exposingtherhats - Resolution riddy

[buster. 4,839]

You have a group of Celtic supporters who not only wish every conceivable ill upon Rangers, to the point that they don't care about any consequences for Scottish football, but organise and spend their life trying to make it happen.

 

They wish to see us title stripped and then dead, attempting to conceal their hatred with self righteous claims about looking to expose corruption.

 

If you take a minute and go down a hypothetical road that sees them having a degree of success, think about what the finances, atmosphere and prospects would be in and around Scottish football. I doubt that Celtic PLC would want to go there, unless they were sure they'd get out of Scottish football (of which there is no sign of a route).

Edited June 2, 2016 by buster.

[boabie 230]

From the Sunday Herald -

 

" Offshore owners can avoid capital gains tax if they ever sell stakes in clubs, which often control valuable urban real estate, such as stadiums and training grounds, as well as their brand rights.

Fan groups are concerned about the developments. Paul Goodwin of the Scottish Football Supporters Association explained: "We all live in a democracy and people should be paying the right level of tax. We also want to make sure we know and understand who owns our football clubs. That is critical. How can we be assured that the clubs are in safe hands if these owners are shadowy businesses that we don't know enough about?"

 

" CELTIC

 

Due to Celtic's status as a Public Limited Company, it is expected to operate transparently. As a PLC, the Parkhead-based giants are traded on the stock exchange, and anyone can buy shares and - technically - go over their books. But supporters, even as they enjoy the high of a fifth consecutive Premiership title and an ambitious new manager in former Liverpool coach Brendan Rodgers, can't be quite sure who actually calls the shots at Celtic Park.

That is because some two-fifths of the PLC's shares - by market capitalisation, or the value on business on the stock market - are held offshore. These include three substantial holdings in the name of an account in Gibraltar, Line Nominees.

This business - one of many that acts as nominal shareholder for either the convenience or the privacy of the real owners - is believed to represent the man usually described as Celtic's biggest single investor, Dermot Desmond.

Desmond, an Irish citizen, lists his address in Celtic accounts as a marina in Gibraltar, the British outpost in the Mediterranean that is one of the world's most successful tax havens.

Desmond, 65, was named in the Panama Papers - a massive dump of documents from the Panama law firm, Mossack Fonseca, that has brought renewed focus on the use and abuse of offshore accounts and companies to avoid tax. Desmond made no comment on this revelation - nor did Celtic FC. Being named in the Panama Papers or being found to hold assets or shares offshore is not evidence of wrongdoing.

Line Nominees - which operates a perfectly legal business - was also named in the Panama Papers.

According to Celtic's website, the firm holds 5,131,300 or 32 per cent of the club's 60p convertible cumulative preference shares; 32,772,073 or 35 per cent of its 1p ordinary shares and 8,000,000 or 61 per cent of its preferred convertible preferred ordinary shares. At current market prices, that represents roughly £38m worth of stock.

Desmond, who is said to be a billionaire, has been reported as owning other interests through Line Nominees.

However, Line Nominees is not the only offshore entity with an at least nominal shareholding in Celtic. Another firm whose named cropped up in the Panama Papers, Hanom 1 Limited, whose address is a post box in St Helier, the capital of British offshore haven Jersey, has 625,000 of the £1 shares.

A Swiss firm called Telsar Holdings SA Depfyffer and Associes has another 1,600,000 such shares. A London-based nominee wing of the Bank of New York also formally holds substantial stock. Only shareholdings of more than three per cent in any kind of stock is declared.

The Sunday Herald asked Celtic if it could identify the 'ultimate beneficial owners' - the official expression for what is in layman's terms the 'real owners' - of all these companies. It did not respond. We also asked Celtic if it thought offshore ownership was suitable for football clubs. It did not reply."

[RabiDuck 89]

You have to love the vagaries of language. "The cost to the UK taxpayer could be up to £94M" is technically an accurate statement so difficult to challenge. On the other hand, "The cost to the UK taxpayer could exceed £1.49" is equally accurate but doesn't have quite the same impact!

[RabiDuck 89]

Hmm, Celtic shares trading at about 73p currently (according to Google). How many shares would it take to have an impact and what could an organised Rangers Support do with such a holding?

[Davie P 4]

Surely there will be a massive media scrum over the ultimate beneficial ownership of Line Nominees, Telsar Holdings and Hanom 1 Limited, in the same manner that Blue Pitch was so frequently highlighted! All in the interests of balanced journalism, of course.

[boabie 230]

Surely there will be a massive media scrum over the ultimate beneficial ownership of Line Nominees, Telsar Holdings and Hanom 1 Limited, in the same manner that Blue Pitch was so frequently highlighted! All in the interests of balanced journalism, of course.

 

They already "balanced" the report Davie. Blue Pitch, Margarita, etc were mentioned in the section on us.

Point taken though, they couldn't just do an article on the maze around the manks. They had to drag us into it too via a couple of companies who have zero relevance nowadays.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Thing is it was rangers fans who wanted to expose blue pitch etc

[Davie P 4]

Thing is it was rangers fans who wanted to expose blue pitch etc

 

Absolutely agree with you, just pointing out the difference in approach by the press to the beneficial ownership of Celtic and Rangers. Transparency on ownership should be a given, when it comes to football clubs.

[JFK-1 1,684]

There's no embarrassment unfortunately.

 

To me that's one of the most bizarre features of the entire obsession. I seriously look at it and see a band of complete weirdos so far gone in this weird obsession they don't grasp that they're looking like obsessive oddballs to anyone outside their fantasy reality.

 

I also feel this sevco new club obsession started as banter and somewhere along the way they forgot that and created an elaborate alternate reality they now think is real and can't get out of it as the rest of the world looks on bamboozled at the freakiness of it.

 

And I suspect it's actually becoming worse recently due to the fact that the team were on a high this season playing a brand of football everyone was impressed by while their season was basically a dud when they were humiliated in Europe and won nothing but a one horse race of a league and to top off the dud of a season were humiliated again in the Scottish cup semi final when they weren't just beaten they were made to look second rate for long periods.

 

And now an even darker terror beckons. Rangers come back into the league and win it in the first year back highlighting for one and all how much of a one horse race it really was and how irrelevant winning it was without us in it. If we hit the ground running next season and they stutter we're going to see levels of screaming about sevco approaching full meltdown.

 

And incidentally I and I expect everyone else but the obsessives have become so bored with the new club line that I don't even give a flying expletive about it anymore and why would I when every footballing authority maintains records saying otherwise. If they want to add to their alternate reality that a brand new team popped into existence like magic and instantly put an end to their one horse trot go for it. Now along with being whipped by the minnows of Europe they're being humiliated by startups.

[boabie 230]

While searching for some info around the criminal case I came across this beauty from the demented fool John James -

 

 

“The company will pay any reasonable professional (including, without limitation, legal and accounting) costs and expenses properly incurred by the employee after the date of this agreement which arise from his having to defend, or appear in any administrative, regulatory, judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings by a third party as

a result of his having been chief executive of Rangers Football Club or the company.”

 

There has been no end of speculation, on social media, in regard to Green’s charges. I have consistently pointed out in three previous blogs, that Rangers/RIFC will be liable for the costs of Green’s defence. Rangers will not be able to hedge their costs with an insurer. No insurance policy will indemnify against criminal charges. The writ has been served, RIFC have responded in writing to the clerks at The Court of Session that they will respond to Green’s petition, and in these circumstances I would anticipate no more than a one-day hearing, with a decision on the same day. "

 

How'd that one go JJ ?

 

On the tarred ones site a bear has succeeded in shutting them up for the past 8 hours with two quick posts on the resolution 12 rubbish.

 

Obsessed doesn't cover the actions of the clowns in the manks support.