Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[7-2]

I don't know if you listened to Sportsound last night, but if you did, you would have heard Chico and Roddy Forsyth blaming the Business Editors, saying that it wasn't the job of football journos to look into the business side.

I didn't but I'm sorry, that is just a pathetic excuse. I would expect nothing less.

[Bearwithme]

...at the request of Craig Whyte, no?

He started this thing and asked that D&P were assigned/given/tethered to this Blue Nightmare.

Yes, Whyte asked the Court (after the Court offered him the opportunity). You may recall that the administrators had to go back to the Court of Session to confirm their appointment following a technical hitch. Nobody opposed that and, as I understand it, nor did anyone contest their initial appointment once Whyte was offered the chance to make the application. Bottom line is the Court of Session appointed them and they have to report to that Court.

Edited April 6, 2012 by Bearwithme

[Guest]

Oh aye lads, that's a fair old fucking dent in the debt you've made here

[sparky88]

I just want to say how fantastic it is that we're getting a completely unbiased, knowledgeable analysis of Rangers' administration from Bearwithme. Bravo, kind sir!

[Newbornbairn]

the snivelling little rat

Perfect description of Chick Young. Surely to God his bosses at the BBC will be looking to replace him now.

[Bearwithme]

Also, to point out that Rangers were only found to be doing this because of Harry Rednapp is ludicrous. HMRC have found thousands upon thousands of firms up and down the country who have used the scheme. Even little companies up here in the Highlands. They investigated everywhere. Rangers were going to be found no matter what.

It was of course no secret that Rangers used the scheme. It was stated in the club's accounts every year and those accounts were submitted to both the tax and football authorities.

[Bearwithme]

I just want to say how fantastic it is that we're getting a completely unbiased, knowledgeable analysis of Rangers' administration from Bearwithme. Bravo, kind sir!

I thank you.

[HTG]

It bothers me greatly. He is paid by the tax funded BBC, the organisation that spends millions promoting it's world wide news service as the last bastion of impartiality, so it is his duty to ask questions to help reveal the truth.

His failure to do this doesn't just show him up to be the snivelling little rat that he is but also highlights the BBC's failure to carry out it's tax funded purpose and reveal what they and the whole of the Glasgow, and probably Scottish, media undoubtedly knew.

The BBC are as guilty as sin as being part of what is a major institutional cover up of the goings on at Ibrox and shows how rotten to the core the public and private sector corridors of power in Scotland are.

So the first hundred or so years of blatant sectarianism is ok as they paid their billys bills? Every moment of this vile institution's history is tainted.

I think you know fine well what I mean. By all means get on your high horse about sectarianism or the BBC being a public service provider funded by the govt. But those are not relevant points here. Rangers generally paid their way for the first 120 years of their history - that's the crux of this debate. The fact that they are vile influences a lot of the commentary. But it's somewhat ironic that their financial skullduggery has coincided with the biggest change in their approach as a club to the signing of catholic players. Prior to that their approach was accepted by every footballing authority since their formation so if you're going to rage about their history then a hell of a lot of people are accountable. I never said their sectarianism was ok - but the context here is a club losing 120 years of its history and in Scottish football terms it is an institution whether you or me like it or not.

The BBC are supposed to report facts and news. This stuff about them being part of a cover up is a huge pile of shite. They employ good and bad journalists - same as everyone else. But folk like Chick and Traynor or Spence are first and foremost there to feed punters news from within the corridors of clubs. They never sold themselves as investigative journalists. You don't have to like them (I can't stand some of them) but see them for what they are. Incidentally, what they are is a dying breed. Chick's refusal to embrace the social media scene will kill off his type. People don't need to be spoon-fed stuff from business lunches any more. They are much more astute at asking their own questions of people who are accountable. If you sift this thread, you'll find hundreds of inciteful questions and loads of commentary which is bang on the money. Chick's journalism style is put to the sword by social media and he should either accept that it exists or bale out. If he accepts it exists then he should embrace the good and ridicule the awful - rather than ridicule the whole lot. That is backing the wrong horse completely.

[betting competition]

Yes, Whyte asked the Court (after the Court offered him the opportunity). You may recall that the administrators had to go back to the Court of Session to confirm their appointment following a technical hitch. Nobody opposed that and, as I understand it, nor did anyone contest their initial appointment once Whyte was offered the chance to make the application. Bottom line is the Court of Session appointed them and they have to report to that Court.

Indeed although if the HMRC guys put their people in place it could have been a lot worse and they would have digged a lot deeper. For Rangers its better to have administration appointed by Whyte than those in HMRC.

[7-2]

I think you know fine well what I mean.

Oh yes, I know exactly what you mean.

[PeeTeeJag]

Just spent the last 15 minutes looking through the HMRC website for the section entitled "If you have racked up a silly amount of debt and dont want to pay it all back.", but I couldnt find it.

It goes on about having to pay your tax back IN FULL. That any assets are to be sold off to pay the debt. That if you cant pay the debt IN FULL straight away then an agreement can be reached with HMRC to pay what you can now and installments to eventually pay the FULL AMOUNT. Oh and that they will issue a winding up order if it is shown that you will be unable to pay the FULL AMOUNT owed after investigation.

Has the page that deals with taking a few pence in the pound instead of the full amount been taken down???

My worry is that HMRC will turn around and say "right we'll come to a deal this time, but just to let all other clubs know, this is the very last time!!!"

[Bearwithme]

I think you know fine well what I mean. By all means get on your high horse about sectarianism or the BBC being a public service provider funded by the govt. But those are not relevant points here. Rangers generally paid their way for the first 120 years of their history - that's the crux of this debate. The fact that they are vile influences a lot of the commentary. But it's somewhat ironic that their financial skullduggery has coincided with the biggest change in their approach as a club to the signing of catholic players. Prior to that their approach was accepted by every footballing authority since their formation so if you're going to rage about their history then a hell of a lot of people are accountable. I never said their sectarianism was ok - but the context here is a club losing 120 years of its history and in Scottish football terms it is an institution whether you or me like it or not.

The BBC are supposed to report facts and news. This stuff about them being part of a cover up is a huge pile of shite. They employ good and bad journalists - same as everyone else. But folk like Chick and Traynor or Spence are first and foremost there to feed punters news from within the corridors of clubs. They never sold themselves as investigative journalists. You don't have to like them (I can't stand some of them) but see them for what they are. Incidentally, what they are is a dying breed. Chick's refusal to embrace the social media scene will kill off his type. People don't need to be spoon-fed stuff from business lunches any more. They are much more astute at asking their own questions of people who are accountable. If you sift this thread, you'll find hundreds of inciteful questions and loads of commentary which is bang on the money. Chick's journalism style is put to the sword by social media and he should either accept that it exists or bale out. If he accepts it exists then he should embrace the good and ridicule the awful - rather than ridicule the whole lot. That is backing the wrong horse completely.

Just to be clear on the question of sectarianism, Rangers were founded with no religious or sectarian associations whatsoever and as it happens signed their first known Catholic player (Pat Lafferty) before Celtic even existed. Not that I'm suggesting the club is blameless, just getting the facts straight.

As for Chico, he's just a numpty. He seems to there largely for comic relief. My overall view on Scottish football hacks is that they are generally pretty useless and lazy. Most of them aren't much good at writing about actual football so I don't know why anyone would expect them to be good at financial investigations and reporting.

[Bearwithme]

Indeed although if the HMRC guys put their people in place it could have been a lot worse and they would have digged a lot deeper. For Rangers its better to have administration appointed by Whyte than those in HMRC.

Like I said, the administrators were appointed by the Court of Session and are accountable to it. So it's not at all in their interests do a bad or even a dodgy job. They are a long-established American firm, listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Does anyone seriously think they would defy one of the highest courts in the land and get involved in jiggery-pokery over a Scottish "soccer" club?

[Granny Danger]

I think you know fine well what I mean. By all means get on your high horse about sectarianism or the BBC being a public service provider funded by the govt. But those are not relevant points here. Rangers generally paid their way for the first 120 years of their history - that's the crux of this debate. The fact that they are vile influences a lot of the commentary. But it's somewhat ironic that their financial skullduggery has coincided with the biggest change in their approach as a club to the signing of catholic players. Prior to that their approach was accepted by every footballing authority since their formation so if you're going to rage about their history then a hell of a lot of people are accountable. I never said their sectarianism was ok - but the context here is a club losing 120 years of its history and in Scottish football terms it is an institution whether you or me like it or not.

The BBC are supposed to report facts and news. This stuff about them being part of a cover up is a huge pile of shite. They employ good and bad journalists - same as everyone else. But folk like Chick and Traynor or Spence are first and foremost there to feed punters news from within the corridors of clubs. They never sold themselves as investigative journalists. You don't have to like them (I can't stand some of them) but see them for what they are. Incidentally, what they are is a dying breed. Chick's refusal to embrace the social media scene will kill off his type. People don't need to be spoon-fed stuff from business lunches any more. They are much more astute at asking their own questions of people who are accountable. If you sift this thread, you'll find hundreds of inciteful questions and loads of commentary which is bang on the money. Chick's journalism style is put to the sword by social media and he should either accept that it exists or bale out. If he accepts it exists then he should embrace the good and ridicule the awful - rather than ridicule the whole lot. That is backing the wrong horse completely.

Yes, but I think the people who contribute to P&B are very much the exception to the rule. I can't be arsed finding out the circulation figures for the Record and the Sun, but I know it is very high. It pains me to say it but many people are happy to sit back and largely beieve the shit that is fed to them by the print and broadcast media. Sadly I can't see that changing anytime soon, even with the advance of 'new media'. Whilst this is the case Young, traynor and their ilk will continue to be able to peddle pish.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

No, just getting things clear.

You can see why there was talking of "lessons not being learned" etc when it had happened before.

Can't you?

And how many times and to how many clubs does it have to happen for the braindead bigots at the big hoose to get the hint?

KTID

[betting competition]

Like I said, the administrators were appointed by the Court of Session and are accountable to it. So it's not at all in their interests do a bad or even a dodgy job. They are a long-established American firm, listed on the New York Stock Exchange. Does anyone seriously think they would defy one of the highest courts in the land and get involved in jiggery-pokery over a Scottish "soccer" club?

No they have to do everything above the law but what i'm saying is the HMRC financial people would have digged a lot deeper which has a possibility of hurting previous owners as they would have went over the accounts with a fine toothcomb

[Bearwithme]

And how many times and to how many clubs does it have to happen for the braindead bigots at the big hoose to get the hint?

KTID

I'm not sure you grasped my point. The fact that it was Dundee's second time in administration helped explain the nature of the particular comments quoted. If you'd rather just rant against Rangers, so be it.

[eightmile]

It was of course no secret that Rangers used the scheme. It was stated in the club's accounts every year and those accounts were submitted to both the tax and football authorities.

....not denying that only making the point that when the forensic auditors were investigating the Boumsong deal to Newcastle (not Rangers) they reputedly discovered extensive information of the exact detail of the players and staff involved in the EBT scheme at RFC, which was not in the club's accounts. We all agree EBTs are legal if applied within the terms and condition of tax law. It is the unpublished information that has been described as 'voodoo' but since I have no knowledge what is in those various files I can't comment on the state of their voodoo-ness.

...i also agree your posts are illuminating and fair and unlike some on this thread I do not have an SPL axe to grind I'm a student of voodoo

[Bearwithme]

No they have to do everything above the law but what i'm saying is the HMRC financial people would have digged a lot deeper which has a possibility of hurting previous owners as they would have went over the accounts with a fine toothcomb

Just in case there's any confusion, it wouldn't have been HMRC employees doing the job. It would have been a different firm of insolvency practitioners. It really would be very stupid of Duff & Phelps to wilfully do a shoddy or dodgy job and I really don't think they're that stupid. It could have a seriously bad effect on their business.

[Fife Saint]

I don't know if you listened to Sportsound last night, but if you did, you would have heard Chico and Roddy Forsyth blaming the Business Editors, saying that it wasn't the job of football journos to look into the business side.

That's fucking hilarious.