HTG

Did the Channel 4 piece actually show anything new? It was already accepted that if EBTs were in operation then highly paid Rangers staff would be benefitting. The question is whether the payments made were contractual, deemed to be in lieu of salary or were in fact discretionary. That is a judgement that has still to be made and the tax expert seemed to use the word "if" a lot when interviewed. That didn't tell me whether Rangers were guilty or not guilty to any greater an extent than I knew before. Martin Bain and some other directors being caught by it makes no odds.

Anyone tell me why this thread is necessary. It seems to me that it is about the administration of rangers. I'm sure saw a thread about that somewhere ...

To be fair, he'll hardly be the first or last.

Tell me this is a whoosh.

In the midst of all this speculation it's important to stick with fact for some of the time. It is a fact that the BBC showed a clip of "We don't do walking away" on the programme this evening. It's a fvckin' classic and deserves a national prime time slot like that. Nearly fell aff the couch laughing!

The Ticketus position may be a simple one. If they are owed money while Rangers are in admin, they will become creditors for the sum owed. If Rangers come out of admin and the next instalment is due, it will be payable in full. The only way it could not be paid in full is if Rangers are in admin on each of the due dates. By failing to get the agreement quashed, Rangers cashflow is fucked for years. There is no way D and P can incorporate future debts into an admin settlement otherwise everyone would pay 10p in the pound on all current and future liability. They are quite fucked by this I think.

Pile of shite.

Looks to me like Ticketus can assure their position if they move themselves into a position where they are secured creditors. These people are venture capitalists and have a duty to look after their investors. If they take over a secured position they won't give a stuff about liquidation. They'll get far more out of the sale of assets than they will if things go tits up just now. It only cost Whyte a quid so why would it cost them much more to assume the debt. They'll be out the box if the big tax case goes against them but Ticketus will get much better value thereafter.

If the Rangers approach is successful it certainly provides a template for every other club in the division. The key is to run up a huge debt - no point doing this stuff for pennies - and then go through the 3 month process to emerge bearing a big shiny arse at all these fuckin idiots that pay their way. Vlad has made a good start but now he can shell out a lot more. Dunfermline have missed a trick - they should have spent like fvck in the transfer window. It's worth remembering that Rangers are where they are because on day 1 of his ownership, Craig Whyte has kept every penny of tax that has been deducted from the players and other staff at Rangers. Nothing to do with the big tax case. Everything to do with stealing other people's cash. If my company did that to me and then asked me to take a 75% wage cut they'd get a big middle digit by way of response. Frankly I'm stunned that any Rangers players are up for helping out tossers appointed by the man who stole their tax off them. If they return into the SPL - even with some token gesture of a 10 point penalty at the start of the next 3 seasons the ba' will be on the slates. Surely nobody outwith Rangers can stomach watching this league.

I caught wee bits of the stuff on Radio Scotland last night where the panel (particularly Dodds) were bleating on about the impact of losing Rangers from the SPL. They absolutely understood that supporters would see a more competitive and exciting league. "But what about the money" they kept saying. "It's all very well having more excitement but you wouldn't get the tv money". In the midst of this line of thinking you could be forgiven for thinking that people who buy their season tickets do so because they want to watch the tv money rather than their team playing in a league that isn't carved up. I'm left asking the question - what additional quality does the tv money bring to the majority of teams in the SPL. How many overpaid, useless articles are lumbering about the place? Our international team isn't going to win big anytime soon. Our club sides are becoming less likely to win big anytime soon. Because on both counts, we simply cannot compete with our near neighbours. The impact on our game beyond its domestic borders will be very limited. We are not performing in that arena anyway. So there must be an argument that if we can make the domestic league more competitive for 36 games a year then that is worth the sacrfice of a few quid. Sod the television people and sod accountants. We'd probably be better off starting again with clubs reliant on finding and using Scottish young players instead of has-beens and second raters from beyond these shores.

If that's what they need then they are stuffed. Murray spent years looking for a buyer and if Craig Whyte is right about nothing else, he's right that nobody else stepped up to the plate. Largely because nobody fancied buying the rights to a £49m tax bill in addition to existing debts. Those years looking for a buyer are what tested Lloyds patience beyond its limits in the end. If some shining knight appears on his white charger now, I'd be asking the question "where were you 2 years ago?". I don't think the appetite exists among the business community to buy Rangers. Paul Murray showing an interest is just a man with aspirations. Why didn't he put up against Whyte? How much of the £100m does he have? Let's face it, any Rangers supporter could have stood there and said what he did. When Rangers were for sale he never moved a muscle. Lot of hot air. Now of course, the club is much less attractive to buy because not only do they have a pile of debt (almost as much as when Whyte took over) but Whyte has severely restricted income streams through the Ticketus and catering deals. If Rangers still owed £18m and everything else was as at last May then maybe. But they now owe something like £15m having paid off £18m but mortgaging about £28m (tickets and grub) to do so. So the debt has reduced by £3m but income streams have reduced by £25m on top of that (or whatever the actual figures are - a shedload anyway!). Shut it down and start again I think.

But isn't that every day???

The Daily Mail must have its story wrong. I'm sure that when the Ticketus deal became public Craig Whyte said that the cash would be used to develop the team and that none of it had been used for the purposes of debt reduction. Surely a writ will be issued in the next few days and the Mail can join the BBC in the dock.They'd be off the visitor list at Ibrox if Whyte were still around the place.

I want to know why the BBC website still shows Rangers with 61 points. I think they have an agenda against Motherwell. Get the lawyers on to it ...

That would be strange given that Whyte has had this company on his payroll since day 1. Surely the 1 thing he'd guarantee is that both he and they will be well rewarded. Unless he's moved so much money out that being a secured creditor doesn't matter and actually saves him a lot of grief if he's seen to be taking the same as everyone else (plus £30m up front).

One thing puzzles me ... Craig Whyte said that the money from Ticketus was to be used for building the team. It was not going to be used to pay off debt, be transferred to Wavetower or whatever. On no account was he taking money up front off the supporters for the next 4 years for any other purpose than developing Rangers. Was he not telling the truth?

Is it just me that can't get their head around why Rangers would need to go into Admin now? How much money has Whyte generated since last May and why has he been unable to maintain the day to day running of the club? He allegedly paid off the debt to the bank so there is no external creditor pressure. He sold off the rights to provide catering at Ibrox for a hefty sum (£5m ... can someone confirm). He had access to the 2011/12 season ticket income (30k - 40k season tickets paying their money up front?) He sold 4 years of season tickets for £24m. Reason - to provide working capital while he knocks down their costs. So why, within weeks, is there no working capital? He had access to an additional £9m in tax deducted from salaries etc but which was not paid to HMRC. He sold Jelavic to Everton for £5.5m. This was allegedly less than the offer from West Ham so it is safe to assume that the up front payment terms were better. He's had access to the TV cash from the SPL deal along with money from their brief trek into Europe. He's had access to running capital from walk-up ticket sales, merchandising etc etc. Now, even if they hadn't received all of the Ticketus or Jelavic money, it is in the public domain that they are going to receive it. So who would be putting pressure on Rangers? If you didn't have immediate access to £9m to pay the tax due, surely those offering credit to the club would know that in the short term Rangers were awash with money because they've just generated huge sums through the rights issues to season tickets and pies along with the sale of Jelavic. In the face of all of that, why has he chosen to say that the club simply cannot pay its day to day running costs (which include tax and VAT)? WHERE IS THE MONEY? Surely the SPL and others who might have reason to sympathise with the plight of Rangers can see that this tactical administration has arisen because he has sold off a pile of silver, put the money out of reach and informed everyone that Rangers can't afford to be Rangers. In the meantime, he's continued to blame the previous regime. But nothing of what is happening now seems to reflect the pre-Whyte period. Once the banks were happy, he should have had a free run at getting his house in order as long as his new creditors (i.e. him through his holding company!!!) didn't turn up and put the screws on him. There ought to be no sympathy for Rangers given the behaviour that has led to this point. There has been no decision on the big tax case. What happened to Rangers being confident of winning it? Because if they do, the worst you can say about Murray's time at Rangers is that they were running with an £18m debt after 20 years. And that they'd just about halved the debt in 3 or 4 years without embarassing Rangers. Having run the debt up, that sounds like prudent mgt to me. I don't think you can say the same about Whyte. He will almost certainly be exposed in the administration process. But that won't get the money back.

If Rangers go into admin now, does the £9m debt to HMRC amount to more than 25% of the total owed to all creditors? Whyte will claim £18m and Ticketus will claim £24m. Even without adding in any football related debt, these 3 sums add up to £51m so the HMRC element is around 20%. If Whyte and Ticketus are secured creditors, they'd get their cash back in full and only HMRC and every other creditor would be gubbed with some 5p in the £ solution. Not sure what then happens to the big tax bill if that comes to pass but by then they might have re-established Rangers as a new entity. The bill for HMRC is against a defunct institution but Ticketus may be given a free pass to provide season tickets to the supporters of the new club. So they wouldn't need to seek any of the debt from the old club. And Whyte would value the £18m as small beer when compared to selling on Rangers as a going concern with no tax debt hanging over them. He could float the new club and make £30m or £40m from the flotation. In the meantime, the taxpayer (me) gets screwed. There was a story in the paper today about the Government coming down hard on benefit cheats who defraud the country out of £100m a year by claiming to be single when they are shacked up. The effort in chasing that £100m down will be considerable. But they will put it in. Why are they not as concerned with Rangers potentially walking away from a £75m bill? It's time the law was changed and the Directors made accountable for stuff like this. In the meantime, Craig Whyte has blamed everything on the previous board. But the previous board didn't decide to deduct PAYE from the players and then pocket it. He did that all by himself and for that alone he is not fit to run a football club.

For as long as HMRC are unsecured creditors football clubs will piss all over them. All they can do is seek to enforce the debt. If company law really works in favour of football clubs there is not much they can do under current legislation. With many businesses, they go under and money is lost to the exchequer. That's pretty much the end of the story because they are not worth redeeming. But football clubs are. So this is just massive tax dodging. If the fit and proper person test is not finished, I fail to see how CW can pass it now that evidence has been presented that he would rather put a club like Rangers into admin than pay tax he has deducted from players. Not that this is an issue. He'll swan off with a huge profit and there will be a massive queue of Rangers minded business men desperate to take the club forward with assurances that this must never happen again etc etc. And they can resume walking through streets in july with heads held high and drums banging. Fuckin sickening. But the law will need to change or soon no club will bother paying tax.

Lightning

projectile vomit (see also Post #1!!)

Congratulations!! A bit of work and you'll be able to keep this out the Shite Presents thread 3 years down the line!!

Tickets for England - South Africa Test Match at Headingly in August. Linlithgow Rose Calendar Books Sweeties Clothes New cabin luggage Toiletries Some cash to buy good stuff with Mustn't grumble!!

Bam

Eyes