Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

[jacomo]

Well, that's the threat of an imminent Admin 2 eased off now. But the fact that Der Hun have had to arrange these short term loans speaks volumes about how badly run they are.

Will they need to cut costs this summer? Will Wallace try to cut the squad? Expect Swally to go greeting to Dave King if he does.

[greenginger]

Laxey get paid 15% , £ 150,000 for providing the £ 1 million loan until 1st September.

I make that about 35% per annum.

That's nearly Wonga rates !

[Weststandwanab]

Love the "Laxley facility" fee. That covers ten percent of both facilities.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Laxey get paid 15% , £ 150,000 for providing the £ 1 million loan until 1st September.

I make that about 35% per annum.

That's nearly Wonga rates !

It's not actually a loan, if I read it properly. It's a "facility", ie an overdraft, to be used if they need it.

Still... 15%... pretty horrible rate

[GreenLake]

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

It's not actually a loan, if I read it properly. It's a "facility", ie an overdraft, to be used if they need it.

Still... 15%... pretty horrible rate

7% would be considered high yield for junk bonds

[ballengeich]

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

It's not actually a loan, if I read it properly. It's a "facility", ie an overdraft, to be used if they need it.

Still... 15%... pretty horrible rate

I think you're right about the "facility". The 15% rate is for 6 months so the APR is about 32% - better than I get from the building society.

What's not clear is whether this is part of, or in addition to, the £2.5 million facility that was declared as available in the accounts. Whichever it is, a substantial proportion of next year's income will have been spent before the season starts. There's nothing left from the IPO, the original working capital put in during the summer of 2012 is long gone, and this season's income will not last till the accounting date of 30th June.

[grunt]

Quite a lot happening on the Rangers front today.

We have the Big Tax Case appeal starting today, covered by Alex Thomson's blog here http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...rt-battle/7273

It seems that not all Rangers fans are happy with the £1.5m loan

Fan groups statement regarding loans from Easdale and Laxey

Rangers Supporters Association, Assembly & Trust Statement

The Rangers Supporters Association, Assembly and Trust have been contacted by a number of Rangers supporters, who are also current shareholders, indicating they would have provided a secured loan of £1.5m on more favourable terms than the combined Laxey Partners/ Easdale loans. The terms of the Laxey loan in particular seem unduly onerous.

We are concerned that not all shareholders are being treated equally. Fans and shareholders both deserve an explanation as to why other shareholders were not approached to provide this loan.

The 3 groups call on Rangers, or the NOMAD Daniel Stewart, to clarify the matter. Either in public or through a direct meeting with fan representatives. We have contacted both companies with our concerns.

[jacomo]

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

Quite a lot happening on the Rangers front today.

We have the Big Tax Case appeal starting today, covered by Alex Thomson's blog here http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thoms...rt-battle/7273

It seems that not all Rangers fans are happy with the £1.5m loan

SDM's crowing is going to look pretty stupid if this comes back to bite him.

As Alex Thomson sets it out, it seems inconceivable that Rangers won the Big Tax Case first time out. Read the report and it's obvious that it was the narrowest of victories - and may yet be overturned.

[Caversham Green]

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

It's not actually a loan, if I read it properly. It's a "facility", ie an overdraft, to be used if they need it.

Still... 15%... pretty horrible rate

As I read it, it's not a rate it's a flat charge - '15% of the nominal amount of the facility'. That means they're paying £150k whether they use the overdraft or not.

[SurferRosa]

Apparently, Alex McCleish had a flat bought for him through an EBT. Wonder how he, or anyone else, will explain this as a 'loan'..?

[yeezus.]

I just walked into my local for a can of coke and bag of crisps for Faisal with my Hibs jacket on. One Sevco fan said "there's the taig united supporter there".

God I hope Stranraer do them dirty huns tomorrow night.

[Sylar]

Wonder who's to blame for their latest inability to balance the books...

They've hosed away money since getting dumped into the third division to ensure they saved face and got back ASAP, paying single player salaries that eclipse entire team budgets in the same divisions.

Despite the fact that their fans have continued to turn up in decent numbers, that alone can't sustain the levels of excess they've been spending and they'll still need to seek out major investment or this dance will pick up in the summer again, particularly as the fans are on the whole getting sick of this (though not many are complaining at their meteoric rise 'back to their rightful place').

The fans will demand to know what's happening before they buy their STs and yet on the other hand, will demand the club be buying players/strengthening for the Championship assault.

Would be bloody hilarious if neither them, nor Hearts get out of that division next season - will also be interesting if Dundee don't go up to the Premiership as the Championship will be a who's who of financial mismanagement with Dundee, Hearts, Rangers, Livingston and probably Dunfermline all in the same league

[AndyM_1875]

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

I was talking about the non payment of tax that caused HMRC to put them into administration, not the EBTs.

That was the 9 million or so in PAYE & NI that Craig Whyte never paid from the moment he took over from Murray. What a cheeky lad he was.,,

That was just blatant. The EBTs were much more of a shade of grey. Mishandled by Rangers stupid Board probably, but a legal loophole that the Murray group amongst other companies exploited

This whole appeal has absolutely no impact on Rangers now irrespective of the verdict. It's basically HMRC looking to get a precedent that they can use to go round bashing other organisations for backdated taxes they feel were evaded rather than avoided.

[Billy Whizz]

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

This whole appeal has absolutely no impact on Rangers now irrespective of the verdict. It's basically HMRC looking to get a precedent that they can use to go round bashing other organisations for backdated taxes they feel were evaded rather than avoided.

Might have no impact, but when Fat Sally's asked to substantially trim his budget for the new season, it will be interesting to see what the ave Rangers fan will say.
I think most of their players are on decent term contract's. Will be interesting to see how they arrange to shed these players/pay them off

[CropleyWasGod]

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

As I read it, it's not a rate it's a flat charge - '15% of the nominal amount of the facility'. That means they're paying £150k whether they use the overdraft or not.

Yup. Tis too.

A bit like the £150 RBS charge me every year for "renewing" my overdraft. ie pushing a button.

Times 1,000.

[CropleyWasGod]

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

SDM's crowing is going to look pretty stupid if this comes back to bite him.

As Alex Thomson sets it out, it seems inconceivable that Rangers won the Big Tax Case first time out. Read the report and it's obvious that it was the narrowest of victories - and may yet be overturned.

It's a common misapprehension that they "won". The FTTT found in their favour on most of the issues, but against them on others. HMRC are appealling against the former; I am not sure about RFC's position on the latter.

[Weststandwanab]

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

For me, it's about buying time until they can get something more substantial, and longer term, arranged.

If one can believe Phil Magubbin, they are having trouble getting finance from anyone, and this latest move bears that out.

Just noticed the pun there, how apt.

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

That was the 9 million or so in PAYE & NI that Craig Whyte never paid from the moment he took over from Murray. What a cheeky lad he was.,,

That was just blatant. The EBTs were much more of a shade of grey. Mishandled by Rangers stupid Board probably, but a legal loophole that the Murray group amongst other companies exploited

This whole appeal has absolutely no impact on Rangers now irrespective of the verdict. It's basically HMRC looking to get a precedent that they can use to go round bashing other organisations for backdated taxes they feel were evaded rather than avoided.

And so they should chase these scoundrels

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

Might have no impact, but when Fat Sally's asked to substantially trim his budget for the new season, it will be interesting to see what the ave Rangers fan will say.
I think most of their players are on decent term contract's. Will be interesting to see how they arrange to shed these players/pay them off

Sell them probably.

[Eyrie]

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

SDM's crowing is going to look pretty stupid if this comes back to bite him.

As Alex Thomson sets it out, it seems inconceivable that Rangers won the Big Tax Case first time out. Read the report and it's obvious that it was the narrowest of victories - and may yet be overturned.

If I remember correctly, it was a split decision with the two lawyers finding in favour of Huns RIP on narrow legal grounds and the tax expert not only agreed with HMRC on the reality of the transactions but wrote half the report explaining why the other two tribunal members were wrong.

[ballengeich]

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

As I read it, it's not a rate it's a flat charge - '15% of the nominal amount of the facility'. That means they're paying £150k whether they use the overdraft or not.

That's brilliant. An interest rate of over 30% if they loan the full amount for the full period, with the rate even higher and less risk if they loan a smaller amount for a shorter period.

[HFC 0-7]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26333152

[Steven_Hibs]

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

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26333152

So that's why they needed the money

[mjhibby]

They are seriously challenging the yams as the most deluded fans on the planet. Every neutral observer who follows the saga knows they are in the deepest poo and just like our friends from Gorgie they just assume because they are the sevco rangers it will all be fine. Sally mccoist is possibly the most deluded of all as he thinks he can just keep on spending millions he and the club don't have. At least the yams have made some attempt to cutback. Complete roasters the lot of them.

[adhibs]

Good luck Imran!

[Bill Milne]

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

SDM's crowing is going to look pretty stupid if this comes back to bite him.

As Alex Thomson sets it out, it seems inconceivable that Rangers won the Big Tax Case first time out. Read the report and it's obvious that it was the narrowest of victories - and may yet be overturned.

I may be wrong (not unusual) but my understanding of the original case was that two blokes, basically Huns, rubber stamped the case in their teams favour with the dissenting female member of the tribunal producing a very detailed rationale for her rejection of the Huns arguments. Sounds to me like this could very well be overturned in favour of HMRC!!

[CropleyWasGod]

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

I may be wrong (not unusual) but my understanding of the original case was that two blokes, basically Huns, rubber stamped the case in their teams favour with the dissenting female member of the tribunal producing a very detailed rationale for her rejection of the Huns arguments. Sounds to me like this could very well be overturned in favour of HMRC!!

I don't think there was any serious suggestion that the two who were in favour of the parts of the finding that favoured RFC were Huns.

However, the type of arguments put forward by the dissenter will form a key part of HMRC's case, I'm sure.

[Keith_M]

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

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/26333152

I have a new hero

[ACLeith]

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

I don't think there was any serious suggestion that the two who were in favour of the parts of the finding that favoured RFC were Huns.

However, the type of arguments put forward by the dissenter will form a key part of HMRC's case, I'm sure.

Seems a long time since the verdict, what's the possible timescale for the appeal? And if HMRC win, are there implications for TRFC? Or is it all to the old club?

[jacomo]

Poor Swally!

He doesn't know what his budget for next season will be and he doesn't have any scouts. However, he HAS spoken to a player about joining in the summer, so he's working VERY hard, even though he's now being paid LESS than half a million!

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...imbo-1-3318486

[CropleyWasGod]

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

Seems a long time since the verdict, what's the possible timescale for the appeal? And if HMRC win, are there implications for TRFC? Or is it all to the old club?

It's starting today, but I don't know how long it will last.

There shouldn't be any implications for the new club. Principally, it's about HMRC establishing a precedent to enable them to deal with other companies in the same situation. The old club has no money, so there is nothing financial in it for HMRC.

The only thing which, although unlikely, might happen, is that HMRC (if they get the result they want) might instigate criminal proceedings against the individuals concerned. Which would be nice.

[Scorrie]

But I thought the new club was the old club or something. Didn't somebody rule that the new club was a continuation of the old club? If for example the new club went into admin, would be the first or second offence? Or is it the old club when it suits the Huns but the new one when it doesn't?