on level of interest and how much was pledged). These tickets could then then be used by others (perhaps on payment of a portion of the equivalent match fee directly to ICT (?)) or maybe given out for charity or something like that .....

Like the person who suggested it to me I havent thought through the specifics yet, but we will be happy to try and drive any fundraising ideas, or to publicise and push those ideas towards the Supporters Trust if the management of them is more appropriate that way.

If the site members feel it is warranted, perhaps - in this new spirit of unity - we might want a small sub-forum for fundraising ideas and such like ? Definitely a thread of its own though rather than getting lost in here !

Of course, for our own part, CTO will now go ahead and try to get names of site members who want to re-subscribe to or rejoin our player sponsor group so we can also contribute to the club this way and we will likely make our own contribution on top of that.

If ever there was a time for all of us to dip into our pockets and help the club that time is now. We can all do our part, no matter how large or small that assistance is.

Let me know, i will be happy to contribute.

Mrs Gabby is in Inverness for the next couple of weeks, she has a shopping list for me for the club shop. I think I will give her a call and add a few extra things to the list.

If you have information showing that TV and Sponsorship monies are in place for next season then you should share it with the SPL and SPL Clubs because they are unaware of such a commitment.

The main league sponsor, Clydesdale Bank, has one more season to run. They are not pulling out early. Sky TV have a deal in place. They have publicly said they wont be pulling out. They may renegotiate but they wont pull out. Motherwells figures are based on neither of those two puting the cash up. They are over dramatising because the Grand Master says they should.

Sky don't have a deal in place, what they have said is they won't walk away. My word Sky will re-negotiate, and while they won't walk away, the deal will be worth a small fraction of the original terms. It would be commercially irresponsble for Sky to continue with the original terms, they simply will not get the same return on their investment without Rangers. If I had to guess I would say that Rangers' supporters would represent 40% of their viewers.

40% would be Celtic and 20% would be all other clubs combined.

I don't believe that Motherwell are overstating their financial situation. If anything, they are planning on a worst case scenario which is the only finacially responsible thing to do at the moment. The difference is that Motherwell are being up front about it. Let's be clear, every Chairman in the SPL is doing the exact same thing.

Good luck with the jump Julie!

What I can't quite understand is why is the SPL share is "owned" by Oldco Rangers and becomes a part of their assets even after liquidation, when they effectively no longer exist as a football club. I can see it being an asset for a football club being sold as a going concern, or even one which has agreed a CVA as long as the club remains in existence, and still has a chance of continuing to fulfill games and of finding a buyer in the close season....but why do they "own" it, given the use of it is not within their sole disposal, is subject to the vote in agreement of the other clubs and in some circ.umstances can be removed from them? Why not just "control" it as long as they fulfill the criteria for SPL membership, and relinquish it immediately when that is not the case?

If that was the situation, there would be no Rangers oldco eligible to vote and muddy the waters...and a newco would have no other option but to start the same way all other brand new Scottish football clubs are obliged to do.

Why is there no automatic mechanism to expel every football club from any league on liquidation? Is that just football, given the way the football economy is going, covering their own backsides in case "there but for the grace of God go I"?

It is because the SPL share cannot be sold as an asset without the approval of the SPL. So oldco has the players and the SPL share but no ground to play at and newco has a ground to play at with no membership to a league or players.

It is also important to remember that Rangers aren't liquidated yet - this is still a few weeks away - technically they are still in administration so therefore the SPL share is theirs and they get to vote on admitting newco despite the massive conflict of interest.

I understand what you are saying however Green is trying to play a clever game here.

He is trying to claim Rangers history/trophies when talking to fans, but says it is a different club for the purpose of punishment and re-introduction to SPL.

Below is an article worth reading suggesting there is still come confusion around the transfer of history/trophies of rangers to newco (even if they are in Div 3)

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/why-rangers-can-vote-on-4th-july-and-how-the-spl-and-rangers-are-in-error/

See previous post

Tough on this. I think they should be stripped of titles (if found guilty after due process) for 2 reasons:

1. It acts as a deterent in the future.

2. It is part of the healing process. Justice is seen to be done and everyone can move forward from there.

We had a similar situation in Aust a few years ago where a team was found to be cheating the salary cap by asking sponsors and other third parties to make payments to players outside of their contracts. They were operating dual contacts offering extra paymentd not outlined to the governing body (NRL)

They were stripped of the titles they won during the period. From a player and club point of view this is a severe penalty.

As a result I see no reason why the SFA/SPL can't investiage transgressions of the past while planning for the future.

12th MAN,----- IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ABOUT WHAT IS RIGHT (I.E SAME OLD, SAME OLD) BUT IT'S ABOUT THE STATUS QUO WHEN THAT IS CONVENIENT. Right?

MEANING IF THE RULES CAN BE CONVENIENTLY SIDETRACKED TO ALLOW THE 'GERS TO ENTER THE SPL, THEN WHY NOT USE THEM ALSO TO ENSURE THAT THE DEVIANT CLUB IS ALLOWED TO SWAY THE RESULT IN IT'S FAVOUR.

If you see what I mean-- and THATt is bizarre and no mistake.

The whole thing is a sickening crock and the clubs must see this .

I think that if they vote in favour of allowing Rank Rotten Rangers into the SPL then they are about to commit suicide and I can't put it any more plainly than that. For sure, nothing will ever be the same again for the vast majority of the fans and if Scottish Football is currently on a downward slide then such a vote may well complete the job.

I actually thought it was a very sensible idea.

However, I will be more interested to see the draw when it comes out to see if 12th Team has a home game on the same weekend as Celtic or Dundee Utd.

The news isbad for dunfermline. the spl rules say that once relegation is confirmed, any subsequent place is filled by the team that finished 2nd in Div 1

No they don't.

Yes they do. See, I can play this game as well.

Rules attached.....H5 is the one you need.

RULES EFFECTIVE 14 MAY 2012.pdf

H5 says:

H5 If any Club in the League ceases to operate or to be member of the League for any reason, its playing record in the League may be expunged and the number of relegation places from the League shall be reduced accordingly.

H5 only applies during the season, and since Rangers survived to the end of the season, Dunfermline has been relegated. Once Rangers reached the end of the season, H5 no longer applied. The Gretna situation is a more appropriate example of the application of H5.

Must try harder.

So with the liquidation of Rangers the discussion changes from who will get releated to who will be accepted into the SPL.

May I be the first to suggest some type of X Factor type format.

The news isbad for dunfermline. the spl rules say that once relegation is confirmed, any subsequent place is filled by the team that finished 2nd in Div 1

No they don't.

Yes they do. See, I can play this game as well.

The news isbad for dunfermline. the spl rules say that once relegation is confirmed, any subsequent place is filled by the team that finished 2nd in Div 1

He scored some cracking goals for Wellingon this seasn

Some very good points and arguments there. But I would have to disagree with this one.

The deciding factor for most clubs is the fear that broadcasting rights money from Sky and ESPN will be reduced or withheld because of reduced exposure in the event of the SPL breaching contract to show a minimum number of old firm games per season. This is extremely unlikely for several reasons:

Sky/ESPN will reduce the amount they are prepared to pay for a Rangerless SPL. Significantly, I believe.

Rightly or wrongly, having both of the OF clearly means an awful lot to them. That's why the expiring contracts had a clause specifying 4 OF derbies a season. That's why they haven't signed any TV deal for the new season, and won't sign anything until they know whether Rangers will be in it at all, and whether they will be in a position to compete.

You are right that the SPL is a small part of Sky's operation, and your average English punter doesn't give two hoots about the SPL (but probably watches the odd OF derby).

However, there must be tens of thousands (at least) of Rangers minded people throughout the UK who subscribe first and foremost in order to watch their own team, perhaps paying around £300 a year to do so. Even if only a proportion cancel, that's still £millions a year lost to the TV companies, which then reduces the amount they are willing to pay the SPL.

Lower viewing figures also have a direct impact on Sky/ESPN's advertising revenues.

None of us know the value of a TV deal without Rangers, but I suspect the club chairmen have an inkling and are very concerned about the consequences.

Sky/ESPN will have a very good idea what a TV deal without Rangers is worth and as a result they will drop a lot of zeros of the end of the original number.

Yeah, the original tax will stand...not claiming it wouldn't.

Penalties and Interest are a set formula, you can't just conjure up an appeal on the basis that you think they are too much, you need to have mitigating circumstances in order to ask for them to be reduced. Rangers (claimed) mitigating circumstance is that "we didn't know we were breaking the tax laws". Whilst it's not quite as straight forward as that (ignorance being no defence and all that), it's basically what their claim amounts to.

They are appealing on the grounds that they didn't expect to be caught.

Let's be clear. Rangers have been found guilty of the Big Tax Case and they have admitted guilt. The appeal is against the size of the peanlties and interest on top of the outstanding tax.

The appeal is on the basis of diminished responsibility....i.e. Rangers defence is one of "we didn't know we were breaking the tax laws". The job of the tribunal is to ascertain whether or not (on the balance of probability) that is true. HMRC do not have to prove that it was deliberate in every case, they just require enough to show that Rangers knowingly and purposefully broke the tax laws as part of the scheme. In other words, do the claims of ignorance hold water.

It comes down to whether or not the payments were discretionary or non-discretionary (was it part of a salary package or not). If the existence of side letters can be proven (and the BBC claims would suggest it can) then it's case closed as that would be as damming as it gets.

On top of that it throws open the player registration breaches with the SPL/SFA...and I have to say that I believe the SPL & SFA have been negligent in their handling of that to date. For a start, the SPL didn't begin looking in to it until March when they should have been investigating it in parallel with the Tax Tribunal. We then learn this week (although we kinds knew before) that Rangers have not released the required information to them...why have they waited this long before setting a deadline? Furthermore, as it involves player registrations then why have the SFA not been investigating?

UEFA have to be looking at all this and wondering if these associations are fit for purpose, if they're not then it's more than just Scottish Football that's screwed up.

No it's not. They are appealing the amount of the penalty and interest. Regardless of the result on the FTT, the original tax owed from the EBT's will stand. This seems to be a fairly common error amongst the scottish media.