Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

24567…90

Comments

  • #52
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    He always knew that this was a possible outcome, he said so himself.

    He bloody well engineered it intentionally.

    Seriously Jelle, and I said it before on here, how come a club that can't afford it's day to day running costs can afford to put it's more sellable players on long term contracts paying them £15m more and paying agents £1m?

    Answer: Because he knew that Rangers would have gone not admin by then and he'd get a good price for them.


  • #53
    A Dub in Glasgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,280 ✭✭✭✭A Dub in Glasgo


    This is what I posted in the Rangers thread in October 2011

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=75077885#post75077885

    'It looks very likely that Mr Whyte will put Rangers into Administration if they lose their 'water tight' case against the taxman. Whyte is in the media saying 'Rangers are in crisis'.

    The current 10 point gap over Celtic seems to be allowing their next move'


  • #54
    dartbhoy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,328 ✭✭✭dartbhoy


    bobbysands81 wrote: »
    He bloody well engineered it intentionally.

    Seriously Jelle, and I said it before on here, how come a club that can't afford it's day to day running costs can afford to put it's more sellable players on long term contracts paying them £15m more and paying agents £1m?

    Answer: Because he knew that Rangers would have gone not admin by then and he'd get a good price for them.
    Well judging by the scenes outside Ibrox this evening the fans smell a rat with Whyte IMO. Why would anyone want to take over any football club in such a dire financial position in the first place? Certainly your answer Bobby makes a lot of sense.


  • #55
    bobmalooka
    Registered Users Posts: 1,521 ✭✭✭bobmalooka


    dartbhoy wrote: »
    Well judging by the scenes outside Ibrox this evening the fans smell a rat with Whyte IMO. Why would anyone want to take over any football club in such a dire financial position in the first place? Certainly your answer Bobby makes a lot of sense.

    Speaking to my boss earlier (accountant) and he reckons there is a possibility Whyte could make a fortune out of this, there is just so much money unaccounted for.

    Where exactly has the money for the season tickets gone?

    How did this guy get approved for ownership.


  • #56
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    bobmalooka wrote: »
    Speaking to my boss earlier (accountant) and he reckons there is a possibility Whyte could make a fortune out of this, there is just so much money unaccounted for.

    Where exactly has the money for the season tickets gone?

    How did this guy get approved for ownership.

    Most importantly, if Rangers go into liquidation, as long as Whyte can hold onto Ibrox then he can lay claim Rangers 2012 who will be debt free and worth feckin millions on their day of inception.


  • #57
    mikeym
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,985 ✭✭✭mikeym


    I wonder will the Rangers fans stand by the club and keep going to the matches because when they played Dundee Utd Ibrox was half empty.


  • #58
    Eirebear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    mikeym wrote: »
    I wonder will the Rangers fans stand by the club and keep going to the matches because when they played Dundee Utd Ibrox was half empty.

    3 years ago against DUFC in a similar cup game, we got a similar crowd.

    Don't read too much into that.


  • #59
    ItsAWindUp
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,325 ✭✭✭ItsAWindUp


    Kind of sad to see it happen to any club


  • #60
    MrStuffins
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,256 ✭✭✭✭MrStuffins


    stovelid wrote: »
    It's a valid analogy.

    The few sea lion laughs that your answer elicited from people - that probably can't formulate their own worthwhile replies - notwithstanding.

    No it's not!

    Atheism is lack of belief in God.

    it depends on others believing in God just as much as me not believing Superman is real is dependant on people who actually think he's a real person!

    You're analogy is bad!


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    ColeTrain wrote: »
    Whyte has told SSN that the tax bill could be upwards of 75million :pac:

    If that's the case then liquidation is looking very likely.

    No it does, it makes administration very likely, at which point the tax liabilitiy will almost certainly got substantially reduced.


  • #62
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    HMRC have asked to put Rangers into administration today, decision to follow later.

    Whyte's bluff well and truly called.


  • #63
    meriwether
    Registered Users Posts: 1,232 ✭✭✭meriwether


    bobbysands81 wrote: »
    Most importantly, if Rangers go into liquidation, as long as Whyte can hold onto Ibrox then he can lay claim Rangers 2012 who will be debt free and worth feckin millions on their day of inception.

    Yes, as they start life at the bottom of Scottish Division three (if it even goes that far).

    There's no way a Continuity Rangers FC (snigger) will suddenly emerge in the top division immediately.

    You can't behave like Whyte is behaving and pull a fast one on the league.

    Administration is a disaster for Rangers. Pompey went into Admin, and have never recovered.

    You can also write off europe next season. They need to be out of admin by March to be eligible.


  • #64
    cruiserweight
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,307 ✭✭✭cruiserweight


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    HMRC have asked to put Rangers into administration today, decision to follow later.

    Whyte's bluff well and truly called.

    Does not seem like good news for Rangers

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17026172


  • #65
    RoryMac
    Registered Users Posts: 5,320 ✭✭✭RoryMac


    meriwether wrote: »
    Yes, as they start life at the bottom of Scottish Division three (if it even goes that far).

    There's no way a Continuity Rangers FC (snigger) will suddenly emerge in the top division immediately.

    You can't behave like Whyte is behaving and pull a fast one on the league.

    Administration is a disaster for Rangers. Pompey went into Admin, and have never recovered.

    You can also write off europe next season. They need to be out of admin by March to be eligible.

    There will be huge pressure from the media especially to allow New Rangers FC back into the SPL if liquidation happens. They have already started the campaign in papers, on radio etc that Rangers having to start from the bottom would be the end of Scottish football. There is probably an element of truth in that IMO

    Apparently the SPL rules do allow for a club to be granted entry to the top tier once the clubs vote in favour, what UEFA and FIFA would think of this is anyone's guess.


  • #66
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    Rangers aren't getting liquidated so the point is moot.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Insect Overlord
    Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 30,912 Mod ✭✭✭✭Insect Overlord


    Breaking news: Paul Gascoigne has been spotted outside of Rangers ground Ibrox, with a six pack of Tennants, a fishing rod and some chicken.


  • #68
    karma_
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,798 ✭✭✭karma_


    Beefy78 wrote: »
    Rangers aren't getting liquidated so the point is moot.

    Surely that would depend on what the HMRC decide to do once they become the secured creditor.


  • #69
    Eirebear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    Beefy78 wrote: »
    Rangers aren't getting liquidated so the point is moot.

    Wish i was as confident of that as you.


  • #70
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    Eirebear wrote: »
    Wish i was as confident of that as you.

    There's nothing to suggest that Rangers won't come out of this. I think England are up to 60 Clubs now who have gone into Administration since 1997 and not many failed. Certainly none with the sort of turnover that Rangers have. You simply can't compare this situation with those of Gretna or Chester City.

    Administration is about protecting the interests of the creditors. Liquidation is not in the interest of the creditors as they're not going to get their money back. The best interest of the creditors is best served by Rangers agreeing a CVA to pay back 20% or whatever of what they owe and then allowing them to exit Administration with outgoings that the club can afford.

    HMRC are aggressive on this now because of what happened with Leeds. They won't allow clubs to use their tax liabilities to fund working capital and they won't allow Rangers to take the piss with what they pay back as Leeds did. As a point of principle they are deeply offended by the Football Creditors Rule however at the end of the day they're there to protect the interest of the Treasury and the interest of the Treasury are not best served by forcing Rangers out of business.


  • #71
    Eirebear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    I get what your saying, but if (and it's a big if) Rangers are hit with a tax bill of 75m then i have absolutely no idea where that is coming from.

    I am not savvy enough on these things to really comment, but it seems to me that everything about Rangers is an absolute mess at the moment.
    I've never trusted Whyte, and those worries seem to be coming to fruition. Now we're getting stories about Murray waiting in the wings with a buy back clause.

    It all seems extremely convaluted and desperate at the moment, and that worries me a lot.


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Beefy78 wrote: »
    There's nothing to suggest that Rangers won't come out of this. I think England are up to 60 Clubs now who have gone into Administration since 1997 and not many failed. Certainly none with the sort of turnover that Rangers have. You simply can't compare this situation with those of Gretna or Chester City.

    Administration is about protecting the interests of the creditors. Liquidation is not in the interest of the creditors as they're not going to get their money back. The best interest of the creditors is best served by Rangers agreeing a CVA to pay back 20% or whatever of what they owe and then allowing them to exit Administration with outgoings that the club can afford.

    HMRC are aggressive on this now because of what happened with Leeds. They won't allow clubs to use their tax liabilities to fund working capital and they won't allow Rangers to take the piss with what they pay back as Leeds did. As a point of principle they are deeply offended by the Football Creditors Rule however at the end of the day they're there to protect the interest of the Treasury and the interest of the Treasury are not best served by forcing Rangers out of business.

    We're not talking about simple administration anymore, the threat of liquidation is real now.


  • #73
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Eirebear wrote: »
    I get what your saying, but if (and it's a big if) Rangers are hit with a tax bill of 75m then i have absolutely no idea where that is coming from.

    I am not savvy enough on these things to really comment, but it seems to me that everything about Rangers is an absolute mess at the moment.
    I've never trusted Whyte, and those worries seem to be coming to fruition. Now we're getting stories about Murray waiting in the wings with a buy back clause.

    It all seems extremely convaluted and desperate at the moment, and that worries me a lot.

    I don't think that "buy back" clause exists as you think it does mate.

    Is Murray not broke himself now?

    ...and I don't think the £75m is that big an "if" mate, Whyte himself said it last night.


  • #74
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    Could be back to playing on the local park like the pioneers.


  • #75
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    Eirebear wrote: »
    I get what your saying, but if (and it's a big if) Rangers are hit with a tax bill of 75m then i have absolutely no idea where that is coming from.

    Well it isn't coming from anywhere, which is exactly the reason why both Rangers and HMRC are now pushing for Administration. Rangers have no way of paying a tax bill of that sort of money.

    Once they're in administration, the administrator will come take over the running of the business and do what he can to make it a sustainable entity. With the transfer window closed, essentially that would mean reducing outgoings which would mean sacking people (not the players).

    The Administrator then will look to find someone to buy the Club (or rather take on the debt). Once a buyer, or a number of buyers, are found they'll attempt to reach agreement with the various creditors to accept a certain number of pence to the pound of debt (a CVA) and if that is reached then they'll exist administration (in theory a stronger entity which should be able to manage its cashflow better.

    Who owns Ibrox? Because that's where things start getting complicated.


  • #76
    Beefy78
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,166 ✭✭✭Beefy78


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    We're not talking about simple administration anymore, the threat of liquidation is real now.

    Why? How is liquidation in HMRC's interest and why is what Rangers are going through so different to what Leeds, Portsmouth, Swindon, Southampton, Leicester and 45 other clubs have been in where liquidation wasn't even considered?


  • #77
    Eirebear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    bobbysands81 wrote: »
    I don't think that "buy back" clause exists as you think it does mate.

    Is Murray not broke himself now?

    ...and I don't think the £75m is that big an "if" mate, Whyte himself said it last night.

    Few media types (Spiers and another fella) on STV last night saying they reckon he's inflated that tag and they expect the bill to come in around the 40m mark.


  • #78
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Eirebear wrote: »
    Few media types (Spiers and another fella) on STV last night saying they reckon he's inflated that tag and they expect the bill to come in around the 40m mark.

    I'd be very surprised if it was that low.


  • #79
    Eirebear
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,014 ✭✭✭Eirebear


    bobbysands81 wrote: »
    I'd be very surprised if it was that low.

    Nothing would surprise me at the minute.

    Too much over my head in all honesty.


  • #80
    RoryMac
    Registered Users Posts: 5,320 ✭✭✭RoryMac


    Beefy78 wrote: »
    Well it isn't coming from anywhere, which is exactly the reason why both Rangers and HMRC are now pushing for Administration. Rangers have no way of paying a tax bill of that sort of money.

    Once they're in administration, the administrator will come take over the running of the business and do what he can to make it a sustainable entity. With the transfer window closed, essentially that would mean reducing outgoings which would mean sacking people (not the players).

    The Administrator then will look to find someone to buy the Club (or rather take on the debt). Once a buyer, or a number of buyers, are found they'll attempt to reach agreement with the various creditors to accept a certain number of pence to the pound of debt (a CVA) and if that is reached then they'll exist administration (in theory a stronger entity which should be able to manage its cashflow better.

    Who owns Ibrox? Because that's where things start getting complicated.

    Rangers were heading for Administration without taking the tax case into consideration, they have sold off future revenue in season ticket sales, merchandising, catering etc, they were losing money year on year and prior to the new owner were being effectively run by the bank.

    The new owner seems to have made little difference to how the club is run and plenty of players have been re-signed on new contracts when surely offloading high earners would have been the responsible thing to do. Everything the new owner has done so far seems to be pushing Rangers in the wrong direction.

    Everything done so far seems to be pointing towards a pre-pack administration where Rangers FC will be liquidated and sold to New Rangers FC.


  • #81
    Pompey Magnus
    Registered Users Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    STV are reporting that Rangers have had the 10 points deducted, is it official now so?


  • Advertisement
  • #82
    Dempsey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Pompey Magnus wrote: »
    STV are reporting that Rangers have had the 10 points deducted, is it official now so?

    They are not in administration yet AFAIK


  • #83
    RoryMac
    Registered Users Posts: 5,320 ✭✭✭RoryMac


    Dempsey wrote: »
    They are not in administration yet AFAIK

    The Rangers lawyer fighting the HMRC administration case said that administrators would be appointed today.

    EDIT If they win the case!


  • #84
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Looks like Rangers asked for it themselves.


  • #85
    Dempsey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    RoryMac wrote: »
    The Rangers lawyer fighting the HMRC administration case said that administrators would be appointed today.

    EDIT If they win the case!

    Until that actually happens, the arent in administration. The administrators need to be appointed then and only then the 10 point deduction is made


  • #86
    Pompey Magnus
    Registered Users Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Looks like Rangers asked for it themselves.

    Yep, looks as if Whyte was caught off guard with the HMRC's action today. He hesitated with the application yesterday and thought he would get a 10 day breathing space before committing to administration, looks like he may have lost the initiative if HMRC get their way.


  • #87
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Pompey Magnus wrote: »
    Yep, looks as if Whyte was caught off guard with the HMRC's action today. He hesitated with the application yesterday and thought he would get a 10 day breathing space before committing to administration, looks like he may have lost the initiative if HMRC get their way.

    Not if they succeed, then Rangers can appoint their own administrators.


  • #88
    Dempsey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Jelle1880 wrote: »
    Not if they succeed, then Rangers can appoint their own administrators.

    You sure that they have a choice in who gets appointed? I think that gets appointed by the court.

    It wont matter though, Whyte has worked with them all over the years :rolleyes:


  • #89
    Pompey Magnus
    Registered Users Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    So HMRC's action relates to PAYE and National Insurance bill it seems, am I right in saying this is from Craig Whyte's period in charge or have I misheard?


  • #90
    Pompey Magnus
    Registered Users Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    Dempsey wrote: »
    You sure that they have a choice in who gets appointed? I think that gets appointed by the court.

    It wont matter though, Whyte has worked with them all over the years :rolleyes:

    Voluntary Administration means you can chose your own administrator, he has close links to the crowd he has nominated, one of their senior members was with him in the directors box of Ibrox when he took over the club.


  • Advertisement
  • #91
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    stvmikeMike Edwards

    RFC to appoint administrators by 3.30 pm today or HMRC case to appoint administrators stands


  • #92
    Blatter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,832 ✭✭✭✭Blatter


    Just heard that Rangers have been given until 3.30pm today to appoint their own administrators or else the court will make the appointment, hardly enough time is it?


  • #93
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Tweet from BBC that Timmy was reporting a few months ago...

    Douglas Fraser @BBCDouglsFraser

    I'm told this is not just about the back tax to 2001. It's more to do with unpaid tax since last May when Craig Whyte took over


  • #94
    Pompey Magnus
    Registered Users Posts: 5,406 ✭✭✭Pompey Magnus


    bobbysands81 wrote: »
    Tweet from BBC that Timmy was reporting a few months ago...

    Douglas Fraser @BBCDouglsFraser

    I'm told this is not just about the back tax to 2001. It's more to do with unpaid tax since last May when Craig Whyte took over

    So for all the condemnation of Murray and support of Whyte it will actually be Whyte's actions which will see an Administrator move in. Can someone explain how this guy still has defenders?


  • #95
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Pompey Magnus wrote: »
    So HMRC's action relates to PAYE and National Insurance bill it seems, am I right in saying this is from Craig Whyte's period in charge or have I misheard?

    Correct.

    Bang goes the theory that the entire mess was David Murray's.


  • #96
    Dempsey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Blatter wrote: »
    Just heard that Rangers have been given until 3.30pm today to appoint their own administrators or else the court will make the appointment, hardly enough time is it?

    Craig Whyte has wound up alot of companies! He has administrators on speed dial.


  • Advertisement
  • #97
    Jelle1880
    Registered Users Posts: 9,839 ✭✭✭Jelle1880


    Dempsey wrote: »
    Craig Whyte has wound up alot of companies! He has administrators on speed dial.

    Actually he does, Duff and Phelps I've heard who were already with him when he took over.


  • #98
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Pompey Magnus wrote: »
    So for all the condemnation of Murray and support of Whyte it will actually be Whyte's actions which will see an Administrator move in. Can someone explain how this guy still has defenders?

    Quite simple really... because Timmy was tellin' 'em the they refused to believe.

    It's taken a while for the penny (arcade) to drop but at last it is.

    The irony is Rangers really are Royally f**ked.


  • #99
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Seemingly unbelievable stuff going on in court where there's actually a race between the owner of Rangers and HMRC to see who can put them into Administration.

    Surreal stuff and not a nice time to be a Rangers fan.


  • #100
    Dempsey
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,553 ✭✭✭✭Dempsey


    Unless HMRC have a 2nd ace up their sleeve, Whyte will beat them to the appointment of Administrators imo


  • #101
    bobbysands81
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,213 ✭✭✭bobbysands81


    Dempsey wrote: »
    Unless HMRC have a 2nd ace up their sleeve, Whyte will beat them to the appointment of Administrators imo

    No idea if this is true but...

    "according to the insolvency act of 86 once an intent is lodged with the court a company cannot go into administration untill the period has expired which is 5 days."

    Teh Huddleborad has two fellas in court giving up to the second info, I'm trying to catch up on the thread.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement