“Sources close to Whyte” in economical with truth shocker!


Yesterday’s blog post revealed for the first time in any media outlet (mainstream or otherwise) that Rangers had prepared an appeal of the “wee tax case” and seems to have ruffled a few feathers in the process.

In this morning’s Daily Telegraph, Roddy Forsyth reports: “A source close to Craig Whyte, the Rangers owner, told The Daily Telegraph that an appeal had been lodged several months ago against the liability – incurred under the previous regime of Sir David Murray and not to be confused with the much larger potential debt to HMRC… … The source added emphatically that the existing appeal was not intended to be a defence against Uefa sanctions.”

First, Forsyth is confused or has been misled.  This appeal absolutely and categorically was not filed “several months ago“.  Assuming that Forsyth is not confused, his source is either a shameless liar whose opinions on any of these matters should be treated on a par with asking Joseph Goebbels how the defence of Berlin is going- or his source does not know what is going on.

Next, why did it require “a source close to Craig Whyte“?  Why not an on-the-record statement from the club or one of its executives?  Why have Rangers not made any reference to an appeal of the “wee tax case” assessment prior to my post yesterday?

The phrase “a source close to Craig Whyte” is reminiscent of all of those fabulous promises made in the run-up to the takeover.  Googling this phrase is instructive.  “A source close to Craig Whyte” has been responsible for the following gems being quoted in our mainstream media without critical analysis or qualification:

  • For a start, the deal Craig Whyte is putting forward is worth £52.5m, more than double the amount apparently to be raised by this unnamed Rangers director.  Further, the Craig Whyte investment in the club would begin on day one of a deal being completed.”
  • “…the businessman had decided to make available “significantly more” than the average sum of £5m-a-season to Ally McCoist when he succeeds current manager Walter Smith at the start of next term.”
  • “Ally knows he will have significant funds to spend on players”

With the track record of such “sources close to Whyte” one has to wonder why any member of the press would take them seriously?  Roddy Forsyth is one of the better journalists among a very poor bunch.  However, to repeat the words of someone who will undoubtedly be one of Whyte’s handsomely rewarded PR goons without getting objective proof is symptomatic of the malaise affecting Scottish football journalism.  The lazily and cheaply acquired quote is favoured over truth.  To repeat the words of someone who misleads others for a living without obtaining objective confirmation is just comically stupid or willfully negligent.    I must assume that the subject of Rangers’ accumulating unpaid PAYE & national insurance money just did not come up in conversation?

I do not claim to know with any certainty the motivation behind the appeal.  So I cannot swear that it is related to the mounting pressure for Rangers to make an official and unequivocal statement on the status of this liability to HMRC as of 31 March 2011.  However, the timing of the appeal does look convenient.  I must acknowledge that it is also very possible that it is simply driven by financial necessity i.e. it is an attempt to reverse the arrestment of the £2.3m which is currently frozen prior to it disappearing forever within the next couple of weeks. However, I can confidently state that the launching of this appeal is very recent indeed.

Of course, this can all be cleared up easily.  Mr. Whyte can tell us when the appeal was submitted.  He can produce the appeal documents and show the dates to members of the press.  Even members of his own trusted cadre of tame hacks would suffice.  The central facts of the case are not in dispute and have been a matter of public record since Rangers’ interim accounts were released on 1st April. There will not be many real confidentiality concerns. We know the amount and to what it is related.  All we need to know is the date of the appeal.  This could debunk both my post from yesterday and the theory (expounded by others) that the SFA improperly granted Rangers a UEFA license for the 2011/2012 season.

Go ahead Mr. Whyte.  Prove me wrong.  And Mr Forsyth, you could apply a bit more critical thinking in your work.  If you are interested in the question of Rangers’ UEFA license, you can ask your contacts at Ibrox and at Hampden to show you the evidence.  It would be a good bit of journalism and could lay this issue to rest once and for all.

About rangerstaxcase
I have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

1,149 Responses to “Sources close to Whyte” in economical with truth shocker!

  1. Brenda says:

    Well said Torquemada 🙂

    and may I join Jean in welcoming Katie to the blog 🙂

  2. Torquemada says:

    Adam says:

    04/12/2011 at 10:22 am

    Torquemada says:
    04/12/2011 at 8:30 am

    Do you ever post anything at all to do with the blog?
    ___________________________________________

    Ah, more playing of the man by the blog’s resident pharisee.

    You should have engaged your brain before you snapped into knee-jerk ragers mode.

    The incompetence, ineptitude and bias of Scottish sports journalists has been a staple of this blog since RTC started it and, indeed, he has posted several blogs on this very subject, IIRC.

    Unlike you, Adam, I post when I have something to say, not because I have to say something.

    Since what I know about insolvency law you could stick in your eye, I tend to post about those things I do know about — journalism, in which I have more than 40 years of experience in four different countries, including Scotland, and bigotry, which I have witnessed first-hand since the day and hour my family settled in Scotland.

    Feel free to apologise.

  3. Torquemada says:

    Oh no, I thought the original post had been lost! Arghh!

    I tried to remember it verbatim. Feel free to delete the second post, RTC.

  4. Hugh McEwan says:

    I think to mistake Scottish football reporting for journalism and in particular investigative journalism is a basic error.

    They are for the most part just people writing about what happened in a game, from their own perspective. They are fans with a typewriter and a sub editor to correct their spelling and the worst of their grammar if necessary. It’s written in such a way as to sell as many papers as possible, which in turn generates more advertising revenue. When they wander away from the actual games then they are shown for what they are, hacks writing to sell papers with sensationalist headlines and nebulous drivel.

    To ask any of these people to actually investigate anything is pretty much pointless. They need their “stories” and their “sound bites” so they need access to the clubs.This means they have to keep the appropriate people sweet and will not dig too much or cause them too much hassle.

    An organisation like the BBC is different. They are not reliant on advertising or selling their product to the masses to such an extent. They are also not as parochial. So they can run things like the Craig Whyte exposé. They can do the digging and broadcast their findings. The chances of anyone doing that in a Scottish paper are negligible, well until the body is already dead. If and when Mr Whyte loses then you will see these scavengers feeding on the carrion. Even then all they will be doing is re-hashing other people’s words for the most part.

  5. Torquemada says:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/16023596.stm

    Well, well, well…

    Quote:

    SFA to review Sone Aluko penalty award in Rangers win

    The Scottish FA are likely to review an incident that let to a penalty for Rangers in their 2-1 win over Dunfermline, BBC Scotland has learned.

    Pars manager Jim McIntyre claimed Rangers’ Sone Aluko dived to with the spot-kick, converted by Nikica Jelavic.

    Alleged simulation can be processed using the SFA’s fast-track procedures and compliance officer Vincent Lunny is expected to review the incident.

    A decision would be made on Monday at the earliest.

    The penalty was awarded by referee Steve Conroy when Rangers were already a goal up, with Martin Hardie the player penalised.

    However after Jelavic netted, Joe Cardle pulled one back for the Dunfermline to set up a tense second half.

  6. easyJambo says:

    I see that Graham Spiers is tweeting that he is leaving The Times. It may avoid him having to stick the knife in further to his boyhood team. I actually don’t mind Spiers. He is one of the more intelligent journos.

    GrahamSpiersGraham Spiers
    Breaking news: I’m taking a pretty generous redundancy deal from The Times. Next up for me: 6 weeks’ holiday and then back into action…

  7. easyJambo says:

    Tom English also getting ripped into Paul Murray’s late bid to but RFC in today’s Scotland on Sunday.

    http://www.scotsman.com/news/cartoon/tom_english_paul_murray_s_bid_was_well_meaning_but_not_based_in_reality_1_1990991

  8. John says:

    Hugh McEwan says:

    04/12/2011 at 1:43 pm

    i agree with most of what you are saying here Hugh and think it illustrates my point.

    Media owners now put a premium on the cheap and the untrained who can provide ‘opium for the masses’ and are not prepared to invest time and resources in anything else.

    Your point on the BBC is interesting but, especially since the Condems came to power, the BBC has been under unprecedented attack and. as I mentioned earlier, is facing massive cuts – especially to its news departments.

    Some of this can be traced back to Rupert Murdoch.

    I’m sure that many of you will recall, that just prior to the phone-hacking scandal, the biggest story regarding Murdoch was the Government’s apparent support for Murdoch taking over more of Bskyb news, in so far as it would not refer this virtual takeover to be subjected to further scrutiny.

    For a number of years, Murdoch has been trying to persuade governments to cut back on the BBC’s local news output and its internet presence and to allow his companies to step in.

    Prior to the last election, Murdoch met with David Cameron and, allegedly, made it a condition of his empire’s support that a new government would clear the way for this to happen.

    Almost immediately after the election, the government, essentially pledged its support for Murdoch’s expansion plans and began to pave the way for a curtailment of the BBC by announcing massive cuts.

    At least one part of this plan has been thwarted, it is more than unlikely that the Murdochs will ever be able to wield the same degree of power ever again but, were it not for journalists revealing the sinister core of his ‘evil empire’, Murdoch would have controlled a huge proportion of both print and broadcast news in this country.

    No doubt, if that had transpired, he could have comforted himself in the knowlege that faced with a news output comprised of blanket coverage of ‘i’m a Celebrity get me out of here’, Katie Price and Peter Andre or whether an MP was gay or not, vast sections of the public would have ignored the part played by the government and the Murdoch family but instead would just heap criticism on journalists.

  9. John says:

    easyJambo says:

    04/12/2011 at 2:03 pm

    I see that Graham Spiers is tweeting that he is leaving The Times. It may avoid him having to stick the knife in further to his boyhood team. I actually don’t mind Spiers. He is one of the more intelligent journos.

    GrahamSpiersGraham Spiers
    Breaking news: I’m taking a pretty generous redundancy deal from The Times. Next up for me: 6 weeks’ holiday and then back into action…

    I must confess that I had heard this was on the cards and that was why I mentioned him in an earlier post.
    Again, this illustrates my point, media owners will get rid of journalists who ‘waste time’ on investigative reporting or, at least reasonably, intelligent comment.

  10. Fritz Agrandoldteam says:

    Hugh McEwan says:
    04/12/2011 at 1:43 pm

    Don’t forget Hugh, the BBC “lost” the tape of the 7 – 1 game…………..

    I know, I know, but, I can never forget……………

  11. Adam says:

    I see off topic is still allowed and unchallenged. Suppose “my lot” should remain quiet or talk about off topic opinions in some cyber “lounge” somewhere.

  12. Adam says:

    easyJambo says:
    04/12/2011 at 2:15 pm
    ________________________________________________________________

    He has certainly called Paul Murrays bluff in that article. I dont think you will be seeing any response from Murray on it as English is spot on in regards to Murrays plan and role in where we are.

  13. gunnerb says:

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 2:20 pm plus various earlier posts
    ___________________________________________

    John I find it hard to disagree with your condemnation of media ownership and manipulation of output I find it hard to sympathise with your defence of the ‘journalist in the street’.The NUJ should be ashamed of themselves , their membership face something akin to Thatchers decimation of mining in the 80’s and yet they stand and stare? I appreciate that the face of news reporting and media is changing rapidly but the NUJ should be at the forefront of such change. Is newsprint dead? no, but it is certainly dying due in no small part to ,as you mention , pandering to the lowest common denominator. Why are journalists sitting by and watching colleagues careers ripped from them without a murmur?The NUJ should grow a pair…and mighty quickly too.

  14. Adam says:

    easyJambo says:
    04/12/2011 at 2:03 pm

    “I’m taking a pretty generous redundancy deal from The Times. ”
    ___________________________________________________________________________

    He may have the ability to compose sentences containing big words whilst playing candle in wind on the piano (can anyone remember that ? 🙂 ) however the bottom line is that like all the rest of his ilk up here, he is pretty useless as a football journalist.

    His knowledge of the game couple with a lack of understanding around what is currently the hot topic renders him useless.

    Also pretty sure there were reports saying the Time online readership had dropped by 90%.

  15. Private Land says:

    John says:

    04/12/2011 at 2:20 pm
    _________________________________________________________________________

    Agree with most of what you said earlier re the Murdoch/Tory axis, but as far as the investigative role played by sports journos is concerned, well it just doesn’t exist at all. It has never been their remit to ‘investigate’ anything other than the next bit of gossip on who transfer targets are.

    The structure of journalism in sportland is just not up to a Rangers Tax Case scenario. Having said that, whilst I find no great fault in their failure to expose flaws, it is to their discredit that, armed with the knowledge (from media outlets such as this) of highly questionable activity, they are failing miserably to get to the truth, which is the first aim of any journalist.

    I don’t buy into the conspiracy theorists’ idea that this is a pro-Rangers cover-up. In fact, I’m not even sure that who the ‘real’ Rangers are in this scenario. Is it the new regime? The old regime? The RST?

    I can name as many Celtic fans amongst the ranks of Scottish football journalists as those who are not. They would probably be happy to see Rangers humiliated, and who would hold nothing back if they had a choice. Many are extremely prominent and influential, but they too appear to fail the truth test. Actually they are as unequipped to deal with the particulars of this scandal as most of us, but they are also being held back due to the application of simple economics by their employers. Rangers in crisis doesn’t sell newspapers.

    So now we get back to your original point. Newspapers don’t sell basic truths. They sell palatable ones. And if there are none of these, half truths, gossip or ill-informed speculation will do.

  16. Private Land says:

    Fritz Agrandoldteam says:

    04/12/2011 at 3:11 pm

    Hugh McEwan says:
    04/12/2011 at 1:43 pm

    Don’t forget Hugh, the BBC “lost” the tape of the 7 – 1 game…………..

    I know, I know, but, I can never forget……………
    _________________________________________________________________________

    I believe it was our very own Stunney who discovered the not very exciting and non-conspiratorial truth on that one about twelve years ago……..

  17. John says:

    gunnerb says:

    04/12/2011 at 3:31 pm

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 2:20 pm plus various earlier posts

    The NUJ is not standing by and doing nothing.
    As regards fighting for journalism, I would repeat that the NUJ has been recommending for years that many of the things that are starting to be discussed at the Leveson enquiry should be implemented.
    Its own rules also make requirements of members to uphold the highest standards of ethical journalism and the NUJ has expelled journalists for failing to do so.
    As regards the changing face of journalism, the NUJ in Scotland is at the forefront of training in the use of new, partcularly digital, technology.
    As regards ‘colleagues careers ripped from them without a murmour’ the NUJ has taken industrial action at, amongst others, the BBC, The Herald, and Johnston Press (owners of the Scotsman and other papers).
    Additionally, it has represented members at DC Thomson (owners of the Sunday Post and other titles).
    In many of these situations it has gained significant ground; stopping some of the excesses of management, reducing the levels of redundancies imposed, challenging through the courts many of the decisions made by management and challenging politicians to stand up for high-quality journalism, which has at its heart the intersts of readers and listeners and exposing power to truth.

    As I said earlier, you will not hear about a lot of this because it is not in the interest of media owners to have it reported in any of their outlets.
    I would, however, encourage you to contact the NUJ, which has an office in Glasgow to hear more about what it is attempting to do and the difficulties facing journalists and journalism.

  18. gunnerb says:

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 3:55 pm

    gunnerb says:

    04/12/2011 at 3:31 pm
    ________________________________
    A spirited defence John, why no national action? Allowing proprietors to hack away piecemeal while regional or local apathy prevails is a recipe for disaster.Perhaps a ’cause’ is needed to coalesce …I suggest the need for such is urgent.

  19. west coast hearts 2012 double ugliness says:

    just seen the stv news clip saying “its the big story everyone is talking about”,for a second thought it was rangers announce administration but no its the arrival of 2 pandas in edinburgh.call me paranoid but even if it was rangers armageddon day im sure i would still be reading about pandas and bamboo and not the elephant in the room.

  20. campsiejoe says:

    John

    I admire your defence of journalists, but how do equate that to someone who says he is delighted that he started a riot, and that just about everyone is fair game

    Journalists who have appeared before the inquiry so far, have been fairly unequivocal in their condemnation of the practices within the industry

  21. John says:

    Adam says:

    04/12/2011 at 3:12 pm

    I see off topic is still allowed and unchallenged. Suppose “my lot” should remain quiet or talk about off topic opinions in some cyber “lounge” somewhere.

    Adam, I don’t know it this is to any extend aimed at me. If not please forgive me.
    If it is, may I remind you that one of the first things this blog claimed to be about was the media in Scotland.
    As such, I do not think exploring the reasons for what many see as a compliant, toothless media can be seen as off topic.
    If you want to change a situation, surely it is better to firstly have some concept of what caused the situation in the first plave and how the main protagonists behave.

    If we decide that this is not appropriate regarding one of the original reasons for this blog, should we apply the same logic to the other and decide that any post that attempts to shed light on Craig Whytes motivation or explores the broader issues of the actions of others in regard to the tax case or examines how the problem was allowed to develop, should be seen as off topic?

    I reckon, if that is the case, we could have saved a lot of time and just said ‘It was all David Murray’s fault so let’s not talk about how it affects football in general, let’s not explore any potentail involvement from the SFA, lets ignore the role that UEFA might play and ,instead, let’s just write a constant stream of how Sir David is the dark knight.

  22. Adam says:

    John – not aimed at you mate.

  23. John says:

    gunnerb says:

    04/12/2011 at 4:06 pm

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 3:55 pm

    gunnerb says:

    04/12/2011 at 3:31 pm
    ________________________________
    A spirited defence John, why no national action? Allowing proprietors to hack away piecemeal while regional or local apathy prevails is a recipe for disaster.Perhaps a ’cause’ is needed to coalesce …I suggest the need for such is urgent.

    No disagreemnt from me.
    The NUJ has had national action ( albeit mostly in England) targeting Johnston press.
    Unfortunately, anti-union legislation has been used by newspaper owners to prevent across the board industrial action, although the union has certainly tried to fight this in the courts.

    campsiejoe says:

    04/12/2011 at 4:12 pm

    John

    I admire your defence of journalists, but how do equate that to someone who says he is delighted that he started a riot, and that just about everyone is fair game

    Journalists who have appeared before the inquiry so far, have been fairly unequivocal in their condemnation of the practices within the industry

    I agree and I have always said that I would never defend lazy or bad journalists and neither would the NUJ.

  24. john turkleton says:

    Lies, damned lies and Scottish journalism is very much ON topic, its why this blog exists in the first place. Obviously its uncomfortable reading for some, who may want to take it off on another tangent but its abundantly clear that if the MSM had approached the subject with integrity then we would all be doing the Christmas shopping today.

  25. campsiejoe says:

    John

    On the face of it, the NUJ have done nothing to rectify the situation
    In fact they appear to be complicit in accepting the lowering of standards
    That is my biggest gripe with them

  26. StevieBC says:

    Regardless of the financial pressures on the MSM to be selective about what they report on – or what they do not report on – the end result is the same.

    Any intelligent, Scottish football consumer will now treat the MSM with the contempt it deserves – and will choose to obtain their information from other sources, such as the RTC blog.

    Whilst print media is just another industry which is in terminal decline, I am disappointed at the poor performance of the BBC with regards to the RFC tax case.

    The BBC is supposed to be impartial, [don’t laugh], is not dependent on commercial income because we all pay our TV tax, [mibbees], so it should have been free to investigate RFC in depth at any time over the last 12 months+.

    To produce the CW programme in October was far too little – and far too late by the BBC

    Whatever happens in the fallout of the tax case to RFC, [and to the SFA/SPL], I hope that one positive outcome will be wider access to the truth for Scottish football fans – and that “PR journalists” quickly become a bad memory.

  27. The Scottish media have been silent over the whole Ranger’s fiasco. Icant help if it was a certain other football club in Glasgow would they be so quiet. Or am I just being paranoid?

  28. I STILL See No Subs, Except... says:

    “PR journalists”

    Does that “PR” stand for “Pure Rank”? It damn well should do!

  29. Barcabhoy says:

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 2:50 am

    John,

    Your support of good journalists is admirable. What can’t be resisted is change due to technology.

    There was once a fantastic horse and cart manufacturer in Michigan, He made the best product available in the state, and just down the road his friend made fantastic buggy whips made from local willow.

    Then along came that pesky upstart Henry Ford.

    Fast forward and Thomas Cook are in trouble whilst new versions like Expedia are growing. Insurance brokers are struggling whilst comparethemarket.com and moneysupermarket are hovering up new clients daily

    The old media are struggling in the UK because the demand from the customer is not to merely get news, it is to get it NOW. The old media will continue to move downmarket, but that doesn’t mean the death knell for good journalism.

    Good journalists need to move to an environment where explanation and investigative innovation are valued. There is still a demand for high quality insight.

    Creating that environment is the challenge. However no more of a challenge than Henry Ford faced to break through.

    People will not pay for high quality content, therefore you have to get your revenue through other channels. Not easy but not impossible. The problem is journalists don’t appear to be doing anything innovative to challenge the downward trend in quality

  30. jean says:

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 1:13 pm

    Thank you …on reflection I think that you make some fair points.

  31. Private Land says:

    StevieBC says:

    04/12/2011 at 4:42 pm (Edit)

    Any intelligent, Scottish football consumer will now treat the MSM with the contempt it deserves – and will choose to obtain their information from other sources, such as the RTC blog.
    _____________________________________________________________________________

    But that’s where they still have the upper hand Stevie. Exponentially fewer people have easy access to this type of media compared to the print and TV stuff.

    That’s the elastoplast I spoke about earlier. They may be a bunch of incompetents. Many of them may be complete tubes. Some of them are corpulent and lazy with no peripheral vision whatsoever. Trouble is that not nearly enough people are aware of that.

    Over time perhaps, things will change – but I don’t think that the greater mass of people are ready to shift their media allegiances just yet.

    On another pessimistic note, I can’t see infettered Internet access going unchallenged governmentally if the threat to the traditional media is maintained.

    Not that I’m paranoid mind you 🙂

  32. the Don Dionisio says:

    Very well said Torquemada @1.33 –(nobody ever expects the Spanish Inquisition ! )–and john turkleton @4.26.

    Town criers’ spin, lies and bigotry are all very much germane to the thrust of this blog.

    Sono molto d’accordo con voi due.

  33. Private Land says:

    * UNfettered

  34. liveinhope says:

    Do you noit think its concernign all the shite about whyte or just tarrier shite? Taken from rangers media guy has over 17000 posts good speller eh

  35. StevieBC says:

    Private Land says:
    04/12/2011 at 5:41 pm
    StevieBC says:

    04/12/2011 at 4:42 pm (Edit)

    Any intelligent, Scottish football consumer will now treat the MSM with the contempt it deserves – and will choose to obtain their information from other sources, such as the RTC blog.
    ____________________________________________________________________________
    But that’s where they still have the upper hand Stevie. Exponentially fewer people have easy access to this type of media compared to the print and TV stuff…

    On another pessimistic note, I can’t see infettered Internet access going unchallenged governmentally if the threat to the traditional media is maintained…
    ==========
    Fair points.
    Absolutely, print/tv media is currently most readily accessible. In time that could/should change.
    But you could also argue that the people/consumers who currently have the influence/motivation for change are also savvy with current technolgy. [Yes, I do like to be optimistic sometimes.]

    And I do agree re: unfettered internet access. The ‘copyright/IP’ legislation introduced in the States recently is disturbing. This could very well be abused to restrict internet content – not dissimilar to the abuse of terrorism legislation in the ‘interests of public safety’.

  36. John says:

    campsiejoe says:

    04/12/2011 at 4:29 pm

    John

    On the face of it, the NUJ have done nothing to rectify the situation
    In fact they appear to be complicit in accepting the lowering of standards
    That is my biggest gripe with them

    |If I may, I would like to refer you to an earlier reply:

    ‘The NUJ is not standing by and doing nothing.
    As regards fighting for journalism, I would repeat that the NUJ has been recommending for years that many of the things that are starting to be discussed at the Leveson enquiry should be implemented.
    Its own rules also make requirements of members to uphold the highest standards of ethical journalism and the NUJ has expelled journalists for failing to do so.
    As regards the changing face of journalism, the NUJ in Scotland is at the forefront of training in the use of new, partcularly digital, technology.’

    I should add that the NUJ has produced specific guides for the proper reporting of mental health and racism issues among others. It also has a code of conduct for journalists that owners have chosen to ignore but are now being forced to consider in the light of the Leveson inquiry.

    On a very topical note, the NUJ also produced a guide to reporting suicide that, partcularly in the last week, appears to have been quite closely followed.
    The NUJ is nevertheless quite a small union and does not have unlimited resources. I have said it before, the NUJ has no argument with people who believe that journalism in this country needs to improve and the highest standards should be expected.
    It would, however benefit greatly from help from the general public in highlighting the causes of decline.

    Barcabhoy says:

    04/12/2011 at 5:15 pm

    John says:
    04/12/2011 at 2:50 am

    John,

    Your support of good journalists is admirable. What can’t be resisted is change due to technology.

    I agree entirely and again I would like to refer you to an earlier post where I point out that the NUJ is at the forefront in promoting training in the use of new technology.
    Unfortunately, media owners do not see any real immediate profit in training and it is therefore one of the first things they have cut.
    The union has been arguing for some time that a proportion of profit should be spent on developing journalists ability to embrace this technology.
    In fact, some of you may remember that, a couple of years ago, the Scottish Government and the Local Authorities threatened to remove their advertising from the print media and only advertise on line.
    The newspaper owners argued against this on the basis of the threat to their profits.
    The NUJ argued against it on the basis that even more jobs would be lost but, more pertinently to this discussion, it argued that owners should be required to use some of the profits from this public money on training and development and involving schools etc. in the ongoing development of the media.

    Needless to say, the owners opposed this requirement being imposed.

    You are right to say that newspapers have not embraced new technology. They are simply not prepared to invest either the time nor the money to do so.

    As I said earlier, the prevaling attitude is make as much profit as quickly as possible then get out and who cares about journalism or the public.
    Does that remind you of anyone?

  37. John says:

    Adam says:

    04/12/2011 at 4:19 pm

    John – not aimed at you mate.

    Thank you and my apologies.

  38. John says:

    Barcabhoy says:

    04/12/2011 at 5:15 pm

    ‘Good journalists need to move to an environment where explanation and investigative innovation are valued. There is still a demand for high quality insight.’

    Sorry, meant to mention this as well.
    Many are starting to do this and more will follow, without going into a long list I will mention Phill Mcgillbhain, who is often quoted on here and is proud to be called a journalist and an NUJ member.

  39. Eddiebhoy says:

    I used to get withdrawal symptoms if I didn’t buy a paper before going to work. Now I (my wife to be precise) buy one paper a week on a Sunday and I don’t even read it. Everything in the paper is available to me online and I have invariably read it the day/night before. The next generation who are now getting to working age will, IMHO not even consider buying the print media – they will simply whip out their smartphone, ipad or computer and read today’s news today.

  40. v says:

    On the subject of phil, his latest blog suggests that the MBB may be about to change his accounting year very soon (presumably to bodyswerve the agm/auditors problem)

    Is this possible to do? I’m sure I read on here that it wasn’t an option as Murray had already done that in the last year or so

    Or did I just dream that?

  41. Paulsatim says:

    v says:
    04/12/2011 at 6:53 pm

    I brought that possibility up, but it appears it was MIH who changed their year end, so appparently nothing to stop ragers from doing the same.

  42. Hugh McEwan says:

    v says:
    04/12/2011 at 6:53 pm

    On the subject of phil, his latest blog suggests that the MBB may be about to change his accounting year very soon (presumably to bodyswerve the agm/auditors problem)

    Is this possible to do? I’m sure I read on here that it wasn’t an option as Murray had already done that in the last year or so

    Or did I just dream that?

    ===========================

    MIH did extend their period to 15 months a few years ago. I thought they had to do it in advance though, I didn’t think you could do it after the accounting period was over.

    Maybe he’s going to say he did it months ago.

  43. Barney says:

    Rumour on Follow Follow via KDS re Accounts

    “approaches have been made to each of the big 5 accountancy firms, and so far none will take them on.

    He understands that one is reconsidering but there is a “problem” over asset transfer and where funding reserves are to be within the balance sheet and another issue over amortisation values. ”

    Poster also says that GT have refused to sign them off.

  44. v says:

    🙂

  45. Goosy says:

    I wonder if Lee Walaces continued absence from the first team has anything to do with delaying the next payment to Hearts ?

  46. Davie b says:

    its always about the money – if we accept that the end result is ragers 2012 then there is no european football for 3 years, so why would the licence matter. GEF knows he’s in the proverbial and needs to buy time at least until January – I see this as confirmation that he will run out of funds this month, probably before the wages are due and this is one last throw of the dice to try and get some cash quickly.

  47. gunnerb says:

    Davie b says:
    04/12/2011 at 7:30 pm

    its always about the money – if we accept that the end result is ragers 2012 then there is no european football for 3 years, so why would the licence matter. GEF knows he’s in the proverbial and needs to buy time at least until January – I see this as confirmation that he will run out of funds this month, probably before the wages are due and this is one last throw of the dice to try and get some cash quickly.
    _________________________________________________________________________

    How will this raise cash ?..as I see it the most it will do is stop it being paid over to HMRC temporarily. That does not mean it is released from arrestment.

  48. Hugh McEwan says:

    Barney says:
    04/12/2011 at 7:07 pm

    Rumour on Follow Follow via KDS re Accounts

    “approaches have been made to each of the big 5 accountancy firms, and so far none will take them on.

    He understands that one is reconsidering but there is a “problem” over asset transfer and where funding reserves are to be within the balance sheet and another issue over amortisation values. ”

    Poster also says that GT have refused to sign them off.

    ================================

    I hate to think what the chap who first posted that (on KDS) is currently being described as. They can get rather harsh when they feel someone is decrying their club.

  49. Katie says:

    Thanks Jean & Brenda

  50. paul says:

    We know GT have not signed off, what we don’t know is why they signed off the previous accounts when this tax problem was known but not quantified or qualified.
    GT could also find themselves having to answer some very searching questions.

%d bloggers like this: