Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[Caversham Green]

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

Andy, i have said this a few times, IMO i think it is a deliberate and calculated ploy.


Charles Green wants the CVA to fail as much as you or i do.

If i were a creditor and was reading some of the recent press i would be fuming, i even noticed on the BBC gossip today that they have a list of potential targets 5 of which are currently playing at the Euro's.

I think he's trying to convince the hard of thinking huns that RFC will be in the SPL next season so they'll buy season tickets. RFC holding thousands of fans ST money would arguably put pressure on the SFA not to suspend them if the CVA is accepted and on the SPL to admit a newco if it fails.

It does alienate a lot of people, but I think they're really at the nothing to lose stage now.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Like a lot of people on here i'm not to hot on the legalities of der huns financial jiggery-pokery and i'm thankful of the imput fron those who do have a better understanding.
From what i gather, no matter what happens it looks like the cheats are going to avoid paying up to or in excess of 100 million quid which is disgusting.
Part ofme thinks they should be allowed to continue to operate only on the proviso that this debt is serviced even if it takes 20 years to recoup their dues. This would see them having to operate on a playing budget similar to that of the poorest clubs in the league.
The other point that i'd love soneone to shed light on is the case of the 10 mill plus of recent tax (paye) that they deliberately withheld in the last year or so.
I was led to believe that it was a criminal act to deliberately not pay ongoing costs if there is evidence that the intention was to go into administration/liquidation/cva all along.
Could Whyte be charged and potentially jailed for this specific crime?

Defrauding HMRC is indeed criminal. It would be difficult, though, to prove. On the face of things, RFC were in financial difficulties; the first people to suffer in those circumstances are the Revenue. They would plead lack of money rather than anything more sinister, and that's the way it looks to me as well.

[Part/Time Supporter]

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

Defrauding HMRC is indeed criminal. It would be difficult, though, to prove. On the face of things, RFC were in financial difficulties; the first people to suffer in those circumstances are the Revenue. They would plead lack of money rather than anything more sinister, and that's the way it looks to me as well.

The SFA investigation uncovered emails from Whyte saying that he was refusing to pay taxes to "gain leverage" in negotiations with HMRC over the big tax case.

[Caversham Green]

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

Like a lot of people on here i'm not to hot on the legalities of der huns financial jiggery-pokery and i'm thankful of the imput fron those who do have a better understanding.
From what i gather, no matter what happens it looks like the cheats are going to avoid paying up to or in excess of 100 million quid which is disgusting.
Part ofme thinks they should be allowed to continue to operate only on the proviso that this debt is serviced even if it takes 20 years to recoup their dues. This would see them having to operate on a playing budget similar to that of the poorest clubs in the league.
The other point that i'd love soneone to shed light on is the case of the 10 mill plus of recent tax (paye) that they deliberately withheld in the last year or so.
I was led to believe that it was a criminal act to deliberately not pay ongoing costs if there is evidence that the intention was to go into administration/liquidation/cva all along.
Could Whyte be charged and potentially jailed for this specific crime?

You're thinking of the trading while insolvent rules. They're not actually criminal unless there's an element of fraud involved (it could be argued that the action itself is fraudulent, but that's not how the law sees it). The rules are that if directors incur debt when they are (or should be) aware that the company will not be able to pay it they can become personally liable for that debt. In Whyte's case HMRC and other creditors could in theory pursue him and the other directors for the amounts they've lost in the administration/liquidation process if they can prove that RFC was insolvent at the time the debts were incurred. There's unlikely to be a criminal case though.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

The SFA investigation uncovered emails from Whyte saying that he was refusing to pay taxes to "gain leverage" in negotiations with HMRC over the big tax case.

Not sure that that is "fraud", though. It's dodgy behaviour that would not please HMRC, for sure, whilst others would argue it's commercial sense in terms of a negotiating tool. Fraud, though? Don't think so...

[jgl07]

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

Not sure that that is "fraud", though. It's dodgy behaviour that would not please HMRC, for sure, whilst others would argue it's commercial sense in terms of a negotiating tool. Fraud, though? Don't think so...

Are you saying that deliberate non payment of VAT and NI contributions is not fraud?

It is not a "can't pay" but a "won't pay" situation.

[Seveno]

HMRC are probably going to get two shots at killing them off.

If they vote against the CVA this week then the likelihood is that liquidation follows. If the CVA goes through, then the second chance will come along with the BTC

Once the First Tier Tribunal comes to a decision on the BTC, and it will surely find in favour of HMRC, they have the next chance to kill them off. If this eventuality happens, then any money put in my Green will be lost.

Oh, I do envy Hector.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Are you saying that deliberate non payment of VAT and NI contributions is not fraud?

It is not a "can't pay" but a "won't pay" situation.

I am saying that it would be difficult to prove that RFC set out with the intention of not paying HMRC. The document that was alluded to (which I haven't seen) might help in that, but it would have to be a strong case to prove fraud.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

HMRC are probably going to get two shots at killing them off.

If they vote against the CVA this week then the likelihood is that liquidation follows. If the CVA goes through, then the second chance will come along with the BTC

Once the First Tier Tribunal comes to a decision on the BTC, and it will surely find in favour of HMRC, they have the next chance to kill them off. If this eventuality happens, then any money put in my Green will be lost.

Oh, I do envy Hector.

The BTC is part of the CVA.

[Seveno]

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

The BTC is part of the CVA.

Sure about that ? I thought that D&P had only put forward a sum of £55m or thereabouts as total debt.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Sure about that ? I thought that D&P had only put forward a sum of £55m or thereabouts as total debt.

As I recall, it was a TBC, with no amunt shown.

It has to be part of the CVA, though, as HMRC have made an assessment on RFC.

[Seveno]

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

As I recall, it was a TBC, with no amunt shown.

It has to be part of the CVA, though, as HMRC have made an assessment on RFC.

HMRC still get two shots though, kill them now or wait till the result of the BTC. So stop being so f**ing pedantic.

[jgl07]

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

HMRC still get two shots though, kill them now or wait till the result of the BTC. So stop being so f**ing pedantic.

HMRC get one chance to kill off Rangers. By voting no to the CVA on Thursday.

If they do not veto the CVA the only impact that the resolution of the BTC will have is to change the amount in the pound received.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

HMRC still get two shots though, kill them now or wait till the result of the BTC. So stop being so f**ing pedantic.

I'm missing your point. It's Monday...

If HMRC accept the CVA, the BTC becomes irrelevant. RFC live on.

If they don't accept it, then it's toast-time... maybe.

What have I missed?

[Seveno]

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

I'm missing your point. It's Monday...

If HMRC accept the CVA, the BTC becomes irrelevant. RFC live on.

If they don't accept it, then it's toast-time... maybe.

What have I missed?

Okay, I'm probably wrongly assuming that they can vote to accept 'as is' i.e. leaving the BTC aside until a decision has been announced by the FTT. If the BTC goes in their favour then the CVA is worth diddly squat.

This could happen during the cooling off period, when they could legitimately chamge their mind.

[JeMeSouviens]

I think the CVA has no chance. Far more interesting question is can Green get his mitts on the assets for £5.5M or will any of the creditors step in to argue there is better value in a break up? Sadly I think Ticketus are focusing their recoup strategy on the bold Mr Whyte and I'm not convinced HMRC will do anything either given the likely small amounts involved either way.

Then it'll be onto the SPL transfer of share showdown (say that in a Sean Connery accent) or perhaps back to the SFA tribunal rematch first. Plenty of life in this one ...

[JeMeSouviens]

uh-oh

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20...262950_2807965

World's worst Hibby and Barren Knight (that might still be sniffing around a Hun New Club) is Mr Weatherseal isn't he?

[Just Alf]

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

I think the CVA has no chance. Far more interesting question is can Green get his mitts on the assets for £5.5M or will any of the creditors step in to argue there is better value in a break up? Sadly I think Ticketus are focusing their recoup strategy on the bold Mr Whyte and I'm not convinced HMRC will do anything either given the likely small amounts involved either way.

Then it'll be onto the SPL transfer of share showdown (say that in a Sean Connery accent) or perhaps back to the SFA tribunal rematch first. Plenty of life in this one ...

It's this last bit, the transfer of share I can't quite get my head around.... If CVA fails why does the share HAVE to go to the folks that buy Ibrox etc?

Also of there's transfer embargoes (and the rest) do they apply to the licence, the club or the "holding company"?

In my dreams I can see them getting the licence revoked and handed to Dundee or someone and any newco being told to apply for entry to SFL3 as there's now a vacancy.... Oh well.... One can but hope!

[lapsedhibee]

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

I think he's trying to convince the hard of thinking huns that RFC will be in the SPL next season so they'll buy season tickets. RFC holding thousands of fans ST money would arguably put pressure on the SFA not to suspend them if the CVA is accepted and on the SPL to admit a newco if it fails.

It does alienate a lot of people, but I think they're really at the nothing to lose stage now.

Shirley the concept of sporting integrity (copyright 'tacheman ) has gained sufficient hold now that this financial consideration would not prove decisive?

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

HMRC still get two shots though, kill them now or wait till the result of the BTC. So stop being so f**ing pedantic.

You've missed out an asteriks there.

[JeMeSouviens]

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

It's this last bit, the transfer of share I can't quite get my head around.... If CVA fails why does the share HAVE to go to the folks that buy Ibrox etc?

Also of there's transfer embargoes (and the rest) do they apply to the licence, the club or the "holding company"?

In my dreams I can see them getting the licence revoked and handed to Dundee or someone and any newco being told to apply for entry to SFL3 as there's now a vacancy.... Oh well.... One can but hope!

Because it makes life a lot easier for Doncaster! Seriously there's no reason. Once the CVA fails, it's not completely impossible that the BKs and the Green brigade could both attempt to start Hun New Clubs. That would be an entertaining twist.

If the SFA/SPL attempt to get away with a transfer of share to a New Club then I can't see how they can possibly do anything other than transfer any penalties with them but then again we are deep in Alice in Wonderland territory already so who knows?

[Jim44]

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

As I recall, it was a TBC, with no amunt shown.

It has to be part of the CVA, though, as HMRC have made an assessment on RFC.

OK, IC.

[Just Alf]

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

Once the CVA fails, it's not completely impossible that the BKs and the Green brigade could both attempt to start Hun New Clubs. That would be an entertaining twist.

And this thread will probably triple it's post count! Lol

[CropleyWasGod]

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

OK, IC.

GTF

[Dashing Bob S]

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

Because it makes life a lot easier for Doncaster! Seriously there's no reason. Once the CVA fails, it's not completely impossible that the BKs and the Green brigade could both attempt to start Hun New Clubs. That would be an entertaining twist.

If the SFA/SPL attempt to get away with a transfer of share to a New Club then I can't see how they can possibly do anything other than transfer any penalties with them but then again we are deep in Alice in Wonderland territory already so who knows?

That would be rather splendid! We could have one for the bigots and the other for the glory hunters. But it might be unfair on the 20,000 who proudly count themselves as both - which way would they split?

[jgl07]

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

Because it makes life a lot easier for Doncaster! Seriously there's no reason. Once the CVA fails, it's not completely impossible that the BKs and the Green brigade could both attempt to start Hun New Clubs. That would be an entertaining twist.

If the SFA/SPL attempt to get away with a transfer of share to a New Club then I can't see how they can possibly do anything other than transfer any penalties with them but then again we are deep in Alice in Wonderland territory already so who knows?

I think that opinion in the SPL has moved dramatically against Rangers following them taking the SFA to the Court of Session. I do not think we have heard the last of this issue from FIFA. If a more 'lenient' penalty is dolled out, I can see a Sion situation arising and Scottish Clubs being banned form Europe and Scotland kicked out of World Cup qualification.

I don't expect FIFA to see any difference between a Newco and the Oldco in these issues. If a Rangers Newco comes into the SPL via a share transfer and avoids the punishment they will take the same action.

It would really be fun if multiple Newcos for Rangers were set up by the Blue Knights, the Green Knights and the Knights who say Ng. This will be hilarious if they are all competing for the vacancy in SFL3!

[ballengeich]

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

uh-oh

http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/news/20...262950_2807965

World's worst Hibby and Barren Knight (that might still be sniffing around a Hun New Club) is Mr Weatherseal isn't he?

Makes sense. Plenty of panned-in windaes after Thursday perhaps. More after the SFA tribunal resits.

[Lungo--Drom]

Thanks for the link. I rubbed my palms with garlic before reading it to ward off evil spirits...
Actually it is possibly the most intelligent article I have ever read by a Hun. You can see even back in 2009 when it was written that th cracks were beginning to show. It says clearly that all Rangers retail activities were taken over by JJB so I assume then that the clubstore at Greyskull is also run by JJB even if it is still branded as purely Rangers, although as I never go there I can't confirm or deny that. It answers the question as to how the clubstore staff are getting paid anyway.

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

Huns don't own their shops (warning link contains traces of Hun):

http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmn...23/index.shtml

[Lungo--Drom]

I remember about seven years ago at the height of the UVF / LVF fueding over in the Six Counties and I was cutting through the back streets of Belfast heading for the ferry (in the days when it was an easy walking distance) and I could hear the opposing Loyalist factions shooting at each other in the north of the city. I can just imagine something similar happening in Govan (hopefully minus the guns) if two separate Newco Hun teams were formed. It would not be any more far fetched than what has happened already :D

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

Because it makes life a lot easier for Doncaster! Seriously there's no reason. Once the CVA fails, it's not completely impossible that the BKs and the Green brigade could both attempt to start Hun New Clubs. That would be an entertaining twist.

[Spike Mandela]

All logic points to HMRC rejecting the CVA but my worry is the unseen political pressure in smoke filled back rooms being put on HMRC top brass probably with the occasional funny handshake.

I fear the worst.

[Onion]

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

All logic points to HMRC rejecting the CVA but my worry is the unseen political pressure in smoke filled back rooms being put on HMRC top brass probably with the occasional funny handshake.

I fear the worst.

Put it this way, if HMRC accept 9p in the pound from the Huns there will be public outcry - if not in dodgy Scotland then certainly down South. HMRC is essentially an English institution and the general taxpayers will not take kindly to any public body seemingly supporting a Scottish football club which has traded free of tax for 12 months. I can see Panorama waiting in the wings.