Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: Romford, Rio, Gnome, Northern Paulo, Lost Hammer, bonehead, chalks, goes2eleven, Alf Garnett's (Ex) Missus, bristolhammerfc, Wheels, sicknote

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Wembley1966 on Wed May 30, 2012 11:39 pm

Cuenca 'ammer wrote:As I said, I would put 100 quid on them playing in the SPL, no sanctions except the 10 point penalty and that's it. Lots of gobble deegook, lots of hand-wringing and eventually no transfer ban.

I'll take it - in fact I'll say they won't be playing anywhere next season!
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Thu May 31, 2012 12:11 am

Wembley

Death knell for the SPL if that happens. Old Firm derby pulls in money and guarantees the t.v. rights. Without it, I would bet there won't be any t.v. at all. Remember there are a lot of ex pats out there who thrive on the rivalry and watch it and you have to buy the year's deal to be able to watch it. I watch the computer but it is completely *****. And at the risk of not watching all of it, watching it in fits and starts etc. They get all of the Rangers and Celtic games or at least did. My mate was a prime mover of the Houston Rangers Supporters Club and there were (and most likely still are) 100's of them just throughout America. In fact members of some of the old teams used to travel over to the States every year (and maybe still do). The supporters paid their way and over a 1000 people used to travel to talk to the team have pictures taken with the trophy. One was here in Houston and it was a 4 day affair I think. My ex-mate went with his lad they have a great photo of them holding the trophy.

Anyway I digress a bit. I don't think that the SPL will let the club "die." Some how, some way, they'll survive, and be playing in the SPL. I honestly believe that and have followed the story all the way. You and Pinky and QN have a lot of knowledge of monies, are able to translate this stuff into language we can understand. You obviously have an excellent in depth knowledge of more than just that. PL equivalent of ManYoo going to the wall. I can't see it. HMRC getting nowt. They might want to make an example of the club but I would think finding a way to get some monies back, even over a length of time, would make sense.

Bans, fines and point deduction and future sanctions but not too unmanageable. That's how I think it will all end up. I can't see them completely disappearing off the landscape.

But I have been wrong before (lots of times in fact).

:wink:
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Wembley1966 on Thu May 31, 2012 12:58 pm

Cuenca 'ammer wrote:HMRC getting nowt. They might want to make an example of the club but I would think finding a way to get some monies back, even over a length of time, would make sense.

The CVA as the moment is a joke - creditors might get 2p in the £ if they are very lucky. There are too many TBCs (to be confirmed) in the proposal. There's even the ongoing running costs from now on to be taken out of the creditors pot - and that includes the reverted salaries that go back up at midnight tonight. If this was in the purely in the interest of the creditors they'd get rid of a lot of staff before then.

So HMRC are likely to get less than £1m by agreeing to a CVA. And what signal does that send out to every business in the UK - don't pay your taxes (PAYE and VAT that you have actually already collected on behalf of HMRC) and engage in some spurious tax avoidance schemes and HMRC will agree to you only having to pay 2% of what you owe. That would cost them £gazillions. Also set an example that all the other companies that have been using EBTs and other tax avoidance schemes that are more like tax evasion should reach an agreement to pay up. And also HMRC are still going to fight football clubs for outstanding tax and liquidate them if necessary to show that you don't mess with them - they're still pissed off about Rosie's Monaco bank account!. There's more to understand about what HMRC want out of this - they legally obtained all sorts of information from Rangers about their use of EBTs, which probably threw up all sorts of other interesting potentially incriminating things.

Cuenca 'ammer wrote:Bans, fines and point deduction and future sanctions but not too unmanageable. That's how I think it will all end up. I can't see them completely disappearing off the landscape.

If SFA/SPL finally get around to determining punishments for all the misdemeanour's they're currently investigating, there's still a backlog of others known about to go through, plus some more to come out.

But that's not the problem - the issue they face is that they are nowhere near to having a 'company' that needs to be up and running and able to satisfy whatever league they end up playing in that they will be able to complete the next season's fixtures. The CVA won't happen - the club will be liquidated and someone will buy the assets. Green has specified too many conditions on his proposed buy-out of the club and he'll walk away like all the others have done. He also hasn't got the money himself and the secrecy surrounding his original '20' investors, now down to perhaps only a few and most of them offshore!

At the moment they are still losing money each month; players can go cheaply from tomorrow (they renegotiated contracts with get-out clauses in return for taking salary reductions) so Edu could be off for only £300k; if liquidated the players could all walk for free - or they could stay on at their inflated salaries until the money runs out (it's the employees choice) and HMRC will want a down-payment from a newco. The newco has to buy the assets - they might be in competition with Tesco's (whilst Ibrox is listed, it is only the façade and Tesco's could do exactly the same as they did with the listed 'art deco' Hoover building on the A40 when they turned that into a supermarket), but that's the asset that Whyte's dad (he moved it from his company in the British Virgin Islands to his father's company in the BVI earlier this year!) has the floating charge over and that's how he wants to make his money out of this.

The SPL chairmen now have to agree to letting a newco into the SPL and the tide seems be turning against that easily happening. The St Mirren chairman that previously supported the idea, yesterday announced very forthrightly what he now thought of that idea; to which the Rangers supporters promptly announced a boycott of not attending any matches played there!

Throw in a few more court cases (and appeals) and that's a lot of obstacles to overcome to get sorted before the fixture list needs to be finalised in 3 weeks time!


Answers to the following would provide a lot of clarity to what's really been happening:
Who put the money up behind the Ticketus deal - the answer to that could make many of the unknowns fall into place.
Why was Souness paid from the Employee Benefit Trust 10 years after he left Rangers when he was no longer an 'employee'?


I think someone will buy an existing SPL club and either buy or rent Ibrox and move them there and change their name. Might look and feel like Rangers and have the same strip and some of the same supporters - but it won't be The Rangers.


But I have also been wrong before (lots of times in fact).
:wink:
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Johnny Byrne's Boots on Thu May 31, 2012 1:54 pm

Any supermarket that converts Ibrox had better make sure they have fully comp fire insurance ;)
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
 
Posts: 8476
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: The dry again leafy lanes of Surrey

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Thu May 31, 2012 2:07 pm

Any club like that will be out of business within a season, as nobody would turn up to watch it.
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2301
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby York Ham(mer) on Thu May 31, 2012 10:28 pm

I'm trying to figure out what are the next key dates.

1 June: Players back on full salary and available for transfer on cut-price deals under clauses in their contracts.
?: SFA Appeals Tribunal to rethink sanction for bringing the game in to disrepute - a maximum £100,000 fine, suspension or expulsion from participation in the game, ejection from the Scottish Cup or termination of membership.
14 June: Creditors meeting re CVA - virtually nothing in the pot for creditors.
15 June: Extended deadline for submitting audited accounts to the SPL so to adhere to the SPL's financial disclosure requirements.
18 June: SPL legal team to provide an update to the SPL board on dual contract issue relating to EBTs.
18 June: Fixture list for 2012/13 published
1 July: Transfer window open.
12 July: End of cooling off period for creditors if CVA is agreed on 14 June.
4 August: SPL season starts.

? Big Tax Case verdict.
User avatar
York Ham(mer)
 
Posts: 6726
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:15 am
Location: In exile up north

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:09 am

AL

Don't know if the SFA have any power to stop Rangers going to the CaS.

Inverness Caledonian Thistle chairman Kenny Cameron has added his voice to that of his St Mirren counterpart Stewart Gilmour in criticising Rangers for going to the Court of Session. Football rules prohibit clubs going to civil courts over football decisions.
"This is an extremely disappointing situation," said Cameron.

"The Court for Arbitration in Sport was the correct route for Rangers to take, just as we successfully did in the Marius Niculae dispute.
"Taking sporting matters to the Court of Session was a serious mistake.

Can't see where they didn't try the CaS route.
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:03 am

The clauses run for the remainder of the players' existing contracts, but with salaries again to be paid in full, the administrators and Green must deal with a disparity between income and outlay.

The CVA proposal estimated a shortfall of around £3m, which it is expected will be met by Sevco through either transfer fees or season ticket revenue.

If that revenue is insufficient to meet what are known as the CVA trading costs, the administrators will fund the shortfall from the £8.3m loan from Green's consortium and that figure will subsequently be deducted from the creditors' pot.


So 3M is deducted from the 8.3M leaving 5.3 to be divvied up ??

They can't flog season tickets yet because they haven't applied to rejoin the SPL or haven't been accepted at this stage, so they had better flog players pretty quick, or does Green wait for the 8.3 M to be eaten up and then declare the club insolvent ??
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Swiss Pauli on Fri Jun 01, 2012 6:40 am

SFA decides not to appeal: http://www1.skysports.com/football/news ... ngers-saga

So they'll pick one of the available punishments. Rangers went to the local courts because it's quicker and cheaper than CAS for getting a ruling on such a technicality.
Swiss Pauli
 
Posts: 2182
Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 12:44 pm
Location: Zurich

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Wembley1966 on Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:41 am

Everyone that matters wants liquidation. This is Whyte's show - he's running it. But no one wants to be seen to be pulling the trigger as there's potentially a lot of angry fans out there.

If they have to wait until they run out of money they could do, but then D&P might get blamed - a better way is try and get Rangers suspended - an embargo on signing new players doesn't help to get this - so why not appeal that decision and hope that they come up with a tougher sentence - that appeal didn't work so take it to the courts - if that doesn't work then at least FIFA will suspend them for taking them to the courts. The dual contract investigation should have led to suspension - but the SPL sat on that for too long as they don't want to pull the trigger, so to hurry that up slip the BBC some incriminating emails and copies of paperwork forcing the SPL to take action.

This would all have been so much simpler if the Big Tax Case had announced their verdict months ago - HMRC would have got the blame.

The only way Whyte get's money out of the scheme is by selling Ibrox - so liquidate and you have to sell the assets. But it won't be Tesco's buying it - it's worth more to a Rangers FC of some form that will play there at sometime.


And there's unlikely to be any money coming in from selling players - part of the negotiations on the players taking a salary cut was that if Craig Whyte was still in charge they could walk for free! He is still in charge - he's not sold his majority shareholding yet! That's screwed any plans Green had to get some cash in to try and see Rangers through the next few months. He'll have to find his own cash now - or walk away - and if he does walk away that's liquidation.

A number of Rangers players will be allowed to leave the club on a free transfer in the summer if owner Craig Whyte regains control at Ibrox, administrator Paul Clark has confirmed.

Last week Duff and Phelps announced the players had agreed to changes in their contracts, including wage cuts of between 25% and 75%, until the end of the season.

“I should make it clear now. It’s not in everybody’s contract but there are a number of players who did want a clause that said something like, should Craig Whyte either retain or regain control of the club then they would be entitled to a free transfer.

“That’s in there for a number of them. More than a handful have that in their contracts, the ones who have most likely got value.”

http://m.stv.tv/sport/football/clubs/rangers/300382-rangers-administrator-admits-craig-whyte-clause-exists/
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 2549
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Johnny Byrne's Boots on Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:54 am

FIFA now getting involved.

Football's governing body, Fifa, has confirmed to BBC Scotland it has been in contact with the Scottish FA regarding Rangers.
A spokesperson said letters and phone calls have been exchanged, and that its legal teams will continue to talk and look further into the situation.


If I were a FIFA official, I'd want to know why the SFA prevented Rangers going to the CAS, effectively forcing them to go to the courts.
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
 
Posts: 8476
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: The dry again leafy lanes of Surrey

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Fri Jun 01, 2012 1:58 pm

jbb

Did they ? Couldn't find a link, but I would have thought that no one could have prevented it if they wanted to go that route. Isn't it in every team/player/any person involved in sport right to go there unless CaS rule they can't ??
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Johnny Byrne's Boots on Fri Jun 01, 2012 2:30 pm

I read it a while ago in passing, but have found this on the STV site.

I got a little of the wrong end of the stick, in that it was Rangers themselves who decided the SFA rules prevent an appeal to the CAS, citing the 2005 Ashley Cole case (fined £75k for talking to Chelsea while still under contract to Arsenal). The CAS ruling of August 31 2005 stated that it had no jurisdiction over the dispute because the rules of the Premier League do not contain any reference to a right to appeal to CAS. Premier League rule R63 states that their decision is final and binding – exactly the same wording used in the SFA’s rule 65.3(b).

Rangers used this precedent to go to the civil courts, thereby opening a new can of worms.


It's almost as if they want to cause the biggest shitstorm possible ;)
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
 
Posts: 8476
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: The dry again leafy lanes of Surrey

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Fri Jun 01, 2012 3:56 pm

Expect then the SFA to tell Blatter to mind his own business ????

:wink:
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Fri Jun 01, 2012 5:15 pm

I would say that the SFA (and in particular Stewart Regan) would have other things to worry about:

Image

Yeah, that's correct.
The head of the SFA 'likes' a twitter post which mentions Rangers player Lee McCulloch being hanged.

I know it's from january, but it only surfaced now.
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2301
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Fri Jun 01, 2012 11:49 pm

Rangers administrators say they can cover players' full wages

Rangers' administrators Duff & Phelps claim they have enough money to cover the players' return to full wages.

Won't take much to empty that pot. Then the creditors will have to whistle for their money.
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Johnny Byrne's Boots on Sun Jun 03, 2012 8:41 pm

Green's take on the civil courts and CAS
He pretty much says what is posted above.

As an aside, I inferred from various posters on here that Rangers don't own Ibrox, rather they just rent it. However, reading through the list of assets in the proposed CVA, Ibrox is first on the list.

Assets in the Administration Estate
4.11 The assets of the Company, listed at Schedule 6, currently consist of:
Ibrox;
Murray Park;
The other heritable properties and leasehold interests of the Company;
The Player Contracts;
The SFA Membership;
The Company‘s share in the SPL;
The Goodwill and intellectual property rights;
Stock, plant and equipment and cash at bank;
Amounts owed to the Company (other than the Player Transfer Fees);
The High Court Proceedings; and
The Player Transfer Fees.


Did I get the wrong end of the stick somewhere along the line?
User avatar
Johnny Byrne's Boots
 
Posts: 8476
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2006 5:19 pm
Location: The dry again leafy lanes of Surrey

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby York Ham(mer) on Sun Jun 03, 2012 9:13 pm

I get the sense that Green is nervous about the sanction having been referred back to the Appeals Tribunal.

Re Ibrox, yes it's owned by Rangers but I think Craig Whyte has a floating charge over it?
User avatar
York Ham(mer)
 
Posts: 6726
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:15 am
Location: In exile up north

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby the pink palermo on Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:06 pm

Rangers fans are reluctant to buy ST's unless Green proves he is not going to use their money to buy the club , and as yet he has not shown anything beyond £200k to achieve an exclusivity period .

The administrators pot will run out mid July - that's including the money that should rightly go to creditors which is instead being siphoned off to fund Greens dubious aquisition , and then we will see some real action .

Regardless of who owns Rangers, or even who believes they own Rangers the fact is it will be a money pit until they slash the payroll , by fair means or foul .

Liquidation is the fastest and surest way to break the players contracts and stop the cash drain , the problem comes with who really owns what is left, and how much is it really worth : Whyte with his floating charges , HMRC with the BTC still to be settled .Murray park, even if sold , is worth what ? Ibrox , frankly is not in a nice area , and I've personal experience of selling large chunks of real Estate in Scotland , and it's no easy task .There's loads of property for sale in the vicinity , absolutely stacks so the idea Ibrox could be sold for huge sums is fanciful .

Rangers need to cut their payroll in half by the middle of July, and sell 40,000 season tickets just to approach a break even position .

Good luck with that .
User avatar
the pink palermo
Huge noggin
 
Posts: 26700
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 12:00 pm
Location: don't let it burn, don't let it fade

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Cuenca 'ammer on Sun Jun 03, 2012 10:10 pm

And if they cut their playing staff by huge amounts (there's still people who think a lot will stay and play for nowt because they're Rangers through and through and they don't do walking away) will they sell 40K S/T's ??
User avatar
Cuenca 'ammer
ex 'ouston 'ammer
 
Posts: 22995
Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2002 5:19 pm
Location: Journey to the dead of night. High on a hill in Eldorado

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alexa [Bot], Bonzos4Lagers, Google [Bot], water, whufcmarc and 35 guests