BobbyBiscuit Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Looks as though they've not been making the pension contributions either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kowalski Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 An interesting read: http://rangerstaxcase.com/2012/03/08/rangers-deathwatch-qa/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 An interesting read: http://rangerstaxcase.com/2012/03/08/rangers-deathwatch-qa/ Very informative, interesting point re Murray, and wonder how many huns are conned by his antics: If liquidation is inevitable, why is Paul Murray saying otherwise? As Graham Spiers accurately recalled on TV last night, this is the same Paul Murray who said that it made no sense for anyone to buy Rangers with the Big Tax Case hanging over the club. Yet, today he is posturing on the periphery trying to look like a hero set to save the day? Nothing about Rangers’ position has improved since then. I will call it as I see it: Paul Murray is fronting a consortium of ex-directors who want to claim the corpse of the club killed by their own actions. They are hoping to make life for Craig Whyte so uncomfortable post-liquidation that he will surrender his claim on Rangers’ assets cheaply. Paul Murray is neither so naive nor so stupid as to believe that he can really save the club. He is so cynical as to toy with the hopes and emotions of the Rangers’ many supporters and first time I have seen all this: To explain the breakdown of the debt estimate: £18m – Wavetower (plus interest at rates Whyte can set- £26m at least by now- but let’s stick with £18m). £12m – taxes (could be £15m per BBC Scotland) £6m – misc. working capital owed by RFC at time of takeover (not including any increase due to Whyte just not paying bills) That would be £36m debt before we consider the Big Tax Case. (It will be significantly more, but let’s not get hung up on precision). Big Tax Case: £20-24m in underpayment £16-20m in interest (compounding daily- it has grown by about £2m in the time this blog has been running. Initial estimates assumed monthly compounding. This would have been low). i.e. initial total of £38-44m Penalty: assumed £18m. That actually puts the debt at between £92-98m. My apologies for the low estimate above in the interests of conservatism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 £98 fucking million They surely must be fucked......in any other country they would be, but I still wouldn't stake my life possessions on it happening here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mizer Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 Looks as though they've not been making the pension contributions either. More about the Jerome pensions people 53% of Jerome's parent company is owned by Regenesis Holdings, which is owned by Whyte's associate Wulstan Earley Unsurprisingly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madbadteacher Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 £98 fucking million They surely must be fucked......in any other country they would be, but I still wouldn't stake my life possessions on it happening here This Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgowdon Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 £98 fucking million They surely must be fucked......in any other country they would be, but I still wouldn't stake my life possessions on it happening here That was pretty much the exact figure the "fenian" freelance reporter managed to get a "no comment" from Martin Bain on between 18 and 24 months ago. I mean, wow. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 From RangersMedia "I have read and followed as much as I can stomach over this debacle, and have read most of Leggo's posts, and the weird thing is I wonder just how much John Reid is to blame for our plight. His name has hardly been mentioned during this entire disaster! Everyone else'e has..... From Wiki... At Celtic's Annual General Meeting held on 29 October 2009, Reid highlighted the plight of the club's closest rivals Rangers. In response to a question on the club's spending, Reid said: "If you start getting into a position where you are running up debts that you cannot afford, spending money you don't have, it is the road not to success but to ruin." DID he predict our road to ruin, or did he fire the first salvo towards us, and create the shitstorm we are now in. Remember the crap that came our way, the snide comments, reffing interferance... he even caused them to strike. Then after lighting the "BLUE" touchpaper, he pisses off....and here we are, sick to our stomachs not knowing if the club can even survive. Lawwell gets most of the credit for the bollocks coming from CP, but I believe JR (Dr. apparently) dug the hole we fell into. I would not put it past him, for him to have been the one to instigate/campaign for the HMRC action. Ater leaving, it looks like his hands are spotlessly clean. What George Galloway said about him also speaks volumes.. From Wiki According to George Galloway, Reid is an accomplished singer and guitar player and "taught a whole generation of Labour activists, including yours truly, the entire IRA songbook". Again, the press, OUR PRESS virtually ignored it, but it was extremely relevant to us, no?. And this was also the same John Reid who as a British Government minister said that British troops might leave Afghanistan without a single shot being fired...... The death toll, today now stands at 400+ ...and they bannered.... "NO BLOOSTAINED POPPIES ON OUR HOOPS" Well, as Leggo says, we ken noo.......... This post has been edited by Helicopter Sundae: Today, 02:00 AM" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Just been thinking about the time pre Whyte when Lloyds Bank were effectively running Rangers, and surely if they really were running the club they must have known about all of these alleged illegal practices. If it can be proved they were in the know then surely they must face some form of prosecution over it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgowdon Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 From RangersMedia Do they ever blame anyone apart from themselves? Turning a blind eye when there was trophies makes them equally complicit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotfree Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 £98 million :o :o :wave: :wave: :wave: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 fucking scandalous if true, don't remember this happening for dundee, motherwell etc, in fact hmrc voted against Dundee's most recent cva "HMRC has held meetings with both the Rangers administrators and the SPL to stress that the tax authorities would prefer not to see the club fail... they are willing to have Rangers continue as an existing business – even if the club lose the tax case in respect of Employee Benefit Trusts – but only if Craig Whyte is out of the picture. although an adverse decision by the tribunal that is considering the EBT case could saddle Rangers with a bill of £24 million in back tax, £12 million in interest and as much as £14 million in penalties, HMRC will not stand in the way of a Company Voluntary Agreement – through which creditors emerge with a percentage of the cash owed to them – and that this has been sanctioned at Treasury level. However, that will only be possible if there is what has been described within HMRC as 'regime change'. In other words, Whyte must have no connection with Rangers at the end of the process." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9129851/Rangers-players-told-football-clubs-future-is-in-their-hands.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Seems strange considering it wasn't Whyte who was the owner when they pulled off the EBT scam in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graeme_S Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Surely it'd be pretty obvious that HMRC want Rangers to continue. if they go down the pan, then HMRC would get nowt would they not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyBiscuit Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Surely it'd be pretty obvious that HMRC want Rangers to continue. if they go down the pan, then HMRC would get nowt would they not? Exactly. Looking after their best interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Surely it'd be pretty obvious that HMRC want Rangers to continue. if they go down the pan, then HMRC would get nowt would they not? Fair point, just trawling through a thread on P&B trying to catch up with everything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 btw the huns don't have a home game till the 25th March. Given they are losing money hand over fist and still haven't made any savings will they last that long without cash coming in through the gates, their only source of income. If they do make it this far the game is vs Celtic and could see the tims win the title, which I sure will be warmly welcomed by the home support and won't result in violence and bigotry at all? But then of course apparently this vile institution supported by violent, wife beating, bigots is vital for the functioning of Scottish Fitba and Society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superstar Tradesman Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Giving HMRC nowt was what got them in this pickle in the first place. Sad to think that by 'officially' doing exactly that, they'll get off with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Surely it'd be pretty obvious that HMRC want Rangers to continue. if they go down the pan, then HMRC would get nowt would they not? Surely if the club are liquidated assets are sold off (anything from Ibrox to company cars to fixtures & fittings) and the money generated goes towards paying off as much of the debts (tax bill) that is possible from the sales. So why should HMRC let them off with anything less than having to sell everything to pay them? HMRC agreeing to a CVA with a football club in a highly publicised case would open the floodgates and would very much not be in their best interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyBiscuit Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Just been sent this: Posted on the Bears Den- From reaction they trust the source of the poster .’m probably breaking a confidence but trying to justify to myself that I’m really just bending the line as far as I can. This has come from the insolvency guru that has explained much to me in recent days. This is what I was told – believe it or dismiss it as you wish. Hopefully word will filter through to those that need told that there are no secrets, there are no discussions that will forever remain private if Rangers do collapse. The players did not take us to this point but the supporters have a right to know which players may be about to hit the first blow in the last nail. An agreement had been reached in principle for the 75:50:25 wage cuts. Then two of our highest paid players, both out injured just now, told the Administrators that their wage cut should only be 50% as they couldn’t earn win bonuses. This despite picking up their full wages to date while on the sick and not being able to kick a ball in achieving those wins. The Administrators were angered that they were backtracking on the agreement and were ready to make them redundant and implement the agreement among the other players. Then a third, highly paid, player met with the Administrators and demanded that a £1m release clause be inserted in his contract in case “he didn’t like the new owners”. Clearly that was impossible for the Administrators to agree to – they would be writing £2m off an asset, all for the sake of saving about £300k in wages from that player between now and the summer. A fourth player decided that he could only now afford a 50% cut as he had cars to finance and debts to pay. It was following these discussions that the Administrators decided that an early sale may be preferable to what was beginning to look like the decimation in the value of the squad if four of our biggest assets were made redundant. Compare and contrast the attitudes of those four players, three of whom are massive Rangers fans, with two other players. It has been well documented that one highly paid player offered to play for nothing. That is correct. What isn’t well known is that another senior player decided that he’s made enough money from football/Rangers and that he would be prepared to walk away with nothing and probably retire. If in the next 24 hours there is no sign of a quick sale being possible, and there is no change of heart from these senior players, there will probably be massive redundancies. If Rangers do not complete their matches this season, the hypocrisy of those players will never be forgotten. Indeed their intransigence may have already engendered the sale to a newco and liquidation of the current company. I know deep down that I have broken a confidence and lost a source but I had no choice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 "the supporters have a right to know which players..." and doesn't mention any names. Although I would assume the injured players are Naismith and Laugherty and the older player set to retire is McCulloch? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobbyBiscuit Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 "the supporters have a right to know which players..." and doesn't mention any names. Although I would assume the injured players are Naismith and Laugherty and the older player set to retire is McCulloch? That's who I took it to be. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 Players are in a tough spot in a way. They lead life styles that cost a lot and they need their wages to cover those costs. There's nothing wrong with that if they're living within their means. They're vilified for "only" wanting to take a 50% cut. That's out of order IMO my opinion. It's not their fault that the club is in this mess. As much as I hate all hunnery and associated cunts I can't help but feel the extent to which they're being vilified is unfair. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 That's who I took it to be. I though McGregor would be one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baggy89 Posted March 8, 2012 Share Posted March 8, 2012 I though McGregor would be one of them. Surely he's the fourth with "cars to finance and debts to pay"? and I bet the one who offered to play for nothing is Healey or maybe Aluko. 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.