Printable View
Shirley the concept of sporting integrity (copyright 'tacheman :not worth) has gained sufficient hold now that this financial consideration would not prove decisive?Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
You've missed out an asteriks there. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Seveno
Because it makes life a lot easier for Doncaster! Seriously there's no reason. Once the CVA fails, it's not completely impossible that the BKs and the Green brigade could both attempt to start Hun New Clubs. That would be an entertaining twist. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Alf R
If the SFA/SPL attempt to get away with a transfer of share to a New Club then I can't see how they can possibly do anything other than transfer any penalties with them but then again we are deep in Alice in Wonderland territory already so who knows?
OK, IC. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
And this thread will probably triple it's post count! LolQuote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
GTF :na na:Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
That would be rather splendid! We could have one for the bigots and the other for the glory hunters. But it might be unfair on the 20,000 who proudly count themselves as both - which way would they split?Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
I think that opinion in the SPL has moved dramatically against Rangers following them taking the SFA to the Court of Session. I do not think we have heard the last of this issue from FIFA. If a more 'lenient' penalty is dolled out, I can see a Sion situation arising and Scottish Clubs being banned form Europe and Scotland kicked out of World Cup qualification.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
I don't expect FIFA to see any difference between a Newco and the Oldco in these issues. If a Rangers Newco comes into the SPL via a share transfer and avoids the punishment they will take the same action.
It would really be fun if multiple Newcos for Rangers were set up by the Blue Knights, the Green Knights and the Knights who say Ng. This will be hilarious if they are all competing for the vacancy in SFL3!
Makes sense. Plenty of panned-in windaes after Thursday perhaps. More after the SFA tribunal resits.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Thanks for the link. I rubbed my palms with garlic before reading it to ward off evil spirits...
Actually it is possibly the most intelligent article I have ever read by a Hun. You can see even back in 2009 when it was written that th cracks were beginning to show. It says clearly that all Rangers retail activities were taken over by JJB so I assume then that the clubstore at Greyskull is also run by JJB even if it is still branded as purely Rangers, although as I never go there I can't confirm or deny that. It answers the question as to how the clubstore staff are getting paid anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
I remember about seven years ago at the height of the UVF / LVF fueding over in the Six Counties and I was cutting through the back streets of Belfast heading for the ferry (in the days when it was an easy walking distance) and I could hear the opposing Loyalist factions shooting at each other in the north of the city. I can just imagine something similar happening in Govan (hopefully minus the guns) if two separate Newco Hun teams were formed. It would not be any more far fetched than what has happened already :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
All logic points to HMRC rejecting the CVA but my worry is the unseen political pressure in smoke filled back rooms being put on HMRC top brass probably with the occasional funny handshake.
I fear the worst.
Put it this way, if HMRC accept 9p in the pound from the Huns there will be public outcry - if not in dodgy Scotland then certainly down South. HMRC is essentially an English institution and the general taxpayers will not take kindly to any public body seemingly supporting a Scottish football club which has traded free of tax for 12 months. I can see Panorama waiting in the wings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
Very true. It will send out exactly the wrong message. The likes of Portsmouth and presumably Birmingham will be watching with interest.Quote:
Originally Posted by Onion
However I understood that it will not be anything like 9 pence in the pound assuming that the BTC falls in favour of HMRC.
Interesting Celtic perspective which feels Rangers will try to do a deal with "Gang of 10". Wouldn't it be great to stick it up them as well!!!!!!!
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=...medium=twitter
Cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Yep, i guess proving what his 'intentions' were would be problematic.
Cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
I dont think i was mistaking it for 'trading while insolvent'.
It was something i heard or read quite early on in this saga. It seemed to suggest that it would be treated akin to the 'insolvency' rule. Though i was sure it indicated that if (paye) payments were withheld because the debtor 'planned' to enter administration further down the line then the debt could be treated 'differently' from the other debt (i.e. not included in the larger 'pot') and that (if proven) it was a criminal act to continue to actively run up debt when your 'plan' is to avoid the debt through administration/cva etc. Though, as noted, proof would appear to be difficult.
I honestly cant remember who, where or what was said exactly. Other than after hearing it, it led me to believe that a criminal charge would be possible.
Cheers again guys, keep up the good work.
I must confess, i still find the whole situation about as clear as Steve Fulton's skin.:wink:
I take it that Mr.Green's remarks about the number of stars he is going to sign are to ensure that any waverers re the CVA get so enraged they will vote against.This will make sure he can go the Newco route.However this will not be as easy as he thinks-unless of course he will be quite happy if Rangers go to the SFL-he will then own the ground and sell the club to new purchasers charging them rent-clubs in the SFL don't have to own their grounds-so he will have the rent for 3 years-then he sells the ground to Rangers who will have to buy it to get into the SPL-trebles all round.
Sorry if already mentioned, but I have heard that HMRC have their debt ring fenced. Therefore the current CVA does not relate to HMRC and this is being contested separately. Can this be right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
Nope not an interesting perspective just another poor me victim status being rolled out by the paraniod green brigade!
I know no more than anyone else here about HMRC's intentions but the poster who mentioned that the outcry north of the border will be as loud down south makes a moot point. The balance of probability is that HMRC will hit hard for the simple reason that discussions are at an advanced stage for tax raising powers being moved from Westminster to Holyrood. This is why Salmond has been quiet since his infamous tapping up of HMRC at the beginning of the year. The whole country, whether we like it or not will be branded as being incapable of 'running its own affairs' if HMRC bend to the will of the crooked mob in the West and the political classes are seen to be party to it. We won't be trusted - it's because of this that HMRC has to get this one right. Hammer RFC big-time - if not it's good-bye for the time being to further autonomy over our own affairs and then we are a greater laughing stock than ever. Salmond will keep quiet - he does not want to be seen as a leader of a nation that cannot be trusted to run its own financial affairs by putting pressure on a government run department. By the way I think Campbell Ogilvie will be gone soon - his banal interview in the Scotsman was preparation for it.
Completely agree. I had a look at that website and it proved a timely reminder of what a strange view of the world celtic fans have. Loads of quotes about "diddy teams" and as you say paranoia about teams like Hibs stealing their home gate revenue. They conveniently forget that they are the ones that have been doing joint sponsorship deals with Rangers all these years, they are the one who do the joint voting malarkey, and despite all their crowing about how brilliant Peter Lawell is - it's still not clear which way they would vote. I think it's more likely they would vote with their grubby partner. I'm proud to be a hibby when we are the only club in Scotland who have come out publicly and said we believe in sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmith
Not right at all. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Max
HMRC isn't English, it's British. It's fair to say that most taxpayers are English but nonsense to suggest it is an English institution.Quote:
Originally Posted by Onion
Absolutely correct. As has been said before many times - they are just one cheek of the same arse.Quote:
Originally Posted by gerry70
Agree. Laughable that they are concerned that season ticket supporters would be inconvenienced by kick off times being moved for television. They are one of only two teams who seldom suffer changes to home kick off times.Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSmith
http://t.co/0i7oNTE6
So Weatherseal to sponsor the Spl
Is that the weatherseal that Kennedy (of Blue knights - the king makers fame) owned/owns?
Couldn't possibly be pulling some strings behind the scenes could he?
Rantiic insisted that the only home OF games shown live would be the four OF games as they would lose too much money if their home KO times against anyone else were moved from 3pm Saturday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
You couldnt make it up
There 49 TBC on that list of creditors if u cherrypick 2 HMRC (£75m) & now King (£20m) it starts to mount up n the p in the £ drops even more, how u can agree to a CVA when the document has no written agreement to what you are agreeing to, if they do say yes than more fool them they deserve to get **** allQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Just a question that's been bugging me... If say HMRC or any other creditor never returned their CVA forms (in effect abstain) do they get included as a yes or no vote? And if you don't return it and it gets voted through anyway can you sue the club at a later date for the full amount?
Erm, you're taking it too literally. The point is if Scotland had its own tax raising powers or own own Treasury as would be the case under independence, I think the outcome to the RFC problem would be very different. But glad you agree most taxpayers are English :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
An undeniable fact of demographics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Onion
Yes - this whole affair shows how iffy independence could be - Scottish politicians have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers....Quote:
Originally Posted by Onion
Will the yams take a lead from Rapid Vienna?
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...osal-1-2350099
This is why a transfer embargo should be put in place. It's nonsense that a buying club should be able to sell on a player, keep the proceeds yet stiff the club they bought him from.Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
I detest Rangers.
So what's the timeline on / after Thursday vote?
Is there a 21 day cooling off period both ways of the CVA? If it is accepted I know there is, but what if it's a 'No'? Can the newsagent realise he's fed up repairing his windows and change his mind and accept the generous offer?
If there is no grace period for a 'No' - will anything happen on the Friday? I think Green / D&P may try and move quickly - Newco has probably been set up already. I suppose various court cases may drag things out.
If it's a Yes (and after 21 days) what happens?
I'm not sure of your reasoning there at all. This whole affair has happened during the Union and Scottish politicians.... have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
Not that this has anything at all to do with the independence debate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
And President Soapy will be desperate to keep it that way.
:greengrin
Quote:
Originally Posted by steakbake
I think your reading his response the wrong way it was a tongue in cheek comment towards Onion i think who somehow seemed to be linking the RFC case to a counter argument for independence for Scotland.
I'm not sure how the situation at Rangers really instructs us anything about the state of politics, in all honesty! Besides, I thought Salmond showed his hand when he was bleating on about Rangers being a significant part of Scottish society etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by johnrebus
There's too much politics in football as it is, without this whole sorry affair being stretched into some kind of tenuous analogy about the state of the union, the arguments for or against independence and so on.
You would hope so, after all we all want fairness in this mess :cbQuote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
Is there any truth in the 3rd comment in this article?
3
sonofcosmos
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 at 12:25 AM
#1 seems a story is breaking that duff and co didnt send the cva proposal to all creditors.
They've a brass neck alright. An absolute scandal.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
I'm sure this has been mentioned before somewhere, though can't remember if it was on here or if it was the C4 dude?Quote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
According to the proposal document "A resolution to approve the proposal or a modification is passed when a majority of three quarters or more (in value) of those present and voting in person or by proxy have voted in favour of it."Quote:
Originally Posted by BigKev
I read that as meaning an abstention doesn't count at all in the total, so if the total debt was £60m and HMRC held £20m of that, if they don't vote and everyone else does it needs the holders of £30m debt (60-20=40; 75% of 40=30) to vote yes.
If you receive the notice properly then I doubt if you'd be able to sue anyone after the event.
I suspect the yams will chase the money given their current circumstances. There's some provision for the SPL paying them out of RFC's prize money, but the legality of that is questionable and if they don't get it through that channel the money is effectively lost whichever way the CVA goes.Quote:
Originally Posted by ronaldo7
On that basis the yams will do everything they can to ensure there's a Rangers in the SPL next season, because there will almost certainly be less money in the league if RFC aren't there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Your starting to sound like Doncaster! .. :greengrin
Totally agree - that was the first thing that struck me when reading that. They really have no morals at all do they.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
An analysis recently carried out suggested the financial loss to the SPL would be, worst case scenario, £5.76m with Celtic accounting for nearly half that total. Projections(worst case) showed no Rangers would mean a loss to Hibs of around £100k while Motherwell appeared to be the biggest losers at around £700k. These figures took no account of any increased attendances or potential revenue from a cup run.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
There was a suggestion that it was easy for Hibs to state "sporting integrity" when they stood to be among the least affected by the demise of Der Hun but I would argue that the fact we are least affected, and more capable of standing independently, is no accident.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18407309
p.s. make that Hector!!
I read that article also, and I'd agree 100% with the part in bold. We have suffered on the park because we have kept out house in order, were as Der Huns have blatantly spent money they don't/ never have had and never will and must now pay the price of "overspend" Just like the rest of us have to do! .......... :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancienthibby
Like the end part "more to follow" :pray:
Spot on :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
9 months from now I can see Hector being THE most popular name for baby boys in many parts of Scotland. Go Hector!
Thank ****** I don't look like him.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
Anyway, he pretty much says no RFC would kill the game, I'm just saying clubs would have less money - and the yams have to chase money more than most.
TBH I take these analyses with a pinch of salt, but I do agree that the absence of RFC would be nowhere near as devastating as some would have us believe.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
With regard to Hibs, it's certainly no accident that we are less affected than some. Rod Petrie and the Hibs board have put a lot of hard work into ensuring that the club is financially viable and they've taken and continue to take a lot of abuse for their troubles. Seeing Rangers escape lightly from their self-inflicted problems would render all that pointless. I think that's why Rod's taking a hardline approach to this.
Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug
HMRC to vote against CVA. More soon at http://bbc.co.uk/sportscotland. #Rangers
Collapse
FH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fisherrow_Hibs
Just reported on BBC Radio Scotland news.
:cb
Am I correct in thinking a no from HMRC would be a no for the CVA full stop?
I think so.:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
:not worth:dancer:
Got to be. Even with the absence of BTC, they are due 20 odd million.Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs will reject the company voluntary arrangement proposal made by Rangers' prospective owner Charles Green.
Green's consortium hopes to have its CVA approved by creditors when they meet at Ibrox on Thursday so that the club can exit administration.
But the club needs dominant creditors HMRC and Ticketus to vote in favour to avoid the assets being sold off.
The CVA terms suggest a maximum payout of nine pence for every pound owed.
BBC Scotland has learned that administrators Duff & Phelps held a meeting with HMRC on Monday and were told of their decision.
The CVA requires the approval of 75% or more in value of the creditors, and more than 50% in value of the members, voting on the resolution.
Rangers entered administration on 14 February and await the outcome of a First Tier Tax tribunal at the Court of Session in Edinburgh over unpaid taxes - the so-called "Big Tax Case".
Under the terms of the deal struck by Green's consortium to buy Rangers, it will now proceed to purchase the business and assets of Rangers for £5.5m.
The Hun is dead! :greengrin :thumbsup: :na na:
Long live the New Hun? :confused:
So is it liquidation now?
Almost certainly. There's a lot of TBCs, including the BTC (:dizzy:) but HMRC have a acknowledged debt of £21m. That means the TBCs excluding the BTC would have to take the total debt up to over £84m for the CVA to succeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
On a side note, has anyone noticed that 'Rangers Leech' is an anagram of Charles Green?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Yup and one of those is King claiming £20 million who has stated desire to torpedo Green
Now saying that the consortium buying assets for 5.5m kicks in, is this true even though it was thought HMRC are appointing there own choice of liquidator?
I guess so. They will still try to shaft the Scottish game but liquidation is ever so pleasing nonetheless. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by johnbc70
The £20 million King claim seems to me a nonsense. It will be the latest in a long line of outrages if that is considered.Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
Says who :na na:Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
And that is why many will "never" return to the scottish game... Sad, but true.
It could be challenged I think. It clearly does not benefit the creditors in any way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty_Jack04
Attachment 8346Time......:greengrin
Stop spoiling the moment and enjoy watching them squirm for the time being!Quote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
(By the way I'll be one of them)
Depends. The liquidation process doesn't kick in immediately, somebody (probably D&P or Hector) has to apply to the court. Theoretically the administration could continue and a further CVA proposal be made further down the line. In reality, the money would run out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Matty_Jack04
D&P and the Green brigade can now attempt their asset sale. Hector can attempt to stop it if he sees fit.
While i did not really understand 90% of whats been written here, i did have one view about this, and that was HMRC could not bend over and let them roger the ordinary tax payer.
My thoughts were they couldn't let them off with a CVA because of the signals it would have sent out, anyone in a bit of bother would just have done the same.
They had to let everyone know what the consequences will be, if you dont pay your tax.
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
I was told 2 things this week
1. HMRC will not enter into CVA's if the debt is as a result of Tax fraud.
2. HMRC have already appointed their own administrators and they are waiting in the wings.
Now some of the shadowy secret investors will do walking away.....as Green himself stated would happe if CVA failed
Any chance that Cheshire and Lancs can get a survey up quickley to confirm current feeling re Rangers getting straight back in. It is important that clubs know the strength of feeling and don't think it has gone away.
Continuity Rangers it is then. Let the fun and games really begin.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Liquidation, liquidation ole ole ole
Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
I think that even a blind man will see what's going on and the need for surveys are long gone... :wink:
Just my take, but I can't see how clubs can swerve this one... :agree:
HMRC have indicated who they would prefer as liquidators, should that happen;the creditors (and administrators) have accepted this. That much is in the public domain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibbyradge
Latest from Chuckie -
CHARLES GREEN, who is leading a consortium to acquire Rangers Football Club, issued the following statement today.
Mr Green said: "I am hugely disappointed by the decision of HMRC not to support the CVA proposal and that disappointment will be felt acutely by Rangers fans across the world.
"Frankly, I do not see what benefit will be achieved by this decision. My consortium's offer for a CVA amounted to a total of £8.5 million.
"Now that we will have to complete the purchase via the formation of a NewCo, the purchase price and therefore the amount available to creditors will be £5.5 million.
"I can understand HMRC deciding that football clubs which do not pay their taxes need to be punished, but by effectively banning Rangers from Europe for three years all that will happen is that there will be less revenue generated by the Club and consequently less money paid over to the taxman.
"Also, I do not believe that by opting to vote against the CVA proposal, HMRC will generate more cash by pursuing those they believe as responsible - but that is a matter for them.
"I am particularly saddened by the fact that this decision will mean that small shareholders will lose their shares in The Rangers Football Club plc, something which we were trying to avoid happening.
"We will be exploring ways for the 26,000 shareholders who have lost their shares to subscribe for shares in the new company. We expect to appoint a private client broker in due course to allow existing shareholders and fans to buy into the new company.
"We will, however, examine how to address this with regard to shares in the new company.
"The solemn promise I can make to Rangers fans today is that this Club will continue as Rangers Football Club and will continue to play at Ibrox Stadium.
"We will be liaising with the football authorities at the earliest opportunity to establish our position regarding the SPL.
"I, along with my investors who believe that Rangers can have a bright future, will fight tooth and nail to ensure the Club recovers from this catastrophic phase in its proud history.
"The fans deserve better and we will work tirelessly to realise their ambitions."
Thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
ice cream and jelly
the huns are deid - although we should protest at the assets not being sold for creditors...
HMRC and BDO will be on that particular trail.....Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
SPL Fixtures due out on the 18th June - will this happen ? Will they include Rangers ?
Will the SPL even be able to start on time ? With all the legal stuff going on can we see the season actually starting when it is meant to?
I can see it being delayed and other clubs suffering due to Rangers :agree:
Errmmm - the whole point is that they haven't paid money due to the taxman. Is this guy for real? :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
When will RFC officially officially cease to be? Will any Newco have any claim to their history other than we all know they are a continuing disease?
I can't see how Green's purchase is simply done and dusted without the say-so of creditors. The creditors (i.e. HMRC) must surely have the ability to go back to court to challenge the Green purchase if they so desire, and get BDO onto the case pronto.Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
Who said that? have I missed something .....
I might stick in a bid for their history. If I buy it then Hibs will become the most successful club in world football at a stroke. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Newry Hibs
My understanding was that Green got the assets for £5.5 million due to a prearranged statement in the CVA.Quote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
I would think Rangers assets are worth considerably more.
BTW What is the situation on players contracts now. Are they all null and void with registrations passing to SFA?
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
According to D&P Green has a deal in place to get all the assets including Ibrox and Murray Park for £5.5 millionQuote:
Originally Posted by LeithenHibby
Administrator Paul Clark added: "HMRC has taken the view that the public interest will be better served with the liquidation of The Rangers Football Club plc as a corporate entity.
"The Club will continue to operate as it has always done but within a new company structure."
So it will carry on cheating then...
Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
.......so, they've been undone by a King and the Queen. Irony!
Man this is moving fast :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
1) HMRC will be looking to get the assets Im sure
2) A lot more...
3) Not sure when this would happen, but it will happen .. :greengrin
Green won't get to purchase the assets for £5.5m. He is obliged to agree to a purchase and liquidation if the CVA fails but if BDO get the liquidators gig they will not allow that deal to be the best available to to the creditors, the will sell off everything separately to ensure maximum return and I can see the blue knights putting in a better offer to secure the stadium at the very least
Not so fast, Meester Breezeeeee. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by joe breezy
Cav spotted a clause in the CVA document, which suggested that not all of the assets (ie not the properties) were being transferred to the Newco.
Also, even if they are included, the creditors have the right to petition the Courts if they feel their interests are being prejudiced., eg if they think the assets are worth more.
How can he possibly promise the bit in bold?Quote:
Originally Posted by BarneyK
The only reason I can see that he could buy ibrox at a cut price is that no company that might have an interest in the site/property would want the hassle of all the huns blaming them for the demise of the club.
sing along now...
Liqidation...liquidation....liquidation....its what you need
if you want to rid a pest....bring joy to all the rest..
liquidation's what you need