Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[TrickyNicky]

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

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

MHGB - Mah Heids Gaunnae Burst !!

[CropleyWasGod]

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

MHGB - Mah Heids Gaunnae Burst !!

GTF


:na na:

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

[EuanH78]

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

MHGB - Mah Heids Gaunnae Burst !!

Good morning vietnam? :wink:

[Hibbylad86]

GTF


:na na:

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

:faf:

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

:faf:

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

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

And you can GTF an' all.... :na na:

[Hibbylad86]

And you can GTF an' all.... :na na:

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

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

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

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

[JeMeSouviens]

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

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

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

Roddy Forsyth's article in the Torygraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9129851/Rangers-players-told-football-clubs-future-is-in-their-hands.html



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

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

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

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

[Milandinho]

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

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

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

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

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

Interesting stuff.

[MB62]

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

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

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

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

[WindyMiller]

Roddy Forsyth's article in the Torygraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9129851/Rangers-players-told-football-clubs-future-is-in-their-hands.html

The last paragraph was interesting.

The administrators still have not made contact with Gary Withey – Rangers’ company secretary and a former partner in the London law practice of Collyer Bristow – who was last seen in the firm’s offices on Feb 24 and who may have left the country.

[CropleyWasGod]

Roddy Forsyth's article in the Torygraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9129851/Rangers-players-told-football-clubs-future-is-in-their-hands.html

That IS a belter.

Sanctioned at Treasury level? In these times? With the battering that HMG gave Barclays last week?

I'm still getting my head around that one. I'm struggling to believe it....

[JeMeSouviens]

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

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

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

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

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

Interesting stuff.

It's a nice theory, the only problem being that West's ground, Burnbrae, is on the same flood plain as Murray Park. (Where it says "Motel" on this map, Murray Park is "Football Academy".)

http://binged.it/xC09wW


Edit: although this suggests there might be something in it ...

http://www.milngavieherald.co.uk/news/local-headlines/d_day_for_bearsden_and_milngavie_cala_project_1_21 4301

[johnrebus]

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:


I posted this yesterday.

If you take the Telegraph piece as having some substance, then you have to wonder what is really going on?

If true, then who is pulling the strings?


:confused:

[Jim44]

Has Daniel Cousin slipped back into Murray Park to help the cause or does the Telegraph have a lazy photography editor?

[SurferRosa]

:wtf: So what is HMRCs particular problem with Craig Whyte then? The bulk of their cheating was done under the David Murray regime and was nothing tae do with Whyte.
I cant believe that it`s starting tae look certain that these cheating cretins are going tae get away with this...:brickwall

[Hibbylad86]

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

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

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


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

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


So if the registrations are moved to the SFA are they then de facto adminstrators selling to the highest bidders to share as much (if any) of transfer fees to creditors? If they move to the SFA what is the point of the starting a new co with no team? Or does the new co have to enter the bidding for the players registration?

[Keith_M]

I know it's difficult, but please try putting aside tribal loyalties and distaste for "The Institution" for the moment.

I'd imagine that the current group of Rangers players, at least the ones that are being intransigent as to taking pay cuts, are not going to be very popular with the Rangers support if their actions help the club go bust. Thier current actions (agreeing a wage settlement with the Admins) could well determine the very existence of a 140 year old football club that (like them or not) 100s of thousands of people support.

I've tried to imagine a scenario where, if this were Hibs, how I would feel about being asked to go and pay my 27 quid, or whatever, and go out and "back the boys", when some of those very same boys care more about a couple of months wages than they do about the very existence of MY football club.

It's strange that while the newspapers are trying to paint Greg Wylde as a self-sacrificing individual who has put the welfare of the club and it's lesser paid employees first, they have yet to criticise the majority (which is what they apparently are) who are currently doing the exact opposite.


And please don't give me any guff about "protecting their livelihoods". What we're talkng about here are people who have been rewarded with massive sums of money over their careers and will continue to do so no matter what. We're not talking about the Programme Sellers, Ticket Checkers and backroom staff on poor to average wages.

[CentreLine]

So if the registrations are moved to the SFA are they then de facto adminstrators selling to the highest bidders to share as much (if any) of transfer fees to creditors? If they move to the SFA what is the point of the starting a new co with no team? Or does the new co have to enter the bidding for the players registration?

Player loyalty being what it is it would be hard to imagine too many players wanting to sign back on with the new club and the uncertainty surrounding it. If they get an offer elsewhere we can be sure they "Won't do hanging about" :offski:

[Peevemor]

:wtf: So what is HMRCs particular problem with Craig Whyte then? The bulk of their cheating was done under the David Murray regime and was nothing tae do with Whyte.
I cant believe that it`s starting tae look certain that these cheating cretins are going tae get away with this...:brickwall

Maybe because it looks like Whyte was trying to go into administration with a view to bumping HMRC then continuing with a clean slate? :dunno:

[CropleyWasGod]

So if the registrations are moved to the SFA are they then de facto adminstrators selling to the highest bidders to share as much (if any) of transfer fees to creditors? If they move to the SFA what is the point of the starting a new co with no team? Or does the new co have to enter the bidding for the players registration?

I don't think the SFA sell them as such. I think they hold them "in protection", but would transfer a registration to a new team whenever that player made a deal.

[Hibbylad86]

I don't think the SFA sell them as such. I think they hold them "in protection", but would transfer a registration to a new team whenever that player made a deal.

So does that mean a player like McGregor (arguably their biggest assest) who is valued at c.£5m (IMO!) would then be worth nothing and can move on a free? Does the SFA look after other clubs e.g. Dundee United by trying to sell players and re-coup some cash or just looking after the players and try and get them a new club?

CWG is there an order who gets paid from the sale assets in the case of liquidation? Or is this the same as secured versus non secured status in which case all creditors get the proceeds from assets sales split evenly?


*sigh* I am asking too many questions! I need some lunch

[SurferRosa]

Maybe because it looks like Whyte was trying to go into administration with a view to bumping HMRC then continuing with a clean slate? :dunno:

Quite probably and i can see why they would want to nail Whyte, but they are setting a very dangerous precedent, imo, that will have cheating clubs throughout the land rubbing their hands at the prospect of using this case now as some sort of defence.

( it`s still all unconfirmed though, i believe )

[CropleyWasGod]

Quite probably and i can see why they would want to nail Whyte, but they are setting a very dangerous precedent, imo, that will have cheating clubs throughout the land rubbing their hands at the prospect of using this case now as some sort of defence.

( it`s still all unconfirmed though, i believe )

Not just clubs, but the wider business world.

(rewriting my tax planning manual as we speak)

[Seveno]

From the BBC website :

Rangers are in danger of not being able to complete their remaining fixtures this season unless a decision is made on who is entitled to £3.6m held in a bank account, a court has been told.
The money is in an account of lawyers acting for Craig Whyte.
The funds were part of the process which saw Mr Whyte take over the club in May last year.
Lawyers for the club's administrators told the High Court in London they had expected to find £9.5m in the account.
But they said there was only £3.6m in the account and several parties are claiming ownership of the money.
They include HM Revenue and Customs, which wants £2.8m.
Merchants Turnaround is seeking £1m and pension fund Gerome is claiming £2.9m.
The court heard the football club's current financial situation was "grave".
It was told that Rangers were at the risk of liquidation, demotion from the premier league, and having the club's assets sold at a price that was not "like anything of its true value".

No idea who the pension fund are but Merchants Turnaround is a Craig Whyte company.

[CropleyWasGod]

So does that mean a player like McGregor (arguably their biggest assest) who is valued at c.£5m (IMO!) would then be worth nothing and can move on a free? Does the SFA look after other clubs e.g. Dundee United by trying to sell players and re-coup some cash or just looking after the players and try and get them a new club?

CWG is there an order who gets paid from the sale assets in the case of liquidation? Or is this the same as secured versus non secured status in which case all creditors get the proceeds from assets sales split evenly?


*sigh* I am asking too many questions! I need some lunch

On the McGregor question, that's basically it.

As for the order, you're more or less bang on. The liquidators get first dibs, though...

[CropleyWasGod]

From the BBC website :

Rangers are in danger of not being able to complete their remaining fixtures this season unless a decision is made on who is entitled to £3.6m held in a bank account, a court has been told.
The money is in an account of lawyers acting for Craig Whyte.
The funds were part of the process which saw Mr Whyte take over the club in May last year.
Lawyers for the club's administrators told the High Court in London they had expected to find £9.5m in the account.
But they said there was only £3.6m in the account and several parties are claiming ownership of the money.
They include HM Revenue and Customs, which wants £2.8m.
Merchants Turnaround is seeking £1m and pension fund Gerome is claiming £2.9m.
The court heard the football club's current financial situation was "grave".
It was told that Rangers were at the risk of liquidation, demotion from the premier league, and having the club's assets sold at a price that was not "like anything of its true value".

No idea who the pension fund are but Merchants Turnaround is a Craig Whyte company.

No mention of Ticketus there.

Not sure why HMRC want £2.8m. Could be for CW personally.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Let's see whether tomorrow does in fact the bring the huge redundencies the administrators' statement alluded to yesterday. So far they have been in place three weeks, at a fee of thousands per day, and have so far failed to cut a penny from Rangers' costs. I'm beginning to like their inaction :greengrin

[PaulSmith]

Court date to reconvene and decide who the 3.9m is due to is on March 29 and will last 4 days.
I don't believe Rangers will survive until then IMO.

[Seveno]

Interesting comment from the Telegraph article about HMRC wanting 'regime change' at Ibrox.

I'd be all for that if they did it the American way ....................bomb the barstewards !

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting comment from the Telegraph article about HMRC wanting 'regime change' at Ibrox.

I'd be all for that if they did it the American way ....................bomb the barstewards !

Thinking about that, I don't think that HMRC have any place in deciding who should be involved in companies. If they said that to any of mine, I'd be telling them where to go.

[Seveno]

Thinking about that, I don't think that HMRC have any place in deciding who should be involved in companies. If they said that to any of mine, I'd be telling them where to go.

I think the United Nations have one or two objections to the American interventions.

Stop spoiling an amusing scenario anyway. :na na:

[CropleyWasGod]

I think the United Nations have one or two objections to the American interventions.

Stop spoiling an amusing scenario anyway. :na na:

Sorry... I didn't get past the first line of your previous post before my keyboard got battered.:greengrin

But.. hell, yeah, let's nuke 'em now!!

[stokesmessiah]

I was just speaking to a sheep supporting friend of mine who said Rangers can't just play the youth team as DM sold the rights to them and a fee in the region of 300k is due every time someone makes a debut. I don't think this is possible, has anyone heard of it?

[CropleyWasGod]

I was just speaking to a sheep supporting friend of mine who said Rangers can't just play the youth team as DM sold the rights to them and a fee in the region of 300k is due every time someone makes a debut. I don't think this is possible, has anyone heard of it?

Sounds like a Tevez/Koorabachian type thing. That got bombed out, didn't it?

AFAIK, RFC own the "rights" to all staff.

[Andy74]

I was just speaking to a sheep supporting friend of mine who said Rangers can't just play the youth team as DM sold the rights to them and a fee in the region of 300k is due every time someone makes a debut. I don't think this is possible, has anyone heard of it?

Eh??

[Seveno]

Sorry... I didn't get past the first line of your previous post before my keyboard got battered.:greengrin

But.. hell, yeah, let's nuke 'em now!!


Ooops ! Just realised that we could be in trouble with the cyber police.:shhhsh!:

[JeMeSouviens]

I was just speaking to a sheep supporting friend of mine who said Rangers can't just play the youth team as DM sold the rights to them and a fee in the region of 300k is due every time someone makes a debut. I don't think this is possible, has anyone heard of it?

They do pay their won subsidiary company when a player is promoted from their youths but according to wiki, the youth development company is wholly owned by Rangers ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangers_F.C._Reserve_and_Youth_squads

[stokesmessiah]

Eh??

That was my response. Although, nothing would surprise me now!

[cabbageandribs1875]

No idea who the pension fund are but Merchants Turnaround is a Craig Whyte company.



Admin want it all
HMRC want - £2.8 mill
Jerome Group pensions - £2.95 mill
merchant turnaround - £1 mill
Ticketus want some

rumoured whyte dipped in to some pension fund

interesting names involved in the merchant turnaround company

http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/merchant-turnaround


DAVID GILLESPIE (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/889541/DAVID+GILLESPIE)23 Feb 12 director - Appointment ended (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/53507299)
MR JAMES DOMINIC RUPERT HOLMES (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/1177754/MR+JAMES+DOMINIC+RUPERT+HOLMES)23 Feb 12 director - Appointed (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/53507300)
THOMAS MILLAR (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/172991/THOMAS+MILLAR)24 Nov 11 director - Appointment ended (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/51698736)
MR CRAIG THOMAS WHYTE (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/1476723/MR+CRAIG+THOMAS+WHYTE)04 Mar 10 secretary - Appointed (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589539)
PHILIP BETTS (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/230206/PHILIP+BETTS)04 Mar 10 secretary - Appointment ended (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589540)
CRAIG WHYTE (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/347259/CRAIG+WHYTE)10 Feb 10 director - Appointment ended (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589541)
MR PHILIP BETTS (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/2154202/MR+PHILIP+BETTS)09 Feb 10 secretary - Appointed (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589542)
JAMES HOLMES (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/32865/JAMES+HOLMES)09 Feb 10 director - Appointment ended (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589543)
CRAIG WHYTE (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/347259/CRAIG+WHYTE)09 Feb 10 secretary - Appointment ended (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589544)
MR PHILIP JOHN BETTS (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/831419/MR+PHILIP+JOHN+BETTS)09 Feb 10 director - Appointed (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589545)
MR DAVID JOHN GILLESPIE (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/968991/MR+DAVID+JOHN+GILLESPIE)09 Feb 10 director - Appointed (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589546)
MR THOMAS MILLAR (http://www.directorsintheuk.co.uk/company-director/1313529/MR+THOMAS+MILLAR)09 Feb 10 director - Appointed (http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/Purchase/AddToBasket/49589547)

[stokesmessiah]

They do pay their won subsidiary company when a player is promoted from their youths but according to wiki, the youth development company is wholly owned by Rangers ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangers_F.C._Reserve_and_Youth_squads

Until we find out that CW secured a years supply of chewable toothbrushes against it and Rangers no longer own the rights.

[BurghHibby]

The big man is coming to the big house tomorrow

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUB__PR7EiI

[JeMeSouviens]

I wonder if the HMRC position rumoured by Forsyth should be viewed in light of Danny Alexander's (chief secretary to the treasury) speech to the Lib Dems last week:



The treasury chief also warned there would be no "hiding place" for those who tried to avoid or evade tax - and he made it clear that such a tough approach would apply to Rangers and other football clubs.

He said: "People who dodge taxes are on the same moral plane as benefit cheats. Whether you are a wealthy person or a small business, a football club or a bank, our message is a simple one. You must pay the tax you owe, and we will make sure you do. There is no hiding place.


Maybe a shift in HMRC strategy? Force them onto some kind of long term repayment scheme? Not sure how that fits with other creditors though.

[Andy74]

That was my response. Although, nothing would surprise me now!

Mental!

[IWasThere2016]

They do pay their won subsidiary company when a player is promoted from their youths but according to wiki, the youth development company is wholly owned by Rangers ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rangers_F.C._Reserve_and_Youth_squads

That is correct. Youth Co is a wholly-owned sub of the Gers. Development of a player to the level of a first team performance result triggers a payment. However, this co. could be collapsed and the payment avoided if need be.

[CropleyWasGod]

That is correct. Youth Co is a wholly-owned sub of the Gers. Development of a player to the level of a first team performance result triggers a payment. However, this co. could be collapsed and the payment avoided if need be.

If it is a wholly owned subsidiary of RFC, then it's 83% owned by RFCG. In that light, SDM couldn't still be involved.

[DH1875]

This is really starting to P me off. What other companies are given this amount of time to sort things once they've gone into administration? I worked for a company that went into administration. The administrators came in in the morning and we were all sacked by the afternoon and I'm talking about over 100 people here. We werent offered any deals or pay cuts or anything like that. GET ON WITH IT.

[green glory]

Administrators' Statement

Thu, Mar 8, 2012
Tweet

Duff and Phelps, administrators of Rangers Football Club, issued the following statement today.

David Whitehouse, joint administrator, said: "As part of the financial recovery process we made an emergency application to the High Court in London last week to secure money held in the client account of a firm of solicitors, Collyer Bristow, who had acted for the purchaser of the Club in May 2011.

"Following the court hearing last week Collyer Bristow paid approximately £3.6m to our lawyers, Taylor Wessing, to be held securely by Taylor Wessing until the High Court decides whether or not it is the Club's money.

"We are very pleased with the decision by the High Court today to order a further hearing on this matter on March 30 and I am sure that all Rangers Football Club supporters will be encouraged that this issue will be dealt with as speedily as possible.

"If we are successful in retrieving these funds that will help the recovery process of the Club and will be an important step towards the Club emerging from administration.

"No-one should be in any doubt however about the overall financial situation of the Club and every effort is being made to ensure its survival.

"We are continuing to meet prospective purchasers over the next few days. This does not mean that the Club has to be sold within the next 24 hours - we are establishing how quickly we can get to that point.

"There has been much speculation in recent days about the administration process.

"We should at this point repeat that, as administrators, our preferred strategy is that we work towards achieving a Company Voluntary Arrangement through which the Club can emerge from administration.

"There has also been comment on the decision-making process and whether so-called tough decisions should have been taken earlier in the process, such as making players redundant.

"This would not have been a tough decision - it would have been folly.

"The scale of the cost-cutting required is very substantial indeed - and making a few players redundant along the way would not have achieved the necessary savings.

"Furthermore, we are striving to strike a balance where we retain valuable assets of the business such as players, both for their performance and their potential value and this strategy is understood by major stakeholders.

"We continue to reach agreement with the players on cost cutting measures that will be a real benefit to the Club - the players themselves want that but they are being asked to make big sacrifices.

"These are difficult choices but the survival of the Club is of paramount importance.

"As administrators, we believe that most Rangers supporters will understand that from the moment the Club went into administration every effort has been made to keep the business alive.

"The reality is that the perilous cash position of the Club meant that even staging games was a major challenge and required a substantial collaborative effort between the administration team, the Club staff and suppliers who have certainly gone the extra mile.

"In addition to this, there has also been a heavy focus on retrieving funds that we believe belong to the Club and we are making good progress in this area as today's proceedings at the High Court in London indicate.

"These are unquestionably difficult times for Rangers but we can assure all those involved we remain wholly committed to achieving the best outcome."



Hopefully the end of the month will be too late.


With the SFA and the SPL making a statement today, things could get interesting. They'd better not turn this into a whitewash.

[CropleyWasGod]

This is really starting to P me off. What other companies are given this amount of time to sort things once they've gone into administration? I worked for a company that went into administration. The administrators came in in the morning and we were all sacked by the afternoon and I'm talking about over 100 people here. We werent offered any deals or pay cuts or anything like that. GET ON WITH IT.

The two situations are very different, I'll bet.

You weren't on fixed-term contracts, I'm guessing. With the greatest of respect, you probably didn't have a sell-on value.

What you did have in common, though, is your rights under Employment Law.

Edit:- the above statement from D & P might be useful.

[green glory]

The two situations are very different, I'll bet.

You weren't on fixed-term contracts, I'm guessing. With the greatest of respect, you probably didn't have a sell-on value.

What you did have in common, though, is your rights under Employment Law.


With the players holding out for the best deals for themselves because of the above, and costs racking up the longer it goes on, thus pushing them closer to the brink. If the admins can't get their paws on the 3.6m before the end of the month surely the club can't last much longer now? :agree:

[Benny Brazil]

"These are unquestionably difficult times for Rangers but we can assure all those involved we remain wholly committed to achieving the best outcome."

For who?

[CropleyWasGod]

"These are unquestionably difficult times for Rangers but we can assure all those involved we remain wholly committed to achieving the best outcome."

For who?

The creditors and shareholders. That's their job.

[PatHead]

On a seperate note, Paul Murray who is making all the running to be the next owner of Rangers, was previously a Director of Rangers at the time they were making all the alleged payments to players. HOW THE F@~K IS HE GOING TO PASS THE FIT AND PROPER TESTS AT THE SFA??????????????????

Thinking about it I hope he does become the preferred buyer, the SFA then refuse him a "licence" and Rangers are so far into debt no-one else can take them on.

[heretoday]

Ironic that players' agents scuppered the deal yesterday. Parasites who have done so much to ruin the game are now bent on destroying a golden goose.

[alfie]

The longer this farce goes on, the less money there is in the pot to split in a CVA, and the less likelihood there is of the creditors agreeing to one. Which just helps us along the road to liquidation. :wink:

It sounds like Cala could be interested in MP and if they can do a deal with WOSRFC then they could be quids in. The fact that they want to build on a flood plain has never bothered them before after all. That would give the administrators, or liquidators if it takes them time to agree a deal, a bit of cash. That just leaves Ibrox to be squabbled over in court for a couple of years.

The only outcome I can see for the supporters is to do an Airdrie and buy their way into the SFL and work their way up from there, but I cant see all the supporters going to the same newco. Some will drift off to the likes of St. Mirren, Motherwell and Partick, or just spend their free time practising the flute and watching the EPL on Sky. Cant see them back as a force in the SPL for a long time! :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

On a seperate note, Paul Murray who is making all the running to be the next owner of Rangers, was previously a Director of Rangers at the time they were making all the alleged payments to players. HOW THE F@~K IS HE GOING TO PASS THE FIT AND PROPER TESTS AT THE SFA??????????????????

Thinking about it I hope he does become the preferred buyer, the SFA then refuse him a "licence" and Rangers are so far into debt no-one else can take them on.

He can be the major shareholder without being a Board member. The SFA's rules only seem to cover Board members:-

The SFA's articles of association describe how any office-bearer, secretary, director or member of the board of management must pass a fit and proper person test.

It states: "The board must be satisfied that any such person is fit and proper to hold such position within Association Football. The board hereby reserves its discretion as to whether or not such a person is fit and proper, as aforesaid, after due consideration of all relevant facts which the board has in its possession and knowledge."

[green glory]

www.rangerstaxcase.comDespite the positive statement from the admins earlier today, the clock is ticking down.As a certain band would say. "Two Minutes to Midnight".

[PatHead]

He can be the major shareholder without being a Board member. The SFA's rules only seem to cover Board members:-

The SFA's articles of association describe how any office-bearer, secretary, director or member of the board of management must pass a fit and proper person test.

It states: "The board must be satisfied that any such person is fit and proper to hold such position within Association Football. The board hereby reserves its discretion as to whether or not such a person is fit and proper, as aforesaid, after due consideration of all relevant facts which the board has in its possession and knowledge."

Would a person of "considerable influence" not fall into this category as although they may not actually be on the board they could exert an awful lot of power.

[CropleyWasGod]

Would a person of "considerable influence" not fall into this category as although they may not actually be on the board they could exert an awful lot of power.

I think the spirit of the rules are probably more important than the letter, which is of course what I've quoted. That said, a decent lawyer could argue that "it disny say shareholder, so it disny mean shareholder!!".

There is the concept of "shadow director", which covers the situation you describe. From memory, I'm sure that it is defined in law; it can be particularly important in insolvency situations. I think it might have been wise of the SFA to add it to their list.

Talking of Paul Murray, apparently Graham Spiers described him last night as "the same Paul Murray who said no-one in their right mind would buy Rangers with the Big Tax Case hanging over them." :rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

www.rangerstaxcase.comDespite the positive statement from the admins earlier today, the clock is ticking down.As a certain band would say. "Two Minutes to Midnight".

Good reading, but I can't agree with the debt calculation. I'm still sticking to my guns about Wavetower/RFCG not being due a farthing.

[CentreLine]

Lord Nimmo Smith says CW not fit to be Chairman of Rangers. Also highlights other breaches of the rules by the club. Since it may lead to judicial panel review they will not publish all findings as yet and can’t talk about illegal payments leaving it to the SPL to investigate. Club face discipline if they do not pay Dundee Utd so watch that space.

Radio Scotland right now

[WindyMiller]

Lord Nimmo Smith says CW not fit to be Chairman of Rangers. Also highlights other breaches of the rules by the club. Since it may lead to judicial panel review they will not publish all findings as yet and can’t talk about illegal payments leaving it to the SPL to investigate. Club face discipline if they do not pay Dundee Utd so watch that space.

Radio Scotland right now


Should the not have said that 10 months ago?

[ancienthibby]

Lord Nimmo Smith says CW not fit to be Chairman of Rangers. Also highlights other breaches of the rules by the club. Since it may lead to judicial panel review they will not publish all findings as yet and can’t talk about illegal payments leaving it to the SPL to investigate. Club face discipline if they do not pay Dundee Utd so watch that space.

Radio Scotland right now

'The Big Hoose' is falling apart at the seams!:cb

[CropleyWasGod]

Lord Nimmo Smith says CW not fit to be Chairman of Rangers. Also highlights other breaches of the rules by the club. Since it may lead to judicial panel review they will not publish all findings as yet and can’t talk about illegal payments leaving it to the SPL to investigate. Club face discipline if they do not pay Dundee Utd so watch that space.

Radio Scotland right now

... right back to the Unfair Preference discussion that we had earlier.

[PaulSmith]

Wonder what grounds they found Whyte not to be a fit and proper person.
If its previous business dealings and non payment of taxes then I suspect Dave King would also fail?
More pressure on Whyte to sell up the cynics would suggest and keep Rangers alive a little longer.

See also that 10 non OF clubs to meet ASAP, I tell ya SPL 2 is on its way very soon

[CropleyWasGod]

Should the not have said that 10 months ago?

... nahhh.... just think of the fun we would have missed!!:greengrin

[stokesmessiah]

... nahhh.... just think of the fun we would have missed!!:greengrin

CWG - Your child like enthusiasm for all things RFC at the moment is truly refreshing, keep it up :thumbsup:

[Caversham Green]

Wonder what grounds they found Whyte not to be a fit and proper person.
If its previous business dealings and non payment of taxes then I suspect Dave King would also fail?
More pressure on Whyte to sell up the cynics would suggest and keep Rangers alive a little longer.

See also that 10 non OF clubs to meet ASAP, I tell ya SPL 2 is on its way very soon

I would guess it's the disqualified director thing since that's what has been talked about so far.

Anyway, here's the SFA statement - sorry if already linked.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2111&newsCategoryID=36&newsID=9459

[CropleyWasGod]

Wonder what grounds they found Whyte not to be a fit and proper person.
If its previous business dealings and non payment of taxes then I suspect Dave King would also fail?
More pressure on Whyte to sell up the cynics would suggest and keep Rangers alive a little longer.

See also that 10 non OF clubs to meet ASAP, I tell ya SPL 2 is on its way very soon

I don't think Dave King has been found guilty of anything as yet, although there are something like 321 charges against him FFS, including fraud, money-laundering and racketeering.

[Andy74]

I don't get the latest announcement. If the required cuts are so severe doesn't that tell them they should get on with it? Do thery really expect that a buyer will come along with the investment to plug the funding gap of the playing squad and other costs they have kept intact as well as covering the outstanding debt claims?

[Cabbage East]

The big house. It must stay open.

[Keith_M]

Anyway, here's the SFA statement - sorry if already linked.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2111&newsCategoryID=36&newsID=9459


A bit more encouraging. Over to you, SPL.

[ancienthibby]

I don't get the latest announcement. If the required cuts are so severe doesn't that tell them they should get on with it? Do thery really expect that a buyer will come along with the investment to plug the funding gap of the playing squad and other costs they have kept intact as well as covering the outstanding debt claims?

I would guess they're expecting the court case to go in their favour?:agree:

[Hibs07p]

Wonder what grounds they found Whyte not to be a fit and proper person.
If its previous business dealings and non payment of taxes then I suspect Dave King would also fail?
More pressure on Whyte to sell up the cynics would suggest and keep Rangers alive a little longer.

See also that 10 non OF clubs to meet ASAP, I tell ya SPL 2 is on its way very soon

Not so sure. Maybe a gathering to sharpen the knives, to ensure a fairer cut of future revenues and voting rights.

GGTTH

[CropleyWasGod]

I don't get the latest announcement. If the required cuts are so severe doesn't that tell them they should get on with it? Do thery really expect that a buyer will come along with the investment to plug the funding gap of the playing squad and other costs they have kept intact as well as covering the outstanding debt claims?

Which one? lol... there have been a few today.... the one you're talking about is almost chip paper.:greengrin

I don't think they do expect that a buyer will come along. I think they are now putting the pressure on to weed out the time-wasters, and to say to the rest (the one?) "show us the money". They have again said that they'd prefer to get a CVA, but they don't want to leave themselves open to the accusation that they didn't actively seek a buyer.

[CropleyWasGod]

I would guess they're expecting the court case to go in their favour?:agree:

... but do they have enough cash to last until then?

Dah dah daaaaahhhhhhhh...

[ancienthibby]

... but do they have enough cash to last until then?

Dah dah daaaaahhhhhhhh...

Beeb radio just reported that there's a new statement from Duffus and P(lease)helpus to the effect that they will not be paying the Arabs their cup-tie money, since there are 'mitigating circumstances' which the reporter was suggesting could be the 'fit and proper' person statement from Lord N Smith.

Another brick falls from 'the Big Hoose':greengrin

[brog]

"These are difficult choices but the survival of the Club is of paramount importance".

AS DH1875 said earlier, businesses go to the wall every day of the week & the administrators' job is to secure the best value for creditors & shareholders. They cheerfully lay other people off & close businesses down without any regard for the human cost involved, until it comes to Rangers! Their statement above should only be true if the survival of Rangers coincides with the best value for creditors etc.
Separately, I'm registered for VAT. For my 2nd ever 1/4ly submission HMRC were due me several hundred pounds so naively I didn't submit, intending to set off money due to me against 3rd 1/4 return. Within weeks I had a demand from HMRC telling me in the absence of a return they had assessed me as owing them £5,000!! Of course I submitted by return & a phone call resolved matters but how did Rangers get away with defaulting on millions for many months? As the above seems to demonstrate there's different rules for different folks.
PS, I should say the VAT branch of HMRC have been extraordinarily efficient with me over 4 years of dealing with them which makes the lapse with Rangers even more questionable.

[CropleyWasGod]

Beeb radio just reported that there's a new statement from Duffus and P(lease)helpus to the effect that they will not be paying the Arabs their cup-tie money, since there are 'mitigating circumstances' which the reporter was suggesting could be the 'fit and proper' person statement from Lord N Smith.

Another brick falls from 'the Big Hoose':greengrin

I think it's back to the Unfair Preference debate that we all had about Dunfermline.

Taking the view that paying DAFC was essential to RFC continuing playing in the SPL, paying DUFC is not as important, since RFC are out of the Cup.

[greenginger]

I would guess they're expecting the court case to go in their favour?:agree:


There is a hearing set for 30th March but I can't see a decision being reached that day , besides which any losing claimant will probably appeal.

This could run for months, if not years. This money won't be the Huns salvation.:wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

"These are difficult choices but the survival of the Club is of paramount importance".

AS DH1875 said earlier, businesses go to the wall every day of the week & the administrators' job is to secure the best value for creditors & shareholders. They cheerfully lay other people off & close businesses down without any regard for the human cost involved, until it comes to Rangers! Their statement above should only be true if the survival of Rangers coincides with the best value for creditors etc.
Separately, I'm registered for VAT. For my 2nd ever 1/4ly submission HMRC were due me several hundred pounds so naively I didn't submit, intending to set off money due to me against 3rd 1/4 return. Within weeks I had a demand from HMRC telling me in the absence of a return they had assessed me as owing them £5,000!! Of course I submitted by return & a phone call resolved matters but how did Rangers get away with defaulting on millions for many months? As the above seems to demonstrate there's different rules for different folks.
PS, I should say the VAT branch of HMRC have been extraordinarily efficient with me over 4 years of dealing with them which makes the lapse with Rangers even more questionable.

Again, it's about the difference between fixed-term contracts and permanent employments.

As for the VAT, I am sure that RFC would have had the same pressure from HMRC that you had. Reminders, telephone calls, assessments and the like; everybody gets them. The difference, of course, is that you sorted it and did the right thing. The rules aren't different... you just chose to obey them.

[ancienthibby]

I think it's back to the Unfair Preference debate that we all had about Dunfermline.

Taking the view that paying DAFC was essential to RFC continuing playing in the SPL, paying DUFC is not as important, since RFC are out of the Cup.

I don't have the quote to give you, Mr Croppers, but what I heard was suggesting that the Craikie White 'fit and proper person' edict from 'm'Lud' gave the Admins an escape clause for not paying. We'll see!

[jgl07]

On a seperate note, Paul Murray who is making all the running to be the next owner of Rangers, was previously a Director of Rangers at the time they were making all the alleged payments to players. HOW THE F@~K IS HE GOING TO PASS THE FIT AND PROPER TESTS AT THE SFA??????????????????

Thinking about it I hope he does become the preferred buyer, the SFA then refuse him a "licence" and Rangers are so far into debt no-one else can take them on.

Well the Blue Knoghts will have to put Dave King as frontman.

Hang on.......

[CropleyWasGod]

I don't have the quote to give you, Mr Croppers, but what I heard was suggesting that the Craikie White 'fit and proper person' edict from 'm'Lud' gave the Admins an escape clause for not paying. We'll see!

Within minutes of the SFA announcement, Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "We note the findings and announcement by the Scottish Football Association.

"We look forward to stating the club's case to the judicial panel.

"In broad terms, we believe there are mitigating factors and we hope to demonstrate the distinction between the club and the actions of any individuals."

So sod all to do with Unfair Preference then? :greengrin

Interesting though....

[Andy74]

... but do they have enough cash to last until then?

Dah dah daaaaahhhhhhhh...

This is what I'm getting at. They keep talking about severe cuts needed to run the club and those same cuts will surely be required under a new owner or do they really feel a new guy will just cover it all and happily take on a compmay losing money?

Should they not be ensuring that the club didn't make a further month of a loss?

They can't be betting everyting on a buyer coming along who wants the full staff left as it is because he will pay it all off himself? That seems a quite dangerous and negligent assumption given the overall state of things.

[CropleyWasGod]

This is what I'm getting at. They keep talking about severe cuts needed to run the club and those same cuts will surely be required under a new owner or do they really feel a new guy will just cover it all and happily take on a compmay losing money?

Should they not be ensuring that the club didn't make a further month of a loss?

They can't be betting everyting on a buyer coming along who wants the full staff left as it is because he will pay it all off himself? That seems a quite dangerous and negligent assumption given the overall state of things.

They're not betting anything on getting a new owner, I reckon. Like anyone with half a business brain, they know there's sod all to sell. But, at the risk of repeating myself again, they have to keep that option open.

[brog]

Again, it's about the difference between fixed-term contracts and permanent employments.

As for the VAT, I am sure that RFC would have had the same pressure from HMRC that you had. Reminders, telephone calls, assessments and the like; everybody gets them. The difference, of course, is that you sorted it and did the right thing. The rules aren't different... you just chose to obey them.

I agree but you don't often ( ever? ) see Administrators coming out with statements saying " The survival of the business is paramount".

That's really not their concern, unless as I said that move coincides with their obtaining the best value for creditors & shareholders. What it is I believe is that the Administrators are in an almost unprecedented spotlight & they're trying their utmost to convince Rangers' supporters that they're trying to save the club. I wouldn't want their job just now!

[stokesmessiah]

Just seen and tweet (and lost it as quickly as i had found it) saying that 100 SPL clubs minus the OF are meeting up next week to discuss radical plans??

Anyone else seen something along those lines?

[CropleyWasGod]

I agree but you don't often ( ever? ) see Administrators coming out with statements saying " The survival of the business is paramount".

That's really not their concern, unless as I said that move coincides with their obtaining the best value for creditors & shareholders. What it is I believe is that the Administrators are in an almost unprecedented spotlight & they're trying their utmost to convince Rangers' supporters that they're trying to save the club. I wouldn't want their job just now!

That is a factor, IMO. I mentioned a while back that they were probably unprepared for the depth of the scrutiny. If they ever did have a plan cooked up with CW, I reckon it was abandoned when they discovered the reality of the situation.

[Billy Whizz]

Just seen and tweet (and lost it as quickly as i had found it) saying that 100 SPL clubs minus the OF are meeting up next week to discuss radical plans??

Anyone else seen something along those lines?

I'm sure you mean 10 clubs?
Getting too excited on the keyboard😄

[jgl07]

I'm sure you mean 10 clubs?
Getting too excited on the keyboard

I know that many of us wangt to seethe SPL expand but not to 100!

[WindyMiller]

... nahhh.... just think of the fun we would have missed!!:greengrin


Fairynuff



:agree:

[stokesmessiah]

I'm sure you mean 10 clubs?
Getting too excited on the keyboard


No, it's the new radical SPL. People wanted a bigger league and they have got it. Also, due to the size of the league they are introducing football in the summer....autumn.....winter.....spring.....summer. ...autumn...winter....you get the idea!

[ancienthibby]

Within minutes of the SFA announcement, Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "We note the findings and announcement by the Scottish Football Association.

"We look forward to stating the club's case to the judicial panel.

"In broad terms, we believe there are mitigating factors and we hope to demonstrate the distinction between the club and the actions of any individuals."

So sod all to do with Unfair Preference then? :greengrin

Interesting though....


Going back to 'ancient' times, of course, I seem to remember doing deals which were subject to conditions before monies could be released.

The legal term used to be - conditions being 'cured'.

I suspect this is at the root of the monies held back by Craikie Whyte's lawyers.

In other words, if the conditions had been satisfied, the monies would have been released.

Suggests to me that these conditions remain unsatisfied.

So, two fingers are pointing somewhere!:greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

Just seen and tweet (and lost it as quickly as i had found it) saying that 100 SPL clubs minus the OF are meeting up next week to discuss radical plans??

Anyone else seen something along those lines?

Correct Alasdair Lamont quoting Jim Spence
This from @bbcjimspence All 10 SPL clubs excluding Celtic and Rangers plan to meet next week to discuss radical changes to Scottish football

[CropleyWasGod]

Going back to 'ancient' times, of course, I seem to remember doing deals which were subject to conditions before monies could be released.

The legal term used to be - conditions being 'cured'.

I suspect this is at the root of the monies held back by Craikie Whyte's lawyers.

In other words, if the conditions had been satisfied, the monies would have been released.

Suggests to me that these conditions remain unsatisfied.

So, two fingers are pointing somewhere!:greengrin

Put the bloody fingers away, ya cheeky auld get:na na:

I'm not following you....I'm talking about the DUFC money, but are you not talking about the Collyer Bristow money?

[Twa Cairpets]

I would guess it's the disqualified director thing since that's what has been talked about so far.

Anyway, here's the SFA statement - sorry if already linked.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2111&newsCategoryID=36&newsID=9459

This to me looks like the SFA are playing a straight bat.

Particularly like the end of the statement:

"...I can confirm that the club is facing a charge of bringing the game into disrepute. Specifically, areas of potential breach to be considered by the Judicial Panel include:
· Obligations and duties of members
· Official return
· Financial records
· Division of receipts and payment of expenses (Scottish Cup)
I would like to clarify the situation relating to possible non-disclosure of payments to players, and in particular the Employee Benefit Trust. Having noted the Scottish Premier League’s intention to investigate this matter, the Board has decided to allow the SPL to complete this process, given our potential status as the appellate body. We retain our position until such time as the SPL’s investigation is concluded.
Finally, we have sent a letter to the Rangers administrators, Duff and Phelps, advising them that failure to pay monies owed to another member constitutes a breach of the Cup Competition Rules. Consequently, the club faces disciplinary action unless they make payments due to Dundee United from their recent William Hill Scottish Cup tie. A Notice of Complaint has been issued to that effect.”

Bringing the game into disrepute. Could have told them that years ago if they'd only asked :greengrin

Die, you vile home for the sub-normal, just f*** off and die, forever.

[ancienthibby]

Put the bloody fingers away, ya cheeky auld get:na na:

I'm not following you....I'm talking about the DUFC money, but are you not talking about the Collyer Bristow money?

Yup!




By the way, the fingers were never pointed at you!

I was just surmising that either side could do this to the other!!

[Seveno]

Can I respectfully suggest to Duff and Phelps that they consult the gentlemen of ***ushima on how to manage the consequences of a tsunami, a fire and a nuclear meltdown.

[ancient hibee]

Can I respectfully suggest to Duff and Phelps that they consult the gentlemen of ***ushima on how to manage the consequences of a tsunami, a fire and a nuclear meltdown.

By the time they've got through this they'll be advising ***ushima.

[Sergey]

By the time they've got through this they'll be advising ***ushima.

And I'm off there in 2 weeks time!

Shirakawa, to be exact (白河市)

[down-the-slope]

So latest in layman summary...

Mr Whyte is a very naughty boy...

Administrators will be arguing that it was all the naughty boy and not Rangers (the clubs fault)....


Whyte will be the Patsy...Rangers avoid the lashes :dunno:

[ancienthibby]

So latest in layman summary...

Mr Whyte is a very naughty boy...

Administrators will be arguing that it was all the naughty boy and not Rangers (the clubs fault)....


Whyte will be the Patsy...Rangers avoid the lashes :dunno:


If this process continues on, I think there's a whole bundle of trouble looming for some former RFC directors who Craikie Whyte exited!:greengrin

[EuanH78]

So latest in layman summary...

Mr Whyte is a very naughty boy...

Administrators will be arguing that it was all the naughty boy and not Rangers (the clubs fault)....


Whyte will be the Patsy...Rangers avoid the lashes :dunno:

Dont think so, too much brown stuff about forRangers to possibly pin it all on Craig Whyte tbh, they aren't getting away with this imho

[Billy Whizz]

Rangers administrators looking for an advance from SPL to fulfill their fixtures until the end of the season. Similar to Gretna a few years ago

[CropleyWasGod]

And I'm off there in 2 weeks time!

Shirakawa, to be exact (白河市)

Jeezo, travelogues now. This thread gets better and better.

Thank you, Judith Chalmers.

:wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

Rangers administrators looking for an advance from SPL to fulfill their fixtures until the end of the season. Similar to Gretna a few years ago

They can't really refuse. There is precedent, I suppose.

Tell em " aye okay, we'll advance you £1m. But we're fining you £2m first... so you're still due us £1m".

[blindsummit]

They can't really refuse. There is precedent, I suppose.

Tell em " aye okay, we'll advance you £1m. But we're fining you £2m first... so you're still due us £1m".

it's unfortunate though as it means that the SPL will be subsidising them to continue to overpay players that can't afford to pay, so they can continue cheating the rest of us.

[DaveF]

Rangers administrators looking for an advance from SPL to fulfill their fixtures until the end of the season. Similar to Gretna a few years ago

How much would they get? The prize money varies per place and they are by no means guaranteed second.

[CropleyWasGod]

it's unfortunate though as it means that the SPL will be subsidising them to continue to overpay players that can't afford to pay, so they can continue cheating the rest of us.

Ach, it's just like giving a terminal patient some drugs to keep them alive in a vegetative state. Pain for all their loved ones, and prolonged agony (and perhaps false hopes) for them.

[blindsummit]

Ach, it's just like giving a terminal patient some drugs to keep them alive in a vegetative state. Pain for all their loved ones, and prolonged agony (and perhaps false hopes) for them.

Now,if you look at it like that, maybe it's not so bad. keep 'em on mimimum life support for a while to prolong their suffering and our joy. I think you have converted me!:thumbsup:

[CropleyWasGod]

How much would they get? The prize money varies per place and they are by no means guaranteed second.

Good point. If the SPL decide to dock them points, or worse, they could end up well down the League. That might mean that they owed some of the advance back to the SPL,..... not a good idea.

Sorry, Blind Summit, I've changed my mind. ..... get my rubber gloves, nurse, this one's getting a right good fisting.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Tomorrow will be a big day in this ongoing soap opera, as we learn whether the threatened player redundencies go ahead. The morbidly obese Jim Traynor was saying on Sportsound that he thinks there will be very few if any, because an agreement with the players about wage cuts (deferrals) is very close, in which they'll accept cuts until the the end of the season in return for being allowed to leave on the cheap in the summer. We'll soon find out.

[Billy Whizz]

Administrators confirm that Craig Whyte is not the preferred creditor. Not sure where this leaves us?

[Eyrie]

A new bidder has emerged in the race to take over financially stricken SPL club Rangers. He is believed to be an elderly German with extensive business interests in Italy called Benedict Pope.

[CentreLine]

So latest in layman summary...

Mr Whyte is a very naughty boy...

Administrators will be arguing that it was all the naughty boy and not Rangers (the clubs fault)....


Whyte will be the Patsy...Rangers avoid the lashes :dunno:

It really smells like this was the intention all along, albeit the plan hasn't quite come together so far. I just can't help but feel that CW was always intended to be a "straw man" there specifically to get burned and to take as much of the debt as possible with him. Then we will see the true figure behind this coming forward as the knight in shining.........Oh!............................. Naw! Couldn't possibly be that simple?

As for D&P? Well their credibility has to be crumbling by the minute. Not too many people can be watching this fiasco and thinking "they're the company for me". Unless of course they are looking for an administrator to look after their own very substantial interests while shouting very loudly all the right things but being painfully slow in taking action. Just exactly how many times can they get away with crying wolf?

The players, the fans, employees, other SPL clubs and now the court, have had to listen to the poor poor Rangers story and how action is imminent and please please please can we have a CVA so that we can cheat the country and X number of creditors out of millions. But we would like to keep these assets for the new owners of this great institution.......Bla bla bla...............

[CropleyWasGod]

Administrators confirm that Craig Whyte is not the preferred creditor. Not sure where this leaves us?

It leaves me feeling very smug, since I have been saying this since the day they were appointed. :cool2:

It means that CW does not have first call on the company's assets. He is not a creditor.

[McSwanky]

The morbidly obese Jim Traynor

:tee hee:

[CropleyWasGod]

It really smells like this was the intention all along, albeit the plan hasn't quite come together so far. I just can't help but feel that CW was always intended to be a "straw man" there specifically to get burned and to take as much of the debt as possible with him. Then we will see the true figure behind this coming forward as the knight in shining.........Oh!............................. Naw! Couldn't possibly be that simple?

As for D&P? Well their credibility has to be crumbling by the minute. Not too many people can be watching this fiasco and thinking "they're the company for me". Unless of course they are looking for an administrator to look after their own very substantial interests while shouting very loudly all the right things but being painfully slow in taking action. Just exactly how many times can they get away with crying wolf?

The players, the fans, employees, other SPL clubs and now the court, have had to listen to the poor poor Rangers story and how action is imminent and please please please can we have a CVA so that we can cheat the country and X number of creditors out of millions. But we would like to keep these assets for the new owners of this great institution.......Bla bla bla...............

... it has just taken a massive leap up for me, with their announcement that CW is not a preferred creditor. That knocks the stuffing out of much of the suspicion that he and they were acting together.

If they do get a CVA, it won't be them to blame. That's them doing their job. It'll be the fault of HMRC, who will be going back on their stated policy of opposing CVA's.

[CentreLine]

... it has just taken a massive leap up for me, with their announcement that CW is not a preferred creditor. That knocks the stuffing out of much of the suspicion that he and they were acting together.

Not if he is the Straw Man. It would put the plan firmly on track and allow any number of sins to be attributed to his being a very naughty boy

[CropleyWasGod]

Not if he is the Straw Man. It would put the plan firmly on track and allow any number of sins to be attributed to his being a very naughty boy

So what is the plan?

You tell me and I'll tell you mine :greengrin

[CentreLine]

So what is the plan?

I do not know but see my previous post for a suggestion

[easty]

Anyone see Gorams collumn in the Sun today?


I had my doubts about Craig Whyte from the off.

Too many questions were unanswered even before he completed his takeover last may..

But why learn from the past...

He goes on to say...


I don't know Paul Murray, but if he is willing to invest in Rangers then he'll do for me.

[hibsbollah]

Interesting that David Cameron refused to comment on Rangers when pressed in the Commons today. This is in contrast to him and Salmond's lobbying on behalf of the huns two weeks ago. Are they losing their political clout?

[CropleyWasGod]

I do not know but see my previous post for a suggestion

Okay.

The reason I don't agree with you is that it presupposes that a CVA was always going to happen. Given that HMRC's policy is to oppose them, that's a helluva supposition to make. I know that Roddy Forsyth has said that HMRC might remove their objection in this case, but CW/AN Other couldn't possibly have forseen this.

If, however, a CVA does happen..... our anger should be directed at HMRC, not Duff & Phelps.

Now my version of "the plan"....

I reckon CW wanted to play this one straight(ish). He scammed the club, sure, by using the Ticketus money to pay off Lloyds. However, he was gambling on there being enough income generated by the club over the next few years to fill that hole. Particularly from the Champions League

That gamble failed the moment Malmo scored way back when.....

[greenginger]

It leaves me feeling very smug, since I have been saying this since the day they were appointed. :cool2:

It means that CW does not have first call on the company's assets. He is not a creditor.


This is D & P's decision, but can this be contested by Whyte. The waters are so murky I don't know it can be left to this company to make a decision like that on their own.

I think this must be good news for New-Co Huns that they won't have Whyte for a landlord. :confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting that David Cameron refused to comment on Rangers when pressed in the Commons today. This is in contrast to him and Salmond's lobbying on behalf of the huns two weeks ago. Are they losing their political clout?

Hmmm.... Roddy Forsyth is of the opinion that HMRC are going to remove their objection to a CVA, and that it has been "sanctioned by the Treasury".

Either RF has got the wrong info, or DC is being evasive.

[hibee92]

Probably been talked about but i'm not going through the whole thread.

Will the huns demise effect the coefficient?

[CropleyWasGod]

This is D & P's decision, but can this be contested by Whyte. The waters are so murky I don't know it can be left to this company to make a decision like that on their own.

I think this must be good news for New-Co Huns that they won't have Whyte for a landlord. :confused:

It may be contested, but I really can't see what his grounds would be. Every accountant and insolvency practitioner I have spoken to, and heard talking about it, have said the same as me.

[Billy Whizz]

Probably been talked about but i'm not going through the whole thread.

Will the huns demise effect the coefficient?

If they erase their record it actually might improve it

[hibsbollah]

Either RF has got the wrong info, or DC is being evasive.


Both of them have previous for these things :greengrin

[easty]

Probably been talked about but i'm not going through the whole thread.

Will the huns demise effect the coefficient?

If our teams do well in Europe then we get a better coefficient, if we get pumped out in the first rounds then we'll get a worse coefficient. But seeing as Rangers were going out at the first round anyway, it'll not be any worse!

[HibeeSince85]

Why are HMRC considering going against all they have said and done in the past and possibly removing an objection to a CVA?

Have I got that right, surely they do it once, they'll have to do it for countless others.

[silverhibee]

This is what I'm getting at. They keep talking about severe cuts needed to run the club and those same cuts will surely be required under a new owner or do they really feel a new guy will just cover it all and happily take on a compmay losing money?

Should they not be ensuring that the club didn't make a further month of a loss?

They can't be betting everyting on a buyer coming along who wants the full staff left as it is because he will pay it all off himself? That seems a quite dangerous and negligent assumption given the overall state of things.


There must be doubts about the next old firm game going ahead at Ibrox in the next few weeks, where will the money come from to pay the Police for the high number that will be needed for that game.

[easty]

Why are HMRC considering going against all they have said and done in the past and possibly removing an objection to a CVA?

Have I got that right, surely they do it once, they'll have to do it for countless others.

Ive not read anything from the HMRC suggesting they'll do that. have I missed something?

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Is it a pipedream?

Even if television revenues were split evenly...
The breakdown on the revenues from the Annual Report 2010 for Rangers.

Interestingly enough the biggest revenue stream was the gate receipts. The commercial deals/sponsorship will also blow others out the water.













2. TURNOVER








Contributions to turnover, which is derived entirely in the United Kingdom and is related to one activity, are as follows:






2010

2009







£’000
%
£’000
%


Gate receipts and hospitality

25,834
45.9
24,228
43.0


Sponsorship and advertising

2,941
5.2
2,835
5.0


Broadcasting rights


3,760
6.7
5,133
9.1


Commercial


21,730
38.6
5,633
10.0


Other operating income

2,022
3.6
1,875
3.3






56,287

39,704





So if fairer distribution is not the answer what is?

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Anyone see Gorams collumn in the Sun today?



But why learn from the past...

He goes on to say...

Never was the sharpest tool in the box. Tool nevertheless :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Ive not read anything from the HMRC suggesting they'll do that. have I missed something?

Roddy Forsyth said it in the Telegraph this morning. And that it had been "sanctioned by the Treasury".

[easty]

Roddy Forsyth said it in the Telegraph this morning. And that it had been "sanctioned by the Treasury".

Interesting.

Dangerous road for the HMRC to go down.

[HibeeSince85]

Ive not read anything from the HMRC suggesting they'll do that. have I missed something?

Neither had I, I'm amazed at that. CWG got it from The Guardian so he says above.

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting.

Dangerous road for the HMRC to go down.

I honestly can't see it. Just last week the Government hammered Barclay's, as a sign that they were getting tough on tax avoidance. And Danny Alexander said to the LibDems conference that they are out to get tax dodgers, and used the words "football club".

[CentreLine]

Okay.

The reason I don't agree with you is that it presupposes that a CVA was always going to happen. Given that HMRC's policy is to oppose them, that's a helluva supposition to make. I know that Roddy Forsyth has said that HMRC might remove their objection in this case, but CW/AN Other couldn't possibly have forseen this.

If, however, a CVA does happen..... our anger should be directed at HMRC, not Duff & Phelps.

Now my version of "the plan"....

I reckon CW wanted to play this one straight(ish). He scammed the club, sure, by using the Ticketus money to pay off Lloyds. However, he was gambling on there being enough income generated by the club over the next few years to fill that hole. Particularly from the Champions League

That gamble failed the moment Malmo scored way back when.....

Yes I have seen you suggest this previously in the thread and a perfectly good suggestion it is backed by an incredible and entertaining knowledge of the financial game. A knowledge that has had us all glued to your posts and learning all the time.

But for me, as a simple observer of this tasteless phenomenon, with no financial background whatsoever, I see conspirecies deeper than CW. I see him as having been placed there to get rid of an impossible debt. A debt that Rangers could see no other way out of but to expose a whole lot of dirty washing in a oner and throw one man to the wolves. No doubt there would be a reward deal under the counter.

After all this is a club that has quite clearly set itself up to cheat the country and cheat the other clubs SPL for their own ends. No scruples whatsoever. So in my fictional case and in the interests of entertainment I see dark figures in the background waiting for the dust to settle, the debt to be gone and, with the help of the Scottish media and a sympathetic SPL/SFA, getting away with it all and carrying on as if nothing had ever happened in a smug and conceited manner.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

I honestly can't see it. Just last week the Government hammered Barclay's, as a sign that they were getting tough on tax avoidance. And Danny Alexander said to the LibDems conference that they are out to get tax dodgers, and used the words "football club".

Since when can The Lib Dems stake claim to be able to deliver on their words on matters of consequence :confused::wink:

[WindyMiller]

Neither had I, I'm amazed at that. CWG got it from The Guardian so he says above.

The Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9129851/Rangers-players-told-football-clubs-future-is-in-their-hands.html

[calmac12000]

Yes I have seen you suggest this previously in the thread and a perfectly good suggestion it is backed by an incredible and entertaining knowledge of the financial game. A knowledge that has had us all glued to your posts and learning all the time.

But for me, as a simple observer of this tasteless phenomenon, with no financial background whatsoever, I see conspirecies deeper than CW. I see him as having been placed there to get rid of an impossible debt. A debt that Rangers could see no other way out of but to expose a whole lot of dirty washing in a oner and throw one man to the wolves. No doubt there would be a reward deal under the counter.

After all this is a club that has quite clearly set itself up to cheat the country and cheat the other clubs SPL for their own ends. No scruples whatsoever. So in my fictional case and in the interests of entertainment I see dark figures in the background waiting for the dust to settle, the debt to be gone and, with the help of the Scottish media and a sympathetic SPL/SFA, getting away with it all and carrying on as if nothing had ever happened in a smug and conceited manner.

My fears exactly!

[HibeeSince85]

The Telegraph.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9129851/Rangers-players-told-football-clubs-future-is-in-their-hands.html

What a tit, I said the wrong paper:greengrin:

[CropleyWasGod]

Yes I have seen you suggest this previously in the thread and a perfectly good suggestion it is backed by an incredible and entertaining knowledge of the financial game. A knowledge that has had us all glued to your posts and learning all the time.

But for me, as a simple observer of this tasteless phenomenon, with no financial background whatsoever, I see conspirecies deeper than CW. I see him as having been placed there to get rid of an impossible debt. A debt that Rangers could see no other way out of but to expose a whole lot of dirty washing in a oner and throw one man to the wolves. No doubt there would be a reward deal under the counter.

After all this is a club that has quite clearly set itself up to cheat the country and cheat the other clubs SPL for their own ends. No scruples whatsoever. So in my fictional case and in the interests of entertainment I see dark figures in the background waiting for the dust to settle, the debt to be gone and, with the help of the Scottish media and a sympathetic SPL/SFA, getting away with it all and carrying on as if nothing had ever happened in a smug and conceited manner.

I prefer your version ... it's got a lot more dramatic value than mine :aok:

Who would you get to play Craigie in the film??

[ancienthibby]

I prefer your version ... it's got a lot more dramatic value than mine :aok:

Who would you get to play Craigie in the film??

Have no fears, Mr Croppers, that part is reserved for you alone!!

I feel those staring eyes coming through from your every post!!:not worth:not worth:not worth

[CropleyWasGod]

Administrators confirm that Craig Whyte is not the preferred creditor. Not sure where this leaves us?

Sorry, GH, I am trying to find this... not doubting you, but where did you see it?

[CropleyWasGod]

Have no fears, Mr Croppers, that part is reserved for you alone!!

I feel those staring eyes coming through from your every post!!:not worth:not worth:not worth

You have just had my two fingers again, ya cheeky get.

Think Warren Beatty, or Jack Nicholson. They're my type of roles.:cool2:

[jgl07]

Hmmm.... Roddy Forsyth is of the opinion that HMRC are going to remove their objection to a CVA, and that it has been "sanctioned by the Treasury".

Either RF has got the wrong info, or DC is being evasive.

I don't believe it for one moment. Delusion I think.

How would a CVA work without a secured creditor?

There is next to nothing there apart from the balance of the Ticketus cash and the real estate. Would the Treasury accept 1 pence in the pound on a £75 million debt?

The club, if it survived would have no ground, or would have to rent Ibrox, and most of its season ticket money would be in hoc to Ticketus for three to four years.

They would have no access to Europe for at least a year. What support would they get if they put out a team they could afford to pay?

The whole thing will not work without a full liquidation to really clear the debts and get rid of the Ticketus obligation.

[ancienthibby]

You have just had my two fingers again, ya cheeky get.

Think Warren Beatty, or Jack Nicholson. They're my type of roles.:cool2:

Understood. Jack N has a post-graduate degree in staring eyes.:agree:

Warren Beatty - nah - he's me!:greengrin

(ps - it's git!)

[CropleyWasGod]

I don't believe it for one moment. Delusion I think.

How would a CVA work without a secured creditor?

There is next to nothing there apart from the balance of the Ticketus cash and the real estate. Would the Treasury accept 1 pence in the pound on a £75 million debt?

The club, if it survived would have no ground, or would have to rent Ibrox, and most of its season ticket money would be in hoc to Ticketus for three to four years.

They would have no access to Europe for at least a year. What support would they get if they put out a team they could afford to pay?

The whole thing will not work without a full liquidation to really clear the debts and get rid of the Ticketus obligation.

A couple of points:-

1. it's "only" £15m that HMRC are in for just now. The BTC, not being settled yet, wouldn't form part of the debt.

2. the real estate wouldn't necessarily be relevant, I don't think. The creditors would be entitled to say "we'll take x% of whatever liquid assets you have, and you can stay at Ibrox" just to get something, and to ensure a continuing future relationship. I reckon they'd be daft to do that.... as you say, there would be more for them in a liquidation.

[blindsummit]

Good point. If the SPL decide to dock them points, or worse, they could end up well down the League. That might mean that they owed some of the advance back to the SPL,..... not a good idea.

Sorry, Blind Summit, I've changed my mind. ..... get my rubber gloves, nurse, this one's getting a right good fisting.

I am sure it will hurt them waaaaaayyyy more than it will you :greengrin

[blindsummit]

Why are HMRC considering going against all they have said and done in the past and possibly removing an objection to a CVA?

Have I got that right, surely they do it once, they'll have to do it for countless others.

If they do this for Rangers, then the stench of corruption will be overpowering. I'm not sure that there won't be an enormous backlash, particularly amongst English taxpayers.

[CentreLine]

I prefer your version ... it's got a lot more dramatic value than mine :aok:

Who would you get to play Craigie in the film??

Can't quite make my mind up if he has to be a villain or a victim at the end of the movie. I think a villain but the real bad guys in my movie would be the former club owner wishing to off-load an impossible debt and whoever is eventually exposed as the Mr Kingpin behind the scheme. Any resemblance to any non fictional characters would of course be purely coincidental and in no way intended to reflect real life:hi:.

[SurferRosa]

There must be doubts about the next old firm game going ahead at Ibrox in the next few weeks, where will the money come from to pay the Police for the high number that will be needed for that game.

IMO the decision by the authorities tae allow this game tae go ahead as normal is complete insanity. It`s one thing tae have Killie, ICT et al giving it tae them tight, but Smeltc singing taxman jingles and waving scrawled banners ( most likely mis-spelled ) while doin that nauseating backs tae the pitch pish would be a recipe for utter mayhem. It`ll be chaos.
It should be played behind closed doors although the TV company that runs our game would never allow that.:tsk tsk:

[Viva_Palmeiras]

If they do this for Rangers, then the stench of corruption will be overpowering. I'm not sure that there won't be an enormous backlash, particularly amongst English taxpayers.


Could it be that a rash of English clubs are on the brink of following suit?

[Bostonhibby]

I prefer your version ... it's got a lot more dramatic value than mine :aok:

Who would you get to play Craigie in the film??

Has Nick Leeson got an equity card? Ideal candidate. Or maybe Fred Goodwin though the role might be small beer to him.

[CropleyWasGod]

Can't quite make my mind up if he has to be a villain or a victim at the end of the movie. I think a villain but the real bad guys in my movie would be the former club owner wishing to off-load an impossible debt and whoever is eventually exposed as the Mr Kingpin behind the scheme. Any resemblance to any non fictional characters would of course be purely coincidental and in no way intended to reflect real life:hi:.

That's Mike Myers, for sure...


Oh, you HAVE to have a sex scene. That Swedish burd of Craigie's has to get her kit off.

[CropleyWasGod]

IMO the decision by the authorities tae allow this game tae go ahead as normal is complete insanity. It`s one thing tae have Killie, ICT et al giving it tae them tight, but Smeltc singing taxman jingles and waving scrawled banners ( most likely mis-spelled ) while doin that nauseating backs tae the pitch pish would be a recipe for utter mayhem. It`ll be chaos.
It should be played behind closed doors although the TV company that runs our game would never allow that.:tsk tsk:

Think it was yesterday's Sun (Bill Leckie?) that took the same view.

I dunno though... could be a great place to chuck a dirty bomb.

[PatHead]

That's Mike Myers, for sure...


Oh, you HAVE to have a sex scene. That Swedish burd of Craigie's has to get her kit off.

surely it was Rangers who got f'%ked in the film..............

[CropleyWasGod]

surely it was Rangers who got f'%ked in the film..............

:greengrin

You can take as much artistic licence as you want with soft porn.

[cabbageandribs1875]

IMO the decision by the authorities tae allow this game tae go ahead as normal is complete insanity. It`s one thing tae have Killie, ICT et al giving it tae them tight, but Smeltc singing taxman jingles and waving scrawled banners ( most likely mis-spelled ) while doin that nauseating backs tae the pitch pish would be a recipe for utter mayhem. It`ll be chaos.
It should be played behind closed doors although the TV company that runs our game would never allow that.:tsk tsk:



lets change the teams here, hertz v hibs at the pink palace, hertz in the same predicament as the sons of william, you would want the hibs fans denied the chance possibly seeing us winning the league in this game, yes ??

[Hibs Class]

IMO the decision by the authorities tae allow this game tae go ahead as normal is complete insanity. It`s one thing tae have Killie, ICT et al giving it tae them tight, but Smeltc singing taxman jingles and waving scrawled banners ( most likely mis-spelled ) while doin that nauseating backs tae the pitch pish would be a recipe for utter mayhem. It`ll be chaos.
It should be played behind closed doors although the TV company that runs our game would never allow that.:tsk tsk:

It's this type of thinking that is killing scottish football. They're not special, they don't deserve allowances to be made. Treat it like any other fixture and if they choose to riot then nail the b******s. Pretending they matter more than the rest of us and treating them differently has contributed to the current situation where they think that they are better than the rest.

[Onion]

It's this type of thinking that is killing scottish football. They're not special, they don't deserve allowances to be made. Treat it like any other fixture and if they choose to riot then nail the b******s. Pretending they matter more than the rest of us and treating them differently has contributed to the current situation where they think that they are better than the rest.

Finding the complexities of the Hun predicament more amusing by the day. SKY TV will be CREAMING themselves over the thought of an OF match at the mo. Note to UEFA, SFA and Salmon if it goes ahead - think there might be a bit of sectarianism. bigotry at this match :green grin

Either way, if t goes ahead as planned - excellent entertainment for all. If it doesn't go ahead because the Huns have collapse.... that's just as good.

[jgl07]

A couple of points:-

1. it's "only" £15m that HMRC are in for just now. The BTC, not being settled yet, wouldn't form part of the debt.

2. the real estate wouldn't necessarily be relevant, I don't think. The creditors would be entitled to say "we'll take x% of whatever liquid assets you have, and you can stay at Ibrox" just to get something, and to ensure a continuing future relationship. I reckon they'd be daft to do that.... as you say, there would be more for them in a liquidation.

It's true that the debt is currently £15 million. But what would be the point of a CVA now with the Big Tax Case near to a decision and the Wee Tax Case still in the pipeline? The club would emerge from administration to be hit by another £55 million tax bill.

As for letting Rangers keep Ibrox, that would be right! ore likely that Murray Park would be sold to a housebuilder in the hope that planning permission could be extracted and Ibrox would be sold either for development or more likely to rent it back to Rangers.

The mad rush to sell by D&P seems very strange, Who will buy a club with that sort of tax bill on the horizon?

Why not wait until the tax tribunal reports? Obviously the cash will run out prior to that.

[jonty]

I might have missed this....

With Dunfermline getting paid, and punishment if Dundee Utd don't get paid, are Hearts likely to get paid their money?

[Mon_the_cabbage]

I might have missed this....

With Dunfermline getting paid, and punishment if Dundee Utd don't get paid, are Hearts likely to get paid their money?


Hearts are not due any money at this time.

They are due an installment for Wallace in the Summer however.

[Col2]

Hearts are not owed anything until end of season which is next installment of Wallace transfer.

[CropleyWasGod]

It's true that the debt is currently £15 million. But what would be the point of a CVA now with the Big Tax Case near to a decision and the Wee Tax Case still in the pipeline? The club would emerge from administration to be hit by another £55 million tax bill. A gamble on the BTC going their way, no more than that.

As for letting Rangers keep Ibrox, that would be right! ore likely that Murray Park would be sold to a housebuilder in the hope that planning permission could be extracted and Ibrox would be sold either for development or more likely to rent it back to Rangers. The sale and leaseback scenario is one of the only ways I can see out of things.

The mad rush to sell by D&P seems very strange, Who will buy a club with that sort of tax bill on the horizon?--- which is exactly what Paul Murray said not that long ago. :rolleyes:

Why not wait until the tax tribunal reports? Obviously the cash will run out prior to that.

.

[Onion]

It's true that the debt is currently £15 million. But what would be the point of a CVA now with the Big Tax Case near to a decision and the Wee Tax Case still in the pipeline? The club would emerge from administration to be hit by another £55 million tax bill.

As for letting Rangers keep Ibrox, that would be right! ore likely that Murray Park would be sold to a housebuilder in the hope that planning permission could be extracted and Ibrox would be sold either for development or more likely to rent it back to Rangers.

The mad rush to sell by D&P seems very strange, Who will buy a club with that sort of tax bill on the horizon?

Why not wait until the tax tribunal reports? Obviously the cash will run out prior to that.

Exactly :agree: Why on Earth would anyone even pay £1 for the Huns at the moment ? Obvious thing is to wait until after the tax case and see what's what. Problem the Admins have is that they've no money left to keep the business going to summer unless players basically agree to play for nothing. Even then, the tax case would kill them off.

Smelling like ... the Admins see this as a gravy train until it final runs off the rails :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Exactly :agree: Why on Earth would anyone even pay £1 for the Huns at the moment ? Obvious thing is to wait until after the tax case and see what's what. Problem the Admins have is that they've no money left to keep the business going to summer unless players basically agree to play for nothing. Even then, the tax case would kill them off.

Smelling like ... the Admins see this as a gravy train until it final runs off the rails :greengrin

Accountants artificially pushing fees up? Wash your mouth out, boy!!

:greengrin

[jonty]

Hearts are not due any money at this time.

They are due an installment for Wallace in the Summer however.


Hearts are not owed anything until end of season which is next installment of Wallace transfer.

Aha. By which point there won't be a RFC. :cb

[CropleyWasGod]

Aha. By which point there won't be a RFC. :cb

However, if RFC are liquidated, Hearts would put in a claim for everything they are owed... so they may get something, earlier than they would otherwise.

[greenginger]

However, if RFC are liquidated, Hearts would put in a claim for everything they are owed... so they may get something, earlier than they would otherwise.


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

[degenerated]

I prefer your version ... it's got a lot more dramatic value than mine :aok:

Who would you get to play Craigie in the film??

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

[Seveno]

Not if he is the Straw Man. It would put the plan firmly on track and allow any number of sins to be attributed to his being a very naughty boy


Can't quite make my mind up if he has to be a villain or a victim at the end of the movie. I think a villain but the real bad guys in my movie would be the former club owner wishing to off-load an impossible debt and whoever is eventually exposed as the Mr Kingpin behind the scheme. Any resemblance to any non fictional characters would of course be purely coincidental and in no way intended to reflect real life:hi:.


:greengrin

You can take as much artistic licence as you want with soft porn.

A porn expert as well as accountancy. Is there no end to your talents ?

[Seveno]

It's this type of thinking that is killing scottish football. They're not special, they don't deserve allowances to be made. Treat it like any other fixture and if they choose to riot then nail the b******s. Pretending they matter more than the rest of us and treating them differently has contributed to the current situation where they think that they are better than the rest.

Except you have to consider the poor wives that will get battered when the animals return home. That's what concerns the Police more than the relatively minor violence that tends to happen in and around the match.

That escaped Fat Eck as well when he introduced that ridiculous legislation.

[CropleyWasGod]

A porn expert as well as accountancy. Is there no end to your talents ?

As we head towards page 100, is this where I come clean and tell everyone that I was struck off 20 years ago for raiding a client's account? That I spent 5 years inside, where I met a young man from Motherwell, a man eager to learn all that I had to teach him.

After intensive study, he was ready to go out in the world. I gave him my favourite calculator, and a signed photo of Charles Ponzi, and said "treasure them, young Craig."

That was a long time ago, of course. I often wonder what became of him.

These days, I have to eke out a living as a fluffer for Ron Jeremy.

[BonnieFitbaTeam]

I prefer your version ... it's got a lot more dramatic value than mine :aok:

Who would you get to play Craigie in the film??

Sorry but you're all wrong. Only one man could possibly play wee Craigie in the film...













......Marty Feldman !

[WindyMiller]

Sorry but you're all wrong. Only one man could possibly play wee Craigie in the film...













......Marty Feldman !


http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0tZrIiQyTZ0/TsStCJ0tAyI/AAAAAAAACbk/ad0uJDqKXkE/s1600/marty_feldman_512.jpg

[SteveHFC]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4179620/Rangers-FC-is-up-for-sale.html

[Leithenhibby]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4179620/Rangers-FC-is-up-for-sale.html


This is old news Mr, now wrapping the suppers down Govan :greengrin

[Spike Mandela]

So as the 100 page approaches the utterly predictable Rangers agenda becomes clearer...............

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2112398/Rangers-Administrator-seize-Craig-Whytes-shares.html

Ever get the feeling you've been swindled!

[gramskiwood]

:top marks:top marks
As we head towards page 100, is this where I come clean and tell everyone that I was struck off 20 years ago for raiding a client's account? That I spent 5 years inside, where I met a young man from Motherwell, a man eager to learn all that I had to teach him.

After intensive study, he was ready to go out in the world. I gave him my favourite calculator, and a signed photo of Charles Ponzi, and said "treasure them, young Craig."

That was a long time ago, of course. I often wonder what became of him.

These days, I have to eke out a living as a fluffer for Ron Jeremy.

:top marks

[SteveHFC]

Steven Whittaker and Steven Naismith agree Rangers wage cuts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17308715

[Liberal Hibby]

It's true that the debt is currently £15 million. But what would be the point of a CVA now with the Big Tax Case near to a decision and the Wee Tax Case still in the pipeline? The club would emerge from administration to be hit by another £55 million tax bill. A gamble on the BTC going their way, no more than that.

As for letting Rangers keep Ibrox, that would be right! ore likely that Murray Park would be sold to a housebuilder in the hope that planning permission could be extracted and Ibrox would be sold either for development or more likely to rent it back to Rangers. The sale and leaseback scenario is one of the only ways I can see out of things.

The mad rush to sell by D&P seems very strange, Who will buy a club with that sort of tax bill on the horizon?--- which is exactly what Paul Murray said not that long ago.

Why not wait until the tax tribunal reports? Obviously the cash will run out prior to that..

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

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

[Spike Mandela]

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

[Hibernia&Alba]

Steven Whittaker and Steven Naismith agree Rangers wage cuts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17308715

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

[Hibrandenburg]

This saga moves on faster than Concorde and always raises more and more questions. Are all players now agreed to cut pay? Will there still be redundencies Friday? Even with an agreement, how long will those top players remain at a Rangers without a new buyer?
Let's just hope that that's not where the concord similarities end :-)

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

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

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

So, there are two scenarios in this:-

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

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

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

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

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

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

A few points:-

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

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

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

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

[SkintHibby]

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

[Viva_Palmeiras]

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

[bruno]

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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


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

[Moulin Yarns]

:wtf:

100 pages about the Hun-dreaded Huns

[truehibernian]

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

[CropleyWasGod]

:wtf:

100 pages about the Hun-dreaded Huns

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

[Caversham Green]

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

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

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

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

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

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

A few points:-

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

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

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

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

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Good spot.

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

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

[Jim44]

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

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

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

[Seveno]

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

[Sylar]

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

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

[Part/Time Supporter]

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

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

And how are they going to do that?

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

[easty]

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

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

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

[Caversham Green]

Good spot.

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

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

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

[easty]

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

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

According to an article in The Sun this morning.

Are they not just regurgitating the Telegraph story from yesterday?

[Sylar]

And how are they going to do that?

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

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


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

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


Are they not just regurgitating the Telegraph story from yesterday?

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

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

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

[IWasThere2016]

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

[CropleyWasGod]

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



?

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

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

[SkintHibby]

Are they not just regurgitating the Telegraph story from yesterday?

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

[Captain Trips]

Mcgregor agrees to 75% cut

[easty]

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



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

[CropleyWasGod]

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

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

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

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

[johnrebus]

It is now becoming pretty obvious that Rangers fate is now being decided from the highest level possible. I don't believe there will be any liquidation.

Why have HMRC been so quiet over the last near four weeks, while the administrators have (seemingly) stumbled around like a blind man in the dark?

You would have expected some kind of, ' will you just get a move on please, do your job and give us the money. Normal rules obvious don't apply here.

Here is my take on the end game.

1. Rangers FC will take their place in the SPL, perhaps with a ten point penalty for the next two seasons.
2. The Ticketus deal will be declared void.
3. Craig Whyte will be left with nothing. Rangers will still own Ibrox and MP.
4. The big tax case will be withdrawn on a hitherto unseen technicality.
5. The CVA will be agreed in the next few days - early enough for the accounts to be completed and the Huns to play in Europe.
6. Sir David Murray and the double contract fiasco will be found unproven.
7. Rangers will finish second in next seasons SPL - twenty five points ahead of the third placed club.
8. SPL crowds will be down by a further 20% due to the disappearance of sickened fans.




:titanic:

[CropleyWasGod]

In a slight deviation (way hey), does anyone know anything about the gentleman named as Arsenal's retail director in this piece?

http://www.arsenal.com/news/news-archive/arsenal-launch-online-boot-room

He was at RFC in a similar role for a few years in the SDM years.

[Seveno]

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

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

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

Isn't French Cricket where someone stands on a box with a bat and everyone else is in a circle around the box. it means that fast balls are coming at the batsman from every angle. ( we used to play it in the Scouts )

Seems like an excellent analogy. ( the game, not the Scouts ).

[Thecat23]

If I'm being honest, i find this whole thing a joke. If this was any other club players would not get the chance to sit down and talk over pay cuts etc.. They would be punted. Look at Motherwell, Dundee and Livvi. Seems the Administrators have bent over backwards for Rangers and i also think they are delaying lot's of issues until a proper buyer is found. I'm sick to death of the old firm and if they come out this and nothing is done about it then Scottish football can GTF.

A real chance to chance the face of Scottish football but as usual I think all the clubs will bottle it. I just wish Rangers would close down now. Then they can apply for the 3rd Division. Anything else is just a shambles. :furious:

[CropleyWasGod]

Isn't French Cricket where someone stands on a box with a bat and everyone else is in a circle around the box. it means that fast balls are coming at the batsman from every angle. ( we used to play it in the Scouts )

Seems like an excellent analogy. ( the game, not the Scouts ).

Yup, that's the one.

I think the modern term is fire-fighting.

But fire-fighting doesn't run the risk of getting a vindictive chuck in the chuckies.

[IWasThere2016]

It is now becoming pretty obvious that Rangers fate is now being decided from the highest level possible. I don't believe there will be any liquidation.

Why have HMRC been so quiet over the last near four weeks, while the administrators have (seemingly) stumbled around like a blind man in the dark?

You would have expected some kind of, ' will you just get a move on please, do your job and give us the money. Normal rules obvious don't apply here.

Here is my take on the end game.

1. Rangers FC will take their place in the SPL, perhaps with a ten point penalty for the next two seasons.
2. The Ticketus deal will be declared void.
3. Craig Whyte will be left with nothing. Rangers will still own Ibrox and MP.
4. The big tax case will be withdrawn on a hitherto unseen technicality.
5. The CVA will be agreed in the next few days - early enough for the accounts to be completed and the Huns to play in Europe.
6. Sir David Murray and the double contract fiasco will be found unproven.
7. Rangers will finish second in next seasons SPL - twenty five points ahead of the third placed club.
8. SPL crowds will be down by a further 20% due to the disappearance of sickened fans.




:titanic:

Only the 10 SPL chairmen growing a collective pair and bringing about change can save us from the horror above. COME ON ROD ET AL!!!

[CropleyWasGod]

Why have HMRC been so quiet over the last near four weeks, while the administrators have (seemingly) stumbled around like a blind man in the dark?

You would have expected some kind of, ' will you just get a move on please, do your job and give us the money. Normal rules obvious don't apply here.



:titanic:

There is no need for HMRC to say or do anything. Indeed, they can't actually "do" anything; that's one of the protections that administration provides.

They are sitting on a £15m debt. As each day passes, they are closer to a potential further £49m. Why should they do anything?

That said, some reports have them in talks with D&P. Personally, I hope those reports aren't true.

[johnrebus]

Only the 10 SPL chairmen growing a collective pair and bringing about change can save us from the horror above. COME ON ROD ET AL!!!


TQM, I'm pretty sure that it won't make a blind bit of difference what the SPL chairman do.

We're stuck with the *******s.



But believe me, I want to be wrong.

:brickwall

[Seveno]

Only the 10 SPL chairmen growing a collective pair and bringing about change can save us from the horror above. COME ON ROD ET AL!!!

I have a feeling that this could be Rod's finest hour. There is a growing rage bubbling beneath that Tache.

[hibeesjoe]

If rangers come out of this whole thing with very little damage then i reckon a lot of people might just give up on scottish football. They should be made an examlple of or it will give the green light to every other club to rip off the taxman and spend well outwith there limits.

[johnrebus]

There is no need for HMRC to say or do anything. Indeed, they can't actually "do" anything; that's one of the protections that administation provides.

They are sitting on a £15m debt. As each day passes, they are closer to a potential further £49m. Why should they do anything?

That said, some reports have them in talks with D&P. Personally, I hope those reports aren't true.


This is what worries me.

I'm not normally one for conspiracy theories, but.............,


:spider:

[Steve20]

Rangers are still heading for liquidation because no one will buy a club with the level of debt they have and although The Sun is claiming HMRC might do a deal over the "big tax case", there is nothing to confirm this.

[CropleyWasGod]

I have a feeling that this could be Rod's finest hour. There is a growing rage bubbling beneath that Tache.

I have a vision of a statue of Rod, not just outside ER, not just outside every football ground in the country, but also right in front of the massive new Tesco on Edmiston Drive.

:hibees

[Seveno]

I have a vision of a statue of Rod, not just outside ER, not just outside every football ground in the country, but also right in front of the massive new Tesco on Edmiston Drive.

:hibees

And a special day in March will henceforth be named 'Tache Day'. Football fans around the country will congregate around their local statue and bow, just like that, proclaiming 'Hail the Tache'.

I'm close to tears at the mere thought.

[Jim44]

TQM, I'm pretty sure that it won't make a blind bit of difference what the SPL chairman do.

We're stuck with the *******s.



But believe me, I want to be wrong.

:brickwall

I wish you were wrong as well but is clear that they will pay back a relative pittance of the many millions they stole from the taxman. With the possibility of liquidation now out of the equation, their position in the duopoly in the SPL will be consolidated in the near future ( in fact the meeting of the SPL clubs is hardly worth taking place ). Is the party over?

[HIBERNIAN-0762]

Whittaker, Naismith and McGregor have all agreed to take a 75% wage cut...

Must surely be off their rockers?

:crazy:

[Twa Cairpets]

I wish you were wrong as well but is clear that they will pay back a relative pittance of the many millions they stole from the taxman. With the possibility of liquidation now out of the equation, their position in the duopoly in the SPL will be consolidated in the near future ( in fact the meeting of the SPL clubs is hardly worth taking place ). Is the party over?

Well that's a jolly post.

It is NOT clear that they will pay back a pittance.
Liquidation is NOT out of the equation unless I've missed something.
The SPL10 meeting is worth taking place.

No need to quite put yourself on suicide watch yet...

[CropleyWasGod]

I wish you were wrong as well but is clear that they will pay back a relative pittance of the many millions they stole from the taxman. With the possibility of liquidation now out of the equation, their position in the duopoly in the SPL will be consolidated in the near future ( in fact the meeting of the SPL clubs is hardly worth taking place ). Is the party over?

Missed that one.... where did you get it from?

[Twa Cairpets]

Whittaker, Naismith and McGregor have all agreed to take a 75% wage cut...

Must surely be off their rockers?

:crazy:

Yes, how they'll struggle by on a mere £5K+ a week is almost enough to make me weep for their sacrifice. Dont people know their kids need new shoes? We should really have a whip round for them.

[GreenPJ]

Rangers are still heading for liquidation because no one will buy a club with the level of debt they have and although The Sun is claiming HMRC might do a deal over the "big tax case", there is nothing to confirm this.

I thought that the big tax case was effectively a test case that the HMRC want to win as there is then significant revenue they can go after with English clubs. On that basis I would not have thought they would be in any position to be negotiating a deal on the big taxcase until they have either won or lost?

[Andy74]

Yes, how they'll struggle by on a mere £5K+ a week is almost enough to make me weep for their sacrifice. Dont people know their kids need new shoes? We should really have a whip round for them.

And only for about 3 months until they either get a new club or normal business is resumed.

[CropleyWasGod]

I thought that the big tax case was effectively a test case that the HMRC want to win as there is then significant revenue they can go after with English clubs. On that basis I would not have thought they would be in any position to be negotiating a deal on the big taxcase until they have either won or lost?

Correct. It was The Sun wot said it. Ignore it. :greengrin

Taking the "test case" scenario a bit further, I did read that the RFC judgement, when it comes, is not necessarily to be relied on for future cases involving football clubs. That is because it is a "First Tier" Tribunal, and apparently that doesn't have any clout in setting precedents. However, if it goes further up the chain, perhaps through appeal, those Courts higher up will be setting precedent.

That said, the verdict in RFC's case will certainly help to shape HMRC's approach in those other cases.

[jgl07]

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

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

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

But they will presumably get a second bite for the £50-55 million if the tax disputes go in favour of HMRC.

[PaulSmith]

So taking all this into account Whyte started with a debt at Rangers of £75m give it take.
He creates a Phoenix company (wavetower) to get £24m from Ticketus on basis of future sales to wipe out bank debt.
Rangers Fc no longer owe lloyds, the ticketus deal is with Wavetower and now not valid.
£64m worth of tax due becomes £6.4m.
Rangers sell 40k STs in May, have insignificant debt, start next season in spl with no penalties and become the richest club in Scotland overnight.

Sporting integrity, aye right. I'm out of this nonsense if this comes to pass.

[CropleyWasGod]

But they will presumably get a second bite for the £50-55 million if the tax disputes go in favour of HMRC.

See, that's my big worry.

If HMRC agree to a CVA on the £15m, it means that a buyer can take the club over, through his/her company, with a much-reduced debt. That leaves the BTC in RFC(the old company). Even if that went against RFC, there would be nothing in that company to pay it with.

No liking this idea one bit.

[CropleyWasGod]

So taking all this into account Whyte started with a debt at Rangers of £75m give it take.
He creates a Phoenix company (wavetower) to get £24m from Ticketus on basis of future sales to wipe out bank debt.
Rangers Fc no longer owe lloyds, the ticketus deal is with Wavetower and now not valid.
£64m worth of tax due becomes £6.4m.
Rangers sell 40k STs in May, have insignificant debt, start next season in spl with no penalties and become the richest club in Scotland overnight.

Sporting integrity, aye right. I'm out of this nonsense if this comes to pass.

It's not just about sporting integrity for me, Paul. It's about moral integrity, but more than that it's sending out a message to UKplc that they can do what they want with their tax debts.

[jonty]

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

On the other side of things, liquidaton might mean the closing off of future tax revenues from RFC. Agreeing to a CVA now would keep that stream open.
Surely if they get liquidised (http://joecartoon.org/?p=37) then newco will have to pay tax? Either way, whatever company comes out of it will still be raking in enough money for the tax man to be happy.

[Kato]

6. Sir David Murray and the double contract fiasco will be found unproven.


.....and within two years he'll Lord Murray, for services to football.

[CropleyWasGod]

Surely if they get liquidised (http://joecartoon.org/?p=37) then newco will have to pay tax? Either way, whatever company comes out of it will still be raking in enough money for the tax man to be happy.

That is correct if there is a newco after liquidation. It is likely that there would be, but it's not certain.

[Jim44]

Well that's a jolly post.

It is NOT clear that they will pay back a pittance.
Liquidation is NOT out of the equation unless I've missed something.
The SPL10 meeting is worth taking place.

No need to quite put yourself on suicide watch yet...


Missed that one.... where did you get it from?

Sorry guys, cynicism got the better of me. I must repeat to myself "Rangers are stuffed, Rangers are stuffed, Rangers are stuffed ......... There, I've almost convinced myself.:greengrin. I promise I won't do anything silly while we wait for the axe to fall.