Presumably MIH were using the same EBT scheme? Considering various ex Gers directors seem to be suggesting that MIH were entirely responsible for deciding Rangers tax policies...Quote:
Originally Posted by Seveno
Printable View
Presumably MIH were using the same EBT scheme? Considering various ex Gers directors seem to be suggesting that MIH were entirely responsible for deciding Rangers tax policies...Quote:
Originally Posted by Seveno
Have I misses something on Europe?
Motherwell v Rangers the other day there was still the premise that motherweel needed to beat them to try and get this champions League place.
Did I imagine a few weeks ago that the club had to be out of admin by 31 March to have any chance of Europe?
There seems to have been no word after that deadline having been passed that Rangers are now officially out of Europe next year?
That is the case though I think they can still appeal if special circumstances are in place. These could include not being able to read or write due to them being knuckle draggers, the big house must stay open and they arra peepil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy74
They gave up on Europe ages ago:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17287929
... and it was mentioned in the lead up to their game v the Huns that 3rd would do for CL:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17532237
Fancy United to catch them anyway.
If the post-FTT revelations are as juicy as RTC hints, Murray could be joining Fred Goodwin in the ex-knights' club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Seveno
There's still a few 'ifs' in there and I am surprised not to have seen some official confirmation with the date having passed.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
To be fair, the deadline was only on Saturday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy74
Given that that was the deadline for every club in Scotland to get their appropriate licence submissions in, I'd imagine that the SFA will be very busy today.
More to the point, did Hearts get their accounts in on time?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
We can but hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Not.
notice that Rangerstaxcase has been down all day. Under cyber attack from the Loyal and their chums in the MSM perhaps?
:whistle:
Same happened to Phil Mac's website a while back when some of the more interesting revelations began to emerge. Some big-wig current bun wrote to the hosting company and complained that the website was full of libelous claims about Rangers that were devaluing the club. Safe to say the website was back up and running not long after.Quote:
Originally Posted by blindsummit
I think it was more on the basis that Motherwell need points to stay ahead of Dundee United, St. Johnstone and possibly Hearts. The administrators have already accepted that Rangers won't be in compliance with the UEFA requirements.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy74
If this is the case, I hope Rangerstaxcase is back up and running soon. And if they were shut down in this way, then I hope rtc gives us the scoop.Quote:
Originally Posted by moff1875
Good. Just checking! :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter
Rangers Tax-Case@rangerstaxcaseLooks like DoS attack on the blog. Will prob take a few days to fix. Coincidental timing I am sure! :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by blindsummit
I would just love to know who has coordinated this attack. That knowledge could be explosive if uncovered.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Nice quote from Duff and Duffer in today's Scotsman about the possibility of liquidation :pray: that "... there is an amount of toxicity in there ...". Just surprised that it was in reference to their past financial decisions and not to their support.
Question for those with the accountancy hats on - CavG & CWG come to mind.
If these EBT's were loans than cant the club or creditors pursue those who got the loans for repayment?
Now that would be good, can you imagine the squealing.
My understanding is that an EBT is a separate legal entity to the club and so is not affected by the current administration.
I was thinking about this yesterday, actually....Quote:
Originally Posted by Granton Stanton
As I understand it, the "loans" were from the Trust... which was set up, I believe, in Jersey or Guernsey. The Trust was funded by contributions from the Club.
So, it's only the Trust that can recover the loans from it. Once the money left the Club, the Club no longer has control.
Which is a shame. It would have been good to see Amoruso, Laudrup, Albertz et al having their days in Court.
Just getting round to reading the back pages of this morning's rag.
Martin Bain's excuse for the EBT scandal is now ,
" I acted in strict accordance with the tax and legal instructions given by the Murray Group "
" At Rangers, we had no in-house legal and tax advice. This all came from the head office of the Murray Group "
Is Bain trying to cut some slack for the Huns with the HMRC, or simply trying to save his own neck from the Govan lynch-mob when Armageddon arrives.
Ass-saving, I reckon. No more, no less. There will be a lot of that in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
It's irrelevant to HMRC who was giving the advice. RFC took it, or didn't take it, and had their finger on the trigger.
I guess that there may be a little mileage in this. On the C4 news story last week a guy called Paul Baxendale-Walker (Google him!) was interviewed. He suggested that Der Hun would have received advice from his "bible" on EBTs and offshore tax guidance but then "did something different". He clearly distanced himself from their actions and, by doing so, appeared to suggest that they were fairly well screwed.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
If no discretionary payments were made into the trust then Der Hun retained de facto control over the funds. If this was indeed the case Duff & Duffer may well then have some right of recovery....... now that would be far too good to be true. :greengrin
Although I think that there is probably enough distance between the loans and the club for such a recovery to be fairly unlikely. Shame.
Is it such a shame, though? If the admins thought they had a case for recovery of the payments, they could be here for years taking the legal actions. The amounts involved might be enough to keep them solvent.Quote:
Originally Posted by banchoryhibs
We dinny want that....
Nah, on reflection.... it's clutching at straws in cloud cuckoo land. :greengrin
Absolutely agreed::aok::greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
There is no way they can reclaim the money as all the players have letters saying they don't have to pay back the loans. That's why they are in so much trouble in the first place.
It's really sad to see such a loyal and steadfast group of people turning on each other. :fibber::fibber::fibber::fibber::fibber:Quote:
Originally Posted by greenginger
http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmn...90/index.shtml
Over to CWG and our other financial yins......
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
So there is a Santa Claus!
Why would Ticketus wipe out £17m? Unless they are getting a major shareholding in the Blue Knights deal which they sell on at a later date.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
Quote:
Originally Posted by WindyMiller
Whatever deal they have done, or think they have done, with Ticketus is immaterial if the BTC goes against them. They wont find HMRC as accomodating. Theres also the small matter of CW's 85% shareholding to overcome.
Because a debt free rangers after a CVA (it won't happen) or liquidation would be worth a lot more.Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky
A CVA is even less likely if HMRC feel that tickets is moving up the Q of creditors. Their rules for granting one state that all creditors are treated equally.
'End game in sight' (from today's Herald)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
They are calling a creditors meeting for Friday, April 20 at Ibrox, when they will present their proposals for taking Rangers out of administration. This will involve two possible scenarios: exiting via a Company Voluntary Arrangement, or the assets being sold to a newco. The creditors will, effectively, be voting for which of the two outcomes suits them best, but by then the likely future of the club will have been determined.
As administrators, Duff & Phelps have three priorities, in order: first, to try to rescue the company as a going concern; second, to achieve a better result for the creditors than winding the company up; then lastly, selling assets to raise funds to be distributed to the secured or preferred creditors. In their proposal, Duff & Phelps must explain any reasons why they would consider either or both of the first two objectives to be impossible to meet.
The three remaining interested parties – the Blue Knights consortium, Club 9 Sports and a Singapore-based consortium – must submit their best and final offers by tomorrow, with proof of funding. Duff & Phelps will then decide upon their preferred bidder. They can offer a period of exclusivity, during which the administrators cannot enter in negotiations with any other potential buyers, in return for a non-refundable fee, thought to be in the region of £1m.
The deposit acts as further proof of intention, and provides an element of security for the winning offer. It also establishes how much money Duff & Phelps can utilise in a CVA, allowing them to then begin negotiations between the dominant creditors and their preferred bidder. The likelihood or otherwise of a CVA will have, in effect, been determined before the creditors meeting is held, since Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs already represent a large percentage of Rangers' debt.
For a CVA to be passed, creditors holding 75% or more of the debt must vote in favour, and if the first tier tax tribunal finds in HMRC's favour – landing Rangers with another tax bill of up to £50m – they alone could determine the outcome of the CVA. The votes of the other creditors would then essentially be irrelevant.
Yet it seems unlikely that any of the interested parties other than the Blue Knights could pull together a workable CVA. Paul Murray's move to bring Ticketus – the company that lent Craig Whyte £24.4m in return for future season ticket sales – into his consortium means that if the Knights are successful in their bid to buy the club, Ticketus will not be among the creditors.
Murray, the former Rangers director, is also thought to have negotiated better repayment terms and conditions from Ticketus, freeing up more revenue in the short-term and allowing the club to re-stabilise more quickly. Ticketus would also effectively act as the club's bank, providing a bridging loan for working capital until a share issue is held, with the proceeds being split between CVA payments – HMRC often agree to CVAs that involve a lump sum payment then further installments form future revenue – and investment.
Under the Knights' plans, the rest of the creditors would receive more money from the CVA, and their deal with Ticketus also avoids further legal battles. In a court judgment last week, Lord Hodge declared that Ticketus's claim on future season ticket sales cannot be enforced – because it is not recognised in Scots Law – but they do have a contractual entitlement.
"Although Lord Hodge's decision has, if you like, got rid of the Ticketus rights to future income, Ticketus will almost certainly have an unsecured claim against the football club," says Maureen Leslie of MLM Solutions, the insolvency practitioners. "Lord Hodge left it open just a tiny bit by not precluding Ticketus taking their case to a higher court. If you're going to have months of horrendous litigation, that's going to prevent you from taking a CVA forward within a realistic time frame. You need to get that litigation out of the way."
Club 9 Sports, the Chicago-based investment fund, are believed to have made the highest indicative offer for the club – around £25m – but this is thought to contain several clauses that could see it reduced to become closer to the other bids. Herald Sport has also received a firm denial from the owners of the New York Yankees that they are among the backers. Club 9 Sports are also not thought to have carried out due diligence on Rangers, even though Duff & Phelps set up a website with secured access to a data vault of all the relevant financial and legal information.
"One of the reasons you do diligence is to understand the obligations you're taking on," says Neil Patey, a partner with Ernst and Young. "That all disappears if you're just buying the assets. The other part is understanding the revenue generation of what you're buying, the wage structure, what the historical expenses are. But in a distressed scenario you're just buying the assets so there's less diligence done.
"Why go down the liquidation route? It is cleaner. A CVA is about preserving history. You could see why a Paul Murray consortium would be much more aligned to the history than an American investor."
Duff & Phelps are duty bound to accept the highest offer, but they must also be certain the bidders can deliver. Liquidation and starting the club under a newco is the simplest route out of administration – so still the most likely – while a CVA requires the new owners to submit business plans, cost and future revenue projections for creditors to scrutinise. Yet the Blue Knights' bid has been constructed in such a way as to make it favourable for both the club and the prospects of gaining a CVA.
With Duff & Phelps planning to name their preferred bidder on Thursday, the coming days will be critical to the shape of Rangers' future.
Now, I'm not one to say I told you so but.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
http://www.saintmirren.net/pages/?p=11540
I'm loath to believe anything I read on Follow Follow, but I see Keith Jackson is saying a similar thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibernia&Alba
It all seems to good to be true, which for me normally means it probably is.
I would rather wait until Ticketus themselves say what the truth is.
Edit....The BBC's report suggests things aren't as final as PM claims. http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17592209
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-17588695
Rangers owner Craig Whyte has been warned by police that he is an "increased security risk".
Officers believe the businessman could be in danger of being targeted by fans for his part in the financial collapse of the club, which has been placed in administration
och, leave the poor wee man alone :( he was only trying his best :cb
Talks are still ongoing. Nothing has been signed between PM and Ticketus yet. Tabloids feed Orc hordes positive news to keep selling their sh*tey newspapers shock.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The talks:-Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
Murray, P. "Ok, guys. You write off £17m. We pay back the rest when we can, with no interest. You also give us another £10m. Is that ok?"
Ticketus "Beat it."
The end.
These will be the same fantastic, wonderful supporters who,we keep getting told, dont deserve to be in this mess.......Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Hurry up and die Rangers....
BBC now reporting deal
The Blue Knights consortium believe a deal has been broadly agreed with Ticketus to wipe £17m off the debt they are owed by Rangers.
The two parties plan to mount their bid for the club on Wednesday.
Details of the proposals are still to be finalised, but it would mean Rangers owe Ticketus just £10m if the Blue Knights take over.
That sum would be paid back interest-free over seven years, with nothing repaid in the first two years.
If the agreement is concluded, the Blue Knights-controlled Rangers would also benefit from £10m in working capital from Ticketus prior to a fans share issue.
The rest of the article is just padding.
:agree: It's always worth bearing in mind that Ticketus are in business to make money for their clients, not to rescue destitute football clubs. Unless there's something we're not being told this deal will cost them more money rather than recovering what they've already sunk. With Whyte now saying he's willing to sell to Murray it feels like a concerted attempt to put pressure on the administrators ahead of tomorrow's deadline.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Pat... I have underlined what I think are the key words here.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
Are your clients not a bit nervous?
Quote:
Originally Posted by RossHibs
my(and thousands of others) sentiments exactly :greengrin but it aint gonna happen unfortunately :(
Courage, mon brave. Hector still has his cards to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Oh dear.
The tax case explained.
http://www.channel4.com/news/reveale...ngers-downfall
When is the ruling on the £50m tax case going to happen. Surely that will destroy Rangers and force them into liquidation?
J
And Ticketus take money out of Ranger for ever more.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
There's no danger Ticketus will agree to anything unless it provides them with at least their money back.
Think they would be looking for more than they can expect from liquidation and them becoming a "normal" creditor. The old "half of something is better than all of nothing" would be their take. Don't think it will be as straightforward as is being reported though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy74
Don't have any clients invested in their VCT/EISs which are affected by this investment. As these are high risk investment vehicles by nature clients would have to expect a risk of their investment going belly up. They will, more then likely, have already received 40% tax relief which will be a cushion and the funds will have been invested in more than Rangers in the first case. By the sounds of it though this has become a very illiquid investment unless Ticketus have a 3 year exit strategy.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Huns have applied to the SFA for a European club licence apparently.
More breaking news from the Beeb:Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Brian Kennedy expected to be among up to five bidders for Rangers
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...72_chrismc.jpgBy Chris McLaughlinSenior Football Reporter, BBC Scotland
Rangers' administrator is expecting four or five final bids for the club - and BBC Scotland understands Brian Kennedy will be one of them.
It is believed the owner of Sale Sharks rugby club has tabled a fresh offer.
BBC Scotland also understands that owner Craig Whyte has agreed to transfer his shares to the Blue Knights consortium led by Paul Murray.
Meanwhile, Duff and Phelps is investigating the consequences of liquidation with football authorities.
The administrator has confirmed that it has started negotiations with both the Scottish Premier League and the Scottish Football Association over the formation of a so-called newco Rangers should that course of action be followed by a new prospective owner.
More to follow...
Quote:
Originally Posted by ancienthibby
:rolleyes: Nothing like trying to drum up business :wink:
Sticking another £10m in working capital on top of what they've already given over? Seems like they will be extracting what they can as joint owners of the club for as long as they can if they get in.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
It strikes me that Ticketus are the one concern that would benefit financially from RFC surviving in its current form, because they could then enforce their original contract - or a diluted version of it. The arrangement that's being reported seems to me to destroy that advantage to the extent that they'd probably be better off in a liquidation. There has to be more behind this deal than meets the eye (or at least more than meets my eye).Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
I thought it had been a bit quiet on that front. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Meanwhile, alex thomson has been chatting to Craig Whyte today, from his twitter:
Quote:
CW reiterated his point that he is due £30 million and wants his £30 million
CW tells me " I've now spoken to all the bidders except Club 9 and none of them wants to seel liquidation"
CW tells me "so far as I understand Paul Murray isn't putting in any of his own money" into RFC bid
CW tells me liquidation of RFC is "absolutely unnecessary" all RFC needs "is to live within its means in future"
Says he's not for walking away and wants to see CVA to exit administration
Craig Whyte tells me any notion he's selling his shares to PM is " absolute nonsense."
I think I would have done the same in the administrators' position - they have to make the application even if they know it will be refused. If they do get the licence though........:timebomb::furious::worms:Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Their argument seems to be that the UEFA deadline is not until June and so there is plenty of time to get things sorted out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Just like it was with Portsmouth two or three years back. Not!Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
In any event the draw for the 1st and 2nd Qualifying Rounds is to be held on 25 June. It will need to be resolved well before then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Could these two be related?Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Ticketus know they will get the money from CW, or at least stand a good chance, through the courts, or some such thing … which is why CW wants £30m. Enough to pay off Ticketus and a few million in his tail for his troubles.
http://bit.ly/Hi1ooy
Interesting as BBC were reporting only minutes previously that Whyte had agreed to sell to Blue Knights.
He, Whyte, wants his 30m back as well :)
The story today is confirmation that the administrators are speaking to the footalling authorities about the consequences of liquidation.
Why isn't the BBC reporting that?
They have been, Mr Smurf - see post at 2.39pm today!Quote:
Originally Posted by smurf
Get £30 million from Whyte?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack
You have got to be joking.
Whyte will get no more than a nominal price for his shares.
The club is insolvent and the Big Tax case will flatten what is left once the Tribunal reports.
"I have £30m in cash and guarantees on the line but I would walk away if it is best for Rangers."
What???? He bought the club with a pound and paid off the Lloyds debt with somebody else's money. Exactly when has he put any money into rangers???
From today's Scotsman:
"... Kennedy is thought to have upped his interest in Rangers as he is keen to avoid the club being liquidised."
:faf:
That would be a 'solution' to please us all.:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by dan sarf
And now Kennedy says he will not bid.
A bad day for the pr machine of rangers?
5...4...3...2... Cannae be long now!!!!!!
They'll be up to their knees in bodily fluids!Quote:
Originally Posted by dan sarf
Since it's reported that the £10m is working capital until the share offer, any chance then Cav that this share offer will include some money being ringfenced to then pay Ticketus back, possibly both the £10m working capital, and maybe a lump sum on top? Maybe even offer then non voting stock that they can sell down the line when the price jumps enough?Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Whyte has done a bit of jiggery pokery to try and ensure that he stays at the head of the queue when the dosh is being doled out.Quote:
Originally Posted by keekaboo
http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-cen...old-over-club/
So, does it work like this?
Whyte's RFC Group (formerly Wavetower) buys RFC for £1.
RFC sells xx thousand STs up front for £27M.
RFC Group borrows £18M from RFC, pays off Lloyds, thereby taking on the secured debt of RFC. There are now loans in both directions but one is unsecured.
Whyte takes out a debenture over RFC Group securing first dibs on any money accruing to it before its creditors (RFC).
RFC liquidises, RFC Group collects the security (Ibrox + Murray Park), Whyte shuts down RFC Group and heads for the hills.
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Pursued by large men all sounding like Dr.Paisley.
I dont know if they could ring-fence that money. If it comes in before exiting administration it would surely have to go into the CVA pot, and if it's a post-administration promise they would have real difficulty achieving the CVA - who's going to accept keechpence in the pound when they know there's more money to come from the new owners? I do suspect there must be a value in equity prospect, but it looks very high-risk to me. Alternatively, Ticketus could be into RFC's income for a very long time.Quote:
Originally Posted by HibeesLA
Now here's another thing that's got me baffled
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17601438
How's that gonna work then? If Oldco survives the debt remains with it unless there's a CVA, and if there's a CVA there's no point in having a newco.Quote:
Originally posted by Phluff & Skelps "What we have also discussed with interest parties is the concept of a hybrid of both whereby they could buy the business into a newco but trade it through the existing company to preserve the SPL share."
Club9 Sports have just pulled the plug on their bid.
Statement from CLUB 9 SPORTS
“We can confirm that representatives of Club 9 Sports have been involved with investigating, analyzing
and considering a potential purchase of Rangers Football Club, plc on behalf of a group of interested
parties from the US and UK. However, at no time has Club 9 Sports itself offered a bid to acquire the
club. Our role has been as a member of a proposed consortium. We can also confirm that we have not
met with, spoken to or otherwise been associated with Craig Whyte in any way.
Furthermore, Club 9 Sports will not be bidding for control of Rangers Football Club, plc. We understand
that it has been strongly rumored that our group planned to “liquidate” the club. It should be made
clear that any party that attempts to acquire the club, eliminate the debts, affect a turnaround, invest
monies and put the club back on solid ground is in fact “saving” the club from liquidation and preserving
its past and its future. In an asset purchase, all of the good and valuable assets (records, marks, names,
trophies, players, staff, history) are preserved and separated from the bad and harmful liabilities (tax
bills, bad contracts, creditors), which have put the club into administration and which act to force the
entirety into liquidation. By putting all of the assets into a different corporate structure, the assets are
in fact rescued from liquidation. Such a transaction would be very similar to the one that occurred at
Leeds United in 2007, which simultaneously rescued that club, maintained its proud history and allowed
the club to shed its debt burdens so that it could have the opportunity for future success.
Finally, we would like to acknowledge that any successful bidder for Rangers will indeed need to
embrace the legendary fan base of the club and communicate with openness and regularity. There is no
doubt that the remarkable record of championships won by Rangers is matched only by its equally
remarkable support from legions of fans, supporters and followers throughout the world.”
WTF!!!!! Pass the ****ing sickbag.Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
So what was the shimmy that Leeds pulled?Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Leeds tried to go with a CVA with Bates offering 1 pence in the pound later rising to 8 pence in the pound but this was blocked by a legal challenge from HMRC.It was a very dubious CVA as there was strong suspicion that certain of the major creditors were 'persuaded' to vote for the CVA (and this shaft HMRC) by being offered shares in the new company.
Evenually the club was sold by KPMG. This was accepted by the Football League and the Newco was allowed to remain in League One with a 15 point penalty for next seeason. There was no doubt that Ken Bates was behind the bid. It was not possible to find out who the new owners were are it was all hidden behind a holding company somewhere in the Cayman Islands.
Eventually the Football League upgraded its disclosure rules following pressure from the Premier League and the precise ownership details became public.
OK cheers.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Absolutely disgusting and every red-top and other news outlet in the country should be saying so and condemning this gangster and torrorist behaviour. They should then take a long hard look at the biased way many of them have reported this messQuote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
i have this feeling that Hector will do exactly what duff & duffer want him to do :(
Administrators leaning more to American takeover and liquidation by sound of if, but bun fight seems to be in full swing.....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...eal-plans.html
If a newco Rangers get back in the SPL. Then **** Scottish Football :aok:Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
I thought the American shower declared themselves out only yesterday. What a messQuote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
Quote:
Originally Posted by CentreLine
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17601438
:confused:
The paragraph below sums it up for me, just who the F*** do Rangers think they are?! Them and the Scottish football authorities, who bend over backwards for them, are a joke and embarrassment to everyone associated with the Scottish game!Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
Quote:
"Meanwhile, Rangers have applied to Uefa for participation in its competitions - the Champions League and Europa League - next season despite having missed the 31 March cut-off for securing a licence and being told there would no extension granted"
Took a totally unscientific straw poll in the pub tonight and out of the 6 Hibs fans in my company ( 5season ticket holders) 5 of them said they would no longer be interested if the Huns got away With it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mainboy19
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
I've refrained from getting in to this conversation although I've read the posts. However today's news that the admins are looking at the 'possibility of a hybrid company to preserve the SPL share' is the end for me. I am writing to the Hibernian board today and after 16 years as a ST holder will not set foot in Easter Road again if this happens. This is the lowest of the low. There was an indication in last Friday's Herald that the SPL and SFA were preparing to abdicate responsibility by saying they would need to take external legal advice on interpretation of its own rules! They make the rules - they should know how to apply them.
We are talking about alleged criminal activity on a large scale here and the authorities are looking to absolve this crowd. It's an utter disgrace and every utterance in support of Rangers in its present state is a complicit acceptance of that alleged criminal activity - media et al plus the ramblings of the chairman of St Johnstone. I would also say that I do not believe for one moment that the players down the years can be absolved either. They have been active participants in all this by accepting the possible 'double contracts. They are given legal advice like all of us if we seek it. There is a simple question - is this legal?
I cannot believe either that the Scottish government can sit back and allow this mess to play itself out to the betterment of Rangers. If that's the case then it shows how rotten to the core the whole system is and that the administrators are equally culpable in it too.
Mr Petrie and the board in order to save Hibernian FC from losing a swathe of its support I suggest you speak out publicly against this whole mess in unequivocal terms.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mainboy19
What he said! I am lucky enough to have a relatively secure job and I have worked my way into a position where I have a decent amount of disposable income. There are plenty of other things I could be doing at the weekend (and I'm not even guaranteed Saturday games - I note that only our last game of the post-split fixtures is on a Saturday!) and I have only renewed my season ticket over the past few years through sheer blind loyalty. I should actually be seeking compensation from somewhere, as it is now apparent that at least the past ten years' "competition" has been skewed by Rangers' financial doping!
Make no mistake - if these b******s are admitted straight back into the league as a debt-free newco, I, a Hibernian season ticket holder every year since season 1992 - 1993, will have no hesitation in walking away from this corrupt game. Leave the f*****s with nobody to play.
This for me also. I wish someone would conduct a pole into non OF fans re leaving the game if that cancerous mob gets back in in the way it is looking like. There needs to be some light put on this story in the press as those west of Scotland press ar$eholes are just ignoring it. Anyone has that C4 reporters contact derails? They are the only media outlet I can think who would do this.Quote:
Originally Posted by camhibby1
Sent from another universe!
11 years ago Fiorentina went bust, and had to start in Serie C2. the following is taken from Wiki, and shows the way things should happen in the case of the current Failed Rangers football club. With the exception of the double promotion, because there has never been anything like the Catania situatuin in Scottish Football, yet.
2001 heralded major changes for Fiorentina, as the terrible state of the club's finances was revealed: they were unable to pay wages and had debts of around USD 50 million. The club's owner, Vittorio Cecchi Gori, was able to raise some more money, but even this soon proved to be insufficient resources to sustain the club. Fiorentina were relegated at the end of the 2001-02 season and went into judicially controlled administration in June 2002. This form of bankruptcy meant that the club was refused a place in Serie B for the 2002-03 season, and as a result effectively ceased to exist.
The club was promptly re-established in August 2002 as Associazione Calcio Fiorentina e Florentia Viola with shoe and leather entrepreneur Diego Della Valle as new owner, and was admitted into Serie C2, the fourth tier of Italian football. The only player to remain at the club in its new incarnation was Angelo Di Livio , whose commitment to club's cause further endeared him to the fans. Helped by Di Livio and 30-goal striker Christianl Rigano, the club won its Serie C2 group with considerable ease, which would normally have led to a promotion to Serie C1. However, due to the bizarre Catania Case the club skipped Serie C1 and was admitted into Serie B, something that was only made possible by the Italian Football Federation's decision to resolve the Catania situation by increasing the number of teams in Serie B from 20 to 24 and promoting Fiorentina for "sports merits". In the 2003 off-season, the club also bought back the right to use the Fiorentina name and the famous shirt design, and re-incorporated itself as ACF Fiorentina.
The club's unusual double promotion was controversial, with some suggesting that Fiorentina did not deserve it. However, the club remained in Serie B and managed to finish the2003-04 season in sixth place.
Hun sources are attempting to bandy Leeds around as a precedent for a newco phoenix being allowed to continue in their league. The Leeds situation is incredibly murky and Ken Bates seems to operate on a level of dodginess that makes Whyte seem like a rank amateur but it would appear that Leeds United AFC Ltd, the actual football club, has continued as the same company. Its old parent, Leeds United FC Ltd was liquidated and it was eventually bought by a new parent, which also seems to be called Leeds United FC Ltd but has a different company number.
The good news for the current situation is that the main reason Bates got away with his stunt is that HMRC were a <25% creditor so tried but failed to block the sale. The Huns don't have this luxury, even without the BTC, HMRC will be comfortably above 25%.
Quote:
Originally Posted by camhibby1
People say Rods a shrewd cookie, a tough businessman to deal with ," we couldn't do any better as STF said at our last AGM"
so with the expertise of STF in the background here's the big question as I see it.
Rangers, Celtic , Sky, SFA and the SPL keep or ditch , then its a number game how many walk away ,against a new enterprise and what that brings through the turnstiles ,the bigots tried and tested for 140 years feeding for the scraps ,or a new future .
I honestly dont know what would be the bigger crime regarding Scottish Football carrying on as is ,or The Rebels missing this opportunity to change what we watch every week .
Ask the fans Rod ,here's a starter for 10 , if it carries on as is, even with a better voting system ,Im no interested .
Its got to be without the baggage of The Old Firm the Suits and Sky
Funny, I was just wishing that someone would conduct a pole into Ralph Topping's jacksie.Quote:
Originally Posted by John_the_angus_hibby
Talk about vested interests!!Quote:
Originally Posted by cad
http://www.ralphtopping.com/about-me/
:grr:
Sfa take £35k that was due to Rangers and use it to pay Dundee United for Scottish cup tie
Exactly, I wonder what percentage of William Hills betting business is based on Old Firm fixtures and Rangers matches in general.Quote:
Originally Posted by ancienthibby
Toppings position is obviously compromised and should take no further part in Rangers situation or better still resign immediately.
What do you want Rod to say. He can't / won't speak out about something that has not or maybe will not happen. Up till now all that is happening is the media speculating what the outcome MIGHT be , so until the Rangers situation is confirmed one way or the other Rod will stay quiet.Quote:
Originally Posted by camhibby1
It is well known that Hibs / Rod won't comment until there is actually something to comment on.
It seems to me that there's lots and lots that could be commented on given the various events of the last few weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hot Shot Hamish