[HibeeJibee]

Colin M, on 02 February 2012 - 08:50, said:

And absolutely aware of the second point - I would expect the SFA to flex as much muscle as they can in that situation to ensure that fair play is enforced. But then given who the current SFA president is, that's probably a pipe dream.

SPL dominates SFA governance structures now anyway. Of the 4 Office Bearers, half (Ogilvie and 2nd VP Rod Petrie of Hibs) have clear links to SPL and SPL clubs. Of the 6 other members of the Pro Game Board, half (Sir Ralph Topping, Neil Doncaster, Peter Lawell of Celtic) are SPL officials or from SPL clubs.

Topping (of bookmaker William Hill...) is the Pro Game Board rep to SFA Main Board, joining the 4 Office Bearers, the Junior FA Secretary, and an independent director (who's from a major brewer...).

[HanoMaSano]

phanni tikklar, on 01 February 2012 - 17:37, said:

You're right who ever buys ibrox has a head start in becoming the real new rangers. But i was more getting at the new rangers should be treated as a complete new club. And they dont have any legal rights at all in getting admitted to any league in scotland...

If you are a new club how do you go about getting into the leagues?? You apply, but does every senior club get to vote?? Or does the sfa/spl decide??

I might be wrong as I have limited knowledge of financial rules and the ins and outs of Rangers case in particular. However I don't think it's even a case of who buys Ibrox, but who owns it.

Whyte might be an arse hole and a crook but he's not stupid. Is his £18m not secured against Ibrox? If they are to go into administration and prefered creditors get paid first is it not in his best interest to make sure Rangers cannot pay him his money and therefore he gets the ground in lieu of it?

Once he owns the ground and the old company gets wound up, he's in prime position to re-create Rangers and apply to join the league (I would sincerely hope that the any new club would start at the bottom of the SFL at most)

The SFL would vote for their re-entry at the 3rd division, you can imagine the reaction of the bean counters at most SFL clubs would have to getting the travelling support (however debatable the size of those crowds would be) of "Govan Rangers FC 2012" as they make their way through the divisions. I imagine this would be in stark contrast to the views of the fans of those clubs.

If any new club was somehow elected straight back to the SPL then I'm afraid the games up, though I think this is what "Ra Peepil" would expect.

[barney sumner]

T_S_A_R, on 01 February 2012 - 18:00, said:

it's extremely unlikely that rangers will go into liquidation.

if they go into admin then whyte is the preffered creditor and gets his 18 million before anyone gets a penny. the rest of the creditors are behind him so if they are, for example, owed 40 million the administrator would have to raise 22m before they get 10p in the pound. the more likely situation is that whyte offers eg 10m and writing off his 18m for the club (paying out 25 pence in the pound to ordinary creditors). the administrator would have to accept that unless another party offers 28m+1p.

this ticketus mob confuse the situation slightly. you have to assume that they know what they are doing and have an agreement with whyte to protect their investment.

personally i think rangers will negotiate a settlment with hmrc. they will surely cut a deal rather than being behind whyte's 18m preffered creditor status and in amongst another 30m of ordinary creditors.

i'm still of the opinion that whyte knows what he is doing here. the fact an angry hmrc official appeared on the bbc documentary to complain about whyte but wasn't able to take any action against him suggests he knows how to work the system.

I think tickets would be the preferred creditors as they are owed 24 mill?

[HanoMaSano]

barney sumner, on 02 February 2012 - 10:29, said:

I think tickets would be the preferred creditors as they are owed 24 mill?

Simply being owed more does not make you a preferred creditor.

[HibeeJibee]

Equally, it's doubtful Ticketus would've lent them £24M or whatever it is on a repayment schedule dependant on 3-4 years of future ST sales, if they thought there was much of a chance of not seeing it.

[HanoMaSano]

HibeeJibee, on 02 February 2012 - 11:08, said:

Equally, it's doubtful Ticketus would've lent them £24M or whatever it is on a repayment schedule dependant on 3-4 years of future ST sales, if they thought there was much of a chance of not seeing it.

True, but this was all done as Whyte was coming in (as a saviour) it wasn't totally clear how bad things really were. AlsoI don't think it's been stated what interest there is on this loan. Greece still borrows money even though there's a high chance of the whole country going bust, they just pay through the nose for it in terms of interest.

Relatively high risk high reward lending? Wouldn't be unheard of.

[Ross.]

Suppose it depends on what HMRC want from this.

Do they want a high profile head to scare others into behaving, or do they want to accept pennies in the pound and suggest that other clubs don't have to worry?

That said, if Whyte has ramped up the debt to a level that will see HMRC have a small enough % to allow him to force through a CVA, that would be irrelevant.

Personally, I think if Rangers are liquidated, I can see a fan owned entity getting re entry to the 3rd division, or buying another club and renaming. What level of support is lost will be a big factor in how succesful they are long term.

If Hearts get their act together and challenge Celtic in the meantime, could it be spun as Glasgow v Edinburgh in an attempt to market the already fairly bitter rivalry between both teams?

This post has been edited by Ross.: 02 February 2012 - 11:19

[TartanArmani]

deky, on 01 February 2012 - 15:28, said:

Nothing like blind hope.

Do you think there will still be a rangers in 20 years?

Course there will. Not one bit concerned over financial crises. No big team in Britain will fold.

[deky]

TartanArmani, on 02 February 2012 - 11:27, said:

Course there will. Not one bit concerned over financial crises. No big team in Britain will fold.

Unfortunately you're probably right

Did anyone see the Portsmouth MP in Westminster get Cameron's support for talks between Portsmouth and HMRC over their tax bill?

The MP for Govan will have been watching no doubt. and a precedent has been set.

If Cameron saves rangers, who should be more embarrased?

Do you think Whyte is trying to hold out until independence in the hope he can bump the british?

Rangers fans in SNP vote shocker

This post has been edited by deky: 02 February 2012 - 11:33

[T_S_A_R]

deky, on 02 February 2012 - 11:32, said:

Unfortunately you're probably right

Did anyone see the Portsmouth MP in Westminster get Cameron's support for talks between Portsmouth and HMRC over their tax bill?

The MP for Govan will have been watching no doubt. and a precedent has been set.

If Cameron saves rangers, who should be more embarrased?

Do you think Whyte is trying to hold out until independence in the hope he can bump the british?

Rangers fans in SNP vote shocker

maybe this could be cameron's ace card for saving the union. bribe the 1m currant buns by writing off the tax bill.

[Mr Waldo]

Ross., on 02 February 2012 - 11:17, said:

Suppose it depends on what HMRC want from this.

HMRC will want what they wanted from Motherwell FC, 100p in the pound, or a firesale.

[HanoMaSano]

Mr Waldo, on 02 February 2012 - 13:45, said:

HMRC will want what they wanted from Motherwell FC, 100p in the pound, or a firesale.

There is a difference in that when Motherwell went into administration the law stipulated that the Revenue was ALWAYS the preferred creditor and had to be paid first, and in full.

The rules have changed and this is no longer the case, they are lumped in with everypne else.

I'm sure they will want 100% of what they are owed, and in this case they will be owed enough to have the clout to block any CVA they don't agree with. But there is no way if Rangers lose the tax case that HMRC will see 100% of their money. They will sign up to a CVA and accept less or Rangers will be forced into liquidation and assets sold off (minus Ibrox which is security against Whyte's loan AFAIK).

[Ross.]

T_S_A_R, on 02 February 2012 - 13:09, said:

maybe this could be cameron's ace card for saving the union. bribe the 1m currant buns by writing off the tax bill.

This is why the political parties will probably do what they can to stay out of it.

Anyone who is seen to be backing a bail out, or standing against one, will instantly alienate a massive section of the voting public, for a very long time.

[Savage Henry]

Ross., on 02 February 2012 - 14:22, said:

This is why the political parties will probably do what they can to stay out of it.

Anyone who is seen to be backing a bail out, or standing against one, will instantly alienate a massive section of the voting public, for a very long time.

A good point. This will certainly show up Celtic fans' vociferous denial as "we are not the establishment club" for the nonsense it palpably is.

Incidentally, is it true that the rangerstaxcase.com is actually at the behest of Phil McScrabblescore? I'd be acutely disappointed if that were true.

[Ross.]

Savage Henry, on 02 February 2012 - 14:33, said:

A good point. This will certainly show up Celtic fans' vociferous denial as "we are not the establishment club" for the nonsense it palpably is.

Incidentally, is it true that the rangerstaxcase.com is actually at the behest of Phil McScrabblescore? I'd be acutely disappointed if that were true.

I can't see it being Phil. The posts submitted by the blog author are far removed from the usual stuff that Phil comes out with, the spelling and grammar in particular.

As for the first point, anyone who backs a bail out has instantly lost the vote of most Celtic fans, and I'd guess quite a high % of any other football supporters who do not follow Rangers. Anyone who stands against it loses the Rangers minded voters. If everyone stays out of it, then they all lose in equal proportion. A sort of mutually assured destruction that see's everyone lose, but no one lose(Apart from Rangers).

[Savage Henry]

Ross., on 02 February 2012 - 14:44, said:

I can't see it being Phil. The posts submitted by the blog author are far removed from the usual stuff that Phil comes out with, the spelling and grammar in particular.

As for the first point, anyone who backs a bail out has instantly lost the vote of most Celtic fans, and I'd guess quite a high % of any other football supporters who do not follow Rangers. Anyone who stands against it loses the Rangers minded voters. If everyone stays out of it, then they all lose in equal proportion. A sort of mutually assured destruction that see's everyone lose, but no one lose(Apart from Rangers).

The right result, for all the wrong reasons.

Seriously though, I feel sorry for the Rangers fans. Most of them on here who can string a coherent sentence together - i.e the ones who largely avoid the OF forum - have seen the signs but whistled into the wind. Someone elsewhere was saying that on Follow Follow over 50% think Whyte is the man to see them out of this mess. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see. He's palpably a crook, and this is going to end in the liquidation of Rangers.

All hell is going to erupt when - not if - Rangers lose the tax case.

[uni]

stonedsailor, on 01 February 2012 - 10:28, said:

Nothin has happened, nothing is good though, I am enjoying watching the death of the old firm, the slower, more protracted a death the better as far as I am concerned. The fact that they are dying at differing speeds is even more satisfying given that one lot are so smug just now watching their greatest rivals die off in screaming agony but for one to survive the other must also survive. The diddies will take over the asylum and that 11 to 1 majority will see the remaining dinosaur of Scottish football slowly starve as income is shared on a fairer basis through the league. I feel good.

This quote should be archived and kept forever and made readily available to the whole population of Scotland!

[deky]

Ross., on 02 February 2012 - 14:22, said:

This is why the political parties will probably do what they can to stay out of it.

Anyone who is seen to be backing a bail out, or standing against one, will instantly alienate a massive section of the voting public, for a very long time.

Step forward David Cameron.

The set the precedent yesterday in commons.

Portsmouth MP asked if he would join her in asking HMRC to talks with club to avoid winding up petiton, Cameron said yes

[Ross.]

deky, on 02 February 2012 - 15:20, said:

Step forward David Cameron.

The set the precedent yesterday in commons.

Portsmouth MP asked if he would join her in asking HMRC to talks with club to avoid winding up petiton, Cameron said yes

"Will the Prime Minister add his voice to mine in calling for HMRC to meet with the club so it recoups the taxes it is owed, so that our club survives and that the fans have their chance to become its owner?"

Don't think anyone will complain if Cameron asks HMRC to recoup every penny Rangers owe them!

[bennett]

Hearts Daft, on 01 February 2012 - 10:04, said:

LULZERS

Our players still get paid on time

[shiltrum]

StandFree03, on 01 February 2012 - 17:24, said:

Celtic fans are completely deluded if they think they won't suffer if Rangers go bust. The Old Firm always sign players of similar quality, the fact that Rangers haven't signed anyone on the transfer window means Celtic haven't had to rush out and spend money.

Without Rangers, Celtic will spend less and less as they will have no competition, right until the fans have left and they are another diddy team.

Strange to categorize your team as 'Diddy' things must be bad.

[shiltrum]

Isaiah Osbourne, on 01 February 2012 - 20:26, said:

http://www.youtube.c...d&v=P3_hyBbvFZI

Someone posted this on Hibs.Net

Had to laugh at that.

[theoriginalhedge]

stonedsailor, on 01 February 2012 - 14:37, said:

I don't know who Fergie is but I doubt he married your mum and I suspect this is due to the incest act.

That'll be Fergie fae Hamilton . He was banned from most Scottish grounds , so it's probably a case of like father like son !

[Gaz FFC]

Hate to think what T-shirts most of Scotland's workshy will wear to sign on if Rangers go out the game.

[vanpablo79]

stonedsailor, on 01 February 2012 - 17:01, said:

Good luck with that, no derby, no outside interest, you may not expire and you may be competing on a level akin to any other SPL team but only because your level will drop to one similar to the rest of us. Sponsors and investors will dry up, Parkhead will have to be sold and your fans will never ever taste glory again, no more European dreams, nothing, Celtic would be better off dead.

On a cheerier note, as much as I have protested that I would hate the idea of them in the SPL, I look forward to the Highland derby becoming the big fixture on the card soon. Increased revenue from their fans will, perhaps, even more than make up for the loss of a few neanderthals visiting once or twice per season.

i don't think you small minded fools get it. Celtic are bigger than every other club in scotland put together and that will always be the case.

will Celtic slowly die?

such negative arguments, look at yourselves first. What are your clubs going to do now there is more space to grow?