Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[DensDerry80]

this is the plan:

offer 1p in the pound CVA

get it knocked back

no choice but to liquidate and form a Newco

get into the SPL without sanctions or debt

claim the newco fc hates celtic to keep the punters on board

1year later everything is rosy

[Drooper]

If this CVA is agreed, I'll eat a 10 gallon hat full of white dug shite (including the hat itself....for pudding).

[Florentine_Pogen]

Hughie's proposed loan is conditional upon them retaining a licence to play in the SPL?

Hence the reason Doncaster came out and said the SPL would grant them a licence ?

Hence the reason when the H*ns go "BANG" Doncaster can say it was the SFA's / FIFA / UEFA's fault ?

Or am I just havering ?

Edited May 29, 2012 by Florentine_Pogen

[Drooper]

If the CVA fails, then Sevco are contractually obliged to but the assets for £5.5m. Good luck enforcing that clause.

The liquidators might have a bit to say about it (and it won't be the Chuckle Bros).

Indeed.

This is truly laughable.

[Ivo den Bieman]

what an absolutely laughable excuse for a CVA

[Araminta Moonbeam QC]

1338296064[/url]' post='6283399']

Hence the reason Doncaster came out and said the SPL would grant them a licence ?

Hence the reason when the H*ns go "BANG" Doncaster can say it was the SFA's / FIFA / UEFA's fault ?

Am I havering ?

Not at all.....

But surely this issue about the lack of accounts by 15th June means no licence? Wasn't that what happened yesterday? It seems so long ago......

[Tam Servo]

How dare you. A Journalist of the first rank:

Cara Sulieman ‏@carasuliemanI like Binky and Jamie. The rest of them can stuff off. #madeinchelsea

Expand

• Reply
• Retweet
• Favorite

20hCara Sulieman ‏@carasuliemanThere should be a law which makes it illegal for men to go around barechested unless there's something worth looking at. Euch.

Decision expected at 3.30

The one about fat guys cutting aboot shirtless when it's nice out?

[vikingTON]

CVA: http://www.rangers.c...5~177097,00.pdf

Seems legit.

[Drooper]

what an absolutely laughable excuse for a CVA

"We very much hope it will be accepted," Clark told BBC Scotland.

[Araminta Moonbeam QC]

The floating charge could be in excess of the estimated CVA pot of £8.3m (plus moonbeam chasing player transfer fees and Collyer Bristow 'win'). So amount available to creditors = £0.00

[Macshimmy]

Seems legit.

Aye. I especially like the way they have valued the Freehold properties at either:

110m

or

4.6m

Depending on who is asking.

Well Kosher. I wonder what happened to Sevcos 0001 through 5087?

[Florentine_Pogen]

Not at all.....

But surely this issue about the lack of accounts by 15th June means no licence? Wasn't that what happened yesterday? It seems so long ago......

I thought it was the SFA that requires 3 yrs. audited accts ? Feck, I'm suffering information overload, brain beginning to get a bit frazzled......

[Drooper]

Cue the HMRC winding-up order.

[Jacksgranda]

[The Master]

This bit is comedy gold:

2.10 The Administrators believe that this CVA will, if approved:

2.10.1 Provide a better return to creditors than would otherwise be achieved on a sale of the

business and assets of the Company or liquidation of the Company;

2.10.2 Ensure the continuation of Rangers Football Club in its current corporate entity

providing the maximum opportunity to avoid additional football regulatory sanctions;

2.10.3 Allow an enhanced prospect of a successful application for a UEFA licence, which is

required to compete in UEFA competitions (subject to satisfying the necessary UEFA

regulations), thereby enhancing the business‘ value;

2.10.4 Permit the achievement of the primary statutory objective of the Administration in

accordance with Paragraph 3 of Schedule B1 to the Act, being rescuing the

Company as a going concern; and

2.10.5 Satisfy the strong preference of the supporters that the football club continues to

trade within its current corporate entity.

2.11 The Joint Administrators therefore believe that it is in the best interests of the creditors to

approve this Proposal.

Taking 2.11 as the major premise for accepting the CVA, let's go through each minor premise one-by-one...

2.10.1 Provide a better return to creditors than would otherwise be achieved on a sale of the

business and assets of the Company or liquidation of the Company;

Perhaps. But your arbitrary figure of £5.5m could easily be challanged.

2.10.2 Ensure the continuation of Rangers Football Club in its current corporate entity

providing the maximum opportunity to avoid additional football regulatory sanctions;

Right...and why does that interest a creditor who will be paid from the cash currently (apparently) on the table and be told to toddle off?

2.10.3 Allow an enhanced prospect of a successful application for a UEFA licence, which is

required to compete in UEFA competitions (subject to satisfying the necessary UEFA

regulations), thereby enhancing the business‘ value;

See above.

2.10.4 Permit the achievement of the primary statutory objective of the Administration in

accordance with Paragraph 3 of Schedule B1 to the Act, being rescuing the

Company as a going concern; and

This bit reminds me of that episode of M*A*S*H where Charles defended Klinger, with his ultimate argument being "please find him not guilty, just so I can win".

2.10.5 Satisfy the strong preference of the supporters that the football club continues to

trade within its current corporate entity.

Lol, wut?

Are they really using that as an argument for creditors to accept a pittance?

[ayrmad]

£8.3m-£3.9m-£3m=£1.4m

They're having a laugh.

£5.5m-£3.9=£1.6m

Edited May 29, 2012 by ayrmad

[Araminta Moonbeam QC]

1338296377[/url]' post='6283422']

Cue the HMRC winding-up order.

Let's hope so. Someone has to end this charade.

Estimated trading costs over the summer £3m, Duff fees £4m. There is NO money in the CVA pot. Whole thing is smoke and mirrors.

[Homer Thompson]

If the CVA fails, then Sevco are contractually obliged to but the assets for £5.5m. Good luck enforcing that clause.

The liquidators might have a bit to say about it (and it won't be the Chuckle Bros).

The liquidators wont come in. The assets will be transferred prior to liquidation.

To be honest, and maybe its just me, but that CVA poses more questions than it answers. A few "observations"

1) No mention of Whytes, supposed, floating charge

edited to add - seems there is ...

The Joint Administrators understand that, in respect of this security: (1) Group has confirmed that no debt is secured; and (2) Group has agreed to release the security concurrently with the approval of this Proposal.

Whyte is listed as an unsecured creditor with the amount TBC As are the Bank of Scotland :huh:

2) No mention of where any transfer money from players sold in June goes

3) Greens sale has a bucket load of conditions - didnt H&D tell us it was unconditional?

4) On the actual figures - the sale of property is listed as c£4m if liquidated, but there is no cost attached in a CVA/newco. Its not included in the £8.5m/£5.5m sales to Sevco - why not?

5) The administration trading shortfall is listed at over £3m :-o

6) Total fees, including H&D and legal fees are over £5.5m for a CVA but over £6.2m for a newco or liquidation. Leaving aside the sheer scale of the costs, can anyone explain why it costs nearly £1m more to transfer to a newco or liquidate?

7) One of the notes says this

17. In the CVA and New Company scenarios, the amounts due to preferential creditors consist of outstanding holiday entitlement for the employees who were made redundant during the Administration trading period. In the Liquidation scenario, it is anticipated that preferntial claims would exceed the funds available to preferential creditors.

Can anyone explain why?

Edited May 29, 2012 by Mr X

[shull]

You paying for it ???

I pay for nothing.

[Florentine_Pogen]

For anyone wanting a wee break from all this H*nnery and schadenfreude, could I just inform the board that the Archers has just started on R4.

Thankyew.