Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

Going by those guidelines, it would be impossible for HMRC to accept a CVA from any football club

One of their conditions is

the proposal treats all creditors within the same class equally

obviously, there is the "football creditors" law in England, but is it not the case that the football authorities in general, require all football debt to be settled in full?

I keep reading on here that HMRC don't accept CVA's though.

Thats what the blog says

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I keep hearing is that , on liquidation, IP would be up for grabs, but only as a football park since the demand for housing land in Govan is non-existent. What about housing land in the West End. I don't want to upset the Jags fans (ok, i don't give a sh1t, in fact I might enjoy winding them up), but would it not make sense for the Jags to sell Firhill and move to Ibrox? What's the land value of Firhill? It's no' B-listed or anything, is it? Nice, newish, shiny stadium for £2million? :blink:

Or how about Clyde coming (nearly) home? When I was a (very wee) boy, Glasgow had 6 teams, now there are only 4, Third Lanark gone in 67 and Clyde moved out to Cumbernauld. They could groundshare at IP with the Jags.

Edited by Happy Buddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep reading on here that HMRC don't accept CVA's though.

They do accept CVAs in certain circumstances. Their conditions for accepting CVAs have been listed on this thread on more than one occasion.

One of those conditions is that they would not accept a CVA if a company was a member of an association which required debts to other members to be paid in full. This would apply to Rangers, because there's no way that football creditors would allow them to skip back in without paying off their football debts in full (remember that there are clubs outside Scotland which are owed money).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tickets really a creditor?

Extract from the SFA tribunal report.

"74. That in the course of the latter part of August 2011 Mr Ken Olvermanwas contacted by two senior officials of the Customs and Excise (VAT)division of HMRC. Their enquiry was in relation to invoices which hadbeen discovered in the business records of Ticketus which bore to have been raised by Rangers FC. The invoices related to sums of many millions of pounds and the VAT element in each of them had been thesubject of offset by Ticketus in the submission of its VAT returns forthe last period. Such was the size and impact of this offset of VAT which had been paid by Ticketus in respect of these invoices,thatTicketus had made a claim for payment of a substantial sum to itby HMRC by way of recovery of VAT paid.

75. That Mr Ken Olverman, the Financial Controller of Rangers FC had no knowledge of the existence of the invoices purportedly raised byRangers FC. The raising of such invoices was a matter which fell squarely within his sphere of responsibility and it was inconceivable that such invoices for such large sums could be raised and issued fromthe finance office of Rangers FC without his knowledge. He had no knowledge of any agreement with Ticketus which might give rise to any invoice within the period concerned. He was unaware of anycurrent transaction with Ticketus and knew that no sums of moneyhad been received in recent times from Ticketus into any accounts of Rangers FC.

76. That in the course of September 2011 Mr Ken Olverman had sight of the said invoices. The nature and format of the invoices was entirelydifferent to that of invoices raised within the finance office of Rangers

FC. He was of the view that it appeared as though “Clip Art” computer processes had been involved in their creation. They did not appear tohim to resemble any invoices he had ever seen issued by Rangers FC.Having sight of the invoices confirmed his view even further that theyhad not been created within the finance office of Rangers FC. "

If I were a creditor of Rangers, even for the supply of newspapers or flowers, or a Davie Weir chanty, I would contest Ticketus's presence there as a creditor, which can be brought up at the creditors' meeting. . Ticketus paid over their money on the basis of what were dodgy invoices not from Rangers according to the above. They were conned. So let them chase the money they handed over in whatever way they want, but not as a valid creditor.

This will be the place where HMRC must step in and show clarity of intent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I keep hearing is that , on liquidation, IP would be up for grabs, but only as a football park since the demand for housing land in Govan is non-existent. What about housing land in the West End. I don't want to upset the Jags fans (ok, i don't give a sh1t, in fact I might enjoy winding them up), but would it not make sense for the Jags to sell Firhill and move to Ibrox? What's the land value of Firhill? It's no' B-listed or anything, is it? Nice, newish, shiny stadium for £2million? :blink:

Or how about Clyde coming (nearly) home? When I was a (very wee) boy, Glasgow had 6 teams, now there are only 4, Third Lanark gone in 67 and Clyde moved out to Cumbernauld. They could groundshare at IP with the Jags.

Have you ever been to Firhill?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's almost four months these b*****ds have been in administration.

Just out of interest, does anyone know off the top of their heads how long Motherwell and Dundee (both times) were in administration?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fact they haven't made any of it public yet suggests that it may not have gone well for them.

I agree, they only seem to want to talk when it Is good news or when they can spin it to look like good news, so in this case it can't even be spun to resemble good news.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They do accept CVAs in certain circumstances. Their conditions for accepting CVAs have been listed on this thread on more than one occasion.

One of those conditions is that they would not accept a CVA if a company was a member of an association which required debts to other members to be paid in full. This would apply to Rangers, because there's no way that football creditors would allow them to skip back in without paying off their football debts in full (remember that there are clubs outside Scotland which are owed money).

The other thing to consider is if (when) they lose the BTC tribunal. The sums owed are then down to tax avoidance and as such the HMRC view tax avoidance/evasion as illegal acts and will NOT enter into a CVA situation. This has been mentioned by a lot of tax experts and the media here seem to let it just pass them by (surprise surprise).

I honestly think all this side stepping by the SPL is purely to play for time. They dont want blood on their hands (metaphorically). They are stalling to see if Rangers demise is of their own doing rather than being the ones pushing them over the cliff. Hanging by a thread comes to mind right now though. They sealed their fate when they decided to take the SFA to court. Even their "allies" (in the loosest terms) must surely now be turning against them after putting the whole sport at risk in this country. The Sky deal is now pretty much irrelevant.

This is all before we hear of the "nuclear" aspect which I think may come out right after the court proceedings. AR15firing.gif

Tick Tock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Rangers_buzz: The SPL has given Rangers extra time – until Fri 15 June – to meet the membership criteria to play in the top flight next season.

Reading that you think that raises hope for the ordinary rangers fans, but the SPL's Dual Contract investigation is still ongoing (eh doddsy) and the SPL clubs meet on Wednesday on Newco vote.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's almost four months these b*****ds have been in administration.

Just out of interest, does anyone know off the top of their heads how long Motherwell and Dundee (both times) were in administration?

No idea, but I'm still annoyed we were denied the standard 'Administrator at the front door' shot, followed by the 'Players leaving with everthing in binbags' shot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's exactly what would happen - but for various reasons, it's difficult to see it being commercially optimal to build houses on it.

Failing that they might look at Scotstoun, groundshare at Firhill, etc.

If Jags board allow them into Firhill, dont bet against it being wrecked!! And Thistle fans would go ballistic.:angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's almost four months these b*****ds have been in administration.

Just out of interest, does anyone know off the top of their heads how long Motherwell and Dundee (both times) were in administration?

While we are at it, whats the "record" for the length of time a club has been in administration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@STVGrant: STV can reveal Rangers haven't met criteria to play in SPL next season, extension given til June 15 to provide accounts http://t.co/0FXeIVL7

What accounts?

Whytes?

D&P's ones since valentines day?

A mix of the two?

All in the administrators' hands now.

But Duff & Duffer would be mad to deliver anything close to saying they were 'audited accounts'.

Obviously every stone that is unturned finds another fine mess, with more still to come.

So whatever is produced by any professional will be so well qualified to be utterly meaningless.

Given there are qualified accountants in the SFA and SPL with reputations to uphold, they must bring this to the attention of anyone making decisions based on such information.

I trust they spell it out to the board members of these bodies so they understand that by going against these warnings they will move to a point of having personal liability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we know how much the RFFF has raised again? Just read this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-18221382

It would appear Blackburns fans have raised much more than I remember Rangers fans raising. Not something I would have expected at all.

I'm sure Rangers had 500k hard cash that they told the press. Pledges are worth f**k all in this game.

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...