Jump to content

 

 

BrahimHemdani

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,099

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BrahimHemdani

  1. BrahimHemdani
    Fair point but there may be conditions attached.
  2. BrahimHemdani
    Of course.
  3. BrahimHemdani
    I wouldn't know obviously but one would assume so; however if it doesn't and he's had legal opinion to that effect, then perhaps that's the answer.
  4. BrahimHemdani
    If you were him would you have given notice without having something else in mind, if not an actual offer?
  5. BrahimHemdani
    Any spares for Easter Rd?
  6. BrahimHemdani
    Would you expect him to do nothing for 12 months?
  7. BrahimHemdani
    I am surpised that Ashley is prepared to countenance and effectively pay for a year's gardening leave but he has softened the blow on the share offer and the Club financially by promoting McDowall, which is a clever move out of left field that none (probabaly McCoist and McDowall included) might have anticipated. However, anyone who sees what happens in front of the dug out week in and week out will not be surprised. It has been obvious in recent days that McCoist had lost the support of the Boardroom and appeared to have successfully called their bluff by giving notice. However, I think that what might have happened is that he was made an offer to work till the end of the season or perhaps as I suggested in the earlier thread, £200,000 - £250,000 to go now and refused, perhaps thinking that they would then make a better offer. But in this game of bluff and counter bluff, the Board/Ashley have been too clever. In putting him on gardening leave for a year, they have called Ally's bluff. This means that if he wants his £750,000 plus the £350,000 -£400,000 deferred he has to stay on the books for the 12 months. If gets an offer he wants to accept to go back into TV, then he will have to resign immediately and Rangers won't owe him a penny. Also if he says a word out of place then he will be in breach of contract and they'll sack him for gross misconduct and let him sue if he wants to pursue it. Whatever was said today, obviously they were not going to take the chance of him disrupting the AGM, nor in reality could they really justify his non-attendance as Manager, which is why they have acted tonight. It is another embarrassing moment in a long list of embarrassing moments but Ally should have resigned with immediate effect (not given notice) after Alloa or if not Alloa, certainly after it was clear last Friday night that he was no longer able to motivate the players (if indeed he has ever been capable of that).
  8. BrahimHemdani
    I spy a certain Mr McCall just the other side of the Director's box wall.
  9. BrahimHemdani
    I am not sure that the letter is entirely misguided TB. I was one who was want to ask questions after the main business of the AGM; but these were about things like the travel club, a membership scheme, the colour of the third strips etc etc, so it is debatable if that type of issue could properly have been dealt with as part of the AGM proper. The first Resolution for consideration is: 1. "THAT the Company's audited Financial Statements, the Directors' Report and the Strategic Report for the financial year ended 30 June 2014 together with the Auditor's Report be received and adopted." So any shareholder is entitled to ask any question on any matter related to the Accounts or the Reports and in my view that would cover any matter that a shareholder might expect to be covered in such Reports and is absent for any reason. That said I don't think it is unreasonable for the Chair to set a limit on the number of questions or the overall time allowed for questions especially if they become repetitive in nature. Ultimately, if shareholders are dissatisfied with the answers or lack of answers, they could vote against the adoption of the Reports and Accounts and since the next order of business is: 2. "THAT David Somers, who retires and offers himself for re-appointment in accordance with the Company's Articles of Association, be re-appointed as a Director of the Company." they can always vote against his reappointment if they are dissatisfied with his conduct of the meeting. Of course, the Board might also say that they have set up the Rangers Fans Board to deal with supporters issues and since one assumes that most "ordinary" shareholders would also be fans they may attempt to deflect some questions (perhaps away fans issues) in that direction.
  10. BrahimHemdani
    Outsourcing the Company Secretary position is not at all unusual (some solicitors offer a specialist service) and may well be a more cost effective solution than employing someone directly. That said I would think it is surprising in a company the size of Rangers but BD might be better placed to advise at what level a Company Secretary is normally an in house appointment.
  11. BrahimHemdani
    As I suggested at #28' date=' silence will come at a price; the only questions are: is it a price Rangers are willing to pay and a price that Ally is willing to accept? I am sure he will want to write a book (or even a trilogy: [i']Ally the Management Years[/i] perhaps) or more likely have it ghost written for him (I can think of two or three candidates on here) at some point, so perhaps a limited time silence; beyond which period both parties agree that any revelations will be more historic in nature than harmful to the Club.
  12. BrahimHemdani
    Coming from you I'll take that as a great compliment SB. One strong factor on Ally's side of the table is that he does indeed know all the "beans" and a very tight non-disclosure clause might be expensive from the Club's point of view. I was tempted to add in a comment to the effect that Durrant did get compensation and it's arguable that Rangers have long ago fulfilled any obligation they might have had towards him. I'll edit both parts now. Thanks.
  13. BrahimHemdani
    I have always been at a loss to understand the benefit of a 12-month rolling contract from a football club's point of view. In other walks of life, normally you would be on an open ended contract subject to a fixed period of notice on either side, very often a week or even up to a month for every year of employment with a limit of say 1-3 months, sometimes longer for senior staff or directors. This would almost always apply except in cases of instant dismissal for gross misconduct. In practice at big companies the HR Department would most likely advise paying for a full notice period even where the circumstances of leaving/dismissal are in dispute, because then there is little or no point in the former employee going to a Tribunal because they have suffered no loss (except perhaps ongoing or future employment, which is difficult to argue and even more difficult to prove). So if Ally had been on this kind of "normal" contract then he would have given say 3 months notice and it would be up to the Club whether to allow him to work that notice, put him on gardening leave (which would mean paying two people to do the same job, and possibly ditto the coaching staff), or pay him in lieu and say leave now (which in reality again means paying two people to do the same job). Six months might have been ideal, of course, to the end of the season; unless he/the directors thought that with him in charge promotion was unlikely. Perhaps more commonly in football terms and sometimes in other spheres of employment, he might have been on a fixed term contract (to do a specific job); the obvious term in his case being 3 years to see if he got us up to the SPL and then reassess. In that case, if he had opted to leave early, I don't see that he would have been entitled to anything; but if the Club asked him to leave before the end of the contract obviously they would need to pay it up. However, with a rolling 12 month contract, Ally would almost always be entitled to a year's pay, pretty much regardless of the circumstances of his leaving and it seems a reversion to full salary AND most likely the difference in back pay as well. So it is difficult if not impossible to understand the purpose of such a contract from the Club's point of view, given that managerial dismissals are almost always instantaneous; but equally it is a nice cushion to have from Ally's perspective and one cannot blame him for accepting if that is what was on offer. So the situation here is more or less the same as for an open ended contract except that the notice period is 12 months. So, as has been widely reported it is up to the Club whether to allow him to work that notice, put him on gardening leave or pay him in lieu and say off you go with a pocket full of money. The money would appear to be around £1.1-1.2M (a year’s salary + a year’s deferral) and perhaps compensation for other bonuses and add-ons. Around £700-800k of that will not have been included in the £8M required to fund operations till the end of the season. If one includes Messrs McDowall and Durrant (but see below) assuming they are on the same kind of deal, then that figure might easily rise well above £1M but let’s just say £1M for the sake of argument. Rangers don’t have the money, so what are the options? Mike Ashley opens the petty cash and says there you go? Possible, if he takes the view that immediate change is vital to secure his long term objective; but then he didn’t take the initiative, so that seems unlikely. Also given the small bit of bother with the SFA, would Ashley want to pay off the Manager of a Club where he may find his control restricted or expensive or both, perhaps even to the extent that he calls it quits? Again, that’s unlikely in my view. Rangers add a million to the impending share issue on the basis that paying off the coaching crew is just another debt or cost of operation. That certainly wouldn’t make the issue any more attractive and becomes more difficult as the current price continues to fall – 18p today. Also if Ashley underwrites the issue, notwithstanding the SFA, then effectively he might be forced to pay up anyway; again unlikely that is in his mindset. For all the same reasons, a year’s gardening leave is unsustainable; unless it is on a vastly reduced salary and if you were Ally would you do agree to that? Some might argue he might for the good of the Club and it’s certainly possible; but given the clever way he has engineered this situation, I very much doubt it. It would not surprise me in the least if he felt that he was entitled to every last penny on the basis that the actions of the Club have made his position untenable rather than the team’s performances making his position untenable. He can still argue rightly that Rangers are well-placed for a play-off berth and no reason why they still shouldn’t go up. That said it’s clear he wants to leave asap. I think there are two aspects to this. The first is that he genuinely cannot abide what is happening inside the Club, with ordinary staff being made redundant at no great saving within the overall scheme of things, and now Murray Park staff under threat as well. The second is that the even his most loyal of supporters amongst the fans are turning against him because of the abysmal performances on the field. Ally McCoist is rightly a legend at Ibrox, he doesn’t want that overshadowed by failure if we don’t go up. Nor would he ever want to see or hear a real demonstration against him by the fans. In my opinion a few more humiliations like Alloa and QoS and that might be on the cards; that is if there are enough fans left to demonstrate. So, all this leads me to the conclusion that compromise is on the cards. The ball is in the Club’s court. As things stand they have a lame duck manager and a year’s money and more to pay him and his staff. I doubt 3-moths pay would suffice but if I was them I would offer something like 6-months to 30 June 2015 at the existing reduced salary ex the back pay and be prepared to go to 6-months full pay + some or all of the back pay; with the proviso that he could leave when either promotion was assured or beyond our reach. On the other hand, one strong factor on Ally's side of the table is that he does indeed know all the "beans" and a very tight non-disclosure clause might be expensive from the Club's point of view. If he would leave now for say £200-250k then that might be an affordable option. I cannot see that either party will want (and Rangers can’t afford) an extended period of gardening leave; nor will either side want the situation to persist into next season. I think I am correct in saying that there are a dozen or so players out of contract in the summer and there is no way the Club will want Ally to be making the decisions on who gets offered new contracts and who doesn’t, far less who is brought in to replace those who whose contract s will not be renewed. A small issue in relation to the immediate future is the position of the 8 players currently out on loan. However, Ally and his staff are probably better placed to consider their futures than any new manager might be unless he had a strong background in Scottish football or relied on the opinions of others. I mentioned that Ian Durrant might be a special case. There are few if any (perhaps including Ian himself) who understand what his current role entails. It has always seemed to me that he has been employed in a sinecure on the basis of the horrendous injury that befell him in our cause. I don’t have any problem with that but not at a reputed £100-200k. Ally will go back into TV. Kenny McDowall will get another job in football, albeit this spell will not have enhanced his reputation, he can argue that he didn’t have the highest quality tools in his box. I would offer Durrant a job at say £25-30k, the exact job specification doesn’t really matter, so long as it is clear that he will be taken care off. He won’t get a job elsewhere and we should look after our own. Again I wouldn’t fault him for taking whatever contract he was offered but equally I don’t think he has had any real influence on where we are now in football terms. That said Durrant accepted an out of court settlelement in 1993 http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football-durrant-settles-out-of-court-1470817.html and it might well be argued that Rangers have long ago generously fulfilled any commitment that they might have had towards him.
  14. BrahimHemdani
    I sit in Row A of the Main Front and I may well be mistaken but I am convinced that the note that was shown to the journalists was 21,837 not 28,137. There were more there than v KIlmarnock but there is no way there were either 28,000 in attendance or 28,000 inc all ST's because that would imply 5,000 paper tickets or walk ups and I don't believe that.
  15. BrahimHemdani
    Note: Daniel Stewart & Company plc Tel: 020 7776 6550 Paul Shackleton / David Coffman still listed on announcement.
  16. BrahimHemdani
    Shocking behaviour
  17. BrahimHemdani
    Promises, promises...........
  18. BrahimHemdani
    Hardly an orgy of depravity, an orgy of eating and drinking, perhaps; the only revelations were from Dave Smith about Rangers' training, seems nothing changes in that respect. Hope you can make the next one.
  19. BrahimHemdani
    Not quite clear whether you mean in order to be fair to her, in order to be fair to yourself, or she lives in a small town called "fairness".
  20. BrahimHemdani
    Hard to understand
  21. BrahimHemdani
    Shocking revelation, more to come................................?
  22. BrahimHemdani
    I understand that some or all of the ex Daniel Stewart guys have moved to WHI.
  23. BrahimHemdani
    I can confirm that Charltonman and "The Lovely Samantha" left together in a taxi, as did Messrs ian1964 & Hastie in a separate taxi. FS and DS left together in FS' car and I have a room full of witnesses who saw my wife collect me. SC's new bride collected him and Miko. Beyond that I really couldn't say
  24. BrahimHemdani
    More like a play-off party or a wake perhaps the way things are right now
  25. BrahimHemdani
    Good to meet you, live and in person
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.