Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

Sorry, we can't take the credit for this one. I think it comes from South Korea

เรนเจอร์ต้องตายสำหรับชีวิตของสก็อตฟุตบอล - translate it!

Good to see investigative journalism is alive and well. This video has explained more about what is happening than the idiots pretending to be proper journalists we have here have managed.

Presume เรนเจอร์ต้องตายสำหรับชีวิตของสก็อตฟุตบอล means "you heard it here first".

Edited by thelegendthatis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am so bored waiting for the inevitable liquidation announcement - that I have noticed that this Big Rangers Administration Thread - is B.R.A.T. - which I think is fitting.

Also if you google HMRC and Tax Avoidance there is some interesting reading regarding EBT's in Spotlight 5

Spotlight 5: Using trusts and similar entities to reward employees - PAYE and NICs, Corporation Tax and Inheritance Tax

HMRC are aware that companies have been seeking to reward employees without operating PAYE (Pay As You Earn)/NICs (National Insurance contributions) by making payments through trusts and other intermediaries that favour the employees or their families. The arrangements usually seek to secure a Corporation Tax deduction, as if the amounts were earnings at the time they are allocated, and also defer PAYE/NICs or avoid them altogether.HMRC's view is that at the time the funds are allocated to the employee or his/her beneficiaries, those funds become earnings on which PAYE and NICs are due and should be accounted for by the employer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've no idea... considering that clubs outside the OF paying transfers has become rare as hen's teeth, and belts are tight, I'd doubt a significant sum of cash is expended by the Other 10 toward agents.

You don't have to have a transfer fee for agents to be paid. mad.gif

But it would be good to know what Walter and Ally and Martin Bain's pal Willie Mackay made out of Rangers over the last few years. Shame he missed a fee on the Daniel Cousin transfer that was talked about even after 14th Feb. Who I wonder was pushing the administrators to try to put that one through, and more importantly, WHY??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can anyone point to a single example where HMRC have agreed a CVA when they have been in a position to block one - i.e. being owed more than 25% of the debt.

If there is such an example how much were they getting paid in the pound?

Yes, not naming names, but I've seen it and within the last fortnight.

However, I'm not conscious of them doing so within football.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To all the lurkers checking out Pie and Bovril.

Sign up, its brilliant!

Hmm. It really depends on who the lurkers are.

If you are lurking from one of the Rangers fans sites, dont bother.. we have enough c***s on here as it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the risk of revealing my true identity because i was assured of an anonymous position when joining this panel but my uncles sisters nieces nephew's brothers dad (find me now bears.....) works quite high up in the corporate banking sector and deals with HMRC after the fiasco they were in. It would be unprecedented in a case of this magnitude to accept less than 10p in the pound. That's what he has been told, pardon the pun, off the record.

Edited by chrismcarab
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect it means £600,000 per club.

E.g. TV deal next season supposed to be worth £16M.

If actually worth ~£7M, then there's a £9M loss... equating to £600k for the clubs otherwise expected to finish 3rd-12th (they get 68% of prizemonies). Tbh it could be more than £600k if gates and future naming rights deals are taken into consideration.

Where did your £7m figure come from? Plucked out of mid air?

Why would the teams in 3rd-12th continue to get 68%? Without Rangers, everyone would move up a place and earn more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did your £7m figure come from? Plucked out of mid air?

Why would the teams in 3rd-12th continue to get 68%? Without Rangers, everyone would move up a place and earn more.

Yes, it was an approximation - but given I don't buy the Daily Express (and I'd doubt they have based the figure on a detailed breakdown anyway) that seems fair enough. Since TV is interested in 4x OF derbies, then OF away games and Edinburgh derbies, and then some bits-n-bobs predominantly to fill the schedule, I don't see it as particularly unreasonable to base a hypothetical example upon TV paying slightly under half of what they were intending to pay, and slightly over half of what they currently pay, for the diminished product.

And unless Sky-ESPN has explicitly told SPL what they'll pay for a Rangers-less product, and it becomes public, then hypothetical examples are all the discussion can be based upon.

If Rangers folded and that happened, then whoever finishes behind Celtic would get about what 3rd currently gets IIRC. Everyone below that would lose an average of £500-600k (except whoever comes in from SFL1, I suppose, in that they get more than otherwise). So "they could lose £600k" seems a fair general statement, tbh, since 9 of 10 of them might.

As things stand the Other 10 should get 68% of ~£20.5M next season, so ~£1.4M each.

If the TV deal was halved they'd get 78.5% of ~£11.5M, so £900k.

Edited by HibeeJibee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe this but this thread (and soap opera) has taken over my life! I found out last night that the man who introduced me to Scottish football and nurtured me as a Dundee fan (my old man) has about as long to live as Rangers and all I can do is read this to find out what's going down! I'm not right! I just hope Rangers die before he does so he goes with a smirk on his face!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it was an approximation - but given I don't buy the Daily Express (and I'd doubt they have based the figure on a detailed breakdown anyway) that seems fair enough. Since TV is interested in 4x OF derbies, then OF away games and Edinburgh derbies, and then some bits-n-bobs predominantly to fill the schedule, I don't see it as particularly unreasonable to base a hypothetical example upon TV paying slightly under half of what they were intending to pay, and slightly over half of what they currently pay, for the diminished product.

And unless Sky-ESPN has explicitly told SPL what they'll pay for a Rangers-less product, and it becomes public, then hypothetical examples are all the discussion can be based upon.

If Rangers folded and that happened, then whoever finishes behind Celtic would get about what 3rd currently gets IIRC. Everyone below that would lose an average of £500-600k (except whoever comes in from SFL1, I suppose, in that they get more than otherwise). So "they could lose £600k" seems a fair general statement, tbh, since 9 of 10 of them might.

Professor David Hillier reckons that, rather than the £600k quoted by the Express it might be nearer £250k. How he came to that figure I don't know.

“@ScotExpress: #SPL clubs could lose £600k a season if #Rangers out of the top flight http://bit.ly/ICA6wQ #sports #news”

closer to £250k.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here's more retards going into the game singing about the pope ,Lennon dying,paedos etc etc the sad thing is it seems to be all young guys ,the next generation of bigots proof positive that the governing bodies and clubs attempt to stamp out bigotry had failed miserably.

Ps just noticed even smashing windows on the way in.

Rangers/Celtic

Rangers fans/Celtic fans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it was an approximation - but given I don't buy the Daily Express (and I'd doubt they have based the figure on a detailed breakdown anyway) that seems fair enough. Since TV is interested in 4x OF derbies, then OF away games and Edinburgh derbies, and then some bits-n-bobs predominantly to fill the schedule, I don't see it as particularly unreasonable to base a hypothetical example upon TV paying slightly under half of what they were intending to pay, and slightly over half of what they currently pay, for the diminished product.

And unless Sky-ESPN has explicitly told SPL what they'll pay for a Rangers-less product, and it becomes public, then hypothetical examples are all the discussion can be based upon.

If Rangers folded and that happened, then whoever finishes behind Celtic would get about what 3rd currently gets IIRC. Everyone below that would lose an average of £500-600k (except whoever comes in from SFL1, I suppose, in that they get more than otherwise). So "they could lose £600k" seems a fair general statement, tbh, since 9 of 10 of them might.

As things stand the Other 10 should get 68% of ~£20.5M next season, so ~£1.4M each.

If the TV deal was halved they'd get 78.5% of ~£11.5M, so £900k.

A price well worth paying to get these evil, thieving, lying, arrogant, and bigoted thugs out of the SPL and preferably out of Scottish football.

There is a yellow brick road awaiting the rest without Rangers. biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it worth taking a drop in standard and working our way back to a level which we should be playing at in order to keep the integrity and sport in our game? or should we try to keep a false standard and teach the next generation that the only way to get ahead in life is to cheat and stamp all over everyone on your way to the top?

Drop the standard. A fan can get just as much excitement from the Highland League than in La Liga despite the gulf in class.

Also, from following international football and watching the news in general, whoever said "cheaters never win" was a dirty lying b*****d. Very rarely do the good guys win - disturbing, sad but true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Professor David Hillier reckons that, rather than the £600k quoted by the Express it might be nearer £250k. How he came to that figure I don't know.

Well, presumably he's on the optimistic side of thoughts on what Sky-ESPN might do.

They're supposed to be paying £16M from next season, and for it to only equate to a drop of £250k per club (even working on the basis of calculating for the Other 10 and finishing 2nd-11th versus 3rd-12th) that could only fall by a few million £.

I guess I'm sceptical as to why Sky-ESPN would pay such money.

He may also mean £250k lost v this season's handouts, i.e. £250k x10 from £13M TV of ~£17.5M, i.e. not considering £Xk x10 of £3M TV increase to ~£20.5M that never started.

EDIT: the last sentence reads like it's written in swahili.

If you're currently paid £10 per hour, get a payrise to £12 per hour, but then something happens and it has to be cut to £7 per hour, have you "lost" £3 or £5?

Edited by HibeeJibee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, the Daily Express..

He worked with the Sunday People up to a few years ago and similar to Tam Cowan with Motherwell, (not that I am in any way comparing them) nearly every topic he wrote about involved the bigot club from the South side of Glasgow

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...