Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Gaz FFC]

That's Tore Andre Flo isn't it...

Sadly for Scottish football yes.

Somebody needs to pay £13M for a player so we can move on from this shame.

I worry that that transfer will remain the record for decades to come.

[Gaz FFC]

I've 2 questions for anyone financially minded.

1, is it normal for not 1 compulsory redundancy during administration?

Maybe normal isn't the right word, more a case of does it happen?

2, Rangers have been in administration for 105 days or 15 weeks if you prefer.

They only now are submitting their CVA proposal, is that normal?

Seems an Awfy long time to me.

[roverthemoon]

As much as I have enjoyed/am enjoying this thread and the car crash that is RFC, taking a step back and thinking about when this nonsense finally plays itself out what will have ACTUALLY changed in Scottish football?

At the moment the only thing I can see being different is Rangers not challenging for the league and potentially the 11-1 voting thing gone. Both of those are to be welcomed of course but it's hard not to feel a little deflated when you think what could be the same.

Rangers still in the SPL

One of the Old Firm still a shoe in for the title

Still no play off between the SPL and the first

The same arsehole journalists and pundits on our TV and radio

The SKY TV deal still intact and our future hocked to TV for the forseeable future

Doncaster still there

Ogilvie still there

Am I being too pessimistic?

[beermonkey]

Feck me !!!!....i went to work a 3pm yesterday & came home just before midnight & this thread jumped about 20 pages, most of it just complete & utter bigoted OF bollox & i've just wasted about an hour of my life reading it.

Not happy.

Anyway

Tick tock!

[roverthemoon]

I've 2 questions for anyone financially minded.

1, is it normal for not 1 compulsory redundancy during administration?

Maybe normal isn't the right word, more a case of does it happen?

2, Rangers have been in administration for 105 days or 15 weeks if you prefer.

They only now are submitting their CVA proposal, is that normal?

Seems an Awfy long time to me.

I'm not financially minded but I think 2 is probably not unusual but I think 1 is probably highly unusual.

I read in the paper today that they are still losing £1.5m a month. The fact that this is the case proves that the administrators aren't working for the creditors. If they were the losses would have been stopped and any income generated put into the pot to pay their debts

[HibeeJibee]

Fair point above but what we have is a diddy league at the moment and is probably much worse than having a premier league of 16 even if the mid table seams meaningless.The old firm over the last 20 years have been sort of winning all 4 fixtures against the other teams,changing could have a 12 point shift from the old firm to the chasing pack at the end of the year ! a closer fought league.

We've got a 'diddy' league... which conforms to the format of the majority of European top-tiers (3x/4x) ? How does that work. One-up-one-down is insufficient, granted; that aside?

And the thing about playing 2x not 4x: it's a myth. OF happily dominated many eras under 2x playing; non-OF clubs almost invariably trail after 18 or 22 games currently. Non-OF clubs trail since they fail to take as many pts off the smaller clubs the the OF do. You can argue 4x playing gives double the opportunity to rectify that inferiority, as much as it gives OF opportunity to secure their lead. Neither did 4x playing stop 1980s challenges.

Did all of the above you mentioned actually help clubs eventually and did the gates go up ?.

Yes. Gates improved. Ultimately from 1990s 'til before the recession they'd reached near-historical highs.

Yeh I believe SKY are deffo manipulating the situation

So it's not been reported anywhere, it's just a conspiracy theory? I'm glad we've established that.

their no 4 OF games "clause" and we give you less money if there isn't,it's a threat and interfering plus demeaning to the other clubs.

It's a fairly obvious piece of basic business practice.

Edited May 29, 2012 by HibeeJibee

[HibeeJibee]

The problem with every single person involved in Scottish football, is that they cannot look beyond the next season. For the past 30 years all I've heard from anyone concerned with our game have been things like;

"This will help improve our game"

"This will help bring the fans in"

"This will give our clubs more money, allowing them to buy better players therefore improving our game"

"This will give our young players more chances to play"

"This will.................."

etc etc etc

And while all our "Football people" have been spewing this pish out, every other country on the planet (with the possible exception of England) have manged to improve their game. Thats the problem. This country has been held back because any plan to help improve the game, would need a level playing field for all, and that would never be allowed by the OF.

If we did change to an 18, or even 20 team SPL, with a level playing field for all, the football would improve, crowds would rise and the money would come back into our game. The only problem would be that it may take time, and that is something that a lot of people in our game wont put up with. If it cant be done within a single season, then it wont be done at all.

If/when "The Rangers" get whats coming to them, we must take this opportunity to change the whole structure of the game in this country. If we dont, we will just have done what we have been doing for the last 30 years, and thats "f**k All"

Bold section is populist "woe-us" mopery, without any basis in fact... Underlined section is also without any basis in fact. Both are wild over-simplifications and exaggerations.

There's no evidence that 18/20 will improve football, boost crowds, or increase revenues. People just hope it would, basically since we had it 50 years ago "when we were great" - and they hark back to it through sepia-framed and rose-tinted nostalgia. Nothing wrong with that, but let's not pretend it's some certainty.

Edited May 29, 2012 by HibeeJibee

[chico]

Bold section is populist "woe-us" mopery, without any basis in fact... Underlined section is also without any basis in fact. Both are wild over-simplifications and exaggerations.

There's no evidence that 18/20 will improve football, boost crowds, or increase revenues. People just hope it would, basically since we had it 50 years ago "when we were great" - and they hark back to it through sepia-framed and rose-tinted nostalgia. Nothing wrong with that, but let's not pretend it's some certainty.

Agree 100% with HJ

Out best bet is a 14 with a 7/7 split and 2 up down.

There's only 16/18 clubs that can presently do top level football, a quick move to 18 puts all of them in the same division, removes incentive or interest and IMO would be a retrograde step.

[hellbhoy]

Yes. Gates improved. Ultimately from 1990s 'til before the recession they'd reached near-historical highs.

So it's not been reported anywhere, it's just a conspiracy theory? I'm glad we've established that.

It's a fairly obvious piece of basic business practice.

Well happy for the education there on the gates.

Conspiracy theory ! my left nut but business practice yes and is hovering over next years team selection for all the SPL clubs is it not ?.

So in theory but not conspiracy mind you is that the deal SKY put forward is also affecting for an immediate shoe in for any newco Gers is it not.

I'd rather they told SKY to piss off till they came back with a better offer even if the gers got kicked down to the 3rd.

If you think SKY don't have their nasty mitts over it think again,SKY want the OF games to sell so they can profit out of it,so this by arguments sake has SKY effectively pushing for an immediate shoe in for the cheats does it not ?.

The SPL should be selling the league and only he league instead of guaranteeing 4 OF games a season.

[hellbhoy]

Agree 100% with HJ

Out best bet is a 14 with a 7/7 split and 2 up down.

There's only 16/18 clubs that can presently do top level football, a quick move to 18 puts all of them in the same division, removes incentive or interest and IMO would be a retrograde step.

Yeh I've heard the pundits say there's not enough quality out there to conceive a 16 team league but a 4 up and 4 down with playoffs might spice things up a little bottom 3 get relegated with 4th &5th last dueling out for safety.Any team in the first division on a roll with a good team for a couple of years at least get a good shot at promotion quickly to the top and the shite get relegated.We should at least give it a shot if the gers go tits up and try it out first before just dismissing it.Because the league is pants as it is and change may help.

[chico]

Yeh I've heard the pundits say there's not enough quality out there to conceive a 16 team league but a 4 up and 4 down with playoffs might spice things up a little bottom 3 get relegated with 4th &5th last dueling out for safety.Any team in the first division on a roll with a good team for a couple of years at least get a good shot at promotion quickly to the top and the shite get relegated.We should at least give it a shot if the gers go tits up and try it out first before just dismissing it.Because the league is pants as it is and change may help.

:lol:

[mozam76]

So in theory but not conspiracy mind you is that the deal SKY put forward is also affecting for an immediate shoe in for any newco Gers is it not.

I'd rather they told SKY to piss off till they came back with a better offer even if the gers got kicked down to the 3rd.

If you think SKY don't have their nasty mitts over it think again,SKY want the OF games to sell so they can profit out of it,so this by arguments sake has SKY effectively pushing for an immediate shoe in for the cheats does it not ?.

The SPL should be selling the league and only he league instead of guaranteeing 4 OF games a season.

Posting on my phone so unfortunately I can't bold the bits in your post that I'd like to. The first part though - are you referring to the contract that is in place just now? Or a mythical drastically reduced contract that Sky are going to offer if Rangers aren't in the SPL?

If it's the former, then I assume that you're in the Andy Goram esque camp that thinks that there is a watertight demand for four OF fixtures - which is nonsense. If its the latter, then again, it's akin to the nonsense that the aforementioned Goram and that dunderheids like Chick Young have spouted for weeks. Where is the evidence that Sky are going to offer a shellacked contract, or indeed, pull out entirely?

The rest of your post, as well as being horrendously difficult to understand, is conspiratorial nonsense.

Edited May 29, 2012 by mozam76

[Owsley]

Agree 100% with HJ

Out best bet is a 14 with a 7/7 split and 2 up down.

There's only 16/18 clubs that can presently do top level football, a quick move to 18 puts all of them in the same division, removes incentive or interest and IMO would be a retrograde step.

I don't want to turn this into a reconstruction debate, but for me a split after 26 games would be ludicrous. You just miss out on the top seven, then you are consigned to playing out even more games than before in the bottom half. I don't see improved crowds in that scenario.

[WeeHectorPar]

Nice to see I've got them wound up, and doing exactly the same thing I was complaining about to get my record low post on here

I've been using myself in a self-sacrifice role, while they concentrate on me then others can nip in and take advantage

Oh, and for the record to any Rangers Media users, I hate Celtic just as much

Don't know if you got the whole point of that but the link sends the user back to his own profile page and makes it look as though he has been outed. Hence the "shitting oneself". It was just a joke but a bloody good one.

[itzdrk]

http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=221397

As the title says I met a sheep fan yesterday and he was pretty decent about how this whole farce was being played out.

It's fair to say that his point was tempered by the fact he was speaking directly with a Gers fan but again he was pretty specific in his thoughts.

We deserve to be hammered, I think thats a pretty popular claim by almost anyone who doesn't support the Gers.

He listened to my point with regards the vast majority of bears saying we had no issue with punishment where it's fair and taken from the list of agreed sanctions, not made up to suit agendas. He was also very very honest in saying that it would cost the Dons in the region of a half million every home game against Rangers, taking in to account our fans plus the extra home fans who turn up when we are in town. With the added sponsorship money that comes in for live tv games against us it's pretty damning how much they do rely on us.

He was also very cagey about the punishment we receive as it's in the back of their minds that we would survive the harsh punishments we would receive, albeit it may hamstring us for a couple of seasons but it would destroy them if they suffered administration and they would go out of business. He seemed to think that the rush to punish us was a great way to get back at us but the cold light of day and time to reflect has made them stop and think.

All in all without going into the full conversation he hates us just as we hate them but understands the implications of us leaving the SPL.

We both agreed on one thing though, take away the big two and the game dies, what have the SFA done to combat the obvious decline in supporters and if they were to spend more time helping the clubs rather than punishing them we may see a move for the better.

mustve been aberdeens #1 fan

[buriram]

This administration had been going on so it"s starting to make my head nip.Why has everything have to be so difficult in Scotland.It"s an open and shut case,Rangers have been caught breaking every rule.There should be no ifs or buts,can someone in authority please grow a set of gonads and put this to rest,it"s embarassing.INTEGRITY BEFORE MONEY. Ok I"ll get my coat !

[LordHawHaw]

Let the games commence....

Barcabhoy says:

29/05/2012

at 6:33 am

5

0

i

Rate This

there has been a lot of speculation surrounding the news that more is to come out about Rangers and the seriousness of what is still to be revealed.the first thing however is to dispel some of the wider rumours that have been

doing the rounds.

this is not about match fixing, its not about bribing referees, its not about political interference , its not about banks behaving inappropriately or illegally .

I have absolutely no knowledge of any of these things.It is also highly unfair that individuals who have not been involved in any wrongdoing are

speculated about. As i posted earlier the information I alluded to is not my story. I can therefore only provide a little bit of information at this time.

When I am allowed to I will post more. Timing is not in my control.

The BBC documentary touched on EBT beneficiaries and the amounts they received. The nuclear information takes this further. I am able only to give you

this initial bit of information just now, however the significance is enormous .

“Graeme Souness received much more than just the 30k Mark Daly mentioned.

Rangers supporters, Scottish football administrators, and the legal authorities

in Scotland deserve to know why he received this money a decade after leaving

Rangers’ employment?”

Maybe Mr Souness could enlighten us, or maybe one his chums in the MSM could provide him with a platform to deny this.

[drs]

CVA day.

Let the mayhem begin.

[Dunlop Don]

1338244915[/url]' post='6282157']

The problem with every single person involved in Scottish football, is that they cannot look beyond the next season. For the past 30 years all I've heard from anyone concerned with our game have been things like;

"This will help improve our game"

"This will help bring the fans in"

"This will give our clubs more money, allowing them to buy better players therefore improving our game"

"This will give our young players more chances to play"

"This will.................."

etc etc etc

And while all our "Football people" have been spewing this pish out, every other country on the planet (with the possible exception of England) have manged to improve their game. Thats the problem. This country has been held back because any plan to help improve the game, would need a level playing field for all, and that would never be allowed by the OF.

If we did change to an 18, or even 20 team SPL, with a level playing field for all, the football would improve, crowds would rise and the money would come back into our game. The only problem would be that it may take time, and that is something that a lot of people in our game wont put up with. If it cant be done within a single season, then it wont be done at all.

If/when "The Rangers" get whats coming to them, we must take this opportunity to change the whole structure of the game in this country. If we dont, we will just have done what we have been doing for the last 30 years, and thats "f**k All"

Good post. If they/we don't take this opportunity to sort things out, it will never happen.

[EdinburghPar1975]

My Rangers supporting boss said to me yesterday that he had been told that the major creditors had agreed in principal to a CVA, to be fair to him he also said that in principle was fine....but when they see 1 or 2p in the £ then that will be different and Green would then trot out the line of people going back on their word.