glasgow sheep Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Also it should be pointed out that Motherwell and Dundee paid a lot less than 10p in the £1 when they went through a cva, so although it seems unfair it is actually a harsher deal than others have gone through. Sadly Motherwell have shown cheating pays by staying the SPL and now qualifying for the Chumps League, as have Dundee by surviving in Div 1 despite cheating twice, if anything they are worse than the huns as they atleast should have learnt their lesson Quote
baggy89 Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 What a load of utter tripe. The reason CVA's have not gone through in England is not because they have the football creditors rule as such it's because there hasn't been enough money in the pot to pay HMRC what they want after football debts have been paid first. Don't be drawn in by the weegia HMRC will in no way get NOTHING if the Huns are liquidated. HMRC will get a lot more than £0.10 in the pound they are No. 1 creditor Ibrox and Murray Park must be worth more than £0.10 in the pound of the money they are owed. As far as I can remember HMRC were not the major creditor in Motherwell or Dundee cases and so had no power to block the CVA's. This is not true in the huns case. Then we get into the fact that the £49 million Tax case hasn't even reached its conclusion and we are expected to believe that someone from HMRC is not only discussing an ongoing Tax case with a journalist but is alluding to the fact that an agreement is in place to accept only part payment - bollocks. I'd hazard a guess that the cost for the preparation of the case is getting on for a couple of million so why then go on to accept £4.9 million. Even the stuff about HMRC only dealing with the huns if Whyte is out of the picture seems a bit too convenient for sensationalist journalism for my liking. Quote
glasgowdon Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 IF it is true, I'll be pretty happy as we can all start paying 10% of tax. Quote
BigAl Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 IF it is true, I'll be pretty happy as we can all start paying 10% of tax. Yep, and I'll be claiming substantial back dated refund Quote
BigAl Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 SSN confirming that Davies, Naismith, McGregor and Whittaker as biggest wage earners have all agreed to the 75% cut. Quote
Harcus Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Do they not already have form form this? Airdrieonians? I may be wrong but was there not some hunduggery that ultimately led to Airdrieonians going to the wall. I may be wrong. Rangers Chairman David Murray dealt a decisive blow for Airdrieonians in 2002 when he demanded money owed to him by the club and was unsympathetic towards their cause. Murray was quoted as saying: “I apologise to Airdrie’s supporters but something had to be done about this debt. Business is business and Carnegie Sports also have wages to pay,” bluntly refusing to help the debt-stricken club. Quote
Tyrant Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Will what goes around come around? Will it fuck. Quote
Kowalski Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 No Rangers could leave £20m hole Craig Brown says it would be a huge blow if Ibrox team disappeared Published: 09/03/2012 ABERDEEN FC boss Craig Brown today claimed it could cost the SPL £20 million if Rangers go out of business. Brown also admitted he’s hoping the SPL agree to allow Rangers to continue playing in the top flight if they win their battle for survival. Brown said: “I have been tip-toeing through the tulips when asked about Rangers at the moment. “You don’t want to say anything that might add to their problems. “But I see no harm in admitting I believe it would be a huge blow to our game if Rangers disappeared. “You only need to look at the problems Dunfermline encountered when they failed to get the gate money due to them from playing Rangers. “If Rangers weren’t there every club would suddenly see money disappearing from their budgets. “Neil Doncaster (the SPL’s chief executive) has talked about the SPL losing £20m if the league was restructured in the wrong way.” Quote
tom_widdows Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 “You only need to look at the problems Dunfermline encountered when they failed to get the gate money due to them from playing Rangers. “If Rangers weren’t there every club would suddenly see money disappearing from their budgets. Imagine having problems because money you were owed, expected and had budgeted to get weeks in advance suddenly didnt turn up. I know for a fact I would have a massive problem if my boss decided not to give me my pay cheque with no warning. Lumping fuck I really hope this is some journo fiction because if not Brown is in danger of finding his way on the road to Media Mcghee-ville. Quote
BobbyBiscuit Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 Rangers: Paul Murray's Blue Knights finalise offer to buy club Former Rangers director Paul Murray has confirmed that his 'Blue Knights' consortium is finalising an offer to buy the club. Ticketus, who advanced money to Rangers in return for several seasons' worth of ticket sales, are part of the consortium along with fans' groups. Murray feels his party "are able to deliver an attractive solution". The group says "new and experienced" board members could be appointed in the event of a successful purchase. He had previously been linked with a purchase of the club from Sir David Murray, who had owned the club since 1988. The Blue Knights comprises Paul Murray, the Rangers Supporters Assembly, the Rangers Supporters Association and the Rangers Supporters Trust and Ticketus. Since Rangers' went into administration on 14 February, Paul Murray's name has been consistently linked with a fresh takeover bid . He said: "I believe that the Blue Knights, working in collaboration with the fans and Ticketus, are able to deliver an attractive solution that will see the club emerge from administration with a clear plan for the future that will bring the financial stability that the club needs. "We firmly believe that a CVA [creditors voluntary arrangement] is the best way forwards and we are working hard to offer a solution that will enable this to happen. "As the administrators have stated, the alternative route of putting the club into liquidation is much less attractive for creditors, supporters and players, with its capacity to destroy value. ""Under current UEFA rules, a football club is banned from European competition for three years in the event of liquidation. Taking this route would have a significant impact on Rangers' future revenues and the overall financial viability of the club, so it is something we want to avoid." Rangers' administrators, Duff and Phelps, have already ruled out the possibility of the club playing in European competition next season as audited accounts are unlikely to be signed off by the 31 March deadline. A deadline of 16 March has been set by Duff and Phelps for parties interested in buying Rangers to come forward. Ticketus, whose advanced funds were used as part of Whyte's takeover , stated: "We believe that the Blue Knights understand very clearly what needs to be done to stabilise the club, and represent the most attractive long-term solution to Rangers' financial situation. "We are therefore backing their bid and will be an active partner, contributing to a successful outcome. "We believe working alongside the Blue Knights and fans' representatives offers the best chance of the club surviving and becoming a viable business." Earlier, Ticketus had indicated they would be confident of winning any case relating to recovering the money they forwarded as part of Whyte's takeover. The firm has taken legal advice after Duff and Phelps pursued the release £3.6m from an account belonging to Whyte. A High Court judge ordered a trial date to decide who owns the money with Ticketus, HM Revenue and Customs, Merchants Turnaround and the pension fund Gerome contesting ownership of the funds. HMRC want £2.8m, Merchants Turnaround is seeking £1m and Gerome is claiming £2.9m. Rangers' administrator emerged from the High Court in London on Thursday pleased that the judge had ordered a further hearing on the club's claim on £3.6m for 30 March. David Whitehouse argued that the money, frozen in his firm's lawyer's account, belongs to Rangers and should be released to ease the club's plight. Lawyers for the club's administrator told the High Court in London they had expected to find £9.5m in the account. But they said there was only £3.6m in it and several parties are claiming ownership of the money. Meanwhile, Rangers' players and management have agreed to temporary wage cuts which will minimise redundancies of the non-playing staff and ensure the club can fulfil its remaining fixtures this season. Quote
Kowalski Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 It fucking stinks. A director who is complicit in the mess they're in, being lined up to buy them back. What a load of pish. Quote
BobbyBiscuit Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 It fucking stinks. A director who is complicit in the mess they're in, being lined up to buy them back. What a load of pish. I'd imagine the "experienced" board members are pretty familiar with the Ibronx Boardroom already too. Quote
BobbyBiscuit Posted March 9, 2012 Report Posted March 9, 2012 http://rangerstaxcase.com/2012/03/09/its-a-deal/ In a move backed by the Treasury, a government source today announced that the taxpayer will fund a stadium made of gold (complete with hover-pitch) for Celtic Football Club. See- I can do it too. I can publish fabricated nonsense. Can someone now send me an NUJ card? It is a confusing business following events surrounding Rangers these days. Depending upon the agenda of the day, we are treated to stories designed to either terrify players into accepting reduced terms or to build confidence in ticket buyers and prospective investors. The story this week that the Treasury is supporting an HMRC deal to write off all of Rangers’ debts to allow a CVA to go through shows that a nauseating mixture of naivety and cynicism is still pumping through the hearts of the Scottish media. Are they really so stupid to believe the same individuals who briefed them on behalf of Whyte? Those same people are still employed by Rangers but are now fabricating on behalf of their new bosses. (How many “HMRC about to do a deal” stories have we heard from the media in the last year?) An actual source close to the facts of this story described the latest wave of claims of about a Treasury sanctioned deal as “utter bollocks”. There is no process for and no history of the Treasury involving itself in this type of discussion. Of course, the people who invented this story know that HMRC cannot comment. So, they hope to do a “Dave King” and make all sorts of claims about deals with the taxman in the belief that the stories will go unchallenged and eventually be accepted as fact. Quite what HMRC will do after the FTT returns a result is anyone’s guess. My guess is that after mishandling deals with Goldman Sachs and Vodaphone, they will want to demonstrate that all tax bills must be paid- end of story. They might offer time to pay (which is of no use to Rangers as the amounts are unpayable on any time scale), but I think that they will want the tax paid in full. However, the idea that anyone is discussing a deal- and with the Treasury no less- a bill that has not been legally determined and with an unknown amount- is just stupid. Any journalist who accepted the word of a PR company, especially one that has been proven wrong in almost its every utterance about this subject, without seeing documentary evidence is an idiot. Quote
tlg1903 Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 Any journalist who accepted the word of a PR company, especially one that has been proven wrong in almost its every utterance about this subject, without seeing documentary evidence is an idiot. I don't think i have ever seen a nail so nicely hit on the head in text. I really hope the guy that writes this blog lands a journalism job in Scottish football. Quote
tom_widdows Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 Rangers: Tax case outcome 'will not hold up sale' Joint administrator Paul Clark says the pending outcome of Rangers' tax dispute will not hold up the sale of the club. Rangers are awaiting the verdict of a tribunal, commonly known as the 'big tax case', relating to payments to employees over a 10-year period. "The big tax is something that is out of our hands," said Clark. "Even if the big tax case decision has not actually been delivered, we still think that we could conduct a transaction with a new buyer." And he added: "Just because we don't have the final extent of the amount that's outstanding, it needn't hold that process up, so it doesn't concern me. "To some extent it's about what that would mean in terms of the deal that was offered to settle the big tax case." Asked about the possibility of a "deal" being made with HM Revenue and Customs, Clark replied: "We're not at the stage where we can go to any of the creditors with any specifics and so I think that it would be too early for me to say what the chances of a deal with any of the creditors are. "It's something that, when we've got a considered position, when we've got a suitable purchaser, that will be the time to sit down and talk to the various of the stakeholders who at the end of the day will need to make the decisions and that's the creditors." Clark also reiterated his firm Duff and Phelps' view that the club can avoid liqidation and that the required information was being made available to prospective buyers. "The plan of ours from the outset is to avoid any talk of liquidation," he said. "We firmly believe that Rangers Football Club will continue to operate and that's why we are talking to all these parties and that's why it was so important to get all the necessary cuts in place so that we could keep the club in operation for long enough to enable a party to come in and make an acquisition. "We have given as much clarity as we can. There are some issues that still need to be dealt. "We believe that we can give that clarity to enable someone to make a considered judgement in a more stabilised environment so that they know what they're buying and that they know what they're getting into." Meanwhile, former Motherwell chief executive Pat Nevin believes Duff and Phelps' success in reaching an agreement over wage cuts at Ibrox "is a way for Rangers to possibly survive only until the summer". Former Scotland international Nevin, who was at Motherwell during the Fir Park club's period of administration, told BBC Radio 5 live: "There are two ways out; one's a CVA [creditors voluntary arrangement] then asking HMRC to look for 10p in the pound and the £49m big tax bill and there's a smaller tax bill - which is considerable too. "If the HMRC do not agree then there is no route out. Nobody is going to come in and pay £60m/£70m to Rangers because that money will never be recouped. "They still have massive problems." Big difference between 'will not hold up' and 'we still think that we could' Pat Nevin joining the growing list of people who dont have their heads in the sand Quote
capitalsharpie Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 They still have massive problems phew! thank god for that! Quote
octavion Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 +1 was getting worried they were getting everything there way Quote
glasgow sheep Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 Surely this is all bollocks. Why the fuck would anyone buy Rangers, even die hard fans, while the big tax case is still undecided? Why would you voluntarily expose your self to a liability of at least £50M? Aside from this bullshit the nauseating way the huns players are being held up as some kind of selfless, philanthropic individuals by many is staggering. How many weeks did they take to agree to the pay cut, how many (exaggerated?) statements of the imminent death of rfc did the administrators have to make before they agreed to deals with significant clauses in their favour attached? I don't blame them for that, it's their fucking livelihood but to suggest they are doing this for the good of rangers is yet more bullshit. Quote
tom_widdows Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 See this EBT stuff? Does that not mean that the players were also cheating the Taxman therefore they could bring charges against every current and former rangers player that got them? Quote
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 Doubt it though it usually works out as personal liability if your employer fucks up your PAYE. There are football precedents, Arsenal being one, who paid a fucking fortune to HMRC to settle. Can't see them being pleased that they gave HMRC a huge wedge and the huns getting away with a small percentage. Quote
dave_min Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 See this EBT stuff? Does that not mean that the players were also cheating the Taxman therefore they could bring charges against every current and former rangers player that got them? The 'contract' I seen says that the Huns will take care of the players liabilities. Quote
Kowalski Posted March 10, 2012 Report Posted March 10, 2012 Hey, that's a Blue Knight! It's rhyming slang. Quote
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.