Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

It is stunning to think that there are still no figures in the public domain from Sky/ESPN in regard to what a TV deal would be should the league contain Rangers or not. It seems to be a key point to all this talk of teams going under. Rangers and the SPL seem very keen to fire out the repeated line that 5 or 6 teams would go to the wall, but just what are they basing that on? The fact that without Rangers there would be no deal or that without them it would be reduced. It's fair to say that Sky/ESPN would naturally look to reduce the monies paid should there not be OF derbies, nobody could really blame them for that, but to what extent still seems to be shrouded in mystery.

I just don't understand how any club can claim they will be losing £Xm when they are not in the possession of the full facts. Houston has gone on to say something akin to suggesting they would lose a £1m. How does he know this? Has he been told by Thomson? And if so, who told him?

There is no information as the TV companies will be keeping cards close to their chest.

Talk of losing £1 million is nonsense, there will be a tv deal unless Doncaster f*cks up beyond anything I can imagine. Yes it may be lower, but given that the diddy clubs will then be able to rejig the Prize money output then it will only be Celtic getting the shaft.

I have done a bit more analysis into the figures I posted earlier in the thread, and assuming that the SPL (without Rangers) can vote through a linear split of TV money, then going by the assumptions I've read (ie. this year we are on £12M a year payout and next year we were scheduled to move to a £16M a season deal).

Then for the majority of the league to break even on what they achieved last season (assuming a similar league placing):

The SPL TV Deal could Drop to 60.075% of that publicised and clubs would lose NO money (out-with 1st place and to a very much smaller degree 3rd)

Figures available to anyone who cares.

Bottom line, slashing the TV deal for a Rangerless SPL would pretty much only affect Celtic. I can only assume, going by the noises coming from most clubs that they just haven't done the numbers.

EDIT: for dodgy spelling

Edited by HanoMaSano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cos Ticketus are being offered a pittance by Charleton Green, even if accepted they'll chase the balance. My simpleton question is why Whyte ain't chasing the mighty Ranjurs for the £18 million he paid Lloyds to keep the insolvency off yer backs for a while

245 posts...240 in SPL forum...East Fife ma arse!!! :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't reveal my source but I have it on good authority the reply from Ticketus has already been prepared.

34oc3yw.jpg

"regret fucking with be"

oh god

wasps_vespula_vulgaris_queen_face.jpg

they're commingsad.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can only believe that this must be funded by people in HK, as it is beyond belief that Rangers consider it not possible to pay the local paper shop a couple of quid but utterly acceptable to send players on a junket to the other side of the planet. Incredulous would be the apt description if this is coming out of their own pocket.

Mind you, the levels of arrogance are not confined to the Far East. I believe Rangers still spend nights in hotels for games that take place in the Central Belt.

This is the mob that stayed in a hotel in Edinburgh prior to the game at Tynecastle and stayed in Dunblane Hydro before the game at Perth last weekend. Ripping the p1sh doesnt even come close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who have asked for thread to be locked up at page 1690 two things why NOT !!! page 1872 when the tax dodgers afterbirth was born and straight after that page 1873 when the feckers started cheating :D so a few more landmarks why

"THE BIG THREAD MUST STAY OPEN" :thumsup2.

Edit also page 2012 for their administration.:lol:

Edited by hellbhoy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1337348405[/url]' post='6249945']

OK i am just a simple Rangers supporter and if this has been explained before i am sorry...Why are ticketus being added to the CVA at Rangers AND pursuing Craig Whyte through the courts for the same £27 million? Surely one or the other owes the money but not both.

From the legal stuff I read early in the process Ticketus was trying to do a future flow securitization, where instead of lending money to the company you buy current and future assets that produce somewhat predictable revenue streams. This is legal, normal and provides cheaper costs of funds to Rangers since if done right the purchaser is partially or entirely insulated from insolvency of the company.

The trouble for Ticketus is they seem to have bollixed up the legal form of the sale. Lord Hodge indicated in an early decision that Scots law governed the creation of the asset trust and unlike under English law it would not create a valid sale of the tickets. This wasn't a binding decision on the point but strongly indicates Ticketus is screwed. It would be rare, but not unheard of, for something like this to happen.

If Ticketus is screwed its treated as a loan instead of a sale and they join the queue in CVA or liquidation. Ticketus also appears to have guarantees from Craig Whyte that would apply to this loan.

Ticketus will have the option to try and litigate that Hodges was wrong and the sale is valid, and D&P appears to be seeking to close off that avenue now. If Ticketus doesn't come out and fight like mad it probably means they really did muck it up and I would hate to be the law firm that signed off on the documents. Ticketus may in the alternative argue that Craig Whyte's floating charge is valid at least up to the £18 million of Lloyd's debt they provided and they can thus step into a secured creditor position once Whyte fails to pay the guaranty as expected.

It's perfectly valid for Ticketus to argue they own the tickets, they are creditors of Rangers and/or they are creditors of Whyte and Whyte is a creditor of Rangers, but ultimately only one of those arguments can apply to the money they advanced.

There will be a shitstorm of lawsuits regardless, the only question is how deep Rangers get dragged in.

Hope that helps.

(edited for IPad muppetry)

Edited by GirondistNYC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who have asked for thread to be locked up at page 1690 two things why NOT !!! page 1872 when the tax dodgers afterbirth was born and straight after that page 1873 when the feckers started cheating :D so a few more landmarks why

"THE BIG THREAD MUST STAY OPEN" :thumsup2.

Edit also page 2012 for their administration.:lol:

I'm all for some Rangers pointing-and-laughing but save this drastic banter...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK i am just a simple Rangers supporter and if this has been explained before i am sorry...Why are ticketus being added to the CVA at Rangers AND pursuing Craig Whyte through the courts for the same £27 million? Surely one or the other owes the money but not both.

Whye holds the floating charge over Ibrox.

Ticketus will get the floating charge from Whyte upon liquidation and will own Ibrox.

Any newco Rangers will need to rent Ibrox from Ticketus.

To all intents and purposes, the money that Rangers fans pay for their season tickets will go to Ticketus for the rent of Ibrox.

It doesn’t really matter which way you cut it – Ticketus will get their money – and it will be paid for by Rangers season ticket holders! :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ticketus paid for the ticket sales for next 3 years to the company not Whyte so I cant see how they can be shafted with a couple of quid from Hughie Green when those tickets will still be sold by said company.That one seems a nice bit of business.

Also still nobody explains how Hughie is going to slither past paying the football debts without screwing his cva deal.Eufa dont appreciate teams reneging on these debts and are liable to throw a lather large book at them if they try offering pence in the pound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To my mind if we can't sign anyone but we can keep the existing players why wouldn't we win the league?

Has he heard of injuries, suspensions and Kirk Broadfoot?

Big Kirky is decent - if played in his best position. Centre of defence. For a 'dud' he did no' bad being flung in at full-back once they sold Alan Hutton.

Anyway, I digress.... Instead of asking 'Are they dead yet?' at moments like this, I shall amend it to 'Have Doncaster and his gang of shitehawk chairmen voted their rotting corpse back into their boys club yet?'

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ticketus paid for the ticket sales for next 3 years to the company not Whyte so I cant see how they can be shafted with a couple of quid from Hughie Green when those tickets will still be sold by said company.That one seems a nice bit of business.

Also still nobody explains how Hughie is going to slither past paying the football debts without screwing his cva deal.Eufa dont appreciate teams reneging on these debts and are liable to throw a lather large book at them if they try offering pence in the pound.

Did Uefa intervene in the Livi/Dundee administrations?

I can see Uefa taking a dim view on a NewCo swanning back in as if nothing's happened, though. Especially the issue of dual contracts/dodgy player registrations (allegedly)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ticketus paid for the ticket sales for next 3 years to the company not Whyte so I cant see how they can be shafted with a couple of quid from Hughie Green when those tickets will still be sold by said company.That one seems a nice bit of business.

Also still nobody explains how Hughie is going to slither past paying the football debts without screwing his cva deal.Eufa dont appreciate teams reneging on these debts and are liable to throw a lather large book at them if they try offering pence in the pound.

Who are Eufa??? and what is a Lather Large Book???

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
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...