Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[jgl07]

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

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.

Very true. It will send out exactly the wrong message. The likes of Portsmouth and presumably Birmingham will be watching with interest.

However I understood that it will not be anything like 9 pence in the pound assuming that the BTC falls in favour of HMRC.

[PatHead]

Interesting Celtic perspective which feels Rangers will try to do a deal with "Gang of 10". Wouldn't it be great to stick it up them as well!!!!!!!

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=...medium=twitter

[sadtom]

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.

Cheers.
Yep, i guess proving what his 'intentions' were would be problematic.

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

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.

Cheers.
I dont think i was mistaking it for 'trading while insolvent'.
It was something i heard or read quite early on in this saga. It seemed to suggest that it would be treated akin to the 'insolvency' rule. Though i was sure it indicated that if (paye) payments were withheld because the debtor 'planned' to enter administration further down the line then the debt could be treated 'differently' from the other debt (i.e. not included in the larger 'pot') and that (if proven) it was a criminal act to continue to actively run up debt when your 'plan' is to avoid the debt through administration/cva etc. Though, as noted, proof would appear to be difficult.
I honestly cant remember who, where or what was said exactly. Other than after hearing it, it led me to believe that a criminal charge would be possible.

Cheers again guys, keep up the good work.
I must confess, i still find the whole situation about as clear as Steve Fulton's skin.

[ancient hibee]

I take it that Mr.Green's remarks about the number of stars he is going to sign are to ensure that any waverers re the CVA get so enraged they will vote against.This will make sure he can go the Newco route.However this will not be as easy as he thinks-unless of course he will be quite happy if Rangers go to the SFL-he will then own the ground and sell the club to new purchasers charging them rent-clubs in the SFL don't have to own their grounds-so he will have the rent for 3 years-then he sells the ground to Rangers who will have to buy it to get into the SPL-trebles all round.

[Dr Jimmy]

Sorry if already mentioned, but I have heard that HMRC have their debt ring fenced. Therefore the current CVA does not relate to HMRC and this is being contested separately. Can this be right?

[MrSmith]

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

Interesting Celtic perspective which feels Rangers will try to do a deal with "Gang of 10". Wouldn't it be great to stick it up them as well!!!!!!!

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=...medium=twitter

Nope not an interesting perspective just another poor me victim status being rolled out by the paraniod green brigade!

[camhibby1]

I know no more than anyone else here about HMRC's intentions but the poster who mentioned that the outcry north of the border will be as loud down south makes a moot point. The balance of probability is that HMRC will hit hard for the simple reason that discussions are at an advanced stage for tax raising powers being moved from Westminster to Holyrood. This is why Salmond has been quiet since his infamous tapping up of HMRC at the beginning of the year. The whole country, whether we like it or not will be branded as being incapable of 'running its own affairs' if HMRC bend to the will of the crooked mob in the West and the political classes are seen to be party to it. We won't be trusted - it's because of this that HMRC has to get this one right. Hammer RFC big-time - if not it's good-bye for the time being to further autonomy over our own affairs and then we are a greater laughing stock than ever. Salmond will keep quiet - he does not want to be seen as a leader of a nation that cannot be trusted to run its own financial affairs by putting pressure on a government run department. By the way I think Campbell Ogilvie will be gone soon - his banal interview in the Scotsman was preparation for it.

[gerry70]

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

Nope not an interesting perspective just another poor me victim status being rolled out by the paraniod green brigade!

Completely agree. I had a look at that website and it proved a timely reminder of what a strange view of the world celtic fans have. Loads of quotes about "diddy teams" and as you say paranoia about teams like Hibs stealing their home gate revenue. They conveniently forget that they are the ones that have been doing joint sponsorship deals with Rangers all these years, they are the one who do the joint voting malarkey, and despite all their crowing about how brilliant Peter Lawell is - it's still not clear which way they would vote. I think it's more likely they would vote with their grubby partner. I'm proud to be a hibby when we are the only club in Scotland who have come out publicly and said we believe in sport.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Sorry if already mentioned, but I have heard that HMRC have their debt ring fenced. Therefore the current CVA does not relate to HMRC and this is being contested separately. Can this be right?

Not right at all.

[Hibs Class]

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

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.

HMRC isn't English, it's British. It's fair to say that most taxpayers are English but nonsense to suggest it is an English institution.

[Paisley Hibby]

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

Completely agree. I had a look at that website and it proved a timely reminder of what a strange view of the world celtic fans have. Loads of quotes about "diddy teams" and as you say paranoia about teams like Hibs stealing their home gate revenue. They conveniently forget that they are the ones that have been doing joint sponsorship deals with Rangers all these years, they are the one who do the joint voting malarkey, and despite all their crowing about how brilliant Peter Lawell is - it's still not clear which way they would vote. I think it's more likely they would vote with their grubby partner. I'm proud to be a hibby when we are the only club in Scotland who have come out publicly and said we believe in sport.

Absolutely correct. As has been said before many times - they are just one cheek of the same arse.

[Hibs Class]

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

Nope not an interesting perspective just another poor me victim status being rolled out by the paraniod green brigade!

Agree. Laughable that they are concerned that season ticket supporters would be inconvenienced by kick off times being moved for television. They are one of only two teams who seldom suffer changes to home kick off times.

[Viva_Palmeiras]

http://t.co/0i7oNTE6

So Weatherseal to sponsor the Spl

Is that the weatherseal that Kennedy (of Blue knights - the king makers fame) owned/owns?

Couldn't possibly be pulling some strings behind the scenes could he?

[Kojock]

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

Agree. Laughable that they are concerned that season ticket supporters would be inconvenienced by kick off times being moved for television. They are one of only two teams who seldom suffer changes to home kick off times.

Rantiic insisted that the only home OF games shown live would be the four OF games as they would lose too much money if their home KO times against anyone else were moved from 3pm Saturday.

You couldnt make it up

[Brando7]

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.

There 49 TBC on that list of creditors if u cherrypick 2 HMRC (£75m) & now King (£20m) it starts to mount up n the p in the £ drops even more, how u can agree to a CVA when the document has no written agreement to what you are agreeing to, if they do say yes than more fool them they deserve to get **** all

[BigKev]

Just a question that's been bugging me... If say HMRC or any other creditor never returned their CVA forms (in effect abstain) do they get included as a yes or no vote? And if you don't return it and it gets voted through anyway can you sue the club at a later date for the full amount?

[Onion]

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

HMRC isn't English, it's British. It's fair to say that most taxpayers are English but nonsense to suggest it is an English institution.

Erm, you're taking it too literally. The point is if Scotland had its own tax raising powers or own own Treasury as would be the case under independence, I think the outcome to the RFC problem would be very different. But glad you agree most taxpayers are English

[steakbake]

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

But glad you agree most taxpayers are English

An undeniable fact of demographics.

[joe breezy]

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

Erm, you're taking it too literally. The point is if Scotland had its own tax raising powers or own own Treasury as would be the case under independence, I think the outcome to the RFC problem would be very different. But glad you agree most taxpayers are English

Yes - this whole affair shows how iffy independence could be - Scottish politicians have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers....

[ronaldo7]

Will the yams take a lead from Rapid Vienna?

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...osal-1-2350099

[matty_f]

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

Will the yams take a lead from Rapid Vienna?

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...osal-1-2350099

This is why a transfer embargo should be put in place. It's nonsense that a buying club should be able to sell on a player, keep the proceeds yet stiff the club they bought him from.

I detest Rangers.

[Newry Hibs]

So what's the timeline on / after Thursday vote?

Is there a 21 day cooling off period both ways of the CVA? If it is accepted I know there is, but what if it's a 'No'? Can the newsagent realise he's fed up repairing his windows and change his mind and accept the generous offer?

If there is no grace period for a 'No' - will anything happen on the Friday? I think Green / D&P may try and move quickly - Newco has probably been set up already. I suppose various court cases may drag things out.


If it's a Yes (and after 21 days) what happens?

[steakbake]

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

Yes - this whole affair shows how iffy independence could be - Scottish politicians have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers....

I'm not sure of your reasoning there at all. This whole affair has happened during the Union and Scottish politicians.... have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers.

Not that this has anything at all to do with the independence debate.

[johnrebus]

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

I'm not sure of your reasoning there at all. This whole affair has happened during the Union and Scottish politicians.... have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers.

Not that this has anything at all to do with the independence debate.

And President Soapy will be desperate to keep it that way.

[stokesmessiah]

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

I'm not sure of your reasoning there at all. This whole affair has happened during the Union and Scottish politicians.... have wanted nothing but to preserve Rangers.

Not that this has anything at all to do with the independence debate.

I think your reading his response the wrong way it was a tongue in cheek comment towards Onion i think who somehow seemed to be linking the RFC case to a counter argument for independence for Scotland.

[steakbake]

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

And President Soapy will be desperate to keep it that way.

I'm not sure how the situation at Rangers really instructs us anything about the state of politics, in all honesty! Besides, I thought Salmond showed his hand when he was bleating on about Rangers being a significant part of Scottish society etc.

There's too much politics in football as it is, without this whole sorry affair being stretched into some kind of tenuous analogy about the state of the union, the arguments for or against independence and so on.

[Leithenhibby]

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

Will the yams take a lead from Rapid Vienna?

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...osal-1-2350099

You would hope so, after all we all want fairness in this mess


Is there any truth in the 3rd comment in this article?


3
sonofcosmos
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 at 12:25 AM
#1 seems a story is breaking that duff and co didnt send the cva proposal to all creditors.

[BarneyK]

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

This is why a transfer embargo should be put in place. It's nonsense that a buying club should be able to sell on a player, keep the proceeds yet stiff the club they bought him from.

I detest Rangers.

They've a brass neck alright. An absolute scandal.

[BarneyK]

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

You would hope so, after all we all want fairness in this mess


Is there any truth in the 3rd comment in this article?


3
sonofcosmos
Tuesday, June 12, 2012 at 12:25 AM
#1 seems a story is breaking that duff and co didnt send the cva proposal to all creditors.

I'm sure this has been mentioned before somewhere, though can't remember if it was on here or if it was the C4 dude?

[Caversham Green]

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

Just a question that's been bugging me... If say HMRC or any other creditor never returned their CVA forms (in effect abstain) do they get included as a yes or no vote? And if you don't return it and it gets voted through anyway can you sue the club at a later date for the full amount?

According to the proposal document "A resolution to approve the proposal or a modification is passed when a majority of three quarters or more (in value) of those present and voting in person or by proxy have voted in favour of it."

I read that as meaning an abstention doesn't count at all in the total, so if the total debt was £60m and HMRC held £20m of that, if they don't vote and everyone else does it needs the holders of £30m debt (60-20=40; 75% of 40=30) to vote yes.

If you receive the notice properly then I doubt if you'd be able to sue anyone after the event.