Damning! Who are these people? Do they have any power?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Printable View
Damning! Who are these people? Do they have any power?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Brilliant, thanks Tracey. It will be nice to hear from Hibs on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by traceyhibs
When is the next board meeting scheduled for?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I hope you're right. Most Scottish clubs and our tainted football authorities seem to be sitting tight hoping this will blow over.Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelTheCelt
In my view this is the biggest corruption scandal in European football in my lifetime (think of the central role of Ogilvie) and I want to know HFC's position on it. I worked in Edinburgh and had a season ticket for most of that period yet every time we played Rangers they fielded a team of mis-registered players.
They are a Swiss magazine that covers the business side of Football. Probably the most widely read in the world although the business side of football would be a minority interest I think. Except in Scotland. [emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What about if Porto go along with the argument (which you also espouse) that they are the same club. Can they demand compensation for revenue lost?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
This is good to know.Quote:
Originally Posted by traceyhibs
When is the next board meeting Tracey?
Our next board meeting isn't until 31st July which I know seems a long way away. We feel it's one of the bigger issues and therefore needs to be addressed at this level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
We also have our update coming out that week and it will be addressed in there also.
Many thanks
Tracey
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well done, Tracey. Great to hear that the board are going to be made well aware of the fans feelings on this. I hope other fans across the country are doing the same with their board.Quote:
Originally Posted by traceyhibs
Hi Tracey, I am sure our board will stick up for our club. No whitewash, tell King to go do one. Strip then vullify all trophies "won" by cheating. And while [ am at it a points deduction for sectarian chanting too.Quote:
Originally Posted by traceyhibs
If Carlsberg did board meetings..Quote:
Originally Posted by southsider
It's time for our board to stand up and be counted. We have talked about sporting integrity in the past, now is the time to show we actually mean it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Is It On....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd say yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazyhorse
But you can hear the sound of the "We're the same club" bus reversing already :greengrin And the sharp intake of breath of the lawyers (on both sides) as they count up the fees to be earned.
:worms:
Not to mention impartial accountants with an in depth knowledge of the subject ☺️Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I'd still have the same view. If those clubs went after Newco, it would partly support that, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by Is It On....
If it's deemed to be football debt then newco are liable anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They seem to have the following options:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
1. We are the same club and must forfeit all titles/cups etc. "won" during the rule breaking period (2001-10) and pay out compensation to clubs across Europe.
2. We are not the same club and so far in our history (2012-17) we have won no major Scottish titles/cups.
Not quite.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Football creditors have preference in an insolvency situation, but it doesn't necessarily follow that a Newco would pick them up. In the Rangers case, it was paid by the Newco, as a requirement of the 5-way agreement, in order to get their licence. In Hearts' case, Budge paid it as part of the CVA deal.
These were different arrangements, but the similarity is that neither HAD to pay them legally. If neither had happened (eg no "follow-on" situation), the football debts would still have been paid by the liquidator/administrator in preference to other creditors.
In this rumoured Porto action, if they go after Newco, that's a third scenario IMO, where the creditor ignores the demise of the OldCo and goes for (in their eyes) the substance of their loss, rather than the legal form.If they go after the OldCo, they will be a preferential creditor, to the detriment of HMRC and all the other ordinary creditors.
To save me re-reading 38,000 posts ... how did the side letters originally come to light? I know it followed a polis raid on Ipox to investigate some dodgy boumsongness/bungsouness/whatevs, but how did it get into the public domain? Was it a SMSMer actually doing a proper job for once :faint:, or did a polisman turn Timmy, or did john james / Phil 3 names have a mole inside Ipox, orwot?
(Commenting on the GFA's handling & performance of the entire saga)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
' ............................... it is clear many elements of its operations and the regulatory decisions relating to them were extremely badly handled'
If they were 'badly handled' then they were intentionally done so - I never for one minute, since the Huns cheating emerged, fully belived that Regan & Co would deliver the justice that the Hun cheating merited !
Phil Macgiollabhain first broke the story in 2010 and Rangerstaxcase blog followed ( https://rangerstaxcase.wordpress.com/2011/03/ ) in March 2011.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ta.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Not sure what the legal status of the LNS commission was, but hope there's a possibility of Campbell Ogilvie eventually getting done for contempt of something, as he clearly misled that inquiry.
I imagine that the current situation is that the Thes have told the SFA quite bluntly that if they go ahead with stripping titles then the Thes will drop all those in the SFA who previously lied and covered up for them into some very brown stuff.
I feel some blazer resignations coming soon.
As has been mentioned previously, there ciuld be a few ex players a bit worried. It seems that if old rangers cant make a satisfactory offer, it will be the players being pursued.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I think in this instance the players would be pursued by hmrc to recoup their losses. Lets hope so, a double whammy.
Sorry if this is a dumb question, I really don't know the ins and outs of the case but did the players KNOW they were being paid through illegal means? If they didn't then it's a little harsh to go after them personally. If they did however then yes indeed they are fair game and can't complain if they are pursued.Quote:
Originally Posted by beensaidbefore
Sorry. Didn't make myself clear... I was referring to the Tax Justice Network.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Just googled them... No powers, but at least it's an international organisation, highlighting the state of our football affairs
Campbell Ogilvie, to be heavily involved with one club stiffing its' creditors is unfortunate. To be involved with 2, to be a shareholder in one while MD of the other, to be in receipt of an EBT & then to become President of the SFA is beyond parody.
As far as i am aware this was made known to the players. Hiw it was 'sold' to them as an idea may have varied. Been told .hmrc will not pursue both club and players. Club first, players if unsuccessful.Quote:
Originally Posted by 21.05.2016
I stand to be corrected though.
Nothing to see here. Please move on.Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
I'm not sure if you can plead ignorance.Quote:
Originally Posted by 21.05.2016
At the end of the day, it is your arse that is on the line and it is up to you to appoint advisors, accountants etc that know their stuff.
Of course, if you do find yourself in bother as a result of advice you have been given I'm sure you could sue your advisors and depending on what position they officially hold they might have some sort of indemnity insurance.
My brother works down in London and when he started to get a few media gigs everyone used to say "oh, you should go to see Jimmy Carr's accountant".
He didn't, but I believe all of those who did ended up in a lot of trouble and had to find significant sums of money for Hector a few years down the line.
Not sure what you mean by "suitable offer".Quote:
Originally Posted by beensaidbefore
The HMRC assessment has now been confirmed as due. The amount payable will go into the pot along with the other ordinary creditors, and be paid the same dividend as them.
The amount recovered will have little bearing on whether the players are being pursued. That's more to do with principles and HMRC's attitude.
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
The 'Airdrie United' episode is proof that the SFA bent their rules to accommodate the new Rangers.
Airdieonians FC went bust and a new club was formed by the purchase of Clydebank FC and the associated SFA licence. This new club was not allowed to change their name from Clydebank to the name of the now defunct Airdrionians (because of SFA rules) so had to call themselves Airdrie United instead.
Fast forward to 2012 and Rangers FC went bust. A new entity was formed and, lo and behold, they were (unlike Airdrie) allowed to use the name of the former club.
Different situation? Well, the owners of Airdrie United weren't happy about it and asked again for the right to call their club Airdieonians. Basically, the SFA didn't have a leg to stand on and allowed the renaming, despite their former ruling.
Agreed but many of them aren't particularly bright, many of them see the big money figures and grab it. Your right though, its their responsibility to ensure they aren't being roped into anything dodgy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I suspect their will be a few of them keeping a low profile for a while.
To paraphrase W. Shakespeare "Something is rotten in the state of Scottish Football"Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
I suspect so.Quote:
Originally Posted by 21.05.2016
Looking at the sums of money involved too, I can't imagine many of them will have that kind of money just lying around any more. If bills were to come their way then I suspect a few assets might have to be liquidised (?) to pay any forthcoming bills.
This, of course, may be the best bit of the whole saga so far. The players, the board and the advisors all paying lawyers fortunes whilst pointing fingers in every direction other than at themselves, whilst the hordes turn on anyone that they see fit to along the way.
Muchos popcorn required.
Just in case tax is required to be paid Lee Wallace will be dropping by from time to time to help Mr Taxman out:
Nacho Novo Last seen in Belfast.
FYI
I note with interest that when Rangers were found guilty, the SFA issued a statement within hours stating that, after 'consideration' :rolleyes:, they would take no further action. The SPFL later released a statement saying they would 'consider' the implications... That was 5 days ago now, and not a cheep from them yet.
To be fair to the SPFL there are some serious implications to be taken into consideration. To take a bit of time is 100% the right thing to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
It was the SFA rushing out their nonsense on the day who were wrong.
Satisfactory, not suitable. If hmrc are satisfied that they have recouped 'enough' back. Who decides what is enough is another question.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I have heard that they are not intending to take more than what is 'fair'. That could mean pursuing individuals but not if they get a 'fair' amount from rangers. Make of that what you will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I believe Belize is nice......
It was more the speed of the 'do' SFA's response I was having the bigger dig at, hence the :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I'm actually hoping the SPFL are taking so long because they realise they're up the proverbial creek, and will have to do something
Edit. The nonsense of the SFA's statement, is that Ogilvy was up to his neck in what was going on
It was the word "offer" that jumped out at me, since it has a particular connotation in the tax context. The opportunity for Oldco to make any kind of offer passed many years ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by beensaidbefore
HMRC won't actually know how much they are recouping for some time yet...maybe years. The Wavetower and Duff & Phelps cases still have to be settled before the creditors can get any sort of payout.
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
I'm not too up to speed on the correct terminology tbh. As you allude to though, the plan is not yet clear, which is why going after individuals could still be an option.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Indeed. I can't help thinking this is only start of the next chapter rather than the end of the story and that the SFA / SPFL could be moving towards a starring role. The potential for past indiscretions to be classed as football debt and therefore transferable to "NewCo" is always something I gave wondered about. On a connected matter, whatever happened to the money due to Rapid Vienna in respect of the Jelavic transfer in the dying days of Craig Whyte's reign?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Yip, and as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, there is the not insignificant matter of the Disguised Remuneration loan charge which means tax and NIC is due on any loans which remain outstanding to EBTs as at April 2019. I know CWG posted an earlier link in this thread to a general Deloitte article which concluded with a "might be difficult to enforce" view from Deloitte on the April 2019 loan charge. I am pretty sure that the Deloitte view will have moved on since that article... :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
So I think there is every chance that the requirement to satisfy the April 2019 loan charge to HMRC will arrive BEFORE any creditors' payout from the liquidation pot. If you were Hector what would you do? :greengrin
Or, thought about another way, if you were HMRC, would it pass the smell test to enforce the loan charge on other non-RFC EBT beneficiaries in April 2019 (of which there are thousands upon thousands across the UK and in which 99 times out of 100 the bill will ultimately be for the account of the employees/ex-employees themselves) yet somehow exempt the RFC loan beneficiaries (players, management) from the same charge just because their former employer went bust? Would seem to be a very unequal treatment...
Will be fascinating to see how HMRC play this one, particularly given how unusually public this case is....
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...00a5d8e5e0.jpg
Old Rangers up in the Court of Session tomorrow. No idea what it's about.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Wavetower case?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Duff & Phelps?
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
We're all talking rubbish because according to an article in the 'Daily Rectum' (where else, of course !) with Arthur Numan who says -
'Title-stripping is nonsense because trophies were won fair and square'
You can't really argue with the fact that their players DID win their games/trophies and titles because they played the better football.
However, Arthur - and I strongly suspect, the 'Rectum' - all conveniently forget that the argument is that were it NOT for the dodgy tax-scheme, these players would NOT have been playing for Rangers - THAT wasn't 'fair and square' !
Oh aye,and Arthur himself was a recipient of some £510,000 via EBT according to whatever EBT-list of 'who-received-what' is genuine.
Just another day and another mis-leading/deflecting/biased article in the world of surely the world's most corrupt, inefficient, spineless 'Football Media' !
If Arthur was paid £510k via EBT..then he could be due that in unpaid tax and late payment fines..so the winning of titles are the last thing he should be worried about.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deansy
Such an inane defence - which I think Chris Sutton also made, presumably just to be his usual controversialist self - to claim that things were won 'on the pitch' and ought therefore to stand. Every team that's ever been thrown out of a competition for a mis-registration could argue exactly the same - that it's unjust for a team who've won a match to be thrown out. That's the whole point - it's a punishment, you morons!Quote:
Originally Posted by Deansy
Lance Armstrong and Ben Johnson said the same thing. [emoji23][emoji3]Quote:
Originally Posted by Deansy
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Aye. And the key thing being that the likes of Numan and some of his colleagues wouldn't have been anywhere near that cesspit without that dodgy scheme topping up their earnings to acceptable levels.Quote:
Originally Posted by lapsedhibee
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Very detailed update from the Celtic shareholders pursuing the fraudulent awarding of Rangers UEFA license in 2011/12.
I think Celtic will now act on this.
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/off...s12-july-2017/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
is there a TL;DR ? :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201...6184f7f933.jpg
Sevco 5088 accounts out today. Now that Craig Whyte is in the clear we may see some action with them.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Sorry Ozzy but I've lost track a bit;
Who is currently the owner of Sevco 5088 Ltd, is it still Whyte?
Green & WhyteQuote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SingHibs
:greengrin
The main shareholder in Sevco5088 is Law Financial.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
The main shareholder in Law Financial is the Worthington Group.
The Worthington Group is in liquidation :greengrin
Aiden Early, Douglas Ware, Law Financial, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/c...11390/officers
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Early and Ware are directors, not shareholders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
The company has £10,001 of shares. Law Financial have £10k, and the other is owned by Charles Green. :greengrin
If the titles are stripped, do the players have to give their medals back?
I have no way of verifying this story of course, but lovely to think there may be a split in the camp already.......
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2017/0...shop-mourinho/
I have been thinking that something like this would happen provided it is true, and hopefully it is cause next season could be a disaster for the The Rangers :greengrin. Tell you one thing though they will play a lot dirtier than usual I suspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
Latest from JJ. Some of his articles are questionable at best but he is correct in commenting on the silence from Hibs and Hearts with regard to the title stripping question. I have to say that I am not enjoying the silence either......
https://johnjamessite.com/
Tracey was on to say that the Board will be discussing it at their next meeting.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
At club level, isn't it only Celtic that have commented?
Sent from my SM-A510F using Tapatalk
I believe so - Aberdeen and Dundee United fans put out their own statements and good on them for that. The silence from Hibs (and Hibs.net for that matter) is a source of disappointment for me and does nothing for sporting integrity which we were proclaiming loudly when Sevco were trying to gain admittance back into the league.....Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Just to clarify, the Admin team at hibs.net are not here act as spokespersons for the support, we simply provide a platform for all Hibs fans to make their views known.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
I understand that in normal circumstances but on an issue as monumental as this, every fans group in the country should be making a statement IMHO.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
None of us will be particularly enjoying the silence but Hibs are not exactly going out on a limb in maintaining a silence. Celtic are the only club to comment so far, and have so far done only that - made a comment, a statement without pushing for or demanding anything significant. No other club has officially commented, although I accept that some other fans groups have been commenting.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
I really didn't like his comment about Budge and Dempster being seduced by the blue pound. It is total, complete and utter nonsense. There may be many reasons for the silence but to suggest that the blue pound has any effect in this context is nonsense.
The fact that he managed to squeeze some casual sexism into the sentence with his reference to raising a plucked eyebrow just went to show how much of a total helmet JJ is.
If that was the case it'd be the HSA who commented.... not Hibs.net.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
I agree with you for the most part Smartie but the fact remains that JJ can make these comments because we (Hibs) have been utterly silent which gives bloggers like JJ the room to invent reasons in the absence of any real facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
His comments about Budge and Dempster are shocking. Made up sexist crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smartie
I said every fans group in the country should be commenting and they should. Cheating by Sevco on an industrial scale and we have near silence.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigKev
Bloggers like JJ rely on comments like yours. He and his ilk light the blue touchpaper and stand back whilst the gullible.......................................... .
Although it's taking longer than I would like, Tracey did say there was a board meeting on the 30th and that it was on the agenda and that they would make the position clear to the fans after that.
It's taken 5 years to get this far so I can wait a little bit longer. So long as they make the right decision. [emoji3]
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There was a petition that someone put on one of the threads for fans to sign about this issue , although think it was a Celtic Supporter that started itQuote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
As nonsensical comments go, yours is right up there with the best. Gullible in what way? For complaining that Sevco got away for years with side letters? Lol, lol and lol again..... :faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sioux
I'd rather we wait until after the Rangers away game to make any comment anyway. Going to be a bad atmosphere at this game, without adding to it for the visiting Hibs support
It might have been one of the Mexicans?Quote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It could have been a Mexican he was talking to? Believe he has signed at least one.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Keekaboo
As nonsensical comments go, yours is at the top:faf: :faf: :faf:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
For the avoidance of doubt, your phrase has no sense at all and JJ relies on people like you trying to infiltrate the minds of others whilst leading the charge from the front.
Signed
JJ
But a Mexican won't be his fellow countryman will he?Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
Have you read the transfer threads recently? No one can agree on anything! The chances of getting agreement on a statement re this issue would be extremely problematic & just who would do it? Effectively we all own Hibs Net so anyone of us could in principle produce a statement & submit it for approval. Over to you HH.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
No sense? Sevco did; that was one of the central planks of of the HMRC case, and one of the bases for claiming that they cheated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sioux
I already offered to do just that and Ozy was the only one who replied......Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
Could I be the first to say that I object to the content of any statement claiming to be on my behalf.:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by brog
There's some confusion here. The article talks about the manager talking in Spanish to a Hispanic player. It also talks about someone intervening on behalf of their fellow countryman. That comment I believe refers to the UK players who have split from the new imports. It's a tad confusing but I think I just about understand it now.Quote:
Originally Posted by ancient hibee
We can't really accept your offer before we see what you write.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
Any statement from Hibs.net would have to make clear that it only represents the 89% of Hibs.netters who voted in favour of stripping titles.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
You should be be a politician.Maybe you are.What you mean is the 89percent of those that completed the poll.A little different from 89percent of Hibs.netters.How about making clear that it doesn't represent the views of the 90 percent of Hibs netters who didn't bother completing it.
I had assumed that what I would have written would have been for approval, but I'm not spending two or three hours of my life writing something that will end up in an electronic trash can. There does not seem to be any real appetite amongst .netters to get involved.Quote:
Originally Posted by brog
According to JJ, Hibs and Hearts are not commenting for fear of the blue pound. And a commenter adds that our silence means we are worthy of a green pound boycott.
Perhaps holders of green and blue pounds may wish to tot-up how many games in the last three years their teams have played at ER. A handful of TRFC games and zero Celtic games.
We have gotten-by fairly well without blue and green pounds thank you very much. This year, there is every liklihood of games being swapped for TV, which will generate a bit of extra cash to offset reduced attendances. If you wish to stay away, then this will reduce our costs in stewarding, policing, reduce the posionous atmosphere both sets of fans bring and allow more spaces for us to sell to Hibs supporters, just like we did last season against St Mirren with their stripey black and white pounds.
And another thing, since when did the Royal Mint start issuing money in custom colours for football fans?? Full of their usual pompous self importance - they really are two cheeks of the same backside.
Your first mistake was reading JJ's site.Quote:
Originally Posted by Topographic Hibby
Actually, come to think of it, that was your only mistake.
Does he still say that there's a contract out on him?
That's pretty much what I was trying to say to you. I share your loathing of Sevco but it would be really difficult for us as a fans' group to do anything more than put pressure on our club.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
I no longer read JJ. He's a clown best ignored.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If I were on the Hibs board and someone was handing me green and blue pounds I'd start asking questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Topographic Hibby
As far as i'm concerned I, or the other admins, have no mandate to speak on behalf of the site. We differ from a group such as the HSA, for example, who have elections.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoboHarry
I'm here because I love Hibs and like talking about them at any opportunity, I also like the other discussion on the forum and I don't mind giving up a bit of my own time to keep something I enjoy ticking over. I have never felt Hibs.net speaks for, or hadsthe right to speak for or on behalf of either Hibs fans as a whole or the users of the forum. I'd go as far as to say that if that was a route others wanted to go down it would be time for me to call it a day.
This is a place for people to come and express their opinions about Hibs and football (primarily), it's not our remit to try to influence opinion or voice a collective opinion that not everyone may agree with.
Excellent post :top marks
and that is exactly why this place is one of the best around :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy