glasgow sheep

Also reading the RTC blog and staggeringly only one Scottish journalist has got in touch with the author while several English journalists have. Read more here: http://rangerstaxcase.com/2012/03/24/not-long-to-go/comment-page-1/#comments

Some good reading for a Monday morning:

On yesterday's performance cup final vouchers won't be an issue. Surely even hibs aren't as bad as that

Superb stuff. Amazing it has taken one journalist to look at things with a fresh pair of eyes to say what we've all been saying for years, if not decades.

lengthy but helpful: http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/rangers-administration-lord-hodges-decision-re-ticketus-part-1-new-information/

Are we playing one up top? Mitch up top with Veron?

Tickets on sale this morning. Early reports coming in from the ticket office: Meanwhile outside

Well that's that clarified

The only way this will be resolved quickly will be if rangers are liquidated. If they don't then it will hinge on the result of the big tax case which is likely to face further court battles which ever way it goes.

Basically Ticketus will become creditors if the first payment to them is due while the club is administration meaning the would get p/£ back If the club has exited administration via a CVA Ticketus will/should get their money in full meaning rangers cash flow is fucked for years. A CVA presumably wouldn't be able to incorporate future debts. So the only deal on the table is the Blue Knights/Ticketus deal which will presumably see Ticketus get most their money back, c60% of Rangers annual income going to Ticketus and the BlueKnights hoping they can get enough in a share issue to balance the books for the next 5 years. Which makes rangers broke and struggling for several years yet. Only other options in Liquidation, wipe out the debt and hope the spl/sfa/sfl let them in somewhere. All of this excludes the BTC which will blow all this out the water.

This whole situation is as clear as mud. My understanding was that Ticketus bought so many season tickets in advance at reduced price (as little as 50%). They then planned to make their money back each year by taking the money for each ST (minus admin): eg They paid £200 for a ST, hun buys said ST for £400, ticketus go off with £200 profit per ST minus admin charges. I'm not sure on reflection that this judgement changes anything in that respect, Ticketus will still be after the £400 per ST but as an unsecured creditor in a CVA they will only get say £40 per ST if it is 10p in the £1. This would make the debt they are after significantly more than the £24M they paid Whyte. If that is true on top of their other debts that is huge and perhaps not a great day for Rangers after all. Anyway someone on the rangerstaxcase comment section put it a bit better:

http://celtictaxcase.wordpress.com/

Oh cancel that http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17489451?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=sportsound BUT I think this means that instead of owning the STs for the next 3 or 4 years and getting millions from them (millions more than they gave Whyte) they are in fact simply a creditor, presumably for whatever money they gave Whyte which can be paid off at a fraction of the potential earning power of ST sales in a CVA I'm afraid this is good news for Rangers.

This deserves a wafer! http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/187633/187633,1214995207,2/stock-photo-jelly-and-ice-cream-with-a-wafer-and-cream-14435560.jpg[/img]

About bloody time

Apologies about the length of this copy and paste but some interesting points. From: http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/

Ok this might be a bit back of the envelope and correct me if I have the figures wrong. Current split of TV money: 1st - 4% + 13% = 17% 2nd - 4% + 11% = 15% 3rd - 4% + 5.5% = 9.5% 4th - 4% + 4.5% = 8.5% 5th - 4% + 4.0% = 8.0% 6th - 4% + 3.5% = 7.5% 7th - 4% + 3.0% = 7.0% 8th - 4% + 2.5% = 6.5% 9th - 4% + 2.0% = 6.0% 10th - 4% + 1.5% = 5.5% 11th - 4% + 1.0% = 5.0% 12th - 4% + 0.5% = 4.5% New Deal £80M over 5 years so £16M per year Currently Rantic (1st and 2nd) get 32% which is £5.12M per year leaving "The 10" with £10.88M So what we are asking I suppose is could "The 10" get anywhere near c£10M per year from TV? League of Ireland: The 10 clubs competing in the Premier Division received an equal share payment of €20,000 during the 2009 season, while an additional €35,000 was set aside to compensate clubs with six or more fixtures selected for live television broadcast, or four or more live television fixtures held on nights other than Friday Rugby League Super League: Live Super League broadcasts regularly rank amongst the top 10 most watched programmes in a week on Sky Sports with in excess of 250,000 viewers. £90M over 5 years Danish League (smaller average attendances, no idea what time period the deal is for) The deal amounted to DKK 1,062,300,000[5] (USD 210 million, EUR 140 million),[6] effective from the 2009–10 season.

You think you're Tam Widdows or something?

I missed that. wtf does that mean? And was he not boasting the other day about not needing Rangers? And do SKY really care how the money is shared around the 12 member clubs or how the voting structure is organised? Cunt is too mild a word.

Christ 14-team league is on the agenda. As if 5 meaningless games weren't bad enough they now want us to have half a season of meaningless games: http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/celtic/301332-celtic-would-favour-switch-to-14-team-spl/

Even more so when the OF can veto this anyway. God forbid we have a democratically run SPL rather than the duoloply we have now.

What utter cunts: