Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[johnrebus]

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

Mother of five ,or no.

Hmmm, probably a velcro job then?

Ah'll get ma coat.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

RFC chasing Whyte for monies owed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17232197

Another wee twist.

I can understand them going after the balance of the Ticketus cash, but the extra £5m is news to me.

I do remember CW making promises, when he first came in, about £xmillion for working capital, and £xmillion for players, and it may be something to do with that.

[nonshinyfinish]

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

In a liquidation event all points won are removed. In a situation where second contracts the result changes to a nil-3 loss to the offender.

Not sure what difference this makes, but if Rangers cheated Well wouldn't lose the points they won, we'd just gain them too.

If the results all became 3-0 defeats, we'd still be above Well - we'd gain more extra points than them, rather than losing less in the event of results being entirely annulled.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

If the results all became 3-0 defeats, we'd still be above Well - we'd gain more extra points than them, rather than losing less in the event of results being entirely annulled.

Who missed the Huns' penalty?

[Andy74]

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

Mother of five ,or no.

Dear god no, nothing remotely attractive about Sally Magnuson.

[nonshinyfinish]

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

Who missed the Huns' penalty?

Excellent.

[J-C]

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

Another wee twist.

I can understand them going after the balance of the Ticketus cash, but the extra £5m is news to me.

I do remember CW making promises, when he first came in, about £xmillion for working capital, and £xmillion for players, and it may be something to do with that.

Will this not be the Jelevic money

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Will this not be the Jelevic money

Possibly, actually. Traynor asked about that a couple of weeks ago.

I doubt that it was all paid at once, though.

And then there's the Arsenal shares money.

[Andy74]

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

Will this not be the Jelevic money

Seems to be more of a promise that was made on the inital takeover deal.

[J-C]

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

Possibly, actually. Traynor asked about that a couple of weeks ago.

I doubt that it was all paid at once, though.

And then there's the Arsenal shares money.

This is what this guy does, he comes in, strips the company bare and puts them into admin, quick year, quick £5-6m then onto his next one.

Murray brought him in to do exactly this, clear the debt and make Rangers better for someone to buy and put money in, no one should be too surprised.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

This is what this guy does, he comes in, strips the company bare and puts them into admin, quick year, quick £5-6m then onto his next one.

Murray brought him in to do exactly this, clear the debt and make Rangers better for someone to buy and put money in, no one should be too surprised.

Who is going to buy a company with £15m of Revenue debt, and a £24m hole in their income over the next 4 years?

Thus far, I haven't seen CW make anything out of this.

[J-C]

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

Seems to be more of a promise that was made on the inital takeover deal.

But a promise doesn't mean there's money there, I could promise to buy everyone on this site a pint at the next home game, doesn't mean I'm going to do it though.

[Hibernia&Alba]

These administrators were appointed by Whyte before a deadline which have resulted in HMRC appointing their own. I can think this is significant, if Whyte was keen to make it happen. Are they in his pocket? Whose interests are they serving?

[CropleyWasGod]

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

But a promise doesn't mean there's money there, I could promise to buy everyone on this site a pint at the next home game, doesn't mean I'm going to do it though.

Think he must have signed up to something, and is now getting sued for not doing it.

If you didny buy everyone a pint, you'd get a doing an all

[J-C]

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

Who is going to buy a company with £15m of Revenue debt, and a £24m hole in their income over the next 4 years?

Thus far, I haven't seen CW make anything out of this.

In admin that wouldn't happen, offer creditors 10-15p in the pound, HMRC would be happy taking £5m to cover tax( better than nowt ) that'd be the Jelevic money, Ticketus would get their money evey year and new investors start off with no debt and whatever they invest to spend. Say 5 investors at £5m each, start new Rangers off with £25 revenue and no debt.

[J-C]

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

Think he must have signed up to something, and is now getting sued for not doing it.

If you didny buy everyone a pint, you'd get a doing an all

Pretty sure he only promised to pay off the bank when he took over, Ticketus money was used for that.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

In admin that wouldn't happen, offer creditors 10-15p in the pound, HMRC would be happy taking £5m to cover tax( better than nowt ) that'd be the Jelevic money, Ticketus would get their money evey year and new investors start off with no debt and whatever they invest to spend. Say 5 investors at £5m each, start new Rangers off with £25 revenue and no debt.

Three holes in that argument:-

1. HMRC won't accept that offer. They don't agree to such arrangements. As they are largest creditor thus far, an arrangement like that won't get passed.

2. RFC have had £24m of season ticket sales for the next 4 years. That means that the first 25,000 ST fans at very home game, for the next 4 seasons, have effectively already paid; Ticketus get that cash. In your scenario, the new company won't see that cash. Even in a full house, only half have paid.

3. it ignores the Big Tax Case

[easty]

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

HMRC would be happy taking £5m to cover tax( better than nowt ) .

Would they? Sets a precedent doesn't it?

[Spike Mandela]

Ha there been a list of creditors published and how much Rangers owe to each? Very little being mentioned about creditors by administrators and media.

[J-C]

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

Two holes in that argument:-

1. HMRC won't accept that offer. They don't agree to such arrangements. As they are largest creditor thus far, an arrangement like that won't get passed.

2. RFC have had £24m of season ticket sales for the next 4 year. That means that the first 25,000 fans at very home game, for the next 4 seasons, have already paid. In your scenario, the new company won't see that cash. Even in a full house, only half have paid.

HMRC would have to accept as there's no more money for them, better than nowt, it's happened to other companies. At the mo Rangers only owe £9m from last year, the £24m-45m is only if they win their legal case in the courts.

Don't know how many season tickets Rangers sell but they get an average of 53,000ish, if 30,000 are already sold for the next 4 years then Rangers have only got the other 23,000 game tickets to play with, hence why people are saying it'll take around 4-5 years for Rangers to get back to normal.
That's why the £25m cash injection from new owners is important.

[stokesmessiah]

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

Would they? Sets a precedent doesn't it?

Nae chance they will. They already said they would appeal, appeal and appeal some if the decision went against them, they want that money.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Ha there been a list of creditors published and how much Rangers owe to each? Very little being mentioned about creditors by administrators and media.

They will do, in due course. It's a requirement of their appointment.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

HMRC would have to accept as there's no more money for them, better than nowt, it's happened to other companies. At the mo Rangers only owe £9m from last year, the £24m-45m is only if they win their legal case in the courts.

Don't know how many season tickets Rangers sell but they get an average of 53,000ish, if 30,000 are already sold for the next 4 years then Rangers have only got the other 23,000 game tickets to play with, hence why people are saying it'll take around 4-5 years for Rangers to get back to normal.
That's why the £25m cash injection from new owners is important.

No they won't. It's Revenue policy not to agree to CVA's.

RFC owe £15m for the last year, since CW took over, not £9m.

And the BTC is not for £24-25m. It's £49m.

Oh, and Ibrox's capacity is only 51k. Their average is a lot less than that . Sorry!!

[jgl07]

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

Three holes in that argument:-

1. HMRC won't accept that offer. They don't agree to such arrangements. As they are largest creditor thus far, an arrangement like that won't get passed.

2. RFC have had £24m of season ticket sales for the next 4 years. That means that the first 25,000 ST fans at very home game, for the next 4 seasons, have effectively already paid; Ticketus get that cash. In your scenario, the new company won't see that cash. Even in a full house, only half have paid.

3. it ignores the Big Tax Case

HMRC want a big scalp. They want to bring down a big football club "pour encourager les autres". The bigger the better. There are few bigger, in this context, than Rangers.

They have been stiffed too many times by the likes of Leeds getting away with 1 pence in the pound on outstanding tax bills and by Portsmouth last time around. Even if liquidation yields less than a CVA they will go for it.

They will go for the jugular and then maybe clubs will realize that taxes have to be paid.

Rangers are likely to lose the big tax case (£49 million) and the wee tax case (£4.3 million) and compound this by paying nothing for the best part of a year.

The recent situation is not tax evasion or avoidance, it is theft. They deducted PAYE taxes and National Insurance from employees' wages and charged VAT on tickets and trousered the lot.

[magpie1892]

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

Would they? Sets a precedent doesn't it?

In this financial climate, and with the past, negative publicity surrounding 'sweetner' tax deals for big companies... not a chance in hell.

[magpie1892]

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

Don't know how many season tickets Rangers sell but they get an average of 53,000ish,

Unlikely, given Ipox holds 51,000. Average is nearer 44,000 this season and you're assuming they would all turn up to watch a decimated team (if RFC survive, which seems increasingly unlikely), not in Europe, and knowing that their ST money is already spent...

[blindsummit]

If Rangers get away with some sort of deal that leaves them able to continue on in whatever form, as before, with the taxman stiffed and their cheating overlooked, then the charade that is the Scottish game is dead and buried. The corruption and bias will be laid bare, so what's the point for those clubs who've followed the rules. In my opinion this is the one and only chance, the last stand, to create any semblence of a fair game in Scotland. We miss this chance then, what's the point, other than a vestigal emotional attacheent for non-OF club supporters to their clubs. Without even the pretence of a chance at a level playing field, the game is dead. Sorry to be so gloomy, but I have no faith in the Scottish establishment to do what's right.

By rights by now Rankgers should have been stripped bare, relegated or thrown out of the league, and several people would be perp walked. But it seems like business as usual.

That cheered me up no end <l>

never mind, tomorrow's Saturday and we can hammer the Saints, whilst applauding them for being like us, an honest well run club. No stench of cheating at ER tomorrow at least.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Unlikely, given Ipox holds 51,000. Average is nearer 44,000 this season and you're assuming they would all turn up to watch a decimated team (if RFC survive, which seems increasingly unlikely), not in Europe, and knowing that their ST money is already spent...

...which is my point about "why would anyone want to buy them the way things are?".

It's a slippery slope. Less cash--->fewer class players-----> less glory-----> less punters------> less cash.

[magpie1892]

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

...which is my point about "why would anyone want to buy them the way things are?".

It's a slippery slope. Less cash--->fewer class players-----> less glory-----> less punters------> less cash.

These 'Blue Knight' characters, and others like them, may well have hun wellbeing at heart but there's not a chance you'd take a punt on the club at the moment unless you could afford to write off the thick end of £100m for zero return.

My man on the ground says liquidation is the likely outcome. Rangers Football Club will cease to exist.

[matty_f]

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

In this financial climate, and with the past, negative publicity surrounding 'sweetner' tax deals for big companies... not a chance in hell.

HMRC got hammered for the deal that they did with Vodafone, amongst others - with questions over the legality of the deal raised in Parliament, IIRC.

No way that they'll take a fraction of what's owed, they're going after the lot - they kind of have to otherwise where's the incentive for any company to pay their taxes? Everyone would just hold off until the HMRC got round to dealing with them, then plead poverty.

The more I read about what Rangers have been doing, the more I want to see them disappear.