Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

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

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

Serious buyer waiting in the wings?

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Wow, that is big news.

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

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

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

---

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

Ye couldnae make this stuff up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hibs Class

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

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

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

Serious buyer waiting in the wings?

---

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by silverhibee

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23773872/


Spl rivals are being too soft. imo :agree:

---

:agree:

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

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

This is what Paul Murray said last night:-

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy74

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hibs0666

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

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

Serious buyer waiting in the wings?

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

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

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

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

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

---

They wouldn't have found the Ticketus money.

They would have taken the CW security at face value.

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

They wouldn't be suing CW.

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

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

---

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

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

---

As in, "we are the people"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

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

---

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

As in, "we are the people"?

---

GETTYFA :greengrin THEY arra peepul :na na:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ancienthibby

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

---

:hmmm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

BIG BIG NEWS RE TICKETUS DEAL

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

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

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

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

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

---

Mr Ticketus must read hibs.net !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seveno

Mr Ticketus must read hibs.net !

---

Them and STV :agree:

We could have fun with this :cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

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

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

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

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

---

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

Why did Whyte insist that they were appointed ?

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

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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seveno

Why did Whyte insist that they were appointed ?

---

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

Better the devil you know ..

:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

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

---

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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