Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[WeeHectorPar]

The title says it all.

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=220614

"Before I make a c*** of myself elsewhere"

WVB

• 
• If you obey societys' rules you will be societys' tools
• 

• Group: True Blue
• Topics: 1,321
• Posts: 24,250
• Rep: 1,028
• Joined: 22-December 07
• Gender:Male
• Location:Teuchterland

Posted Yesterday, 08:12 PM

.....as I've done it loads of times here already, it wont matter to ask......

Can anyone explain to me how Rangers FC benefitted from Craig Whytes failure to pay tax/national insurance?

I assume we did benefit from it somehow, if we are being punished for it now, but I am unable to see how. Maybe one of our smarter members (thats pretty much any of you) could help me out here?

Could one of our double agents who can count from 1 to 14,000,000 please help this guy out as none of the natives will be able to explain.

OH god the trouble I will get in answering thsi - cause it is NOT that simple.

The simple - anti-rangers view!

By not paying tax we were living beyond our means - - we should have sold players and reduced the wage bill and operated withing our cash means. By not doing this we had better players and a larger squad than we would have otherwise - ergo we could be said to have cheated. - now lets forget that Hearts did similar with no charges - and Kilmarnock (and I am sure a few others)

The less simple view

BUT the less simples answer is that IF all the cash from Ticketus had come in and with a bit of bank support and cash management we could have maintained the squad, paid our taxes and 'every little thing would have been all right' -

NOW a supportive SFA could have bought the second arguement that it MAY have been Shytes fault and suspended sentence until all the myraid of court cases have finished (in about 4 years time) but by then no one would give a fk.

[Ric]

Has Doncaster had widened discussions with Green about other clubs financial situations?

I think it can be taken as written that Doncaster will be lobbying the pro-OF SPL in order to "retain the brand" or other similar taglines. As we all know, lobbying involves taking a grain of truth and building a massive amount of spin around it to suit your argument.

It's clear from Green's claim that 5 or 6 SPL clubs will go out of business if there is no Rangers in the league, that this information will have come from Doncaster as I don't believe Mr Green has neither contacted each and every SPL club to confirm the situation, nor has he been privy to their accounts. It's made all the more interesting considering Sky/ESPN hasn't provided a bid for the TV rights without Rangers in the league.

[greyman]

Just read the BBC report with mr kerrs rant about you can't hold one man accountable for a company. Seemed to that there is a similarity between, albeit on a smaller scale, of RBS. RBS as a whole got panned for a man who basically did what he wanted to piss folk off.

[thelegendthatis]

This is from Rangersmedia.

Without doubt this is a Chic Young posting (anyone know his id on RM?).

Note the writing style, terms like "it is not that simple", and the bias throughout. Best of all he demonstrates his inability to grasp anything of the financial machinations, with a total lack of understanding of how Scottish football is governed. It is just Chic all over.

Maybe RM will be so impressed they will promise him big bucks to write for them (exclusively) , and leave the BBC.

EBT for Chic.

Quote

OH god the trouble I will get in answering thsi - cause it is NOT that simple.

The simple - anti-rangers view!

By not paying tax we were living beyond our means - - we should have sold players and reduced the wage bill and operated withing our cash means. By not doing this we had better players and a larger squad than we would have otherwise - ergo we could be said to have cheated. - now lets forget that Hearts did similar with no charges - and Kilmarnock (and I am sure a few others)

The less simple view

BUT the less simples answer is that IF all the cash from Ticketus had come in and with a bit of bank support and cash management we could have maintained the squad, paid our taxes and 'every little thing would have been all right' -

NOW a supportive SFA could have bought the second arguement that it MAY have been Shytes fault and suspended sentence until all the myraid of court cases have finished (in about 4 years time) but by then no one would give a fk.

[Jim Leighton]

Seem to remember a Junior team, (think it was Bo'ness Utd), had got to the final of the cup and romped the league but because none of the players were properly registered they got demoted and punted out the cup. Dont think it was the SFA that was behind that punishment but if the EBT enquiry proves the players had two contracts then surely a similar punishment will be met out?

The weak SJFA only threw them out the cup. They ignored that a number of players were ineligible for league games.

[sparky88]

The title says it all.

http://forum.rangers...howtopic=220614

"Before I make a c*** of myself elsewhere"

Could one of our double agents who can count from 1 to 14,000,000 please help this guy out as none of the natives will be able to explain.

We've already dealt with him in this thread, he's cdp1072 or something.... I hope he comes back.

[Green&White Zebra]

I will sign off by saying that I do not (unlike a lot of the OF extremists), tarnish everyone by the same brush. I have a lot of great friends in Glasgow, but the amount of narrow minded bigoted people on that side of the country is disturbing and museum standard. Take a step back and look at the situation from a modernist point of view. The attitudes of the OF in general is largely aimed at maintaining a narrow minded point of view that is centuries old and not befitting a nation that should be looking to the future and shaking off the negatives of a dodgy past. All Glaswegians who believe in a bright future can join us at the museum gates to change the damage done. Dundee ain't perfect (far far from it and at times complicit in the "problems"), but let's make use of this collective opportunity to rid ourselves of a backward attitude that makes Scotland look like a country forever a few chapters behind in the writing of world history. Now is the perfect opportunity to rid ourselves of this ridiculous stereotype that tarnishes our game and our cultural image.

That side of the country being the West and Clyde valley in particular ? Glasgow only contributes about 30% of the population of that region. The attitudes you are describing are in reality an industrial Scotland phenomenon, which takes in the entire Central Belt. Indeed, as a Glaswegian, I've found that the most regressive attitudes have tended to reside in the small industry towns. Glasgow, if anything, has succeeded in becoming a melting pot to a large degree. Things to flare up, particularly on match days (when many folk come into the city), but to hold up the city as a divided warzone simpy isn't accurate.

[thelegendthatis]

From the Scotsman

Kerr said: "My initial reaction was that I was extremely disappointed. There was also an element of anger, which I'm sure will be felt across the supporter base."

"When we looked at the reasons for the decision, the rationale behind it and the circumstances in which it occurred, we had a clear view that Craig Whyte was the villain of the piece here. It looks as though the way they have reasoned the case is that effectively the actions of the owner apply equally to the actions of the club. We think that was totally unreasonable."

Quite obviously this idiotic clown hasn't even read the report from the tribunal. If he did (or could?) all would be explained. He talks about "the way they reasoned the case" as if it was a pub chat about who was the best Rangers centre forward ever. The tribunal was based on facts and precedent. Read the damn thing man

How do people like Kerr end up as a spokesman for anything?

He said: "Over the years Rangers have bought players from other Scottish clubs. They have effectively propped them up with pretty sizeable transfer fees. If I was the chairman of, for example, Motherwell or St Mirren, and I had a promising player, I would be thinking that Rangers might be interested in signing him. That money would be very welcome by them I'm sure."

No comment needed.

http://tinyurl.com/7l7qywo

Edited May 18, 2012 by thelegendthatis

[Richie]

My mate tried to put the argument forward that Killie etc spent money which wasnt theirs. The difference is that Killie have an agreement with the bank, therefore the funding is from a legitimate source. Rangers didnt have that with the paye. That was theft/fraud.

[Montague Withnail]

The maroon side!!!

Always considered Rangers and Celtic to be one and the same. Part of the brand that is "the Old Firm". Whether its the green division or the blue division it matters not a jot mate. They are exactly the same. Nowt without each other.

When it comes to trying to leave to join the EPL? They put out a joint statement.

When it comes to charging a 5% handling fee for selling away game tickets on behalf of the host club? Again, a joint statement!

It's actually quite amusing to think that out there are thousands of OF fans who genuinely believe there is a rivalry between the two clubs.

Is there f**k. At boardroom level, both clubs are thick as thieves. Workin together to protect the duopoly, whilst wryly smiling at the news of another poor c**t being stabbed on the streets of Glasgow, for wearing the wrong colour jersey.

Celtic and Rangers = two cheeks of the same shit stained arse.

Way back in the day Celtic and Rangers colluded to fix draws in cup games between them meaning more money from replays - hence the 'Old Firm'.

They conned their own fans for money.

[madwullie]

So what is the best outcome for us diddies, realistically?

Rangers in SPL as newco crippled by financial fair play and embargo - would these punishments still stand?

Rangers in SPL after CVA with embargo?

Rangers out of SPL and (I assume) admitted to SFL3 as newco - would embargo etc still stand?

[Ric]

Without doubt this is a Chic Young posting

Er, I have considerable doubt. I couldn't care less whether Chic Young posts to RM or not, or what he posts if he does, but what you quoted has little similar in style and has numerous grammatical and spelling errors.

[Montague Withnail]

I'd always thought Sky saw it as a two way street with the viewing figures v attendance argument. For every home game they show from Ibrox or Parkhead there are between 45 and 60 thousand folk inside the ground that can't be watching the game on Sky.

Can't imagine the viewing figures for SPL games are high enough that they'd want to regularly take that number of people out their figures.

The recent poorly-attended cup tie against Dundee Utd shows what happens when OF homes games are on TV.

Edited May 18, 2012 by Montague Withnail

[Ric]

He said: "Over the years Rangers have bought players from other Scottish clubs. They have effectively propped them up with pretty sizeable transfer fees. If I was the chairman of, for example, Motherwell or St Mirren, and I had a promising player, I would be thinking that Rangers might be interested in signing him. That money would be very welcome by them I'm sure."

.. er, yes.. of course that is the case. In fact I am wondering if there is a single Scottish club that feels it got market value for their player when they moved to Rangers.

[Gaspode]

From today's Telegraph.....more bad news for the Bears

New blow for Rangers with threat of SPL sanctions

Rangers have suffered a second body blow in the space of 24 hours with the confirmation on Thursday that any newco would face sanctions from the Scottish Premier League should the ruling body’s ongoing investigation into alleged non-disclosure of payments to players find against the beleaguered Glasgow giants.

Club in crisis: Rangers have suffered a second body blow in the space of 24 hours

The SPL’s chief executive, Neil Doncaster, disclosed to newspaper reporters that their legal team are currently studying every contract issued to players by Rangers since the formation of the elite division in 1998 and 2010.

It covers some of the same ground as Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs’ case against the club for the alleged misuse of Employee Benefit Trusts. HMRC claim that the scheme, introduced by former owner Sir David Murray, amounts to tax evasion and a verdict from the top-tier tax tribunal (which could rule Rangers to be liable for up to £75 million in unpaid tax plus penalties) is imminent.

On Wednesday Rangers lost an appeal to the Scottish Football Association’s independent tribunal, which upheld the original punishment of a 12-month transfer embargo and a fine of £100,000 for breaching their articles of association.

The news for the consortium fronted by former Sheffield United chief executive Charles Green then took a turn for the worse when Doncaster revealed that any sporting penalties imposed by the authorities on the club as it currently exists would be passed on to a new entity.

“You would expect the football club to take with it responsibility for anything which emerged from that investigation,” said the latter.

“It will take some time and, ultimately, it’s being done by our lawyers. They will bring the case forward to us and the SPL board when they can do so.

“How long will it take? How long has the HMRC case taken? These things take as long as they take. These are complicated matters, far more complicated than people might think.

“The issue will be; have any of our rules been breached? If there is a prima facie case that they have then we will act accordingly.

“The rules are there and all clubs are treated equally under the current rules. The investigation is going on in accordance with the rules set down at various stages of the SPL’s history.

“There is only one rule within our whole set of rules where the breach has a pre-determined sanction: if you go into administration the sanction is a 10-point sporting penalty, although perhaps that will be increased.

“All the rest of the other rule breaches have 18 potential sanctions, unlimited in scope. Whoever makes the decision on any disciplinary matter, be it the board or an independent commission, there is no set sanction in place.”

Doncaster, though, believes that the newco option has become unfairly discredited in the media since Rangers were plunged into administration over three months ago.

“Whenever I speak to people about the distinction between a Company Voluntary Agreement and a newco what I keep being told is that it’s simply wrong that any club should be able to create a newco and shed debt - as if a CVA doesn’t lead to the shedding of debt,” he said.

“Administration is the protection the court gives you when you can’t pay your debts. There are two ways out of that; one is a newco, one is a CVA.”

Green was at Hampden on Thursday to be grilled by Doncaster and the SFA’s chief executive, Stewart Regan. “When we offered to buy the club we realised what the potential was,” said Green.

“Last night’s announcement was an option we’d considered when we bought the club.”

Asked whether he was considering a legal action against the SFA for dismissing their appeal, he replied: “We’re discussing all the options that are available to the club."

[sparky88]

I'd always thought Sky saw it as a two way street with the viewing figures v attendance argument. For every home game they show from Ibrox or Parkhead there are between 45 and 60 thousand folk inside the ground that can't be watching the game on Sky.

Can't imagine the viewing figures for SPL games are high enough that they'd want to regularly take that number of people out their figures.

Viewing figures are an irrelevance to Sky, well for their sports coverage anyway. The money for Sky is in subscribers, not advertising (course they do advertise but, as only a relatively small number of people watch, the sum gained from that tends not to be high)

[djchapsticks]

He said: "Over the years Rangers have bought players from other Scottish clubs. They have effectively propped them up with pretty sizeable transfer fees. If I was the chairman of, for example, Motherwell or St Mirren, and I had a promising player, I would be thinking that Rangers might be interested in signing him. That money would be very welcome by them I'm sure."

Ridiculous. I can't remember us ever selling a player directly to Rangers since Ian Ferguson and that was 25 years ago FFS, so the transfer fee point is totally moot.

I'm sure Stewart Gilmour also doesn't sit at night and hope Rangers are interested in taking Kenny McLean or Darren McGregor off our hands. Nor does the Motherwell Chairman sit and hope they swoop for any of their talents.

Deluded. Totally, deluded.

[madwullie]

Last time Rangers made a bid for one of our players we turned it down (£1 mil for Mark Reynolds) - I can't remember the last time before that that we actually sold a player straight to them.

[Spain]

I wish they'd stop going on about "footballing men" - in general, the majority of "footballing men" are as thick as f**k, and should not be anywhere near any decision making process.

[Benjamin_Nevis]

I wish they'd stop going on about "footballing men" - in general, the majority of "footballing men" are as thick as f**k, and should not be anywhere near any decision making process.

Indeed.

Sandy Jardine is a "football man" and seems to have difficulty grasping the most basic of concepts.