Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Claymores]

Check the join date. Pretty much every poster who has joined over the last 2 weeks has been a windup merchant. Now not that I am defending RM as it has it's fair share of zoomers to say the least but I do feel some of the threads shared here and used as point and laugh material are just people at it.

Naw you've been foond-oot as a closet currant bun - what Gers vid will you treat us to next?!

[chico]

NewCo can join SFL - it's got SFA full membership if it's been transferred (with SFA Board approval). That should also mean it carries the transfer embargo.

So a Newco would need to have Rangers existing SFA membership transferred to it from the existing company, before that company was liquididated?

On paper they cannot form a new company from scratch but not transfer the SFA full membership - as [1] a club joining SFL must obtain SFA associate membership within a couple of weeks of entry, and [2] obtaining that is supposed to need 3 years audited accounts, extant youth team, etc.

However, the potential always exists for rules to be bent or amended, as a poster above notes.

Rangers can't go down the NewCo route once in SFL, under existing SFL rules, as they expressly permit transfer-of-membership only when [1] changing legal status, or [2] in solvently restructuring.

Hmm.

[Claymores]

What stopped you?

Was at work and not supposed to be looking at such stuff!!!

[Ric]

Naw you've been foond-oot as a closet currant bun - what Gers vid will you treat us to next?!

The highlights when we beat them at SMP in December?

[HibeeJibee]

So a Newco would need to have Rangers existing SFA membership transferred to it from the existing company, before that company was liquididated?

Or during liquidation, e.g. buying the asset, again with SFA approval.

Non-starter then?

IMO everyone jumping to an SFA-run league is a pretty nuclear, and thus extreme, eventuality.

Edited April 28, 2012 by HibeeJibee

[chico]

Non-starter then?

The SFA SNL is a non starter in my opinion too,

But that's only until we know if Rangers are going to go CVA and stay in the SPL.

If rangers get liquidated, then id reckon all bets are off and changing the structure becomes much much more likely

[Claymores]

The SFA SNL is a non starter in my opinion too,

But that's only until we know if Rangers are going to go CVA and stay in the SPL.

If rangers get liquidated, then id reckon all bets are off and changing the structure becomes much much more likely

Interesting thought considering I can see NO WAY a CVA can be reached if the reports on the piddling bids on the mighty Gers are to be believed. Not even with Buffalo bill's wild proposals that he dreamed-up watching an episode of E.R. and leaving the "toxic" part to be hammered out................it seems under 10p in the pound even with jiggery-pokery of pretending the debenture holders ain't creditors.

[Waspie]

Has anyone seriously addressed the economics of the "Scottish football needs Rangers" argument ?

With regards to the television revenues. Granted Sky maywant to renegotiate the contract without the old firm games, but (and this is a big but) the diddy teams see relatively little of that money anyway. Without Rangers the other teams would be able to redistribute the money in a fairer fashion, so how much of an effect would it really have on the other teams ?

With regards to turnstile revenue from the bi annual visit fromthe Orc masses.

Lets say rangers take 10-15000 away supporters, that's ashortfall of 20-30000 at the gates. Do Traynor et al really not believe thatmost teams in the SPL would easily increase their gates by much more than that,over the course of a season, if their teams competing in a more competitive andexciting league. Also the absence of Rangers can only bring a more pleasant atmosphere to the SPL. Generally I used to avoid the OF games because of their vile atmosphere and the threat of violence if my diddy team dared to win the game.

Has anyone actually done a breakdown of the numbers ?

This guy had a try ( http://wingsland.podgamer.com/why-scotland-doesnt-need-rangers/ ). It was posted on here a few hundred pages back .

[Claymores]

The highlights when we beat them at SMP in December?

So you're predicting they'll still be in SPL or were you thinking of a cup game?!

[chico]

Or during liquidation, e.g. buying the asset, again with SFA approval.

So why would the SFA permit the transfer of Rangers membership of the SFA given that the current owner is subject to substantial fines that he has scoffed at and refused to pay?

It doesn't matter what the administrator says about getting control of Whyte's interest, he's the owner.

So they'd allow that fine to go unpaid, then say okay you can transfer your SFA membership..

Nah.

[Claymores]

went to log on there and they have kicked me out before my first post, never even got past the front door, they must be edgy. guess its back to being a killie fan.

HAHAHA - I notice a newly "banned" member posted on that thread the YouTube "Jelly & Ice Cream When Rangers Die" HAHAHA - I should maybe join using my wifi dongle and post "Teaching Debt to a H*n"

I've seen the perfect RM thread to drop it in - it is entitled "How on earth did we end up in administration?"

Edited April 28, 2012 by Claymores

[WeeHectorPar]

went to log on there and they have kicked me out before my first post, never even got past the front door, they must be edgy. guess its back to being a killie fan.

You're not out yet. You have to be vetted by a mod so by Monday at the latest you will be given clearance. Happened to me. Whatever you do don't think logically. I did a rant about Ally shooting his mouth off and how it would be bad for the club and got banned within 5 minutes even though later events have proved me right. Just go with the flow. Everyone else is a basturt who is out to kill the club. Don't expect to get much variety into your posts. You have to think ECHR and, why not, UN to protest about injustice. Above all set yourself a limit on posts, say 10, before your nerve runs out and you want to leave. Then you can go out with a big rant. However when you do please let us know here beforehand so we can witness your demise as your future will be measured in milliseconds.

I would wish you good luck but you will return to us as a shivering wreck. It really is hell in there.

[HibeeJibee]

So why would the SFA permit the transfer of Rangers membership of the SFA given that the current owner is subject to substantial fines that he has scoffed at and refused to pay?

It doesn't matter what the administrator says about getting control of Whyte's interest, he's the owner.

So they'd allow that fine to go unpaid, then say okay you can transfer your SFA membership..

Nah.

... ahem, well, it does allow them to 'survive' of course . Also lets not get our SFA at cross-purposes: their sanction wasn't applied by the Board, it was applied by an independant panel of outsiders.

[dirk]

The bidding process: Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose

2012 instead of 2112 too

Pass me my coat too!

it's a headlong flight to oblivion,

i never brought a coat.

[Broken Algorithms]

Notice that suddenly Rovers finances are under the spotlight on RM now that they feel the need to hit out due to their own insecurities over finances. They seem to be fawning over this "Boss" character, who says:

I am informed that Raith Rovers last month received £70,000 from one rich benefactor in order to pay their wages. In the absence of that injection, the spectre of Administration was writ large, allegedly. Drysdale would, ipso facto, have been debarred from s(h)itting on high. And there would have been no more dancing in the streets of Raith. If this is untrue in any material respect, RM will of course give Raith Rovers a platform to publish clarification on the extent of their financial woes.Who'd have thunk it? A director of a venerable, old football club with a history of over 100 years in the Scottish game and sitting on the precipice of extinction, sitting in judgement of a venerable, old football club with a history of over 100 years in the Scottish game and sitting on the precipice of extinction

Not quite sure how this is related to Rangers and their misdemenours. Delighted to hear that he is informed, it must be true if some unnamed individual states that Rovers, like many other Scottish clubs have financial backing from outside the club.

Edited April 28, 2012 by rw89

[Claymores]

You're not out yet. You have to be vetted by a mod so by Monday at the latest you will be given clearance. Happened to me. Whatever you do don't think logically. I did a rant about Ally shooting his mouth off and how it would be bad for the club and got banned within 5 minutes even though later events have proved me right. Just go with the flow. Everyone else is a basturt who is out to kill the club. Don't expect to get much variety into your posts. You have to think ECHR and, why not, UN to protest about injustice. Above all set yourself a limit on posts, say 10, before your nerve runs out and you want to leave. Then you can go out with a big rant. However when you do please let us know here beforehand so we can witness your demise as your future will be measured in milliseconds.

I would wish you good luck but you will return to us as a shivering wreck. It really is hell in there.

big praise to allysarmy72 on RM - classic to burst their baw!!!!!!

[HibeeJibee]

This guy had a try ( http://wingsland.pod...t-need-rangers/ ). It was posted on here a few hundred pages back .

His try wasn't very good though... Citing Aberdeen going on a UEFA Cup run, or everyone being successful (which isn't really possible) and everyone adding 1,000-odd people onto their gates (which is questionable - how much have Motherwell and St Johnstone's gates increased this season?), and harking to the 1980s, isn't a particularly credible way of claiming books could be balanced.

Unless someone matches Celtic over 10months, there's nothing more to play for than this season. (Less, infact, as no 2nd CL slot and Rangers went out of both cups early anyway).

Basically, if Rangers aren't in SPL then most clubs lose money. There'll probably be a much-reduced TV deal, a reduced naming rights deal, and no 1/2 visits from X thousand Rangers fans. League Cup is also after a naming rights sponsor.

However... that's not the question needing asked, frankly.

Question is whether or not the monetary loss is sufficient enough reason to justify keeping Rangers in SPL.

Or, subsequently, whether the consequences of that monetary loss justify keeping them.

It seems evident that a majority of fans, at least, think the answer is "no".

Edited April 28, 2012 by HibeeJibee

[Swampy]

Question is whether or not the monetary loss is sufficient enough reason to justify keeping Rangers in SPL.

It seems evident that a majority of fans, at least, think the answer is "no".

Why exactly is it incumbent on the fans to think of the financial angle? If the fans don't think about the integrity of the competition, who will? By reducing it to pennies and pounds you are completely misjudging the mood of the fans, which given that you've presumably read at least some of the 150+ pages on this is quite an achievement.

[Islay]

Notice that suddenly Rovers finances are under the spotlight on RM now that they feel the need to hit out due to their own insecurities over finances. They seem to be fawning over this "Boss" character, who says:

Not quite sure how this is related to Rangers and their misdemenours. Delighted to hear that he is informed, it must be true if some unnamed individual states that Rovers, like many other Scottish clubs have financial backing from outside the club.

If he is 'informed', then he would realise that his club voted for such panels to adjudicate over matters like the Rangers case. Therefore it doesn't matter what has happened to Raith Rovers, they are not the ones who are currently under scrutiny. Rangers are in administration and on the very brink of liquidation, hence why the panel of three (very well educated and qualified individuals) people were brought in to impose sanction on Glasgow Rangers. They along with the other clubs voted for such rulings on financial irregularities, as the old saying goes they have made their bed and now they must lie in it. It is also the reason we don't allow fuckwits like Billy Dodds to decide the fate of such important matters, or 'fitbaw people' as wee Doddsy likes to scream. Dodds is a biased bellend, Eric Drysdale is a Chartered Accountant. The two men could not be any further apart in terms of intelligence. Dodds should stick to breathing in and out, he uses the majority of his brain power to perform this simple task.

[HibeeJibee]

Why exactly is it incumbent on the fans to think of the financial angle? If the fans don't think about the integrity of the competition, who will? By reducing it to pennies and pounds you are completely misjudging the mood of the fans, which given that you've presumably read at least some of the 150+ pages on this is quite an achievement.

I think you've missed the point, perhaps having missed the posts which it followed-on from. When considering the financial argument it's not the existence or not of a loss which is the main area of the debate... it's fairly futile to argue there's no loss, as that bloke did. It's the consequences of the loss.

I didn't mean it was incumbent on fans to think of the financial angle.

I mean that when/if they are thinking of the financial angle, they would/should be thinking about it in terms of outcomes, not inputs.

Very succinctly put. Professional football by its very nature is a compromise between the innate sporting integrity of the game and financial concerns. I, like most fans it would appear, feel that Rangers staying in the SPL would be too much.

Yes, it's about balance - about equilibrium. Too much emphasis either way upsets the required balance.

Story of the game since 1890 has been that balancing act.

Edited April 28, 2012 by HibeeJibee