Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Friedrich Engels]

i haven't bothered looking through this but i presume most of us are talking about the proposals that the SPL are looking to introduce regarding clubs that go under. so here is my two bob's worth

these new proposals are designed in an attempt to be as lenient as possible on any newco rangers, if any other club outwith the OF were in this mess these new rules wouldn't even be proposed, we would simply be told " liquidation is it? don't let the door hit your arse on the way under" this league is a sham, if these proposals are voted in the league is sending a message to every other member that they can get into a tonne of debt and when they can't or won't pay, can wrap up the football club and come straight back as a newco with same squad, same stadium and same status.

we keep getting told by the weegie media that to lose rangers will destroy our game, i think a newco rangers being let straight into the top tier will signal the death of our game in a way that pumping them out could never.

and i also wonder why we would all continue to watch football in this country knowing full well that the league is there only to protect the interests of the OF

[WhiteRoseKillie]

Because should they disappear there would be a couple of hundred people that could lose their jobs, that's forby those at companies servicing these major employers, whether you or I like it or not. That a enough of a similarity for you?

It would be remiss of Holyrood to standby, & say nothing, whilst a major employer in the WoS lurched into a financial quagmire.

On your points in the first place, that's exactly what they are, YOUR opinion.

Apart from asking HMRC not to act like a bull in a china shop & "calling for leniency". You actually think they're calling the shots on this! Something that ISN'T a devolved matter.

As for your inference on UEFA, I bow to you, obviously being on their executive committee makes you privy to their thoughts. Never mind where you get the idea that the Scottish Govt are telling the SFA what to do.

There's an opinion polll coming up on AS & his SNP cohorts, next month. We'll see if everyone agrees with you.

Aye, that'll be why the Johnnie Walker plant is taking on will it? Thousands of jobs gone, not the couple of hundred employed by the crooks in Govan. Spare me the tears. Over the years, rangers cheated and prospered. Now they've been caught. Hell mend them.

KTID

[stonedsailor]

I've already expressed my opinion that Celtic (and maybe a couple of other clubs) will not vote for this, my opinion is that other SPL clubs will

Will you be pressing your chairman to make sure your opinion is heard?

[LordHawHaw]

i haven't bothered looking through this but i presume most of us are talking about the proposals that the SPL are looking to introduce regarding clubs that go under. so here is my two bob's worth

these new proposals are designed in an attempt to be as lenient as possible on any newco rangers, if any other club outwith the OF were in this mess these new rules wouldn't even be proposed, we would simply be told " liquidation is it? don't let the door hit your arse on the way under" this league is a sham, if these proposals are voted in the league is sending a message to every other member that they can get into a tonne of debt and when they can't or won't pay, can wrap up the football club and come straight back as a newco with same squad, same stadium and same status.

we keep getting told by the weegie media that to lose rangers will destroy our game, i think a newco rangers being let straight into the top tier will signal the death of our game in a way that pumping them out could never.

and i also wonder why we would all continue to watch football in this country knowing full well that the league is there only to protect the interests of the OF

While agreeing with most of that I think you are being unfair on Celtic, Rangers are in this position, not Celtic, so that question does not arise, it may do for other SPL clubs in the future. But this is Rangers that is being discussed...lumping us both together in this instance dilutes the argument imo

[eightmile]

See, we won't deal with the problem, we can't, it's never about Rangers or Celtic, it's always them both. This is about Rangers running up huge debts by cheating Scottish football for decades, not the old firm, it confuses the issue

...why then is Peter Lawell so keen to protect them? Hhe has already erupted against the other clubs for wanting a more equitable voting structure. If Celtic and the businessmen that run it had shown any enthusiasm for change it would be happening - what we have is a squalid set of proposals that will in the long term 'forgive' the cheating. So until there is consistent evidence that what Celtic want and what Rangers want are clearly different don't be suprised when your squalid partnership and utterly immoral voting pact bind you togther as an 'old firm'. Either change it or live with it.

[RotWeissEssen]

I don't think a newco Rangers should be let straight back in. However if they do get liquidated it will be a complete

disaster for them. There is no doubt that none of the people bidding for rangers want a new co. Consider this

(assuming the new rules are brought in)

1.) At least 3 years of without European football (due to uefa rules)

2.) 2 years of -10 points ( at least two years they cant win the league)

3.) 75% loss of SPL revenue for 3 years

I just cannot see rangers getting decent crowds under these restrictions.

Although these rules are new a point to consider is that it what any club that does a new co will face in the SPL

going forward.

Making them play in the 3rd division in some ways would benefit them as they would have something to play

for and could play a young team and romp through the leagues.

European revenue is vital to Rangers/Celtic. Most years the minimum they should get is europa league.

There is no way Rangers get it easy with the newco route and I would imagine all the bidders are trying

like feck to somehow get a CVA together.

A newco rangers would be looking at 3 years of low crowds and not much to play for. Fans talking

of not going to games when rangers would be at there lowest point ever does not make much sense to me.

Another point to mention is that Hibs/Motherwell/Celtic all entered admin without any penalties. The fans

of these clubs who say 'I will never go back if a newco is admitted' are really taking the piss. The fact

is that for some reason the SPL has never had rules on newco. Hibs got out of trouble by going into admin on purpose what they did is no more or less moral than what rangers do. You either form a new co,agree a CVA or you cease to exist. That is what happens once you enter admin. The SPL putting newco rules up now is a good thing.

A positive from this from what I see is that the 11-1 voting may still change.

Edited April 11, 2012 by RotWeissEssen

[kiddy]

Yes.

Because Glaxo and Rangers are not only exactly the same type of company, fulfilling exactly the same role in the economy, they also both went into administration. Glaxo also are subject to regulaton by the SFA and SPL. No really, that's all true.

why the need for all the snidey rage?

Snidey, whatever makes you think that?

[pollymac]

...why then is Peter Lawell so keen to protect them? Hhe has already erupted against the other clubs for wanting a more equitable voting structure. If Celtic and the businessmen that run it had shown any enthusiasm for change it would be happening - what we have is a squalid set of proposals that will in the long term 'forgive' the cheating. So until there is consistent evidence that what Celtic want and what Rangers want are clearly different don't be suprised when your squalid partnership and utterly immoral voting pact bind you togther as an 'old firm'. Either change it or live with it.

I don't like chips. Do you like chips? If you don't, does that mean that we both drive the same kind of car?

[LordHawHaw]

...why then is Peter Lawell so keen to protect them? Hhe has already erupted against the other clubs for wanting a more equitable voting structure. If Celtic and the businessmen that run it had shown any enthusiasm for change it would be happening - what we have is a squalid set of proposals that will in the long term 'forgive' the cheating. So until there is consistent evidence that what Celtic want and what Rangers want are clearly different don't be suprised when your squalid partnership and utterly immoral voting pact bind you togther as an 'old firm'. Either change it or live with it.

I can only say, once again, that it is my sincere opinion that Celtic will not vote for this and will make it known that they will not vote for this, if I'm wrong that I will consider not watching a team I have supported and followed home and away since I was able to do so

[LordHawHaw]

I don't think a newco Rangers should be let straight back in. However if they do get liquidated it will be a complete

disaster for them. There is no doubt that none of the people bidding for rangers want a new co. Consider this

(assuming the new rules are brought in)

1.) At least 3 years of without European football (due to uefa rules)

2.) 2 years of -10 points ( at least two years they cant win the league)

3.) 75% loss of SPL revenue for 3 years

I just cannot see rangers getting decent crowds under these restrictions.

Although these rules are new a point to consider is that it what any club that does a new co will face in the SPL

going forward.

Making them play in the 3rd division in some ways would benefit them as they would have something to play

for and could play a young team and romp through the leagues.

European revenue is vital to Rangers/Celtic. Most years the minimum they should get is europa league.

There is no way Rangers get it easy with the newco route and I would imagine all the bidders are trying

like feck to somehow get a CVA together.

A newco rangers would be looking at 3 years of low crowds and not much to play for. Fans talking

of not going to games when rangers would be at there lowest point ever does not make much sense to me.

It's more than that, this goes right to the heart of fair play in the game....I know that Celtic abd Rangers have run the game to their advantage since they have been able to do so, but this is beyond the pale

Edited April 11, 2012 by LordHawHaw

[flyingrodent]

I can only say, once again, that it is my sincere opinion that Celtic will not vote for this and will make it known that they will not vote for this, if I'm wrong that I will consider not watching a team I have supported and followed home and away since I was able to do so

I'll back that up. There are fans who will swallow the business case pish, but most will see voting RFC back in with these minimal sanctions as an infamous, unforgivable betrayal. Justice has to be done and be seen to be done, even if it's detrimental to Celtic's interests.

Edited April 11, 2012 by flyingrodent

[thelegendthatis]

The loans weren't made by Rangers. They were made by a trust, which was set up by Murray Group.

And where did the money come from that went into these trusts?

Maybe setup and administered by the Murray Group but surely (surely means I am guessing) no payments made into the trusts by the Murray Group otherwise the Murray board members, auditors, bankers would have asked what was going on.

All we need to do is follow the money.

.

[Highlandmagyar]

I can only say, once again, that it is my sincere opinion that Celtic will not vote for this and will make it known that they will not vote for this, if I'm wrong that I will consider not watching a team I have supported and followed home and away since I was able to do so

Naiveity in the extreme!! Ususal self denial from Parkhead!!

[Friedrich Engels]

While agreeing with most of that I think you are being unfair on Celtic, Rangers are in this position, not Celtic, so that question does not arise, it may do for other SPL clubs in the future. But this is Rangers that is being discussed...lumping us both together in this instance dilutes the argument imo

yeah, sorry your right. with my point on the OF i was looking to say that i think if it were also Celtic in this position then i think the SPL would bend over backwards to accommodate them too. but your right it is unfair to lump Celtic into this argument.

[LordHawHaw]

Naiveity in the extreme!! Ususal self denial from Parkhead!!

Lets wait and see, I'm being honest I will consider not paying thousands of pounds a year watching Celtic if they agree to support these proposals

[wunfellaff]

And where did the money come from that went into these trusts?

Maybe setup and administered by the Murray Group but surely (surely means I am guessing) no payments made into the trusts by the Murray Group otherwise the Murray board members, auditors, bankers would have asked what was going on.

All we need to do is follow the money.

.

Surely the Trust is now insolvent as well?????

[pollymac]

I don't think a newco Rangers should be let straight back in. However if they do get liquidated it will be a complete

disaster for them. There is no doubt that none of the people bidding for rangers want a new co. Consider this

(assuming the new rules are brought in)

1.) At least 3 years of without European football (due to uefa rules)

2.) 2 years of -10 points ( at least two years they cant win the league)

3.) 75% loss of SPL revenue for 3 years

I just cannot see rangers getting decent crowds under these restrictions.

Although these rules are new a point to consider is that it what any club that does a new co will face in the SPL

going forward.

Making them play in the 3rd division in some ways would benefit them as they would have something to play

for and could play a young team and romp through the leagues.

European revenue is vital to Rangers/Celtic. Most years the minimum they should get is europa league.

There is no way Rangers get it easy with the newco route and I would imagine all the bidders are trying

like feck to somehow get a CVA together.

A newco rangers would be looking at 3 years of low crowds and not much to play for. Fans talking

of not going to games when rangers would be at there lowest point ever does not make much sense to me.

No, no, no and for good measure: no.

To answer your numbered points specifically (first):

1. Yes, they will not be allowed into Europe. That will hurt them. Like it hurt them when they had recently performed a debt to equity bailout of £50m and had their arses handed to them by Kaunas. Any guesses as to what they did next?

2. For sure, they won't win the league in those two seasons and most likely beyond - Celtic have a very young team which will be given breathing space to gel further. So Renegers will get 2nd place prize money (see next point) as opposed to 1st.

3. 75% of what? £2m? That probably covers the amount they'll be able to save on interest payments and is about a quarter of the amount they'll save from not being beholden to Ticketus. In essence, they'll be about £6m better off than if they stay in administration.

With negligible debt and a license to 'do as you please, SPL pyoor needs you', they could go out and spend tens of millions of pounds this summer, assuming FIFA can't apply a transfer embargo on a newco (which they can't). I've posted in this thread before regarding the numbers Renegers have received from external sources over the years - with a clean slate, what would there be to stop someone doing it again?

Their lowest point ever would not and should not ever be considered them taking a slight slap on the wrists, it should* be them liquidated and applying, not for the SPL, but for a space in the SFL, like any other club would.

*based on their appeal to the FTTT failing.

[LordHawHaw]

I'll back that up. There are fans who will swallow the business case pish, but most will see voting RFC back in with these minimal sanctions as an infamous, unforgivable betrayal. Justice has to be done and be seen to be done, even if it's detrimental to Celtic's interests.

I'm saying "consider giving up watching Celtic" as I don't know if I could, but I'd sure as hell want to if Celtic support these proposals

[sergie's no1 fan]

True but they would have a lot less money

Yeah thats true.

Most clubs would have to go part-time and slash the wages.A couple of clubs might even die.

The quality would be poor but it would be very competitive and honest.Most importantly on a saturday with 3pm kick offs.

Who knows there could be a tv deal to be made, but it would be fairly distributed.

[sjc]

And where did the money come from that went into these trusts?

Maybe setup and administered by the Murray Group but surely (surely means I am guessing) no payments made into the trusts by the Murray Group otherwise the Murray board members, auditors, bankers would have asked what was going on.

All we need to do is follow the money.

.

if it didn't come from Rangers FC its a second contract......for which they should be expelled from the league by the SPL/SFA.