Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[chico]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/18263819

love the last paragraph-Rangers' administrators Duff & Phelps said the announcement of the new proposals has caused "a delay in the sale process".

:lol:

More delays

What chance of that? Slippery sliding until they get an answer they like the sound of.

Clearly cockwomble told them Newco would get in.

Edited May 30, 2012 by chico

[Wellboy1978]

Perfect!

[monrovianmonk]

This vote today may be huge...its just struck me....if CVA rejected will Green still go ahead with his purchase as there is now no guarantee that newco will be in SPL.

[10 CC ICT]

Former Scottish FA president John McBeth.

"If you look after the sport the money will follow you, if you look after the money you'll kill the sport.''

[welshbairn]

I take it everyone has seen the D & P comments that the proposals being passed will cause 'a delay in the sale process'. Pahanahahahahahahahahahaha

I think that quote is an old one when CockWomble first announced the proposals..

[Araminta Moonbeam QC]

That is my reading - I hope it's right. There's no chance his crafty master plan will still be on the table if there is no SPL fitba.

[GirondistNYC]

1338380069[/url]' post='6287127']

Realistically, how much heat are UEFA/FIFA likely to place on the SFA/SPL behind the scenes on this issue? I need to adjust my Rangers death optimism level accordingly.

We just don't know. FIFA and UEFA both have policies against going to civil law on core matters (as opposed to, say, a touch line ban for a manager (not that I'm defending that)). FIFA clarified this with a very clear rule last year and put tons of pressure on the Swiss SFA when Sion went to court. Said pressure was a factor in Sion getting absolutely hammered by the Swiss FA, as one of the ir people said in the papers today. The cases Bears are talking about predate FIFA clarifying their policy.

UEFA is also very wedded to its financial fair play rules and clearly wants to show clubs it means business. Besitikas just got hammered or financial irregularities.

One could see FIFA pushing SFA hard to give a strong penalty to Rangers to enforce the lesson that civil law is not an option to be taken lightly. Better to make an example of high profile but unimportant Rangers now than deal with Manchester City or Chelsea later. The general toxicity around Rangers conduct makes them a wonderfully attractive target compared to other clubs with more friends and potentially narrower issues.

Cutting against that, though, is the fact the COS acted very fast and provided clarity. Also, the SFA's rules were badly drafted in providing inadequate range of enumerated punishments and imprecise language about discretion. It would be very easy for FIFA to accept something like a Scottish Cup ban as an adequate punishment and write off the brief COS interlude as the fault of flaws in the SFAs own setup. They give a warning, tell everyone to clarify their rules so it can't happen again and trust that Rangers are such a mess that nobody with sense will ever cite them as precedent. Sion, in a pinch, can be distinguished.

Ionnadis, the lawyer on newsnight last night, has extensive experience in these things and indicates that the SFA will need to be seen to do something to placate FIFA. However, he didn't indicate contrary to what ome are saying that they will demand expulsion. We can't rely on Deus Ex Machina Platini/Blatter.

[roverthemoon]

There is no such thing as a reasonable fallback with Rangers in the SPL, these bawless fcukers just want Rangers back in with the least damage done to themselves, your lot have all those nice empty seats because these fcukers don't want things to be fair and equitable.

I agree with you. The completely pointless 10,000 seats to get into the SPL has fucked us ever since and has left us with a white elephant of a stadium. I also agree that they are bawless fuckers and from day one I've been pessimistic about Rangers getting punished properly. I'm still pessimistic and wouldn't rule out nothing good out of it so the vote change is a straw to clutch at. It doesn't mean I think it is acceptable or morally right.

[Herman Hessian]

Sorry to steal your thunder Jagsman. Wife always complains about getting things done quickly but i have no idea what she means

Yeah, mines is like that to.

so, Jagsman, DXBBud spends a few minutes round at yours every once in a while does he ?

[Araminta Moonbeam QC]

1338383204[/url]' post='6287287']

I'm still trying to work out why no-one has mounted some sort of challenge to D + P intending to sell the Hvns assets, worth over £100m, to Hughie Green for £5.5m.

Surely Hector and his boys should be slapping them with a writ for liquidation ? The creditors are getting shafted every which way.

Probably waiting for D&P and Green to try and go through with it. At the moment, it's still all just moonbeam chasing, as per usual.

[Happy Buddie]

This vote today may be huge...its just struck me....if CVA rejected will Green still go ahead with his purchase as there is now no guarantee that newco will be in SPL.

Precisley, that's why H&D have stated that "the announcement of the new proposals has caused "a delay in the sale process.""

And.....that phecks up his planned "buy'em and sell'em" business plan, 'cos the quality of players he could tempt to join in the SPL is a whole different ballgame to those he could tempt to the SFL, in addition to the much reduced income, IF they were to get into the SFL, which is no "done deal" now.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Happy Buddie

[rustyarabnuts]

I'm still trying to work out why no-one has mounted some sort of challenge to D + P intending to sell the Hvns assets, worth over £100m, to Hughie Green for £5.5m.

Surely Hector and his boys should be slapping them with a writ for liquidation ? The creditors are getting shafted every which way.

IIRC it was mentioned on newsnight that although in footballing terms ,the assets are valued at 100mil, in real terms,they are worth a fraction of that

[itzdrk]

http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/18263819

love the last paragraph-Rangers' administrators Duff & Phelps said the announcement of the new proposals has caused "a delay in the sale process".

edited cos my laptops a cockwomble

i think the paragraph above is more interesting actually as it would seem charlie brown green isnt "the only show in town" as had been stated

"Miller has since withdrawn his offer, but other interested parties are pursuing his idea of forming a new company to run Rangers while the old one attempts to resolve the debt problem that led to the club going into administration"

[HibeeJibee]

Personally I think the voting structure is a red herring. I don't believe it's the Old Firm who are/have been standing in the way of restructure, for example. Distribution of TV money, yes, but I don't think that a more even spread would make the league more competitive to actually win it. I would still welcome a more even spread though.

I agree.

Neither 9-3 voting nor a smoothed prizemoney distribution is going to make much difference at all, being realistic. That doesn't stop the principle of them being right, though.

[welshbairn]

Personally I think the voting structure is a red herring. I don't believe it's the Old Firm who are/have been standing in the way of restructure, for example. Distribution of TV money, yes, but I don't think that a more even spread would make the league more competitive to actually win it. I would still welcome a more even spread though.

But, as such I don't think anything softens the blow for letting in a newco Rangers, perhaps short of ensuring they face an uphill struggle to even make 11th place.

The reason Lawwell came over all as "The Fan's Friend" saying he would be happy with league expansion to 14, but it was the nasty rebel 10 who were blocking it, was that it would cost the Old Firm nothing. They would still split 32% of the TV money and still have their 4 days of wife beating. The dilution of the TV money by bringing 2 more teams into the SPL would be entirely borne by the non OF sides, so isn't going to happen till the 11-1 rule is scrapped, and a fair distribution of revenue established.

Edited May 30, 2012 by welshbairn

[thelegendthatis]

Well, he'll be putting more money in than TBK or Whyte and it will be very much at risk. By structuring the purchase as a loan, however, he can take a security interest / floating charge over Ibrox and other assets. That means that if they get the CVA and subsequently go bust again he can recover some of the cash by being first in line for the proceeds of sale.

By the way, since it keeps cropping up, the BTC amounts ARE included in the CVA. If it goes through, HMRC can't come back and try and extract cash after the judgement - the CVA specifically makes creditors wait until the BTC is resolved to get paid.

The first paragraph is the same business model used by Craig Whyte.

Well yes the BTC is included in the CVA as one of the options. One of the many many ifs buts and maybes.

Assuming HMRC win the BTC they won't come back, unless something else is unearthed as the detail comes out. Liquidation is a preferred option as it will allow a proper liquidator to be appointed who will do a through job of chasing the money.

This lot seem to be just the people we need

PKF is one of the leading firms of accountants and business advisers in the UK providing a full range of forensic accountancy, litigation support services, investigatory and expert witness services including business intelligence and forensic IT on a national and international basis.

We offer a different approach, team structure and cost efficiency to our competitors while still delivering robust advice and expert evidence based on the breadth of our experience. Where we really differ is the level of client service. Our approach is focused and proportionate, quickly identifying the critical aspects and ensuring you can make informed decisions in a dynamic dispute resolution and investigatory environment.

Our forensic and litigation support experts have considerable experience of acting in commercial disputes, fraud and financial investigations; professional negligence actions; asset tracing and money laundering investigations; competition and regulatory enquiries; cartel and corruption investigations; and matrimonial and personal injury actions. Whether the proceedings are issued in the High Court, Criminal Court, County Court or in International Arbitration, PKF (UK) LLP has the experience to advise. Whether a local dispute with a contractor or employee, or a multi-jurisdictional investigation, PKF (UK) LLP has the resources and experience to react quickly and cost effectively to assist in resolving the dispute.

Our business intelligence team has a unique network of 1,000 contacts globally offering a significant advantage to you by sourcing current and reliable information about people and entities worldwide which is not available in the public domain. We specialise in fraud investigations, cross border M&A, litigation support, asset tracing and reputational due diligence.

Edited May 30, 2012 by thelegendthatis

[monrovianmonk]

I'm still trying to work out why no-one has mounted some sort of challenge to D + P intending to sell the Hvns assets, worth over £100m, to Hughie Green for £5.5m.

Surely Hector and his boys should be slapping them with a writ for liquidation ? The creditors are getting shafted every which way.

Because no one came forward an offered anymore? The assets are only worth what someone will pay and I believe the aim of an administrator is to get best deal for creditors AND attempt to keep the business running as a going concern.

[stonedsailor]

Just back from a very pleasurable couple of hours up the loch casting flies to see that the mood on here has improved no end, I told you guys it'll all be okay.

So to recap,

The SPL chairmen have shown that they do have balls since Rangers decided to take measures into their own hands and by-pass the recognised rules of appeal? or did they listen to us and realise that their own fans mean more to their clubs than some armchair supporters of the old firm?

Green is just about to do walking away because his plans for going newco have gone nuclear after a stern dressing down by those who actually do run football clubs.

And it would seem that currently we have no currents trolling us diddies, you should have all gotten your rods out, it would have saved you hours of frustration

Edited May 30, 2012 by stonedsailor

[Florentine_Pogen]

IIRC it was mentioned on newsnight that although in footballing terms ,the assets are valued at 100mil, in real terms,they are worth a fraction of that

Yes, I saw that. 'In footballing terms' Hughie Green and his 'consortium' are intending to buy Rangers FC. They intend to continue as a football club. Hughie Green stated that Rangers 'would never be in debt again'.

So why is he getting £100m worth of 'goods' for £5.5m ?

Edited May 30, 2012 by Florentine_Pogen

[GirondistNYC]

1338381769[/url]' post='6287198']

How would that work with Whyte's existing floating charges?

Hmm, a strange structure to that CVA, assuming its accepted.

13.6 and 6.2 of the CVA are where the BTC is included and the date tied to it. Not much point in doing a CVA unless you either get rid of the BTC or are dead certain you're going to win.

The CVA also assumes that the amount secured by Whyte's floating charge is nil both in his hands and implicitly if Ticketus claims it as security for it's guaranty. Lots of talk on RTC about how this might be a huge complication, speculation that Ticketus may have an alternative stratagey etc. no bloody idea how that plays out and can't see a CVA going through unless it's absolutely clear Whyte and the charge have gone or will go away.