hellbhoy Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 I've alluded to this before, but the real end game won't come til someone gets hurt IMO the real end game is to liquidate Rangers at some point but I can't understand why it's took so long !. Are Rangers actually hoping and holding out till the BTC result on the slimmest remotest chance they will win it and then try to agree to an improved CVA and continue as they are ?. If they lose it then liquidate the club immediately just before next seasons fixture are made in time for a parachuted newco with very little punishments just for the sake of the SKY deal and the rangers asking to be thanked for saving the TV revenue saying other SPL clubs have been saved by this ?. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davi3j Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Tbf, it's even funnier/stranger than that. Entire EBT scheme was leveraging them perhaps 5-6% extra spending power a season. They've put themselves in this royal mess for something which didn't - strategically - make much difference. I'm not so sure...how many of their big signings were swayed by the prospect of a tax free lump sum? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 (edited) I'm not so sure...how many of their big signings were swayed by the prospect of a tax free lump sum? Yes, and the degree to which it was tax-free was 5-6%... money going via EBTs amounted to 10-12% of total wage spending, over the 10 years - and therefore about half of that was avoided tax. So you could say they were boosting their budgets by 5-6% or they were making themselves more attractive to players/staff by paying 5-6% tax-free. Regarding my point r.e. Regan... he doesn't decide/guarantee anything, was my point. * independent panel is exactly that. Guidance is provided, but it decides the sanctions. It could, in theory, still come back with something off the list. He doesn't order/instruct it. No-one really does, infact. * he can only "direct" a punishment against anyone insofar as contributing to a Board meeting Edited June 1, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Tbf, it's even funnier/stranger than that. Entire EBT scheme was leveraging them perhaps 5-6% extra spending power a season. They've put themselves in this royal mess for something which didn't - strategically - make much difference. Disagree, the EBT's were used differently on different individuals. In some individual cases it did make much difference see the BBC lists the 'marquee' signings especially in the advocaat period and for certain players that stayed longer term. It wasn't applied 'across the board' as far as I can see and my take on it was that it was used to attract in the 'better' players or as a fillip to keep others at the club. So applied in the way it was, did it apply as a greater leverage on those specific players 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 (edited) The unfortunate reality for you diddy fans (btw the mighty Dons are no diddy team ) is that nothing is going to happen over the long Jubilee weekend and the infinite source of fun that is this thread will go slow for a while. Can't kill the buns on the queens birthday, it'll be like typing google into google or crossing the stream in ghostbusters. We have to get over that and be patient till next week. But this is what will keep me warm through this rocky patch: I believe, deep down, that the SFA through a combination of finally discovering their testicles and the threats of serious violence done to their person from FIFA, that the buns licence will be suspended for next season. Effectively ending the charade that has been the rescue / administration process. The spin will be that it'll both punish the club severely (not in the eyes of most) and 'give them a chance to sort out the uncertainty surrounding their financial position'. No income next year, Green will scarper, no new interest in a stained dirty club that's not allowed to play. Toodle – fucking – ooh. Fat lady sings. If there was any possibility of the club surviving this it would have been done by now. The only reason that it has carried on so long is so the carrion birds can pick the carcass to the bone. In 18 months time the totality of Rangers FC will be reduced to 12 – 15 sad, dejected little men sitting round a social club meeting room looking like stoneybridge town council (ch4, absolutely, circa 1990) plotting the return of 'ra peeple'. Where will all the orcs be you ask? I'll tell you: They'll just walk melt away……. A majority (60% say) will reject football entirely and focus on golf, beating their wife, egg chasing or betting their brew money on fights between a pitbull and 4 starving ferrets. A significant minority (25%) who actually like football (the born again) will visit their local team for the first time. Maybe dabble in the juniors, perhaps follow the national team (shock horror) or get their fix from MOTD. Whatever, most of these unfortunates, with hard work and exposure to life away from great satan will, after 10-12 years, become inoffensive and perhaps not a total drain on society. Still wouldn't buy them a pint though. A very small number will remain loyal and hang around stoneybridge town council hoping for the impossible. Soon enough they'll lose faith and join group number 1. The rest (15%)? Where will they go? Next season when celtic romp to the title, during the last few away games of the season, one bhoy will look across the sea of green, in full irritating party mode, and see an old school chum. "Brilliant not seen him for years!" he thinks. "I never knew he was one of us. Hang on a minute didn't he have a rangers pencil case?" Bingo. Edited June 2, 2012 by williemillersmoustache 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted June 1, 2012 Share Posted June 1, 2012 Tbf, it's even funnier/stranger than that. Entire EBT scheme was leveraging them perhaps 5-6% extra spending power a season. They've put themselves in this royal mess for something which didn't - strategically - make much difference. I don't think it's spending power as much because said player would be the market value rangers paid for them as an EBT system wouldn't work there. I'd go for they increased their wage structure by 5-6% or more depending on the EBT the player and agent agreed to with rangers. They might have been able to afford the transfer fee for good players but budgeting for wages on rangers income might have been more the problem and why they bribed players with more money using the EBT scheme. My thoughts there . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wokcomble Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Just looking at the 'estimated' value of MP and Ibrox. Selling 50,000 of the plastic seats to fans at £20 each would bring in £1m alone. I'd buy one and charge the bigot that lives 3 doors along £400 to sit on it once a fortnight and shout obscenities at the passing pigeons. But only the dirty ****** tarrier pigeons though, leave the prody *** bigot wans in peace. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Why do you think Celtic would vote NO? Whilst I think they have more to lose if "they" go tits up they are also the club in the best position to be able to cope with the loss! I thought I expained that elsewhere - LIEwell cannot vote yes otherwise he with face the wrath of fans. He will vote "no" in the security that diddies will be voting "yes" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 (edited) I don't think it's spending power as much because said player would be the market value rangers paid for them as an EBT system wouldn't work there. I'd go for they increased their wage structure by 5-6% or more depending on the EBT the player and agent agreed to with rangers. They might have been able to afford the transfer fee for good players but budgeting for wages on rangers income might have been more the problem and why they bribed players with more money using the EBT scheme. My thoughts there . Yes, that's what I was saying. They boosted the 'pot' of wage money by 5-6% or something of that order by using EBTs, since money which would've gone on tax on that element of the wage money could instead itself go back to the 'pot'. (Obviously that's not how it worked in practice but that's a good way to illustrate it... money that would've gone on tax didn't have to and thus increased the amount available overall). Edited June 2, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 I thought I expained that elsewhere - LIEwell cannot vote yes otherwise he with face the wrath of fans. He will vote "no" in the security that diddies will be voting "yes" Is abstain open to him as an option? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Gordon Smith speaks http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spl/gordon-smith-i-d-have-stayed-at-rangers-for-free-1-2334170 Offering to stay at Rangers for nothing, and claiming he could have been a creditor means he was actually paid. For what? Nobody seemed to know what his job was. Medium to long term strategies? Anyone who claims to be putting long term strategies in place knows they will be out the door before anyone can work out what they were really doing. Can I also confirm I have NOT, repeat NOT been approached to be director of football at Chelsea or Man City. Just like Gordon hasn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killingfloorman Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Can I also confirm I have NOT, repeat NOT been approached to be director of football at Chelsea or Man City. Just like Gordon hasn't. In the interests of transparency, I too have NOT been approached for either of those positions 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Yes, that's what I was saying. They boosted the 'pot' of wage money by 5-6% or something of that order by using EBTs, since money which would've gone on tax on that element of the wage money could instead itself go back to the 'pot'. (Obviously that's not how it worked in practice but that's a good way to illustrate it... money that would've gone on tax didn't have to and thus increased the amount available overall). By the looks of some of the numbers quoted on the recent BBC Tom Daly program a few of they players got well in excess of 20% more in their wages "Barry Ferguson" £2.5 million over 5 years ? reputed to around £20K plus a week ! This guy must have been saving around £5K a week on tax due by the size of his EBT ! now that's some incentive.So probably worked at different levels for different players maybe. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoTeamGaz Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 if/when Rangers are liquidated Green is going to move his loan into buying rangers assets, so Rangers are borrowing money to buy themselves (again)? someone needs to pull the plug on this as a favour to Rangers fans, still can't understand why the fans groups haven't just gone ahead and arranged an FC United style junior club already, they could have had the whole thing set up by now, have all the fans on side & have a solid case to take the SFL place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Is abstain open to him as an option? LOL - cockwomble will fix it so he can, just in case to save his precious Gers! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 (edited) so Rangers are borrowing money to buy themselves (again)? [/quote Funny enough I've kept saying that the rangers fans are the only ones who have ever put money into the club,but they still believe that it's other investors who have ploughed money into them ! crazy or what !.Rangers get a bank loan and then the fans money pay it off,wish I had found out the orcs were thick coz I'd have given Murray a tenner last may . EDIT : it's only ever the fans who put money into the clubs DOH ! Edited June 2, 2012 by hellbhoy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 The unfortunate reality for you diddy fans (btw the mighty Dons are no diddy team ) is... Oh dear.. Even after last season, delusions continue amongst the Aberdeen fans. :lol: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Oh dear.. Even after last season, delusions continue amongst the Aberdeen fans. :lol: Especially after avoiding relegation only because a stadium was not up to scratch years ago. All teams are diddies but the OF are a massive pair of tits . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 Worry not, Killie are not in danger, in fact, we posted profit the past two seasons and just had the scoreboards sorted! The scoreboards at Ibrox are working and look at the state of their finances. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WDR Posted June 2, 2012 Share Posted June 2, 2012 This seems appropriate, by the, ahem, Moody Blues. 0 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.