MacWatt Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) From the information trickling out it seems clear that there should have been no sound reason for Rangers to go into administration. Future ticket sales mortgaged = £24.4million. Money withheld from the Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs in VAT and PAYE payments since May last year, when Mr Whyte took over, had been used as a "funding tool". Mr Whitehouse said: "The reason it hasn't been paid is that it wasn't sent. = £9 million Working capital required to be held in an Collyeer whatsit account (until 30 June 2012) under terms of the Share Purchase Agreement between Murray MHL Ltd. Wavetower Ltd. and Liberty Capital Ltd. = £5 million + £1.7 million. Sale of pie stalls = £5 million Sale of Jela vic (first stage payment) = £3 million Total of capital available = £48.1 million. That should have been enough to keep Rangers trading for the first year? Edited February 17, 2012 by MacWatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I think this one will be best. Its certainly shaping up that way. Although, there is a certain lack of Rangers fans making spurious claims and generally spouting nonsense. Thats what made the Livy one so much fun. Am I right in thinking the Airdrie saga happened before P&B existed? Must have been summer of 2002? Not sure when P&B started. 2002 is well before I joined though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintee4life Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 ? Mcoist is picking which players get released will it be overpaid players Walter smith signed or shite players he signed or a mix 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highlandmagyar Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Ideal as he knows his way around tax laws rather well. That was mentioned on the Rangerstaxcase blog months ago. Think the guy also has fairly dubious legal methods and has been in trouble for them in the past but that won't make the media as it, almost literally, isn't as sexy. Think one of Whyte's big mistakes was getting shot of Alastair "No Surrender" Johnston. While he doesn't know exactly where the bodies were buried he has a fair idea and has obviously been pointing folk in the general direction. Whyte should have kept him because it was better having him inside the tent pissing out - instead he has him pissing in before running inside and taking a massive jobbie on the sleeping bag. Well! That tent and sleeping bag WILL have to go! Another asset!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Not sure when P&B started. 2002 is well before I joined though. It started in February 2003. I joined when it was about a fortnight old or something like that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alimci Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) Today's Herald The administrators are hoping to have the club's finances in order in time to meet requirements for a UEFA licence to play in Europe next season. "That is something that we are addressing at the moment because it is one of the requirements to retain European footballing status, that we complete those accounts," said joint administrator David Whitehouse. WTF? So they really expect to be in the SPL and with a standard of player to be able to compete in Europe? Does the whole financial meltdown not mean anything? Edited February 17, 2012 by alimci 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Today's Herald WTF? So they really expect to be in the SPL and with a standard of player to be able to compete in Europe? Does the whole financial meltdown not mean anything? I doubt the standard of player is much of a factor. Its all about getting whatever money they can from playing in Europe. Im sure it was mentioned earlier in the thread, but you need 3 years audited accounts to get a UEFA license. Therefore, if Rangers dont file this years, it would be, at least, 3 years before they could compete in Europe again. The whole press conference, though, was one contradiction after another. "We dont know where that money has gone" + "We havent gone through the books in detail" <> "We're working towards coming out of admin by April" + "Liquidation is unlikely" Im surprised there hasnt been more comment about how they got into admin. In the last few weeks, the talk seems to have been about how the previous regime have to take their share of the blame etc, yet the club are in admin purely on the basis of a debt to HMRC run up since Whyte took over 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45 Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Today's Herald WTF? So they really expect to be in the SPL and with a standard of player to be able to compete in Europe? Does the whole financial meltdown not mean anything? I think it's almost a given they won't be good enough to qualify for the champions league. They'd need to draw Maribor's second team. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 From the information trickling out it seems clear that there should have been no sound reason for Rangers to go into administration. Future ticket sales mortgaged = £24.4million. Money withheld from the Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs in VAT and PAYE payments since May last year, when Mr Whyte took over, had been used as a "funding tool". Mr Whitehouse said: "The reason it hasn't been paid is that it wasn't sent. = £9 million Working capital required to be held in an Collyeer whatsit account (until 30 June 2012) under terms of the Share Purchase Agreement between Murray MHL Ltd. Wavetower Ltd. and Liberty Capital Ltd. = £5 million + £1.7 million. Sale of pie stalls = £5 million Sale of Jela vic (first stage payment) = £3 million Total of capital available = £48.1 million. That should have been enough to keep Rangers trading for the first year? Is it then merely a play to try to force negotiation with HMRC over the big tax case? (Admittedly not paying PAYE in the meantime will hardly strengthen those negotiations...) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Milan Mandaric aye? You`ve got to be having a laugh! I hear Nick Leeson is on board as Chief Executive and Gerald Ratner has been sounded out as potential head of commercial activities. Mandric is just a front man for Harry Redknapp's dug. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alimci Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I really don't see why they should be playing in Europe at all, even against Gozo Under 10 Girls. They essentially cheated their way into Europe, all this means is that despite administration it was all worth it if they continue to get income from UEFA. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donaldo Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 He does too. He plays drums with Rush! This needs more greenies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Im sure it was mentioned earlier in the thread, but you need 3 years audited accounts to get a UEFA license. Therefore, if Rangers dont file this years, it would be, at least, 3 years before they could compete in Europe again. They can't "not" file a year's accounts. It's about when they file them. They might file them too late to make this year's deadline but they'll still have to file them eventually so they won't be ruled out for three years on that basis. If they file them a day beyond the UEFA deadline and then file every other year within time they'd be fine next year. However, there's a lot more to it than not having filed accounts. If they are in administration they won't get a UEFA licence regardless of their accounts. Im surprised there hasnt been more comment about how they got into admin. In the last few weeks, the talk seems to have been about how the previous regime have to take their share of the blame etc, yet the club are in admin purely on the basis of a debt to HMRC run up since Whyte took over I pointed this out a couple of days ago and it was largely ignored. When HMRC applied to appoint administrators themselves it was clear there was a significant current debt unrelated to the tax cases which Rangers could still theoretically win. The current crisis has nothing to do with the previous regime, though they are not without blame clearly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWatt Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 (edited) They can't "not" file a year's accounts. It's about when they file them. They might file them too late to make this year's deadline but they'll still have to file them eventually so they won't be ruled out for three years on that basis. If they file them a day beyond the UEFA deadline and then file every other year within time they'd be fine next year. However, there's a lot more to it than not having filed accounts. If they are in administration they won't get a UEFA licence regardless of their accounts. Clubs do have to have annual financial statements but interestingly............. "where a licensee becomes insolvent but enters administration during the season, for so long as the purpose of the administration is to rescue the club and its business, the licence should not be withdrawn" The three year thing relates to the Financial Fair Play regulations on clubs running up debts and clubs are required to limit losses up until 2015.............. "Football clubs wishing to take part in the UEFA Champions League or UEFA Europa League must balance their football-related expenditure over a three-year period up to the 2014/15 season. The 2011/2012 season is the first season which counts towards the 2014/15 assessment; however clubs will be allowed to make a loss of 45m euros (£39.4m) over the three years, falling to 30m euros from 2015/16 It is not until 2018 that clubs will be expected to bring their annual losses below £8.8m on 2010 exchange rates." Edited February 17, 2012 by MacWatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 It started in February 2003. I joined when it was about a fortnight old or something like that. Ah so the Airdrie Utd saga was a Scottish Football Online job. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 I doubt the standard of player is much of a factor. Its all about getting whatever money they can from playing in Europe. Im sure it was mentioned earlier in the thread, but you need 3 years audited accounts to get a UEFA license. Therefore, if Rangers dont file this years, it would be, at least, 3 years before they could compete in Europe again. The whole press conference, though, was one contradiction after another. "We dont know where that money has gone" + "We havent gone through the books in detail" <> "We're working towards coming out of admin by April" + "Liquidation is unlikely" Im surprised there hasnt been more comment about how they got into admin. In the last few weeks, the talk seems to have been about how the previous regime have to take their share of the blame etc, yet the club are in admin purely on the basis of a debt to HMRC run up since Whyte took over Think the administrators were as they say in their trade 'ducking and diving'. They should just get a list of staff, with the highest paid at the top, lowest at the bottom. Can we do without number 1? and so on. Obvious ones to get out the door immediately even before going down the list will be Lafferty (to avoid the 100 games surcharge), and injured unable to contribute to the team over the rest of the season (Naismith etc). What won't be included in any decisions will be the number of times they kissed the shirt. From the BBC web site .... David Whitehouse, from administrators Duff and Phelps told a press conference: "Our understanding is that the funds from Ticketus didn't come through the company's account, they went through a parent company account so we haven't got visibility on that." This is just trying to fudge the story. For parent company read different company. If someone sold something belonging to me for £24mill (I wish), I would be pretty keen to find out who has the money. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alimci Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Clubs do have to have annual financial statements but interestingly............. "where a licensee becomes insolvent but enters administration during the season, for so long as the purpose of the administration is to rescue the club and its business, the licence should not be withdrawn" The three year thing relates to the Financial Fair Play regulations on clubs running up debts and clubs are required to limit losses up until 2015.............. "Football clubs wishing to take part in the UEFA Champions League or UEFA Europa League must balance their football-related expenditure over a three-year period up to the 2014/15 season. The 2011/2012 season is the first season which counts towards the 2014/15 assessment; however clubs will be allowed to make a loss of 45m euros (£39.4m) over the three years, falling to 30m euros from 2015/16 It is not until 2018 that clubs will be expected to bring their annual losses below £8.8m on 2010 exchange rates." So if Reboot United are debt free after administration, then in theory they could happily go back up to 45m Euros debt over the next three years? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Obvious ones to get out the door immediately even before going down the list will be Lafferty (to avoid the 100 games surcharge), and injured unable to contribute to the team over the rest of the season (Naismith etc). That would be utter stupidity. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 They can't "not" file a year's accounts. It's about when they file them. They might file them too late to make this year's deadline but they'll still have to file them eventually so they won't be ruled out for three years on that basis. If they file them a day beyond the UEFA deadline and then file every other year within time they'd be fine next year. However, there's a lot more to it than not having filed accounts. If they are in administration they won't get a UEFA licence regardless of their accounts. Could they file "unaudited" accounts? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted February 17, 2012 Share Posted February 17, 2012 Could they file "unaudited" accounts? No. Their turnover will require audited accounts to be filed. This is nothing to do with football. It's covered by the Companies Act. Club licensing however does require audited accounts and without a club licence you wouldn't be allowed into Europe anyway. They do not however require to have a CLEAN audit report, just to have one. Very few football clubs have an straightforward true and fair view audit report. Most have some sort of Emphasis of Matter on Going Concern if nothing else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.