What is ‘Rangers
FC’?
A short
time ago this would have been a ridiculous question, but today it is highly pertinent.
Is it:
A) A registered company privately owned
and financed by shares and debt.
B) An important element within Scottish
contemporary history.
C) An essential part of Scotland’s
social culture.
If the answer
is A, then it should be liquidated. It employs a couple of hundred folks of
which only a few would find themselves on the dole for any length of time and
its financial affairs have been driven to the position whereby it should be
closed down, the assets sold and at least something returned to creditors.
Basic capitalism at work.
If the answer
is B, then it should also be liquidated. Third Lanark are a part of Scottish
contemporary history (arguably the third leg of the ‘Auld Firm’) but were
liquidated in 1967. Actually, there is probably a fortune to be made in opening
a Rangers Museum celebrating the role that the club has played in Scottish life
and debating the damage that the sectarian culture wrecked on Scotland’s
economic and social affairs.
If the answer
is C, then nationalize it. Surely the Scottish government would be in a better
position to negotiate with HMRC, clean up the balance sheet and influence the
SFA such that the club cannot be penalized to the heavy extent as is currently
being envisaged. Then the ‘club’ can leave nationalization and return to the
public sector in no different a manner than we have seen with the banks.
The Essence of Scottish Football
How many
Scots spend more on Rangers FC than they do on their houses, how many spend
more on Rangers FC than they do on their cars or on their food bill? The reality
is that Rangers inspires a passion amongst a significant percentage of the
Scottish pubic that perhaps only Celtic FC can rival. This is a brand far more
powerful in Scotland than Coca-Cola, McDonalds or Apple.
It is right
that these folks are angry. They have been let down. The sacrifice that they
have made over the years has been stolen from them by corrupt businessmen and
now they are facing a repeat. Let’s say that the club is bought by an American
or Singaporean. They will only buy it if
the price is right and if they can make a buck out of it. That is no criticism
of them, they are perfectly entitled to do so, but in the meantime, the people
who really ‘own’ the club are suffering and it is likely that their sacrifice
will continue for some time to come.
However, it
is not only Rangers supporters that will suffer. Despite their naïve giggling,
all other Scottish soccer fans will also suffer. Celtic domination is
inevitable so no excitement in the league. Hardly any reason for any decent
players to come to the Scottish game, the best of Scotland departing for more
interesting leagues and the continuation in the decline of the national team.
Scottish
football would be renamed ‘The Juniors’.
Who Decides?
It is clear
that no-one is taking responsibility here. The supporters are powerless, the
Scottish Government are cowards and the administrators sorely out of their
depth.
However, it
is the SFA that should be primarily accused of neglect. This organization should
be the guardian of the Scottish game.
However, they have stood by whilst commercial mismanagement of Rangers
continued whilst many, even occasional, observers could see it happening. Now
they act like a business regulator handing out penalties that whilst perhaps
consistent with the rules, show little regard for the future of the Scottish
game they are pledged to encourage. Let’s be under no illusions that the transfer
ban is based on the same commercial premise as the fine imposed on Wal-Mart for
paying bribes in Mexico. Luckily for Wal-Mart they will survive, but Rangers
the company will not.
Does the
SFA have a crisis room established? Is it discussing this with the other clubs,
shouldn’t it have been prepared for this and have seen it as an opportunity for
a lasting restructuring of the Scottish game in such a way that some of the
passion returns? It appears not. It appears that the future of Scottish
football fans is to watch the EPL on TV and visit a Scottish ground for ‘Auld
Lang Syne’
So What is the Answer?
Nationalisation
will not happen. Salmond is too focused on the upcoming referendum to risk alienating
sections of the Scottish public. The SFA is not going to intervene, that is
clear so what is the alternative?
Return it
to the fans I say, but this cannot happen without someone making money in the
interim. However, make it a condition of
sale that an offer to acquire at least 51% of the shares of the company will be
made within 2 years will be made to the general public.
When one
group agrees to do this, make them the preferred creditor for a period of 1
month and let them go into closed session with HMRC and the SFA. Don’t let Duff
and Phelps do the negotiation here, they are useless and only focused on
drawing their salary at the end of the month. Actually don’t let the Blue Knights
do this as their pretense of being a ‘fans proxy’ is counter-productive to the
process. Let it be a hard nosed private equity type who is simply looking for
an acceptable 2 year return with a carry thereafter.
Let the law
punish Craig Whyte or David Murray. As Whyte correctly pointed out, the SFA
cannot punish him in any way that will affect him. However, let’s not punish
the real owners of Rangers. Let’s actually reward them for their investment in
the club. Let’s not punish the fans of Celtic or St Mirren or Hearts by taking
away one of the supporting pillars of the Scottish game. A game that is
desperate for leadership, vision and reform. Let’s admit that the game is not just about
passion and religion but is about money. The old fans of Third Lanark know
this.
