Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Exiled Hibby]

That was exactly what I said.

Had Hearts loaned Wallace for the season with an option to buy at the end of the term, it would have been different.

Apologies. Mis read your post.

I agree entirely with you. Now where's that embarrassed as hell smiley

[magpie1892]

TBut once it's cheerio ****ger, cya Papac, thanks for the memories Flecky. These fans will suddenly find other things to do on Saturdays.

What memories? I'll I can remember of his ipox 'career' is how he was better than Rooney.

[Exiled Hibby]

Craig Moore was returned to Rangers in 1998/99 after Crystal Palace (who had bought him in the previous summer) went bust.

Cant recall circumstances but wasnt that him just re-signing rather than the huns claiming him back due to non-payment?

[Smidge]

Cant recall circumstances but wasnt that him just re-signing rather than the huns claiming him back due to non-payment?

Not according to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Moore).

[stokesmessiah]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17047957

So if Rangers or Celtic had happened to of been relegated the deal would not stand either?

[Andy74]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17047957

So if Rangers or Celtic had happened to of been relegated the deal would not stand either?

I wish they'd stop with the TV deal stuff - we hardly get any of it anyway and if we all miss out then so what, a levelling out at a natural level for everyone would be not a bad thing.

We might even reclaim some armchar fans and be allowed games on a saturday at 3pm once in a while!

[Captain Trips]

I wish they'd stop with the TV deal stuff - we hardly get any of it anyway and if we all miss out then so what, a levelling out at a natural level for everyone would be not a bad thing.

We might even reclaim some armchar fans and be allowed games on a saturday at 3pm once in a while!

Andy I agree, and I think there would be still an interest in the league from TV, big story people just might be interested in what happens.

[SteveHFC]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17047957

So if Rangers or Celtic had happened to of been relegated the deal would not stand either?

They can stick their tv deal up their a***. :aok:

[Part/Time Supporter]

I wish they'd stop with the TV deal stuff - we hardly get any of it anyway and if we all miss out then so what, a levelling out at a natural level for everyone would be not a bad thing.

We might even reclaim some armchar fans and be allowed games on a saturday at 3pm once in a while!

The "no TV deal" chat misses the point that the TV deal (including daft kick off times) depresses the attendance, particularly for what were traditionally Hibs' biggest games (Rantic and Hertz). The attendance for those three games (all televised) this season were circa 11K (Huns), 12K (Celtic) and 15K (Hertz). Even with Hibs playing crap I bet each of those attendances would have been 2-3K higher without TV. That's another 100-150K of revenue.

Hibs have previously argued for the removal of live TV coverage, when the BBC had the rights 8-9 years ago. The current deal just about makes sense but it wouldn't be catastrophic to lose it.

[blindsummit]

I wish they'd stop with the TV deal stuff - we hardly get any of it anyway and if we all miss out then so what, a levelling out at a natural level for everyone would be not a bad thing.

We might even reclaim some armchar fans and be allowed games on a saturday at 3pm once in a while!

If any TV deal is dependant on letting Rankgers off the hook then stuff the TV deal! Let them die!

[Saorsa]

If the losing the TV deal is all there is tae worry about for making the huns pay the price for their years of over spending and cheating then Sky can stick their TV deal where the sun disnae shine :bye: and we can get back tae 3pm Saturday KO's

[StevieC]

Andy I agree, and I think there would be still an interest in the league from TV, big story people just might be interested in what happens.

And what an incentive to finish second in the league if they get punted to Div 3.
The team finishing 2nd could pretty much double their usual allocation of TV money.

:greengrin

[stokesmessiah]

If the losing the TV deal is all there is tae worry about for making the huns pay the price for their years of over spending and cheating then Sky can stick their TV deal where the sun disnae shine :bye: and we can get back tae 3pm Saturday KO's

I think this is the SPL TV deal that was mooted previously and not the existing Sky deal.

For the record i am horrified at the scare mongering approach we seem to be getting from the media so far. I would quite like (maybe i have missed it somewhere) if one of them came out and said what a lot of non-Rangers fans are thinking which is....Stuff them, they cheated and now they can fall on their own sword.

[DarlingtonHibee]

If the losing the TV deal is all there is tae worry about for making the huns pay the price for their years of over spending and cheating then Sky can stick their TV deal where the sun disnae shine :bye: and we can get back tae 3pm Saturday KO's

Agreed, but this is the problem.

All the "blazers" in the SPL, SFA etc..... need SKY / ESPN to keep funding their existence, that is why Doncaster and crew will do everything to keep the Huns is business.

Here's hoping HMRC stick to their guns, and really shaft these cheats FFS, would we get away with this ?

The biggest joke for me is they also rattle out "God save the Queen" etc, but they are refusing to pay her revenue people !

I hope they get well turned over.

[truehibernian]

Typical media and political spin. Rangers are not 'key to the deal'. A contract for TV rights to the SPL is exactly that....for the SPL, which are 12 teams not just one or two.

Clearly Rangers would attract viewers and sponsorship/advertising, but that's the chance you take when you sign a contract at the end of the day. Indeed, if they were liquidated and say for example demoted to the first division, then surely that would give the SPL a great opportunity to get their SPL2 off the ground with the vital ingredient of Rangers and their 'march back to where they belong' type crusade (and give clubs like Falkirk, Partick, Dundee some much needed exposure and cash).

The media 'save our Rangers' campaign started at 3pm yesterday IMHO. Strange that not one journalist, despite the outrage they had for Sir Fred Goodwin, the scandal that was 'bankers bonuses', the severe cutbacks to public services and job losses that effect all of the UK due to chronic mismanagement both political and private, has not taken it upon themselves to stand from the rooftop and shout aloud that over £70 million of syphoned off cash could have built 5 football/sports academies, built a new hospital wing or a few of schools, or saved countless jobs in both the public and private sector.


Rangers have IMHO committed 'legalised' fraud against the state and I loathe any politicain, such as Curran or Robison, getting involved and offering advice or 'support' to their plight.......they should be putting their weight behind efforts to recoup the lost tax AND then start to offer support to get Rangers acting responsibly once it is paid back to the public purse. How much has Rangers for example cost the everyday tax payer with their decades of bigotry, hatred, violence, rioting, death and domestic abuse. Charlatans the lot of them.


And so much for people monitoring and overseeing their forums. I don't normally venture onto other teams forums however I have done this last few days. On RangersMedia there have been posts hoping that David Murray gets cancer, posts that allude to nail bombs being sent to Parkhead, threads that want to reintroduction of singing sectarian songs and the 'Billy Boys', and constant references to catholics and child abuse.........in one today, about an article stating they pretty much have themselves to blame, the opening posts were 'bet it was written by a pape'. Is it any wonder that the nation is in the state it's in eh.


For me, the OF are two cheeks on the same arse. Both are Scotland's Shame.

[PaulSmith]

Administrators on SSN saying that "Rangers will continue as a football club".

Question is this old Rangers1873 or new co Rangers2012

[marinello59]

Agreed, but this is the problem.

All the "blazers" in the SPL, SFA etc..... need SKY / ESPN to keep funding their existence, that is why Doncaster and crew will do everything to keep the Huns is business.

Here's hoping HMRC stick to their guns, and really shaft these cheats FFS, would we get away with this ?

The biggest joke for me is they also rattle out "God save the Queen" etc, but they are refusing to pay her revenue people !

I hope they get well turned over.

If Scottish football still has genuine ambitions to compete at European level then Hibs and every other club needs Sky/ESPN money. That's indisputable. Now many will argue we would have a more competitive league without the TV money. That's fine if we are all willing to accept even lower standards than we currently endure. Are we really at that stage?

[DarlingtonHibee]

I think this is the SPL TV deal that was mooted previously and not the existing Sky deal.

For the record i am horrified at the scare mongering approach we seem to be getting from the media so far. I would quite like (maybe i have missed it somewhere) if one of them came out and said what a lot of non-Rangers fans are thinking which is....Stuff them, they cheated and now they can fall on their own sword.

I'm pretty sure its or the current SKY deal.

[DarlingtonHibee]

If Scottish football still has genuine ambitions to compete at European level then Hibs and every other club needs Sky/ESPN money. That's indisputable. Now many will argue we would have a more competitive league without the TV money. That's fine if we are all willing to accept even lower standards than we currently endure. Are we really at that stage?

Don't disagree, but seems like blackmail /bullying - ie if you don't agree then tough, no matter what the Huns do, they will stay in the SPL - very sad...

[Andy74]

If Scottish football still has genuine ambitions to compete at European level then Hibs and every other club needs Sky/ESPN money. That's indisputable. Now many will argue we would have a more competitive league without the TV money. That's fine if we are all willing to accept even lower standards than we currently endure. Are we really at that stage?

So we are competing now with the TV money are we?

[CropleyWasGod]

Typical media and political spin. Rangers are not 'key to the deal'. A contract for TV rights to the SPL is exactly that....for the SPL, which are 12 teams not just one or two.

Clearly Rangers would attract viewers and sponsorship/advertising, but that's the chance you take when you sign a contract at the end of the day. Indeed, if they were liquidated and say for example demoted to the first division, then surely that would give the SPL a great opportunity to get their SPL2 off the ground with the vital ingredient of Rangers and their 'march back to where they belong' type crusade (and give clubs like Falkirk, Partick, Dundee some much needed exposure and cash).

The media 'save our Rangers' campaign started at 3pm yesterday IMHO. Strange that not one journalist, despite the outrage they had for Sir Fred Goodwin, the scandal that was 'bankers bonuses', the severe cutbacks to public services and job losses that effect all of the UK due to chronic mismanagement both political and private, has not taken it upon themselves to stand from the rooftop and shout aloud that over £70 million of syphoned off cash could have built 5 football/sports academies, built a new hospital wing or a few of schools, or saved countless jobs in both the public and private sector.


Rangers have IMHO committed 'legalised' fraud against the state and I loathe any politicain, such as Curran or Robison, getting involved and offering advice or 'support' to their plight.......they should be putting their weight behind efforts to recoup the lost tax AND then start to offer support to get Rangers acting responsibly once it is paid back to the public purse. How much has Rangers for example cost the everyday tax payer with their decades of bigotry, hatred, violence, rioting, death and domestic abuse. Charlatans the lot of them.


And so much for people monitoring and overseeing their forums. I don't normally venture onto other teams forums however I have done this last few days. On RangersMedia there have been posts hoping that David Murray gets cancer, posts that allude to nail bombs being sent to Parkhead, threads that want to reintroduction of singing sectarian songs and the 'Billy Boys', and constant references to catholics and child abuse.........in one today, about an article stating they pretty much have themselves to blame, the opening posts were 'bet it was written by a pape'. Is it any wonder that the nation is in the state it's in eh.


For me, the OF are two cheeks on the same arse. Both are Scotland's Shame.

Can't agree about a few things here.

1. forget about the £75m that Whyte is talking about. Bullwhyte. The tax is half of that.

2. the media ARE talking critically about things. The Herald for one. Channel 4 News last night. Jim Traynor on Newsnight last night for another; much as I don't normally care for him, he was asking the important questions. Like... where has the Ticketus money gone? Where has the Jelavic money gone?

The media are not as they once were. They know that people no longer have blind faith in what they spit out. Yes, they know that RFC and CFC supporters are in the majority. But they also read fora like this.. they know the mood of the non-OF supporter. The responsible media will reflect that.

[Andy74]

They said on the radio last night (i think it was on Real radio) that ST holders will be allowed in this weekend for free. They were pleading for the "loyal" army to turn out and fill the stadium. I am guessing that ST #'s are around 35K so 15K T's to be sold bringing in ~ 400K. I think it was left hanging in the balance as to games after that, I wasnt listening too attently but I can see them saying to fans please pay again.

Home Ticket money will be their only significant income till they go POP or come out of administration.

Surely now is the time for away fans to boycot the place.

Am I missing something or do season ticket fans not generally get in for 'free' given that they've already paid for their season tickets??

[CropleyWasGod]

Am I missing something or do season ticket fans not generally get in for 'free' given that they've already paid for their season tickets??

shhhhhh..... dinny tell them. :aok:

[gringojoe]

***** them. Perfect operchancity for them to start as a brand new club in Englandshire as they have always wanted to move there as Scottish football held them back.

[DarlingtonHibee]

Can't agree about a few things here.

1. forget about the £75m that Whyte is talking about. Bullwhyte. The tax is half of that.

2. the media ARE talking critically about things. The Herald for one. Channel 4 News last night. Jim Traynor on Newsnight last night for another; much as I don't normally care for him, he was asking the important questions. Like... where has the Ticketus money gone? Where has the Jelavic money gone?

The media are not as they once were. They know that people no longer have blind faith in what they spit out. Yes, they know that RFC and CFC supporters are in the majority. But they also read fora like this.. they know the mood of the non-OF supporter. The responsible media will reflect that.

Still wont stop SPL chiefs bottling it....

I can see it now "Scottish football needs a strong Rangers"....:blah: :blah:

[IWasThere2016]

I think this is the SPL TV deal that was mooted previously and not the existing Sky deal.

For the record i am horrified at the scare mongering approach we seem to be getting from the media so far. I would quite like (maybe i have missed it somewhere) if one of them came out and said what a lot of non-Rangers fans are thinking which is....Stuff them, they cheated and now they can fall on their own sword.

You have read the threads on here re life witouth the OF? There's plenty posters on here stated we couldn't live with them. Don't see it myself - I think the lack of competition has the game dying a slow and painful one. I genuinely think the game would improve without them.

[marinello59]

So we are competing now with the TV money are we?

Eh? Where did I say that? I was talking about our ability to compete in Europe, you know, something ambitious footballing nations want to do.

If we want players of a decent standard in Scotland then we have to pay decent wages. Don't we? Without the TV money the ability of our clubs to do that will be limited.

[Andy74]

Eh? Where did I say that? I was talking about our ability to compete in Europe, you know, something ambitious footballing nations want to do.

If we want players of a decent standard in Scotland then we have to pay decent wages. Don't we? Without the TV money the ability of our clubs to do that will be limited.

Yeah, but we get that money now and we have no chance of competing in Europe under the current set up. Just qualifying is bad enough as two places are already taken.

The standard of player we can attract doesn't bother me. Why watch average players competing for nothing and achieving nothing in a dead league?

Less than average players playing in a competitive and living league would satisfy me far more.

The upshot might be that we develop our own talent again. We seem to be getting left behing by the likes of Irish and Scandiavian leagues in a European sense, take away the Old Firm.

I do get the money argument but I fail to see what could be worse than the quite awful situation we have right now from a competition point of view.

Do the thousdands that go and watch Junior football care too much about the relative standard or do they enjoy the competititon, the entertinment and the identity?

[marinello59]

Yeah, but we get that money now and we have no chance of competing in Europe under the current set up. Just qualifying is bad enough as two places are already taken.

The standard of player we can attract doesn't bother me. Why watch average players competing for nothing and achieving nothing in a dead league?

Less than average players playing in a competitive and living league would satisfy me far more.

The upshot might be that we develop our own talent again. We seem to be getting left behing by the likes of Irish and Scandiavian leagues in a European sense, take away the Old Firm.

I do get the money argument but I fail to see what could be worse than the quite awful situation we have right now from a competition point of view.

Do the thousdands that go and watch Junior football care too much about the relative standard or do they enjoy the competititon, the entertinment and the identity?

That's why I asked the question, are we at the stage where we are willing to accept lower standards as a trade off for a more competive league? It smacks of lack of ambition to me. Scotland the Brave? Naw, we'll just give up and play amongst ourselves, the big boys ruined our game. :boo hoo:

[Andy74]

That's why I asked the question, are we at the stage where we are willing to accept lower standards as a trade off for a more competive league? It smacks of lack of ambition to me. Scotland the Brave? Naw, we'll just give up and play amongst ourselves, the big boys ruined our game. :boo hoo:

Yes we are at that stage. The current set up ensures that two clubs can pay over £30 million per year in wages whilst the rest of us can muster about £4 million per year at best. That's the reality and any change to that would be welcome, whether its with the Old Firm or whithout them.

Just saying we can't change the current set up because of TV money is crazy, we have that now and it's not doing anyhting for competition or furthering us in Europe.

Yes, Celtic and Rangers have always been a bit bigger but you'd have to say that it's got out of hand now, hasn't it? It wasn't like this forever.

[s.a.m]

Am I missing something or do season ticket fans not generally get in for 'free' given that they've already paid for their season tickets??

I know nowt about this, but I'm assuming that the season tickets are now redundant, and their holders are now creditors? I remember reading something similar about gift tokens, and other sorts of credit, when retail chains have collapsed.


Eh? Where did I say that? I was talking about our ability to compete in Europe, you know, something ambitious footballing nations want to do.

If we want players of a decent standard in Scotland then we have to pay decent wages. Don't we? Without the TV money the ability of our clubs to do that will be limited.

I'd probably agree with you if I thought that the money we have at present was enabling us too compete - but as far as I can see, Scottish clubs have been using the money that we get to sign mediocre journeymen, and the standard that we are getting is on a downward spiral. The status quo doesn't appear to be working. I can understand the concerns that people have about a future with much-reduced income, but can it be any worse? If this is the event that forces clubs to invest in development, then it may turn out to be a good thing.

[marinello59]

Yes we are at that stage. The current set up ensures that two clubs can pay over £30 million per year in wages whilst the rest of us can muster about £4 million per year at best. That's the reality and any change to that would be welcome, whether its with the Old Firm or whithout them.

Just saying we can't change the current set up because of TV money is crazy, we have that now and it's not doing anything for competition or furthering us in Europe.

It would be even worse without it. A Scottish team would never be seen in the Champions League again. We all want to see more competition but surely we also want to see our national sport make a mark outside of our own borders.

[Haymaker]

Didnt we lose the SKY money before?

We survived once, we can survive again.

[GreenPJ]

So we are competing now with the TV money are we?

I think the issue is that all clubs (possibly with the exception of ICT?) have existing debt that needs to be serviced and can't be serviced on matchday income alone. With reduced attendances and reduced TV money they would have no way of servicing that debt so even if they were up challenging for second they could still be in deep trouble. Unless the collective Scottish football debt can be restructured somehow (government guarantee or some preferential lending) I can't help but think the Chairmen and SPL are only ever going to vote for whatever is going to bring them the most money.

[PaulSmith]

It would be even worse without it. A Scottish team would never be seen in the Champions League again. We all want to see more competition but surely we also want to see our national sport make a mark outside of our own borders.

There's a next to zero chance of seeing another Scottish club in the Champs league with the current TV deal. I'd maybe even argue that if we're forced to get back to basics then through time we may be in a better position than other Euro countries should UEFA push through with vigour their financial fair play settings.

[CropleyWasGod]

I think the issue is that all clubs (possibly with the exception of ICT?) have existing debt that needs to be serviced and can't be serviced on matchday income alone. With reduced attendances and reduced TV money they would have no way of servicing that debt so even if they were up challenging for second they could still be in deep trouble. Unless the collective Scottish football debt can be restructured somehow (government guarantee or some preferential lending) I can't help but think the Chairmen and SPL are only ever going to vote for whatever is going to bring them the most money.

I am willing to bet that our Board are already working on a Business Plan on the basis of "no Rangers next season". That would be prudent. I would be interested in seeing how their projections pan out.

[CropleyWasGod]

Can someone remind me how much the Sky money is, and how it is split?

[GreenPJ]

I am willing to bet that our Board are already working on a Business Plan on the basis of "no Rangers next season". That would be prudent. I would be interested in seeing how their projections pan out.

I hope they are and as you say will be interesting to see what those projections look like but am guessing they won't be good reading.

[hibeesdude]

stupid question alert......

the admin order is based round unpayed £9m in NI/PAYE apparently, that being the case why was it not paid
a) to pay other debts, pay the players - combo thereof
or
b) they just didnt pay it to help force the admin issue


if i'm correct one of the administrators first jobs is to see if the business is a going concern or not if the answer is a) then surely its an easy decision no money coming in to pay due debts = not going concern.
if the answer is b) then???? criminal proceedings?

[HibbyAndy]

Im no liking the noises coming from some of the journalists from various tv channels, Im getting the vibe these c unts are going to get away pretty much scot free with it:no way:


It will be an absolute hanging offence if these bigoted morons get away with a pishy wee points deduction and their millions of debt wiped out.

[ancienthibby]

Reporting Scotland now saying that Lord John McFall is suggesting the FSA should hold an investigation into CW's takeover.

Bet that was not in the CW MasterPlan.:greengrin

[carlos70]

PF on Radio Scotland's Sportsound playing the "Scottish football needs Rangers" card. :grr:

[Hibby Hippy]

Can someone remind me how much the Sky money is, and how it is split?

I think its something along the lines of 50% evenly spread over all clubs,25% split up according to league position,25% split between live games broadcast.i dont know actual figures but it looks weighted in favour of rantic(top two places + most live matches broadcast)

[CropleyWasGod]

I hope they are and as you say will be interesting to see what those projections look like but am guessing they won't be good reading.

Hmmm... I am not so sure that it will be as bad as some of the scaremongers would have us believe. 2 visits from Rangers.... a big drop in income, yes, but also a big drop in police and stewarding costs.

TV money... dunno..that is why I asked the question about the split.

Potential increase in walk-ups if we're able to compete for 2nd and 3rd rather than 4th?

[EuanH78]

Im no liking the noises coming from some of the journalists from various tv channels, Im getting the vibe these c unts are going to get away pretty much scot free with it:no way:


It will be an absolute hanging offence if these bigoted morons get away with a pishy wee points deduction and their millions of debt wiped out.


Been having that feeling since yesterday. That's certainly what the media is driving for. Though, its really up the SPL member clubs. I guess all we can do (and fans of other teams as well) is fire off emails to our club about how we feel.

[CropleyWasGod]

Reporting Scotland now saying that Lord John McFall is suggesting the FSA should hold an investigation into CW's takeover.

Bet that was not in the CW MasterPlan.:greengrin

Alastair Johnson has already asked the Insolvency Service to investigate.

[CropleyWasGod]

Been having that feeling since yesterday. That's certainly what the media is driving for. Though, its really up the SPL member clubs. I guess all we can do (and fans of other teams as well) is fire off emails to our club about how we feel.

Would that we had so much power :greengrin You are forgetting about the due process of law....

[ancienthibby]

Alastair Johnson has already asked the Insolvency Service to investigate.

Indeedie!

But this is a call from a well-respected heavy-hitting Parliamentarian - the issue is being ratcheted up!

[blackpoolhibs]

That herts tosser Salmond said on the news, the most important thing is the survival of Rangers football club.

Is it just me, but i'd have thought the most important thing is the payment of the tax, the tax that keeps this clown in work?

[CropleyWasGod]

Indeedie!

But this is a call from a well-respected heavy-hitting Parliamentarian - the issue is being ratcheted up!

Yup.

I think the MP's expenses nonsense and the phone-hacking stuff have had a positive effect in that "transparency" is a sexy word now. The general public are more cynical and media-savvy than ever now, and those in power and the media know that.

[stokesmessiah]

You have read the threads on here re life witouth the OF? There's plenty posters on here stated we couldn't live with them. Don't see it myself - I think the lack of competition has the game dying a slow and painful one. I genuinely think the game would improve without them.

TQM it is not often i agree with you but on this one i do. The OF have strangled the life out of the football in this country and without them i think things would be better.

[CropleyWasGod]

That herts tosser Salmond said on the news, the most important thing is the survival of Rangers football club.

Is it just me, but i'd have thought the most important thing is the payment of the tax, the tax that keeps this clown in work?

There is some sense in what he says. It is often better to save a business, and ensure a future revenue source for the Treasury (insert appropriate cynical smiley here), rather than throw people on to the dole and pay them benefits.

However, £49m..... :rolleyes:

[James70]

Billy Dodds - "The Rangers players must be going through hell"

Come off it, any players that get released will be able to find another club without much trouble and it's not like they're earning the minimum wage.

[Hibrandenburg]

I know nowt about this, but I'm assuming that the season tickets are now redundant, and their holders are now creditors? I remember reading something similar about gift tokens, and other sorts of credit, when retail chains have collapsed.



I'd probably agree with you if I thought that the money we have at present was enabling us too compete - but as far as I can see, Scottish clubs have been using the money that we get to sign mediocre journeymen, and the standard that we are getting is on a downward spiral. The status quo doesn't appear to be working. I can understand the concerns that people have about a future with much-reduced income, but can it be any worse? If this is the event that forces clubs to invest in development, then it may turn out to be a good thing.

So in other words they've not only ripped off HMRC but also their own fans?

Know what I'd tell them to do if they asked me to pay again for something I'd already paid for.

[Part/Time Supporter]

There is some sense in what he says. It is often better to save a business, and ensure a future revenue source for the Treasury (insert appropriate cynical smiley here), rather than throw people on to the dole and pay them benefits.

However, £49m..... :rolleyes:

:agree:

Best outcome is that they survive and pay back the tax due (even if it is spread over 10 years, say).

[EuanH78]

Would that we had so much power :greengrin You are forgetting about the due process of law....

I mean, I fully expect them to dodge the tax bullet and though it's cynical in the extreme I'm not sure theres anything illegal about it, pretty morally skewed though. I mean about the pheonix companies re-admittance to the SPL, if that comes to pass they really will have got away with everything and thats something so unpalatable to me I dont think I could continue to support Hibs while they remain part of scottish football (not that they have an alternative).
The thought of which saddens me quite a bit, Hibs are a clean and well run club but if the games rigged whats the point?

[CropleyWasGod]

stupid question alert......

the admin order is based round unpayed £9m in NI/PAYE apparently, that being the case why was it not paid
a) to pay other debts, pay the players - combo thereof
or
b) they just didnt pay it to help force the admin issue


if i'm correct one of the administrators first jobs is to see if the business is a going concern or not if the answer is a) then surely its an easy decision no money coming in to pay due debts = not going concern.
if the answer is b) then???? criminal proceedings?

Finally got round to answering your question :greengrin

I suspect the former. Often, if a business has cash flow problems, it's the Revenue debts that get shelved first. Wages and suppliers have to be paid in order to keep the income coming in.

However, this is CW. All assumptions are suspect! Many have said that administration was always his intention,

[blackpoolhibs]

There is some sense in what he says. It is often better to save a business, and ensure a future revenue source for the Treasury (insert appropriate cynical smiley here), rather than throw people on to the dole and pay them benefits.

However, £49m..... :rolleyes:

I dont see any sense in what he says, as in essence he's saying its fine for all of us to screw each other and not pay the taxes we owe, how does that work? :confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

I mean, I fully expect them to dodge the tax bullet and though it's cynical in the extreme I'm not sure theres anything illegal about it, pretty morally skewed though. I mean about the pheonix companies re-admittance to the SPL, if that comes to pass they really will have got away with everything and thats something so unpalatable to me I dont think I could continue to support Hibs while they remain part of scottish football (not that they have an alternative).
The thought of which saddens me quite a bit, Hibs are a clean and well run club but if the games rigged whats the point?

Ah okay...understood :agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

I dont see any sense in what he says, as in essence he's saying its fine for all of us to screw each other and not pay the taxes we owe, how does that work? :confused:

I don't think... and hope he isn't... saying that. He will be coming from the point of view of the lost jobs, the community stuff..etc etc.

Of course, in an independent Scotland, our tax authorities would never have allowed things to get this bad.....:greengrin

[blackpoolhibs]

I mean, I fully expect them to dodge the tax bullet and though it's cynical in the extreme I'm not sure theres anything illegal about it, pretty morally skewed though. I mean about the pheonix companies re-admittance to the SPL, if that comes to pass they really will have got away with everything and thats something so unpalatable to me I dont think I could continue to support Hibs while they remain part of scottish football (not that they have an alternative).
The thought of which saddens me quite a bit, Hibs are a clean and well run club but if the games rigged whats the point?

And you just know once the huns have done this, and are out of debt. The next club to do so would be slaughtered, and driven out the game by the same people who sat back and watched the huns run all over the rest of us.

[EuanH78]

And you just know once the huns have done this, and are out of debt. The next club to do so would be slaughtered, and driven out the game by the same people who sat back and watched the huns run all over the rest of us.

Yeah but that's most likely to be the diet-huns which would be kinda hysterical in it's own way :greengrin

[s.a.m]

So in other words they've not only ripped off HMRC but also their own fans?

Know what I'd tell them to do if they asked me to pay again for something I'd already paid for.

Well - like I said, I don't know anything about it, so I may well be wrong about that........I'm guessing, though, that the administrator gets to choose whether to honour previous committments or not. Does someone who DOES know about these things know the answer?

[ancienthibby]

I dont see any sense in what he says, as in essence he's saying its fine for all of us to screw each other and not pay the taxes we owe, how does that work? :confused:

The FM was very clear that RFC should pay their tax obligations at whatever level was agreed.:agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

The FM was very clear that RFC should pay their tax obligations at whatever level was agreed.:agree:

... and did he demand that pay the Hertz for Lee Wallace? :greengrin

[WindyMiller]

Can someone remind me how much the Sky money is, and how it is split?


+ All revenues generated by the SPL are effectively put into one pot. This money comes from TV deals and other commercial contracts.

+ A support payment to the SFL and parachute payments to recently relegated clubs are then removed. All associated costs of running the SPL are also deducted.

+ The remaining amount is split two ways to the member clubs: 48% is divided equally between all 12 clubs while 52% is distributed to teams dependant upon their final league position.

+ The higher up the table that a club finishes, the more money they will receive - see table below. For season 2007/08, more than £18m was paid out to SPL clubs.

League position - % of cash pot

1 - 4% + 13% = 17%
2 - 4% + 11% = 15%
3 - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5%
4 - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5%
5 - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0%
6 - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5%
7 - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0%
8 - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5%
9 - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0%
10 - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5%
11 - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0%

12 - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5%

We probably fall in the middle somewhere, giving us about 7.5% of the pot.
If that's the same for the new contract, that would give us a maximum of 7.5% of £80m over 5 years= £1.2m per season.

[blackpoolhibs]

I don't think... and hope he isn't... saying that. He will be coming from the point of view of the lost jobs, the community stuff..etc etc.

Of course, in an independent Scotland, our tax authorities would never have allowed things to get this bad.....:greengrin


Aye in an independant Scotland there will be no tax. :greengrin I understand about lost jobs and the community stuff, but this happens every day with firms going bust, and little thought or help goes out to them.

If they are allowed to get out of this mess, then its over for Scottish football imo. Not only do they spend much more than the rest, but they are even allowed to cheat their way too, while the rest of us play by the rules, they just make them up.

This will finish a lot of folk with the Scottish game imo.

[CropleyWasGod]

+ All revenues generated by the SPL are effectively put into one pot. This money comes from TV deals and other commercial contracts.

+ A support payment to the SFL and parachute payments to recently relegated clubs are then removed. All associated costs of running the SPL are also deducted.

+ The remaining amount is split two ways to the member clubs: 48% is divided equally between all 12 clubs while 52% is distributed to teams dependant upon their final league position.

+ The higher up the table that a club finishes, the more money they will receive - see table below. For season 2007/08, more than £18m was paid out to SPL clubs.

League position - % of cash pot

1 - 4% + 13% = 17%
2 - 4% + 11% = 15%
3 - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5%
4 - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5%
5 - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0%
6 - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5%
7 - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0%
8 - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5%
9 - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0%
10 - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5%
11 - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0%

12 - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5%

We probably fall in the middle somewhere, giving us about 7.5% of the pot.
If that's the same for the new contract, that would give us a maximum of 7.5% of £80m over 5 years= £1.2m per season.

Great stuff.... ta.

Okay, it's a fair chunk.....more than 10%...of our income.

Sack the Board?

[Part/Time Supporter]

I don't think... and hope he isn't... saying that. He will be coming from the point of view of the lost jobs, the community stuff..etc etc.

Of course, in an independent Scotland, our tax authorities would never have allowed things to get this bad.....:greengrin

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17035992


Meanwhile, First Minister Alex Salmond admitted he was "very concerned" about the future of Rangers. Mr Salmond has appealed to the club and HM Revenue and Customs to hold talks about how any money owed could be paid back and over what timescale.

I think that's fair enough. I mean we seem to be faced with two extreme alternatives at the moment: either Rangers go bust completely, in which case a significant amount of economic activity is lost; or Craig Whyte forms a Rangers newco, in which case all or most of the money owed to HMRC is lost to the public.

A better alternative is where Rangers and HMRC come to some sort of agreement where the amount is paid back within a reasonable period. I don't think that is what Mr Whyte is planning, however. In which case the state (through HMRC) needs to pursue him vigorously.

[green glory]

The FM was very clear that RFC should pay their tax obligations at whatever level was agreed.:agree:

The SNP are no friend of RFC. Public statements about support will be regarding people losing their jobs which is fair enough. Lip-service that's all.

[ancienthibby]

... and did he demand that pay the Hertz for Lee Wallace? :greengrin

He pointedly did not!

[WindyMiller]

I dont see any sense in what he says, as in essence he's saying its fine for all of us to screw each other and not pay the taxes we owe, how does that work? :confused:

What Salmond was saying BH, was that Rangers surviving and the debt being paid would be the best result.

[blackpoolhibs]

What Salmond was saying BH, was that Rangers surviving and the debt being paid would be the best result.

Unless i watched a different interview, his first words were, the most important thing was the survival of Rangers football club. Now that maybe his opinion, but it does carry a lot of clout, as i dont feel that is anywhere near the most important thing in this?

The most important thing in all of this is we all play by the same rules, and clearly Salmond does not think this way, or he'd think the most important thing was we all pay our taxes so the country runs smoothly?

We dont fiddle our way out of what we owe, and leave all the creditors with penny's in the pound?

Saying that he is a politician, most couldn't lye straight in bed.

[Twa Cairpets]

[/B]...We probably fall in the middle somewhere, giving us about 7.5% of the pot.
If that's the same for the new contract, that would give us a maximum of 7.5% of £80m over 5 years= £1.2m per season.

Very roughly with 19 homes games a season and an average of £20 a ticket, that would equate to us needing an extra 3,157 punters through the turnstiles every home game to make up the loss, and tht ius assuming of course that every single penny of TV revenue drops away. If you assume it halves, for arguments sake, then we would need an extra 1700 or so to come. Neither figure unreasonable for Hibs if they're up there challenging and playing decent football. I concede it is more serious for smaller clubs in the league where this increase wouldnt be feasible.

What is more important though is the reduction in income from punters (myself included) who would seriously be thinking about the value of watching a chronically unfair and laughable competition if they are allowed back relatively unscathed. I'd suggest it would be bigger than this.

I feel sorry for the SPL - damned if they do, damned of they dont, so take the morally correct route and make it work.

[sahib]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17035992



I think that's fair enough. I mean we seem to be faced with two extreme alternatives at the moment: either Rangers go bust completely, in which case a significant amount of economic activity is lost; or Craig Whyte forms a Rangers newco, in which case all or most of the money owed to HMRC is lost to the public.

A better alternative is where Rangers and HMRC come to some sort of agreement where the amount is paid back within a reasonable period. I don't think that is what Mr Whyte is planning, however. In which case the state (through HMRC) needs to pursue him vigorously.

I am reminded of the words of Noel Coward

Let's be meek to them
And turn the other cheek to them
And try to bring out their latent sense of fun.
Let's give them full air parity
And treat the rats with charity,
But don't let's be beastly to the Hun.

[WindyMiller]

Very roughly with 19 homes games a season and an average of £20 a ticket, that would equate to us needing an extra 3,157 punters through the turnstiles every home game to make up the loss, and tht ius assuming of course that every single penny of TV revenue drops away. If you assume it halves, for arguments sake, then we would need an extra 1700 or so to come. Neither figure unreasonable for Hibs if they're up there challenging and playing decent football. I concede it is more serious for smaller clubs in the league where this increase wouldnt be feasible.

What is more important though is the reduction in income from punters (myself included) who would seriously be thinking about the value of watching a chronically unfair and laughable competition if they are allowed back relatively unscathed. I'd suggest it would be bigger than this.

I feel sorry for the SPL - damned if they do, damned of they dont, so take the morally correct route and make it work.

There are many regular attendees that prefer to stay and watch the match in the pub/on-line if it's an early kick-off.
Perhaps the T.V. companies will need to work a bit harder building up interest in the lesser teams rather than only talking about the O.F.

[blackpoolhibs]

There are many regular attendees that prefer to stay and watch the match in the pub/on-line if it's an early kick-off

:agree: Me, i miss most early kick offs.

[WindyMiller]

:agree: Me, i miss most early kick offs.


Lot's of parents have other things to do on a Saturday or Sunday morning.

But in your case it's just the drink taking it's toll.



:greengrin

[blackpoolhibs]

Lot's of parents have other things to do on a Saturday or Sunday morning.

But in your case it's just the drink taking it's toll.



:greengrin

:wink:

[Eyrie]

+ All revenues generated by the SPL are effectively put into one pot. This money comes from TV deals and other commercial contracts.

+ A support payment to the SFL and parachute payments to recently relegated clubs are then removed. All associated costs of running the SPL are also deducted.

+ The remaining amount is split two ways to the member clubs: 48% is divided equally between all 12 clubs while 52% is distributed to teams dependant upon their final league position.

+ The higher up the table that a club finishes, the more money they will receive - see table below. For season 2007/08, more than £18m was paid out to SPL clubs.

League position - % of cash pot

1 - 4% + 13% = 17%
2 - 4% + 11% = 15%
3 - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5%
4 - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5%
5 - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0%
6 - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5%
7 - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0%
8 - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5%
9 - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0%
10 - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5%
11 - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0%

12 - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5%

We probably fall in the middle somewhere, giving us about 7.5% of the pot.
If that's the same for the new contract, that would give us a maximum of 7.5% of £80m over 5 years= £1.2m per season.

Excellent stuff - thanks.

So we boot the Huns to Division 3, then organise the other clubs to vote through a more equitable split of revenue with first getting 11.5% (4%+7.5%, down 5.5%), second getting 10.5% (4%+6.5%, down 4.5%) and the others staying the same. If Sky insist on a new deal then this can be arranged on the basis of a 10% cut and only Celtic will lose out on their currently unfair share for finishing first/second every season.

Even if the next deal comes in at 20% less then Hibs are only down £120k. Hardly big money when we will have a much better chance of European football and cup success with Rangers out of the picture, so the increased crowds will offset.

[CropleyWasGod]

Excellent stuff - thanks.

So we boot the Huns to Division 3, then organise the other clubs to vote through a more equitable split of revenue with first getting 11.5% (4%+7.5%, down 5.5%), second getting 10.5% (4%+6.5%, down 4.5%) and the others staying the same. If Sky insist on a new deal then this can be arranged on the basis of a 10% cut and only Celtic will lose out on their currently unfair share for finishing first/second every season.

Even if the next deal comes in at 20% less then Hibs are only down £120k. Hardly big money when we will have a much better chance of European football and cup success with Rangers out of the picture, so the increased crowds will offset.

Not a chance. It'll be more like a 50% cut.

[EasterRoad4Ever]

Unless i watched a different interview, his first words were, the most important thing was the survival of Rangers football club. Now that maybe his opinion, but it does carry a lot of clout, as i dont feel that is anywhere near the most important thing in this?

The most important thing in all of this is we all play by the same rules, and clearly Salmond does not think this way, or he'd think the most important thing was we all pay our taxes so the country runs smoothly?

We dont fiddle our way out of what we owe, and leave all the creditors with penny's in the pound?

Saying that he is a politician, most couldn't lye straight in bed.

:agree:exactly what I thought when some SNP no mark was interviewed this morning. All they were saying was the RFC must survive.

What about the £million they have scammed out of the State ? What about justice and fairness to those who have played the game and paid their taxes - and effectively suffered as a result.

The Huns have had their Fun, now it's payback time. Let the buggers go to wall - if nothing else as an example to others. Otherwise, it appears that crime does pay after all. What other privately owned company in Scotland owing the Revenue £50million could get a government bail out ??? This is all about politicians chasing votes - nothing else. I understand the banks getting bailed out as it affects the hole economy, but football is a game - nothing more - and apparently the source of bigotry, domestic violence, racial and religious hatred. You got to ask the question, WHY the rush to bail out RFC ?

[CropleyWasGod]

:agree:exactly what I thought when some SNP no mark was interviewed this morning. All they were saying was the RFC must survive.

What about the £million they have scammed out of the State ? What about justice and fairness to those who have played the game and paid their taxes - and effectively suffered as a result.

The Huns have had their Fun, now it's payback time. Let the buggers go to wall - if nothing else as an example to others. Otherwise, it appears that crime does pay after all. What other privately owned company in Scotland owing the Revenue £50million could get a government bail out ??? This is all about politicians chasing votes - nothing else. I understand the banks getting bailed out as it affects the hole economy, but football is a game - nothing more - and apparently the source of bigotry, domestic violence, racial and religious hatred. You got to ask the question, WHY the rush to bail out RFC ?

Missed this bit. Who said the Government were bailing them out?

[Eyrie]

You got to ask the question, WHY the rush to bail out RFC ?

Because the politicians think they will lose votes if they upset Rangers fans.

They need to realise that supporters of other teams and those with no interest in football whatsoever far outnumber the Huns, and this is public money at stake. Would any of these politicians be so keen to let a bank off the hook for using a similar tax evasion scheme?

Hypocrisy of the usual order from our elected representatives.

[thekaratekid]

It's worrying that someone at Duff & Phelps assisted Whyte with the takeover of Rangers.

I thought administrators were meant to be wholly independent?

[ScottB]

I don't see it as any more than lip service, enough positive noises to placate Rangers fans, no actual offers that would enrage the rest of us.

Would anyone honestly expect Salmond to come out and say 'let the Huns burn for it!' then? It's pretty unlikely, at the end of the day these speeches and soundbites are aimed at the fans / general public, not the club hierarchy.

Even if the Government wanted to bail them out, where the hell would they find the £100million plus needed to settle their debts and get them going again? Holyrood can't borrow, and they wouldn't even consider cutting it from something else important.


Flying pigs will be playing up front for Rangers before they get bailed out by the Government!

[killie-hibby]

Eh? Where did I say that? I was talking about our ability to compete in Europe, you know, something ambitious footballing nations want to do.

If we want players of a decent standard in Scotland then we have to pay decent wages. Don't we? Without the TV money the ability of our clubs to do that will be limited.


Can you provide proof or evidence of TV money being advantageous to Hibs.

[thekaratekid]

http://i40.tinypic.com/2ueiemv.jpg

:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

Can you provide proof or evidence of TV money being advantageous to Hibs.

lol

[killie-hibby]

lol

Why LOL?

[TornadoHibby]

Am I missing something or do season ticket fans not generally get in for 'free' given that they've already paid for their season tickets??

Don't thinks so unless the Administrators allow them to get in for free! :wink:

The Admninistrators are not bound by any contracts entered into before they were appointed unless they agree to be bound by them! Apparently they have stated that they will not be bound by the ST contracts but will allow ST holders in for free on Saturday. Probably won't for subsequent games as they will require income to meet the wages and operating costs as they fall due I imagine! :confused:

[ScottB]

The league survived going from the old bumper Sky to deal to pennies from the BBC, they'd survive a drop in TV money due to there being no Rangers just the same.

Doesn't mean cutbacks wouldn't have to be made, but the idea that the league would crumble is a nonsense.

[HFC 0-7]

The league survived going from the old bumper Sky to deal to pennies from the BBC, they'd survive a drop in TV money due to there being no Rangers just the same.

Doesn't mean cutbacks wouldn't have to be made, but the idea that the league would crumble is a nonsense.

Have Hibs not said recently its not the TV money that keeps us going its people attending games that provide the bulk of income, if so and Sky pull the plug on the tv deal then it could mean more people through the gate as it would be more competative and better chances for everyone else to get a european space.

[CropleyWasGod]

Why LOL?

I thought it was funny.

But I take it you're not joking then?

If you look at the posts on the previous page (WindyMiller etc.), you will see the extent to which Hibs benefit from TV money.

[HFC 0-7]

+ All revenues generated by the SPL are effectively put into one pot. This money comes from TV deals and other commercial contracts.

+ A support payment to the SFL and parachute payments to recently relegated clubs are then removed. All associated costs of running the SPL are also deducted.

+ The remaining amount is split two ways to the member clubs: 48% is divided equally between all 12 clubs while 52% is distributed to teams dependant upon their final league position.

+ The higher up the table that a club finishes, the more money they will receive - see table below. For season 2007/08, more than £18m was paid out to SPL clubs.

League position - % of cash pot

1 - 4% + 13% = 17%
2 - 4% + 11% = 15%
3 - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5%
4 - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5%
5 - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0%
6 - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5%
7 - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0%
8 - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5%
9 - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0%
10 - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5%
11 - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0%

12 - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5%

We probably fall in the middle somewhere, giving us about 7.5% of the pot.
If that's the same for the new contract, that would give us a maximum of 7.5% of £80m over 5 years= £1.2m per season.

Losing the TV money could be a problem but IMO it depends on what circumstances. If it was because rangers are relegated to the third division I think it would make for a better league as it would be more competative for european places. We have been banging on for years about having a more competative league, yes it would now be a one horse race for celtic each year but for european spots it would be more competative. That sort of thing could easily boost attendances. 3500 extra people through the gate each game could plug that 1.2M hole. As other have said, the league and club have survived with small TV deals before.

[HibeeBigFly]

It's worrying that someone at Duff & Phelps assisted Whyte with the takeover of Rangers.

I thought administrators were meant to be wholly independent?

That pisses me off. I took one look at the administrator and am convinced he will be one of whyte's henchmen. How hmrc weren't allowed to appoint is completely baffling. No doubt contingency plans in place! The whole thing is starting to stink imo. I seriously hope I am proved wrong.

[silverhibee]

http://twitpic.com/8kf2dy

[Andy74]

Don't thinks so unless the Administrators allow them to get in for free! :wink:

The Admninistrators are not bound by any contracts entered into before they were appointed unless they agree to be bound by them! Apparently they have stated that they will not be bound by the ST contracts but will allow ST holders in for free on Saturday. Probably won't for subsequent games as they will require income to meet the wages and operating costs as they fall due I imagine! :confused:

That's brilliant! :greengrin

[HibeeBigFly]

http://twitpic.com/8kf2dy

Arabs banning fans bit is a nice touch. Hope that is a trend that catches on.

[CropleyWasGod]

Arabs banning fans bit is a nice touch. Hope that is a trend that catches on.

They're not banning fans. That would be stupid,

They are asking for the money from RFC first, before they let them have tickets. That's only sensible.

[HibeeBigFly]

They're not banning fans. That would be stupid,

They are asking for the money from RFC first, before they let them have tickets. That's only sensible.

Didn't read the small print. I just live in hope of rangers free stadiums. Fingers crossed we are rid of that lovely bunch for a few season. On a side note do most teams not sell to them direct?

[Part/Time Supporter]

Missed this bit. Who said the Government were bailing them out?

Nobody did. Salmond said that Rangers and HMRC should talk in an attempt to reach argreement on how Rangers can pay what's due. The sports minister (Robison) said that the Government will assist with any fall-out (ie young players or normal employees being laid off by the administrator). No bailout or forgiveness. In any case, the Scottish Parliament doesn't have the legal authority to do that.

The only politician I have read who has explicitly called for HMRC to go easy on Rangers is Brian Donohoe, a backbench Labour MP.

[CropleyWasGod]

Nobody did. Salmond said that Rangers and HMRC should talk in an attempt to reach argreement on how Rangers can pay what's due. The sports minister (Robison) said that the Government will assist with any fall-out (ie young players or normal employees being laid off by the administrator). No bailout or forgiveness. In any case, the Scottish Parliament doesn't have the legal authority to do that.

The only politician I have read who has explicitly called for HMRC to go easy on Rangers is Brian Donohoe, a backbench Labour MP.

Yeah, I know. I was being facetious earlier to the poster who was talking about them being bailed out.

[Northernhibee]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKV88nEMu50&feature=related

Even if Rangers go bust, at least they gave us this wonderful moment.

[killie-hibby]

I thought it was funny.

But I take it you're not joking then?

If you look at the posts on the previous page (WindyMiller etc.), you will see the extent to which Hibs benefit from TV money.


Not joking. WindyMiller calculates TV money as £1.2m per season for Hibs. I calculate this as £63158 for each of our 19 home games. For category B matches at £22 and £12 for concessions, we would likely average £17 per walk up admission. Therefore 3715 walk ups required to cover the loss of TV money. Over recent seasons our crowds at televised matches have been lower than when playing the same teams in the absence of TV. I agree with other posters that without live TV crowds at Hibs and other SPL clubs would increase to a level which would more than compensate for the loss of TV money. Scottish football is being suffocated by the demands of TV companies. IMOP TV money has not been advantageous.

[CropleyWasGod]

Not joking. WindyMiller calculates TV money as £1.2m per season for Hibs. I calculate this as £63158 for each of our 19 home games. For category B matches at £22 and £12 for concessions, we would likely average £17 per walk up admission. Therefore 3715 walk ups required to cover the loss of TV money. Over recent seasons our crowds at televised matches have been lower than when playing the same teams in the absence of TV. I agree with other posters that without live TV crowds at Hibs and other SPL clubs would increase to a level which would more than compensate for the loss of TV money. Scottish football is being suffocated by the demands of TV companies. IMOP TV money has not been advantageous.

Okay, sorry, I misunderstood the tone of your initial question.

3700 extra punters is a steep increase. That's about the number of walk-ups we have at the moment, no? So we would have to double the walk-ups.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see 12-13,000 every week. Just don't know if it's likely.

[ScottB]

Nobody did. Salmond said that Rangers and HMRC should talk in an attempt to reach argreement on how Rangers can pay what's due. The sports minister (Robison) said that the Government will assist with any fall-out (ie young players or normal employees being laid off by the administrator). No bailout or forgiveness. In any case, the Scottish Parliament doesn't have the legal authority to do that.

The only politician I have read who has explicitly called for HMRC to go easy on Rangers is Brian Donohoe, a backbench Labour MP.

I can recall Jim Murphy saying they should be bailed out in the past back when the tax case came to light, yet another reason to dislike him :greengrin

[killie-hibby]

Okay, sorry, I misunderstood the tone of your initial question.

3700 extra punters is a steep increase. That's about the number of walk-ups we have at the moment, no? So we would have to double the walk-ups.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to see 12-13,000 every week. Just don't know if it's likely.


My thinking is on the basis of ten SPL clubs being given a huge boost by Rangers being in administration and hopefully eventual liquidation. The psycophantic media believe Sky would withdraw their current SPL agreement if Rangers are kicked out. If that happens the habit of attending matches at 3pm on Saturdays and the realistic possibility of finishing second would boost crowds. I have stopped going to early KO,s. More than likely I am not the only one.
The general opinion is that the standard of Scottish football has being going down the plughole. Television has not helped, its time to get back to basics.

[ScottB]

My thinking is on the basis of ten SPL clubs being given a huge boost by Rangers being in administration and hopefully eventual liquidation. The psycophantic media believe Sky would withdraw their current SPL agreement if Rangers are kicked out. If that happens the habit of attending matches at 3pm on Saturdays and the realistic possibility of finishing second would boost crowds. I have stopped going to early KO,s. More than likely I am not the only one.
The general opinion is that the standard of Scottish football has being going down the plughole. Television has not helped, its time to get back to basics.

Agreed.

I live in Glasgow, even at that distance making an evening kick off after work is pretty much impossible, and an early kick off a right pain in the ass if god forbid you like the slightest hint of a lie in on a day off!

[brydekirk]

***** them. Perfect operchancity for them to start as a brand new club in Englandshire as they have always wanted to move there as Scottish football held them back.

Good shout,.

[Bishop Hibee]

I can't believe there are posters on here advocating we can't survive without the huns because of tv/home game revenue. I know plenty fans who don't attend OF games on a variety of principles that I don't btw agree with.

Similarly, our crowds would increase if we were more competitive as we would be from the demise of one of our rivals.

Don't do the huns job for them. C'mon HMRC!

I'd rather watch amateur quality football if it meant those **** were gone forever.

[brydekirk]

The SNP are no friend of RFC. Public statements about support will be regarding people losing their jobs which is fair enough. Lip-service that's all.

I hope so

[Lucius Apuleius]

OK, couple of points. Never saw the interview with Salmond however I cannot believe a politician would come out and defend wholeheartedly the very group who completely disagree with his main policy and unlikely to vote for his party anyhoo.

Not often I disagree with M59 but I believe the televised football matches drag down the attendances to a level lower than TV income benefits, therefore no problem for me to go back to seeing 2 or 3 games a season live on TV. I do however see a problem where kids growing up whose fathers have not a lot of interest in live football also become the same and nurture an affinity for teams from SKY and ESPN rather than a local team.

Der Hun have to be pursued for every penny they owe. We do not owe anything to these guys or their history. It is good that certain people are starting to argue against saving them at any cost. That money must be recouped in the current financial climate and I would hope the government would eventually step in and make some sort of comment.

[Hibs07p]

The attractiveness of a season ticket has been gradually eroded over a number of years due to numerous reasons, including increased seating, and TV schedules. At one point it was a good bit cheaper, than attending as an ever present walk up fan. After all seated stadia was introduced, ST's meant you could sit beside your friends, at all games, especially the "big games", and not have to queue for tickets. All our "big games" at home are now on TV, at times that are not conducive to all ST holders, with a significant reduction in our home support. The loss of Rangers, their "benefit" to Scottish football through advertising and TV revenue, would be negligible, and if more supporters attended the game, rather than watch it on TV, Hibs, IMO, would benefit more, in a more competitive league, with little or no TV coverage.

GGTTH

[Gatecrasher]

So if rangers or Celtic were to be relegated for whatever reason sky have the option to pull out of the t. Deal? That's a pathetic clause for the SPL to allow and totally puts into perspective how it's one rule for them and another for everyone else. **** sky and espn give us a league without em

[greenginger]

If Sky want to pull out of the T V deal because of a shortage of Bigot-fests let them.

What Scottish Football needs is a decent TV deal with the BBC providing a good quality highlights program and a set number of live games in a season.

At the moment the BBC spends about one hundredth of the cash on Scottish Football than it does on the block coverage given to all aspects of the game in England.

10% of the License Fee money comes from Scotland and the SPL and politicians eager to gain some credibility from footballs current problems should be raising this inequality with the BBC.

[tamig]

My thinking is on the basis of ten SPL clubs being given a huge boost by Rangers being in administration and hopefully eventual liquidation. The psycophantic media believe Sky would withdraw their current SPL agreement if Rangers are kicked out. If that happens the habit of attending matches at 3pm on Saturdays and the realistic possibility of finishing second would boost crowds. I have stopped going to early KO,s. More than likely I am not the only one.
The general opinion is that the standard of Scottish football has being going down the plughole. Television has not helped, its time to get back to basics.

Agreed. Although it was in a different financial climate when we were guilty of spending beyond our means, you only need to go back to the First Division season in 98-99. When we went on that great run ER was packed and buzzing. No OF and any TV deal (to speak of) in these days. I'm sure PF will have us challenging at the very top end again and the crowds will return. Having one of the OF missing only strengthens that challenge imo.

[Andy74]

Agreed. Although it was in a different financial climate when we were guilty of spending beyond our means, you only need to go back to the First Division season in 98-99. When we went on that great run ER was packed and buzzing. No OF and any TV deal (to speak of) in these days. I'm sure PF will have us challenging at the very top end again and the crowds will return. Having one of the OF missing only strengthens that challenge imo.

Totally agree.

The TV deal line is a joke - the game is currently badly broken here as it is. I'd happily see what happens without one or either of the OF and without a TV deal.

[pentlando]

From the bits on this thread i've looked at I can see two prevailing arguments. 1. That Hibs benefit more from the TV deal than if it wasn't there and 2. Hibs would benefit more or equally from no tv games and increased walk ups. What I would argue is that it shouldn't be a question of figures of current TV earnings and current attendance, but rather a question of how Hibs would be relative to the other SPL teams. For example, Hibs may lose 1.2 million a season from the TV deal, but so would every other SPL side. What we need is someone who can work out how the removal of Rangers and the TV deal would impact on Hibs in comparison to other SPL sides. Then we make a decision based on that. Part of me wants Rangers to die and never return, but the other part thinks what if keeping Rangers in the SPL actually benefits Hibs in comparison to the other sides. Are we better placed, or worse placed, than the other sides to handle life after Rangers? If anyone has any formula to work it out then throw it into the mix!

[IWasThere2016]

Just short - but they still loaned more to SMEs almost as much as the other banks combined.

Failed on the no1 benchmark (IMHO) then. Nae bonus fully merited :cb

[StevieC]

What I would argue is that it shouldn't be a question of figures of current TV earnings and current attendance, but rather a question of how Hibs would be relative to the other SPL teams.

I would think that relative to other teams that Hibs would be better placed without a TV deal due to the average size of crowd.

However, that seems a slightly selfish approach to decision making and we should not be looking to gain advantages over others but looking towards making a more competitive league with teams on a more even keel.

[GreenPJ]

From the bits on this thread i've looked at I can see two prevailing arguments. 1. That Hibs benefit more from the TV deal than if it wasn't there and 2. Hibs would benefit more or equally from no tv games and increased walk ups. What I would argue is that it shouldn't be a question of figures of current TV earnings and current attendance, but rather a question of how Hibs would be relative to the other SPL teams. For example, Hibs may lose 1.2 million a season from the TV deal, but so would every other SPL side. What we need is someone who can work out how the removal of Rangers and the TV deal would impact on Hibs in comparison to other SPL sides. Then we make a decision based on that. Part of me wants Rangers to die and never return, but the other part thinks what if keeping Rangers in the SPL actually benefits Hibs in comparison to the other sides. Are we better placed, or worse placed, than the other sides to handle life after Rangers? If anyone has any formula to work it out then throw it into the mix!

People seem to be forgetting that all clubs, most worse than us, have debt to service now. Its all well and good saying income will reduce and so costs will have to be cut but the debt that exists now does not disappear and banks want their money back now more so than ever. This is the part where we may be better than others but does it really do us any good if you have clubs like Dundee Utd or Killie whose current debt becomes unserviceable and may have to enter administration themselves.

[Andy74]

Failed on the no1 benchmark (IMHO) then. Nae bonus fully merited :cb

He was allocated 60% of his total entitlement.

[pentlando]

People seem to be forgetting that all clubs, most worse than us, have debt to service now. Its all well and good saying income will reduce and so costs will have to be cut but the debt that exists now does not disappear and banks want their money back now more so than ever. This is the part where we may be better than others but does it really do us any good if you have clubs like Dundee Utd or Killie whose current debt becomes unserviceable and may have to enter administration themselves.

True and clubs will have to cut their cloth accordingly. Clubs with bigger debt will have to make bigger cuts, which probably bodes well for Hibs with our significantly reduced debt compared to previous years, but we must remember that our last two January signing sprees and poor performances must have hit us in the pocket too. Therefore the potential demise of Rangers could go two ways. It could force clubs to wake up and smell the coffee, with a club the size of Rangers going busts other clubs may redouble their debt servicing measures. Or it could actually force these clubs further down, with the lack of up to 8,000 away fans per annum paying top whack for tickets when Rangers play. We would inevitably lose out on co-efficients with less success in Europe meaning more early season qualifiers and less chance of getting to group stages/1st rounds etc. The whole thing is a bit guessing game, the only way we'll know for sure is when it actually happens.


I would think that relative to other teams that Hibs would be better placed without a TV deal due to the average size of crowd.

However, that seems a slightly selfish approach to decision making and we should not be looking to gain advantages over others but looking towards making a more competitive league with teams on a more even keel.

I'm all for change in the Scottish game, even if it doesn't directly benefit Hibs. However should we be pressing for change if it might disproportionately impact Hibs. As you say, we might have one of the higher average attendances and best quality stadium and training centre. But we also have higher outgoings on maintenance of our infrastructure and a higher wage output than most too. Surely if the Scottish game's finances was to nosedive we'd be quite at risk due to our higher than average expenditure?

[tamig]

He was allocated 60% of his total entitlement.

Indeed. Other measures were also in place.

[BurghHibby]

If Sky want to pull out of the T V deal because of a shortage of Bigot-fests let them.

What Scottish Football needs is a decent TV deal with the BBC providing a good quality highlights program and a set number of live games in a season.

At the moment the BBC spends about one hundredth of the cash on Scottish Football than it does on the block coverage given to all aspects of the game in England.

10% of the License Fee money comes from Scotland and the SPL and politicians eager to gain some credibility from footballs current problems should be raising this inequality with the BBC.

Spot on, I've been advocating this for years, Sportscene relegated to late Sunday nights or whenever there's an inconvenient slot to fill in and really crap coverage at that.
Consider what the BBC spent on last years F1 coverage for what is basically a minority sport (although I do like it) in comparison to football in this country.
The SPL should demand at least 10% of what the BBC spend on the EPL, same with the SFL re the football league coverage.

[pentlando]

Spot on, I've been advocating this for years, Sportscene relegated to late Sunday nights or whenever there's an inconvenient slot to fill in and really crap coverage at that.
Consider what the BBC spent on last years F1 coverage for what is basically a minority sport (although I do like it) in comparison to football in this country.
The SPL should demand at least 10% of what the BBC spend on the EPL, same with the SFL re the football league coverage.

Or alternatively a collapse of the SKY deal could mean a chance to get the SPL TV channel going. I like the idea of having a channel dedicated to the SPL, therefore we know that every penny spent towards subscribing to the channel is reinvested straight into our game. It could include one or two live matches per week, at peak times and not just slotted in around EPL matches. A comprehensive highlights package on a Saturday night at prime time. A highlight show of all SFL matches, which would bring the lower leagues back in from the cold. During the week it could re-run all the weekends matches, have daily 10-15 minute features on all clubs previous/upcoming matches etc. At least a proposal for this could force the BBC to pay the going rate and not just pick up the old deal for scraps.

[StevieC]

I'm all for change in the Scottish game, even if it doesn't directly benefit Hibs. However should we be pressing for change if it might disproportionately impact Hibs.

Yes .. if it's for the benefit of the Scottish game.

Whilst there might be short term disadvantages, through time teams would cut their cloth accordingly and at the end of it you should hopefully have an improved football league.

[IWasThere2016]

He was allocated 60% of his total entitlement.

Excellent - just as well really as otherwise he'd have joined the hoardes of bankers that have left the UK for China and other far flung countries in search of fully deserving remuneration packages :greengrin

How are our shares doing btw?

[Andy74]

Excellent - just as well really as otherwise he'd have joined the hoardes of bankers that have left the UK for China and other far flung countries in search of fully deserving remuneration packages :greengrin

How are our shares doing btw?

Crap :greengrin

[Smidge]

We simply cannot be precise about the impact of losing the TV deal vs a potential increase in gate receipts. Any calculations (see below!) are speculation. However, if we assume that there will still be some TV money - I can't believe that Sky/ESPN would pull the plug in the short-term - then I don't think it would be a doomsday scenario for Hibs.

If our share of the commercial revenue from the SPL including, estimated elsewhere on this thread as totalling about £1.2m normally, drops by half then that is a loss of £600k on a turnover of £6-7m. Roughly speaking, let's say its a 10% reduction, which doesn't sound bad in my view, compared to the devastation in the Football League when ITV Digital went bust.

Of course, we wouldn't need to make up just the £600k in lost revenue, there are the gate receipts from a visit by Rangers 1-2 times every season. Being optimistic with last season and this season as the exceptions to recent history, let's say it's 2 visits. At 3500 fans x £26pp x 2, that's additional lost income of £182k.

Rounding it up, that equals say £800k reduction in revenue. At an average of £20pp - walk-ups AND additional STs - and assuming 19 home games a season, we would need an average 2,100 fans in the home end over and above current figures. This would be countered slightly by the income from the other away team that would replace Rangers twice a season at ER.

In a more competitive and family-friendly league, with match scheduling reverting more to traditional times (though there would still be some scheduling changes for TV), I do not think this is out of the question on a medium-term basis. Commercial revenue streams would recover if the league was more competitive in due course.

If a short-term reduction in income is the price for a fair league without Newco Rangers being "rewarded" for their criminal financial doping of the last 14 years or so, then I think it has got to be worth considering!

[HFC 0-7]

We simply cannot be precise about the impact of losing the TV deal vs a potential increase in gate receipts. Any calculations (see below!) are speculation. However, if we assume that there will still be some TV money - I can't believe that Sky/ESPN would pull the plug in the short-term - then I don't think it would be a doomsday scenario for Hibs.

If our share of the commercial revenue from the SPL including, estimated elsewhere on this thread as totalling about £1.2m normally, drops by half then that is a loss of £600k on a turnover of £6-7m. Roughly speaking, let's say its a 10% reduction, which doesn't sound bad in my view, compared to the devastation in the Football League when ITV Digital went bust.

Of course, we wouldn't need to make up just the £600k in lost revenue, there are the gate receipts from a visit by Rangers 1-2 times every season. Being optimistic with last season and this season as the exceptions to recent history, let's say it's 2 visits. At 3500 fans x £26pp x 2, that's additional lost income of £182k.

Rounding it up, that equals say £800k reduction in revenue. At an average of £20pp - walk-ups AND additional STs - and assuming 19 home games a season, we would need an average 2,100 fans in the home end over and above current figures. This would be countered slightly by the income from the other away team that would replace Rangers twice a season at ER.

In a more competitive and family-friendly league, with match scheduling reverting more to traditional times (though there would still be some scheduling changes for TV), I do not think this is out of the question on a medium-term basis. Commercial revenue streams would recover if the league was more competitive in due course.

If a short-term reduction in income is the price for a fair league without Newco Rangers being "rewarded" for their criminal financial doping of the last 14 years or so, then I think it has got to be worth considering!

We are happy to lose revenue when we are wanting to go down the line of league reconstruction to only playing each other twice a season losing 4 old firm games a season. League reconstruction to only playing twice would lose old firm games and tv revenue as SKY would re negotiate. What is the point of it all if we keep the rich, rich and winning everything, instead of losing a bit of income and making the league more competative for european places etc. The fans constantly moan about lunch time kick offs and the bigots, we may have the chance to sort that out but some people still say we cant cope without them. Money has fallen out of scottish football before and its survived.

[Exiled Hibby]

No tv coverage would probably be a good thing as far as Sparky's concerned. :greengrin

[MB62]

My thinking is on the basis of ten SPL clubs being given a huge boost by Rangers being in administration and hopefully eventual liquidation. The psycophantic media believe Sky would withdraw their current SPL agreement if Rangers are kicked out. If that happens the habit of attending matches at 3pm on Saturdays and the realistic possibility of finishing second would boost crowds. I have stopped going to early KO,s. More than likely I am not the only one.The general opinion is that the standard of Scottish football has being going down the plughole. Television has not helped, its time to get back to basics.

You certainly are not. I have stopped going to games that are live on T.V. I cannot justify paying £28 for a game I can watch for free in the house, (or have already paid for with my T.V. deal anyway). I know this does not help Hibs finances but it certainly helps mine. I realise that the reason these games are priced higher is because the away support (celtc, derhun, Yams) will generally fill their end anyway and Hibs score out of that, but no way am I paying that price.
I have said for long enough now that we if sold home games in batches of 2 or 3 at a time and they were all priced the same, e.g. 2 cat B and one cat A game for £22 each, it would help the cause but there are several factors to why Cat A games are no longer sell outs, Price, kick-off times and probably more importantly live T.V. coverage.
The T.V. deal is crap and even if we lost the ESPN/SKY deal, I'm sure BBC or STV would step in with a lesser deal to compensate slightly, it would not be a total loss.

[pentlando]

Seen on Sky Sports News that the administrators are holding a press conference at 3.30pm. Hopefully they come out with a massive list of playing redundancies leaving them with a youth team. I'm not getting excited at players losing employment, but rather Rangers losing their best players. Hopefully this will happen and the Rangers fans start to see what the next few years has in store for them.

[frazeHFC]

When is Naismith out of contract? Possibly they might be forced into getting rid of him especially with his injury?

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I think this is the SPL TV deal that was mooted previously and not the existing Sky deal.

For the record i am horrified at the scare mongering approach we seem to be getting from the media so far. I would quite like (maybe i have missed it somewhere) if one of them came out and said what a lot of non-Rangers fans are thinking which is....Stuff them, they cheated and now they can fall on their own sword.

I've go to agree with this. Hopefully when they have wiped away all the tears someone will eventually come out and tell it like it this.

[IWasThere2016]

Crap :greengrin

PETRIE!!! :grr:

[ancienthibby]

Seen on Sky Sports News that the administrators are holding a press conference at 3.30pm. Hopefully they come out with a massive list of playing redundancies leaving them with a youth team. I'm not getting excited at players losing employment, but rather Rangers losing their best players. Hopefully this will happen and the Rangers fans start to see what the next few years has in store for them.

There will be no player redundancies this week!:agree:

The Huns are expecting a full house on Saturday at Ipox - the administrators would themselves be liquidated if they made any player redundant ahead of the game!:devil:

There's not enough polis in the entire country that could cope with the anger of 45,000 'fans' in a confined space.

On the other hand, bet you they have hundreds of stewards with collection pails and take in a cool million on the day??:greengrin

[Benny Brazil]

Just read this bit on the BBC News website:

Scottish Labour said the threat to one of Scottish football's oldest institutions was a serious concern.
In a letter to Treasury minister David Gauke, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Margaret Curran said it was correct that the tax was collected.
But she added: "I would however ask that you, as the minister responsible, ensure that this is done in a reasonable way, focused on the best outcome for the club and taxpayer."

Why should any pressure be applied by Politicians on the HMRC to help Rangers out is beyond me. If you or I didnt pay our taxes we would not recieve any special treatment from HMRC - why should Rangers.

[CropleyWasGod]

Just read this bit on the BBC News website:

Scottish Labour said the threat to one of Scottish football's oldest institutions was a serious concern.
In a letter to Treasury minister David Gauke, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Margaret Curran said it was correct that the tax was collected.
But she added: "I would however ask that you, as the minister responsible, ensure that this is done in a reasonable way, focused on the best outcome for the club and taxpayer."

Why should any pressure be applied by Politicians on the HMRC to help Rangers out is beyond me. If you or I didnt pay our taxes we would not recieve any special treatment from HMRC - why should Rangers.

I think you are mis-reading it. She says...the best outcome for the club and taxpayer. That doesn't seem to be putting pressure on to help RFC.

[Bad Martini]

In the words of nelson from the simpsons...

AHAAA

:na na

[Gatecrasher]

Just read this bit on the BBC News website:

Scottish Labour said the threat to one of Scottish football's oldest institutions was a serious concern.
In a letter to Treasury minister David Gauke, Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland Margaret Curran said it was correct that the tax was collected.
But she added: "I would however ask that you, as the minister responsible, ensure that this is done in a reasonable way, focused on the best outcome for the club and taxpayer."

Why should any pressure be applied by Politicians on the HMRC to help Rangers out is beyond me. If you or I didnt pay our taxes we would not recieve any special treatment from HMRC - why should Rangers.

Thats what is pissing me off about this. Poor Rangers have this big bill that they cant afford, Hardly anyone mentioning that they have been cheating the country out of millions of pounds each year. If this were any other club apart from celtic no one would even consider helping them. It has brought to light the easy ride the OF get in Scotland

[Bad Martini]

Thats what is pissing me off about this. Poor Rangers have this big bill that they cant afford, Hardly anyone mentioning that they have been cheating the country out of millions of pounds each year. If this were any other club apart from celtic no one would even consider helping them. It has brought to light the easy ride the OF get in Scotland

:agree:

However, know this. In this life, you can be guaranteed but two things if you live in this country.
No 1 - you will eventually die.
No 2 - you will pay taxes until you die, period.

You cannot cheat either.

Also know this; cheating the tax man is worse to the powers that be than say, beating the **** out some random in the street.

The huns will get theirs. So will the yams. The common denominator, ironically. HMRC :greengrin

"God pay the Queen" :greengrin
"Borrow Borrow" :greengrin etc etc

ENDOF

[Phil MaGlass]

It would be great for Scottish Fitba if they were pumped oot the league and had to start at the bottom of 3, it would mean sellik would find it harder to attract good players,the fans wouldnae turn up as they will get fed up with not having competition, meaning less money and dragging them down aswell, HAPPY DAYS. A more even playing field for all.
SPHell will be rid of 1 set of bigots while the other set will begin to dwindle,what a GREAT CHANCE FOR SCOTTISH FITBA to start over and demand changes and a bigger slice of whatever pot of tv/sponsor money (which will obviously be way less than now if the buns weere to leave) is on offer.
SPL GRAB YIR CHANCE AND TELL THE OF WHERE TAE GO.
OH AYE..stolen from above ditto....
..in lieu of any new news and on account of decades of religious sectarian biggotry being the sole contribution of glasgarangersfcpuredeadbrilliantman, I'd just like to reiterate the following:

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ya hun radges and ....

GIRFUY and all yer apologists.



ENDOF

[Seveno]

I think you are mis-reading it. She says...the best outcome for the club and taxpayer. That doesn't seem to be putting pressure on to help RFC.

Alex Salmond said yesterday that the most important thing was for Rangers to survive. Surely, abiding by the law and paying your taxes is far more important.

[jgl07]

Spot on, I've been advocating this for years, Sportscene relegated to late Sunday nights or whenever there's an inconvenient slot to fill in and really crap coverage at that.
Consider what the BBC spent on last years F1 coverage for what is basically a minority sport (although I do like it) in comparison to football in this country.
The SPL should demand at least 10% of what the BBC spend on the EPL, same with the SFL re the football league coverage.

The problem is that BBC could reply, with some justification, that many up here prefer to watch Premiership Football from down South.

[hibiedude]

Rangers players just been told jobs are safe and DC looks likes he's safe as well, so it looks like a back room staff kull.

Season ticket holders contract looks to be terminated sometime today to generate more cash at home games.

Before anyone asks source.........twitter is giving updates on discussions.

Press conference 15.30 today

[Andy74]

Rangers players just been told jobs are safe and DC looks likes he's safe as well, so it looks like a back room staff kull.

Season ticket holders contract looks to be terminated sometime today to generate more cash at home games.

Before anyone asks source.........twitter is giving updates on discussions.

Press conference 15.30 today

They surely can't be allowed to escape a tax bill when they are getting away with carrying on as normal paying players that they can no longer afford?

[IWasThere2016]

Listen tae auld reekin' bacon chops at 1.15 onwards .. what a tool!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17052096

[neilmartinrocks]

Alex Salmond said yesterday that the most important thing was for Rangers to survive. Surely, abiding by the law and paying your taxes is far more important.

obviously when your an INSTITUTION of the calibre of the mighty RFC paying your taxes is just an option not a legal requirement. (sorry no sarcasm smillie):confused::confused:

[hibiedude]

They surely can't be allowed to escape a tax bill when they are getting away with carrying on as normal paying players that they can no longer afford?

I could be wrong but after todays press conference a lot of football fans are going to be very angry because it does look it's business as usual at Ibrox with the fans and back room staff paying the costs

[Benny Brazil]

I think you are mis-reading it. She says...the best outcome for the club and taxpayer. That doesn't seem to be putting pressure on to help RFC.

I am not so sure I am mis-reading it. Why should the best outcome for the club even come into the equation? They have basically defrauded the taxman for a number of years- why should they be assisted in this?

[pentlando]

If hibs terminated my season ticket contract I would not be back for the forseeable. I understand its the administrators decision, but hopefully in a few boycotts will force their hand to try something which punishes the club and not the fans.

[CropleyWasGod]

Alex Salmond said yesterday that the most important thing was for Rangers to survive. Surely, abiding by the law and paying your taxes is far more important.

He also said that the tax had to be paid.

He's a politician. Safeguarding votes is more important than either. :0)

[CropleyWasGod]

I am not so sure I am mis-reading it. Why should the best outcome for the club even come into the equation? They have basically defrauded the taxman for a number of years- why should they be assisted in this?

You said that pressure was being put on to save Rangers. I didn't see any suggestion at all in what she said.

[jonty]

IMHO its a shame when any long standing institution folds.

However, it doesn't mean that i'll be losing any sleep over this one.

They need to repay the unpaid monies - including any penalties and interest.
They need to be punished for the SPL/SFA for cheating in league and cup competitions. This should include fines, disqualification from cup and league wins/championships.
Retrospective action should be taken for the entire duration of the 'cheating' or 'financial doping'
They should be barred from this seasons competitions and all points removed as if they'd never existed.
Current and previous directors and owners shouldnt escape punishment - including custodial sentences.
They should be allowed to start at the very bottom of the league structure.
SPL/SFA should introduce fair play in terms of ownership and complete transparency when it comes to accounts and audits. Any club not submitting prompt accounts should face an instant points deduction. This should be increased to suspension from league and demotion the next season.

It's time the SPL/SFA started playing hardball - there have been too many idiots using football clubs for their own gains/shady practices.
It needs cleaned up, and there's no time like the present.

[Andy74]

If hibs terminated my season ticket contract I would not be back for the forseeable. I understand its the administrators decision, but hopefully in a few boycotts will force their hand to try something which punishes the club and not the fans.

I think I'd be demanding that they emptied guys that are on £7.5k per week, particularly those signed on the day they went into administration, before they started to ask me to pay again for something I'd paid for already.

Almost 300 people's ticket money would be used just to pay Cousin for this one week, or about 3,500 people's cash to pay him to the end of the season.

[Seveno]

He also said that the tax had to be paid.

He's a politician. Safeguarding votes is more important than either. :0)

Well we all know that he will say and do anything to get some votes. Even if it means cosying up to the Unionists.

Actually, I realise that the last remark contained an inaccuracy. Just because the Rangers support swear loyalty to the Queen and the Union does not mean that they are in favour of the Union, any more than they are in favour of paying Her Majesty's tax collectors.

[Andy74]

Anyone know why HMRC haven't been able to do what they have done with Hearts and go straight for the winding up order to get their cash?

Is it because the amount is under appeal?

[marinello59]

Alex Salmond said yesterday that the most important thing was for Rangers to survive. Surely, abiding by the law and paying your taxes is far more important.

Not as important as winning potential votes is to our Eck.

[Andy74]

Rangers players just been told jobs are safe and DC looks likes he's safe as well, so it looks like a back room staff kull.

Season ticket holders contract looks to be terminated sometime today to generate more cash at home games.

Before anyone asks source.........twitter is giving updates on discussions.

Press conference 15.30 today

On closer look at the reporting of this it looks as though this is only a short term commitment and that all levels of jobs will be reviewed next week?

[CropleyWasGod]

Anyone know why HMRC haven't been able to do what they have done with Hearts and go straight for the winding up order to get their cash?

Is it because the amount is under appeal?

The Big Tax Case is still in progress. The Tribunal hasn't made its decision yet, so there is no liability as yet

As for the other tax due, the PAYE etc since CW took over, it would have been a bad move IMHO to go for winding-up. In doing that, I reckon they would be kissing bye-bye to anything from the BTC.

In Hearts case, the WUO process is purely (again IMO) to shift Hearts to pay. Thus far it's worked. HMRC know, though, that in a winding-up they would get zip.

[IWasThere2016]

Anyone know why HMRC haven't been able to do what they have done with Hearts and go straight for the winding up order to get their cash?

Is it because the amount is under appeal?

They've settled everytime - this latest occasion included.

[neilmartinrocks]

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc7/p480x480/428090_10150796158489129_564974128_12557325_170974 4668_n.jpg

[blindsummit]

IMHO its a shame when any long standing institution folds.

However, it doesn't mean that i'll be losing any sleep over this one.

They need to repay the unpaid monies - including any penalties and interest.
They need to be punished for the SPL/SFA for cheating in league and cup competitions. This should include fines, disqualification from cup and league wins/championships.
Retrospective action should be taken for the entire duration of the 'cheating' or 'financial doping'
They should be barred from this seasons competitions and all points removed as if they'd never existed.
Current and previous directors and owners shouldnt escape punishment - including custodial sentences.
They should be allowed to start at the very bottom of the league structure.
SPL/SFA should introduce fair play in terms of ownership and complete transparency when it comes to accounts and audits. Any club not submitting prompt accounts should face an instant points deduction. This should be increased to suspension from league and demotion the next season.

It's time the SPL/SFA started playing hardball - there have been too many idiots using football clubs for their own gains/shady practices.
It needs cleaned up, and there's no time like the present.

I agree Jonty, these are all great rules and punishments. But this is Scotland and Rangers we are talking about and none of that will ever happen to them.

Ironically in the survival unscathed of Rangers (which I fully expect) I believe we are seeing the death blow for Scottish Football itself. The unvarnished rigging of the game will be blatantly there for all to see, and I fear it will so sicken fans of all other teams that they will give up the game for good, dealing a fatal blow to all other teams.

[ehf]

Anyone know why HMRC haven't been able to do what they have done with Hearts and go straight for the winding up order to get their cash?

Is it because the amount is under appeal?

Being in administration protects them against all legal actions, including winding-up petitions.

[Andy74]

I agree Jonty, these are all great rules and punishments. But this is Scotland and Rangers we are talking about and none of that will ever happen to them.

Ironically in the survival unscathed of Rangers (which I fully expect) I believe we are seeing the death blow for Scottish Football itself. The unvarnished rigging of the game will be blatantly there for all to see, and I fear it will so sicken fans of all other teams that they will give up the game for good, dealing a fatal blow to all other teams.

It is an important time, if the likes of Rangers and Hearts can carrying on being artificially better than the competition and nothing changes then what really is the point for anyone?

The SPL, and football in general needs to be very careful about how it treads in the next year or so.

[Mark79]

"Season ticket holders contract looks to be terminated sometime today to generate more cash at home games."


Am I being stupid but are they saying that no one will have a season ticket? Even if they have paid up front for one (unlikely for the unwashed I know). How does this work if he borrowed money against the season tickets?

[neilmartinrocks]

"Season ticket holders contract looks to be terminated sometime today to generate more cash at home games."


Am I being stupid but are they saying that no one will have a season ticket? Even if they have paid up front for one (unlikely for the unwashed I know). How does this work if he borrowed money against the season tickets?

it means they have ripped off their own fans as well as the taxpayer.

[CropleyWasGod]

"Season ticket holders contract looks to be terminated sometime today to generate more cash at home games."


Am I being stupid but are they saying that no one will have a season ticket? Even if they have paid up front for one (unlikely for the unwashed I know). How does this work if he borrowed money against the season tickets?

He borrowed money against future season tickets. He got £24m up front, on the basis that he would repay it from the proceeds of future season ticket income.

This latest move, to cancel current season tickets, will last as long as the administration.

[jonty]

I agree Jonty, these are all great rules and punishments. But this is Scotland and Rangers we are talking about and none of that will ever happen to them.

Ironically in the survival unscathed of Rangers (which I fully expect) I believe we are seeing the death blow for Scottish Football itself. The unvarnished rigging of the game will be blatantly there for all to see, and I fear it will so sicken fans of all other teams that they will give up the game for good, dealing a fatal blow to all other teams.

I also expect for them to get off relatively scott-free.

An ideal time for the remaining SPL teams to tell the SPL to ram it, and setup their own rival leage, without Rangers (or Hearts) and implement financial fair play.

[Andy74]

I also expect for them to get off relatively scott-free.

An ideal time for the remaining SPL teams to tell the SLP to ram it, and setup their own rival leage, without Rangers (or Hearts) and imlpement financial fair play.

At the last forum SL did confirm that fair play rules were now in place and teams wouldn't get an SPL licence if they didn't meet them. Not sure what they were exactly or the timescales.

[jonty]

At the last forum SL did confirm that fair play rules were now in place and teams wouldn't get an SPL licence if they didn't meet them. Not sure what they were exactly or the timescales.

The rules clearly dont included paying wages, tax returns or filing accounts.

In that case, about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

[jgl07]

I agree Jonty, these are all great rules and punishments. But this is Scotland and Rangers we are talking about and none of that will ever happen to them.

Ironically in the survival unscathed of Rangers (which I fully expect) I believe we are seeing the death blow for Scottish Football itself. The unvarnished rigging of the game will be blatantly there for all to see, and I fear it will so sicken fans of all other teams that they will give up the game for good, dealing a fatal blow to all other teams.

You can see in the press the extent to which we are being softened up for Rangers to be readmitted. Geoff Brown of St Johnstone said as much in the Herald this morning. The annoying thing is that I fully expect Rangers FC to be liquidated at the end of the season and a new club to emerge and I think that this was Craig Whyte's plan all along. He could emerge as secured creditor with possession of Ibrox and probably Murray Park as well. He can then start from scratch free of all debts.

If this meant applying for membership of Division Three and working their way back to the SPL, there is not at lot that can be done about it but I think they will be readmitted directly into the SPL and this was what Whyte was banking on all along.

It may serve the short term interests of the SPL to take this course of action but in the long term it could prove fatal. Rangers would be back after three seasons anyway. The whole integrity of the League will be gone forever. Maybe it will simply expose the whole thing for the charade it has been all along. It will cause civil war between the SPL clubs and their supporters.

I will have nothing to do with the SPL if this happens. I will not go to matches again nor watch them on TV. I will boycott all sponsors associated with the SPL.

Maybe it will end up putting Scottish Football out of its misery.

[CropleyWasGod]

You can see in the press the extent to which we are being softened up for Rangers to be readmitted. Geoff Brown of St Johnstone said as much in the Herald this morning. The annoying thing is that I fully expect Rangers FC to be liquidated at the end of the season and a new club to emerge and I think that this was Craig Whyte's plan all along. He could emerge as secured creditor with possession of Ibrox and probably Murray Park as well. He can then start from scratch free of all debts.

If this meant applying for membership of Division Three and working their way back to the SPL, there is not at lot that can be done about it but I think they will be readmitted directly into the SPL and this was what Whyte was banking on all along.

It may serve the short term interests of the SPL to take this course of action but in the long term it could prove fatal. Rangers would be back after three seasons anyway. The whole integrity of the League will be gone forever. Maybe it will simply expose the whole thing for the charade it has been all along. It will cause civil war between the SPL clubs and their supporters.

I will have nothing to do with the SPL if this happens. I will not go to matches again nor watch them on TV. I will boycott all sponsors associated with the SPL.

Maybe it will end up putting Scottish Football out of its misery.

Still to be ascertained.

FWIW, I don't think he is a creditor, but that's my gut talking at the moment.

[Geo_1875]

Still to be ascertained.

FWIW, I don't think he is a creditor, but that's my gut talking at the moment.

He might not be a creditor but don't be surprised if he turns out to own most of RFC assets. He's got previous for that.

[CropleyWasGod]

He might not be a creditor but don't be surprised if he turns out to own most of RFC assets. He's got previous for that.

If he isn't a creditor, he can't take part in the CVA. I can't see anyone involved in the CVA (Ticketus at £20m, HMRC at c. £50m) allowing the administrators to transfer the assets out of the company, at least not without a fair price being obtained.

What are Ibrox, Murray Park and the car park worth? :confused:

[ancienthibby]

He might not be a creditor but don't be surprised if he turns out to own most of RFC assets. He's got previous for that.


So to define that position a bit more, CW did fund RFC at the start, which money was then used to pay-off LLoyds, switch the Floating charge to one of his companies along with the key assets of Ipox and Murray Park, then sell 3 years ST monies to Ticketus and then pay-off the loans he had put in place in the first place, along with a wee dividend which left RFC with no cash??:not worth:not worth

[Spike Mandela]

I think you are mis-reading it. She says...the best outcome for the club and taxpayer. That doesn't seem to be putting pressure on to help RFC.

Come off it, iI think you are misreading it, it says Rangers fans vote for me. And yes it does put pressure on HMRC but she is insignificant enough to be ignored by them.

[CropleyWasGod]

So to define that position a bit more, CW did fund RFC at the start, which money was then used to pay-off LLoyds, switch the Floating charge to one of his companies along with the key assets of Ipox and Murray Park, then sell 3 years ST monies to Ticketus and then pay-off the loans he had put in place in the first place, along with a wee dividend which left RFC with no cash??:not worth:not worth

There is no charge registered at Companies House. That, of course, doesn't mean that one doesn't exist.

However, if RFC don't owe CW anything, any charge held by him is worthless. And he can't take part in the CVA.

I also find it hard to believe that Ticketus don't have any security. Their part in all of this is, for me, critical.

[ancienthibby]

There is no charge registered at Companies House. That, of course, doesn't mean that one doesn't exist.

However, if RFC don't owe CW anything, any charge held by him is worthless. And he can't take part in the CVA.

I also find it hard to believe that Ticketus don't have any security. Their part in all of this is, for me, critical.

Assume you mean as given by RFC? But if the assets had first been switched to a CWNewco, then it would be in the name of ANO?

Re Ticketus, I believe they have done this for some EPL clubs so they will have a model they use, with or without security. One of their key criteria would be to lend only at a huge discount, say 50%, to book value??

Reporting Scotland last night suggested there's up to £30 million that cannot be account for.

[CropleyWasGod]

Assume you mean as given by RFC? But if the assets had first been switched to a CWNewco, then it would be in the name of ANO?

Re Ticketus, I believe they have done this for some EPL clubs so they will have a model they use, with or without security. One of their key criteria would be to lend only at a huge discount, say 50%, to book value??

Reporting Scotland last night suggested there's up to £30 million that cannot be account for.

So you're saying that the assets may have been switched already? I am sure some journalist would have discovered that already... it's easy to check.

But okay, assuming you're right (and I'm thinking out loud here :greengrin)...if so, where did the proceeds go? Two things flow from that:-

1. CW potentially owes RFC for that. The administrator has to recoup that..... at an open market value.

2. HMRC would want to get a liquidator involved, and have the transfer reversed.

The Reporting Scotland figure is what Jim Traynor mentioned on Newsnight the other night. £24m Ticketus and £6m Jelavic.

[Spike Mandela]

Anyone still clinging to the notion that this administration is anything other tha a tool for tax avoidance and stinks to high heaven really must read this blog.....

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/

[jgl07]

So you're saying that the assets may have been switched already? I am sure some journalist would have discovered that already... it's easy to check.

But okay, assuming you're right (and I'm thinking out loud here :greengrin)...if so, where did the proceeds go? Two things flow from that:-

1. CW potentially owes RFC for that. The administrator has to recoup that..... at an open market value.

2. HMRC would want to get a liquidator involved, and have the transfer reversed.

The Reporting Scotland figure is what Jim Traynor mentioned on Newsnight the other night. £24m Ticketus and £6m Jelavic.

All this should be investigated to see if there is any fraud involved. There have been calls to involve the FSA:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17049723

[Leithenhibby]

All this should be investigated to see if there is any fraud involved. There have been calls to involve the FSA:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17049723


John McFall was on Newsnight Scotland last night trying to put this point over. Not very well may I add. :rolleyes:

I can't see RFC getting away with as much as they would like. This matter has still to gather pace and the administrators know that everyone is watching them like a hawk ... :wink:

[Sylar]

Live streaming press conference on BBC Sportscotland website in 5 minutes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/8501453.stm

[silverhibee]

Rangers news Conference coming up on SSN shortly.

[PatHead]

Ticketus have their loan fully insured and will not lose out in the deal.

[YehButNoBut]

Celtic released a statement today saying that they were very disappointed with Salmonds statement thet they need Rangers to prosper. Salmond really should not be getting involved in this.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#Celtic (http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23Celtic) statement on First Minister's comments: "We are very disappointed with the First Minister's claims that Celtic "need" Rangers and that Celtic "can't prosper unless Rangers are there".

"This is simply not true. In a series of interviews given just 3 days ago, we made it abundantly clear that Celtic has a well defined strategy and a business plan independent of the fortunes of any other club. That remains absolutely the case ".

"The predicament of Rangers is clearly a serious and complex matter with a whole range of possible outcomes.

"However, we are extremely well qualified to make our own position clear and have no wish to see that being misrepresented for political reasons ".

[CropleyWasGod]

Ticketus have their loan fully insured and will not lose out in the deal.

Insured as in "insured" or as in "secured"?

[Smidge]

Insured as in "insured" or as in "secured"?

I would have thought it was a credit default swap-type arrangement. I wonder what the margin on that was?!?

[CropleyWasGod]

I would have thought it was a credit default swap-type arrangement. I wonder what the margin on that was?!?

I also wonder if it is transferable to a NewHunCo?

[PatHead]

Insured as in "insured" or as in "secured"?

Insured with a third party.....was told this by an Octopus employee a couple of weeks ago when story re sale was first revealed. Used in their IHT plan

[Moody Mulder]

If he isn't a creditor, he can't take part in the CVA. I can't see anyone involved in the CVA (Ticketus at £20m, HMRC at c. £50m) allowing the administrators to transfer the assets out of the company, at least not without a fair price being obtained.

What are Ibrox, Murray Park and the car park worth? :confused:

Erm its glasgow so probs worth about £30.00 for all 3

[CropleyWasGod]

Insured with a third party.....was told this by an Octopus employee a couple of weeks ago when story re sale was first revealed. Used in their IHT plan

Ah okay, that's interesting. Cheers.

[YehButNoBut]

Celtic released a statement today saying that they were very disappointed with Salmonds statement thet they need Rangers to prosper. Salmond really should not be getting involved in this.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#Celtic (http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23Celtic) statement on First Minister's comments: "We are very disappointed with the First Minister's claims that Celtic "need" Rangers and that Celtic "can't prosper unless Rangers are there".

"This is simply not true. In a series of interviews given just 3 days ago, we made it abundantly clear that Celtic has a well defined strategy and a business plan independent of the fortunes of any other club. That remains absolutely the case ".

"The predicament of Rangers is clearly a serious and complex matter with a whole range of possible outcomes.

"However, we are extremely well qualified to make our own position clear and have no wish to see that being misrepresented for political reasons ".

The more I think about this the more stupid Salmond's comments are politically as he will not get many votes from Hun fans (mostly Unionists) and after these comments there will be few Celtic fans voting for him. :greengrin

[Leithenhibby]

Live streaming press conference on BBC Sportscotland website in 5 minutes.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/8501453.stm


I'm not getting anything, has it started yet?? :confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm not getting anything, has it started yet?? :confused:

Not yet. STV site is better

[Smidge]

I'm not getting anything, has it started yet?? :confused:

Nope. Also available on SSN.

[jonty]

Late for tax payments, late for press conference.

[Captain Trips]

I'm not getting anything, has it started yet?? :confused:

Just about to start, hope this is worse than hoped. :greengrin

[Leithenhibby]

Not yet. STV site is better

Cheers :wink:

[YehButNoBut]

Just starting now on SSN

[jonty]

here we go.

[hibs0666]

Press conference just starting - hope it's all bad.

[Joe's ice cream]

The more I think about this the more stupid Salmond's comments are politically as he will not get many votes from Hun fans (mostly Unionists) and after these comments there will be few Celtic fans voting for him. :greengrin

tbh i would love to see other clubs, inc us in the SPL put out similar style statments, already fed up with being told how we couldnt survive without them!!

[Phil MaGlass]

live footage
http://i114.photobucket.com/albums/n277/gerrythebhoy/Image2-57.jpg

[YehButNoBut]

Sounds to me that there is little for Rangers to be concerned about and they will be "Business As Normal" fairly soon. :grr::no way::fuming:

[PaulSmith]

Sounds to me that there is little for Rangers to be concerned about and they will be "Business As Normal" fairly soon. :grr::no way::fuming:

Not listening but how then do they expect to pay the o/s tax issues?

[Benny Brazil]

Not listening but how then do they expect to pay the o/s tax issues?

I think they are hoping to come to a deal with HMRC - I think but not very clear.

[greenginger]

Sounds to me that there is little for Rangers to be concerned about and they will be "Business As Normal" fairly soon. :grr::no way::fuming:



Until the £ 50 million tax bill hits the floor. :agree:

[Bad Martini]

Not listening but how then do they expect to pay the o/s tax issues?

Maybe they could use the next 4 seasons worth of season ticket money....if. they could only find that pesky few millions that seems to have magically disappeared :greengrin ....shame that eh.

MON THE HMRC, RECEIVORS AND LIQUIDATORS YA BASS

[EuanH78]

Until the £ 50 million tax bill hits the floor. :agree:

Got to admit to feeling a bit wrong footed (not in the religious sense for any hun *******s looking in) about that press conference really. Did I hear the administrators say the big tax case has not been considered just now as it's still an unknown quantity?

More questions than answers from that for me..

[CropleyWasGod]

Got to admit to feeling a bit wrong footed (not in the religious sense for any hun *******s looking in) about that press conference really. Did I hear the administrators say the big tax case has not been considered just now as it's still an unknown quantity?

More questions than answers from that for me..

It can't be just now, but it will be as time goes on.

[Leithenhibby]

By all accounts, this is going to run, and run until we can't take no more .. :rolleyes:

I remember when WM was trying to get hold of us, it seamed to go on for a lifetime :agree:

[ancienthibby]

If the ancient ears have not deceived me, I took two key points from what I watched:

First, Murray Park and Ipox are not in the name of RFC.

Second, the Ticketus monies went 'to another company'

Is this the quickest asset-stripping operation in history??:devil:

[alfie]

From STV twitter feed, doesn't sound like much news in there. Jellywitch monies have been paid, which presumably means there was an even bigger hole than was thought!

Edit - that is what I get for trusting their feed and not listening to the the video, but I'm at work

[CropleyWasGod]

If the ancient ears have not deceived me, I took two key points from what I watched:

First, Murray Park and Ipox are not in the name of RFC.

Second, the Ticketus monies went 'to another company'

Is this the quickest asset-stripping operation in history??:devil:

I heard differently on the first point.

But the same as you on the second.

[jonty]

By all accounts, this is going to run, and run until we can't take no more .. :rolleyes:

I remember when WM was trying to get hold of us, it seamed to go on for a lifetime :agree:

Seems to me that Whyte is expecting a buyer for the club, if he expects the club to be out of administration next month.
Or maybe he expects it to be liquidated by then.

Either way - he'll be off the the south of france with the ticketus money.

[PaulSmith]

So could it be that ticketus are the 24m losers here

[Leithenhibby]

From STV twitter feed, doesn't sound like much news in there. Jellywitch monies have been paid, which presumably means there was an even bigger hole than was thought!


Was there not some monies "Deferred" :confused:

[Caversham Green]

If the ancient ears have not deceived me, I took two key points from what I watched:

First, Murray Park and Ipox are not in the name of RFC.

Second, the Ticketus monies went 'to another company'

Is this the quickest asset-stripping operation in history??:devil:

I think it's no to the first and yes to the second. They said there was a security on the properties in Whyte's favour and they have to verify its validity - that's run of the mill.

The Ticketus thing smells a bit though...

[hibs0666]

If the ancient ears have not deceived me, I took two key points from what I watched:

First, Murray Park and Ipox are not in the name of RFC.

Second, the Ticketus monies went 'to another company'

Is this the quickest asset-stripping operation in history??:devil:

The Ticketus one is incredible - amongst the possible options here is that they have been scammed or subject to fraud.

[Smidge]

A few observations about what was said....

- The Ticketus money did not flow through the football club - presumably just the parent company, so it MUST have been used to finance the takeover. Need to think about how they could incur the liability without the benefit of the cash.

- There seems some dubiety over the security held. I'm not sure they said exactly who holds it - presumably a Craig Whyte-related company - but they did suggest that, if valid, Ibrox and Murray Park would be caught by it.

- It would be "optimistic" to suggest that they'll be out of administration by March's pay date.

- Seemed overly confident that Rangers would be able to exit administration eventually without being liquidated. I'm sure HMRC are not quiet so unequivocal.

- Sounds to me like there will be substantial redundancies next week - quite a lot of emphasis placed on playing this weekend's game.

- The way that Rangers' finances were managed was described as "unusual" more than once - particularly with reference to PAYE and VAT.

That's the highlights for me so far.

[SteveHFC]

Every SPL club should walk away from the SPL and set up their own league and leave the old firm to play in their own league.

[EuanH78]

It can't be just now, but it will be as time goes on.

So, in effect are the administrators saying 'at the minute' this club is a going concern'? I could expect that to be honest from this 'snapshot in time' at least, but not with the scale of the uncertainty of the big tax case in the near future, unless a deal has been cut with HMRC, maybe?

[Leithenhibby]

I think it's no to the first and yes to the second. They said there was a security on the properties in Whyte's favour and they have to verify its validity - that's run of the mill.

The Ticketus thing smells a bit though...


Everything about this sorry mess stinks ... ******g everything :rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

A few observations about what was said....

- The Ticketus money did not flow through the football club - presumably just the parent company, so it MUST have been used to finance the takeover. Need to think about how they could incur the liability without the benefit of the cash.

- There seems some dubiety over the security held. I'm not sure they said exactly who holds it - presumably a Craig Whyte-related company - but they did suggest that, if valid, Ibrox and Murray Park would be caught by it.

- It would be "optimistic" to suggest that they'll be out of administration by March's pay date.

- Seemed overly confident that Rangers would be able to exit administration eventually without being liquidated. I'm sure HMRC are not quiet so unequivocal.

- Sounds to me like there will be substantial redundancies next week - quite a lot of emphasis placed on playing this weekend's game.

- The way that Rangers' finances were managed was described as "unusual" more than once - particularly with reference to PAYE and VAT.

That's the highlights for me so far.

On the security issue.... even if it is valid, I can't see its value. If, as seems increasingly likely, CW has taken the Ticketus cash, he is not a creditor.

[Smidge]

I think it's no to the first and yes to the second. They said there was a security on the properties in Whyte's favour and they have to verify its validity - that's run of the mill.

The Ticketus thing smells a bit though...

That's what I heard....but if the securities are not lodged at Companies House, then their validity is definitely in question.

Still can't get my head around the Ticketus thing, unless it was a giant scam. Gut feeling is that I should made "allegedly" there :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

So, in effect are the administrators saying 'at the minute' this club is a going concern'? I could expect that to be honest from this 'snapshot in time' at least, but not with the scale of the uncertainty of the big tax case in the near future, unless a deal has been cut with HMRC, maybe?

It is, kind of, in a day-to-day sense.

However, the BTC has to be taken into account in the bigger picture.

[Smidge]

On the security issue.... even if it is valid, I can't see its value. If, as seems increasingly likely, CW has taken the Ticketus cash, he is not a creditor.

Unless the Ticketus money went to a different company that took on the debt from Lloyds?

[CropleyWasGod]

That's what I heard....but if the securities are not lodged at Companies House, then their validity is definitely in question.

Still can't get my head around the Ticketus thing, unless it was a giant scam. Gut feeling is that I should made "allegedly" there :greengrin

Okay... here we go.

Ticketus advanced the money before CW took over. It was paid to CW's solicitors. That seems to be fairly common knowledge.

CW then paid off Lloyds TSB, £18m.

The Ticketus money didn't go to RFC, so..... putting on Columbo voice.... did it go to CW and, in effect, fund his purchase of the club??

[cabbageandribs1875]

one day there will be a statue of the little dwarf whyte outside hunbrox

[CropleyWasGod]

Unless the Ticketus money went to a different company that took on the debt from Lloyds?

In that case, CW is owed £18m, and the "different company" owes RFC £24m.

[greenginger]

Duff and Phelps ? its a pity its not Duff and Gray, the sods would be in liquidation by now. :greengrin

[Smidge]

In that case, CW is owed £18m, and the "different company" owes RFC £24m.

I might go with that theory then.... if this "different company" is just a shell, then Ticketus probably deserved to be turned over as it would have been breathtakingly stupid :confused:

[Part/Time Supporter]

Okay... here we go.

Ticketus advanced the money before CW took over. It was paid to CW's solicitors. That seems to be fairly common knowledge.

CW then paid off Lloyds TSB, £18m.

The Ticketus money didn't go to RFC, so..... putting on Columbo voice.... did it go to CW and, in effect, fund his purchase of the club??

That's what the ex-Hun chairman (Johnston) has been more or less accusing him of for the last few weeks.

[EasterRoad4Ever]

A few observations about what was said....

- The Ticketus money did not flow through the football club - presumably just the parent company, so it MUST have been used to finance the takeover. Need to think about how they could incur the liability without the benefit of the cash.

- There seems some dubiety over the security held. I'm not sure they said exactly who holds it - presumably a Craig Whyte-related company - but they did suggest that, if valid, Ibrox and Murray Park would be caught by it.

- It would be "optimistic" to suggest that they'll be out of administration by March's pay date.

- Seemed overly confident that Rangers would be able to exit administration eventually without being liquidated. I'm sure HMRC are not quiet so unequivocal.

- Sounds to me like there will be substantial redundancies next week - quite a lot of emphasis placed on playing this weekend's game.

- The way that Rangers' finances were managed was described as "unusual" more than once - particularly with reference to PAYE and VAT.

That's the highlights for me so far.


Yip, they just decided not to pay it :green grin (allegedly)

While they might manage to extract themselves from Administration, who in their right minds would actually deal with the Huns again - particularly with the HMRC £49 mill hanging over them ??? In fact I'd go as far as say it would be negligent of any limited co or plc to give them any services or products without money up front in cash. Anyone giving them credit or unsecured funding would need their heads examined. So that basically means that they will no longer be buying players in the usual way - which normally involves staged payments plus contingencies. Now everyone in the Uk knows about their £49mill con of the public purse. I just don't see how they can trade.:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

I might go with that theory then.... if this "different company" is just a shell, then Ticketus probably deserved to be turned over as it would have been breathtakingly stupid :confused:

According to stuff I read recently, the money was sent to CW's solicitors, BEFORE the take-over, and sat in their client account.

I agree about Ticketus.... but would have thought that they would do a bit of due diligence.

Oh, wait..... people don't do that now :greengrin

[Caversham Green]

That's what I heard....but if the securities are not lodged at Companies House, then their validity is definitely in question.

Still can't get my head around the Ticketus thing, unless it was a giant scam. Gut feeling is that I should made "allegedly" there :greengrin

Sounds to me like Whyte (rather than Rangers) borrowed the money offering the future income as security. The debt falls to be paid only as and when the ST money is paid by the punters. Meanwhile Whyte 'owes' Ticketus for the funding but it's deferred, uses the money to pay off Lloyds so Rangers owe Whyte for that immediately. I suspect there would be a few interim companies involved though.

One bit that I'm struggling with though, this would all have to be done before the takeover, which means Murray would have to have known about it - they wouldn't take a cross-guarantee without the owner's consent would they? I suppose some sort of bridging finance is possible.

As with your 'allegedly', I ought to stress this is all my opinion and might not have any relation to the reality of the situation.

Edit: Beaten to it all by CropleyWasGod and Smidge..

[Billy Whizz]

I think Whyte gambled on Champions League football to help their cash flow. When they were knocked out the Champions League before the season started his plans fell apart

[CropleyWasGod]

Sounds to me like Whyte (rather than Rangers) borrowed the money offering the future income as security. The debt falls to be paid only as and when the ST money is paid by the punters. Meanwhile Whyte 'owes' Ticketus for the funding but it's deferred, uses the money to pay off Lloyds so Rangers owe Whyte for that immediately. I suspect there would be a few interim companies involved though.

One bit that I'm struggling with though, this would all have to be done before the takeover, which means Murray would have to have known about it - they wouldn't take a cross-guarantee without the owner's consent would they? I suppose some sort of bridging finance is possible.

As with your 'allegedly', I ought to stress this is all my opinion and might not have any relation to the reality of the situation.

The Ticketus money was with CW's solicitors before the takeover.

[Leithenhibby]

The Ticketus money was with CW's solicitors before the takeover.


How would he have the right to do this, if he is not the owner??? :confused:

[CropleyWasGod]

How would he have the right to do this, if he is not the owner??? :confused:

Indeed.

As Cav said, Sir D Murray must have known.

[Smidge]

The Ticketus money was with CW's solicitors before the takeover.

"Allegedly" :wink:

[Leithenhibby]

Indeed.

As Cav said, Sir D Murray must have known.

The plot thickens :greengrin

[blindsummit]

Every SPL club should walk away from the SPL and set up their own league and leave the old firm to play in their own league.

This.

It's the only hope for Professional Scottish Football to survive, other than as a vestigal appendix to the corrupt Ugly Sisters.

[Smidge]

How would he have the right to do this, if he is not the owner??? :confused:

The money could have been forwarded by Ticketus on a contingent basis, being held in escrow until certain conditions were met. In this case, that would have been when Whyte took control of Rangers under the Share Purchase Agreement. The funds were then released to him/his company so that Lloyds could be repaid. Don't think it is necessarily the case that Murray would have known, but negligent if his advisors didn't get the indepth detail of where the cash was coming from. Speaking from experience as well, I would have thought that Lloyds' part in this would be under greater scrutiny if they weren't 100% sure where the funds were coming from, under anti-money laundering legislation.

All speculation and based on hypotheticals of course.....

[Leithenhibby]

Indeed.

As Cav said, Sir D Murray must have known.


Perhaps that is why SDM is so p!ssed off ... And the administrator has such a serious looking face :greengrin :greengrin

CW may well be out his depth with this one ...