This is worth a read! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-17999964
Printable View
This is worth a read! http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-17999964
[QUOTE=Cabbage East;3216347]Very interesting post on another forum...
If for example club X with big brand and heritage was liquidated, is anyone aware of any impediment to club C to buying club X main assets and changing name, colours etc to X2013 for example. Surely above licence issue would not be a factor? Not that this is likely to happen, just beinghttps://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/im...pEGL4KztgzcvuuQuote:
For those asking about licences and transfers... (Long and boring, but will put the lie to any Newco gaining automatic entry into ANY Scottish league next season) The most important part regards being an SFA member for at least three years and the non-transferral of a club licence.
From the Scottish Football Association rules on Club Licensing (specifically Part 3, Section 03 – The Club as Licence Applicant and the UEFA Licence). Emphasis ours.
"3.1.1 The Licence Applicant may only be a football club, that is the legal entity fully responsible for the football team participating in national and international competitions and which is the legal entity member of the Scottish Football Association (Full or Associate Member). The licence applicant is responsible for the fulfillment of the club licensing criteria. This membership must have been in place at the start of the licence season for a minimum period of three consecutive years.
[...]
3.3.1 UEFA Licence Awards for Scottish Premier League Clubs (SPL)
A Licence cannot be transferred from one legal entity to another."
NB: "UEFA Licence" does not denote a licence to compete in UEFA competitions, which are governed by an entirely different set of criteria. As the SFA website explains:
"National Club Licensing applies to Scottish FA member clubs and UEFA Club Licensing applies to Scottish Premier League clubs."
In other words, to play in the SPL you must have a UEFA Club Licence, regardless of whether you actually compete in UEFA competitions or not. (SFL clubs, who in normal circumstances wouldn't be expected to qualify for European tournaments, are dealt with separately via an "extraordinary procedure" in the event that they do.)
So, should Rangers FC be subject to liquidation and then reborn as a "newco", the new company would NOT be eligible for the licence required to play in the SPL, for at least three years. Furthermore, it is plainly and explicitly forbidden under SFA rules for such a licence to be transferred from one legal entity (Rangers FC) to another (New Rangers FC 2012)
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resource...icence (2).pdf [\QUOTE]
:greengrin
Great piece. No sympathy with Der Hun but if I were them I would be looking at Duff + Phelps as the real villain of the piece. Totally out of their depth. Taken circa 5 million in fees and costs (straight from operating income) but have sold the club and the creditors down the river. Best hope for creditors is a negligence suite against them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minder
:top marks
Which is why every decent trader in Scotland, every ice cream seller, hot dog seller, fish'n'chip stall, programme printer, merchandise maker, kit maker, advertising agency, website provider, ANY service provider should stand up for those same companies / traders already shafted by these corrupt numbnuts and REFUSE TO TRADE at all with RFC, 'Oldco' or 'Newco'. Obviously some bluenose nutters who have businesses will keep trading with them for reasons of 'loyalty' (or is that loyalism) but even they will back off eventually when they know it is a choice between feeding their family or feeding the lie.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
We needed business journalists doing this from the start and not chick young and Jonathan Sutherland asking nonsense questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
This certianly paints a very bleak picture
The most fascinating part of that for me was its the first time someone has attempted a quote at the Blew it Nights offer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paisley Hibby
£1,500,000
And that maybe includes the worst ever Hibbys contribution!
And they wanted Snow Whites shares thrown in as well as Broxy Bears town and country houses :-D
Its been a long time since my flabber has been so gasted =-O
This is absolutely priceless.
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scot...g-dealers.html
The Sun running with a Whytes Knights to save the club story?
Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
lol I wonder how that fits in with his lifetime ban with any club in Scottish football. Even if he is not directly involved this is clutching at straws now surely.
Sounds like a good match. Dar wen and der Hun. Can't imagine that even anyone on here would have anything against that :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by BoltonHibee
Sounds like a good match. Dar wen and der Hun. Can't imagine that even anyone on here would have anything against that :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by BoltonHibee
Seriously? They expect people to believe that?Quote:
Originally Posted by stokesmessiah
I can't believe there hasn't been much of a hint of discontent with the tabloids from the Rangers fans, this reads as yet another bit of made up nonsense!
On Radio Scotland this morning there is a Rangers debate/phone in on the Call Kay show, and it is comedy Gold :thumbsup:
Well worth a listen, including the female host who has no knowledge of football telling the Rangers fan to Zip it! :greengrin.........Plenty raging huns trying to blame Graham Spiers (who is also on the show) for the clubs demise. Crazy!!
Too many of them have read David Legget's ramblings and rants about Spiers, although his nickname for Spiers tickles me - 'odious creep' :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by youngyosh
Meanwhile, Rangers fans are bewildered by Wild Bill saying he felt unwelcome - "I don't know where he is getting the 'Yanks go home' line from".
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/sc...6908-23852964/
A further expanded BBC Sport news item which is the same as yesterday's but expands and repeats all the reasons that Bill Miller pulled out of his bid for:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/mobile/football/17996474 :coffee:
The bit that amazes me is that this news item basically lists all the financial reasons why no-one apart from a suicidal true blue RFC fan would even bother wasting their money on this farce. There are more than enough reasons in Bill's list for never even considering buying this financial basket case and that's before we consider the non-financial reason, aka the vitriolic bile directed at Bill Miller :foot: A word of warning to any blue nose thnking of stepping in to the chasm, I don't think even a declared true blue will be safe from the bile and vitriol because Bill's spokesman has made it clear what we all knew anyway :protest: The accounts are a total shambles and and have been for years. Anyone, ANYONE, who wants to buy Der Hun FC will have to do all the things Bill Miller was going to do, i.e. cut spending to virtually nothing for quite some time. The "Raith Rovers fire bomber" squad :timebomb: will have plenty of bile and bomb threats for whoever wants to buy the club. They're that daft, and have probably pissed off the one semi decent bid they were going to get. Bill Miller might be a Yank but guaranteed he knows about money, so all the things his spokesman says needed done at the club will still be needing done, no matter who puts in a successful bid and so the "fans" will turn on no matter who ends up owning the whole sorry mess.
What I want to know is, who is working the strings of Duff & Phelps? :paranoid: It seems that their actions are NOT in the interests of the creditors but ARE in the interests of keeping the "sporting tradition" (bleuchhh....) of RFC alive. As quite a few other posters have pointed out this is contrary to duties of their task and possibly the law :rules: Is some high power blue noser in an influential position in society sitting in his big office somewhere with a blue framed photo of the Der Huns team on the wall phoning D&P every morning telling them to "keep looking for bidders" or he'll have them shot? :dead:
Been trying to get on Hunmedia all morning. Still locked out. Pity 'cos I was looking forward to shrieking in mockery at their suffering.
Sometime between Monday and June 1st blue lemmings will be jumping in their thousands off all the bridges along the Clyde.
I wet myself when i read that this morning....Eh maybe from the big banner saying "Yank Go Home"???Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
:thumbsup: :faf:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nando™
I just read the "official" statement from Der Huns on their website about why Bill Miller pulled out from his bid. This is priceless, like something in the old Soviet Union Pravda newspaper, aka blatant bollocks tarted up for the loyal faithful to somehow delude themselves into believing:
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/footba...rticle/2764178
Funny how they don't mention this aspect below....
[SAFETY WARNING: The following image contains multiple incidences of adult delusionals in a mutually agreed stance, also quite a lot of ugly fat people too]
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...otest1_sns.jpg
:faf: :faf: :faf: :faf: :faf:
Och it seems no matter how much things change you can rely on the Scottish media to try and ensure things remain the same, The crass and frankly unbelievable drivel emanating from the so-called popular press in this country would be hard pushed to convince a class load of primary school kids.Considering how out of touch with reality the average Hun is, perhaps we should realise that being spoon fed dross for umpteen years is a significant factor in this state of affairs. To me it is not just this rotten institution in Govan that needs reform, but also the ignorant media outlets who for years have cravenly excused the actions of this club and its supporters that needs to get their house in order.
And now the Rangers players are in the mix (and not happy!!!) as well...... that CVA is looking less and less likely by the minute.... Liquidsor time!
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/footbal...6908-23853179/
I thought they were dyed in the wool huns? Play for the mighty 'gers for nothing? No club in the world like renjurs.Tough **** & Ta Ta.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Alf R
Sorry if already been posted but another great blog from Paul Mcconville
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.co...angers-appear/
I know there is a lot of scepticism, on here and in the media, about the emergence of the "new" bidders.
It wouldn't surprise me that they do exist, TBH. The Miller bid finally put to bed the notion that a CVA was the only option. Now that D & P have shown that they will be open to Miller-type deals, others may be more interested.
One thing is for sure, though. With the cash running out, a prospective purchaser has the admins over a barrel, price-wise.
Miller's not skint, and I'd be surprised if there are many more that would have similar resources to Miller that haven't already made themselves known. Above that, the fact that Miller needed less than a weekend to decide that it was way worse than the administrators had made out, should be ringing alarm bells with any prospective bidders.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I think that we may well see someone else get a chance to look at the books, but I think the outcome will be the same - as soon as they see the true scale of the problems and how financially infeasible it is, they'll bolt as well.
http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...l-rangers/1422
New Alex Thomson blog.
Interesting stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
But still with the CVA? :confused:
Without the prospect of a CVA surely it becomes a liquidation and the bidders are bidding for the assets only. They may wish to use those assets to start up a new club and they may wish to call that club Rangers, but the conceit that Newco=Oldco-tidyed-up-a-bit must be dead. It seems increasingly doubtful that the players contracts can be transferred across, so we're looking at the prospect of a brand new club, with new owners, new directors and new players playing in a stadium that was abandoned by a now-defunct old club. There should be no prospect of that club getting anywhere near the SPL.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
One would think so, but they still seem to be persisting with that notion, given Alex Thomson and the Sun's latest story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
It is bizarre that people keep assuming this to be a strategy, unless they have a truly vast amount of money to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The issue is still that this needs to happen in a week. Can a group do due diligence, come to an agreement with the creditors, settle the football debts and be approved by the SFA / SPL in a week?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Alf R
Surprise,surprise, the players are coming to their senses. There's an empty ring to "Rangers don't do walking away." No Sally, but your players might prefer 'running away'. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by ****pile
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
David Hillier said on the radio this morning three weeks. An Insolvency Practitioner on the telly a few weeks back said five.
I think they probably have cash flow until the end of the month.
Duff & Phelps seem to think anything is possible. Someone must be taking a long hard look at their part in this mess. It started off a mess when they were appointed, it has now become a fiasco.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
Hypothetically speaking, the proposed structure for Miller's (now abortive) acquisition is not uncommon in non football club insolvencies and, I imagine, had it not been for the "football related" ramifications of liquidation of RFC, this would have been the way forward from the outset! :agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by matty_f
That may be the case regarding cashflow and the admins ability to continue trading, but are there football deadlines which require the SPL share to be transferred to Newco before the end of the season? If RFC disappear during the close season, is that the end of their chances of getting Newco into the SPL?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The bit I don't get there is - where have these people been since Valentine's Day? A wise man said ealier on this very thread 'If it seems too good to be true it usually is'. This story falls into that category IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
"Since those savage cuts it is estimated that McCoist’s dressing room is owed in the region of £3million in lost wages. That means the club’s own first team is now the company’s biggest single football creditor"
Errr .. I think that Ticketus and HMRC may have something to say about that statement. :rolleyes:
In the real world...correct...in the fantasy parallel universe that is Scottish football :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
I'm surprised people are surprised that there are other bidders.....We are at the point where a club with book asset value of circa £110million is being hawked for less than the combined annual salaries of 10 of their players.....
With the gap between CVA 'value' and liquidation 'value' having reached the bottom...asset vultures are sure to be looking at the pickings....I have said this several times but the cash flow / business plan of a 'Rangers' playing in Europe and one not is massive and insurmountable...IF UEFA stick to banning them for 3 years (noises being that they will treat what ever the resultant club is as if liquidated...as any CVA would not be real world) then they need either massive 3 year deficit funding.....or to be radically pruned to the kind of budget the rest of SPL (barring Celtic) are used to.....this would mean even if in SPL the big draw of OF could be a sweepstake of how many Celtic can put past them...not the 'spectical' that TV want....
Any buyer with nouse (and a tin helmet) would see that Div 3 and working up would be better as teh cost cutting would be easier to hide down there...can you imagine the Bears in the SPL un able to compete (very funny if Gers didnt make top 6.....no 4 OF games then...cue another change to rules / reconstruction).......
The next big moment will be the players walking / being let go as new owners can't afford to carry their cost :greengrin
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18002865
Supporters chief Andy Kerr has rejected suggestions that fan opposition is to blame for Bill Miller's decision to withdraw his takeover bid for Rangers.
The American trucking tycoon had cited anti-Miller banners as one of the reasons for his decision.
But Supporters' Assembly president Kerr said: "We are talking a few people here and it is disappointing when people are effectively pre-judging the guy.
Who are these few people? In the interests of transparency and accountability they must be publicly identified.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-18002284
Quote:
Administrators at Rangers have resumed their search for a buyer for the club
after the US businessman who was the preferred bidder announced his withdrawal.
One of Bill Miller's advisors - Jon Pritchett - told the BBC's Newsnight
Scotland programme there were three main factors influencing his decision.
One wonders if the so-called new bidders are in fact vultures getting in early.Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
I watched that interview.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonty
The guy (Miller's associate) came across as very knowledgable about fitba,the culture and the practicalities RFC are facing.
The fundamental problem is that Rangers in their current form are economically unviable. That is how they got into this situation in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by ****pile
They see themselves as a top European team but are competing with club who have far greater spending power. SPL TV revenue will not cut it in comparison with the big-five European Leagues or even in comparison to the Dutch League.
They have a large stadium and a large fanbase. But their support is very fickle and and will melt away if Rangers are performing to their expectations.
Celtic do appear to be viable but have a bigger stadium and a bigger fanbase than Rangers. They sailed close to the wind themselves in the 1990s but got the infrastructure in place in the times of plenty and seem to be well run from a financial viewpoint. This may be a legacy of the Fergus McCann era. I don't see a Fergus McCann coming to the rescue of Rangers.
It is telling that the only bid from Scotland do date has been from the Blue Knights. They are there through emotion rather than financial acumen. The bids from outside have probably been lodged in ignorance thinking that a team with a 50,000 capacity stadium with an average attendance of over 45,000 must be a money making machine. As soon as the likes of Miller and Ng get to look closely at the finances they run a mile.
Maybe Duff and Phelps were under the same misapprehension and that has coloured their actions?
Always seems a source of the most realistic view in all this :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by poolman
"There comes a point where there is very little more that can be said, as the absurdity of the situation beats any commentary that can be offered. We are at that point now.
Maybe there is every opportunity for the chosen bidder to finish things by the end of the season. There is every opportunity for me to win gold in the Olympic 100m this year. However, whilst the opportunity is there, the reality is well nigh impossible.
In the same way, how is a bidder going to be accepted, do due diligence and get SPL and SFA approval, all in three days?
I am sure that D&P have a clever plan. They must have because otherwise it would just look as if they were floundering about in the dark, with no idea from one day to the next what was happening"
:thumbsup:
I thought the players had agreed to wage cuts rather than wage deferrals? If they are still earning their pre-administration pay and have, for example, rights to a % of unpaid wages under a CVA then that would seem like more negligence by D&P as they would have only manipulated cash flow rather than taking cost out of the business.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
But surely that we now approach the summer, they have zero income, their outgoings are about to shoot up, will there not be pressure from the courts to pull the plug after this week?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Thats my take...perched in the highest nearest tree ready to swoop when the carcass becomes available.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Also the closer to the end game we are the more the media / fans will accept the slashing cuts required
Their strategy at the beginning was to cut costs to enable them to trade until "the end of the season". I am guessing that, in their minds, they meant the end of May.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
(According to an earlier poster, they are due £1m (?) from Everton for Jelavic at the end of the season which may buy them more time, or may be nabbed by UEFA, or may pay D&P's hotel tab. )
I think they mean football as in their business, such as Dundee Utd or Hearts, football creditors, not loan sharks like Ticketus or Government agencies such as HMRC.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
I think each player did their own negotiations, and there wasn't uniformity in what each agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hibs Class
It was certainly sold in the media, though, as a wage-cut.
Even if it was actually a deferral, I am not sure I agree about the "negligence" charge. The whole point of the exercise was to buy time, and it was successful in that.
One bit i'm less clear on is Ticketus - surely they will either want their cash back...or to goto court for the right to sell the seats as agreed for coming seasons. Its crucial not only to them but all the clubs that regularly use his type of finance from them and others that this kind of contract is clarified by law...otherwise who will fund this arrangement in future if they are regarded as 'ordinary' creditors...and how will clubs survive the 2/3 months prior to ST's being sold without it :confused:
And the Huns can't sell players until the transfer window opens on the 1st of July.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottB
So from end of the month they'll be on maximum outgoings and zero revenue, It’s highly unlikely that there is sufficient cash to fund this, together with the usual expenses of running a club in the close season and Duff & Duffers fees as well...... they're gonna have to either quickly release players from their contracts (making them free agents), start selling stuff or liquidate?
Wonga.com?Quote:
Originally Posted by down-the-slope
This may explain why season ticket renewals appear to come earlier and a earlier. At this rate you will be asked to renew for 2013-14 before the start of the 2012-13 season.
It really is a crazy situation especially where there is relegation in the air.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
And what happens after that CWG, there next game is away so no more income for them from any football games as it is end of the season at the weekend, how will they be able to pay/keep players over the summer if they have no money, every player with a contract will want to leave as soon as the transfer window opens in July, they will be left with a bunch of kids,(don't tell the yams), this has to be THE END for them surley.
I would say, last man out please turn the lights of, but they have probably had it disconnected by there suppliers. :greengrin
There is still the Court case they have against Collyer Bristow.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by silverhibee
I am jesting... if that was actually heard this month, AND they won it, then they would be in clover.
No. When the money runs out, that's it. Done. Enter the Liquidator.
To buy time by adding significantly to the debt pile harldy seems to be in the interest of the exisiting creditors.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
They could and should have made permanent cuts to the salary costs, that would have reduced the loss the club was making without adding to the debt that had already pushed the club into admin.
Maybe not negligence but throughout this process they have seemed much more focussed on maintaining as close to the status quo as possible, I know their argument is that is in the interest of creditors as this would give them the best hope fo seeing their money but the fact is, which was clear from the start, that anything like the status quo was unsustainable and untenable. Hence why they should have taken a hatchet to existing contracts where possible and looked to create a situation where the playing staff that were worth money in the transfer market could be retained long enough for the club to receive market rates for them....as it stands it now looks like the clubs main saleable assets will be walking away for nothing, how does that help the creditors in any way shape or form?
Radio Scotland mentioned on the lunchtime programme that all "bidders" were being made aware that a loss of £2-3m per month would take place over the close season. They would need to budget for that in there plans. So the next 2 moonths running costs look like they are higher than the value of the club at this time.
Bet Rangers wish they hadn't voted to hold back the start of the season unlike last year :devil:
Doncaster states that the SPL needs clarity on the Rangers situation before making any decisions and they have to be reactive and not proactive. Surely this is the tail wagging the dog.
If the SPL would just agree some newco rules then show some leadership then perhaps it would provide some clarity for any bidders in Rangers and this whole sorry mess would reach a conclusion.
Sitting back twiddling their thumbs waiting to see what Rangers do so they can tailor any new rules to ensure they are back in tha SPL at all costs is surely humiliating and demeaning for the SPL.
http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/r...ers-situation/
Shame on you for assuming they'd have an old stadium to play in :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Still can't understand why they didn't cut costs such as Marketing Dept, ticketing dept, groundstaff, fringe players etc. Even considering putting Murray Park up for sale to see if there were any bidders. (I know it wouldn't have made them solvent but it may make them a lot more attractive rather than the extra burden on the club.) Most other companies in admin lay off staff, reduce assets, and I still can't see logic in keeping Rangers as big as they were.Quote:
Originally Posted by SiMar
The kindest thing that you could say about Duff & Duffer is that they might have just taken a gamble, big time.
It was always a losers bet though.
What confuses me though is why Miller spent 5 days, with the attendant costs, in doing his due diligence. He could have save time and money by coming to hibs.net.
That's a pretty wild guesstimate from a company that should, by now, know exactly how much is going in and out of Rangers on a daily/weekly basis. To be unable to clarify exact losses over a 2 month period to within 50% of the actual loss is nothing short of criminal.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
Are they actually doing any work at Ibrox or just "Twittering" all day?
Yep, even if they could walk away from 100% of the current debt and start again in the SPL, even with the transfer embargo revoked and no other sanctions (apart from no European football for three years, which UEFA will enforce) it wouldn't be viable. So there would have to be a bidder that was prepared to subsidise the business to the tune of at least £10m per annum (per Bill Miller's estimate) for at least three seasons. And even if such a bidder came forward, it wouldn't be allowed due to the FIFA Financial Fair Play rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
To be fair, they don't know which players will be there in the close season.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Does anyone really think Everton will just stump up the £1m after the last game of the season.
There finances aren't much better than Rangers, but then they will probably have more integrity.
Q) what happens if they go for a CVA and offer creditors 1p/£1, do debtors get to offer the same ?
Q) if they go into liquidation do Everton still have to stump up £1m ?
Heartwarming, morally upifting post. :agree: :flag:Quote:
Originally Posted by ehf
No and Yes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gingertosser
They should do though, they've the power to decide and/or discuss with the players. Poor management on their behalf if they are letting the players dictate surely?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The point I'm making, though, is that (as part of the re-negotiated contracts) some players may walk if there are decent offers... and, at this point, the admins don't know whether they will.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
They also don't know the costs of getting the stadium ready for the 3rd division next seasonQuote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
Is it just me that wants them to stumble on for a bit longer and finally go bust on the 12th of July?
How ironic that would be :greengrin
According to the BBC news, McCoist has had discussions with two of the new bidders, who will remain annonymous. Come on now, Sally, as a man who demands transparency, let your supporters know who they are. :cb
Ah got you, I think .. the players that negotiated deals will have their contracts jump back up again and may continue to take wages rather than leave (for free?)? And D&P may decide to let them do this if they view them as a "sellable" asset?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
If the reports are true I think I agree with Hibs Class. The administrators have been running the club at an accounting loss but have disguised the fact by deferring cash outgoings and increasing creditors, thereby reducing the value of existing creditors claims. In fact they've barely reduced expenses (as opposed to cash outflow) at all. To my mind none of that complies with their duties as administrators.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The whole story of the re-negotiated contracts is not clear. It seems that each player negotiated their own deal. For example, some may be entitled to walk if there is a better offer elsewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
But the whole point of the exercise was to buy time, to enable them to sell off RFC as an attractive going concern. Had they been able to do that, at a decent price within a decent time-frame, I don't know that the value to creditors would have been reduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
In hindsight, of course, the whole approach seems to have failed. I am in two minds as to whether that is D&P'S fault (it would have been nice to be a fly on the wall:greengrin), or whether they were always farting against thunder.
D+P are quoted as saying on the 3rd of May that a CVA was 'no longer possible'.
To still be talking about a possible CVA at this stage is ridiculous.
If they've been happily accumulating more creditors that should be enough to get them kicked off the case. Once directors of a company are aware (or should have been) that they are trading insolvently, then any new debts are their personal liability. Not exactly sure if this is the case for administrators, and the situation wouldn't be exactly analogous, but they shouldn't be allowed to put themselves in such a position.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Can we sign Steven Whittaker and play him in the final? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
It was me that said that jelavic money is due, but is there not a point where they need to stop money from debtors to enable them to keep trading and start thinking about using that money to pay creditors. If I was a creditor I would be starting to get worried that the pot is getting smaller and smaller.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
If I was a debtor I think I'd be sitting tight on my wad.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs13681
I take my hat off to you sir, this must be the best post of the day!!! :) It isn't just you that wants that outcome.... :D
Quote:
Originally Posted by keekaboo
Wee demand to know who these bidders are.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
Hot of the press. http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/200...BC_600x365.jpg :cb :greengrin
Coffee spat all over keyboard with that one.:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by silverhibee
They would either have had to promise the players that the arrears would be payable in full once the club had emerged from administration or add the arrears to the list of administration creditors. The first would reduce the amount an investor would be willing to pay and the second would dilute the claim of the other creditors. Either way the existing creditors lose out and the end result is that the club is still not a going concern - it's still making the losses that brought administration about in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Administrators can get away with a lot because the whole process is dependent on professional judgement, but simply deferring payment rather than reducing costs does nothing to improve the club's prospects and really is not far removed from what wee Craig did with the HMRC payments. Having said all that, I think this story originated in the Record and should be treated with the usual caution that applies to that particular paper.
Rumoursville from one of me weegie mates. the land that Murray Park sits on is on the market @ approx £10 mill, for housing.... since originally built a number of new housing developments have gone up around it negating any "remaining issues" re planning permission. Two builders already interested, Bett Homes and Stewart Milne.
Tried googling etc but can't find anything
Aunt Sally would whore himself to anyone at the moment as long as they said they were buying Rangers. Stuff due diligence. Remember him enthusing about his hour long call with Bill Miller which was after midnight thus proving his commitment to doing a deal with Rangers:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Jim44
The only transparent thing in this whole proces is the arrogance of him and those of his ilk. A wee bit of humility required now methinks.
If that's true, it kinda puts Wild Bill's £11.4m in perspective. :cbQuote:
Originally Posted by Sir Alf R
There is some talk on this thread a long time ago that Murray Park is unsuitable for housing due to its positioning on a flood plain. However, West of Scotland Rugby's ground - not a million miles from MP - is far more likely to get a planning consent. Therefore, some sort of deal for the WoS to move to MP and their place getting built on is a bit more unlikely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Alf R
Can't be bothered reading through the last few pages,
can someone please clarify for me what state of affairs rangers are most likely to end up in?
I know that without a UEFA license a newco couldn't play in the SPL for 3 years, but do the SPL have the power to change that? and is it likely that they will?
It's starting to look like a fire sale is getting more and more likely
m.stv.tv/news/scotland/98884-rangers-administrators-could-sell-off-clubs-assets-to-keep-it-alive/
I reckon some flats, with retail and office space and maybe a gymnasium for the site at Edmiston Drive. My missus says there will be a queue a mile long for people offering to drive the bulldozer through the place before the new buildings get put up :D
There's quotes in the press that any Newco OR Oldco re-emerging via CVA will be treated as a "new member" by UEFA etc and the 3 year rule will stand, they've also said that the rule won't be changed "just because it's Rangers" and I think SPL/SFA can do hee haw about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by fergy
It might be "more likely" to get planning consent but it's a lot less desirable. At the moment Murray Park is the "right side" of the railway track (so to speak), at least 5 times the size, and available at a knock down price. The housing development that has been built right opposite MP (since MP opened) has houses that are going for almost £500k. WoS is sandwiched between retail and industrial land, whereas MP skirts nicely round woodland and a golf course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Smidge
If a builder could snap it up at a discounted price (assuming he's willing to take a hun backlash) he'd be daft not to at least consider it.
Now, did I, or did I not say that the bids by the interested parties seemed low considering the real estate on offer with the club?
I believe I got shot down because 'those bits of land are only useful for football clubs'. It seems not to be the case.
I'm not one for telling you 'I told you so' but..... :na na:
:greengrin
It would hinge on planning permission though .. and there's guaranteed to be Rangers supporters on the applications board. :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by HibeeMG
The City Council would never give planning permission.Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
It would have to be won on appeal. That seems unlikely if it is on a flood plain.
More dribbling from Duff & Duffer:
m.skysports.com/article/football//7742162
David Whitehouse (and co.) are either closet huns or are in fear for their lives. It reminds me of when I was a bairn and you broke something like a cup or plate and kept putting off telling your ma what you'd done.
Every local authority is in the process of preparing their Local Plan which identifies land use zones. Depends what MP is zoned for. Also, flooding issues can be overcome with mitigation measures. In other words not insurmountable.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
Am I wrong in saying that the Ticketus deal will still stand unless there is a NewCo?Quote:
Originally Posted by David Whitehouse - Duffus & Helpus
If I'm not wrong then any season ticket renewals will go straight to Ticketus as it seems more and more unlikely that a NewCo will happen. Therefore, why should a prospective buyer worry about fans renewing? He'll hardly see a penny of that money going to the club.