Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[grunt]

Interesting points - specially the one about season ticket holders potentially getting preferential treatment.

[KeithTheHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not even Vlad has ever given us this day by day, almost hour by hour, amusement. David Murray should hand his knighthood over to CW - for services to comedy.

I reckon if the grunts ever went into administration you would uncover a lot more that what we are seeing at Ibrox.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Very interesting post/blog.
In all the info flying around i hadnt picked up the point noted above that (presumably) if Rangers still in administartion they can't play in Europe..is this right or have i misinterpreted?

That is right they need to have had audited accounts signed off by March 31st otherwise they wont be able to play in Europe next season.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That is right they need to have had audited accounts signed off by March 31st otherwise they wont be able to play in Europe next season.

I suspect that the accounts will be seen as a priority.... with the potential for extra income that their lodging has..

I can only guess at what the auditors were hesitating over, but much of the material that has been uncovered over the past week must be helpful to them.

[CropleyWasGod]

Interesting point here.....

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/84...a4/compdetails

The Rangers Football Club of Glasgow Limited was formed on 20 February 2012.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interesting point here.....

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/84...a4/compdetails

The Rangers Football Club of Glasgow Limited was formed on 20 February 2012.

Wonder who stays at that address in Kirkcaldy.

Looks a complete wind up IMO.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This is the correct link. Wonder who stays at that ddress in Kirkcaldy.

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/84...a4/compdetails

My first thought was that it would be a solicitors' office, but it looks as if it's residential.

Some enterprising young buck trying to make a buck by selling the name?

[Part/Time Supporter]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Interesting point here.....

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/84...a4/compdetails

The Rangers Football Club of Glasgow Limited was formed on 20 February 2012.

registered office is what looks awfy like a council house in the middle of Kirkcaldy

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...ed=0CCAQ8gEwAA

probably some laugh-a-minute Celtc fan.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

registered office is what looks awfy like a council house in the middle of Kirkcaldy

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...ed=0CCAQ8gEwAA

probably some laugh-a-minute Celtc fan.

No doubt, hope he hasnt put his own address as he could be getting some interesting visitors I would have thought. If he has put someone else's then you have got to feel sorry for them.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My first thought was that it would be a solicitors' office, but it looks as if it's residential.

Some enterprising young buck trying to make a buck by selling the name?

That or a wind up.

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I suspect that the accounts will be seen as a priority.... with the potential for extra income that their lodging has..

I can only guess at what the auditors were hesitating over, but much of the material that has been uncovered over the past week must be helpful to them.

I don't know if it was the only reason, but Whyte's argument that they couldn't sign off while the big tax case was pending was entirely justified. The audit opinion would have had to be so heavily qualified it was better to wait until things were clearer.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't know if it was the only reason, but Whyte's argument that they couldn't sign off while the big tax case was pending was entirely justified. The audit opinion would have had to be so heavily qualified it was better to wait until things were clearer.

You're being an auditor again, Cav

I can see that, and it would make sense. But I wonder now whether any of the information that has come out in the past week (eg the Ticketus stuff) was available to the auditors.

[EuanH78]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Wonder who stays at that address in Kirkcaldy.

Looks a complete wind up IMO.

That's in T-Hall (Templehall) Kirkcaldy, not know for high flying solicitor types. Council scheme mostly.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's in T-Hall (Templehall) Kirkcaldy, not know for high flying solicitor types. Council scheme mostly.

Craig's coke dealer?

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You're being an auditor again, Cav

I can see that, and it would make sense. But I wonder now whether any of the information that has come out in the past week (eg the Ticketus stuff) was available to the auditors.

I know - I just can't let go.

Given what we were discussing on the PM board I do wonder how the auditors would have dealt with it. I suspect that they were not unhappy that it was all delayed because of the BTC. Still looking forward to the Yams' audit report as well - it's like a drug.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I know - I just can't let go.

Given what we were discussing on the PM board I do wonder how the auditors would have dealt with it. I suspect that they were not unhappy that it was all delayed because of the BTC. Still looking forward to the Yams' audit report as well - it's like a drug.

Maybe they just didn't know?

At that point.... year end, June... audit late summer... they would have known about the borrowing being paid off.

Would they have known about the Ticketus money being due in? If they did know, maybe they were looking for the debit .... or maybe Craigy boy just wouldn't tell them where the money had gone.

I agree that it was easier for them to delay as long as possible.... as long as they stuck in an interim bill.

[Spike Mandela]

Nearly 2 weeks into administration and everything just seems to be ticking along as normal at Ibrox. Does that not strike everyone as rather unusual?

[Caversham Green]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe they just didn't know?

At that point.... year end, June... audit late summer... they would have known about the borrowing being paid off.

Would they have known about the Ticketus money being due in? If they did know, maybe they were looking for the debit .... or maybe Craigy boy just wouldn't tell them where the money had gone.

I agree that it was easier for them to delay as long as possible.... as long as they stuck in an interim bill.

The deal was done in May was it not? If so the auditors would certainly have known about it unless Mr W deliberately concealed it. And yes, they would have had problems with the debit, not least because a holding company debtor would have represented the company lending money to buy its own shares which I reckon is illegal.

Interim bill? goes without saying.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nearly 2 weeks into administration and everything just seems to be ticking along as normal at Ibrox. Does that not strike everyone as rather unusual?

Hmm, don't know I agree that it's "as normal".

From that blog you quoted, the guy seems to suggest things aren't going as quickly as, for example, Portsmouth. The two situations are probably (and I use that word because I am not that clued-up about Portsmouth, and of course we only have some of the RFC story) very different.

I think things have moved quite quickly. They got a big pay day last week (albeit it seems the polis haven't been paid), have found £24m, established the true extent of the HMRC debt, and have passed details along to the police.

I can understand the admins getting those things sorted first, before setting about the redundancies. Only by getting the proper financial picture can they make the appropriate cuts.

You wanting the players sacked, Spike?? You and everybody else

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The deal was done in May was it not? If so the auditors would certainly have known about it unless Mr W deliberately concealed it. And yes, they would have had problems with the debit, not least because a holding company debtor would have represented the company lending money to buy its own shares which I reckon is illegal.

Interim bill? goes without saying.

Oh, you're so cynical.....

[TornadoHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You're being an auditor again, Cav

I can see that, and it would make sense. But I wonder now whether any of the information that has come out in the past week (eg the Ticketus stuff) was available to the auditors.

In terms of current Accounting Standards (known as FRS's) and, particularly, RRS21"Events After the Balance Sheet Date", auditors have a responsibility to look at relevant information about:

1. Material matters that either affect the conditions prevailing at the balance sheet date regarding the company ("adjusting events" as the balance sheet amounts should, where applicable, be adjusted to reflect the effect of those conditions); and

2. Material matters that are indicative of conditions that arose after the balance sheet date for which the entity does not adjust the amounts recognised in its financial statements ("non adjusting events" in so far as the relevant balance sheet amounts are concerned.

If non-adjusting events after the balance sheet date are material and non-disclosure could influence the economic decisions of users the entity should disclose the nature of the event and an estimate of its financial effect, or a statement that such an estimate cannot be made.

I imagine that the sale of the RFC plc to RFC Group, the repayment of the LBG Loan by RFCG, the retention of the Ticketus cash from the sale of future ST's of RFC in the aggregate and each on its own may have been a "material matter" that was caught by the previous paragraph (in bold) and required at least disclosure! This could have been an area of "disagreement" between CW and the auditors resulting in the accounts being delayed.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

In terms of current Accounting Standards (known as FRS's) and, particularly, RRS21"Events After the Balance Sheet Date", auditors have a responsibility to look at relevant information about:

1. Material matters that either affect the conditions prevailing at the balance sheet date regarding the company ("adjusting events" as the balance sheet amounts should, where applicable, be adjusted to reflect the effect of those conditions); and

2. Material matters that are indicative of conditions that arose after the balance sheet date for which the entity does not adjust the amounts recognised in its financial statements ("non adjusting events" in so far as the relevant balance sheet amounts are concerned.

]If non-adjusting events after the balance sheet date are material and non-disclosure could influence the economic decisions of users the entity should disclose the nature of the event and an estimate of its financial effect, or a statement that such an estimate cannot be made.

I imagine that the sale of the RFC plc to RFC Group, the repayment of the LBG Loan by RFCG, the retention of the Ticketus cash from the sale of future ST's of RFC in the aggregate and each on its own may have been a "material matter" that was caught by the previous paragraph (in bold) and required at least disclosure! This could have been an area of "disagreement" between CW and the auditors resulting in the accounts being delayed.

The events in bold happened within the accounting year.

[TornadoHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Maybe they just didn't know?

At that point.... year end, June... audit late summer... they would have known about the borrowing being paid off.

Would they have known about the Ticketus money being due in? If they did know, maybe they were looking for the debit .... or maybe Craigy boy just wouldn't tell them where the money had gone.

I agree that it was easier for them to delay as long as possible.... as long as they stuck in an interim bill.

Excellent!

[hibs0666]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nearly 2 weeks into administration and everything just seems to be ticking along as normal at Ibrox. Does that not strike everyone as rather unusual?

I'm amazed that you think the last two weeks at Ibrox is normal.

[Part/Time Supporter]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nearly 2 weeks into administration and everything just seems to be ticking along as normal at Ibrox. Does that not strike everyone as rather unusual?

If by unusual, you mean that the administrator has made minimal effort to cut costs (ie sacking players) in a loss-making business, then yes, it is unusual.

[Sergio sledge]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

registered office is what looks awfy like a council house in the middle of Kirkcaldy

http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?hl=en&...ed=0CCAQ8gEwAA

probably some laugh-a-minute Celtc fan.

I don't think a Celtc fan would have gates like these:

Rangers.jpg

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think a Celtc fan would have gates like these:

Rangers.jpg

Brilliant!

Well, we know where his benefit money went this week.

[TornadoHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The events in bold happened within the accounting year.

Well in that case the auditors should have been fully aware (i.e. asked for and received full details) of all of the details of the various transactions and that would probably be the reason why the accounts are delayed as there are possible audit concerns regarding these transactions, depending upon the actual circumstances and facts, which should be properly explained to the auditors satisfaction by the directors and be compliant with Company Law and GAAP. Otherwise the auditors would "qualify" the audit report which is something to be avoided by any company wherever possible.

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Well in that case the auditors should have been fully aware (i.e. asked for and received full details) of all of the details of the various transactions and that would probably be the reason why the accounts are delayed as there are possible audit concerns regarding these transactions, depending upon the actual circumstances and facts, which should be properly explained to the auditors satisfaction by the directors and be compliant with Company Law and GAAP. Otherwise the auditors would "qualify" the audit report which is something to be avoided by any company wherever possible.

It wasn't those (in-year) transactions that I was talking about earlier. It was the Ticketus one... whether they were aware of it and, if so, what their view on it was.

[TornadoHibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It wasn't those (in-year) transactions that I was talking about earlier. It was the Ticketus one... whether they were aware of it and, if so, what their view on it was.

Whether it was within the financial year or not, UK financial reporting and auditing standards and Company Law requires that material matters such as these are properly recorded and disclosed to all users of financial statements. Although on the face of it the Ticketus might be considered to be a normal trading transaction in that it deals with the sale of (future periods) ST sales, the "inter-company" "loans" aspect for want of a better description make it something that should be highlighted in the accounts if failure to do so might prejudice a proper understanding of the Company's financial position as a result!