Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[WindyMiller]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17221172

[jgl07]

Just had a listen again to tonight's Sportsound, and they are one hundred per cent clear about the consequences of liquidation: It's newco in the SPL or extinct. No SFL option. Wee Chick trying to get his words out through the tears. Had to chuckle when he reformed Rangers as Govan United.


That is rubbish. It is true that the SPL has no power to'bust a team to SFL3 but a new team can apply for the resultant vacancy.

If Rangers get binned, I assume that should Rangers get kicked out of the SPL that will mean that the bottom club will stay up and the top SFL club still promoted. That will leave a vacancy in SFL Division One so presumably one team will avoid relegation from SFL1. Eventually there will be a vacancy in SFL3 that will be open to outside applicants.

Newco Rangers will be able to apply for that vacancy along with Gala Fairydean and anyone else who applies.

[CropleyWasGod]

They need to cut £4.5 million from the budget in order to get through the season. If they can't come to a voluntary agreement with the players and are too afraid to make redundancies, how are they meant to keep the club alive? What can they do exactly?

It's not about "being afraid" to make redundancies. They could make every player redundant, and every player could then justifiably sue them for the remaining money due on their contract. That would get them nowhere.

If they don't cut the costs, all they could do would be to limp on until the cash runs out. Or try for a CVA.... which they won't get, but they are probably duty bound to try.

Another option which has been mentioned is to sell Murray Park to Glasgow Council, and lease it back. They could do the same with Ibrox. Those deals take time, though, and I'm not sure they have that luxury.

[Coco Bryce]

I

Another option which has been mentioned is to sell Murray Park to Glasgow Council, and lease it back. They could do the same with Ibrox. Those deals take time, though, and I'm not sure they have that luxury.

I'm sure there would be some major objections from one half of the city regarding this.

[johnbc70]

Another option which has been mentioned is to sell Murray Park to Glasgow Council, and lease it back. They could do the same with Ibrox. Those deals take time, though, and I'm not sure they have that luxury.

Can you imagine the reaction of the Celtic fans if that happened - would never be an option.

[jgl07]

I'm sure there would be some major objections from one half of the city regarding this.

And about 85% of the City Council!

And where would the City Council get hold of the capital to purchase Murray Park?

[Billy Whizz]

It's not about "being afraid" to make redundancies. They could make every player redundant, and every player could then justifiably sue them for the remaining money due on their contract. That would get them nowhere.

If they don't cut the costs, all they could do would be to limp on until the cash runs out. Or try for a CVA.... which they won't get, but they are probably duty bound to try.

Another option which has been mentioned is to sell Murray Park to Glasgow Council, and lease it back. They could do the same with Ibrox. Those deals take time, though, and I'm not sure they have that luxury.

I was made redundant by the administrator from a company in administration 6 years ago. All I was able to claim was the Goverment scheme and the rest I became a creditor in the Company for the remaining part, which was around 15p on the £

[Hibernia&Alba]

That is rubbish. It is true that the SPL has no power to'bust a team to SFL3 but a new team can apply for the resultant vacancy.

If Rangers get binned, I assume that should Rangers get kicked out of the SPL that will mean that the bottom club will stay up and the top SFL club still promoted. That will leave a vacancy in SFL Division One so presumably one team will avoid relegation from SFL1. Eventually there will be a vacancy in SFL3 that will be open to outside applicants.

Newco Rangers will be able to apply for that vacancy along with Gala Fairydean and anyone else who applies.


That's the kind of scenario I was expecting them to describe, but Chico and Doncaster were saying something very different.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/scotfoot#playepisode1

[The_Sauz]

It's not about "being afraid" to make redundancies. They could make every player redundant, and every player could then justifiably sue them for the remaining money due on their contract. That would get them nowhere.

If they don't cut the costs, all they could do would be to limp on until the cash runs out. Or try for a CVA.... which they won't get, but they are probably duty bound to try.

Another option which has been mentioned is to sell Murray Park to Glasgow Council, and lease it back. They could do the same with Ibrox. Those deals take time, though, and I'm not sure they have that luxury.

Can't see that plan working, what with council cuts for this year, were are they going to get the cash from?
Can you see one side of Glasgow putting up with that....:greengrin

[Eyrie]

There are better uses of public money, particularly at this time, and especially when the main beneficiary of such a deal owes the public purse a potential £90m.

[Dan Sarf]

"McCoist saved from squad of youth players as Rangers accept 75 per cent wage cut" according to the Daily Mail. So it must be true.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2111272/Rangers-players-accept-75-cent-wage-cut.html#ixzz1oNuVLdcU

[jgl07]

That's the kind of scenario I was expecting them to describe, but Chico and Doncaster were saying something very different.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/scotfoot#playepisode1

Doncaster has no jurisdiction over the SFL so he is talking through the wrong orifice.

It is obviously the 'plan' to convince people that Rangers have to come into the SPL or fold.

[SteveHFC]

http://i985.photobucket.com/albums/ae335/naka25/a28f1dc0.jpg

:faf:

[ScottB]

"McCoist saved from squad of youth players as Rangers accept 75 per cent wage cut" according to the Daily Mail. So it must be true.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2111272/Rangers-players-accept-75-cent-wage-cut.html#ixzz1oNuVLdcU


Beeb story tonight saying 7 or 8 of them have refused to take cuts...

[Hibernia&Alba]

http://i985.photobucket.com/albums/ae335/naka25/a28f1dc0.jpg

:faf:

The guy can't be right in the head!

[Peevemor]

http://i985.photobucket.com/albums/ae335/naka25/a28f1dc0.jpg

:faf:

In the same way that Whale-arse Mercer "saved" Hibs.

[CropleyWasGod]

I was made redundant by the administrator from a company in administration 6 years ago. All I was able to claim was the Goverment scheme and the rest I became a creditor in the Company for the remaining part, which was around 15p on the £

Were you on a fixed term contract ?

[CropleyWasGod]

In the same way that Whale-arse Mercer "saved" Hibs.

There are some financial minds who are of the belief that he did indeed contribute to it. That his bid exposed the extent to which we were financially screwed at that time.

[Peevemor]

There are some financial minds who are of the belief that he did indeed contribute to it. That his bid exposed the extent to which we were financially screwed at that time.

That's what I was getting at. :agree:

[Lucius Apuleius]

Not saying Amanda is wrong CWG. But I work on a fixed contract one year at a time. My company can make me redundant any time they like.

[stokesmessiah]

Not saying Amanda is wrong CWG. But I work on a fixed contract one year at a time. My company can make me redundant any time they like.

I may be mistaken but i think that was the point he was making.

[Hibby Kay-Yay]

If it's a fixed contract then you would be due the remainder of your contract. If you're classed as a temp then you can be made redundant at anytime with no financial settlement.

[Lucius Apuleius]

I may be mistaken but i think that was the point he was making.

Hmmmmmm, I read it the other way mate. Sure he will clarify. :-)

[Billy Whizz]

Were you on a fixed term contract ?

No an employee for 22 years

[Lucius Apuleius]

If it's a fixed contract then you would be due the remainder of your contract. If you're classed as a temp then you can be made redundant at anytime with no financial settlement.

Disagree mate. We are in a demobilization process and lots of our guys just have their contracts ended with no remainder of contract paid. If they were I would be knocking down the HR managers door!!,

[CropleyWasGod]

No an employee for 22 years

That's the difference. You would have a redundancy clause in your terms and conditions of employment. The players, being on fixed-term deals, won't have.

[CropleyWasGod]

Disagree mate. We are in a demobilization process and lots of our guys just have their contracts ended with no remainder of contract paid. If they were I would be knocking down the HR managers door!!,

I would suggest, then, that you get in touch with Amanda. :agree: She was pretty clear on this point.... and she loves dealing with wrongs!!

[MrSmith]

Not saying Amanda is wrong CWG. But I work on a fixed contract one year at a time. My company can make me redundant any time they like.


They can't!

Employment law states two things: employers can't discriminate between temporary or full time staff and that fixed term contracts have a maximum of four. once you have completed three and are offered a fourth, you are expected to become a permanent employee on completion of the fourth.

http://www.unison-scotland.org.uk/briefings/fixedterm.html
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/Understandingyourworkstatus/Fixedtermworkers/DG_175138
http://www.eis.org.uk/print.asp?id=1603&dbase=

[JeMeSouviens]

14. If:- (i) a Member shall cease to be entitled to hold a Share; or (ii) a trustee in sequestration, manager, receiver or administrative receiver shall be appointed in respect of a Member or any property of a Member, or an administration order shall be made in respect of a Member or any property of a Member or an order shall be made or an 9 effective resolution passed for the winding up of a Member otherwise than for the purpose of reconstruction or amalgamation;

then that Member or its manager, receiver, administrative receiver, administrator or liquidator or any other person entitled to the Share shall, on receiving notice in writing from the Board following the Company in General Meeting passing a Qualified Resolution that such notice should be issued by the Board and confirming the identity of the proposed transferee, transfer its Share to such ther person as the Board shall direct at the price of £1 and the Club owned and operated by such Member shall forthwith cease to be a member of the League and the Club owned and operated by the transferee shall become a member of the League in its place.

Again probably reading that wrong but if a phoenix company were formed could Duff and Phelps not transfer the share (effectively league membership) to the new company and they would then hold a place in the SPL?


It reads to me that the liquidator would have to transfer the SPL share to whoever the SPL board tells them to, be that a Phoenix Huns, the relegated club from the SPL or a 2nd team coming up from Div 1. Basically it's all up to the SPL board.

Doncaster is clearly trying to bounce opinion into a fait accompli where we all just lie down and let New Huns walk back in. He is relying on the headless chicken Scottish media doing their usual thorough investigative job and just writing what they're told (Motherwell born billionaire etc etc).

[greenginger]

It reads to me that the liquidator would have to transfer the SPL share to whoever the SPL board tells them to, be that a Phoenix Huns, the relegated club from the SPL or a 2nd team coming up from Div 1. Basically it's all up to the SPL board.

Doncaster is clearly trying to bounce opinion into a fait accompli where we all just lie down and let New Huns walk back in. He is relying on the headless chicken Scottish media doing their usual thorough investigative job and just writing what they're told (Motherwell born billionaire etc etc).


It is not a decision by the SPL Board . I saw it on another site that the Board will be bound by the decision of a special meeting of the full SPL membership. In other words all clubs to have a say in what replaces a defunct Hun.

[s.a.m]

It reads to me that the liquidator would have to transfer the SPL share to whoever the SPL board tells them to, be that a Phoenix Huns, the relegated club from the SPL or a 2nd team coming up from Div 1. Basically it's all up to the SPL board.

Doncaster is clearly trying to bounce opinion into a fait accompli where we all just lie down and let New Huns walk back in. He is relying on the headless chicken Scottish media doing their usual thorough investigative job and just writing what they're told (Motherwell born billionaire etc etc).

You're probably right. And then, next season, as they face relegation after a season of playing with a real-world pool of players, he'll be back on our tellies explaining why they have to restructure the league.:rolleyes:

I'm not generally one for stomping off in the huff, but if they are smuggled back into the league as a phoenix team, that would probably be the final straw for me. We've (as fans) spent a fortune over the years watching our team struggle, as we try to play within our means, and by the rules. What's the point?

[CallumLaidlaw]

#Rangers director Dave King releases a statement saying he believes liquidation is inevitable.

King says the club will not meet euro deadline and will therefore not take part in euro competitions next season. #Rangers

[Dan Sarf]

Beeb story tonight saying 7 or 8 of them have refused to take cuts...

It's a wonderful thing, the Daily Mail.

[stokesmessiah]

#Rangers director Dave King releases a statement saying he believes liquidation is inevitable.

King says the club will not meet euro deadline and will therefore not take part in euro competitions next season. #Rangers

Shame :greengrin

[GloryGlory]

You're probably right. And then, next season, as they face relegation after a season of playing with a real-world pool of players, he'll be back on our tellies explaining why they have to restructure the league.:rolleyes:

I'm not generally one for stomping off in the huff, but if they are smuggled back into the league as a phoenix team, that would probably be the final straw for me. We've (as fans) spent a fortune over the years watching our team struggle, as we try to play within our means, and by the rules. What's the point?

Indeed. What sort of sporting competition allows cheats to get away with it with only minimal sanction (10 point deduction).

[CropleyWasGod]

#Rangers director Dave King releases a statement saying he believes liquidation is inevitable.

King says the club will not meet euro deadline and will therefore not take part in euro competitions next season. #Rangers

TBH, I wouldn't be that keen on relying on Dave King's statements.

In related news, I can't get the story to come up, but the headline is very interesting:-

http://www.heraldscotland.com/

[stokesmessiah]

THe drama that is unfolding at Ibrox has made me pay more attention that i have ever bothered to rankgers and to their fan base which includes often nipping on to their forums to see what their views on it are. I have to say that it totally dumbfounds me how bigoted, narrow minded, stupid and more importantly paranoid their support is. Throughout this whole thing there has been two underlying themes 1) It is everyone else's fault but our own 2) **** them, **** the SPL, **** Scotland and lets just move to another league.

This thread is another example.

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213207

[CentreLine]

You're probably right. And then, next season, as they face relegation after a season of playing with a real-world pool of players, he'll be back on our tellies explaining why they have to restructure the league.:rolleyes:

I'm not generally one for stomping off in the huff, but if they are smuggled back into the league as a phoenix team, that would probably be the final straw for me. We've (as fans) spent a fortune over the years watching our team struggle, as we try to play within our means, and by the rules. What's the point?

:agree: The SPL and SFA absolutely must treat Rangers exactly as they would any other club and apply the rules fairly. To me that means them being expelled from the SPL and having to earn their place back. If the authorities fail to do this they will have driven the final nail in the coffin of Scottish football. On the other hand, if they show a strong hand, we just might be much better off as a result with our credibility in one piece and a clear message to all levels of the game that cheats will not be tolerated. It is all very fine laying down the law to junior clubs for fielding ineligible players, the time it counts is when one of the big boys does it.

C'mon SFA and SPL, let's see your nuts :rules:

[jamiehibee]

THe drama that is unfolding at Ibrox has made me pay more attention that i have ever bothered to rankgers and to their fan base which includes often nipping on to their forums to see what their views on it are. I have to say that it totally dumbfounds me how bigoted, narrow minded, stupid and more importantly
paranoid their support is. Throughout this whole thing there has been two underlying themes 1) It is everyone else's fault but our own 2) **** them, **** the SPL, **** Scotland and lets just move to another league.

This thread is another example.

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/
index.php?showtopic=213207

What really scares me is every other week 40,000 or so of these deluded morons get corralled into the same space to be morons together.

And i realise that it's maybe not all of them that are morons but what this case has done for me is reveal that a f***load of them are!

[CropleyWasGod]

C'mon SFA and SPL, let's see your nuts :rules:

...or, let's see you're nuts :cb

[ancienthibby]

...or, let's see you're nuts :cb

...or, let's see. You're nuts.:devil:

[PaulSmith]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/dave-king-to-sue-sir-david-murray-for-20m.2012039953?_=9a3d6127374af09c22015bf3ede3ac00a 36e3ec6

Full statement here

[Disc O'Dave]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/dave-king-to-sue-sir-david-murray-for-20m.2012039953?_=9a3d6127374af09c22015bf3ede3ac00a 36e3ec6

Full statement here


Rangers director Dave King today revealed he is going to sue former club owner Sir David Murray for 20 million pounds.


Mr King, the South African-based businessman who made a flying visit to Scotland last week, confirmed his intentions in an explosive statement released today.

As well as taking action over the non-disclosure of the full financial picture at the Glasgow club, Mr King said that:

Please enable cookies in your browser to display the rest of this article.

Seems a strange thing for him to say :devil:

[CentreLine]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/dave-king-to-sue-sir-david-murray-for-20m.2012039953?_=9a3d6127374af09c22015bf3ede3ac00a 36e3ec6

Full statement here

Well Well Well. That is as hard hitting a statement as we are likely to see. Assuming that Mr King is not another criminal with his own interests at heart, as the South African Authorities seem to believe, then we may just be seeing the most credible next "King" of Ibrox. I like his comment about needing a strong Rangers and Celtic if a little more humble.

Actually I think that is what we would all like to see. So lets have Rangers expelled from the SPL and earn their place back at the top table in three or four years as Newco Rangers. Then they and Celtic can work with the rest of us as equal shareholders in what is best for Scottish football. If only!

[CropleyWasGod]

http://www.heraldscotland.com/mobile/news/home-news/dave-king-to-sue-sir-david-murray-for-20m.2012039953?_=9a3d6127374af09c22015bf3ede3ac00a 36e3ec6

Full statement here

Cheers for that.

Very interesting reading, which will take some time to digest. Two things strike me immediately, though:-

1. it's very easy to take the moral high ground, as DK is. However, he's not exactly a paragon of virtue himself. He does make reference to his tax problems, to be fair, but it's difficult to trust him completely.

2. I still cannot believe that SDM didn't know about the Ticketus scam. I can't see how he wouldn't have known.

[johnrebus]

:agree: The SPL and SFA absolutely must treat Rangers exactly as they would any other club and apply the rules fairly. To me that means them being expelled from the SPL and having to earn their place back. If the authorities fail to do this they will have driven the final nail in the coffin of Scottish football. On the other hand, if they show a strong hand, we just might be much better off as a result with our credibility in one piece and a clear message to all levels of the game that cheats will not be tolerated. It is all very fine laying down the law to junior clubs for fielding ineligible players, the time it counts is when one of the big boys does it.

C'mon SFA and SPL, let's see your nuts :rules:


This will just not happen.

Whatever filth is still to ooze out of Castle Greyskull over the next few days and weeks, you can rest assured that Glasgow Rangers will take their place in the SPL next season.

Forget the football authorities, it will go well beyond that. The people who will ultimately decide Rangers fate will be a lot higher up than that. If the SPL and SFA make a stand I can guarantee that Alex Salmond and politicians of all other parties will intervene to save them from ultimate humiliation.

Already you can see the bias from the BBC. I have yet to hear anyone on a phone in programme or a text read out, pointing out that most Scottish football fans - never mind Celtic fans - want to see the back of them, and will gladly take the chance of losing TV revenue. The game looks buggered with or without Rangers anyway. Instead we have to listen day in day out to the hand wringing drivel of the likes of Billy Dodds.

There is at this moment a complete media ban on a paedophile case in Scotland, because some of the accused just happen to hold or have held high office. If the people that run the country can do this - and get away with it - then saving Rangers will be a piece of cake.

We are stuck with them.



:grr:

[CentreLine]

Cheers for that.

Very interesting reading, which will take some time to digest. Two things strike me immediately, though:-

1. it's very easy to take the moral high ground, as DK is. However, he's not exactly a paragon of virtue himself. He does make reference to his tax problems, to be fair, but it's difficult to trust him completely.

2. I still cannot believe that SDM didn't know about the Ticketus scam. I can't see how he wouldn't have known.

Even if he did not know about Ticketus he certainly knew about any back door payments to players. I think that is what DK is getting at and how it has exposed the club to more investigation. I think SPL/SFA need to get all of the clubs to open their books to prove financial stability. Wouldn't that be fun across the city

[Lucius Apuleius]

I will answer CWG and MrSmith in one as i am on my tablet and cannae multiquote:-) Both wrong actually as they can do what they like. Such is the life of an expat contract worker. Working for an Italian company out of their Swiss office in a joint venture with an American company which together have formed a nigerian company to allow us to work in nigeria subcontracted to another American company, think I would be struggling to fight a case :-)

[CropleyWasGod]

Even if he did not know about Ticketus he certainly knew about any back door payments to players. I think that is what DK is getting at and how it has exposed the club to more investigation. I think SPL/SFA need to get all of the clubs to open their books to prove financial stability. Wouldn't that be fun across the city

He's suing SDM, because he says he didn't get a full picture of the finances. If that's about the EBT's, I find it hard to believe, since DK was on the Board for much of that time.

However, DK specifically says in his statement that SDM didn't know about Ticketus...... that's the bit that I find really difficult to swallow.

[CropleyWasGod]

I will answer CWG and MrSmith in one as i am on my tablet and cannae multiquote:-) Both wrong actually as they can do what they like. Such is the life of an expat contract worker. Working for an Italian company out of their Swiss office in a joint venture with an American company which together have formed a nigerian company to allow us to work in nigeria subcontracted to another American company, think I would be struggling to fight a case :-)

You saying that we're wrong? (square go??? :greengrin)

But, given the complex nature of what appears to be a Yammish contract in your case, my considered opinion is that you are indeed rubber ducked.

[CentreLine]

It's a bit quiet today over on the dark side. What has happened to the exodus?

[CropleyWasGod]

It's a bit quiet today over on the dark side. What has happened to the exodus?

To be fair to the admins, they probably allow training to go on as normal. It'll be this afternoon before there is any action, I reckon.

[ancienthibby]

It's a bit quiet today over on the dark side. What has happened to the exodus?

Paul Murray to make conditional offer before 16 March deadline (BBC blog)

EDIT: BBC site now also saying that SDM will make a statement this pm re Dave KIng's remarks.

[Togs91]

Paul Murray to make conditional offer before 16 March deadline (BBC blog)


EDIT: BBC site now also saying that SDM will make a statement this pm re Dave KIng's remarks.


i reckon SDM won't show, maybe the new DM might :agree:

[greenginger]

That is rubbish. It is true that the SPL has no power to'bust a team to SFL3 but a new team can apply for the resultant vacancy.

If Rangers get binned, I assume that should Rangers get kicked out of the SPL that will mean that the bottom club will stay up and the top SFL club still promoted. That will leave a vacancy in SFL Division One so presumably one team will avoid relegation from SFL1. Eventually there will be a vacancy in SFL3 that will be open to outside applicants.

Newco Rangers will be able to apply for that vacancy along with Gala Fairydean and anyone else who applies.

Found the SPL Regs I was looking for . Its in the SPL Articles of Association Clause 14

"The SPL Board following the Company General Meeting passing a Qualified Resolution that such notice should be issued by the Board and confirming the identity of the proposed transferee, transfer its share to such other person ---------- "

Page 5 of Articles Qualified Resolutions require 90% approval.

It will require 10 of the 11 SPL members approval for the dead Hun share to be transferred to New-Hun Ltd.

Doncaster is either an imbecile or is seriously at it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Just had some mail from an outfit inviting me to a seminar on "Compliant Offshore & Tax Planning Solutions".

It includes an item on "Life after EBT's".

I have sent copies on to the appropriate places :devil:

[Twa Cairpets]

This will just not happen.

Whatever filth is still to ooze out of Castle Greyskull over the next few days and weeks, you can rest assured that Glasgow Rangers will take their place in the SPL next season.
This might be the cas eoif they come out of administration. I won't be if they are liquidated

Forget the football authorities, it will go well beyond that. The people who will ultimately decide Rangers fate will be a lot higher up than that. If the SPL and SFA make a stand I can guarantee that Alex Salmond and politicians of all other parties will intervene to save them from ultimate humiliation.
No politician is going to see their party decimated by overt support for the Huns over the heads of the SFA/SPL if they decide to kick them.

Already you can see the bias from the BBC. I have yet to hear anyone on a phone in programme or a text read out, pointing out that most Scottish football fans - never mind Celtic fans - want to see the back of them, and will gladly take the chance of losing TV revenue. The game looks buggered with or without Rangers anyway. Instead we have to listen day in day out to the hand wringing drivel of the likes of Billy Dodds.
You've been listening to different programmes to me then. Rangers fansa re going to support them, and there are lots of them. Other fans dont, and there's lots of them too. Lots of Celtic fans for all this jelly and ice cream p!sh dont want them to die becuase like lots of Hibs fans with hearts, their favourite games are their derbies.

There is at this moment a complete media ban on a paedophile case in Scotland, because some of the accused just happen to hold or have held high office. If the people that run the country can do this - and get away with it - then saving Rangers will be a piece of cake.
Entirely and utterly irrelevant. Whtever the truth on this case you mention it is entirely un-related from a legal process point of view.

We are stuck with them.
Lets hope not, eh

:grr:?

The issue I have with posts like this is that it is opinion stated as fact without evidence to back it up. IF you are right, then its a bad, sad day and that'll be it for me with senior football. If you're wrong, then lets gloat at the punishment. But wait to rant until there's something to rant at eh?

[Gingertosser]

Has Doncaster not realised that by letting NewCo Rangers back into the SPL they will probably kill 10 other SPL clubs, as going by what I've read online from non OF fans, most people are not going to attend anymore games, and as such put the remaining SPL clubs into trouble (barring Celtic, as they will still have enough fans to carry on).

It seems strange that they are willing to sacrifice 10 clubs for the good of 1 :confused:

Maybe the 10 chairmen should be looking at the bigger picture.

[Seveno]

Okay I'm back.

I'm more than a little concerned that so many fellow netters seem to have tasted the same corporal punishment from the same Latin teacher as me. There is a clear pattern here.

In other news, nobody seems to have mentioned the interview with our own Amanda Jones earlier this evening. What she said was very enlightening. I was driving at the time, so couldn't write it all down, but from memory she was saying:-

1. employment law doesn't stop just because of administration. That's a fundamental issue.

2. as the admins have said, they can't force wage cuts on players.

3. as the players are on fixed term contracts, it is unlikely that there will be any redundancy provisions in there.

4. as a result of 3, players would be entitled to sue for what is due on the remaining portion of their contract, if they were simply told to leave.

5. notwithstanding 4, it would be normal to have a negotiated settlement in these situations.

She also sympathised with the job of the admins. Being a football person, she understands the issues. The undercurrent was, if I understood her right, that the admins are doing this bit by the book.

I have dealt with Amanda a couple of times, and she knows her stuff.

I heard the same interview and you have reported correctly. It explained why the negotiations are taking so long and I don't see it being picked up by the Press.

Oh, and I only had the one experience with the slipper when he decided to that the whole class would get it.

[CropleyWasGod]

I heard the same interview and you have reported correctly. It explained why the negotiations are taking so long and I don't see it being picked up by the Press.

Oh, and I only had the one experience with the slipper when he decided to that the whole class would get it.

I bumped into him last year in Goldenacre..... I never realised he was so small:greengrin. Had a decent conversation with him... he's 80 odds and still going to the gym. To my amazement (and humility), 30-odd years later, he remembered me.

[johnrebus]

?

The issue I have with posts like this is that it is opinion stated as fact without evidence to back it up. IF you are right, then its a bad, sad day and that'll be it for me with senior football. If you're wrong, then lets gloat at the punishment. But wait to rant until there's something to rant at eh?



As you say, it is my opinion. Whether you think it is stated as fact is up to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I repect that, but if you really think that a team called Rangers won't be in the SPL next season then I believe you are deluding yourself.

As for the ranting you mention, I think there is more than enough going on at the moment that deserves to be ranted at.


:greengrin



Lets just wait and see how this all pans out, but if I'm right, I can assure you that gloating will be the last thing on my mind.

[blackpoolhibs]

Has Doncaster not realised that by letting NewCo Rangers back into the SPL they will probably kill 10 other SPL clubs, as going by what I've read online from non OF fans, most people are not going to attend anymore games, and as such put the remaining SPL clubs into trouble (barring Celtic, as they will still have enough fans to carry on).

It seems strange that they are willing to sacrifice 10 clubs for the good of 1 :confused:

Maybe the 10 chairmen should be looking at the bigger picture.

A lot of folk will have said they are not going back if the huns are not punished properly, and that means demotion.

Just how many will actually do this is unknown, a lot will probably go back, some will keep their promice.

The suits will probably gamble if they can get away with it and try and be as sympathetic as possible with the huns, and hope most folk are all spouting hot air and will go back should they remain in the SPL.

Where i dont think Doncaster and the rest of them are in touch with the average non old firm football fan, is we are really pissed off. We know at the start of every season we are competing for 3rd at best.

If Rangers are allowed to get away with basically cheating, even when they are guaranteed at least 2nd every year, a lot of people will just give up.

It will tell us what we already knew, the old firm are running the game for their own end, and even when caught red handed :wink: nothing changed.

If they are demoted to the bottom league as a new club hun2012 or whatever they wish to call themselves, we will then see some balance at last brought into the game and fairness will be their for all to see, and each and every club will know if you flout the rules, to the extent the huns have, the penalties are there for all to see.

The most galling thing for me in all this, is you can bet your last penny if it was any other club bar Celtic, they'd already be playing their football if they even survived in the 3rd division, and there would be no outpouring of grief for the loss of any institution or highly paid footballers.

[Moulin Yarns]

Can anybody remember/explain what happened to Gretna when they went bust. IIRC they couldn't pay bills, went into administration, then when they found assest were worth less than liabilities they were liquidated.

Next question, is it not the same with Rangers? Gretna, and Livi were demoted to the bottom of the 3rd, so surely the precedent has been set.

Just saying, likes.

[CentreLine]

I know this has appeared before but I can’t find what the views were. What is stopping Newco Rangers from applying to join the English Conference League and trying, over the next few years, to get themselves eventually in to the EPL? (Oh I hope they can) And has this been CW’s plan all along hence his smug approach to admin/liquidation?

[The_Sauz]

To be fair to the admins, they probably allow training to go on as normal. It'll be this afternoon before there is any action, I reckon.

Why....they have no game this weekend :greengrin

[Seveno]

I know this has appeared before but I can’t find what the views were. What is stopping Newco Rangers from applying to join the English Conference League and trying, over the next few years, to get themselves eventually in to the EPL? (Oh I hope they can) And has this been CW’s plan all along hence his smug approach to admin/liquidation?

My understanding is that UEFA rules prevent a club playing in a league in another country.

The rule was not retrospective, hence the Berwick Rangers, Swansea and Cardiff situation. And Berwick is really ours as well.

[jgl07]

My understanding is that UEFA rules prevent a club playing in a league in another country.

The rule was not retrospective, hence the Berwick Rangers, Swansea and Cardiff situation. And Berwick is really ours as well.

Derry City, and Monaco are other exceptions.

In the case of Derry the move from Irish League to the League of Ireland was fairly recent.

[The_Sauz]

My understanding is that UEFA rules prevent a club playing in a league in another country.

The rule was not retrospective, hence the Berwick Rangers, Swansea and Cardiff situation. And Berwick is really ours as well.

North Berwick is, but not Berwick upon Tweed, that belongs to England!

[Seveno]

I get fed up with Doncaster droning on about the need for TV if the SPL is to survive. What he means is for the SPL to survive in its current form. Is that what anyone really wants ?

Take away the TV money and the biggest impact is on the ugly sisters. The direct revenue that Hibs lose would be made up by selling about 1,500 extra ST's. Hard to say the impact on sponsorship money but the gate receipts for matches that were formerly televised would fill a large part of that hole.

In any case, it would mean that a radical re-think would be required and we could perhaps go down the German route of restructing, beginning with a cap on player salaries. This would lead to a departure of foreign players and the opportunity for our own young players to come through.

Without Rangers, these changes would be easier to carry through. So, leaving aside the fact that I loathe everything to do with them, the sooner they are consigned to history, the better.

[Seveno]

North Berwick is, but not Berwick upon Tweed, that belongs to England!


Only on a technicality. We lost the last battle but the war isn't over yet. :na na:

[jgl07]

North Berwick is, but not Berwick upon Tweed, that belongs to England!

Even if you take the Tweed as the English-Scottish border, Berwick Rangers ground is in Tweedmouth on the South bank.

[CropleyWasGod]

Even if you take the Tweed as the English-Scottish border, Berwick Rangers ground is in Tweedmouth on the South bank.

... and ER isn't in Leith? :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

I get fed up with Doncaster droning on about the need for TV if the SPL is to survive. What he means is for the SPL to survive in its current form. Is that what anyone really wants ?

Take away the TV money and the biggest impact is on the ugly sisters. The direct revenue that Hibs lose would be made up by selling about 1,500 extra ST's. Hard to say the impact on sponsorship money but the gate receipts for matches that were formerly televised would fill a large part of that hole.

In any case, it would mean that a radical re-think would be required and we could perhaps go down the German route of restructing, beginning with a cap on player salaries. This would lead to a departure of foreign players and the opportunity for our own young players to come through.

Without Rangers, these changes would be easier to carry through. So, leaving aside the fact that I loathe everything to do with them, the sooner they are consigned to history, the better.

I reckon we, and others, would hold on to our decent young players a couple of seasons longer. There would be less filthy lucre being waved at them from Govan, teasing them to come and sit on the bench. Their careers would benefit, our product would be better, and there would still be a market for selling them on down South.

[Billy Whizz]

North Berwick is, but not Berwick upon Tweed, that belongs to England!

But Berwickshire's in Scotland

[The_Sauz]

Only on a technicality. We lost the last battle but the war isn't over yet. :na na:

That is very true my friend :greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

As you say, it is my opinion. Whether you think it is stated as fact is up to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I repect that, but if you really think that a team called Rangers won't be in the SPL next season then I believe you are deluding yourself.

As for the ranting you mention, I think there is more than enough going on at the moment that deserves to be ranted at.

:greengrin

Lets just wait and see how this all pans out, but if I'm right, I can assure you that gloating will be the last thing on my mind.

I think Rangers will be in the SPL if theyre still in administration, which, sadly, is the only thing that can happen, albeit with another ten points deduction as thems the rools.

I think Rangers wont be in the SPL if they are liquidated. My personal belief is that if it comes to the crunch, the depth of feeling from non OF fans will be expressed to the resepctive boards in spades: "Play fair, dont take the p!sh when voting whether to allow FC Newhun to play, or see ya". It only need two clubs to vote no. I think the 'Tache has made his position pretty clear, and Vlad will joyfully stick it up them.

Their choice is TV + no fans, or fans + reduced TV. Only one way they can go, and it wont involve Ranger sin the SPL if they're liquidated.

And you're right about the ranting, but rant at things that have happened rather than things that might.

[The_Sauz]

But Berwickshire's in Scotland

Berwick upon Tweed comes under Northumberland :agree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwickshire

[CropleyWasGod]

Berwick upon Tweed comes under Northumberland :agree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwickshire

This thread really does have it all.

Now it's cross-border disputes!! :flag:

[Billy Whizz]

Berwick upon Tweed comes under Northumberland :agree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berwickshire

Then move the ground over the water

[jgl07]

Can anybody remember/explain what happened to Gretna when they went bust. IIRC they couldn't pay bills, went into administration, then when they found assest were worth less than liabilities they were liquidated.

Next question, is it not the same with Rangers? Gretna, and Livi were demoted to the bottom of the 3rd, so surely the precedent has been set.

Just saying, likes.

The cases were very different.

Gretna were liquidated and went out of existence. They finished bottom of the SPL so not decision had to be taken as they were already going to be relegated from the SPL.

The SFL1 had no club relegated so a team avoided relegation to SFL2 and as a knock-on effect another was not relegated to SFL3.

That led to a vacancy in SFL3 which was filled by Annan.

Meantime Gretna reformed as a newco in 2008 and joined the East of Scotland League.

Livingston were not liquidated but were relegated two divisions by the SFL down to SFL3. It made little difference as they were strong favourites to be relegated to SFL2 and with the squad they had were always likely to be promoted to SFL2 after one season.

[Seveno]

And, of course, Doncaster Rovers could replace the Hun in the SPL. Neil might like that. :wink:

http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/politics/scottish_independence_english_town_of_doncaster_st akes_its_claim_to_scottish_heritage_1_2125780

[Dashing Bob S]

A lot of folk will have said they are not going back if the huns are not punished properly, and that means demotion.

Just how many will actually do this is unknown, a lot will probably go back, some will keep their promice.

The suits will probably gamble if they can get away with it and try and be as sympathetic as possible with the huns, and hope most folk are all spouting hot air and will go back should they remain in the SPL.

Where i dont think Doncaster and the rest of them are in touch with the average non old firm football fan, is we are really pissed off. We know at the start of every season we are competing for 3rd at best.

If Rangers are allowed to get away with basically cheating, even when they are guaranteed at least 2nd every year, a lot of people will just give up.

It will tell us what we already knew, the old firm are running the game for their own end, and even when caught red handed :wink: nothing changed.

If they are demoted to the bottom league as a new club hun2012 or whatever they wish to call themselves, we will then see some balance at last brought into the game and fairness will be their for all to see, and each and every club will know if you flout the rules, to the extent the huns have, the penalties are there for all to see.

The most galling thing for me in all this, is you can bet your last penny if it was any other club bar Celtic, they'd already be playing their football if they even survived in the 3rd division, and there would be no outpouring of grief for the loss of any institution or highly paid footballers.

I think you're correct. With OF domination led by sectarianism, and now financial cheating, and the general decline of the product, I reckon that thousands of fans are just waiting for the excuse to bail. (And I number OF 'fans' amongst them.) Let's face it, it's become an ugly, shabby circus and a big embarrassment.

I believe the way forward is for the smaller nations to band together and form integrated leagues on a regional basis.

Scottish football is dying and the SPL will kill it stone dead, by once again, doing the wrong thing here. You can count on it.

[easty]

As you say, it is my opinion. Whether you think it is stated as fact is up to you.

You are of course entitled to your opinion and I repect that, but if you really think that a team called Rangers won't be in the SPL next season then I believe you are deluding yourself.

As for the ranting you mention, I think there is more than enough going on at the moment that deserves to be ranted at.


:greengrin



Lets just wait and see how this all pans out, but if I'm right, I can assure you that gloating will be the last thing on my mind.

I'm with you Rebus.

I'd even be surprised if this time next year Rangers arent sitting 2nd in the SPL. The hun masses will be saying that Celtic winning the 2012/13 season is tainted due to them being cheated. We'll all be moaning about the standard and state of Scottish football, still. Vlad will still be with Hearts having released umpteen statements about Mowgli, and has now introduced Baloo the bear into his ramblings. And TQM will still not be going to Easter Road. I dont see anything changing.

[Hibbylad86]

This thread really does have it all.

Now it's cross-border disputes!! :flag:


Cross border disputes aside CWG, Whyte has just come out saying Rangers will agree a CVA and liquidation will not happen. Liklihood of a CVA going through here? zero??

[CentreLine]

Scotsman regular updates on Rangers showing some interesting responses to DK's statement this morning. DM will defend his position he says and CW contradicts DK about liquidation. But then who listens to CW these days. Interestingly the other Murray bloke also says this and that the way forward is CVA. Has that not been done to death?

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers-crisis-live-updates-as-administrators-and-players-reconvene-for-wage-talks-1-2157626

[CropleyWasGod]

Cross border disputes aside CWG, Whyte has just come out saying Rangers will agree a CVA and liquidation will not happen. Liklihood of a CVA going through here? zero??

I'm smiling here at seeing your Location and Craigie's name so close to each other. :greengrin

This tale has twists and turns, and I'm loving it all. But it would be a helluva twist if HMRC were to change their policy and agree to a CVA. Never say never, of course, but I really can't see it.



FFS, just noticed that even Paul Murray is quoted as saying that a CVA is the way forward.

[ancienthibby]

I'm smiling here at seeing your Location and Craigie's name so close to each other. :greengrin

This tale has twists and turns, and I'm loving it all. But it would be a helluva twist if HMRC were to change their policy and agree to a CVA. Never say never, of course, but I really can't see it.



FFS, just noticed that even Paul Murray is quoted as saying that a CVA is the way forward.

Deliberate spoon-feeding by the £1mllion-and-rising liquidators?:greengrin

[CentreLine]

Deliberate spoon-feeding by the £1mllion-and-rising liquidators?:greengrin

I would suggest that this is being heavily promoted by D&P since it is what they were hand picked to do. Otherwise even the remaining tatters of the master-plan does not fall in to place

[SteveHFC]

Coming soon to ESPN - The Administration Cup Rangers Vs Portsmouth winners will be allowed to melt down trophy and sell for scrap !

[ancienthibby]

This just up on the BBC site.

That'll be a no to helping Rangers, then?:wink:



1538:
St Mirren statement continued: "No speculative thought or decision shall come from St Mirren FC until the exact position at Rangers FC is known. If the board of directors of St Mirren FC be required to make any decisions they would decide the best way forward in the best interests of St Mirren FC and the Scottish Premier League...





1536:
St Mirren board of directors:"You will realise there has been a great deal of speculation in the media surrounding the events at Rangers FC. Should it be required and only when the situation is absolutely clear at Rangers FC, any view of St Mirren FC Ltd would be taken by the board of directors...





1535:
BREAKING NEWSSt Mirren statement on Rangers...

[JimBHibees]

This just up on the BBC site.

That'll be a no to helping Rangers, then?:wink:



1538:
St Mirren statement continued: "No speculative thought or decision shall come from St Mirren FC until the exact position at Rangers FC is known. If the board of directors of St Mirren FC be required to make any decisions they would decide the best way forward in the best interests of St Mirren FC and the Scottish Premier League...






1536:
St Mirren board of directors:"You will realise there has been a great deal of speculation in the media surrounding the events at Rangers FC. Should it be required and only when the situation is absolutely clear at Rangers FC, any view of St Mirren FC Ltd would be taken by the board of directors...





1535:
BREAKING NEWSSt Mirren statement on Rangers...






Seems to me more like a we will decide when we need to decide.

[CropleyWasGod]

I would suggest that this is being heavily promoted by D&P since it is what they were hand picked to do. Otherwise even the remaining tatters of the master-plan does not fall in to place

It's not about them being hand-picked to do it. It's about their duty to investigate the possibility of one happening.

[jgl07]

Cross border disputes aside CWG, Whyte has just come out saying Rangers will agree a CVA and liquidation will not happen. Liklihood of a CVA going through here? zero??

Zero might be on the optimistic side.

It will have to wait for the Big Tax case to be sorted surely?

[Beefster]

Seems to me more like a we will decide when we need to decide.

I'm off to phone the bank and tell them that I won't make a decision on whether I need a loan until I know if I need a loan or not and have to make a decision on whether I want one or not.

Completely pointless statement from St Mirren.

[Gingertosser]

This just up on the BBC site.



1538:
decide the best way forward in the best interests of St Mirren FC and the Scottish Premier League...


or......we need them, they have to be readmitted :rolleyes:

[PatHead]

I'm off to phone the bank and tell them that I won't make a decision on whether I need a loan until I know if I need a loan or not and have to make a decision on whether I want one or not.

Completely pointless statement from St Mirren.

To be fair clubs were getting criticised for not saying anything on the Radio yesterday so a "We will comment when we have to" comment is fair enough

[hibs0666]

Hunnish staff meeting being held currently. What's the betting that the administrators will yet again defer a decision on redundancies?

[Billy Whizz]

Hunnish staff meeting being held currently. What's the betting that the administrators will yet again defer a decision on redundancies?

Sky Sports saying it will be Friday now before a decision will be made

[CallumLaidlaw]

Sky Sports saying it will be Friday now before a decision will be made

So they announced on Friday that they need to trim costs by £250k a WEEK. By this Friday they'll have saved £10k in week 1. So they're £240k down already!!!

[CropleyWasGod]

Hunnish staff meeting being held currently. What's the betting that the administrators will yet again defer a decision on redundancies?

To be fair to them, they are in an extremely difficult position.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Apparently the potential new owners are just waiting to shake hands on a deal. No change there then.

[CallumLaidlaw]

Full statement -


Administrators have revealed they wish to sell Rangers FC in the next few days amid a "perilous financial situation".

Duff and Phelps issued a statement on Wednesday as they battled to reach agreement with players over pay cuts.

David Whitehouse, Joint Administrator, said: "We are announcing today we are accelerating the sale of Rangers Football Club.

"The Club is in a perilous financial situation and that should not be under-estimated. Regrettably, we have been unable to agree cost-cutting measures with the playing staff on terms that will preserve value in the business. We understand the players' position as the scale of wage cuts required to achieve these savings without job losses were very substantial indeed.

"In view of this, we are faced with a situation of making redundancies within the playing staff on such a scale that would materially erode the value of the playing squad. We are striving to strike a balance where cost-cutting measures can be implemented but do not destroy the fabric of the playing squad to the extent that it will inhibit the prospect of a sale.

"However, no one should be in any doubt that in the absence of sufficient cost-cutting measures or receipt of substantial unplanned income, the Club will not be able to fulfil its fixtures throughout the remainder of the season.

"As a result, we are expediting the sale process and over the next few days we will be holding discussions with prospective purchasers who have declared their interest. The Manager, Ally McCoist will play an integral part in these discussions.

"If however it becomes apparent that the sale process cannot be accelerated there will be no choice but to implement very severe cost cutting measures at the Club."

[Smidge]

In other words, if we can't agree a sale in the next few days, then liquidation WILL happen.

[CropleyWasGod]

In other words, if we can't agree a sale in the next few days, then liquidation WILL happen.

... or, to be cynical, if we don't do something here quickly, our fees are in jeopardy.

[essexhibee]

Why would anyone want to buy them!?

[CropleyWasGod]

Why would anyone want to buy them!?

Indeed. But they still have to go through that process, otherwise they're not doing their job properly.

I reckon all potential purchasers will take the same stance "it's subject to the BTC going in our favour".... in which case, there can't be a deal..... unless that verdict comes very soon, and in RFC's favour.

[Beefster]

To be fair clubs were getting criticised for not saying anything on the Radio yesterday so a "We will comment when we have to" comment is fair enough

I'm not sure what the criticisers wanted the clubs to say then. They haven't been asked to make a decision and no-one knows what the **** is going on at Rangers.

Away from St Mirren's comment, just read the Duff and Phelps statement - how can they sell the club without knowing the result of the 'big' tax case. If that goes as expected, wouldn't that just force them into administration again?

[PatHead]

... or, to be cynical, if we don't do something here quickly, our fees are in jeopardy.

Administrators are top of the list when it comes to dividing up the money. They are paid no matter what

[ScottB]

To me it sounds like the squad are refusing to take pay cuts, meaning they'd have to lay most of them off, which obviously reduces the value of the club for a buyer.

This smacks of a put up or shut up offer to Murray / King / whoever else, as in buy the club now or most of the playing staff goes bye bye.


There's surely nobody in their right mind who would buy them by the end of the week!

[CropleyWasGod]

Administrators are top of the list when it comes to dividing up the money. They are paid no matter what

Not if there's no cash, though :greengrin

They will already have taken a payment on account. In light of today's announcement, they will probably have taken some more today.

[Andy74]

Full statement -

Like it very much.

[CropleyWasGod]

To me it sounds like the squad are refusing to take pay cuts, meaning they'd have to lay most of them off, which obviously reduces the value of the club for a buyer.

This smacks of a put up or shut up offer to Murray / King / whoever else, as in buy the club now or most of the playing staff goes bye bye.


There's surely nobody in their right mind who would buy them by the end of the week!

... that still leaves them open to legal action from those players.

Okay, SPL experts needed here. If they can't fulfil their fixtures, as the statement suggests... is it as simple as a 3-0 defeat in every game, plus a fine? Or is it more complicated?

[Mark79]

No one will buy that mob whilst there is £60m potentially due to HMRC. Only way they would be a viable purchase is without that debt and the only way that will happen is by liquidation.

[JimBHibees]

I'm off to phone the bank and tell them that I won't make a decision on whether I need a loan until I know if I need a loan or not and have to make a decision on whether I want one or not.

Completely pointless statement from St Mirren.

Yep. :greengrin

[ScottB]

... that still leaves them open to legal action from those players.

But surely that would be postponed till later?

What choice do they have at that point? Not enough money to make the end of the season, staff who won't accept a pay cut...

Would the players be put off pressing for legal action since paying those wages would liquidate the club and they'd get squat anyway?

[ancienthibby]

... that still leaves them open to legal action from those players.

But with about ZERO prospect of success:agree:

[The_Sauz]

This thread really does have it all.

Now it's cross-border disputes!! :flag:

We could talk about the Hertz :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

But surely that would be postponed till later?

What choice do they have at that point? Not enough money to make the end of the season, staff who won't accept a pay cut...

Would the players be put off pressing for legal action since paying those wages would liquidate the club and they'd get squat anyway?

Is this maybe a ploy, to make the players realise that ...in a couple of weeks... that's it, no money AT ALL. But, if they accept pay cuts now, there MIGHT still be a club to play for next season?

:confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

We could talk about the Hertz :greengrin

shhhh... this thread is just a rehearsal for THAT little event. :greengrin

[Beefster]

Is this maybe a ploy, to make the players realise that ...in a couple of weeks... that's it, no money AT ALL. But, if they accept pay cuts now, there MIGHT still be a club to play for next season?

:confused:

I think the players were willing to take the required pay cuts but then wanted free transfers or slices of transfer fees in the summer. I think the Administrators' point is that agreeing to this (or making them all redundant) loses the club its main assets.

[Togs91]

shhhh... this thread is just a rehearsal for THAT little event. :greengrin

:agree:

[ScottB]

Is this maybe a ploy, to make the players realise that ...in a couple of weeks... that's it, no money AT ALL. But, if they accept pay cuts now, there MIGHT still be a club to play for next season?

:confused:

Presumably, but then most of these players, certainly the big earners will know that come the summer, they'll be at another club, maybe even earning more... Guess we shall see just how 'Rangers through and through' the likes of McGreggor are...


shhhh... this thread is just a rehearsal for THAT little event. :greengrin

This is but the Confederations Cup compared to the full on World Cup that thread will be :greengrin

[stokesmessiah]

Well guys for the first time i actually think that Rangers are really going to pop.

[CropleyWasGod]

I think the players were willing to take the required pay cuts but then wanted free transfers or slices of transfer fees in the summer. I think the Administrators' point is that agreeing to this (or making them all redundant) loses the club its main assets.

Having re-read their statement, that makes sense too.

[CropleyWasGod]

Well guys for the first time i actually think that Rangers are really going to pop.

It's not over until the fat King on his white horse rides in.

[CropleyWasGod]

Presumably, but then most of these players, certainly the big earners will know that come the summer, they'll be at another club, maybe even earning more... Guess we shall see just how 'Rangers through and through' the likes of McGreggor are...



This is but the Confederations Cup compared to the full on World Cup that thread will be :greengrin

I will be taking a seat with the punters for that one. Cav has a much better handle on that situation than I , so I'll let him conduct the choir :flag:

[jodjam]

There is a wonderful error on Sky Sports News just now stating that "rangers director Paul King states liquidation is inevitable'......seeing as that's my name it makes for some lovely viewing.

[Gingertosser]

so basically.... they are looking for someone to come up with £30m within 48hrs

and also have sufficient funds at hand to pay a possible £70m tax bill.

seems easy enough :greengrin

[ancienthibby]

It's not over until the fat King on his white horse rides in.

It'll no be over till 'The Big Man' stands over the ruins and observes that 'The Big Hoose' is no more!:wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

so basically.... they are looking for someone to come up with £30m within 48hrs

and also have sufficient funds at hand to pay a possible £70m tax bill.

seems easy enough :greengrin

.. and also someone that can cope with not having the proceeds of 25,000 season tickets every year for the next 3 or 4 years.

[Andy74]

.. and also someone that can cope with not having the proceeds of 25,000 season tickets for the next 3 or 4 years.

I thought Whyte was up for that personally and Ticketus had no claim on the football club for it?

[EuanH78]

.. and also someone that can cope with not having the proceeds of 25,000 season tickets for the next 3 or 4 years.

Or the takings from the pie stands...Mustn't forget about that :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

I thought Whyte was up for that personally and Ticketus had no claim on the football club for it?

Not if it's a going concern. If someone does buy the club as it is just now, they buy it with all its assets,liabilities, and contracts, including Ticketus.

If liquidation happens, that deal would fall and Craigy has to cough up.

[blaikie]

I would like to register my interest in this great Scottish institution.

I will start the bidding with ....

1x Fifty Pence Coin
Wagon Wheel
Signed photograph of Ian Paisley

Yours Faithfully,
Blaikie

[CropleyWasGod]

I would like to register my interest in this great Scottish institution.

I will start the bidding with ....

1x Fifty Pence Coin
Wagon Wheel
Signed photograph of Ian Paisley

Yours Faithfully,
Blaikie

How old is the Wagon Wheel?

[YehButNoBut]

Just up on STV website, does not sound good for Rangers at all: -

Rangers' administrators say the club will not fulfil its remaining fixtures this season unless either a buyer is found imminently or drastic cuts are made to jobs.

Talks with the club's players over an agreement to cut salaries by up to 75% for the next three months have collapsed.

A desire from a number of the first team squad to have clauses inserted in their contracts, which would see them leave in the summer for free or for a "reasonable" price, is understood to have led to the impasse. A statement from co-administrator David Whitehouse said: "The club is in a perilous financial situation and that should not be under-estimated.

"Regrettably, we have been unable to agree cost-cutting measures with the playing staff on terms that will preserve value in the business.

"We understand the players' position as the scale of wage cuts required to achieve these savings without job losses were very substantial indeed.

"In view of this, we are faced with a situation of making redundancies within the playing staff on such a scale that would materially erode the value of the playing squad."

Whitehouse explained that while substantial savings needed to be made immediately, some value had to be retained within the squad to make it an attractive proposition for possible buyers.

However, the administrator warned that substantial cuts would be imposed if no other solution is found quickly.

"We are striving to strike a balance where cost-cutting measures can be implemented but do not destroy the fabric of the playing squad to the extent that it will inhibit the prospect of a sale," he said.

"However, no one should be in any doubt that in the absence of sufficient cost-cutting measures or receipt of substantial unplanned income, the club will not be able to fulfil its fixtures throughout the remainder of the season.

"As a result, we are expediting the sale process and over the next few days we will be holding discussions with prospective purchasers who have declared their interest.

"The manager, Ally McCoist will play an integral part in these discussions. If however it becomes apparent that the sale process cannot be accelerated there will be no choice but to implement very severe cost cutting measures at the club."

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/300051-rangers-unable-to-fulfil-fixtures-unless-drastic-action-taken/

[jgl07]

Just up on STV website, does not sound good for Rangers at all: -

Rangers' administrators say the club will see not fulfil its remaining fixtures this season unless either a buyer is found imminently or drastic cuts are made to jobs.

Talks with the club's players over an agreement to cut salaries by up to 75% for the next three months have collapsed.



Well why don't the Administrators act and cut some of the deadwood from the playing staff?

[Andy74]

Not if it's a going concern. If someone does buy the club as it is just now, they buy it with all its assets,liabilities, and contracts, including Ticketus.

If liquidation happens, that deal would fall and Craigy has to cough up.

Even as a going concern haven't Rangers said, and the guy's statement this morning also confirmed, that Rangers weren't actually part of this deal so couldn't be held to it?

[CropleyWasGod]

Well why don't the Administrators act and cut some of the deadwood from the playing staff?

They are in a very difficult position there.

If they do that, said players can sue for the remaining portion of their contract. A smart lawyer would apply to have funds in RFC ring-fenced (as Martin Bain, I think, did), pending the Court case. That would just get us back to the same position, if not worse.

[PatHead]

Well why don't the Administrators act and cut some of the deadwood from the playing staff? or the coaching/scouting/admin/marketing/groundstaff etc. Know it would be like peeing against the wind but it would save some money

[CropleyWasGod]

Even as a going concern haven't Rangers said, and the guy's statement this morning also confirmed, that Rangers weren't actually part of this deal so couldn't be held to it?

But Rangers got the cash... which was used to pay off Lloyds... so they were actually part of the deal. So someone...be it Ticketus or CW.... is entitled to get it back somehow, be that in cash or the sale of future season tickets.

[Beefster]

Even as a going concern haven't Rangers said, and the guy's statement this morning also confirmed, that Rangers weren't actually part of this deal so couldn't be held to it?

He said that Whyte had claimed that Rangers had no liability to Ticketus but King also said that the administrators would need to confirm this.

To be fair, Whyte's been caught out lying about almost everything so this could easily turn out to be pish too.

[The_Sauz]

shhhh... this thread is just a rehearsal for THAT little event. :greengrin

As Capitan Jean-Luc Picard would say "Make it so!" :greengrin

[Elephant Stone]

Anybody know what would happen if they were liquidated before the big tax case?

[BEEJ]

Away from St Mirren's comment, just read the Duff and Phelps statement - how can they sell the club without knowing the result of the 'big' tax case. If that goes as expected, wouldn't that just force them into administration again?
Any offer for the club would be made conditional upon the outcome of the HMRC case.

And, if accepted on that basis, that would have the effect of placing more pressure on the HMRC decision.

[The_Sauz]

There is a wonderful error on Sky Sports News just now stating that "rangers director Paul King states liquidation is inevitable'......seeing as that's my name it makes for some lovely viewing.
Well my real name is Paul Clark :na na: (by the way...Rangers would have been dead & buried by now :greengrin)

[HibbyAndy]

Rangers are finito like.

[CropleyWasGod]

Anybody know what would happen if they were liquidated before the big tax case?

Can't see that happening, TBH.

If they went into liquidation tomorrow, it would take a while to sell off the assets, by which time the BTC verdict would be in.

In any event, HMRC would put in claim to the liquidator to cover the BTC, on the basis of their original assessment. If they won the case, their claim would be processed like any other creditor. If they lost, their claim would be consequently reduced.

[blindsummit]

"The manager, Ally McCoist will play an integral part in these discussions. If however it becomes apparent that the sale process cannot be accelerated there will be no choice but to implement very severe cost cutting measures at the club."

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/300051-rangers-unable-to-fulfil-fixtures-unless-drastic-action-taken/

Which should have happened on day one! This has been a long drawn out farce.

[Andy74]

But Rangers got the cash... which was used to pay off Lloyds... so they were actually part of the deal. So someone...be it Ticketus or CW.... is entitled to get it back somehow, be that in cash or the sale of future season tickets.

Not so sure. CW got the cash and he paid Lloyds. I think Ticketus are entitled to believe they should get season tickets out of it but Rangers might well be able to blank them and point them towards CW. Ticketus appear to have been daft to deal with someone who wasn't Rangers at the time so they might well have to pursue CW over this one.

That's just one guess from what I can make out of this though and I'll bet Rangers are trying to look at it this way!

[Lucius Apuleius]

You saying that we're wrong? (square go??? :greengrin)

But, given the complex nature of what appears to be a Yammish contract in your case, my considered opinion is that you are indeed rubber ducked.

Come and have a go if you think you're hard enough!!!!!! :greengrin

I should state, it is not me who is rubber ducked, it is the guys I am rubber ducking:wink:

[Togs91]

A desire from a number of the first team squad to have clauses inserted in their contracts, which would see them leave in the summer for free or for a "reasonable" price, is understood to have led to the impasse. A statement from co-administrator David Whitehouse said: "The club is in a perilous financial situation and that should not be under-estimated.



They don't do walking away :agree:

Does this then mean that, if rangers did arrange paycuts, and played the rest of their fixtures, that they would have NO choice but to get rip of practically every high earning player in the club?

[CropleyWasGod]

Which should have happened on day one! This has been a long drawn out farce.

Nope. Can't agree. See any one of my many posts on this. :wink:

[blindsummit]

Nope. Can't agree. See any one of my many posts on this. :wink:

I know mate, I just can't help myself. my desire to see them die screaming in agony is too strong :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Not so sure. CW got the cash and he paid Lloyds. I think Ticketus are entitled to believe they should get season tickets out of it but Rangers might well be able to blank them and point them towards CW. Ticketus appear to have been daft to deal with someone who wasn't Rangers at the time so they might well have to pursue CW over this one.

That's just one guess from what I can make out of this though and I'll bet Rangers are trying to look at it this way!

Can't agree. Rangers got the benefit of the Ticketus cash, in that their overdraft was paid off. They are either due Ticketus that cash, or CW... in which case the whole spectre of CW's security looms again. AFAIK, the admins have rejected that possibility.

[Hibs Class]

They are in a very difficult position there.

If they do that, said players can sue for the remaining portion of their contract. A smart lawyer would apply to have funds in RFC ring-fenced (as Martin Bain, I think, did), pending the Court case. That would just get us back to the same position, if not worse.


Thought one of the elements of administration was the prevention of creditors being able to take court action and effectively create a preference for themselves?

[CropleyWasGod]

I know mate, I just can't help myself. my desire to see them die screaming in agony is too strong :greengrin

*******... all you managed there was an increase in my blood pressure :top marks

[HibeeMG]

Can't see that happening, TBH.

If they went into liquidation tomorrow, it would take a while to sell off the assets, by which time the BTC verdict would be in.

In any event, HMRC would put in claim to the liquidator to cover the BTC, on the basis of their original assessment. If they won the case, their claim would be processed like any other creditor. If they lost, their claim would be consequently reduced.

I know this has been asked before but I couldn't see an answer - when is the BTC verdict likely?

[CropleyWasGod]

Thought one of the elements of administration was the prevention of creditors being able to take court action and effectively create a preference for themselves?

Good point. But Amanda Jones was quite clear on this last night. Employment law doesn't stop applying just because there is an administration, and players would have the right to sue.

Whether they could have funds ring-fenced, though, as I suggested... not sure. But it does seem that Employment Law trumps most things here. Hence the stand-off over the past few days.

[ancienthibby]

New statement coming out from Duffers and (Please)Helpus:

Our client will not play in Europe next year.

:faf::faf::faf:

Link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17285309

[blindsummit]

*******... all you managed there was an increase in my blood pressure :top marks

Imagine what your blood pressure might do if they DO die! I know my heart might burst with the sheer joy of it :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

I know this has been asked before but I couldn't see an answer - when is the BTC verdict likely?

Fuctifano :greengrin

I wish they'd bloody hurry up... it's the key to the whole thing, IMO.

It is imminent, but I have heard March, and I have heard April. The Tribunal will be taking their time, because they know the importance of their decision. Whatever they decide will have consequences far beyond Govan.

[Andy74]

Can't agree. Rangers got the benefit of the Ticketus cash, in that their overdraft was paid off. They are either due Ticketus that cash, or CW... in which case the whole spectre of CW's security looms again. AFAIK, the admins have rejected that possibility.

I think as far as Rangers are aware they got the benefit of cash from CW, doesn't matter to them where from and he chose to pay off Lloyds.

Isn't that just gone and paid though - why would CW be looking for that or entitled to that back now? Unless he paid it as a loan to the club who then paid Lloyds.

I think Ticketus are going to struggle with this one and if anything CW is on the line for it.

Edit: Administrators saying they are still looking into this.

[CropleyWasGod]

I think as far as Rangers are aware they got the benefit of cash from CW, doesn't matter to them where from and he chose to pay off Lloyds.

Isn't that just gone and paid though - why would CW be looking for that or entitled to that back now? Unless he paid it as a loan to the club who then paid Lloyds.

I think Ticketus are going to struggle with this one and if anything CW is on the line for it.

Although we disagree on how we get there, I would agree that, in practice, it's unlikely that Ticketus will get anything from RFC. Even if their claim is admitted by the admins or a liquidator:-

1. there will be no CVA. Even if there was one, the dividend would be pennies.

2. if the club is sold on, the buyer would probably say "I don't want the Ticketus debt". If the admins agree to that, Ticketus get nowt.

3. in a liquidation, it's back to 1 above, although selling off the assets would probably increase the dividend.

[shagpile]

New statement coming out from Duffers and (Please)Helpus:

Our client will not play in Europe next year.

:faf::faf::faf:

Link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17285309

Same as this year then.

[HFC 0-7]

Fuctifano :greengrin

I wish they'd bloody hurry up... it's the key to the whole thing, IMO.

It is imminent, but I have heard March, and I have heard April. The Tribunal will be taking their time, because they know the importance of their decision. Whatever they decide will have consequences far beyond Govan.

Can you see the decision go in rangers favour? If it did would it not just mean every club in the uk would adopt the same scheme and start paying their players via ebt's? Or is it now a case of hmrc having proof that it happened on the way claimed?

[Wembley67]

So after 90 pages has a conclusion been drawn?! Does no one work around here!

Sent from the i****ter

[Caversham Green]

Although we disagree on how we get there, I would agree that, in practice, it's unlikely that Ticketus will get anything from RFC. Even if their claim is admitted by the admins or a liquidator:-

1. there will be no CVA. Even if there was one, the dividend would be pennies.

2. if the club is sold on, the buyer would probably say "I don't want the Ticketus debt". If the admins agree to that, Ticketus get nowt.

3. in a liquidation, it's back to 1 above, although selling off the assets would probably increase the dividend.

One point about the Ticketus deal - on the face of it there is no debt due to them either by RFC or CW. Rangers/CW have sold Ticketus a commodity (future ticket sales) at an agreed price, and that price has been paid over. The fact that that commodity might now have no value is Ticketus' bad luck - that's what investment is all about. They may have a claim for misrepresentation (probably against CW) if there's no events to sell tickets for, but in theory at least there's no monetary debt at the moment. I can't see that prospective buyers can change that, they can only reduce the amount they are willing to pay for the club.

[The_Sauz]

So after 90 pages has a conclusion been drawn?! Does no one work around here!

Sent from the i****ter
On holiday :greengrin

[HibeeMG]

Fuctifano :greengrin

I wish they'd bloody hurry up... it's the key to the whole thing, IMO.

It is imminent, but I have heard March, and I have heard April. The Tribunal will be taking their time, because they know the importance of their decision. Whatever they decide will have consequences far beyond Govan.

Fair do's. Thanks for the honest answer! :greengrin

Yeah, I wish they'd hurry up also. Does anyone know how much notice we'd get of a decision being made? I might just book that day off! :wink:

[down-the-slope]

Although we disagree on how we get there, I would agree that, in practice, it's unlikely that Ticketus will get anything from RFC. Even if their claim is admitted by the admins or a liquidator:-

1. there will be no CVA. Even if there was one, the dividend would be pennies.

2. if the club is sold on, the buyer would probably say "I don't want the Ticketus debt". If the admins agree to that, Ticketus get nowt.

3. in a liquidation, it's back to 1 above, although selling off the assets would probably increase the dividend.

Maybe..but if its liquidated then they have plenty to pay these debts

[Dr Jimmy]

Can you see the decision go in rangers favour? If it did would it not just mean every club in the uk would adopt the same scheme and start paying their players via ebt's? Or is it now a case of hmrc having proof that it happened on the way claimed?

HMRC will never back down on any perceived misuse of EBTs. They view the misuse of the scheme as a threat to the whole PAYE system.

That is, as we see on here......FACT!

[Wat Dabney]

Apologies if this has already been answered, but can anyone tell me why the admins are still honouring the season tickets at Ibrox?

Surely if they had 50,000 paying fans each home game they would have enough new income to get by. :dunno:

[down-the-slope]

the Admins are now wanting to sell ASAP - they must be mental....no one who is sane would take on a business that is technically insolvent with potential outstanding liabilities that are more than assets (its debatable whether these assets could be liquidated to anything near their book value)

Liquidation is several giant strides nearer.....and no home game for 2 1/2 weeks...so no cash income...

Celtic may not get to win league at Ibrox after all...:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

One point about the Ticketus deal - on the face of it there is no debt due to them either by RFC or CW. Rangers/CW have sold Ticketus a commodity (future ticket sales) at an agreed price, and that price has been paid over. The fact that that commodity might now have no value is Ticketus' bad luck - that's what investment is all about. They may have a claim for misrepresentation (probably against CW) if there's no events to sell tickets for, but in theory at least there's no monetary debt at the moment. I can't see that prospective buyers can change that, they can only reduce the amount they are willing to pay for the club.

Welcome back, Cav.... glad you're here to help me out... I'm faking like F here :greengrin

Okay, I have been thinking about this scenario.

1. RFC sell their assets (not the shares) to a New Company. The players, the properties and the name.

2. The old company is liquidated, on the basis of those proceeds, the debts already established and, perhaps, the BTC.

As I see that, the team maintains their place in the SPL. The debts are dealt with, albeit only partly.

I must have missed something.... it seems too simple. Gratuitous alienation, or whatever it's called these days??

[CropleyWasGod]

Apologies if this has already been answered, but can anyone tell me why the admins are still honouring the season tickets at Ibrox?

Surely if they had 50,000 paying fans each home game they would have enough new income to get by. :dunno:

I think it's a goodwill thing to keep the fans on their side.

[Wat Dabney]

I think it's a goodwill thing to keep the fans on their side.

Surely then the admins are not doing their duty to the creditors? Seems a bit odd.

[SteveHFC]

Would Motherwell get the extra champions league spot if they finish 3rd?

[CropleyWasGod]

Surely then the admins are not doing their duty to the creditors? Seems a bit odd.

It does, I agree. But then perhaps they have looked at the legalities of it all. The ST holders have paid for the right to these games, and they probably would have a fair case for suing RFC.

[CropleyWasGod]

Would Motherwell get the extra champions league spot if they finish 3rd?

They would get it, I reckon, if Hearts finished 3rd and Well 4th. As I interpret D & P's statement about Rangers, I can't see Hearts passing UEFA's criteria either.

[CentreLine]

It does, I agree. But then perhaps they have looked at the legalities of it all. The ST holders have paid for the right to these games, and they probably would have a fair case for suing RFC.

Which brings us back to Ticketus - No?

[Caversham Green]

Welcome back, Cav.... glad you're here to help me out... I'm faking like F here :greengrin

Okay, I have been thinking about this scenario.

1. RFC sell their assets (not the shares) to a New Company. The players, the properties and the name.

2. The old company is liquidated, on the basis of those proceeds, the debts already established and, perhaps, the BTC.

As I see that, the team maintains their place in the SPL. The debts are dealt with, albeit only partly.

I must have missed something.... it seems too simple.

You're doing a sterling job CWG, I've just been sitting back watching.

I wonder if the ticket rights are for the current Rangers FC home games at Ibrox, the current Rangers FC games anywhere or any home games at Ibrox. The possibilities change with each different scenario.

I think there are three potential problems with the Newco solution -

1. There's no guarantee that they will get straight into the SPL, although Mr Doncaster sounds as if he's doing his best for them,
2. They definitely won't play in Europe for three years.
3. There are provisions for the debts of old companies to be carried over to phoenix companies, so it would depend on how the Newco was implemented.

Another solution that doesn't seem to have been considered much is for the interested parties to buy an existing club and change their name and location (like Airdrie did with Clydebank). There are at least two SPL clubs looking for a buyer at the moment and while it seems unlikely, it's probably no less so than RFC disappearing completely. I did mention this in jest as a possibility regarding one of those clubs a while back but right now all bets are off afaic.

[CropleyWasGod]

Which brings us back to Ticketus - No?

Oh stop it.... I disappeared up that particular sphincter days ago. :greengrin

[Wat Dabney]

Which brings us back to Ticketus - No?

Maybe ticketus already own 25% of this seasons tickets! It would have to be a lottery to see who gets chucked and who keeps their seat!! :hmmm:

[Wat Dabney]

You're doing a sterling job CWG, I've just been sitting back watching.


Another solution that doesn't seem to have been considered much is for the interested parties to buy an existing club and change their name and location (like Airdrie did with Clydebank). There are at least two SPL clubs looking for a buyer at the moment and while it seems unlikely, it's probably no less so than RFC disappearing completely. I did mention this in jest as a possibility regarding one of those clubs a while back but right now all bets are off afaic.

I've been thinking along those lines for a while. Doncaster also says there is no provision for letting newco enter SFL . How much to buy Berwick Rangers? The name's almost right as well:wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

Maybe ticketus already own 25% of this seasons tickets! It would have to be a lottery to see who gets chucked and who keeps their seat!! :hmmm:

As I understand it, they did pay for 25-30,000 season tickets this season. The original deal was for three years. RFC couldn't afford to pay Ticketus their share this season, so the deal was extended to 4 years.

[CropleyWasGod]

3. There are provisions for the debts of old companies to be carried over to phoenix companies, so it would depend on how the Newco was implemented.

.

Explain. (25 marks) :na na:

[jgl07]

Good point. But Amanda Jones was quite clear on this last night. Employment law doesn't stop applying just because there is an administration, and players would have the right to sue.

Whether they could have funds ring-fenced, though, as I suggested... not sure. But it does seem that Employment Law trumps most things here. Hence the stand-off over the past few days.

They would have to stand in line with the other creditors, behind the secured creditors (if there are any).

We have had plenty of situations of footballclubs entering administration in Scotland: Airdrie, Motherwell, Livingston (twice), Dundee (twice?).

I can recall plenty of players getting binned (19 at Motherwell) and I can't remember any of the players getting anywhere with legal action beyond the payment via the CVA.

In the case of Motherwell, the main aim of administration was to get rid of a number of underperforming players brought in by Billy Davies on long term expensive contracts.

[CropleyWasGod]

They would have to stand in line with the other creditors, behind the secured creditors (if there are any).

We have had plenty of situations of footballclubs entering administration in Scotland: Airdrie, Motherwell, Livingston (twice), Dundee (twice?).

I can recall plenty of players getting binned (19 at Motherwell) and I can't remember any of the players getting anywhere with legal action beyond the payment via the CVA.

In the case of Motherwell, the main aim of administration was to get rid of a number of underperforming players brought in by Billy Davies on long term expensive contracts.

Yeah, I can agree with all that. I think I was trying to demonstrate that binning a player doesn't necessarily help the situation. It might cut immediate costs, but it just adds to the debt. And that, of course, doesn't help if you're trying to sell the club as a going concern.... one player down, and more debt in the company.

[Caversham Green]

Explain. (25 marks) :na na:

:hnetinq: I don't know the details, I'm just aware that where a Newco can be seen as a continuation of a liquidated Oldco there are provisions for some of the debts to be transferred.














I won't get many marks for that will I?

[ancient hibee]

As players contracts are with old Rangers(perhaps)any transfer of assets to a new company would presumably be,under employment law,a breach of contract allowing the players to walk-if they want.

[CropleyWasGod]

:hnetinq: I don't know the details, I'm just aware that where a Newco can be seen as a continuation of a liquidated Oldco there are provisions for some of the debts to be transferred.














I won't get many marks for that will I?

Hmmmm... maybe a couple for identity, but F all for analysis. :rolleyes:

Who decides, though? Is it the admins, or the Courts, or would a creditor of the old company lodge an objection?

[jgl07]

:hnetinq: I don't know the details, I'm just aware that where a Newco can be seen as a continuation of a liquidated Oldco there are provisions for some of the debts to be transferred.

I won't get many marks for that will I?

The suggestions seems to be 'Sell the club including the 'SPL franchise' and leave (most of) the debts behind'.

The immediate question with that scenario, is why has that strategy not been employed before if it was that easy?

[grunt]

:hnetinq: I don't know the details, I'm just aware that where a Newco can be seen as a continuation of a liquidated Oldco there are provisions for some of the debts to be transferred.
This has been covered already on this thread, together with a link to the HMRC statement on phoenix companies. It's the devil's own task trying to find it, though...

[CropleyWasGod]

The suggestions seems to be 'Sell the club including the 'SPL franchise' and leave (most of) the debts behind'.

The immediate question with that scenario, is why has that strategy not been employed before if it was that easy?

I think, as Cav said, that's because the SPL franchise wouldn't be guaranteed. And certainly European football would be out for 3 years.

However, the alternatives are, in theory, more attractive. The CVA route would avoid both of those. Selling the company as a going concern would avoid the European ban, I think, although the SPL place couldn't be guaranteed.

[CropleyWasGod]

This has been covered already on this thread, together with a link to the HMRC statement on phoenix companies. It's the devil's own task trying to find it, though...

This wouldn't be a phoenix company, though, not in the way I understand it. Different directors, different shareholders, of a company buying the assets (and perhaps the debts) of another .

[greenginger]

I've been thinking along those lines for a while. Doncaster also says there is no provision for letting newco enter SFL . How much to buy Berwick Rangers? The name's almost right as well:wink:

These are just weasel words from Doncaster. Sure, the SPL can't insist the SFL accept New-Co Huns but their league will be one short if there is promotion to, but no relegation from the SPL.

Are they likely to turn down the income from the regurgitated Huns ? Not a chance, just hope they make them work their way up the leagues giving everyone an extra couple of paydays. Of course their stay downstairs could be extended if they were refused promotion a couple of times because of Sectarian singing etc. :greengrin

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

There is a wonderful error on Sky Sports News just now stating that "rangers director Paul King states liquidation is inevitable'......seeing as that's my name it makes for some lovely viewing.

Do you have a lot ofLove and Pride for that club?

[jgl07]

These are just weasel words from Doncaster. Sure, the SPL can't insist the SFL accept New-Co Huns but their league will be one short if there is promotion to, but no relegation from the SPL.

Are they likely to turn down the income from the regurgitated Huns ? Not a chance, just hope they make them work their way up the leagues giving everyone an extra couple of paydays. Of course their stay downstairs could be extended if they were refused promotion a couple of times because of Sectarian singing etc. :greengrin

That reminds me of when Marsilles, then French champions and recently champions' league holders, were busted down to Division Two in France for irregular payments. They won promotion first time of asking but were busted down again when new allegations came to light. They never regained their dominance of French Football.

[CentreLine]

I believe there has to be a certain amount of natural justice in a Newco Rangers starting again at the foot of Div3. They would bring good crowds to games by comparison to other teams. Consequently, as they progressed up through leagues 3, 2, and 1, they would leave behind a financial benefit to each of the SFL clubs. This in itself would ensure that Rangers go some way to redressing the balance for a Scottish football system that they have been cheating for years.

In the meantime the SPL would be a fairer and more competitive league which in turn might generate substantial interest from walk-up fans. I am not convinced that the TV companies would abandon that scenario although they may want to renegotiate some.

I see this being a fair and acceptable form of “punishment” that has the potential to leave a genuine legacy the entire length of the professional game in this country. The Rangers that emerged from the process might even be due some plaudits. Perhaps that is pushing the boundaries a little too far.

[SteveHFC]

From the bears den forum....

Fact is....the new SPL deal starts in the summer and is dependent fully on both Old Firm clubs. If we aren't there, there will be no TV deal.

With no TV deal, i'd waive a guess that at least 5 SPL clubs will announce huge..HUGE losses, not only from lost TV revenue but lost away travel from Rangers.

Personally, if the worst comes to the worst, it wouldn't bother me a jot, i'd actually enjoy watching the death of Scottish football and laugh at those asking why.

But the above dosn't count, of course Sky will continue paying the millions....thousands of neutrals already have the mighty Dundee United against St. Mirren on their calander...... http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/laugh.gif


Now there is something in what is being said about the TV deal, however, it would be a renogotiated deal without Rangers and don't you think if the thoughts above were globally thought, the TV companies would be all over it in a macabre deathwatch?

They really are bunch of class a morons :agree:

[Spike Mandela]

CWG Are you on commission for Duff and Phelps? You sound like an administrator's apologist.:wink:

[Barney McGrew]

Fact is....the new SPL deal starts in the summer and is dependent fully on both Old Firm clubs. If we aren't there, there will be no TV deal.

With no TV deal, i'd waive a guess that at least 5 SPL clubs will announce huge..HUGE losses, not only from lost TV revenue but lost away travel from Rangers

He's bang on the money with those two points.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Either a buyer turns up by the end of the week, or else Rangers will have to lay off most of their first team squad in order to carry on until the end of the season. And as has been asked a million times before, who will do that when the big tax case is still undecided? This 'conditional' offer of Paul Murray's must be connected to it. This could be the beginning of the end.


http://youtu.be/6BL_PIiwoWs

[Caversham Green]

CWG Are you on commission for Duff and Phelps? You sound like an administrator's apologist.:wink:

TBH I'm not as convinced as CWG that D & P are doing a good or impartial job, but in truth we won't know how well they're doing it until the job is completed. One thing is sure though, they're doing the job they were appointed and paid to do rather than the one we all want them to do.

[Www1875hfc]

http://i.imgur.com/loyTK.gif :flag:

[Keith_M]

TBH I'm not as convinced as CWG that D & P are doing a good or impartial job, but in truth we won't know how well they're doing it until the job is completed. One thing is sure though, they're doing the job they were appointed and paid to do rather than the one we all want them to do.

I agree with you. It's appointed by whom that has bothered me from the start.

[Kato]

Putting all the speculation/breaking news to one side the discomfort coming from the Rangers fans I know (one of whoms dedication stretches to a musical/uniform bent, he's an ex-stick flinger and top-hole snarist - and a top hole when comes down to it, and maybe bent) is palpable. Digging their discomfort. The only geezer I feel an eensy-teensy bit sorry for is a friend who is a genuine football fan. He's an actual Rangers fan rather than your usual gut bucket that never goes. It is an eensy teensy bit though.

[Caversham Green]

I agree with you. It's appointed by whom that has bothered me from the start.

In law they were appointed by the court, and should be impartial, but it's significant that Whyte went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that the impartial IP that he nominated got the appointment. Likewise, HMRC made damn sure that the impartial IP that administered Portsmouth last time didn't get appointed again. Wonder why?

[SteveHFC]

http://i.imgur.com/loyTK.gif

[FranckSuzy]

http://i.imgur.com/loyTK.gif

:top marks

[stantonhibby]

In law they were appointed by the court, and should be impartial, but it's significant that Whyte went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that the impartial IP that he nominated got the appointment. Likewise, HMRC made damn sure that the impartial IP that administered Portsmouth last time didn't get appointed again. Wonder why?

Indeed - when you see the blokes who walk with Whyte into Ibrox on the day he took charge , one of the suits in the entourage is from Duff & Phelps ( David Grier I think). Makes you wonder if this is all one big Whyte master plan.

[Seveno]

Indeed - when you see the blokes who walk with Whyte into Ibrox on the day he took charge , one of the suits in the entourage is from Duff & Phelps ( David Grier I think). Makes you wonder if this is all one big Whyte master plan.

Not a Whyte master plan but whoever is behind Whyte. He is just the stooge IMHO.

[jodjam]

Do you have a lot ofLove and Pride for that club?

Actually went to see them twice in the 80's just to hear the lassies screaming "my" name :wink:

[EuanH78]

Not a Whyte master plan but whoever is behind Whyte. He is just the stooge IMHO.

I'm pretty sure by now that there is no masterplan if I'm honest. Too many variables and elements that cant be predicted or controlled for this to be anyones 'plan'.

[Seveno]

I'm pretty sure by now that there is no masterplan if I'm honest. Too many variables and elements that cant be predicted or controlled for this to be anyones 'plan'.

I didn't suggest it was a good one. :greengrin

[EuanH78]

I didn't suggest it was a good one. :greengrin

Oh if it is one, I think it's a belter so far :agree:

[Killiehibbie]

Not a Whyte master plan but whoever is behind Whyte. He is just the stooge IMHO.
That's what I thought but I think the mess is far worse than they imagined.

[Seveno]

That's what I thought but I think the mess is far worse than they imagined.

Perhaps the Mr Big is none other than Dermot Desmond. :cb

[CropleyWasGod]

In law they were appointed by the court, and should be impartial, but it's significant that Whyte went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that the impartial IP that he nominated got the appointment. Likewise, HMRC made damn sure that the impartial IP that administered Portsmouth last time didn't get appointed again. Wonder why?

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?

[CropleyWasGod]

CWG Are you on commission for Duff and Phelps? You sound like an administrator's apologist.:wink:

No.

I know that I don't always follow the general trend on here. Trust me, I am as keen to see the end of the cheating as anyone, but it has to be done properly. Part of what I do is play devil's advocate to some of the opinions here, but I am also trying to cut through the complexity of what's going on so that we can all understand it better.

[gramskiwood]

No.

I know that I don't always follow the general trend on here. Trust me, I am as keen to see the end of the cheating as anyone, but it has to be done properly. Part of what I do is play devil's advocate to some of the opinions here, but I am also trying to cut through the complexity of what's going on so that we can all understand it better.

It's greatly appreciated. :thumbsup:

[CropleyWasGod]

It's greatly appreciated. :thumbsup:

Thanks, Mum.

[SteveHFC]

""You b*****ds, you were custodians of an incredible institution: RANGERS FC , and you ****ed it up you absolute b*****ds" "

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213296&pid=1059845746&st=0&#entry1059845746

:faf::faf:

[CropleyWasGod]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213296&pid=1059845746&st=0&#entry1059845746

:faf::faf:

I blame David Murray. The day he allowed them to start signing Tims was the beginning of the end.


:not worth

[Saorsa]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213296&pid=1059845746&st=0&#entry1059845746

:faf::faf:http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b168/jamie1971/smilies%202/fall_off_chair_laughing.gif

[SteveHFC]

would hope that if we manage to stuggle through the situation we are in at the moment, that we don't forget how the SPL and every team it has turned their backs on us.

For all 140 years of our history, our club made scottish football, there is no question in that, our club keeps scottish football alive and it boils my blood to not see any other clubs or even the SPL, speak out even in the slightest to help our cause!

If we were to go under, personally i would not even think of starting up again, i would let scottish football die like they have let us.



**** them all am sick of all the pish being said about us by the wee diddy teams , teams like kilmarnock , hibs , dundee united and the earl haigs lets hit them where it hurts and only attend home matches and make it like the special away day atmosphere


http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213291

What a bunch of class a morons :aok:

[SteveHFC]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4177428/Craigs-girl-is-abr-bit-of-all-Whyte.html

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4179429/The-Old-Firm-clash-is-a-recipe-for-mayhem-dont-put-us-through-it.html

[basehibby]

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 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.

[CropleyWasGod]

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.

If that were the case.... expulsion I mean... it would make sense. The admins are allowed to spend money that keeps the company trading, such as wages , the police etc. Protecting licences, which this might be called, would be okay in that respect.

Still unconvinced, though.... and I don't think any of the journalists I emailed have asked the question yet. :rolleyes:

[Saorsa]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213291

What a bunch of class a morons :aok:you mean you dinnae agree that it's everybody else's fault? http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b168/jamie1971/smilies%202/noteeth.gif

[jgl07]

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/0,19528,11788_2341321,00.html

Anyone remember this? :greengrin

[Hibercelona]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=213291

What a bunch of class a morons :aok:

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. :greengrin

[Hibercelona]

you mean you dinnae agree that it's everybody else's fault? http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b168/jamie1971/smilies%202/noteeth.gif

We've "turned our backs on them".

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

[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 :greengrin

[TornadoHibby]

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]

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]

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? :greengrin

[PaulSmith]

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

[CentreLine]

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? :greengrin

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-battle-for-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? :cb

[CropleyWasGod]

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]

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-battle-for-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? :cb

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]

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-battle-for-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? :cb

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]

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]

Four parties want the cash - including HMRC & Ticketus

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

:rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

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

:rolleyes:

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