pollymac

The best bit about the whole 'fit and proper' person non-test is that it can't actually stop anyone from owning a football club AFAIK. It would appear that at least one owner of a Scottish football club has f*cked up big time with nary a halt nor harness being placed on him by his Board of Directors. Heck, he was even made a Knight of the Realm. Fit and Proper indeed. I have a fair bit of sympathy with Regan's stance on checking club ownership though and have to say good luck to him with checking up on Celtic's 15,000 owners. Facetious observations aside: Whyte could still have taken ownership and forced much of the decision making at the club without ever going near the fit and proper person test. It's such a shame that none of the 'right' people made noises re Whyte 12-18 months ago.

I honestly don't think that's what the court case is about; it's more that they want the terms to be negotiable (or that the terms can be read as being repayable at the end of the term). With any contract, it's only as watertight as tested in a court, although precedent might suggest otherwise to them regarding Ticketus' deal, Renegers admin's appear hell-bent on altering the details, or at least stretching the minutiae as far as they can. Which is, after all, a part of what they are paid to do: get the best deal possible from existing contractual obligations. I had to laugh at suggestions by the Knights who say Ni's idea that they'd further tap Ticketus for £5m for working capital - isn't this what Chraig Whhyte done: sell future revenue to 'exist'?

re Ticketus deal. Renegers are wanting £40m to be written off/details changed. It is not £24m as being widely misreported. Ticketus paid Renegers £24.4m or thereabouts for a hefty wedge of future season tickets sales. With inflation rising, do you think that they did so out of purely altruistic purposes and want to take a hit (in real terms) on their money? Or do you think that they paid out £24.4m for a number of season tickets that will realise them a very healthy profit over three years?

Why would Celtic fans be suicidal at the thought of HMRC cutting a deal? It would be for the small tax case only, as the big one hasn't crystalised (due to it being in limbo). And besides, the orcs have historically been run at catastrophic losses almost each and every season for the last fifteen and they will therefore be required to cut their cloth accordingly. Not to mention that before a single penny is taken from selling tickets, they need to flog about 24,000 of them beforehand ergo another £11m or so worth of cloth being cut before considering anything else. Cutting a deal with HMRC to survive would actually be quite funny.

Gave you a greeny cos I agree with the sentiment. Can you edit your post to remove the gif though cos it's bloody horrid?

I think I have to delete that, it's quite ghastly, tbh.

I think it might be to do with the two contract thing and the eligibility of players in European competition. Werder were knocked out by the orcs in their Manchester riot run in 2008. Not sure what Porto's gripe is, although I recall them being in the same CL group a while back.

re Craig Whyte - there's an excellent court pastiche post on CQN today regarding Whyte defending the Ticketus deal. It's actually quite insightful on a number of counts. It's quite a lengthy piece, but I think it is genuinely worth your time. Anyway, here it is. Uefa to get involved next week, btw. Complaints made by Porto and Werder Bremen.

The problem with that, is that you assume HMRC are creditors for less than 25% of the moneys owed, which would mean that the only bill at the moment being considered from HMRC is the £9m or so PAYE/NIC but what about the now uncontested £2.8m from the 'small tax case' ergo an overall creditor exposure of £47m or so? Are they really so far up to their necks in it? ~£12m HMRC £24m Ticketus £11m to who else? Be that as it may, clearly the 'big tax case' is being discounted, which would indeed allow them to come out of administration, only to go straight back in when that particular finding is published (based on the assumption that they lose their appeal). If they win, HMRC have already stated they will immediately appeal any reverse. All of this is also discounting the fact that an administrator cannot add additional creditors to those in existence in order to shaft said (existing) creditors.

There would also be the not too small matter of not having administration protection when moneys owed to Dunfermline and Dundee Utd fell due (ICT too??) and therefore additional penalties applicable, presumably sporting ones, i.e. a ban from next season's Scottish Cup and additional points removed in the League.

He done the player registrations, presumably with the attached contract paperwork You can imagine him looking through the contracts before posting them on and thinking "Bloomin eck, Amofud's only on a grand a week, kudos to the lad for coming here from Fiorentina instead of going to Liverpool or ManU. We really are a big club and clearly there's nothing amiss here. Next? Andrei Kanchelskis eh? Poor lad, has a gambling problem and is beholden to some dodgy characters for a lot of money, glad Sir Moon of Beam is sorting him out with a heavy wedge. Of £750 per week, whutthefcuk? Come on, even Jim Farry's no gonna be buying that pish. Whilst I'm doing this, s'ppose I'd better check my EBT payments are in order."

Evidently a grossly mismanaged club still employing millionaires earning thousands of pounds per week need the money more than her. She should be comforted, though, that her £20 has paid Duff and Phelps for about 2 minutes of their time. I wonder how far Mssrs Clark and Whitehouse are on Angry Birds?

Aye, but do these other businesses have 'customers' who deserve better?

***rrrring-rin, rrrrring-ring*** Sir Beams of Moon: Hello? Business Partner: Awe right, big man. SBoM: Haw credit-line, that you? BP: Aye, it's me. Quick question for you. SBoM: Shoot. BP: Ah've got some chancer on the other line trying tae sell me 100,000 of your tickets from the next four years. SBoM: Sounds legit. BP: So I can buy them. SBoM: Well, aye, of course you can buy them. Erm, haud on though. Whit's the guy's name? BP: Chraig Whhite Whhyte (born 1969 or was it 1971?) SBoM: Chraig Whhyte, eh? Seems to ring a bell. Wait til a check the pippers, see whit they say. ***two second pause*** SBoM: Aye, chap on, get them tickets aff ma haunds, they're nothing but trouble. **mutters** Stinkin orcs. BP: 'K. C'ya ***SBoM hangs up phone*** SBoM: Phew, thought that was mibbes some chancer trying to dupe me. ***some time later*** SBoM: Aww, furfuxake, I've been duped. Whaur's Jabba, the fat bassa and Action Jackson huv been tellin me porkies. ************************************************** Does anyone actually believe that Chraig Whhyte was able to flog 100,000 tickets belonging to another business, a business in current partnership with the proposed buyer of said tickets, without the business' owner finding out?

Because Rangers have been essentially run at a loss of around £15-20m per season where significant external resources aren't available?

Luvvin Murray's denials in the media. Duped, I tells ye, duped. Aye, right-o. Perhaps someone might want to ask how Chraig Whhyte knew of 'previously involved with Renegers' Ticketus? Before he bought the club. My guess is that someone told him. I wonder who that could have been. Also: Murray's been quoted as saying that there was little turned up about Chraig Whhyte during the due diligence period and build up to the takeover. What the heck was going on for all that time? Anyone else think that Murray has the current world record on Angry Birds? And the media? Motherwell Born Billionaire. :lol:

Hey, Craig Whyte has been a straight up guy from day one, a straight up guy.

Martin 'was paid using an EBT' Bain?

I agree with much of what you wrote, but think this part may well be wrong. davidmurraysuperduperCSC

Indeed. 'The bank was duped'

The bank was duped? I had thought the bank received all of their money from the ticketus arrangement. Or was the unashamed red meat eater alluding to LBG's current involvement with another company not entirely unconnected with all of this?

04/05, hence the suggestion that Juninho (a massive wage earner at Boro) was the recipient after we picked up the final year of his contract(s?) But, yeah, the point stands.

It'd be like googling 'google'

If there was (a Celtic Tax Case), then there would be (such a blog). There could be a Celtic Two Contracts Blog though