Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[greenginger]

Lets not forget our friends over at the PBS. The Yams accounts have not appeared yet, and if they do appear before March 31st and they are in a league position to get into Europe, would the previous restriction on the accounts be an obstacle to getting a Euro Licence or will Mad Vlad be forced to open up the U B I G books. ?

[CropleyWasGod]

Aye of course, the unpaid PAYE and NI since Whyte took over. Now if they require the agreement of 75% of creditors (notwithstanding the BTC) for a CVA, and assuming HMRC won't agree to one, that means they need approx £40 - £60 million (depending on the amount of unpaid tax post-Whyte) of other creditors to possibly get their CVA. This is impossible. So, they plough on until the BTC judgment, and either stay in administration until they win it, or liquidate if they lose it. Is that right?

Yup... that's the state of play just now. The only variables I can see just now are:-

1. HMRC changing their policy of not agreeing to CVA's. That would have enormous consequences throughout the economy.

2. someone with more money than sense riding in on a white horse, singing the Sash, and rattling a biscuit tin with 100 million gold pieces in it.

[Seveno]

Only in the event of liquidation. While the administration continues, the only liability would be for any repayments that are currently due.

I also understand that Ticketus have insurance in place that would cover their outlay in the event of liquidation.

I doubt that Ticketus have insurance in the event of default due to the liquidation of Rangers. No credit insurer would give cover on a business in that level of debt.

Contingency insurers might give cover against the reduction in the future sales of ST's based on previous history but that would be no use if Rangers just went bust and ceased to exist.

[CropleyWasGod]

Lets not forget our friends over at the PBS. The Yams accounts have not appeared yet, and if they do appear before March 31st and they are in a league position to get into Europe, would the previous restriction on the accounts be an obstacle to getting a Euro Licence or will Mad Vlad be forced to open up the U B I G books. ?

As things stand, I think they only need to submit accounts. I don't think it matters what the accounts, or the auditors' report, say.

However, Doncaster was saying today that they are having a meeting on Monday to discuss the implementation of Financial Fair Play rules within the SPL/SFA. These would broadly reflect UEFA's rules, I reckon, but I don't think they would affect Hearts ability to play in Europe next season.

[Fat Penlon]

Anyone know if hearts will have their accounts signed off by 31 march? Someone on here thought the auditors may have a problem this time if i remember correctly?

[CropleyWasGod]

I doubt that Ticketus have insurance in the event of event due to the liquidation of Rangers. No credit insurer would give cover on a business in that level of debt.

Contingency insurers might give cover against the reduction in the future sales of ST's based on previous history but that would be no use if Rangers just went bust and ceased to exist.

I am no insurer, but about 30 pages ago, there was a discussion on this point. The conclusion seemed to be that yes, it was insurable. PatHead is the man to tell you.:agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

Anyone know if hearts will have their accounts signed off by 31 march? Someone on here thought the auditors may have a problem this time if i remember correctly?

A problem this time????

They have a problem every frickin year.....:rolleyes:

I can't see the auditors having any report other than last year's, which, IIRC, said that they couldn't establish whether HMFC were a going concern.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Yup... that's the state of play just now. The only variables I can see just now are:-

1. HMRC changing their policy of not agreeing to CVA's. That would have enormous consequences throughout the economy.

2. someone with more money than sense riding in on a white horse, singing the Sash, and rattling a biscuit tin with 100 million gold pieces in it.
And with the BTC hanging over them, who would do this? You know what all this adds up to, CWG..............



http://youtu.be/PKIaMsm7Hlk

[Seveno]

I am no insurer, but about 30 pages ago, there was a discussion on this point. The conclusion seemed to be that yes, it was insurable. PatHead is the man to tell you.:agree:

It's my specialist subject, Magnus.

[grunt]

Anyone know if hearts will have their accounts signed off by 31 march? Someone on here thought the auditors may have a problem this time if i remember correctly?They were signed on 31 March last year, I expect they will want to achieve that deadline again this year. How difficult it will be for the auditors to sign will depend on how much credence they give to Vlad's announcement that he was no longer going to fund them in future. I expect that if they believe him, it will be difficult for them to agree that HMFC are a going concern. I guess much will also depend on whether Vlad gifts them a further "forgiveness of debt " to allow them to report a small profit, like the £8m he forgave last year.

[CropleyWasGod]

It's my specialist subject, Magnus.

Barely a day goes by on this thread without mention of a Magnusson :wink:

I'll let you and PH argue that one, then lol

[Seveno]

Barely a day goes by on this thread without mention of a Magnusson :wink:

I'll let you and PH argue that one, then lol

Sorry but you do nothing for me, in that way.

[greenginger]

As things stand, I think they only need to submit accounts. I don't think it matters what the accounts, or the auditors' report, say.

However, Doncaster was saying today that they are having a meeting on Monday to discuss the implementation of Financial Fair Play rules within the SPL/SFA. These would broadly reflect UEFA's rules, I reckon, but I don't think they would affect Hearts ability to play in Europe next season.

The UEFA Club Financial Control Panel will assess , among other things


g) The budgets of the club and its ability to meet its commitments in the future;


To me that would raise the " Going - Concern " issue thats had the Yams auditors inserting question marks in their Reports.

[CropleyWasGod]

The UEFA Club Financial Control Panel will assess , among other things


g) The budgets of the club and its ability to meet its commitments in the future;


To me that would raise the " Going - Concern " issue thats had the Yams auditors inserting question marks in their Reports.

Yeah, but when does that come into force? I thought we still had another season to go, no?

[jdships]

The UEFA Club Financial Control Panel will assess , among other things


g) The budgets of the club and its ability to meet its commitments in the future;


To me that would raise the " Going - Concern " issue thats had the Yams auditors inserting question marks in their Reports.


Interesting what you write !!
Coming back from the game today with my friend who is a retired " liquidation administrator " ( an accountant to you and me !!) and we heard the score from Ibrox and were talking about the short term future for Hearts .
His point was " It depends how the powers that be look at Hearts in the light of what constitutes a " going concern" and the then implications "
Just as you say it could be the " achilles heel"

:flag:

[PatHead]

It's my specialist subject, Magnus.

When the story first broke I checked with Octopus regarding the position of investments. I received replies regarding them and the following was stated in an email-

"The Reality & Facts:
The Ticketus deal(s) are all credit insured."

" We have had a club that has went into insolvency (South Coast) and because of the added protection we never lost any of our capital and indeed made the margin we expected."

I can't print the whole email as various clients' names are on it. Obviously if I have been mislead I would really like to hear from you or pointed in the right direction. By the way I have since been told the South Coast club was Plymouth.

[Seveno]

When the story first broke I checked with Octopus regarding the position of investments. I received replies regarding them and the following was stated in an email-

"The Reality & Facts:
The Ticketus deal(s) are all credit insured."

" We have had a club that has went into insolvency (South Coast) and because of the added protection we never lost any of our capital and indeed made the margin we expected."

I can't print the whole email as various clients' names are on it. Obviously if I have been mislead I would really like to hear from you or pointed in the right direction. By the way I have since been told the South Coast club was Plymouth.

Well if you were an Insurer, would you provide cover a against a company defaulting due to liquidation if it was in debt, losing money and had an outstanding court against HMRC a sum of involving a £45m ?

[PatHead]

Well if you were an Insurer, would you provide cover a against a company defaulting due to liquidation if it was in debt, losing money and had an outstanding court against HMRC a sum of involving a £45m ?

If the clubs were in a great financial position they wouldn't need the money up front and to sell the tickets at a discount. Would expect a fairly high premium though! Bit like a car insurance firm covering a previously convicted drink driver

[Seveno]

If the clubs were in a great financial position they wouldn't need the money up front and to sell the tickets at a discount. Would expect a fairly high premium though! Bit like a car insurance firm covering a previously convicted drink driver

More like a car insurance company giving cover on a driver who is currently drunk and driving the wrong way along a motorway at 90mph.

[PatHead]

More like a car insurance company giving cover on a driver who is currently drunk and driving the wrong way along a motorway at 90mph.

We know that now but at the time the purchase was made they were giving the money to a company which was receiving a cash injection from the new owner, was getting rid off it's overdraft etc. Yes had a tax case hanging over it but no guarantee they would lose it.

We now know that the new owner wasn't all he seemed and had borrowed a pound from his mate to buy Rangers before using Ticketus money to clear the overdraft and not buy new players as Daily ****** was reporting at the time.

[StevieC]

We now know that the new owner wasn't all he seemed and had borrowed a pound from his mate to buy Rangers before using Ticketus money to clear the overdraft and not buy new players as Daily ****** was reporting at the time.

Insurance companies are always looking for a get out clause. If Ticketus did not disclose the risks fully (ie BTC) then the insurance company may not pay out.

Purely speculation of course.

[greenginger]

They were signed on 31 March last year, I expect they will want to achieve that deadline again this year. How difficult it will be for the auditors to sign will depend on how much credence they give to Vlad's announcement that he was no longer going to fund them in future. I expect that if they believe him, it will be difficult for them to agree that HMFC are a going concern. I guess much will also depend on whether Vlad gifts them a further "forgiveness of debt " to allow them to report a small profit, like the £8m he forgave last year.


Their accounts are certainly signed and dated 31st March but they were not lodged at Companies House until the 13th of May. That seems a bit strange as it probably doubled or trebled their late filing fee.

No chance of their Auditors back-dating a signature ?

Anyway I think any date used in deciding on clubs admission to competitions will be when the SFA receive said accounts and not some dodgy Tipex and photo-copy job with any date you like at the bottom. :wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/rangers_out_of_europe_over_cash_difficulties_1_215 2461

No Huns in Europe....

[WindyMiller]

http://www.scotsman.com/news/scottish-news/top-stories/rangers_out_of_europe_over_cash_difficulties_1_215 2461

No Huns in Europe....


A far better headline the the Scotman's.


:thumbsup:

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting comments from Stewart Regan:-

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers_administration_ogilvie_out_of_ibrox_probe_ 1_2152924

[greenginger]

I wonder if there are any players who actually had twin contracts and a wee bit down on their luck just now and might fancy a last pay day.:aok:

[WindyMiller]

Anyone know who the present board members are?

I've tried to find some links but I've had no success.

Edit ; this might help......



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14215981

[Kaiser1962]

The excellent www.rangerstaxcase.com (http://www.rangerstaxcase.com) blogged this article in April last year. Given that they have been ahead of the game on most cases it is perhaps worth regurgitating, now that we are aware how events appear to be unfolding, and there should be a warning thet there is considerable Yam content,

http://rangerstaxcase.com/2011/04/14/campbell-ogilvie/

[degenerated]

Interesting comments from Stewart Regan:-

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/rangers_administration_ogilvie_out_of_ibrox_probe_ 1_2152924

"anything from Armageddon to a slap on the wrist"

No need to guess which way this is going to go then.

[CropleyWasGod]

Anyone know who the present board members are?

I've tried to find some links but I've had no success.

Edit ; this might help......



http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/14215981

Lazy get. It's in one of the articles I linked.:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

"anything from Armageddon to a slap on the wrist"

No need to guess which way this is going to go then.

Why do you say that? SR was merely pointing out the range of sanctions. That is all.

[cad]

Lazy get. It's in one of the articles I linked.:greengrin



CWD do you think the SFA have all the info they need to act ,its just that there seems to be new tangents daily to this moneychase .

The 2 links regarding Ogilvie are scary, his times at Hearts and Rangers the same payments etc .

His position in the SFA commitee you couldnt right this , plus the SFA`s part in this has to be investigated if they acted on a honest and trustworthy manner for all of Scotlands football clubs or a puppet to be played with at the chairmans fancy

[CropleyWasGod]

CWD do you think the SFA have all the info they need to act ,its just that there seems to be new tangents daily to this moneychase .

The 2 links regarding Ogilvie are scary, his times at Hearts and Rangers the same payments etc .

His position in the SFA commitee you couldnt right this , plus the SFA`s part in this has to be investigated if they acted on a honest and trustworthy manner for all of Scotlands football clubs or a puppet to be played with at the chairmans fancy

SR does say in one of the articles I linked that, at least as far as the "double contracts" are concerned, they might decide to set up a separate enquiry. My hunch is that this IS what will happen. Given that the Adam accusations only arose this week, and the SFA enquiry is reporting next week, there is no way IMO that they can come to a satisfactory conclusion on that.

I do get the feeling that SR is trying his best to be transparent in all of this. It wouldn't surprise me if he decided that past events at the SFA were worthy of external scrutiny.

[WindyMiller]

Lazy get. It's in one of the articles I linked.:greengrin

It's Sunday morning!

:greengrin

[cad]

SR does say in one of the articles I linked that, at least as far as the "double contracts" are concerned, they might decide to set up a separate enquiry. My hunch is that this IS what will happen. Given that the Adam accusations only arose this week, and the SFA enquiry is reporting next week, there is no way IMO that they can come to a satisfactory conclusion on that.

I do get the feeling that SR is trying his best to be transparent in all of this. It wouldn't surprise me if he decided that past events at the SFA were worthy of external scrutiny.



Dont forget CWG if the fixture list was different it could be us waiting for a wedge from them, wonder how Rod and this message board would have reacted ,not best pleased .

Do you think George Pleat and his emergency fund of £5/6 Million should be used to ease the burden that Dunfermline are going through and pay them the £80,000 also Dun Utd theyre £100,000 it was on theyre watch sort of thing ,, finances put aside should be forthcoming and sorted out at the conclusion of
The Rangers Circus IMHO.

[CropleyWasGod]

Dont forget CWG if the fixture list was different it could be us waiting for a wedge from them, wonder how Rod and this message board would have reacted ,not best pleased .

Do you think George Pleat and his emergency fund of £5/6 Million should be used to ease the burden that Dunfermline are going through and pay them the £80,000 also Dun Utd theyre £100,000 it was on theyre watch sort of thing ,, finances put aside should be forthcoming and sorted out at the conclusion of
The Rangers Circus IMHO.

Wouldn't have happened under Rod, IMO. Remember that this happened just before administration, months after the gossip first emerged. RP would probably have done what he did with Hearts, and demanded that we sell the tickets ourselves.

As for your second question, there is precedent in that the SPL advanced Gretna some of their prize money, to enable them to get to the end of the season. But that's as far as it should go, IMO. The rest of the clubs making up the SFA (to whom the emergency fund belongs to, of course) shouldn't be made to pay for RFC's, DUFC's and DAFC's financial mismanagement.

[cad]

Wouldn't have happened under Rod, IMO. Remember that this happened just before administration, months after the gossip first emerged. RP would probably have done what he did with Hearts, and demanded that we sell the tickets ourselves.

As for your second question, there is precedent in that the SPL advanced Gretna some of their prize money, to enable them to get to the end of the season. But that's as far as it should go, IMO. The rest of the clubs making up the SFA (to whom the emergency fund belongs to, of course) shouldn't be made to pay for RFC's, DUFC's and DAFC's financial mismanagement.


Im trying to remember what the situation was before Dunfermline and Dundee Utd played them ,were Rangers in financial difficulties I cant remember , if everything was hunkydory why would you stipulate how you were to be paid a crystalball they didnt have they were just the unlucky sods who still have to be paid ,a fixture that could have been us as I said before .

You dont think one of the biggest football clubs in Britain, the world ( well they like to think so )
is going to stiff you for £200,000 CWG come on.

[ballengeich]

SR does say in one of the articles I linked that, at least as far as the "double contracts" are concerned, they might decide to set up a separate enquiry. My hunch is that this IS what will happen. Given that the Adam accusations only arose this week, and the SFA enquiry is reporting next week, there is no way IMO that they can come to a satisfactory conclusion on that.

I do get the feeling that SR is trying his best to be transparent in all of this. It wouldn't surprise me if he decided that past events at the SFA were worthy of external scrutiny.

If I understand the Adam accusations correctly they take the tax case on to a new level. The big tax case has previously centered on whether the EBTs, which are in principle a legal method of tax avoidance, had been administered correctly. Adam's accusation seems to be that there were payments which were concealed from the SAF and the revenue. That would surely be tax evasion and lead to criminal cases. It certainly requires something far greater than an SFA enquiry.

[CropleyWasGod]

Im trying to remember what the situation was before Dunfermline and Dundee Utd played them ,were Rangers in financial difficulties I cant remember , if everything was hunkydory why would you stipulate how you were to be paid a crystalball they didnt have they were just the unlucky sods who still have to be paid ,a fixture that could have been us as I said before .

You dont think one of the biggest football clubs in Britain, the world ( well they like to think so )
is going to stiff you for £200,000 CWG come on.

I think you're missing my point. You had asked about the hypothetical situation of Hibs being in DAFC's position.

Part of financial management is risk assessment. Hearts and Rangers' financial problems were well-known, and had been for a long time. In RFC's case, administration had been talked about for a while.

When Hearts came to call in January, we assessed the risk of not getting paid, and decided that one did exist. So we sold Hearts fans their tickets. Presumably, DAFC (and United) went through that same process, and decided that the risk was not that great. In hindsight, a poor decision.

Whilst DUFC and DAFC deserve a lot of sympathy, they also should take part of the blame. It's in situations like this that we should be thankful for the Board we have.

And, it was £80k DAFC lost out on, not £200k :na na:

[Seveno]

We know that now but at the time the purchase was made they were giving the money to a company which was receiving a cash injection from the new owner, was getting rid off it's overdraft etc. Yes had a tax case hanging over it but no guarantee they would lose it.

We now know that the new owner wasn't all he seemed and had borrowed a pound from his mate to buy Rangers before using Ticketus money to clear the overdraft and not buy new players as Daily ****** was reporting at the time.

All raises the spectre of fraudulent misrepresentation.

[greenginger]

I think you're missing my point. You had asked about the hypothetical situation of Hibs being in DAFC's position.

Part of financial management is risk assessment. Hearts and Rangers' financial problems were well-known, and had been for a long time. In RFC's case, administration had been talked about for a while.

When Hearts came to call in January, we assessed the risk of not getting paid, and decided that one did exist. So we sold Hearts fans their tickets. Presumably, DAFC (and United) went through that same process, and decided that the risk was not that great. In hindsight, a poor decision.

Whilst DUFC and DAFC deserve a lot of sympathy, they also should take part of the blame. It's in situations like this that we should be thankful for the Board we have.

And, it was £80k DAFC lost out on, not £200k :na na:

Was Dundee United's problem not arise with their share of the Scottish Cup tie at Ibrox. It was Rangers game so not much United could do to avoid a risk.

[CropleyWasGod]

Was Dundee United's problem not arise with their share of the Scottish Cup tie at Ibrox. It was Rangers game so not much United could do to avoid a risk.

Ah ok, hadn't realised that. They can escape my Sunday grumps then. :greengrin

They should still have taken out insurance against being drawn away against a financial car crash!!! :greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

All raises the spectre of fraudulent misrepresentation.

So, in your opininion, who sues who here?

Ticketus sue the insurance company if they don't pay out?

Ticketus sue RFC for the misrepresentation?

Ticketus sue CW for taking on the deal when he wasn't, at that time, RFC?

The insurance company sue RFC? PLEASE!!

[Seveno]

So, in your opininion, who sues who here?

Ticketus sue the insurance company if they don't pay out?

Ticketus sue RFC for the misrepresentation?

Ticketus sue CW for taking on the deal when he wasn't, at that time, RFC?

The insurance company sue RFC? PLEASE!!

First thing that I would expect is that the insurers don't pay out and effectively challenge Ticketus to take them to court.

There are sufficient grounds for suspicion that there was some form of collusion in the whole deal.

[Seveno]

The more that comes out, the more that I am convinced that Whyte is just a stooge, sent in to drive Rangers into Liquidation. Leaving Rangers FC behind, along with all the debts, a newco is formed and Whyte's 'employer' steps in to buy the assets, sell off whatever is necessary to fund the purchase and then invest in the playing squad.

[CropleyWasGod]

First thing that I would expect is that the insurers don't pay out and effectively challenge Ticketus to take them to court.

There are sufficient grounds for suspicion that there was some form of collusion in the whole deal.

Ah, the C word.

I mentioned, hunners of pages ago, that I thought David Murray must have known what CW was up to. The media have stayed away from such accusations, for lots of reasons. However, what you say just makes me even more convinced.

[CentreLine]

Dont forget CWG if the fixture list was different it could be us waiting for a wedge from them, wonder how Rod and this message board would have reacted ,not best pleased .

Do you think George Pleat and his emergency fund of £5/6 Million should be used to ease the burden that Dunfermline are going through and pay them the £80,000 also Dun Utd theyre £100,000 it was on theyre watch sort of thing ,, finances put aside should be forthcoming and sorted out at the conclusion of
The Rangers Circus IMHO.

Don't think so. When the OF tried to stiff the rest of the SPL clubs by adding a premium to the ticket sales RP refused to allow them to handle our tickets and all ticket sales for OF matches go though our ticket office. Just another case of RP doing the best for our club and fans IMHO but it would certainly have helped if we had played rangers in the recent past home or away. Of course he did the same in respect of hahahahearts and was criticised on this forum because it meant a hike of something like £6 to hahahahearts fans for handling fees.:rolleyes:

[SteveHFC]

Apparently these are the players that will be released:

papac
mculloch
bocanegro
alexander
healy
wylde
wallace
alluko
kerkar
perry
little
hemming
mccabe
mitchell
gallagher

Would take Wylde off them. :agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

Apparently these are the players that will be released:

papac
mculloch
bocanegro
alexander
healy
wylde
wallace
alluko
kerkar
perry
little
hemming
mccabe
mitchell
gallagher

Would take Wylde off them. :agree:

Why? Canny play him.

[Spike Mandela]

Apparently these are the players that will be released:

papac
mculloch
bocanegro
alexander
healy
wylde
wallace
alluko
kerkar
perry
little
hemming
mccabe
mitchell
gallagher

Would take Wylde off them. :agree:

Where did you get this?

[SteveHFC]

Where did you get this?


http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212889

[CyberSauzee]

It's on the bears den forum, some have dismissed it as fake.

Must be a fake - either that or Broadfoot had the day off when they did the headcount.

[CropleyWasGod]

Must be a fake - either that or Broadfoot had the day off when they did the headcount.

Can't see Wylde being on the list either.

[The_Todd]

I wouldn't even bet my jar of pennies I keep in the office on that list being real, blatant fake.

Rangers short term objective is to save £1m a month, all the high earners have to go. Whittaker, McGregor - all of them. Even if they can raise funds by selling them in the summer it'll be no use to them if Rangers are extinct in the summer anyway!

[Twa Cairpets]

Apparently these are the players that will be released:

papac
mculloch
bocanegro
alexander
healy
wylde
wallace
alluko
kerkar
perry
little
hemming
mccabe
mitchell
gallagher

Would take Wylde off them. :agree:

IF true, then thats 13 of 16 of their squad yeaterday against their cousins in iniquity. 'Well guaranteed second I'd say, and you'd have to wonder what Celtic will do to the in a few weeks. Cant see Lennon telling his players to take it easy.

[CropleyWasGod]

I wouldn't even bet my jar of pennies I keep in the office on that list being real, blatant fake.

Rangers short term objective is to save £1m a month, all the high earners have to go. Whittaker, McGregor - all of them. Even if they can raise funds by selling them in the summer it'll be no use to them if Rangers are extinct in the summer anyway!

It's not as simple as just getting rid of the high earners.

It has to be a mixture of high earners/older players/those coming to the end of their contracts.

Also, the admins have to have an eye on the potential sale of the club. They have to keep enough value in the playing squad to make it attractive to a buyer.

[bingo70]

I wouldn't even bet my jar of pennies I keep in the office on that list being real, blatant fake.

Rangers short term objective is to save £1m a month, all the high earners have to go. Whittaker, McGregor - all of them. Even if they can raise funds by selling them in the summer it'll be no use to them if Rangers are extinct in the summer anyway!

Players with massive sell on value like Davis and Mcgregor won't be released, they'll be put on reduced wages or something but there's no way they'd release a player like Mcgregor that could be sold for anything up to £9m (based on what Gordon went for) for nowt when they could make that sort of money in a few months.

[Stonewall]

Players with massive sell on value like Davis and Mcgregor won't be released, they'll be put on reduced wages or something but there's no way they'd release a player like Mcgregor that could be sold for anything up to £9m (based on what Gordon went for) for nowt when they could make that sort of money in a few months.

Except they'll be worth nothing like that as it's known Rangers have to sell: unless they can get an auction going.

[The_Todd]

Normally yes, they'd look to keep some to sell in the summer but Rangers are goosed well and truly. They need to save £1m per month just to survive to May, let alone come out of admin. So again, what is the point in keeping the higher paid players til May to sell them if Rangers FC doesn't even exist come May because they couldn't make the required cuts?

Also, the players won't automatically accept lower wages, they may just happily say "sod that" and leave.

[CropleyWasGod]

Normally yes, they'd look to keep some to sell in the summer but Rangers are goosed well and truly. They need to save £1m per month just to survive to May, let alone come out of admin. So again, what is the point in keeping the higher paid players til May to sell them if Rangers FC doesn't even exist come May because they couldn't make the required cuts?

Also, the players won't automatically accept lower wages, they may just happily say "sod that" and leave.

You're missing the point.

The admins are not only trying to cut costs, but sell the club on as well.

A club with a few valuable players is going to attract a higher price than one full of untried youngsters.

[bingo70]

Normally yes, they'd look to keep some to sell in the summer but Rangers are goosed well and truly. They need to save £1m per month just to survive to May, let alone come out of admin. So again, what is the point in keeping the higher paid players til May to sell them if Rangers FC doesn't even exist come May because they couldn't make the required cuts?

Also, the players won't automatically accept lower wages, they may just happily say "sod that" and leave.

Maybe so, however i'm still certain they won't release players like Mcgregor and Davis, how they get around it and make the money back i don't know but i'm just sure they won't be releasing them.

we'll find out tomorrow of course and if i'm wrong i'll hold my hands up but i don't think i will be.

[jgl07]

It's not as simple as just getting rid of the high earners.

It has to be a mixture of high earners/older players/those coming to the end of their contracts.

Also, the admins have to have an eye on the potential sale of the club. They have to keep enough value in the playing squad to make it attractive to a buyer.

This is all bit academic. Where is this 'buyer' going to come from? Whyte will not back down, neither will HMRC or Ticketus. Murray couldn't give the club away before all this hit, so why should Rangers suddenly become a something worth purchasing?

If, or rather when, Rangers lose the Big Tax case, the game will be up and insolvency will be inevitable.

I suspect that the redundancies will include those not prepared to take a big pay cut.

The Administrators will also be trying to put out a competitive team to keep the walk up fans coming in or they will not make the end of the season.

[CropleyWasGod]

This is all bit academic. Where is this 'buyer' going to come from? Whyte will not back down, neither will HMRC or Ticketus. Murray couldn't give the club away before all this hit, so why should Rangers suddenly become a something worth purchasing?

If, or rather when, Rangers lose the Big Tax case, the game will be up and insolvency will be inevitable.

I suspect that the redundancies will include those not prepared to take a big pay cut.

The Administrators will also be trying to put out a competitive team to keep the walk up fans coming in or they will not make the end of the season.

Whilst I agree that no-one with sense would buy the club as it is, the fact remains that there are potential buyers out there. The admins have been talking to them. They would be failing in their duty if they didn't at least try to make the club more attractive for a buyer.

Once the 16th March comes and goes, if there is no serious activity on the selling front, I suspect we might see more redundancies.

[The_Todd]

You're missing the point.

The admins are not only trying to cut costs, but sell the club on as well.

A club with a few valuable players is going to attract a higher price than one full of untried youngsters.

You're right, I suppose. But they have to figure out what's more important and what will come first? Finding a new buyer in the long term, or even having a club to sell to begin with. It's a tough job those administrators have got, and I don't envy them - unless they get to announce liquidation and then I'd be very envious of them :wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

You're right, I suppose. But they have to figure out what's more important and what will come first? Finding a new buyer in the long term, or even having a club to sell to begin with. It's a tough job those administrators have got, and I don't envy them - unless they get to announce liquidation and then I'd be very envious of them :wink:

It's a balancing act...... I don't envy them either, even at £600 per hour. :greengrin

[aljo7-0]

It's a balancing act...... I don't envy them either, even at £600 per hour. :greengrin
At those rates you really would take your time thinking about matters. No point in rushing into decisions (well not as long as there is any money left in the kitty anyway) :greengrin

[ancient hibee]

Ticketus will be insured and the insurance company will then lay the liability off with other insurance companies-that's the way the market works.

I suspect that all the highest earners will be given the chance to go-as I understand it if anyone is given the option of reduced wages it generates the right to go anyway.


A standard security must be registered at the Register of Sasines otherwise it has no effect.

[jgl07]

Whilst I agree that no-one with sense would buy the club as it is, the fact remains that there are potential buyers out there. The admins have been talking to them. They would be failing in their duty if they didn't at least try to make the club more attractive for a buyer.


The reason that no buyer was forthcoming for Rangers was that there were two tax disputes hanging over Rangers to a total amount of over £53 million. Add in the £18 million due to Lloyds Bank group and the fact that Rangers were hemorrhaging millions each year thanks to a dubious financial model and it is clear why no-one credible would touch the club with a bargepole.

The £18 million due to Lloyds s no longer there but there is £24 million due to Ticketus. The tax bill has been increased by £15 million since Whyte took over and could be as high as £75 million.

The tax cases need to be won (unlikely) and also the Ticketus deal would have to be avoided (dubious) but even then the only way that Rangers will ever be sold is if there is a CVA. And HMRC are not going to fall for that one.

Some realism is needed here. The administrators should attempt to keep Rangers going until the end of the season before an orderly liquidation and the creation of a phoenix company and an applcation to the SFL for next season.

[CropleyWasGod]

The reason that no buyer was forthcoming for Rangers was that there were two tax disputes hanging over Rangers to a total amount of over £53 million. Add in the £18 million due to Lloyds Bank group and the fact that Rangers were hemorrhaging millions each year thanks to a dubious financial model and it is clear why no-one credible would touch the club with a bargepole.

The £18 million due to Lloyds s no longer there but there is £24 million due to Ticketus. The tax bill has been increased by £15 million since Whyte took over and could be as high as £75 million.

The tax cases need to be won (unlikely) and also the Ticketus deal would have to be avoided (dubious) but even then the only way that Rangers will ever be sold is if there is a CVA. And HMRC are not going to fall for that one.

Some realism is needed here. The administrators should attempt to keep Rangers going until the end of the season before an orderly liquidation and the creation of a phoenix company and an applcation to the SFL for next season.

I think you're missing my point. There ARE people out there who are interested in buying RFC... Paul Murray for one. Whilst they remain, the admins must consider them.

I am sure they know, as you and I do, that a sale is unlikely, hence the 16th March deadline.

[PaulSmith]

I think you're missing my point. There ARE people out there who are interested in buying RFC... Paul Murray for one. Whilst they remain, the admins must consider them.

I am sure they know, as you and I do, that a sale is unlikely, hence the 16th March deadline.

Paul Murray, all he's doing is trying to get a consortium together. Absolutely no danger he has anywhere near the financial clout to be considered.
Any deal of his will either be backed by bringing in more debt or he'll need to convince several investors to take a huge gamble akin to giving Greece a loan

[CropleyWasGod]

Paul Murray, all he's doing is trying to get a consortium together. Absolutely no danger he has anywhere near the financial clout to be considered.
Any deal of his will either be backed by bringing in more debt or he'll need to convince several investors to take a huge gamble akin to giving Greece a loan

I know this, but the fact is he is TRYING to get a deal done. The admins have to give him the necessary respect.

IMO, Greece is a safer bet, by the way :wink:

[Hibby cal]

Was informed last night in my taxi
That mcgregor,Whittaker,Davis are
All having there wages paid by a
Third party and will not be on the
Goodbye list.

[CropleyWasGod]

Was informed last night in my taxi
That mcgregor,Whittaker,Davis are
All having there wages paid by a
Third party and will not be on the
Goodbye list.

Is that a Haiku? :greengrin


TBH, if they are being paid by a third party, there's no saving if they are let go. :cb

[Onion]

Was informed last night in my taxi
That mcgregor,Whittaker,Davis are
All having there wages paid by a
Third party and will not be on the
Goodbye list.

Petty sure that's not legal - all income into RFC however it is derived belongs to the creditors and only the admins can dictate how this is deployed - for the good of the creditors.

[TrinityHibs]

I wouldn't even bet my jar of pennies I keep in the office on that list being real, blatant fake.

Rangers short term objective is to save £1m a month, all the high earners have to go. Whittaker, McGregor - all of them. Even if they can raise funds by selling them in the summer it'll be no use to them if Rangers are extinct in the summer anyway!

Are you the fella that noted interest in buying them?

[WindyMiller]

Whilst I agree that no-one with sense would buy the club as it is, the fact remains that there are potential buyers out there. The admins have been talking to them. They would be failing in their duty if they didn't at least try to make the club more attractive for a buyer.

Once the 16th March comes and goes, if there is no serious activity on the selling front, I suspect we might see more redundancies.

Maybe the buyers don't want players on big money contracts on the books.

[CropleyWasGod]

Maybe the buyers don't want players on big money contracts on the books.

IMO, that would be even dafter than wanting to buy them in the first place. :agree:

[jdships]

Maybe the buyers don't want players on big money contracts on the books.


Think you are nearer the truth than you realise :greengrin
David Moyes is advocating a 20 % in EPL wages to reduce gate prices .
There are at least two SPL and three SFL teams looking at the possibility of part time football next season .
Money is tight financial future is unsure and that is the bottom line

Possibly, probably even , there will be some deluded soul for whom RFC ticks all the boxes in his ego which will bring him to take on the task of running the club .

:rolleyes:

[Viva_Palmeiras]

Think you are nearer the truth than you realise :greengrin
David Moyes is advocating a 20 % in EPL wages to reduce gate prices .
There are at least two SPL and three SFL teams looking at the possibility of part time football next season .
Money is tight financial future is unsure and that is the bottom line

Possibly, probably even , there will be some deluded soul for whom RFC ticks all the boxes in his ego which will bring him to take on the task of running the club .

:rolleyes:Read an article written by a concerned Evertonian apparently they are spending beyond their means but can't afford to do otherwise cos relegation would see them in deep doo-doo so the lemmings keep on playing the game alongside the others.
Maybe not surprising to hear that from Moyes.
As I've said all along this all stems for a failure of the authorities to protect the
Sustainability of the game. If they are not about that then what is their purpose ?

[Hibs Class]

Read an article written by a concerned Evertonian apparently they are spending beyond their means but can't afford to do otherwise cos relegation would see them in deep doo-doo so the lemmings keep on playing the game alongside the others.
Maybe not surprising to hear that from Moyes.
As I've said all along this all stems for a failure of the authorities to protect the
Sustainability of the game. If they are not about that then what is their purpose ?


Imho there is a sizeable proportion of people involved in football, from national to world level, for whom the purpose is to milk the cash cow as much as they can for their own benefit, regardless of how much the game they profess to love is damaged in the process.

[J-C]

I'd have thought the out of contract in the summer players would be 1st on the list, then 2nd string that Coisty thought he could do without, then he'd let the younger players who probably won't make it at the club go.

[Green forever]

I'd have thought the out of contract in the summer players would be 1st on the list, then 2nd string that Coisty thought he could do without, then he'd let the younger players who probably won't make it at the club go.


The thing is the players who arent playing wont be the high earners, they have to save £1million per month just to exist so their has to be a smattering of high earners in there to add up to £1million savings.

[PatHead]

The thing is the players who arent playing wont be the high earners, they have to save £1million per month just to exist so their has to be a smattering of high earners in there to add up to £1million savings.

Also be non football staff, they won't need coaches for 60 players so some of them will go and they will only need a small Rock Steady workforce to manage home crowds of 6,000.

[silverhibee]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4172677/Play-for-FREE-before-you-get-sacked.html



:faf:

[SteveHFC]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4172677/Play-for-FREE-before-you-get-sacked.html



:faf:

:faf:

[silverhibee]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/rangers/2012/03/04/spl-rivals-want-to-see-rangers-heavily-punished-if-club-is-liquidated-and-reformed-under-new-name-86908-23773872/


Spl rivals are being too soft. imo :agree:

[silverhibee]

:faf:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGd7uUh5HpU


:faf:

[SteveHFC]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NGd7uUh5HpU


:faf:

:faf:

[Sir David Gray]

Maybe so, however i'm still certain they won't release players like Mcgregor and Davis, how they get around it and make the money back i don't know but i'm just sure they won't be releasing them.

we'll find out tomorrow of course and if i'm wrong i'll hold my hands up but i don't think i will be.

:agree: I'd be astonished if the likes of Allan McGregor and Steven Davis are released this week.

The likes of McCulloch, Healy, Papac, Aluko and Broadfoot, who will all be on pretty good wages, but who have very little transfer value, will be some of the first names on the list for redundancy.

[SteveHFC]

Absolute *****, McGregor would be one of the first to take a pay cut. Rangers through and through.

Sun spouting their usual pish, they can **** right off

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212950

:faf:

[jgl07]

I think you're missing my point. There ARE people out there who are interested in buying RFC... Paul Murray for one. Whilst they remain, the admins must consider them.

I am sure they know, as you and I do, that a sale is unlikely, hence the 16th March deadline.

There were consortia interested in taking over Hearts but none was forthcoming with the cash needed. Pat the Plumber springs to mind!

As for Paul Murray, in his dreams. He is a time waster and the Administrators certainly know this although you are correct that they are duty bound to consider his interest.

The fact that Dave King is linked with the Murray consortium tells it all. Just what Rangers need is another tax avoiding crook running the club! King has been linked with a takeover of Rangers for the past five years in numerous Chick Young 'exclusives' but it never happened.

The Administrators may delude themselves into thinking that Rangers can be sold as a going concern but it is not going to happen, certainly not with a potential £75 million tax bill hanging over them. That case will not be resolved by 15 March so any deadline for then is pointless.

Their emphasis should have been focussed on cutting costs in the interests of the creditors. They have been in control for three weeks now and have hardly saved anything. Compare the situation at Motherwell when the Administrators dispatched 17 players on the first day and cancelled all season tickets making everyone pay at the gate.

Duff and Phelps seem to have a totally different agenda.

[silverhibee]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212950

:faf:


McGregor Naismith Lafferty and Whittaker are all refusing to take wage cuts.


So i have heard.

[Spike Mandela]

More questions than answers

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/twenty-questions-on-rangers-21st-day-of-administration.16923666?

[Barney McGrew]

McGregor Naismith Lafferty and Whittaker are all refusing to take wage cuts.


So i have heard.

The papers are suggesting similar this morning.

I think the players are edging their bets. They know they have value in the transfer market to Rangers so they're taking the chance that the administrator decides there's more value in paying them until the summer then punting them. But if they do get laid off, they'll get a bigger choice of clubs to go to with no transfer fee to pay, and they likely end up getting a bigger signing on fee.

Win win for the players involved.

[Mark79]

The papers are suggesting similar this morning.

I think the players are edging their bets. They know they have value in the transfer market to Rangers so they're taking the chance that the administrator decides there's more value in paying them until the summer then punting them. But if they do get laid off, they'll get a bigger choice of clubs to go to with no transfer fee to pay, and they likely end up getting a bigger signing on fee.

Win win for the players involved.

Agree with most of that apart from Laugherty being one of those with a value to the club!

[CropleyWasGod]

There were consortia interested in taking over Hearts but none was forthcoming with the cash needed. Pat the Plumber springs to mind!

As for Paul Murray, in his dreams. He is a time waster and the Administrators certainly know this although you are correct that they are duty bound to consider his interest.

The fact that Dave King is linked with the Murray consortium tells it all. Just what Rangers need is another tax avoiding crook running the club! King has been linked with a takeover of Rangers for the past five years in numerous Chick Young 'exclusives' but it never happened.

The Administrators may delude themselves into thinking that Rangers can be sold as a going concern but it is not going to happen, certainly not with a potential £75 million tax bill hanging over them. That case will not be resolved by 15 March so any deadline for then is pointless.

Their emphasis should have been focussed on cutting costs in the interests of the creditors. They have been in control for three weeks now and have hardly saved anything. Compare the situation at Motherwell when the Administrators dispatched 17 players on the first day and cancelled all season tickets making everyone pay at the gate.

Duff and Phelps seem to have a totally different agenda.

I actually think D & P have done a decent job thus far. 5 or 10 pages back, I set out my reasons for thinking that, and I haven't seen anything yet to change that opinion.

I don't think you can compare RFC to Motherwell. The two situations are different, in that Motherwell didn't have the kind of shenanigans that RFC have; that was much simpler and, in administration terms, "normal".

[alfie]

http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4172677/Play-for-FREE-before-you-get-sacked.html

:faf:
Just read the story and then noticed the links on the left hand side... :wink:

TICKETS
Great offers

JOBS
Search 1000s

TRAVEL
Find a deal

[J-C]

The thing is the players who arent playing wont be the high earners, they have to save £1million per month just to exist so their has to be a smattering of high earners in there to add up to £1million savings.

Some of the backup on the bench will still be on around £5-10,000

[PatHead]

BIG BIG NEWS RE TICKETUS DEAL

Received an email from Ticketus this morning.............

It has come to my attention that XXXXX (staff of ticketus) has been in contact with you about the Ticketus/Glasgow Rangers deal and suggested that the deal was credit insured.

I would like to point out that this is not correct and to apologise for this error.

Assume they must be bricking it now. Doubt wee Shytie Whytie's guarantee will seem so secure.

Well better get off to speak to clients.......urgently

[CropleyWasGod]

BIG BIG NEWS RE TICKETUS DEAL

Received an email from Ticketus this morning.............

It has come to my attention that XXXXX (staff of ticketus) has been in contact with you about the Ticketus/Glasgow Rangers deal and suggested that the deal was credit insured.

I would like to point out that this is not correct and to apologise for this error.

Assume they must be bricking it now. Doubt wee Shytie Whytie's guarantee will seem so secure.

Well better get off to speak to clients.......urgently

Wow, that is big news.

I would presume that CW was speaking the truth when he said that he had underwritten the deal, then? Otherwise, where was Ticketus' comfort?

Thinking aloud then... RFCG (presumably) guaranteed the Ticketus deal. RFCG had security over the RFC assets, which might have been enough in normal circumstances.

Ticketus, though, clearly didn't allow for the fact that RFC were crap in Europe. The minute Malmo scored back in August, the deck of cards began to wobble.

[hibs0666]

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

BBC reporting that monthly deal might be struck to avoid redundancies, and Dunfermline to be paid the in full.

Serious buyer waiting in the wings?

[stokesmessiah]

The chat on twitter just now from Chris Mclaughlin & Graham Spiers is that there are to be NO immediate redundancies as the players are discussing a 25 -75 % pay cut for the next month.

[Hibs Class]

I actually think D & P have done a decent job thus far. 5 or 10 pages back, I set out my reasons for thinking that, and I haven't seen anything yet to change that opinion.

I don't think you can compare RFC to Motherwell. The two situations are different, in that Motherwell didn't have the kind of shenanigans that RFC have; that was much simpler and, in administration terms, "normal".

Surely one of the "normal" activities in any administration is to take cost out of the business as quickly as possible (the alternative being to continue losing cash and thus reducing the amount available to creditors). I'm sure the overall situation at Ibrox is complex but the failure to cut the playing staff at all so far, three weeks in, is quite unique when compared to other clubs' administrations.

[ancienthibby]

Wow, that is big news.

I would presume that CW was speaking the truth when he said that he had underwritten the deal, then? Otherwise, where was Ticketus' comfort?

Thinking aloud then... RFCG (presumably) guaranteed the Ticketus deal. RFCG had security over the RFC assets, which might have been enough in normal circumstances.

Ticketus, though, clearly didn't allow for the fact that RFC were crap in Europe. The minute Malmo scored back in August, the deck of cards began to wobble.

Beeb Radio reporting that D&P have proposed 75% cut for top wage-earners, 50% for next tier and 25% for the rest for this month only. If accepted, then No redundancies!!

Ye couldnae make this stuff up!

[CropleyWasGod]

Surely one of the "normal" activities in any administration is to take cost out of the business as quickly as possible (the alternative being to continue losing cash and thus reducing the amount available to creditors). I'm sure the overall situation at Ibrox is complex but the failure to cut the playing staff at all so far, three weeks in, is quite unique when compared to other clubs' administrations.

In order to cut the costs appropriately, though, they had to establish the extent of the debt, and the extent of the assets. The first couple of weeks were spent finding out what had happened to the Ticketus money. Once they had established that, and the actual amount of the debts, they could make the appropriate cuts.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

BBC reporting that monthly deal might be struck to avoid redundancies, and Dunfermline to be paid the in full.

Serious buyer waiting in the wings?

I find the Dunfermline thing curious. If RFC are actually going to do this, the rest of the creditors have a justifiable cause for complaint.

Unless, as you say, Mr. Silly Billy has rode in on his white horse.

[jgl07]

I actually think D & P have done a decent job thus far. 5 or 10 pages back, I set out my reasons for thinking that, and I haven't seen anything yet to change that opinion.

I don't think you can compare RFC to Motherwell. The two situations are different, in that Motherwell didn't have the kind of shenanigans that RFC have; that was much simpler and, in administration terms, "normal".

They were faced having to make £1 million a month in cuts and what was the first thing they did?

Yes they tried to sign a 35 year old player on £5,000 a week.

If fannying around for three to four weeks without saving a penny is 'doing a pretty good job', what would they have to do to be judged as failing?

The whole thing stinks from the point that Craig Whyte put them there to do his bidding.

[Andy74]

The whole thing is bizarre. When have other teams in this position done deals with players instead of just looking at the arithmetic and making the call? And making a deal with a credotor without paying anyhting to the rest? Strange.

[jonty]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/rangers/2012/03/04/spl-rivals-want-to-see-rangers-heavily-punished-if-club-is-liquidated-and-reformed-under-new-name-86908-23773872/


Spl rivals are being too soft. imo :agree:

:agree:

where's Petrie on that board when you need him.

RFC - "See all that financial prudence you've stuck to these past years Rod, hahahaha"
RP - "Aye right - GTF ya Rangers pricks. Enjoy Division 3"

[CropleyWasGod]

This is what Paul Murray said last night:-

Last night Murray said: "From my point of view, as a bidder, I want the squad to stay intact. That's my starting point. Fundamentally, I want the squad to stay in place and then to have the chance to build upon that squad going forward. I don't want any of those players to go.

[CropleyWasGod]

The whole thing is bizarre. When have other teams in this position done deals with players instead of just looking at the arithmetic and making the call? And making a deal with a credotor without paying anyhting to the rest? Strange.

It's not just strange, Andy, it's illegal.

[JeMeSouviens]

I find the Dunfermline thing curious. If RFC are actually going to do this, the rest of the creditors have a justifiable cause for complaint.

Unless, as you say, Mr. Silly Billy has rode in on his white horse.

Don't think Dunfermline were creditors as such. The money was for the Huns' tickets for a game at EEP. So although collected by the Hun ticket office I think it actually belonged to Dunfermline.

[JeMeSouviens]

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

BBC reporting that monthly deal might be struck to avoid redundancies, and Dunfermline to be paid the in full.

Serious buyer waiting in the wings?

Sounds like Paul Murray and his knights are waiting. The big tax bill should see them off quicker than you can say "Ni!". :wink:

[CropleyWasGod]

They were faced having to make £1 million a month in cuts and what was the first thing they did?

Yes they tried to sign a 35 year old player on £5,000 a week.

If fannying around for three to four weeks without saving a penny is 'doing a pretty good job', what would they have to do to be judged as failing?

The whole thing stinks from the point that Craig Whyte put them there to do his bidding.

They wouldn't have found the Ticketus money.

They would have taken the CW security at face value.

They wouldn't have established the extra £6m Revenue debt.

They wouldn't be suing CW.

The last point suggest that they aren't doing CW's bidding.

[Thecat23]

Rangers have only themselves to blame here. I see fat Sally saying a few folk have "Sly" digs and "kicks" at his club. Well Ally maybe if the ugly sisters never acted like 2 school bullies other clubs would be more sympathetic. It's like a classroom of 12 kids. 2 kids are the bullies and instead of having the same lunch money the make sure they take everything they can and leave the rest with next to nothing. If this was a classroom they would be expelled unless they paid us all back the money owed to us.

So Ally, I honestly hope you're horrible club die a slow death and free the rest to move on because as it stands this game is pretty much dead anyway, so what do we really have to lose?? the league would be better IMO.

[CropleyWasGod]

Don't think Dunfermline were creditors as such. The money was for the Huns' tickets for a game at EEP. So although collected by the Hun ticket office I think it actually belonged to Dunfermline.

That's a creditor in my book. RFC had cash belonging to DAFC, before they went into administration.

[grunt]

Don't think Dunfermline were creditors as such. The money was for the Huns' tickets for a game at EEP. So although collected by the Hun ticket office I think it actually belonged to Dunfermline.I don't think that matters. If it was in RFC bank account when they entered administration, and it is due to a third party, then I would think that was a creditor. I could be wrong, not an expert.

[Peevemor]

Don't think Dunfermline were creditors as such. The money was for the Huns' tickets for a game at EEP. So although collected by the Hun ticket office I think it actually belonged to Dunfermline.

The same could be said for unpaid VAT and PAYE in that case.

[CropleyWasGod]

The same could be said for unpaid VAT and PAYE in that case.

Yamanomics says that, since HMRC are owned by us, anything owed for PAYE & VAT is owed to ourselves and therefore not a creditor. :agree:

[grunt]

The last point suggest that they aren't doing CW's bidding.Maybe so. But by continuing to pay the players and by continually avoiding addressing the £1m per month deficit, they also do not appear to be working with the best interests of the creditors (certainly HMRC i.e. you and me) in mind.

[Peevemor]

Yamanomics says that, since HMRC are owned by us, anything owed for PAYE & VAT is owed to ourselves and therefore not a creditor. :agree:


Ah...sorry, I forgot. :Ummm:

[grunt]

Yamanomics says that, since HMRC are owned by us, anything owed for PAYE & VAT is owed to ourselves and therefore not a creditor. :agree:As in, "we are the people"?

[CropleyWasGod]

Maybe so. But by continuing to pay the players and by continually avoiding addressing the £1m per month deficit, they also do not appear to be working with the best interests of the creditors (certainly HMRC i.e. you and me) in mind.

If it turns out that King Silly (with his silly money) is indeed in the wings, and that (as Paul Murray says) he wants the squad as it is, then they HAVE been acting in creditors' best interests.

As I have said before, this is a balancing act.

[CropleyWasGod]

As in, "we are the people"?

GETTYFA :greengrin THEY arra peepul :na na:

[StevieC]

Beeb Radio reporting that D&P have proposed 75% cut for top wage-earners, 50% for next tier and 25% for the rest for this month only. If accepted, then No redundancies!!


:hmmm:

[Seveno]

BIG BIG NEWS RE TICKETUS DEAL

Received an email from Ticketus this morning.............

It has come to my attention that XXXXX (staff of ticketus) has been in contact with you about the Ticketus/Glasgow Rangers deal and suggested that the deal was credit insured.

I would like to point out that this is not correct and to apologise for this error.

Assume they must be bricking it now. Doubt wee Shytie Whytie's guarantee will seem so secure.

Well better get off to speak to clients.......urgently

Mr Ticketus must read hibs.net !

[CropleyWasGod]

Mr Ticketus must read hibs.net !

Them and STV :agree:

We could have fun with this :cb

[Seveno]

They were faced having to make £1 million a month in cuts and what was the first thing they did?

Yes they tried to sign a 35 year old player on £5,000 a week.

If fannying around for three to four weeks without saving a penny is 'doing a pretty good job', what would they have to do to be judged as failing?

The whole thing stinks from the point that Craig Whyte put them there to do his bidding.

I'm with you on this one. Remember that they said at the outset that they were confident that Rangers would emerge from administration - a comment made when they had not carried out any research.

Why did Whyte insist that they were appointed ?

I am certain that the agenda from the start was to take them into liquidation to escape from all the debts, including the BTC.

Whoever is behind Whyte could end up with a valuable asset on the cheap. Meanwhile, David Murray could end up facing criminal charges fro tax evasion.

[StevieC]

Why did Whyte insist that they were appointed ?

I suspect that he had history with them and that he would expect them to work closely and keep him one step ahead of the game as they uncovered the various dealings.

Better the devil you know ..

:wink:

[jgl07]

Maybe so. But by continuing to pay the players and by continually avoiding addressing the £1m per month deficit, they also do not appear to be working with the best interests of the creditors (certainly HMRC i.e. you and me) in mind.

The whole thing is inexplicable. The only scenario that I can see that makes sense is as follows:

1. Rangers announce they are considering administration (with D&P being tipped to take the job on).

2. HMRC get edgy about this and go to the Court of Session with their own plea to put Rangers into Administration and by implication not with D&P acting as administrators.

3. The Court gives Rangers two hours to appoint an administrator before they will do it on Rangers behalf.

4. D&P appointed by Whyte with half an hour to spare.

5. D&P rather than invalidate season tickets asking supporters to pay again and trimming the staff actually try to sign Daniel Cousin although this is blocked by the SPL transfer embargo.

6. The only reason for D&P to reasonably adopt a 'business as usual' stance is that some external party (presumably Rangers FC Group) have agreed to provide the cash. This was probably intended to come from the 'missing' cash from the Ticketus advance held by Collyer Bristow.

7. This was presumably a prelude to Rangers being liquidated and the Rangers FC Group taking over the key assets - Ibrox, Murray Park and the key playing staff - and emerging debt free before applying to the SPL for readmission.

8. The heat was on and the extent of Whyte's activities became known so the plan was never pursued. Whyte went to ground and D&P have been running around like headless chickens ever since. All their announcements have been of issues that were well know and splashed in blogs some time earlier.

9. D&P eventually locate the missing balance of the Ticketus cash in Collyer and Bristow's account. They apply to seize this. This is a wise move as it appears that Collyer and Bristow are themselves at threat of
financial meltdown following a court decision.

If anyone can come up with a more plausible scenario, I would be interested to see it.

[CropleyWasGod]

I'm with you on this one. Remember that they said at the outset that they were confident that Rangers would emerge from administration - a comment made when they had not carried out any research.

Why did Whyte insist that they were appointed ?

I am certain that the agenda from the start was to take them into liquidation to escape from all the debts, including the BTC.

Whoever is behind Whyte could end up with a valuable asset on the cheap. Meanwhile, David Murray could end up facing criminal charges fro tax evasion.

Liquidation wouldn't escape all the debts.

Ibrox, Murray Park and the Albion would all have to be sold in such an event. I have no idea how much they would fetch, but the proceeds would make a pretty big hole in the debt.

[Seveno]

The whole thing is inexplicable. The only scenario that I can see that makes sense is as follows:

1. Rangers announce they are considering administration (with D&P being tipped to take the job on).

2. HMRC get edgy about this and go to the Court of Session with their own plea to put Rangers into Administration and by implication not with D&P acting as administrators.

3. The Court gives Rangers two hours to appoint an administrator before they will do it on Rangers behalf.

4. D&P appointed by Whyte with half an hour to spare.

5. D&P rather than invalidate season tickets asking supporters to pay again and trimming the staff actually try to sign Daniel Cousin although this is blocked by the SPL transfer embargo.

6. The only reason for D&P to reasonably adopt a 'business as usual' stance is that some external party (presumably Rangers FC Group) have agreed to provide the cash. This was probably intended to come from the 'missing' cash from the Ticketus advance held by Collyer Bristow.

7. This was presumably a prelude to Rangers being liquidated and the Rangers FC Group taking over the key assets - Ibrox, Murray Park and the key playing staff - and emerging debt free before applying to the SPL for readmission.

8. The heat was on and the extent of Whyte's activities became known so the plan was never pursued. Whyte went to ground and D&P have been running around like headless chickens ever since. All their announcements have been of issues that were well know and splashed in blogs some time earlier.

9. D&P eventually locate the missing balance of the Ticketus cash in Collyer and Bristow's account. They apply to seize this. This is a wise move as it appears that Collyer and Bristow are themselves at threat of
financial meltdown following a court decision.

If anyone can come up with a more plausible scenario, I would be interested to see it.

First class deduction. Makes perfect sense to me.

You don't happen to have tomorrow night's lottery numbers do you ?

[CropleyWasGod]

The whole thing is inexplicable. The only scenario that I can see that makes sense is as follows:

1. Rangers announce they are considering administration (with D&P being tipped to take the job on).

2. HMRC get edgy about this and go to the Court of Session with their own plea to put Rangers into Administration and by implication not with D&P acting as administrators.

3. The Court gives Rangers two hours to appoint an administrator before they will do it on Rangers behalf.

4. D&P appointed by Whyte with half an hour to spare.

5. D&P rather than invalidate season tickets asking supporters to pay again and trimming the staff actually try to sign Daniel Cousin although this is blocked by the SPL transfer embargo.

6. The only reason for D&P to reasonably adopt a 'business as usual' stance is that some external party (presumably Rangers FC Group) have agreed to provide the cash. This was probably intended to come from the 'missing' cash from the Ticketus advance held by Collyer Bristow.

7. This was presumably a prelude to Rangers being liquidated and the Rangers FC Group taking over the key assets - Ibrox, Murray Park and the key playing staff - and emerging debt free before applying to the SPL for readmission.

8. The heat was on and the extent of Whyte's activities became known so the plan was never pursued. Whyte went to ground and D&P have been running around like headless chickens ever since. All their announcements have been of issues that were well know and splashed in blogs some time earlier.

9. D&P eventually locate the missing balance of the Ticketus cash in Collyer and Bristow's account. They apply to seize this. This is a wise move as it appears that Collyer and Bristow are themselves at threat of
financial meltdown following a court decision.

If anyone can come up with a more plausible scenario, I would be interested to see it.

7 is where it falls down for me, and where it probably fell down for the Grand Plan. The security is invalid. Otherwise, it makes sense.

At some point, I reckon D & P might have changed their stance from being CW's pal to a more arms-length position. They have to bear in mind their responsibility to the Court, not to mention their reputation. Because of the high-profile nature of this case, they know their behaviour will be under intense scrutiny.

[PatHead]

RE Dumfermline being paid.
Firstly if I was another creditor awaiting cash for work I had done I would be mad. I would consider suing the administrator as there is no football preferred creditor rule in Scotland.

Secondly, call me a cynic but is this Rangers buying Yorkson's vote in the event of them having to re-apply to the SPL or for them to go soft on any penalties? Wonder if Dundee Utd and Hearts start going bananas if they will find the money for them?

Maybe they will raise it from the friendly against Portsmouth which will doubtless overshadow any Scottish Cup ties this weekend.

[CropleyWasGod]

First class deduction. Makes perfect sense to me.

You don't happen to have tomorrow night's lottery numbers do you ?

16, 90, 18, 73.....and 666

[CropleyWasGod]

RE Dumfermline being paid.
Firstly if I was another creditor awaiting cash for work I had done I would be mad. I would consider suing the administrator as there is no football preferred creditor rule in Scotland.

Secondly, call me a cynic but is this Rangers buying Yorkson's vote in the event of them having to re-apply to the SPL or for them to go soft on any penalties? Wonder if Dundee Utd and Hearts start going bananas if they will find the money for them?

Maybe they will raise it from the friendly against Portsmouth which will doubtless overshadow any Scottish Cup ties this weekend.

This is the only thing that I could come up with. Maybe they think that the rules up here are the same as in England.

If so, they need their erchies kicked.

And, aye, yer a cynic :0)

[JeMeSouviens]

That's a creditor in my book. RFC had cash belonging to DAFC, before they went into administration.


I don't think that matters. If it was in RFC bank account when they entered administration, and it is due to a third party, then I would think that was a creditor. I could be wrong, not an expert.


The same could be said for unpaid VAT and PAYE in that case.

Maybe not then, it was the only guess I could come up with. :wink:

[blindsummit]

The chat on twitter just now from Chris Mclaughlin & Graham Spiers is that there are to be NO immediate redundancies as the players are discussing a 25 -75 % pay cut for the next month.

With apologies to CWG, who takes a rather more balanced and knowledgable approach to what's happening, in my myopic rankers hatred, i think this whole thing stinks. Players should have been out the door on day one. The administrators seem to be more worried about protecting rangers than anything else.

[CropleyWasGod]

With apologies to CWG, who takes a rather more balanced and knowledgable approach to what's happening, in my myopic rankers hatred, i think this whole thing stinks. Players should have been out the door on day one. The administrators seem to be more worried about protecting rangers than anything else.

This is why it's so fascinating for me, though. On one hand, we have the mysteries of insolvency law, and on the other the emotion and cynicism that goes along with being a fitba fan.

FTR, I hate the Huns as much as you do :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

7 is where it falls down for me, and where it probably fell down for the Grand Plan. The security is invalid. Otherwise, it makes sense.


What do you mean "invalid"?

btw, I think Whyte's plan was always to go for administration and then liquidation when the big tax case hit. Unfortunately for him, he wasn't in control of Rangers' defence. It's being conducted on behalf of the Murray Group, so he couldn't control how much stalling went on and the tribunal dragged into the new year. With a £50M bill he would've legitimately been able to say there's no way they could pay it and implicitly put all the blame on Murray's regime. Without that fig leaf it's become blindingly obvious he was a shyster with no intention of ponying up and every intention of making off with the deeds to Ibrox and a nice little earner in renting it to the Phoenix Huns.

[CropleyWasGod]

What do you mean "invalid"?



A floating charge (which is what RFCG have over RFC's assets) is only valid if there is a debt. The admins seem to accept now that there is no debt (from the Record of Friday/Saturday).

[Hibernia&Alba]

Now the administrators are saying they hope to avoid immediate player redundencies. A club that needs to save £4.5 million by the end of the season? I don't recall the administrators at Livi, Dundee and Motherwell being so wonderful.


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

[Twa Cairpets]

This is the only thing that I could come up with. Maybe they think that the rules up here are the same as in England.

If so, they need their erchies kicked.

And, aye, yer a cynic :0)

Is it possibly that the ticket money isn't treated in the same way as, say an invoice for goods or services would be? I take the point though that HMRC money could/should be viewed the same way - i.e. it isnt the Huns money in the first place.

[johnrebus]

Rangers have only themselves to blame here. I see fat Sally saying a few folk have "Sly" digs and "kicks" at his club. Well Ally maybe if the ugly sisters never acted like 2 school bullies other clubs would be more sympathetic. It's like a classroom of 12 kids. 2 kids are the bullies and instead of having the same lunch money the make sure they take everything they can and leave the rest with next to nothing. If this was a classroom they would be expelled unless they paid us all back the money owed to us.

So Ally, I honestly hope you're horrible club die a slow death and free the rest to move on because as it stands this game is pretty much dead anyway, so what do we really have to lose?? the league would be better IMO.


I only wish I was in the positition to give them a full blooded kick in the baws.......,


:greengrin

[Twa Cairpets]

Now the administrators are saying they hope to avoid immediate player redundencies. A club that needs to save £4.5 million by the end of the season? I don't recall the administrators at Livi, Dundee and Motherwell being so wonderful.


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

If it cuts costs, from an administrators point of view, it doesnt matter if its through taking wage earners off completely or reducing what they get paid. If they can reduce the outgoings by changing the remuneration structure it arguably is a better position for ongoing stability than binning them. Mind you, you'd have to ask how long mcgregor/whittaker/davis etc would be happy earning 1/4 of what they could if they went down south, so ultimately the players will leave anyway.

[blindsummit]

This is why it's so fascinating for me, though. On one hand, we have the mysteries of insolvency law, and on the other the emotion and cynicism that goes along with being a fitba fan.

FTR, I hate the Huns as much as you do :greengrin

I believe you old chap :thumbsup:

[johnrebus]

I'm with you on this one. Remember that they said at the outset that they were confident that Rangers would emerge from administration - a comment made when they had not carried out any research.

Why did Whyte insist that they were appointed ?

I am certain that the agenda from the start was to take them into liquidation to escape from all the debts, including the BTC.

Whoever is behind Whyte could end up with a valuable asset on the cheap. Meanwhile, David Murray could end up facing criminal charges for tax evasion.


If he does, the 'Sir' bit will have to go.

Lester Piggott lost his knighthood for exactly the same thing.


:cb

[Thecat23]

I only wish I was in the positition to give them a full blooded kick in the baws.......,


:greengrin

Me too mate. :greengrin

[heretoday]

Apparently Fraser Wishart was along at Hun Central today and was surprised to be offered a deal till the end of the season. :wink:

[Spike Mandela]

If it cuts costs, from an administrators point of view, it doesnt matter if its through taking wage earners off completely or reducing what they get paid. If they can reduce the outgoings by changing the remuneration structure it arguably is a better position for ongoing stability than binning them. Mind you, you'd have to ask how long mcgregor/whittaker/davis etc would be happy earning 1/4 of what they could if they went down south, so ultimately the players will leave anyway.

It is only a month long proposal. Not sure if this is tied in to potential promises made to players should a buyer emerge on March 16th.

Dunfermline being paid flys in the face of a club in administration surely?Whole thing is beginning to emerge as the 'wriggle off the hook' scenario as expected. Something stinks in the state of Ibrox.

Not be long now till Duff and Phelps declare they found a bag of money under a desk and Rangers are actually in profit. Craig Whyte is legit and the moon is made of cheese.

[Hibernia&Alba]

If it cuts costs, from an administrators point of view, it doesnt matter if its through taking wage earners off completely or reducing what they get paid. If they can reduce the outgoings by changing the remuneration structure it arguably is a better position for ongoing stability than binning them. Mind you, you'd have to ask how long mcgregor/whittaker/davis etc would be happy earning 1/4 of what they could if they went down south, so ultimately the players will leave anyway.

Yes, true, they play a balancing act between short term savings and what may bring in more money in the future. It just appears they are being very accommodating, in contrast to the slash and burn position administrators usually take. Craig Whyte was desperate to get Duff & Phelps in before HMRC apoointed their own. Is this proving significant?

To put it in a nutshell, I won't be happy until the bulldozers are at Ibrox :thumbsup:

[jgl07]

There was a rather chilling snippet in the Herald this morning that suggested that some SPL clubs were discussing the sanctions being applied to a 'Newco' Rangers being admitted to the SPL. A 'sizable' points deduction and a reduction in broadcasting income were mentioned. So that's all right then.

Meanwhile the SFA are now on the case. Especially with the President Campbell Ogilvie having inside knowledge of Rangers murky tax affairs when he was Company Secretary from 1978 to 2005. He also served as Operations Director and Managing Director at Hearts from 2005 till 2011. He would have certainly been in a position to stop any money laundering or tax evasion at the PBS.

Mr Ogilvie was seen entering Ibrox with a large bucket of whitewash!

[PatHead]

Is it possibly that the ticket money isn't treated in the same way as, say an invoice for goods or services would be? I take the point though that HMRC money could/should be viewed the same way - i.e. it isnt the Huns money in the first place.

Surprised that HMRC are just letting it go. Would have thought that they would approach court to either replace the administrators or at least ensure Dumfermline remain on the same basis as all other creditors.

By the way CWG am I correct in thinking that the creditors order is-

1. Administrator's expenses
2. Unpaid Staff wages and pension contributions for last 4 months
3. Secured Creditors
4. Everyone else except spouses and shareholders
5. Shareholders
6. Interest on debts incurred since administration
7. Spouses

If I am correct where is the exception that says Dunfermline should get their money and why has no-one pointed this out?

Must admit I am far from impressed with this administrator letting the players dictate when and who will be made redundant.

[johnrebus]

There was a rather chilling snippet in the Herald this morning that suggested that some SPL clubs were discussing the sanctions being applied to a 'Newco' Rangers being admitted to the SPL. A 'sizable' points deduction and a reduction in broadcasting income were mentioned. So that's all right then.

Meanwhile the SFA are now on the case. Especially with the President Campbell Ogilvie having inside knowledge of Rangers murky tax affairs when he was Company Secretary from 1978 to 2005. He also served as Operations Director and Managing Director at Hearts from 2005 till 2011. He would have certainly been in a position to stop any money laundering or tax evasion at the PBS.

Mr Ogilvie was seen entering Ibrox with a large bucket of whitewash!



I wonder how many guide dogs for the blind Campbell has seen off in his time?


:rolleyes:

[jgl07]

Surprised that HMRC are just letting it go. Would have thought that they would approach court to either replace the administrators or at least ensure Dumfermline remain on the same basis as all other creditors.

By the way CWG am I correct in thinking that the creditors order is-

1. Administrator's expenses
2. Unpaid Staff wages and pension contributions for last 4 months
3. Secured Creditors
4. Everyone else except spouses and shareholders
5. Shareholders
6. Interest on debts incurred since administration
7. Spouses

If I am correct where is the exception that says Dunfermline should get their money and why has no-one pointed this out?

Must admit I am far from impressed with this administrator letting the players dictate when and who will be made redundant.

In England there is a 'Football Debts First' policy which seems to have been followed in the case of Portsmouth and Leeds. This policy would suggest that outstanding debts to Dunfermline, Dundee United and Hearts and wages due to players would take priority in any CVA. That is one of the factors that has really annoyed HMRC in the past.

However this does not apply in Scotland although D&P seem to be behaving as if it does!

[Dashing Bob S]

There was a rather chilling snippet in the Herald this morning that suggested that some SPL clubs were discussing the sanctions being applied to a 'Newco' Rangers being admitted to the SPL. A 'sizable' points deduction and a reduction in broadcasting income were mentioned. So that's all right then.

Meanwhile the SFA are now on the case. Especially with the President Campbell Ogilvie having inside knowledge of Rangers murky tax affairs when he was Company Secretary from 1978 to 2005. He also served as Operations Director and Managing Director at Hearts from 2005 till 2011. He would have certainly been in a position to stop any money laundering or tax evasion at the PBS.

Mr Ogilvie was seen entering Ibrox with a large bucket of whitewash!

Funny, I was thinking, when all this was hitting the fan, if there's one chap who's ring piece will be twitching like an epileptic gunslinger's finger, it'll be Campbell Ogilvie. He might not be bent. He might not be stupid. But he certainly has got himself mired in a filthy barrel surrounded by dubious sorts like Whyte, Murray and Romanov, and I wouldn't bet against him ending up as the sacrificial lamb in that bunch of slippery eels.

[ScottB]

Funny, I was thinking, when all this was hitting the fan, if there's one chap who's ring piece will be twitching like an epileptic gunslinger's finger, it'll be Campbell Ogilvie. He might not be bent. He might not be stupid. But he certainly has got himself mired in a filthy barrel surrounded by dubious sorts like Whyte, Murray and Romanov, and I wouldn't bet against him ending up as the sacrificial lamb in that bunch of slippery eels.

He was either fully involved or beyond incompetent, neither option leaves him smelling of anything flowery...

[JeMeSouviens]

A floating charge (which is what RFCG have over RFC's assets) is only valid if there is a debt. The admins seem to accept now that there is no debt (from the Record of Friday/Saturday).

Missed that and can't find it on the Record's site. Presumably the thinking is that the money to pay the bank off came from the Huns themselves (via Ticketus) rather than from Whyte's company? So if Whyte is out of the creditor picture and there are no other secured creditors, then HMRC, as by far the largest unsecured creditor, are likely to be well and truly in the driving seat?

Given their recent attitude pursuing football clubs, that would be most unfortunate for our Hun chums. :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

Yet another investigation time ...

http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=11135

Into alleged second contracts going right back to the start of the SPL.

[SteveHFC]

http://i.imgur.com/n4aEQ.png

[PatHead]

http://i.imgur.com/n4aEQ.png

Excellent love the hooped top from Sporting

[Dashing Bob S]

He was either fully involved or beyond incompetent, neither option leaves him smelling of anything flowery...

That's about the size of it. Doesn't do your credibility any good when your only possible defence against corrupt and fraudulent practices is to claim an almost unparalleled ignorance and stupidity.

[jgl07]

http://i.imgur.com/n4aEQ.png

The begging bowls are out as we speak:

http://www.rangerscharity.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=99&Itemid=120

[TheEastTerrace]

Yet another investigation time ...

http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=11135

Into alleged second contracts going right back to the start of the SPL.

This has been discussed on Twitter over the last couple of weeks - RFC could be more than knee-deep in the stinky broon smelly stuff. Cheating the system for all these years.

[Peevemor]

This has been discussed on Twitter over the last couple of weeks - RFC could be more than knee-deep in the stinky broon smelly stuff. Cheating the system for all these years.

We might still get that league title. :greengrin

[ScottB]

We might still get that league title. :greengrin

Been winding the 'Well supporter at work up about that one all day :greengrin

[greenginger]

Yet another investigation time ...

http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=11135

Into alleged second contracts going right back to the start of the SPL.



All very well, but who are they going to ask and how hard are they going to look. Anything not already shredded soon will and I'm sure all the Ibrox legends will have collective amnesia and the agents will hide behind client confidentiality.

SPL will say that nothing could be proved and write some new rules to show they will be tough on cheating in the future. :confused:

[Hibernia&Alba]

It is only a month long proposal. Not sure if this is tied in to potential promises made to players should a buyer emerge on March 16th.

Dunfermline being paid flys in the face of a club in administration surely?Whole thing is beginning to emerge as the 'wriggle off the hook' scenario as expected. Something stinks in the state of Ibrox.

Not be long now till Duff and Phelps declare they found a bag of money under a desk and Rangers are actually in profit. Craig Whyte is legit and the moon is made of cheese.

The administrators have been there a couple of weeks now but very little re-structuring has been announced. Their legal duty is to the courts and to try to ensure creditors get their money, so you'd think it inconceivable that their priority is a wriggle off the hook scheme in the interests of Mr Hun, but they must forgive the rest of us for being wary. "Ra big hoose must stay open", as Big Daddy on crutches said outside Ibroke, and could this be where we are being led slowly and gently by the hand? 'National treasure, it must be saved at all costs for the benefit of Scotland, not just Scottish football'. The inaction so far makes me suspicious, though I'm no expert in this field and can only compare Rangers' administration to what happened at other clubs previously.

[SteveHFC]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212985

PLEASING :faf::faf:

[Saorsa]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212985

PLEASING :faf::faf:
originally posted by A Knuckledragger
Kicking us out of Scottish football is the worst thing they could possibly do. I almost want them to try itThey really have a high opinion of their importance :hilarious Why almost?


I'd like tae see them do mair than try :bye:

[SteveHFC]

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/299801-spl-clubs-discuss-radical-reform-to-administration-sanctions/

WTF!

[SteveHFC]

They really have a high opinion of their importance :hilarious Why almost?


I'd like tae see them do mair than try :bye:


****ing quality http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/hail.gif we are then free to apply for admission to any league in Europe http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/default/pipeb.gif and I kid you not.

Are they seriously for real?

[CentreLine]

The begging bowls are out as we speak:

http://www.rangerscharity.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=99&Itemid=120

"CHARITY"? is this another tax avoidance scheme?!!!!!!!!!!!

[sh00byd00]

20 days on and still no redundancies. This truly is one of the most bizarre administrations I've ever witnessed. It's almost as if Whyte is trying his damnedest to kill the club.

[Spike Mandela]

Yet another investigation time ...

http://www.scotprem.com/content/default.asp?page=s2&newsid=11135

Into alleged second contracts going right back to the start of the SPL.

Does anybody seriously consider the SPL caplable of running an investigation competently?

A police investigation might get to the bottom of any illegality but what powers do the SPL have to get relevant information? The sound of shredders in the West coast only drowned out by the phone calls frantically being made by Campbell Ogilvie conveniently freed up at the moment from any investigation duties.:rolleyes:

[Saorsa]

Does anybody seriously consider the SPL caplable of running an investigation competently?

A police investigation might get to the bottom of any illegality but what powers do the SPL have to get relevant information? The sound of shredders in the West coast only drowned out by the phone calls frantically being made by Campbell Ogilvie conveniently freed up at the moment from any investigation duties.:rolleyes:I wouldnae trust them tae run a stall at a jumble sale.

I really hope UEFA are keeping both eyes on this for anything that breaches their rules as I wouldnae trust the fitba authorities in this country (tae do the right thing) as far as I could throw a grand piano.

[hibs0666]

Top post on followfollow...

So that's

an investigation by the stock exchange
an investigation by the sfa
an investigation by strathclyde police
an investigation by the insolvency service
an investigation by the spl

***xsakes, the only characters we're not being investigated by are miss marple and scooby doo.

:thumbsup:

[Seveno]

http://i.imgur.com/n4aEQ.png

Entry at gate by cash or I.O.U.

[CropleyWasGod]

Does anybody seriously consider the SPL caplable of running an investigation competently?

A police investigation might get to the bottom of any illegality but what powers do the SPL have to get relevant information? The sound of shredders in the West coast only drowned out by the phone calls frantically being made by Campbell Ogilvie conveniently freed up at the moment from any investigation duties.:rolleyes:

This isn't about illegality. It's about breaches of SPL rules.

[Saorsa]

Top post on followfollow...

So that's

an investigation by the stock exchange
an investigation by the sfa
an investigation by strathclyde police
an investigation by the insolvency service
an investigation by the spl

***xsakes, the only characters we're not being investigated by are miss marple and scooby doo.

:thumbsup:I think they should get on the case right away, probably do a better job than the SPL/SFA

[Dashing Bob S]

20 days on and still no redundancies. This truly is one of the most bizarre administrations I've ever witnessed. It's almost as if Whyte is trying his damnedest to kill the club.

I get the feeling that there's such a tangled web of corruption and mismanagement, the administrators have shat it when they've seen the extent of the damage and don't have a clue what to do next. They are obviously terrified of liquidating Rangers and selling off the ground and the assets, and providing the information that will undoubtedly force the police to pursue prosecutions, but seem to be struggling to come up with a viable solution to keep the club going.

I'll bet there are loads of dodgy behind the scenes discussions taking place with SPL, SFA etc.

[cabbageandribs1875]

If he does, the 'Sir' bit will have to go.

Lester Piggott lost his knighthood for exactly the same thing.


:cb



am thinking a little dwarf called craig whyte will end up getting murray's 'sir' handle

[silverhibee]

There was a rather chilling snippet in the Herald this morning that suggested that some SPL clubs were discussing the sanctions being applied to a 'Newco' Rangers being admitted to the SPL. A 'sizable' points deduction and a reduction in broadcasting income were mentioned. So that's all right then.

Meanwhile the SFA are now on the case. Especially with the President Campbell Ogilvie having inside knowledge of Rangers murky tax affairs when he was Company Secretary from 1978 to 2005. He also served as Operations Director and Managing Director at Hearts from 2005 till 2011. He would have certainly been in a position to stop any money laundering or tax evasion at the PBS.

Mr Ogilvie was seen entering Ibrox with a large bucket of whitewash!


Meeting been held at Hampden tomorrow by SPL clubs.

[Hibernia&Alba]

Top post on followfollow...

So that's

an investigation by the stock exchange
an investigation by the sfa
an investigation by strathclyde police
an investigation by the insolvency service
an investigation by the spl

***xsakes, the only characters we're not being investigated by are miss marple and scooby doo.

:thumbsup:

Ha ha :greengrin


Where are the Serious Fraud Office and Interpol? :flag:

[Twa Cairpets]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212985

PLEASING :faf::faf:

Deluded beyond hearts fans, which says something. They're apparently just going to go to England "and set up there" so that's all ok then.

Its worth a read that thread, if only to see them simultaneously soiling themselves, crying conspiracy (Regan is a plant by Peter Lawell. I was not aware), and still demonstrating that rancid arrogance we've grown to loathe over the years.

[alfie]

At least Yorkston seems to be on the right page...
http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/299754-dunfermline-have-problems-with-new-rangers-spl-entry/

Send a newco to the bottom division!:aok:

[Spike Mandela]

Deluded beyond hearts fans, which says something. They're apparently just going to go to England "and set up there" so that's all ok then.

Its worth a read that thread, if only to see them simultaneously soiling themselves, crying conspiracy (Regan is a plant by Peter Lawell. I was not aware), and still demonstrating that rancid arrogance we've grown to loathe over the years.

To be honest what has significantly changed for your typical Rangers fan? Same manager, same players, same position in league and if anything slightly bigger crowds. Certainly can't say I feel their pain of administration.

[johnrebus]

I get the feeling that there's such a tangled web of corruption and mismanagement, the administrators have shat it when they've seen the extent of the damage and don't have a clue what to do next. They are obviously terrified of liquidating Rangers and selling off the ground and the assets, and providing the information that will undoubtedly force the police to pursue prosecutions, but seem to be struggling to come up with a viable solution to keep the club going.

I'll bet there are loads of dodgy behind the scenes discussions taking place with SPL, SFA etc.


Ahhh!

That must be the, 'bad smell at Ibrox', everybody keeps referring too!

:violin:

[silverhibee]

This has been discussed on Twitter over the last couple of weeks - RFC could be more than knee-deep in the stinky broon smelly stuff. Cheating the system for all these years.



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


:cb

[Spike Mandela]

This isn't about illegality. It's about breaches of SPL rules.

Ok what I meant was the police or the judiciary have powes to get certain info during an investigation. What powers do the SPL have? The chances of any SPL investigation getting to the truth will depend on the good will of those participating in it so in other words no chance.

[silverhibee]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=212985

PLEASING :faf::faf:



****ing deluded, they seem to think that other leagues around Europe will just welcome them with open arms in to there leagues and that Scottish football will be no more if they leave the SPL, what a shock they are in for.

Please SFA/SPL boot them out of Scottish football and see where the great glasgow rankers end up or who will have them.

Die rangers Die.

And GTF.

[CropleyWasGod]

Ok what I meant was the police or the judiciary have powes to get certain info during an investigation. What powers do the SPL have? The chances of any SPL investigation getting to the truth will depend on the good will of those participating in it so in other words no chance.

Well, it will start with Mr. Adam, the ex-director who blew the whistle. He seems to have it in for SDM. There will be others that SDM has fallen out with over the years who will be keen to stick the knife in.

I agree, though, that it's going to be difficult to get people, especially those who have benefitted over the years, to stick their hands up. Legal applications to look at the EBT paperwork could be another angle.


As an aside, it's interesting to hear people's views about championships and the like being reallocated. My dad tells me that, in the days of the Famous Five, it was commonly held that the takings of one turnstile were held back for distribution amongst the players as a win bonus. BUT DINNY TELL THE SFA! :wink:

[alfie]

Ok what I meant was the police or the judiciary have powes to get certain info during an investigation. What powers do the SPL have? The chances of any SPL investigation getting to the truth will depend on the good will of those participating in it so in other words no chance.

Looks like they have some powers from here http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/299799-spl-to-investigate-rangers-player-payments/


The SPL's rules give them the power to ask for access to financial records from any club and can ask club officials to give evidence as part of any inquiry.

However that statement is just a bit too woolly for my liking. Can anyone else hear industrial shredders being fired up?

[Spike Mandela]

No announcement at Ibrox on player cuts tonight at playrs request:faf::faf:

Who Is actually running this administration, talk about tail wagging the dog.:rolleyes:

[CropleyWasGod]

Looks like they have some powers from here http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/299799-spl-to-investigate-rangers-player-payments/



However that statement is just a bit too woolly for my liking. Can anyone else hear industrial shredders being fired up?

HMRC require businesses to keep records for at least 7 years. So there's a start.

Also, the EBT's would, presumably, be copied at the solicitors who set them up.

And, let's not forget, HMRC have copies of all of the EBT's currently under review.

[SteveHFC]

No announcement at Ibrox on player cuts tonight at playrs request:faf::faf:

Who Is actually running this administration, talk about tail wagging the dog.:rolleyes:

That's pish. I was really looking forward to hearing what players were getting axed :boo hoo:

[ancienthibby]

Beeb Radio just reported that no progress has been made with players and the matter is adjourned until tomorrow.:rolleyes:

[StevieC]

Beeb Radio just reported that no progress has been made with players and the matter is adjourned until tomorrow.:rolleyes:

That'll be a "NO" from the players on 75% wage cuts then. :wink:

[Hibernia&Alba]

Beeb Radio just reported that no progress has been made with players and the matter is adjourned until tomorrow.:rolleyes:

Who's in charge of the administration process here - the courts or Rangers FC? This is bizarre.

[Westie1875]

Beeb Radio just reported that no progress has been made with players and the matter is adjourned until tomorrow.:rolleyes:

I thought they had set a deadline for today and if no agreement could be reached then the administrators were going to make the cuts regardless? Who is running this administration, seems like the players/management rather than the administrators :rolleyes:

[easty]

Beeb Radio just reported that no progress has been made with players and the matter is adjourned until tomorrow.:rolleyes:

To be fair, it's Monday. Nobody does any paperwork on a Monday. That's what the rest of the weeks for......or is that just me?

[silverhibee]

Beeb Radio just reported that no progress has been made with players and the matter is adjourned until tomorrow.:rolleyes:



Looks like the big earners at castle greyskull are refusing to take the 50%/75% pay cut, probably refusing to take any wage cut at all, the cull will come tomorrow and the bizarre thing will be the big earners will be kept on while the rest of the squad will be sacked in the morning and youth players will be promoted to the first team for the weekend.

[ancient hibee]

No -the big earners will go.

[ancienthibby]

]Looks like the big earners at castle greyskull are refusing to take the 50%/75% pay cut, probably refusing to take any wage cut at all,[/B] the cull will come tomorrow and the bizarre thing will be the big earners will be kept on while the rest of the squad will be sacked in the morning and youth players will be promoted to the first team for the weekend.

Agreed.

Such an action would send a major message to any prospective employer for these players, so why would they 'cut their own throats':greengrin

[At The Edge]

From Rangers website:

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

Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "Everyone involved in the administration process has been attempting to reach a consensual solution in regard to job losses within the playing squad. The prime reason for this has been to achieve essential cost savings while preserving the fabric of the first team.

"This has not been an easy balance to strike and we would like to thank the manager Ally McCoist, his players and the PFA Scotland for attempting to find a solution that would be workable for all. Every realistic option is being explored.

"Regrettably, it has not been possible thus far to reach a consensus where players could accept the necessary level of wage cuts to prevent job losses within the squad. We do not for a moment criticise the players for this as the wage reductions that would be required are very substantial and would have a significant impact on each individual.

"For clarity, we cannot enforce wage cuts. The players have to agree to this course of action. The players have asked us to consider a final proposal overnight for discussion in the morning and we have agreed to this request."

[Brando7]

If Ranger do go bust could they (Blue knight) not buy out another club..say partick thistle then rename the club?

[Spike Mandela]

From Rangers website:

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

Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "Everyone involved in the administration process has been attempting to reach a consensual solution in regard to job losses within the playing squad. The prime reason for this has been to achieve essential cost savings while preserving the fabric of the first team.

"This has not been an easy balance to strike and we would like to thank the manager Ally McCoist, his players and the PFA Scotland for attempting to find a solution that would be workable for all. Every realistic option is being explored.

"Regrettably, it has not been possible thus far to reach a consensus where players could accept the necessary level of wage cuts to prevent job losses within the squad. We do not for a moment criticise the players for this as the wage reductions that would be required are very substantial and would have a significant impact on each individual.

"For clarity, we cannot enforce wage cuts. The players have to agree to this course of action. The players have asked us to consider a final proposal overnight for discussion in the morning and we have agreed to this request."


This new proposal again includes wage deferrals which the administrtors have already dismissed as not acceptable to acheiving a new buyer.

If the administrators fold on this one surely any professional respect and integrity is lost?

[ancienthibby]

This new proposal again includes wage deferrals which the administrtors have already dismissed as not acceptable to acheiving a new buyer.

If the administrators fold on this one surely any professional respect and integrity is lost?

It's being promoted and reported as a 'wage cut' rather than a 'wage deferral'

I think these actions are quite different in their effects??:wink:

[Hibernia&Alba]

So, no agreement between administrators and players regarding pay cuts in order to prevent redundencies, which means some have agreed to it and others haven't. No consensus reached. The admins now need to weigh up who it is better to release immediately (meaning when they make their move) and who should be kept due to either their low earnings or their potential transfer value at a later date. At some point down the line all the highest will be cleared out.

Is that right?

[ancienthibby]

So, no agreement between administrators and players regarding pay cuts in order to prevent redundencies, which means some have agreed to it and others haven't. No consensus reached. The admins now need to weigh up who it is better to release immediately (meaning when they make their move) and who should be kept due to either their low earnings or their potential transfer value at a later date. At some point down the line all the highest will be cleared out.

Is that right?

Disnae work. Apologies!

[Hibernia&Alba]

Disnae work. Apologies!


Good shout. Cheers, mate :thumbsup:


I know what you meant. Listening now.

[basehibby]

Duff & Phelps??? Duff and Helpless more like - their job is to secure assets for RFC's creditors (ie us - the taxpayers) and all I have seen them do so far is pish 3/4 Million quid down the toilet - get them tae **** and let the HMRC appoint a proper administrator :grr:

[ancienthibby]

Duff & Phelps??? Duff and Helpless more like - their job is to secure assets for RFC's creditors (ie us - the taxpayers) and all I have seen them do so far is pish 3/4 Million quid down the toilet - get them tae **** and let the HMRC appoint a proper administrator :grr:

They should be renamed Duffers and (P)'helpus':faf:

[CropleyWasGod]

Duff & Phelps??? Duff and Helpless more like - their job is to secure assets for RFC's creditors (ie us - the taxpayers) and all I have seen them do so far is pish 3/4 Million quid down the toilet - get them tae **** and let the HMRC appoint a proper administrator :grr:

Okay....you can read my opinions on how I think D & P have done their job.

How would you have done it differently?

[Spike Mandela]

It's being promoted and reported as a 'wage cut' rather than a 'wage deferral'

I think these actions are quite different in their effects??:wink:

Nope, the new proposals put forward by Rangers players are again wage deferrals.

In other words we are prepared to take pay cuts that aren't really pay cuts while you get on with shafting the creditors.

[CropleyWasGod]

So, no agreement between administrators and players regarding pay cuts in order to prevent redundencies, which means some have agreed to it and others haven't. No consensus reached. The admins now need to weigh up who it is better to release immediately (meaning when they make their move) and who should be kept due to either their low earnings or their potential transfer value at a later date. At some point down the line all the highest will be cleared out.

Is that right?

That's about it. If there is no consensus, there will be a cull tomorrow.

IMO, there will be a second one if the 16th March passes with no movement on a buyer.

[Seveno]

That's about it. If there is no consensus, there will be a cull tomorrow.

IMO, there will be a second one if the 16th March passes with no movement on a buyer.

Or liquidation on the 16th.

[Hibernia&Alba]

That's about it. If there is no consensus, there will be a cull tomorrow.

IMO, there will be a second one if the 16th March passes with no movement on a buyer.

And who is going to buy the club with all of this plus the big tax case hanging over it? It seems to be nudging ever closer to goodnight Vienna just now.

[CropleyWasGod]

Or liquidation on the 16th.

... which would tie in with a second cull :greengrin

Actually, I think they will try for a CVA before they go down that route. They, and we, know that isn't going to happen... but I'm pretty sure they have to go through the motions.

[CropleyWasGod]

And who is going to buy the club with all of this plus the big tax case hanging over it? It seems to be nudging ever closer to goodnight Vienna just now.

We've been here already :greengrin

They have to give due respect to those who say they are interested, but they can't wait forever....hence the deadline.

[FranckSuzy]

Funny, I was thinking, when all this was hitting the fan, if there's one chap who's ring piece will be twitching like an epileptic gunslinger's finger, it'll be Campbell Ogilvie. He might not be bent. He might not be stupid. But he certainly has got himself mired in a filthy barrel surrounded by dubious sorts like Whyte, Murray and Romanov, and I wouldn't bet against him ending up as the sacrificial lamb in that bunch of slippery eels.

:tsk tsk: :tee hee:

[Seveno]

... which would tie in with a second cull :greengrin

Actually, I think they will try for a CVA before they go down that route. They, and we, know that isn't going to happen... but I'm pretty sure they have to go through the motions.

If they go into liquidation, all player contracts become void. Correct ?

[Hibernia&Alba]

We've been here already :greengrin

They have to give due respect to those who say they are interested, but they can't wait forever....hence the deadline.

Aye, mate. Let's see what tomorrow brings and I look forward to reading your posts and those of others in the coming weeks.

[EuanH78]

Nope, the new proposals put forward by Rangers players are again wage deferrals.

In other words we are prepared to take pay cuts that aren't really pay cuts while you get on with shafting the creditors.

I dont think so Spike, this is good news from our perspective.

I think probably the players are just in it for themselves at this point, making the cuts inevitable. I reckon when it comes, it'll be hard, fast and brutal or at least thats what I'm hoping for :greengrin

[ancienthibby]

Aye, mate. Let's see what tomorrow brings and I look forward to reading your posts and those of others in the coming weeks.


Yet another twist!

Beeb radio now reporting that the Company Secretary of RFC who was a partner in Craikie (notso)Whyte's legal firm has now left that firm due to personal reasons!!

[Keith_M]

I can just imagine the players all huddled up (oops, wrong team) in Murray Park after the Administrators left singing, "...and the cry was no sur-ren-dur"...



:greengrin

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

Sash-flow problems.

[CropleyWasGod]

Sash-flow problems.

:top marks

[EuanH78]

Sash-flow problems.


:faf: Can I just say

http://sondrak.com/images/uploads/thread-win.jpg

[Seveno]

:faf: Can I just say

http://sondrak.com/images/uploads/thread-win.jpg


Calm down ! We still have the best thread to come. It will be called 'So long, Vlad, it's been good to know you !'

[greenginger]

Okay....you can read my opinions on how I think D & P have done their job.

How would you have done it differently?

Dunfermline's outstanding money has been settled in full which must be to the detriment of other creditors.

Was their claim on RFC funds sufficiently different that they could be treated as a special case, or should the window cleaner, the plumber etc feel aggrieved that D & P have acted the way they have.

[CropleyWasGod]

Dunfermline's outstanding money has been settled in full which must be to the detriment of other creditors.

Was their claim on RFC funds sufficiently different that they could be treated as a special case, or should the window cleaner, the plumber etc feel aggrieved that D & P have acted the way they have.

So far, we only have the BBC's say so on that.

However, if they have done, then that is wrong. As I said before (or maybe on the other thread :greengrin), perhaps D & P think SFA rules are the same as the FA's, in that football creditors rank before others.

The other creditors should kick up if it is the case, and DAFC would have to repay it.

[CropleyWasGod]

Yet another twist!

Beeb radio now reporting that the Company Secretary of RFC who was a partner in Craikie (notso)Whyte's legal firm has now left that firm due to personal reasons!!

Did he take the combination to his safe with him? :greengrin

[Mikey]

Did he take the combination to his safe with him? :greengrin

030303

Repeat for all Rangers matches this season :greengrin

[EuanH78]

Calm down ! We still have the best thread to come. It will be called 'So long, Vlad, it's been good to know you !'

Well, I know it's asking a lot but.. when it goes pear shaped at teh PBS, those threads should be merged into one glorious thread orgy of hilarity. :agree:

[ancienthibby]

So far, we only have the BBC's say so on that.

However, if they have done, then that is wrong. As I said before (or maybe on the other thread :greengrin), perhaps D & P think SFA rules are the same as the FA's, in that football creditors rank before others.

The other creditors should kick up if it is the case, and DAFC would have to repay it.

Is there not a real difference here with the nature of the transaction?

Is it not that of acting as an agent of another club, rather than on behalf of one's self.

The funds due to DAFC (in this case) were never RFC's to do anything with other than forward to DAFC.

These were not monies to go into the big cash pool at RFC and be paid out to creditors in the normal case (ok that last bit does not apply to RFC:greengrin)

RFC had no ownership of these monies since, by definition they were never theirs to begin with, is that not so?

[greenginger]

Is there not a real difference here with the nature of the transaction?

Is it not that of acting as an agent of another club, rather than on behalf of one's self.

The funds due to DAFC (in this case) were never RFC's to do anything with other than forward to DAFC.

These were not monies to go into the big cash pool at RFC and be paid out to creditors in the normal case (ok that last bit does not apply to RFC:greengrin)

RFC had no ownership of these monies since, by definition they were never theirs to begin with, is that not so?


Agree, but is that not the same with the VAT Rangers have collected and the Tax and NI they have deducted from wages.

[jgl07]

Agree, but is that not the same with the VAT Rangers have collected and the Tax and NI they have deducted from wages.


The money was only 'resting' in their account!

[CropleyWasGod]

Is there not a real difference here with the nature of the transaction?

Is it not that of acting as an agent of another club, rather than on behalf of one's self.

The funds due to DAFC (in this case) were never RFC's to do anything with other than forward to DAFC.

These were not monies to go into the big cash pool at RFC and be paid out to creditors in the normal case (ok that last bit does not apply to RFC:greengrin)

RFC had no ownership of these monies since, by definition they were never theirs to begin with, is that not so?

They had possession of them. They were due them to someone else.

Just like, as GG said above, PAYE & VAT.

Creditor. :agree:

[CropleyWasGod]

The money was only 'resting' in their account!

That's one hell of a long rest :greengrin

[ancienthibby]

Agree, but is that not the same with the VAT Rangers have collected and the Tax and NI they have deducted from wages.

I don't think so. In the VAT and PAYE situations RFC are acting as principals - all their own business and services provided by others to RFC, be they creditors or employees.

DAFC were never providing services to RFC, in fact RFC were providing services to DAFC by acting as their agent to collect monies due only to DAFC.

Confused? - you bet!:greengrin

[CropleyWasGod]

I don't think so. In the VAT and PAYE situations RFC are acting as principals - all their own business and services provided by others to RFC, be they creditors or employees.

DAFC were never providing services to RFC, in fact RFC were providing services to DAFC by acting as their agent to collect monies due only to DAFC.

Confused - you bet!:greengrin

That would only apply, IMO, if RFC had a designated Clients Account (like solicitors) that DAFC had prior claim on. I really doubt that would be the case.

[Seveno]

That would only apply, IMO, if RFC had a designated Clients Account (like solicitors) that DAFC had prior claim on. I really doubt that would be the case.

I don't think Mr Whyte is awfully good with the Client account concept.

[CropleyWasGod]

I don't think Mr Whyte is awfully good with the Client account concept.

Leave out the word "client" and I would agree :greengrin

Ticketus cash? = mine

VAT? = mine

PAYE? = mine

Arsenal shares? = mine

Personal responsibility? ...... eh??

[poolman]

That's one hell of a long rest :greengrin


Bout as long as this guy :agree:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSkGjiHaH8E

[Hibercelona]

Players not accepting the terms. :greengrin

[Seveno]

Leave out the word "client" and I would agree :greengrin

Ticketus cash? = mine

VAT? = mine

PAYE? = mine

Arsenal shares? = mine

Personal responsibility? ...... eh??

Bournemouth stockbroking clients money = mine

[jgl07]

That's one hell of a long rest :greengrin

That would be an ecumenical matter.

[matty_f]

These administrators are pish, IMHO!

Surely they should look at what players (as in numbers) are needed as a minimum to put a team out - the team doesn't have to be good enough to finish first or second or even third, just literally enough players to fulfill their fixtures. It's same old Rangers, wanting the best without any real right to it.

Sally McCoist should just be getting told, here's your squad, most of them are young laddies but to be honest we've a whole load of other folk owed our money so we can't sustain your international players' wages. Sorry about that.

It's a joke, IMHO.

And another thing - the SPL will absolutely ruin Scottish football if they don't take the heaviest sanctions possible and punt them from the league for the dual-contract stuff if it's proven that they're guilty of it. Anything else just makes an absolute mockery of the integrity of the league. Strip them of their titles and cups for good measure as well, why the hell should the rest of Scottish football have to make cuts while those bas****s cheated their way to title after title. They've got a massively higher income than the rest of us as it is, and they STILL cheated.

Empty the lot of them from the league.

**** Rangers.

[Seveno]

These administrators are pish, IMHO!

Surely they should look at what players (as in numbers) are needed as a minimum to put a team out - the team doesn't have to be good enough to finish first or second or even third, just literally enough players to fulfill their fixtures. It's same old Rangers, wanting the best without any real right to it.

Sally McCoist should just be getting told, here's your squad, most of them are young laddies but to be honest we've a whole load of other folk owed our money so we can't sustain your international players' wages. Sorry about that.

It's a joke, IMHO.

And another thing - the SPL will absolutely ruin Scottish football if they don't take the heaviest sanctions possible and punt them from the league for the dual-contract stuff if it's proven that they're guilty of it. Anything else just makes an absolute mockery of the integrity of the league. Strip them of their titles and cups for good measure as well, why the hell should the rest of Scottish football have to make cuts while those bas****s cheated their way to title after title. They've got a massively higher income than the rest of us as it is, and they STILL cheated.

Empty the lot of them from the league.

**** Rangers.

And so say all of us !