Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Saorsa]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/inde...owtopic=213291

What a bunch of class a morons

you mean you dinnae agree that it's everybody else's fault?

[jgl07]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My take on that is that D&P were, in the beginning, sympathetic to CW, given the history they had. However, at some stage (perhaps the discovery of the Ticketus shenanigan) I reckon they have realised that the whole situation is not what they were led to believe.

From that point, they have perhaps realised that their professional reputation is far more important than any future relationship they might have had with CW. The level of public scrutiny in this case is very intense, perhaps more than they expected, but certainly much more so than some of the previous cases they would have worked on with CW.

That sums things up quite well.

I still believe that Duff and Phelps were led to believe that money from an outside source would be made available to keep Rangers going (from Rangers FC Group using the balance of the Ticketus money held by Collyer Bristow?). The three to four million would have been enough to tide Rangers over till the end of the season. There is no other explanation for their attempt to sign Daniel Cousin on day one of their administration.

Obviously this did not happen and Duff and Phelps were left in the doggy doo without a clue as to how to proceed as their Plan A was wrecked as details of the dodgy dealings became public and Craig Whyte went to ground.

The two administrators: Paul Clark and David Whitehouse could be combined to give Paul Whitehouse! Is this whole charade the plot for a new Aviva advert?

The real joke is a lot worse than that. We are now close to four weeks into administration (and a further millon pounds pissed away) and the only cost savings have been Gordon Smith and Ali Russell and eventually Greg Wylde and Mervan Celik. In a bizarre twist it was announced that Dunfermline were to be paid the ticket money outstanding but no committment to pay Dundee United similar sums owed.

Now it is being suggested that Rangers may not make it to the end of the season unless cost cutting measures were taken quickly. Yet the media circus continues at Murray Park with negotiations over pay cuts. Rangers playing staff remains at 59 sorry 57.

Liquidation looks inevitable. At least make it tidy by making it till the end of the season or till the split.

[SteveHFC]

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,195...341321,00.html

Anyone remember this?

[Hibercelona]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/inde...owtopic=213291

What a bunch of class a morons

Here's what I think...

We don't let them back into the SPL ever again and the SPL goes on to become a better, bigger and healthier league than it ever has.

I love the comments about them "playing at Ibrox only". As if they're still going to own it.

[Hibercelona]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

you mean you dinnae agree that it's everybody else's fault?

We've "turned our backs on them".

Personally, i'm glad they think its all our fault.

[IWasThere2016]

They paid the Pars (SPL game) and not the Arabs (SC game) to avoid SPL sanctions. Thus D+P were doing the right thing via the club. I think we can safely assume the Arabs are a 'no' vote

[TornadoHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I read somewhere that failure to pay Dunfermline for the match tickets would have been dead against SPL rules and could have brought down all sorts of bad stuff on their heads - including expulsion from the SPL. On that basis I'd reckon it was probably justifiable for D&P to let the Pars "jump the queue" in order to keep the option of selling the club as a going concern as viable as possible.

I suspect the decision to pay the Pars ticket cash was really that simple!

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My take on that is that D&P were, in the beginning, sympathetic to CW, given the history they had. However, at some stage (perhaps the discovery of the Ticketus shenanigan) I reckon they have realised that the whole situation is not what they were led to believe.

From that point, they have perhaps realised that their professional reputation is far more important than any future relationship they might have had with CW. The level of public scrutiny in this case is very intense, perhaps more than they expected, but certainly much more so than some of the previous cases they would have worked on with CW.

Cav, what's your take on the Dunfermline payment? Do you think it should have been allowed?

I don't think you're far wrong re D&P, but it still feels like they're making a whole lot of noise, but not actually doing much - in the words of a former hun, yam, tim and Scotland captain 'A little less conversation, a little more action please.' Of course that could change very quickly, we just don't really know what's going on beyond what they want us to know. A point I was making in my earlier post was that the administrators first duty is to rescue the company in as healthy a position as they can, so them doing their job well is exactly the opposite of what we actually want.

I'm with you on the Doneformline payment, I can't see how it could be legal unless failure to pay threatened RFC's ability to trade as alluded to by Basehibby. Like you, I'm still not entirely convinced.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

For me it seems this current instansigence is purely down to brinkmanship
A buyer will be found rangers in some form will continue it feels like a phoney war that will most likely be settled in the economic interests of a few with a sprinkling of sanctions that will be watered down unless someone mounts a serious legal challenge - do Livi and Dundee have laywyers on their boards that fancy a pop?
Justice, integrity well over to you SPL, SFA and Salmond as he'd have us believe

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I suspect the decision to pay the Pars ticket cash was really that simple!

Hmmm.... still unconvinced, but I follow the logic.

I'm disappointed that no journalist (either the ones I emailed, or the ones who snoop about on here) raised the question. Perhaps they're scared of getting banned from East End Park?

[PaulSmith]

'oh there used to be a team called the Glasgow Rangers, now not one and there never shall be one'

[CentreLine]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Hmmm.... still unconvinced, but I follow the logic.

I'm disappointed that no journalist (either the ones I emailed, or the ones who snoop about on here) raised the question. Perhaps they're scared of getting banned from East End Park?

There are a whole bunch of questions that have not been asked. The question does need to be asked. If Rangers players have been receiving payments contrary to SPL rules, have these payments been stopped or are the administrators compounding the offence? It is difficult to believe that any players concerned have been prepared simply to see that portion of their salary cut. Presumably they and their agents saw (or see) these payments as a perfectly legitimate contract and expect them to continue.

[green glory]

Interesting entry on Phil Mac Ghiolla Bhain's blog this morning. Save the remarks about him being a t*t or whatever. Aye he can be. Interesting none the less.

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the...the-big-house/

According to The Scotsman and The Telegraph HMRC are trying to negotiate a CVA with the admins as we speak, but this is dependant on CW relinquishing involvement in the club. Paul Murray's takeover bid is dependant on a resolution of the 'big tax case'. Without a CVA agreed (and until the first tier tax tribunal result is known sometime in April, this can't really be done) they're screwed.

No CVA agreed NOW, equals no Paul Murray Blue Knight takeover. Let's hope Hector doesn't get cold feet and cut them any slack.

Once liquidation has commenced, hopefully the legal battles over ownership of the assets, ie Ibrox etc will be dragged out at least until after next season therefore making any discussions on a 'newco' and it's theoretical entry into any league, let alone the SPL purely academic. If they reform under a slightly different name/company, they may not have a home to play at.

Jumpers for goalpoasts?

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

There are a whole bunch of questions that have not been asked. The question does need to be asked. If Rangers players have been receiving payments contrary to SPL rules, have these payments been stopped or are the administrators compounding the offence? It is difficult to believe that any players concerned have been prepared simply to see that portion of their salary cut. Presumably they and their agents saw (or see) these payments as a perfectly legitimate contract and expect them to continue.

I have read two different accusations:-

1. the EBT's, which is what Hugh Adam was (I think) talking about. That was in the past, and I can't see that continuing today.

2. the suggestion that some players are being paid from another company. If that is the case, it's outwith the scope of RFC's admins' work.

If, however, it's as simple as the old-fashioned "boot-money" scam, then those payments have to stop.

[sambajustice]

Bryan Swanson ‏ @skysports_bryan



Rangers £3.6m case has started inside Court 10 at High Court in London. Four parties want the cash - including HMRC & Ticketus.


uh-oh!! Looks like the huns might not get all that cash! To someone better placed to comment on such things, how far would £3.6m actually go at Ibrox at the moment?

[CentreLine]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interesting entry on Phil Mac Ghiolla Bhain's blog this morning. Save the remarks about him being a t*t or whatever. Aye he can be. Interesting none the less.

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the...the-big-house/

According to The Scotsman and The Telegraph HMRC are trying to negotiate a CVA with the admins as we speak, but this is dependant on CW relinquishing involvement in the club. Paul Murray's takeover bid is dependant on a resolution of the 'big tax case'. Without a CVA agreed (and until the first tier tax tribunal result is known sometime in April, this can't really be done) they're screwed.

No CVA agreed NOW, equals no Paul Murray Blue Knight takeover. Let's hope Hector doesn't get cold feet and cut them any slack.

Once liquidation has commenced, hopefully the legal battles over ownership of the assets, ie Ibrox etc will be dragged out at least until after next season therefore making any discussions on a 'newco' and it's theoretical entry into any league, let alone the SPL purely academic. If they reform under a slightly different name/company, they may not have a home to play at.

Jumpers for goalpoasts?

More interesting thoughts and if his HMRC friend is correct, it may prove impossible for a Newco Rangers to play at Ibrox for a very long time. That is if the legalities allowed them to form a viable club in time for next season at all. More questions than answers it seems. But I am a little concerned that he seems to think HMRC are negotiating a CVA. "Let's hope Hector doesn't get cold feet and cut them any slack"

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interesting entry on Phil Mac Ghiolla Bhain's blog this morning. Save the remarks about him being a t*t or whatever. Aye he can be. Interesting none the less.

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the...the-big-house/

According to The Scotsman and The Telegraph HMRC are trying to negotiate a CVA with the admins as we speak, but this is dependant on CW relinquishing involvement in the club. Paul Murray's takeover bid is dependant on a resolution of the 'big tax case'. Without a CVA agreed (and until the first tier tax tribunal result is known sometime in April, this can't really be done) they're screwed.

No CVA agreed NOW, equals no Paul Murray Blue Knight takeover. Let's hope Hector doesn't get cold feet and cut them any slack.

Once liquidation has commenced, hopefully the legal battles over ownership of the assets, ie Ibrox etc will be dragged out at least until after next season therefore making any discussions on a 'newco' and it's theoretical entry into any league, let alone the SPL purely academic. If they reform under a slightly different name/company, they may not have a home to play at.

Jumpers for goalpoasts?

If that is the case, it really is a game-changer. HMRC's policy is not to agree to CVA's. If they change that now, it has wide-ranging implications, not just for this case and other football insolvencies, but insolvencies in general.

Forgetting about the BTC for a moment, HMRC are owed £15m. If liquidation happens, they will probably get most of that (depending on the Ticketus situation). So it's in their interests to go for that, rather than a CVA, where they would get pennies. The only argument against that is that, with liquidation, they are potentially cutting off a future source of revenue; a CVA would preserve that source.

Edit... I am not doubting you, but I can't see any reference to the CVA on either paper's website. Do you have a link?

[Benny Brazil]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Bryan Swanson ‏ @skysports_bryan



Rangers £3.6m case has started inside Court 10 at High Court in London. Four parties want the cash - including HMRC & Ticketus.


uh-oh!! Looks like the huns might not get all that cash! To someone better placed to comment on such things, how far would £3.6m actually go at Ibrox at the moment?

Would see them until the end of the season I think without mass redundancies - if I am following this correctly.

[StevieC]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Four parties want the cash - including HMRC & Ticketus

Why would Ticketus want it, they've been telling us their cash is underwritten??

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Why would Ticketus want it, they've been telling us their cash is underwritten??

Not quite. Craigie has been telling us that. BIG difference

[TrickyNicky]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not quite. Craigie has been telling us that. BIG difference

Can I just say CWG that RFC's BTC involving CW and HMRC got me thinking about now I know what a CVA's are, who D&P are where EBT's are coming from.

MHGB - Mah Heids Gaunnae Burst !!

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can I just say CWG that RFC's BTC involving CW and HMRC got me thinking about now I know what a CAV is, who D&P are where EBT's are coming from.

MHGB - Mah Heids Gaunnae Burst !!

GTF




p.s. Cav and CVA are different animals. One is a nasty thing that may yet save the Huns, the other is a ....well, a nasty poster who doesn't want them to be saved....

[EuanH78]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can I just say CWG that RFC's BTC involving CW and HMRC got me thinking about now I know what a CVA's are, who D&P are where EBT's are coming from.

MHGB - Mah Heids Gaunnae Burst !!

Good morning vietnam?

[Hibbylad86]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

GTF




p.s. Cav and CVA are different animals. One is a nasty thing that may yet save the Huns, the other is a ....well, a nasty poster who doesn't want them to be saved....

I want to tell Rangers and Hearts to GTF! Just stop fighting, just dont agree to the wage cuts or agree a CVA and just do one and die quietly..........

Okay maybe a bit harsh because if it goes pop CWG and Cav will have to actually do some real work rather than keeping us on the financial straight and narrow!

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I want to tell Rangers and Hearts to GTF! Just stop fighting, just dont agree to the wage cuts or agree a CVA and just do one and die quietly..........

Okay maybe a bit harsh because if it goes pop CWG and Cav will have to actually do some real work rather than keeping us on the financial straight and narrow!

And you can GTF an' all....

[Hibbylad86]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And you can GTF an' all....

Back to the real stuff CWG.......

If liquidation is the course of action does that mean all the debt needs to be paid or only what they can raise from sales of assets? The assets being MP & Ibronx. Are the players classed as assets aswell? I guess they would all be transferred to a phoenix company but who decides their value? You could get the whole squad for sweeties and potenitally sit on a tidy profit from future sales.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Back to the real stuff CWG.......

If liquidation is the course of action does that mean all the debt needs to be paid or only what they can raise from sales of assets? The assets being MP & Ibronx. Are the players classed as assets aswell? I guess they would all be transferred to a phoenix company but who decides their value? You could get the whole squad for sweeties and potenitally sit on a tidy profit from future sales.

They can only pay out what they take in. If there is enough from the sales to cover all debts, and liquidation costs, everybody gets paid, and the surplus goes to the shareholders. If there isn't enough, then there is a dividend of x pence in the £ made. (no negotiation in this, unlike a CVA).

The property sales would be set by the market. Basically, they are worth whatever anyone is prepared to pay for them.

As for players, I am not sure what happens. It used to be the case that all registrations reverted to the SFA in liquidation, but I have also read that they become free agents. That said, even if RFC retained the contracts, they really wouldn't be worth very much.

[JeMeSouviens]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If that is the case, it really is a game-changer. HMRC's policy is not to agree to CVA's. If they change that now, it has wide-ranging implications, not just for this case and other football insolvencies, but insolvencies in general.

Forgetting about the BTC for a moment, HMRC are owed £15m. If liquidation happens, they will probably get most of that (depending on the Ticketus situation). So it's in their interests to go for that, rather than a CVA, where they would get pennies. The only argument against that is that, with liquidation, they are potentially cutting off a future source of revenue; a CVA would preserve that source.

Edit... I am not doubting you, but I can't see any reference to the CVA on either paper's website. Do you have a link?

Roddy Forsyth's article in the Torygraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/foo...eir-hands.html

Meanwhile, Telegraph Sport can reveal that HMRC has held meetings with both the Rangers administrators and the SPL to stress that the tax authorities would prefer not to see the club fail.

I understand that they are willing to have Rangers continue as an existing business – even if the club lose the tax case in respect of Employee Benefit Trusts – but only if Craig Whyte is out of the picture.

I can also reveal that although an adverse decision by the tribunal that is considering the EBT case could saddle Rangers with a bill of £24 million in back tax, £12 million in interest and as much as £14 million in penalties, HMRC will not stand in the way of a Company Voluntary Agreement – through which creditors emerge with a percentage of the cash owed to them – and that this has been sanctioned at Treasury level.

However, that will only be possible if there is what has been described within HMRC as ‘regime change’. In other words, Whyte must have no connection with Rangers at the end of the process.

[Milandinho]

My mate just forwarded this from his mate who works in a planning office in Glasgow.

"There is a rumour sweeping my office that Cala Homes are in talks to buy Murray Park.

This site is within the green belt and located in a flood plain. Therefore it cannot be developed on for housing. However it appears that Cala, should they complete this aquisition, would then seek to swap the land ownership with the West of Scotland Rugby Club ground in Milngavie (currently based 1.5 miles from Murray Park). From a purely planning perspective there is nothing legislatively wrong or untoward with this. It is essentially a civil matter between Cala and the Rugby club. They would basically change the title deeds and away you go.

So, what does this mean in planning terms? Well, Murray Park could only be used for a comparable use (i.e. a sports complex) or be returned to an agricultrual use. The West of Scotland Rugby Club site, however, is located within land that is designated for Housing and Mixed Use and is right beside a site in Milngavie called 'Lower Kilmardinny' which has currently got planning permission for 550 houses and a new sports complex. Should Cala buy Murray Park and then successfully negotiate this trade off with the Rugby Club, then it is entirely possible that East Dunbartonshire Council would welcome an application for housing and retail on this site.

What would this mean for Rangers? I suspect, that if the sale of the land is rushed through (it's difficult, but not impossible), then Rangers could well recieve enough cash to keep them afloat to the end of the season. Given current land values, i would estimate that Murray Park would be worth in the region of £8-10 million."

Interesting stuff.

[MB62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Back to the real stuff CWG.......

If liquidation is the course of action does that mean all the debt needs to be paid or only what they can raise from sales of assets? The assets being MP & Ibronx. Are the players classed as assets aswell? I guess they would all be transferred to a phoenix company but who decides their value? You could get the whole squad for sweeties and potenitally sit on a tidy profit from future sales.

I thought I read somewhere that if a club goes bust, the players contracts become the property of the SFA

If that is the case, that shirley cannot help the admins recoup money on transfer fees in the summer so all this talk of going in to liquidation before the season is out is idle threats from them.