Yankee_Dollar Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Problem there is... they (like many other yo-yo sides) can't AFFORD to be in the SPL. They vote yes, get a wee pat on the back and close the door quietly as they leave for pastures more familiar. I love all the dream talk fellas, nice to fantasize and all that, but - really...... We all know what your chairman done the last time your lot was in the Premier League. It cost you relegation by your chairman voting for a 12 club league from a 14 club league. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yankee_Dollar Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) The bigger clubs in the league ie Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen would be able to cope but i am not sure about the others. For that reason i would be happy to vote Rangers out of the SPL but i would worry about how the other teams would cope. I think that most teams in the SPL outside of the 3 i mentioned need Rangers away support finance and the TV revenue they bring finance therefore they would probably want Rangers in the SPL. I think though that Celtic need Rangers most of all for the reason that, Celtic almost gaurenteed to win the league every season= less fans in the stadium= less money to compete in Europe with. If Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, Dundee Utd were going for gold, their grounds would be filled without the OF no problem. Edited February 15, 2012 by Yankee_Dollar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeus Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Rangers owe Hearts 800K, owe Dundee Utd 100K and Dunfermline 80K. That may have an impact on how they vote. About other clubs 'needing' Rangers. We have played them once at Paisley this season and they had 2K fans. Not bad but not exactly an amount that would cause us to go under if we didnt get them. If Morton were to replace them (no chance I know) they would bring almost as many. I admit the TV money would be a blow but football would continue. The OF carve up most of the TV money anyway. In Rangers' case they appear to be guilty of deliberately exploring fraudulent and unethical business practise so do not deserve leniency. I would be very pissed off with St Mirren if they voted yes. Not really, any monies owed to another member club will be paid by the SPL from the monies Rangers will receive for finishing in x place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Kong Bundy Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Anybody remember this guy? Joe Lewis, who ploughed a load of money into Rangers in 1997. Ironically, he is a tax exile in the Bahamas now. Wonder if he'd be interested in saving the Gers now?... -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Nomad Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 United will accept and say yes to Rangers, although I`m sure the chairman would love to say no. However I`m with Ghostie, it endorses cheating & I want no part of the fucking farce. I`d still attend football, but it`d be Junior or lower league. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owsley Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Anyone else get the feeling that the next thrilling installment will involve the arrest of Craig Whyte? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orlandoblue Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Anybody remember this guy? Joe Lewis, who ploughed a load of money into Rangers in 1997. Ironically, he is a tax exile in the Bahamas now. Wonder if he'd be interested in saving the Gers now?... I like his glasses 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 ticketus are a front for octopus investments who invest money for hedge funds worth hundreds of millions. the idea that they weren't fully aware that (i) whyte is dodgy (ii) rangers were facing a huge tax bill and (iii) admin was extremely likely is not very realistic. there is a reason why these people are filthy rich and it's not because they throw millions at con men. it's much more likely that whyte, the administration company and ticketus have planned all this from day one. Yeah I Had a look at them. Without delving too deeply into the realms of fantasy, something stinks about this deal too. f**k me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sergie's no1 fan Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 You wonder what football teams done to survive before all these big tv contracts came in to play? If we lose the tv deal who cares? If it means most teams in Scotland go part time so be it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can someone help me with this.. the "missing 9 m in tax" On Sky Sports News earlier, it was claimed Rangers said they had paid tax, until very recently. Why wouldn't the Revenue have queried much earlier the non-payment of tax since Whyte took over? Can companies withhold tax for months on end? Do they have a year to settle up? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 (edited) You are normally spot on but you seem to be missing my point. The fact is there would be NO POINT If you and anyone/everyone else are happy with that then fine but I am not. It is not even a case of BOYCOTTING my club. It's a case of saying f**k this, Scottish fitba is a farce and I want no further part of it. I love my football club and I love going to the football but there comes a point when you have to stand up and be counted. If they allow Ranger to remain in the SPL SHOULD they be liquidated that point will be reached for me.. Fair enough. Equally, I certainly won't be abandoning my clubs because of what is or isn't collectively decided about Rangers. As for a black hole in our finances, we would just have to cut our cloth accordingly. That should be what ALL clubs do when they plan what they are gonna spend. Don't spend more than you make.. Not rocket science is it??? Well, yes it is, in some respects. Every club at SPL level have degrees of liabilities which cannot be scrubbed at a few months notice... everyone has wage bills - including players on contracts running beyond the current season - and most have debts to service. If the bottom falls out their budgets should much of the TV/sponsor money disappear, they've a problem. Rapid repositioning isn't necessarily easy-peasy. Edited February 15, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can someone help me with this.. the "missing 9 m in tax" On Sky Sports News earlier, it was claimed Rangers said they had paid tax, until very recently. Why wouldn't the Revenue have queried much earlier the non-payment of tax since Whyte took over? Can companies withhold tax for months on end? Do they have a year to settle up? Skyline drifter lectured me on this in his inimitable way during the Dundee episode. They should be paid monthly, but I suppose you can stall them for quite a while like you can the Lecky... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zeus Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Skyline drifter lectured me on this in his inimitable way during the Dundee episode. They should be paid monthly, but I suppose you can stall them for quite a while like you can the Lecky... The SSN dweeb claimed that you only have until the 19th of the following month to make good the tax from the previous month. I can only assume that's bollocks, in which case the Revenue need to really change their practices, and send in the men with baseball bats much earlier. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T_S_A_R Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 Can someone help me with this.. the "missing 9 m in tax" On Sky Sports News earlier, it was claimed Rangers said they had paid tax, until very recently. Why wouldn't the Revenue have queried much earlier the non-payment of tax since Whyte took over? Can companies withhold tax for months on end? Do they have a year to settle up? i had a look earlier on and when motherwell went into admin we owed £420,000 in tax which was 14% of our turnover. rangers apparently owe £9m which is probably 20%-25% of their turnover. a bit higher but we do have 20% vat and 50% top tax rate now. i doubt anyone, ever has squared up hmrc before going into admin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 i doubt anyone, ever has squared up hmrc before going into admin. No, it's more that if any business doesn't pay you any tax for what, 9 months? Shouldnt' alarm bells be raised at least at the 6 month mark, especially when that company has a new owner and has visible streams of income. I'm just amazed that any company can withhold tax for the best part of a year, whilst already in a tax avoidance wrangle with the Revenue, and not have sanctions taken against them long ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richie Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 If the tv deal is jeopardized, renegotiate or try and find another broadcaster. Clubs cut their cloth accordingly. Rangers are just another member club and should be treated as such. If rangers were permitted to walk back into the SPL then, for me, the game is up. They may be bigger but they are no "better" or more important than any other club in Scotland. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoriginalhedge Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 No, it's more that if any business doesn't pay you any tax for what, 9 months? Shouldnt' alarm bells be raised at least at the 6 month mark, especially when that company has a new owner and has visible streams of income. I'm just amazed that any company can withhold tax for the best part of a year, whilst already in a tax avoidance wrangle with the Revenue, and not have sanctions taken against them long ago. Especially PAYE which alledgedly makes up a huge chunk of that £9million 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 You wonder what football teams done to survive before all these big tv contracts came in to play? If we lose the tv deal who cares? If it means most teams in Scotland go part time so be it. Exactly. There seems to be some massive fear amongst journalists mostly about standards slipping. Personally I couldnt give a f**k as I am not remotely interested in Scottish footballs standing in the pecking order internationally. I also couldn't give a toss about European football, which is also a massively corrupt shambles which panders to the bigger outfits as well. Slipping standards mainly inconveniences journalists anyway as it stops them getting wee jolly ups abroad. Football is a shit sport anyway, if it wasnt for my St.Mirren habit I wouldnt watch it anymore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebbes20silkcut Posted February 15, 2012 Share Posted February 15, 2012 has there been any statement from HMRC with regards to the £49 million, have heard all the stuff that they won't back down but anything official or dose anyone on the forum work for / or know the workings of HMRC will they finish the b*****ds off! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.