Campbell Ogilvie was an executive director of Rangers for the first five years of their Employee Benefit Trusts and during their earlier illegally-executed tax avoidance Discount Options Scheme. He received a ‘loan’ from a Rangers EBT, which he has not repaid and is not expected to repay, and recently described his company responsibilities during this period to a friendly journalist as being administrative, and then legislative.
He has been a director of the SFA for 22 years and is now president.
During the period when Ogilvie was director of both Rangers and the SFA the club illegally registered dozens of footballers with the SFA. All directors are responsible for actions of a company, executive directors especially so. Those who represent themselves as having administrative and legislative roles, absolutely so.
SFA chief executive, Stewart Regan, yesterday defended Ogilvie’s shameless refusal to resign by offering a defence which echoed Rangers ‘Craig Whyte acted alone’ defence, which was comprehensively dismissed by the SFA Judicial Tribunal.
Regan said, “We have had very clear feedback that the president was not involved in any letter or correspondence with regards to player EBTs.
“We are all aware of businesses being run where you have one owner and operator running the club and a number of directors sitting below. The way this process has been managed, a lot of this correspondence was done much higher up the chain than Campbell Ogilvie.”
This is cringe-worthy nonsense and gets to the heart of the lack of corporate governance at the SFA. Mr Regan is not qualified to assure us that Mr Ogilvie has no case to answer. That is not a judgement for him to make and is certainly not an inference that can be made on the basis of private comments from Mr Ogilvie or other former Rangers directors similarly contaminated by this issue.
Before the chief executive can state as fact how Rangers conducted their business, and the limited involvement of Mr Ogilvie, some form of inquiry must have taken place. No such inquiry happened.
“We have had very clear feedback”, said Mr Regan. Who is “we”, was it an independent panel that received this feedback, or did Mr Regan deal with this personally? Who gave the feedback? Was Mr Ogilvie subject to the same independent scrutiny as anyone else in the game, from Neil Lennon to Craig Whyte, or was this passed off with a handshake?
Mr Regan’s failure to recognise the serious corporate governance failures in his conduct is alarming. We don’t need this guy to know the offside rule but he has to understand good corporate governance requires questions against your president to be openly and independently investigated.
When these are our standards, what else is the executive turning a blind eye to?
Mr Regan was careful to limit his claim on what Mr Ogilvie was not party to. “We have had very clear feedback that the president was not involved in any letter or correspondence with regards to player EBTs” sounds like a substantial piece of information but it’s not.
This only claims that Mr Ogilvie did not author any side letter or contract relating to an EBT, which is not in doubt. The important issue is clearly Mr Ogilvie knew dozens of players had EBTs, he knew football players’ remuneration is subject to detailed written contracts and he knew all money paid to a player, from any source, in relation to football, must be detailed on his contract and registered with the SFA.
For Rangers players’ EBTs to be consistent with SFA and Fifa requirements they would need to be completely discretionary, an optional extra the players were unable to rely on. Mr Ogilvie, the Great Football Administrator, knew all of this.
Instead of good corporate governance we appear to have a self-certified president – we know Mr Ogilvie did nothing wrong because Mr Ogilvie said he did nothing wrong. He is at once, a Great Football Administrator and unaware of the football administration actions of the company he was legally responsible for.
Ogilvie was an executive director of Rangers. It was his responsibility as a director of Rangers to ensure that the club contracts and legislative responsibilities were conducted in a proper manner. He was simultaneously a director of the SFA. It was his responsibility as a director of the SFA to ensure the Association was run in an even-handed manner, that one club – his club or any other – could not load the dice.
Regan went on to say “Since February 14 he has had no involvement at all in any board meetings, any decisions or any meetings with the club.”
It is reassuring that he has withdrawn from an important part of the legislative process of the SFA but his prominent participation in yesterday’s AGM confirms that his influence in other areas remains.
Regan added “[EBTs] are illegal if they are used knowingly in an incorrect manner. That is something we are still waiting for facts on. But I am satisfied that Campbell has discharged his duty of care. He has done everything we could have asked of him and, so far as his integrity is concerned, he is a man with many years as a highly respected administrator across the game of football in Scotland.”
“So far as his integrity is concerned….many years …. respected administrator”. Those words may bring to mind all those years Ogilvie was at Ibrox while Rangers sectarian signing policy was in place.
Regan dismissed calls for his own resignation, no doubt confident he can self-certify his performance.
I am hugely reluctant to open a political debate, but does the painful lack of accountability and scrutiny in Scotland not alarm you? The actions (inactions) of Ogilvie and Regan would never be accepted in England, where structures exist to hold officials to account. As a relic from Rangers sectarian signing policy days, Ogilvie would be regarded as an embarrassing dinosaur, he would never be made president! The ability for officials to state facts without an inquiry would never be tolerated.
We look more like a rotten borough than a country with the mechanisms necessary to nurture a successful state. Where’s your voice now, Mr Salmond?
942 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- ...
- 25
- »
Breeny on 7 June, 2012 at 13:16:
Alex Thomson has been in Syria – a scandal on a bigger scale.
Asonofdan
You mean this video:
Irish fans welcome england to the euros
CYBIG
Is this April 1st?
Paul
One of your best posts yet on this whole disgraceful saga.
Thank you and I hope some CQN’r has forwarded this to UEFA.
When is someone from the executive going to answer these points in a plain and truthful manner?
Fitforpurpose CSC
Is the Celtic legned Mexican international full back away yet?
Or was that a kid on too?
From the ET
RANGERS’ administrators still have the option of accepting the SFA’s original transfer embargo for bringing the game into disrepute and avoiding the possibility of one of three more severe punishments.
Tweet Custom byline text:
By THOMAS JORDAN
SFA chief executive Stewart Regan has made it clear there is no room for negotiation after the Ibrox club took their fight to the Court of Session in Edinburgh, however, they could still make a sensational climbdown to avoid the pending punishments.
As things stand, Gers could find themselves being suspended from football, being expelled from the game or being ejected from the Scottish Cup after Lord Glennie referred the case back to the SFA’s appeal panel.
But SportTimes understands Rangers can still accept the original punishment of not being able to sign any players over the age of 18 for a 12-month period even though their bid to have it overturned was successful in a civil court.
Gers would, however, have to inform the SFA of their decision prior to an appeals tribunal sitting, possibly allowing the club to stabilise and avoiding the gamble of facing harsher sanctions
steinreignedsupreme
I believe he is home now and pehaps in need of a diversion.
Z-You might want to scroll back a couple of pages my friend.
Once again there is a major story for the MSM to get their teeth into but they don’t bother their lazy backsides. No surprise there then. Again. No one is asking the relevant and important questions so I respectfully suggest you get an accredited press pass Paul67 and watch them squirm. Catamongthepidgeons CSC. HH
Paul,
For me your best ever, well written and right to the heart of the matter.
Marc Degryse spotted at Rosshall…. Billy Stark revving in the car park..
what about Trezeget ? heard he was lookin at a house in Bothwell
Can someone clarify this transfer windows activity so far ?
Forster – Loan finished, potentially resigning today.
Cervi – Word on the street that he has left. Confirmed ?
McGinn – Word on the street that he has left. Confirmed ?
Josh Thomson – Word on the street that he has left. Confirmed ?
Towell – Word on the street that he has left. Confirmed ?
Cha – Out of Contract and nothing new signed ?
Loovens – Out of Contract and nothing new signed ?
Juarez – Left the building
Brozek – Left the building
Murphy – Signing for English team £300k fee or thereabouts.
O’Dea – Been released and may sign for an English club ?
Zeng Zhi – New 2 year deal signed.
Any news on K Wilson or Rasmussen ?
BestOfLuckCSC
nothing will happen to the rankers – they will come up smelling of roses
no other countries (nor FIFA etc) are looking at Ecosse – nobody cares
until, maybe(!), Hector gets back from his hols – he’s in
Tokyo at the moment
coffee time !
dixiebhoy69 on 7 June, 2012 at 13:07 said:
Agree mate…. If the board are to speak out it should be regarding this rather than the huns directly. As you say, they’ll wither and die on their own but the fact something as normally straightforward as fixture scheduling cannot be sorted at the moment means action is required.
BB
Understand, It’s not real. I would guess so.
Krakow, Poland: From testicle-biting police dogs to sonic cannons capable of inducing involuntary urination, Polish anti-hooligan squads have an array of weapons ready for potential trouble-makers at Euro 2012.
The English-language Krakow Post newspaper asserted in an editorial that local law enforcement agencies were more than ready to tackle any hooligan threat at England’s southern Poland base camp.
“The Polish police are going to come down on troublemakers like a bag full of anvils and you don’t want to be there when it happens,” the paper warned.
“Krakow has a long history of hooligan violence – the local police have seen it all before and they will ruin your day if you try it on.
“These lads’ mums and dads rioted under Soviet machine guns – a few chairs thrown by beered-up fans is not going to intimidate them.
“Do not expect softly, softly police tactics.
“Poland’s anti-hooligan squads are armed with: Shotguns firing baton rounds that probably won’t kill you as long as you’re 30m away, a truck-mounted water cannon affectionately known as ‘the typhoon’, a high-tech sonic cannon that can make you wet yourself on its lowest setting, dogs trained to bite you directly in the testicles.”
English fans are not expected to arrive in Krakow in significant numbers, with England’s Group D games all taking place in Ukraine.
4 March 2012
“Campbell won’t play any part in any meeting, discussion or conclusion on any activities surrounding Rangers,” said Regan on Friday. “I think it’s pretty obvious that he’s heavily conflicted.” (from the Scotsman)
6 June 2012
“But I am satisfied that Campbell has discharged his duty of care. He has done everything we could have asked of him and, so far as his integrity is concerned, he is a man with many years as a highly respected administrator across the game of football in Scotland.” (See above)
These statements do not sit well together.
Until now, I had given Stewart Regan the benefit of the doubt in his handling of the whole RFCIA situation. I have now come to the conclusion that he is no longer to be trusted.
Many of us on the blog feel Doncaster has been the obstacle in the path of progress by not attempting to advance the Harper McLeod inquiry. However, it may be that any delay is helping Regan and more specifically Ogilvie. They are all able to operate in a vacuum while the inquiry report is awaited. No one in the MSM seems willing to challenge them. Alex Thomson is obviously not able to do so given his current assignmsnt in Syria. So, it’s just like old times then, isn’t it?
Regan is as craven as the rest of them.
Paul67
Supremely well authored and insightful piece..respect.
Are you doing anything to
proactively have this addressed in the wider world?
Is there anything you suggest we do as sympathisers?
I’m thinking I might send it to my local MSP…..
It would also be good to post this on f ansites of other clubs?
Can’t add anything to the article.
Paul67
Here is another guy on the same subject of governance and politics. Sooner or later……
http://pinpointpolitics.co.uk/?p=493
Legislating football (or indeed any sport) has numerous difficulties. Attempts to do so, along with the expected resistance to such moves, are having a direct influence on European politics, and even aspects of the Euro-zone crisis. Because of the incredible transnational appeal of football, its captive market (fans of one team will not up sticks and start supporting a rival because the product is better, a problem for most businesses), and emotional pull, it holds a special place in the hearts of millions of Europeans. The cliché of the overpaid footballer is well established, but this antipathy towards the likes of Wayne Rooney and John Terry is, unsurprisingly but importantly, absent among fans of their respective teams. For example, the idea that Rooney would leave Manchester United for a continental rival on the basis of a government tax hike would be met with horror by many United fans. This sentiment would be shared by all clubs who would likely see their best and brightest picked off by their European counterparts if such tax laws were implemented. Furthermore, given the precarious state of many of the clubs in the lower reaches of English football, any meaningful rise in their expenditure could see dozens go to the wall. Sides like Rangers, Portsmouth and Darlington are all struggling to survive as it is.
Despite the fact that football is a) a phenomenally profitable enterprise and b) a neoliberal behemoth that seems hell-bent on eating itself, there seems to be very little that politicians around the world can do for fear of public opprobrium, and backlash from the global governing body, FIFA.
Hollande in the deep
Before the tragedy of the Toulouse shootings rocked France and caused the suspension of the presidential campaigns, one of the most interesting election promises was Socialist candidate Francois Hollande’s pledge to increase the top tax bracket to 75% for the nation’s top earners (anything over €1m per year). The immediate reaction as judged by Twitter, was hysteria around the impact that the policy could have on French football. Hollande was accused of “declaring war” on football and that this policy would “kill the sport”. The accusation was that the tax would cause a mass exodus of talent from France with Frederic Thiriez, head of the French professional football league claiming that over 150 players would seriously be affected and be likely to leave. He noted, “if [the] plan saw the light of day, it would end in catastrophe for French football, it would be impoverished and downgraded on a European level.”
Opponents of the tax increase inevitably responded that such a policy was “unfair”, that there would be a dramatic loss in television revenue and, of course, that the rich would flee the country if asked to pay too much as a result of the change. Mr Hollande claimed that the tax would only affect around 3,000 people in the country and that during times of economic turbulence it was a “patriotic duty” for the rich to pay their fair share and demonstrate social cohesion. He cited the example of Carlo Ancelotti, former AC Milan and Chelsea boss, who earns around €6m a year, saying “Does PSG have such good results that their trainer should be paid that much?”
Indeed, less than two weeks after suggesting the 75% rate, Mr Hollande was forced into a retreat with specific regard to football. He talked about “smoothing mechanisms” for footballers earning over €1m a year. Despite the policy polling well on a national scale, with over 60% approval ratings for the idea of the rich paying their fair share, Hollande’s retreat sends a clear message: when it comes to taxation, football is a sacred cow.
Spend it like Beckham
The French are not the only ones with this conundrum. In Spain, the so-called Beckham Law allows wealthy foreigners to pay a flat tax rate of only 24%. This has arguably been a huge boon to Spanish football, particularly the two dominant forces of Real Madrid and Barcelona. The tax loophole was created in 2005 in order to lure top executives from around Europe to come to Spain, but was nicknamed the Beckham Law as David Beckham was one of the first to take advantage when he moved to Real Madrid in that same year.
The law partially succeeded in tempting executives to Spain, but its main use has been to benefit top-level footballers. After the Eurozone crisis hit, there were strong calls from the left for the Beckham law to be abolished. Madrid and Barcelona reacted with snake-like speed through their Pravda-esque media outlets (Marca, AS & Mundo Deportivo) with the same arguments that are currently going on in France, claiming that it would cripple the sport and the competitiveness of La Liga.
It has been estimated that both Madrid and Barcelona are the two best-supported clubs within Europe, with the majority of their fans residing in Spain. Even against a backdrop of general strikes, high unemployment, and fierce austerity measures within Spain, the removal of a law that heavily benefits two of the most popular institutions in the country is not a move that many politicians will take lightly. Making sure that the rich ‘pay their fair share’ is as popular policy in Spain as it is in France, but suggesting that such a move will see the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi and Karim Benzema up sticks for pastures new would be a hard sell at best.
FIFA, Football And Greed
A further complicating factor is the intensely aggressive manner in which FIFA, the global governing body, guards its territory and forbids national interference. FIFA has proved that it has no fear in banning teams at international level that choose to step out of line (Nigeria and Togo are working examples of this policy), and there can be no illusions about the fact that it would take serious exception to any national government appearing to regulate the sport. Of course, there is a difference between setting taxation levels and interfering in the sport. However if, as has been suggested, one country took a stand, the best players may simply leave and ply their trade elsewhere. The logic is the same as the one employed by the banks about the need for bonuses; preventing the best talent from moving abroad. The relegation of an entire nation to a “footballing backwater” on the basis of government policy would be deeply unpopular with large sections of the electorate, particularly in countries as enamoured of football as England or France.
What is required is, at a minimum, Europe-wide reform of the rules regarding the governing of football. Dozens of clubs all over Europe are in sensational amounts of debt, while the larger clubs are comfortable attacking any suggestions of paying more tax. Meanwhile FIFA, at the head of the sport, defends the right of football to make such mistakes. For the good of the balance of European football, the clubs, and the fans of the teams, regulation on a governmental or EU level is desperately needed before football becomes a more a greater political issue.
ASonOfDan – “The Polish police are going to come down on troublemakers like a bag full of anvils and you don’t want to be there when it happens,” the paper warned.
Mr. Sheen has a posse. (thumbsup)
Paul67
Here is another guy on the same songsheet. Sooner or later…..
http://pinpointpolitics.co.uk/?p=493
Jorge Caddette to sign today…. Just waiting on the paperwork
So Regan’s basically saying:
“I know my mate Campbell isn’t dodgy – he told me so himself!”
(thumbsup)
The article from above
FOOTBALL AND FISCAL POLICY:TIME TO MOVE THE GOALPOSTS?
Legislating football (or indeed any sport) has numerous difficulties. Attempts to do so, along with the expected resistance to such moves, are having a direct influence on European politics, and even aspects of the Euro-zone crisis. Because of the incredible transnational appeal of football, its captive market (fans of one team will not up sticks and start supporting a rival because the product is better, a problem for most businesses), and emotional pull, it holds a special place in the hearts of millions of Europeans. The cliché of the overpaid footballer is well established, but this antipathy towards the likes of Wayne Rooney and John Terry is, unsurprisingly but importantly, absent among fans of their respective teams. For example, the idea that Rooney would leave Manchester United for a continental rival on the basis of a government tax hike would be met with horror by many United fans. This sentiment would be shared by all clubs who would likely see their best and brightest picked off by their European counterparts if such tax laws were implemented. Furthermore, given the precarious state of many of the clubs in the lower reaches of English football, any meaningful rise in their expenditure could see dozens go to the wall. Sides like Rangers, Portsmouth and Darlington are all struggling to survive as it is.
Despite the fact that football is a) a phenomenally profitable enterprise and b) a neoliberal behemoth that seems hell-bent on eating itself, there seems to be very little that politicians around the world can do for fear of public opprobrium, and backlash from the global governing body, FIFA.
Hollande in the deep
Before the tragedy of the Toulouse shootings rocked France and caused the suspension of the presidential campaigns, one of the most interesting election promises was Socialist candidate Francois Hollande’s pledge to increase the top tax bracket to 75% for the nation’s top earners (anything over €1m per year). The immediate reaction as judged by Twitter, was hysteria around the impact that the policy could have on French football. Hollande was accused of “declaring war” on football and that this policy would “kill the sport”. The accusation was that the tax would cause a mass exodus of talent from France with Frederic Thiriez, head of the French professional football league claiming that over 150 players would seriously be affected and be likely to leave. He noted, “if [the] plan saw the light of day, it would end in catastrophe for French football, it would be impoverished and downgraded on a European level.”
Opponents of the tax increase inevitably responded that such a policy was “unfair”, that there would be a dramatic loss in television revenue and, of course, that the rich would flee the country if asked to pay too much as a result of the change. Mr Hollande claimed that the tax would only affect around 3,000 people in the country and that during times of economic turbulence it was a “patriotic duty” for the rich to pay their fair share and demonstrate social cohesion. He cited the example of Carlo Ancelotti, former AC Milan and Chelsea boss, who earns around €6m a year, saying “Does PSG have such good results that their trainer should be paid that much?”
Indeed, less than two weeks after suggesting the 75% rate, Mr Hollande was forced into a retreat with specific regard to football. He talked about “smoothing mechanisms” for footballers earning over €1m a year. Despite the policy polling well on a national scale, with over 60% approval ratings for the idea of the rich paying their fair share, Hollande’s retreat sends a clear message: when it comes to taxation, football is a sacred cow.
Spend it like Beckham
The French are not the only ones with this conundrum. In Spain, the so-called Beckham Law allows wealthy foreigners to pay a flat tax rate of only 24%. This has arguably been a huge boon to Spanish football, particularly the two dominant forces of Real Madrid and Barcelona. The tax loophole was created in 2005 in order to lure top executives from around Europe to come to Spain, but was nicknamed the Beckham Law as David Beckham was one of the first to take advantage when he moved to Real Madrid in that same year.
The law partially succeeded in tempting executives to Spain, but its main use has been to benefit top-level footballers. After the Eurozone crisis hit, there were strong calls from the left for the Beckham law to be abolished. Madrid and Barcelona reacted with snake-like speed through their Pravda-esque media outlets (Marca, AS & Mundo Deportivo) with the same arguments that are currently going on in France, claiming that it would cripple the sport and the competitiveness of La Liga.
It has been estimated that both Madrid and Barcelona are the two best-supported clubs within Europe, with the majority of their fans residing in Spain. Even against a backdrop of general strikes, high unemployment, and fierce austerity measures within Spain, the removal of a law that heavily benefits two of the most popular institutions in the country is not a move that many politicians will take lightly. Making sure that the rich ‘pay their fair share’ is as popular policy in Spain as it is in France, but suggesting that such a move will see the likes of Cristiano Ronaldo, Leo Messi and Karim Benzema up sticks for pastures new would be a hard sell at best.
FIFA, Football And Greed
A further complicating factor is the intensely aggressive manner in which FIFA, the global governing body, guards its territory and forbids national interference. FIFA has proved that it has no fear in banning teams at international level that choose to step out of line (Nigeria and Togo are working examples of this policy), and there can be no illusions about the fact that it would take serious exception to any national government appearing to regulate the sport. Of course, there is a difference between setting taxation levels and interfering in the sport. However if, as has been suggested, one country took a stand, the best players may simply leave and ply their trade elsewhere. The logic is the same as the one employed by the banks about the need for bonuses; preventing the best talent from moving abroad. The relegation of an entire nation to a “footballing backwater” on the basis of government policy would be deeply unpopular with large sections of the electorate, particularly in countries as enamoured of football as England or France.
What is required is, at a minimum, Europe-wide reform of the rules regarding the governing of football. Dozens of clubs all over Europe are in sensational amounts of debt, while the larger clubs are comfortable attacking any suggestions of paying more tax. Meanwhile FIFA, at the head of the sport, defends the right of football to make such mistakes. For the good of the balance of European football, the clubs, and the fans of the teams, regulation on a governmental or EU level is desperately needed before football becomes a more a greater political issue.
hoopeddreams on 7 June, 2012 at 13:32 said
Regan is as craven as the rest of them.
Well, of course he is.
Who handshaked him into the job?
Is Bored or board?
Hi all, long time lurker here. Saw this – http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-south-scotland-18352528 and felt the judges comments on NI and Income Tax evasion hit the nail on the head –
“…However, Sheriff Kenneth Robb said he did not agree that nobody had been harmed by the offence.
He said that in an age of financial constraints, £635,000 was a lot of money which could have helped the public purse.
He told Maxwell: “You have enjoyed the fruits of your labour and the tax that you should have paid.
“The tree may be bare, but you used the fruits over many years.””
Couldn’t have put it better myself.
Look if campbell told Stuarty he didn’t do it, he probably didn’t do it.
Why should he lie, for goodness sake?
Dearie me.
The last couple of episodes of Mad Men have been brilliant…….
The continued questioning of Campbell is becoming “tiresome”…….The handshake spreads far and wide in the football “fraternity”,ask Dallas.
Paul67
Have we an equivalent all party group in Scotland? If not, why not?
http://www.allpartyfootball.com/index.htm
Auld Neil Lennon heid – Meh, I stopped at “neoliberal”, then skipped to his concluding paragraph.
Generally the use of that word is a good indication that the writer doesn’t know what neoliberalism actually is, and is going to treat you to an extended rant about how we need more taxes and regulations so the Enlightened People can micromanage our lives better.
And, hells horses! I was right again:
regulation on a governmental or EU level is desperately needed before football becomes a more a greater political issue.
Yup. Let’s get the people who are bankrupting and pauperising the nations of Europe to tell football how to run its business.
I mean, the EU has failed to get its own accounts signed off by auditors for what? 17 years running? They make FIFA look like amateurs when it comes to corruption, fraud, and incompetence. (thumbsup)
Wiltord spotted in party bus…..
Can Rangers on the one hand accept the original transfer embargo but at the same time declare they are going to appeal to the CAS?
ARSENAL chief executive Ivan Gazidis last night sent out a warning shot to big spending rivals Chelsea and Manchester City, insisting that new regulations will crack down on football’s “insane business model” of rising wages and transfer fees.
Gazidis faced a grilling by 300 fans at the Emirates Stadium and told the Arsenal faithful that UEFA’s new Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules would turn the tide in the club’s favour.
“Football is moving towards Arsenal,” Gazidis said. “Those financial fair play regulations will be enforced. They are not the wild and wacky brainchild of Michel Platini, they come from the clubs.
“Football has cried out. These [FFP rules] are not the dreamings of somebody sitting in UEFA’s office – this is coming from football clubs that are going bankrupt and they are saying ‘we have to do something’.”
Gazidis also revealed that he had sat on the working group that developed the FFP proposals, which aim to stop clubs running up huge losses that are often paid off by their billionaire owners
The All Party Report
http://www.allpartyfootball.com/APFG_Report_on_English_Football_&_Its_Governance_April_2009%5b1%5d.pdf