Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Hibrandenburg]

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

This saga moves on faster than Concorde and always raises more and more questions. Are all players now agreed to cut pay? Will there still be redundencies Friday? Even with an agreement, how long will those top players remain at a Rangers without a new buyer?

Let's just hope that that's not where the concord similarities end :-)

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Without wanting to interfere with the main point of this thread - ie who plays Craig Whyte in the porn version of the saga - the only reason I can see for HMRC/Treasury to go down the CVA route would be to keep them alive long enough to kill them off with the BTC. If they are liquidated now - there's surely a risk they don't come back in time to pay the £75m. Take £15k now to get £75m later. Or take £15m now and get nothing later.

Incidently, Danny Alexander is a Rangers supporter - but I don't think with the debt he is responsible for (£1 trillion) I think that is £1,000,000,000,000 - he's looking for every 50p down the back of the sofa.

I think how a CVA works normally with HMRC is that they reject it, and then reject a revised one, and then etc etc. That way, the delay you mention would still work.

The problem, as I see it, with "agreeing" one is that the company (with minimal debt) could then be sold on to a new owner before the BTC verdict came in. HMRC would then get stiffed twice.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Boggles the mind that Rangers can free themselves from the ticketus deal but that money has been used to pay off their debt. Theft pure and simple.

I have read the article you posted, and am not seeing that Rangers are freeing themselves from the Ticketus deal.

Any purchaser would want guarantees that there is nothing due to Ticketus from ST sales. The admins can't give any such guarantee; they can only give their opinion. The purchaser would also want to get their own legal advice. Again, that could only be an opinion.

Ticketus, of course, will have their own opinion. To paraphrase Super Ally, they won't walk away.

So, there are two scenarios in this:-

1. the Knights ask the admins for the guarantees I mentioned. The admins don't give them that. The Knights walk away.

2. the Knights decide to go ahead anyway. Ticketus lay claim to what they see as their cash. Cue Court battles for the next few years.

There is a potential third scenario, which I mentioned ages ago. The takeover goes ahead, and then nobody buys a ST. That way, Ticketus would be due nothing.... and they might then have a claim against CW. However, such a scenario would require orchestration of the entire RFC support in a way that Ticketus would see as a deliberate (and fraudulent) ploy to wriggle out of their original debt. They would probably still sue RFC.

[CropleyWasGod]

Turning to the "second contracts", there was an interesting article in the Evening Times last night. Part of it read:-

Tax experts have already said Rangers’ defence will be that EBTs are non-contractual and are discretionary and would therefore not be required to be disclosed to the governing bodies, in the same way that no paperwork from any other bonus payments have to be passed on to Hampden.

Sources close to Sir David Murray claim that he will have his say on Adam’s allegations once Rangers administration process progresses further.

But already the statements have been seriously questioned as EBTs didn’t come into play at Rangers until the year 2000 and their use has never been denied.

Every EBT payment made is documented in the club’s annual figures for each year they ran, signed off by the club’s auditors Grant Thornton.

Albertz and Laurdup have both confirmed to SportTimes they worked with ONE contract, and one contract only, when they played in Scotland.

A few points:-

1. does anyone know if that is true about bonuses, that they don't need to be registered with the SFA? I would have thought that a bonus scheme would form an integral part of a contract.

2. that's bulldust about every payment being documented in the annual accounts. The most we would get would be a total figure.

3. the ET mentions that Mr. Adam is 86. They don't mention Albertz and Laudrup's ages. Smearing the senile auld git??

4. it doesn't mention the allegations of the payments coming from the holding company.

[SkintHibby]

I find it truly astonishing and digraceful that with the complete mess and financial ruin Rangers find themselves - they will continue to the end of the season with the second best squad of players in the league. Hunbelievable.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

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

After seeing the way he minced out of his lawyers in London the other week as he was getting ambushed by reporters the only person I can think of that could possibly do it would have been dick emery

Who gets to play that ugly man-she (or was it she-man) gers fan with the mullet in on if the videos walking alongside Whyte when he took over the club? Limahl?

[CropleyWasGod]

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

I find it truly astonishing and digraceful that with the complete mess and financial ruin Rangers find themselves - they will continue to the end of the season with the second best squad of players in the league. Hunbelievable.

Things could be worse. One could have the third best squad of players in the League, and end up in the bottom half of the table, with a £40m debt.

[bruno]

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

Yep about 5p in the Pound. I can hear Mad Vlad ****** Mafia ***** Monkeys ****** everybody

Mad Vlad yes he probably is. Has he made mistakes. . Yes plenty. . Is he irrational. . Undoubtedly:. . Has he been right about corruption within the establishment and unfair bias towards the old firm well it certainly appears so. As for his media monkeys well the fawning over the poor old Gers by many worried their gravy train has stopped begging us to have sympathy and welcome them back into the fold shows clearly the media have loyalties to the big ugly two. I've yet to speak to a non old firm fan who wants rangers to jump back into SPL yet the media have already started their campaign to try make us believe scottish football needs rangers. Anyway I digress I believe Hearts or more specifically Vlad will be recompensed when. . Hopefuly. . Or if. . Rangers go to the wall by the Spl for the full value of outstanding money when it's due

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Mad Vlad yes he probably is. Has he made mistakes. . Yes plenty. . Is he irrational. . Undoubtedly:. . Has he been right about corruption within the establishment and unfair bias towards the old firm well it certainly appears so. As for his media monkeys well the fawning over the poor old Gers by many worried their gravy train has stopped begging us to have sympathy and welcome them back into the fold shows clearly the media have loyalties to the big ugly two. I've yet to speak to a non old firm fan who wants rangers to jump back into SPL yet the media have already started their campaign to try make us believe scottish football needs rangers. Anyway I digress I believe Hearts or more specifically Vlad will be recompensed when. . Hopefuly. . Or if. . Rangers go to the wall by the Spl for the full value of outstanding money when it's due

Why would the SPL recompense Hearts for a debt that's due by Rangers?

[Moulin Yarns]

100 pages about the Hun-dreaded Huns

[truehibernian]

Talk in the media of player and HMRC deals in the pipeline.....well, well, well.......the Rangers may slither back towards normality unscathed.....hope you all cite Rangers as a stated case when your business struggles to make ends meet regards your tax and PAYE. If this is true re HMRC then they need to ditch Hector's pinstripe and bowler, and just have him with the old tennis ball in the mouth, positioned bent over a table.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

100 pages about the Hun-dreaded Huns

... the hundredth being kicked off by a classic lesson in Yamanomics.

[Caversham Green]

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

Turning to the "second contracts", there was an interesting article in the Evening Times last night. Part of it read:-

Tax experts have already said Rangers’ defence will be that EBTs are non-contractual and are discretionary and would therefore not be required to be disclosed to the governing bodies, in the same way that no paperwork from any other bonus payments have to be passed on to Hampden.

Sources close to Sir David Murray claim that he will have his say on Adam’s allegations once Rangers administration process progresses further.

But already the statements have been seriously questioned as EBTs didn’t come into play at Rangers until the year 2000 and their use has never been denied.

Every EBT payment made is documented in the club’s annual figures for each year they ran, signed off by the club’s auditors Grant Thornton.

Albertz and Laurdup have both confirmed to SportTimes they worked with ONE contract, and one contract only, when they played in Scotland.

A few points:-

1. does anyone know if that is true about bonuses, that they don't need to be registered with the SFA? I would have thought that a bonus scheme would form an integral part of a contract.

2. that's bulldust about every payment being documented in the annual accounts. The most we would get would be a total figure.

3. the ET mentions that Mr. Adam is 86. They don't mention Albertz and Laudrup's ages. Smearing the senile auld git??

4. it doesn't mention the allegations of the payments coming from the holding company.

It's also misleading in implying that the payments to players are documented. The accounts show payments into the trust. The trust itself is a separate accounting entity and being offshore, the amounts paid to players from the trust can't easily be ascertained.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

It's also misleading in implying that the payments to players are documented. The accounts show payments into the trust. The trust itself is a separate accounting entity and being offshore, the amounts paid to players from the trust can't easily be ascertained.

Good spot.

The more I read the ET article, the more it seemed like a PR piece for Rangers. Wheeling out two ex-heroes , emphasising the age of the bad man who's telling stories, quoting a "tax specialist" ... how come these guys are rarely named?

Talking of specialists, the one who's become a regular talking head up here (you probably don't see him where you are) is Steve Morrow from Stirling University. A football fan, and an academic, but who really knows his stuff when it comes to the business angles on fitba. I have worked with him in the past, and he's a decent guy as well. Always worth listening to.

[Jim44]

With Whittaker and Naismith accepting 75% pay cuts, the impression being given on FF is that they have turned the corner and that everything is going to be hunky dory.

The BBC are reporting that an appeal will be made to the SFA to get them into Europe next season. "Rangers' administrator has admitted there was "no realistic prospect" of the club meeting the deadline but hoped to appeal to the Scottish Football Association, which uses Uefa rules to determine whether licences are issued."

I hope that the perceived upturn in their fortunes isn't the start of a universal campaign to get them back on an even keel without the pain and suffering we all think they deserve and assumed was just round the corner.

[Seveno]

Interesting that the Administrators seem to think that there is a good chance that the Club can get out of the Ticketus situation. Could this be because CW signed the contract before he owned Rangers and is not therefore legally binding ?

[Sylar]

HMRC are willing to accept 10p in the £ (sanctioned at the Treasury level) IF Craig Whyte is given the boot.

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

[Part/Time Supporter]

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

HMRC are willing to accept 10p in the £ (sanctioned at the Treasury level) IF Craig Whyte is given the boot.

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

And how are they going to do that?

Yet more wishful thinking from "the people" who were talking about "billionaires", "wealth off the chart" and "warchests".

[easty]

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

HMRC are willing to accept 10p in the £ (sanctioned at the Treasury level) IF Craig Whyte is given the boot.

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

Thats an odd deal for the HMRC to make. Next will Joe Public be allowed to pay 10p in the pound of what he owes if 10 HMRC staff can have a go on his wife?

[Caversham Green]

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

Good spot.

The more I read the ET article, the more it seemed like a PR piece for Rangers. Wheeling out two ex-heroes , emphasising the age of the bad man who's telling stories, quoting a "tax specialist" ... how come these guys are rarely named?

Talking of specialists, the one who's become a regular talking head up here (you probably don't see him where you are) is Steve Morrow from Stirling University. A football fan, and an academic, but who really knows his stuff when it comes to the business angles on fitba. I have worked with him in the past, and he's a decent guy as well. Always worth listening to.

That mention of the accounts showing EBT payments looks deliberately misleading to me - particularly if they've been talking to 'tax experts'. Likewise they have 'tax experts' telling us what can and can't be disclosed to the governing bodies - they have no reason to know any more about that than the rest of us.

[easty]

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

HMRC are willing to accept 10p in the £ (sanctioned at the Treasury level) IF Craig Whyte is given the boot.

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

or maybe they'll offer a 50% reduction for folk who change thier surname to HMRC#1.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

HMRC are willing to accept 10p in the £ (sanctioned at the Treasury level) IF Craig Whyte is given the boot.

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

Are they not just regurgitating the Telegraph story from yesterday?

[Sylar]

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

And how are they going to do that?

Yet more wishful thinking from "the people" who were talking about "billionaires", "wealth off the chart" and "warchests".

I'm not promoting anything - merely sharing the story.

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

Thats an odd deal for the HMRC to make. Next will Joe Public be allowed to pay 10p in the pound of what he owes if 10 HMRC staff can have a go on his wife?

I guess 10p in the pound is better than 100% of nothing?

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

Are they not just regurgitating the Telegraph story from yesterday?

I didn't read the story in the telegraph yesterday, so I don't know - maybe?

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Interesting that the Administrators seem to think that there is a good chance that the Club can get out of the Ticketus situation. Could this be because CW signed the contract before he owned Rangers and is not therefore legally binding ?

That may be the stance they are taking. But, the facts are that RFC have had the money. They are therefore due to pay it back to someone, whether that is Ticketus or CW.

If it's CW, then his security comes back into play. But the smarter journalists are saying that the admins have decided his security is worthless in that he isn't owed a bolt.

An old boss of mine used to talk about "playing French cricket"... in other words, batting away problems in any way you could. I think there's perhaps a lot of this going on just now.

[IWasThere2016]

Shirley Bruno's vButtons should read "-£30m+"?

[CropleyWasGod]

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

I guess 10p in the pound is better than 100% of nothing?



?

If the company goes into liquidation, they will probably get a lot more than 10p.

On the other side of things, liquidaton might mean the closing off of future tax revenues from RFC. Agreeing to a CVA now would keep that stream open.

[SkintHibby]

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

Are they not just regurgitating the Telegraph story from yesterday?

You're a clever guy, is this 10p in the £ likely to happen?

[Captain Trips]

Mcgregor agrees to 75% cut

[easty]

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

I guess 10p in the pound is better than 100% of nothing?

It is in the short term of course. But it opens the door for any Tom, Dick or Harry (Redknapp ) to offer to pay the same thing in the future.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

You're a clever guy, is this 10p in the £ likely to happen?

This whole saga is so fascinating, and there are so many variables, that one can never say never.

However, it is HMRC's policy (to date) not to agree to CVA's, which is what this "dividend" is about. If they do agree to it, it will represent an enormous shift in their stance, and will have major repercussions, not just for football clubs but all businesses. Basically, it will enable struggling businesses to say "let's go into administration, agree a deal with the taxman, and start again".

I just can't see HMRC doing that for what is a "mere" £15m.