Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

Jelle1880 · 15-02-2012 10:10am

Whyte is in Monaco, guess that's the last we see of him (Unless some Bears kidnap him and bring him back

)

Pompey Magnus · 15-02-2012 10:41am

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Whyte is in Monaco, guess that's the last we see of him (Unless some Bears kidnap him and bring him back )

Well his decision to not pay his taxes etc has more or less just handed Celtic the title, I'm sure he still has his supporters among the Rangers fans though, the man is made of teflon it seems.

David Murray ended up owing about £25-30 million in unpaid taxes (not including fines) over the course of 20 years as chairman, Whyte owes £9 million in a space of 9 months and has cost the team 10 points and administration yet he is still seen as the saviour.

KeithAFC · 15-02-2012 10:44am

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Well his decision to not pay his taxes etc has more or less just handed Celtic the title, I'm sure he still has his supporters among the Rangers fans though, the man is made of teflon it seems.

David Murray ended up owing about £25-30 million in unpaid taxes (not including fines) over the course of 20 years as chairman, Whyte owes £9 million in a space of 9 months and has cost the team 10 points and administration yet he is still seen as the saviour.

The tide is turning on that front amongst many Rangers fans.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 10:46am

KeithAFC wrote: »

:pac:

Not to the IRA charity though.

The National Graves Association is not an "IRA charity"... and even if it was or if I pick an "IRA charity" you must honour the bet and pay it.

Can I remind you of the terms of the bet -

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Charity to be chosen by the winner of the bet.

You win you nominate a charity for me to pay, I win I nominate a charity for you to pay.

And here's a post I made when you guys were still 4 points ahead of us in the league and about to play us at home.

tommyhaas wrote: »

How funny would it be to see the name Bobby Sands on a donation to the type of Charity KeithAFC is likely to chose

bobbysands81 wrote: »

No matter what charity he picks, as long as it's a registered charity, I'll pay.

STEP UP AND PAY THEKEITH.

Eirebear · 15-02-2012 10:55am

I did say at the time of the bet .."Oh Dear.." and to be fair keith, you did make the bet.

That said - I wouldnt be paying a penny of the bet until the league is officially over and also, even from a republican point of view, there must be more deserving charities tbh.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 10:59am

Eirebear wrote: »

I did say at the time of the bet .."Oh Dear.." and to be fair keith, you did make the bet.

That said - I wouldnt be paying a penny of the bet until the league is officially over and also, even from a republican point of view, there must be more deserving charities tbh.

Don't worry EB, I won't be looking to collect until the league is officially over... and I'm sure I can come up with an even better charity!!!

Jelle1880 · 15-02-2012 11:03am

Pompey Magnus wrote: »

Well his decision to not pay his taxes etc has more or less just handed Celtic the title, I'm sure he still has his supporters among the Rangers fans though, the man is made of teflon it seems.

David Murray ended up owing about £25-30 million in unpaid taxes (not including fines) over the course of 20 years as chairman, Whyte owes £9 million in a space of 9 months and has cost the team 10 points and administration yet he is still seen as the saviour.

I doubt it, many (including me) are now starting to see what his plan really was.

Eirebear · 15-02-2012 11:05am

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Don't worry EB, I won't be looking to collect until the league is officially over... and I'm sure I can come up with an even better charity!!!

lol, i'm sure you can!

KeithAFC · 15-02-2012 11:06am

Eirebear wrote: »

I did say at the time of the bet .."Oh Dear.." and to be fair keith, you did make the bet.

That said - I wouldnt be paying a penny of the bet until the league is officially over and also, even from a republican point of view, there must be more deserving charities tbh.

I agree. I would give to any charity like cancer research etc.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 11:20am

KeithAFC wrote: »

I agree. I would give to any charity like cancer research etc.

Well then you should have won the bet so you could have chosen the charity... and there's nothing stopping you donating to said cancer research charity as well anyway!

karma_ · 15-02-2012 11:38am

I'd nominate Macmillan for the donation tbh, looking after graves is one thing, but the living is another and in fairness the dead neither need or care any more.

Pompey Magnus · 15-02-2012 11:50am

Eirebear wrote: »

even from a republican point of view, there must be more deserving charities tbh.

I would second that, just my 2 cents but would it not be better to go to one that could have some positive cross community benefits, something like http://www.childni.org.uk (which I know nothing about except through a quick google but looks like a good idea)?

A specifically Republican or Loyalist charity was going to be a bit predictable, and while no doubt it would be funny to see Keith have to do it I do think it could go to a better cause.

Still, Bobby won the bet so Keith should just go with whatever he says, it was an obvious outcome to the bet and he should have known that.

_blank_ · 15-02-2012 12:08pm

winning a bet is one thing.

completely humiliating another human being is absolutely another.

Pompey Magnus · 15-02-2012 12:19pm

Des wrote: »

completely humiliating another human being is absolutely another.

Just a little bit of an exaggeration there? I'm a Republican but if I had to pay money to clean up the grave of James Craig, Edward Carson or even King Billy himself I would find it at most only mildly irritating.

Some Celtic fans get hammered for apparently not showing proper respect for the British war dead (which includes troops who served in Ireland) so can I ask why you regard the maintenance of Irish war graves a "complete humiliation"?

I still think the bet could be more productive but that is just a stupid comment.

Eirebear · 15-02-2012 12:21pm

To be fair to Bobby here, he never actually suggested the War graves Charity, in fact it was'nt even a regular poster who did so.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 12:25pm

Des wrote: »

winning a bet is one thing.

completely humiliating another human being is absolutely another.

What the hell are you on about???

user2011 · 15-02-2012 12:45pm

Des wrote: »

winning a bet is one thing.

completely humiliating another human being is absolutely another.

I think he has been doing that by himself by ignoring numorous posts about paying up on the charity bet. Only started answering posts last night, and now he wants to have an input too where the money should go.. Humiliation

Dempsey · 15-02-2012 12:45pm

Anyone listen the the press conference with the administrators.

The first thing they said about the situation was to blab on about their statutory duty to the creditors (i.e. Whyte & HMRC)

Surely when a club gets to appoint their own administrators, their first act in PR spin would be to reassure the fans that the club will be saved?

Beefy78 · 15-02-2012 12:48pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Anyone listen the the press conference with the administrators.

The first thing they said about the situation was to blab on about their statutory duty to the creditors (i.e. Whyte)

Surely when a club gets to appoint their own administrators, their first act in PR spin would be to reassure the fans that the club will be saved?

Whoever appointed the administrators would say the same thing. The administrators are not there to save the club. They're there to protect the interests of the creditors.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 12:49pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Anyone listen the the press conference with the administrators.

The first thing they said about the situation was to blab on about their statutory duty to the creditors (i.e. Whyte & HMRC)

Surely when a club gets to appoint their own administrators, their first act in PR spin would be to reassure the fans that the club will be saved?

I posted yesterday that if I was a Rangers fan I would want HMRC to appoint the administrator, at least then you know things will be done fairly and by the book.

KeithAFC · 15-02-2012 1:02pm

user2011 wrote: »

I think he has been doing that by himself by ignoring numorous posts about paying up on the charity bet. Only started answering posts last night, and now he wants to have an input too where the money should go.. Humiliation

Its the internet. Calm down.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 1:07pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

Its the internet. Calm down.

Surely you meant to quote Des in that post and not user2011?

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 1:07pm

Twitter rumour:

Tony McKelvie @TonyMcKelvie

For Rangers to get through the next 3 months Season books will need to be cancelled & added to creditors, and all fans will pay at the gate.

user2011 · 15-02-2012 1:12pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

Its the internet. Calm down.

Just saying how i've read thread and i am calm

RoryMac · 15-02-2012 1:16pm

Just read on a Celtic forum(not sure how true it is) that Rangers exit to Dundee Utd in the Scottish cup was the tipping point, it meant that Rangers had no significant income due before the end of the season, most people going to Rangers games go on season tickets so matchday revenue for league games isn't too high, away supporters apart from Celtic don't go in huge numbers either.

Anyway my question is what kind of incomes would a team have coming in between now and the end of the season that will cover wages, policing etc required to keep the club open?

EDIT - Just saw your post Bobby and that was the opinion in the article I read as to the only way Rangers could generate income, I can't see too many Rangers fans wanting to pay twice to see a team decimated due to the incompetent running of the club!

Dempsey · 15-02-2012 1:25pm

Beefy78 wrote: »

Whoever appointed the administrators would say the same thing. The administrators are not there to save the club. They're there to protect the interests of the creditors.

No, regardless of what their actual legal obligations you'd instruct your administrators to pacify the fans. Thats what administrators at every other club in Britain have done. Most administrators declare their intentions to save the club first and foremost because that what they trying to do.

Duff and Phelps were involved in Whyte's takeover of the club last year, their motives are distinctly different to any other insolvency event in football that I've read about.

fionnsda · 15-02-2012 1:41pm

Pompey Magnus posted a link to this blogger yesterday,in the rangers thread, who has a good insight to all of this!

Paul McConville

gosplan · 15-02-2012 1:44pm

Obviously it's only the sun but ....

Anyone hear anything about this/know any of the clubs involved? It could all be made up I guess.

Edited to include: how do Celtic fans feel about all of this? Happy at Rangers misfortune or peeved at the idea of walking a one-horse race for the next couple of years?

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 1:45pm

fionnsda wrote: »

Pompey Magnus posted a link to this blogger yesterday,in the rangers thread, who has a good insight to all of this!

Paul McConville

This guys blog is fantastic... as is www.rangerstaxcase.com who has called everything months in advance of mainstream media.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 1:46pm

gosplan wrote: »

Obviously it's only the sun but ....

Anyone hear anything about this/know any of the clubs involved? It could all be made up I guess.

Edited to include: how do Celtic fans feel about all of this? Happy at Rangers misfortune or peeved at the idea of walking a one-horse race for the next couple of years?

Given that the headline is misleading as Rangers haven't gone bust (yet) then maybe it's best to take with a mountain of salt.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 1:52pm

gosplan wrote: »

Edited to include: how do Celtic fans feel about all of this? Happy at Rangers misfortune or peeved at the idea of walking a one-horse race for the next couple of years?

I'm answering this but I don't want the Rangers fans here to view it as me intentionally winding them up. I'm trying to be respectful to them on this thread and the Rangers thread as I'd like that reciprocated if things were the other way round (however I do reserve the right to post freely on the Celtic thread should I feel like it!).

I'm more than happy at their misfortune. If found guilty in the Big Tax Case (which I'm certain they will be) I would like to see them punished accordingly and in line with the crime they committed - they won championships based on their financial doping, the punishment really needs to fit the crime. They have been intentionally not paying taxes due and this has given them a massive advantage over their rivals.

However, and I might be in a minority here, if Celtic stay in Scotland then I am of the opinion that Rangers existence (in whatever form it may be) is beneficial to us. Preferably I would like to see them weakened to an extent in the short/medium term but if we are to stay in Scotland then I believe it's within our long term interest that there is some form of Rangers FC.

patmac · 15-02-2012 1:59pm

fionnsda wrote: »

Pompey Magnus posted a link to this blogger yesterday,in the rangers thread, who has a good insight to all of this!

Paul McConville

Interesting bit about redundencies:

The administrator has the power to terminate contracts of employment. When Bryan Jackson was appointed administrator of Motherwell in 2002, he made 19 players redundant immediately.
The salaries paid by Rangers to its players will be high, yet, as often happens in these cases, there are many of the “lesser” employees made redundant from ticket office, admin etc, whose wages would be covered by one or two players.
It is likely, on imagines, that the administrator will make redundant a number of players at Ibrox, together with members of the backroom staff and other employees.
Players who are injured, for example, or whose contracts are expiring in the summer, or who are not worth their place in the squad will be first to go.
The administrators may, subject to the amount of money they have available to them, keep a couple of the high earners, in the hope of selling them. However money will be very tight, and there will not be cup-ties to fill the coffers.

I heard that the revenue court case is a test case and that many English clubs could follow suit. Sad and all as it for Rangers (and tbh I'm not that sad about it), this might be a wake up call for many other teams that are spending nearly all of their income on player wages. As probably pointed out before it is inconcievable how a club that gets 44000 every home game and has such a wide ranging fan base can be in so much trouble, it is hard to feel sympathy here.
Good for the peace process though.

geeky · 15-02-2012 2:00pm

There's some misunderstanding on here and elsewhere about the role of administrators.

Administrators are appointed when a potentially viable business is in financial difficulty and needs restructuring. They go in, negotiate with creditors, and try to save the business - typically, the controllers of the business will be the ones pushing for an administrator.

Receivers are solely interested in getting whatever they can for the creditors who appoint them. They'll strip away any assets and parcel them out accordingly. Usually, they're appointed when there's no real prospect of recovery.

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 2:00pm

fionnsda wrote: »

Pompey Magnus posted a link to this blogger yesterday,in the rangers thread, who has a good insight to all of this!

Paul McConville

That is a very very depressing read for any Rangers fan.

RoryMac · 15-02-2012 2:01pm

bobbysands81 wrote: »

I'm answering this but I don't want the Rangers fans here to view it as me intentionally winding them up. I'm trying to be respectful to them on this thread and the Rangers thread as I'd like that reciprocated if things were the other way round (however I do reserve the right to post freely on the Celtic thread should I feel like it!).

I'm more than happy at their misfortune. If found guilty in the Big Tax Case (which I'm certain they will be) I would like to see them punished accordingly and in line with the crime they committed - they won championships based on their financial doping, the punishment really needs to fit the crime. They have been intentionally not paying taxes due and this has given them a massive advantage over their rivals.

However, and I might be in a minority here, if Celtic stay in Scotland then I am of the opinion that Rangers existence (in whatever form it may be) is beneficial to us. Preferably I would like to see them weakened to an extent in the short/medium term but if we are to stay in Scotland then I believe it's within our long term interest that there is some form of Rangers FC.

Agreed Bobby, the way the club has been run is nothing short of a disgrace, signing players as they go into administration, signing Celik with no intention of paying for him, not paying tax since the takeover etc

There needs to be accountability for the actions of the past and present owners but I've no wish to see Rangers disappear nor do I think it will happen.

LuckyLloyd · 15-02-2012 2:09pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

Its the internet. Calm down.

Keith in danger of joining the illustrious list of soccer forum welchers. Say it ain't so!

SantryRed · 15-02-2012 2:11pm

What's the situation with Ibrox lads? Could that be sold to meet creditors due money? How likely is it that Rangers may go bust? The tax bill they owe is nothing short of ridiculous.

Jelle1880 · 15-02-2012 2:53pm

bobbysands81 wrote: »

This guys blog is fantastic... as is www.rangerstaxcase.com who has called everything months in advance of mainstream media.

I seriously wish you would stop posting that site as the be all, end all of this case.
The amount of times they got it wrong is staggering, constantly coming out with 'It's a matter of weeks/months' and when that deadline passed they came up with another date.

They got more wrong than right, the fact they wished for the worst and it's about to happen doesn't mean they're right.
A lot of people called this months ago, both in the press, the club and message boards.

Dempsey · 15-02-2012 2:55pm

bobbysands81 wrote: »

I'm answering this but I don't want the Rangers fans here to view it as me intentionally winding them up. I'm trying to be respectful to them on this thread and the Rangers thread as I'd like that reciprocated if things were the other way round (however I do reserve the right to post freely on the Celtic thread should I feel like it!).

I'm more than happy at their misfortune. If found guilty in the Big Tax Case (which I'm certain they will be) I would like to see them punished accordingly and in line with the crime they committed - they won championships based on their financial doping, the punishment really needs to fit the crime. They have been intentionally not paying taxes due and this has given them a massive advantage over their rivals.

However, and I might be in a minority here, if Celtic stay in Scotland then I am of the opinion that Rangers existence (in whatever form it may be) is beneficial to us. Preferably I would like to see them weakened to an extent in the short/medium term but if we are to stay in Scotland then I believe it's within our long term interest that there is some form of Rangers FC.

Rangers need to be punished to the full extent of the rules, it should be made very clear to everyone what happens to cheaters. If its proven that they have outstanding tax liabilities (which means you shouldnt be granted a european licence) going back to 2001 then I believe that Rangers should be stripped of all titles they won to show clubs that this sort of carry on has no place in Scottish Football. Scottish Football has enough problems without financial doping.

I would be pissed off if Rangers survived because the SFA/SPL didnt punish them to the full extent of the rules. The rules have to apply to everyone, equally.

KeithAFC · 15-02-2012 3:00pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Rangers need to be punished to the full extent of the rules, it should be made very clear to everyone what happens to cheaters. If its proven that they have outstanding tax liabilities (which means you shouldnt be granted a european licence) going back to 2001 then I believe that Rangers should be stripped of all titles they won to show clubs that this sort of carry on has no place in Scottish Football. Scottish Football has enough problems without financial doping.

I would be pissed off if Rangers survived because the SFA/SPL didnt punish them to the full extent of the rules. The rules have to apply to everyone, equally.

The SFA/SPL will do what is in the best interests of the Scottish game. One of them already came out and said fans should donate money to Rangers. So you can see what angle they have taken already.

Dempsey · 15-02-2012 3:05pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

The SFA/SPL will do what is in the best interests of the Scottish game. One of them already came out and said fans should donate money to Rangers. So you can see what angle they have taken already.

Their best interest to make it clear what happens if a club cheats.

If the SFA/SPL dont apply their own rules, UEFA/CAS will be called in to do so

bobmalooka · 15-02-2012 3:06pm

KeithAFC wrote: »

The SFA/SPL will do what is in the best interests of the Scottish game. One of them already came out and said fans should donate money to Rangers. So you can see what angle they have taken already.

Its the lazy option, relying on the old firm is probably the most short sighted view to a viable SPL.

Of course the SFA will act in Rangers interests, its what they do.

Hopefully Uefa will nail them if they dont force appropriate sanctions, would be nice to get two corrupt birds with the one stone.

Jelle1880 · 15-02-2012 3:07pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Their best interest to make it clear what happens if a club cheats.

If the SFA/SPL dont apply their own rules, UEFA/CAS will be called in to do so

Haven't they done that so far ?
Obviously other punishments can only be done when the case is over, but the 10 point penalty and potential of no European football is what is supposed to happen anyway, I don't know what more they can/will do ?

edit: Ah, the good old Rangers-minded SFA bobmalooka ?

Dempsey · 15-02-2012 3:10pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Haven't they done that so far ?
Obviously other punishments can only be done when the case is over, but the 10 point penalty and potential of no European football is what is supposed to happen anyway, I don't know what more they can/will do ?

They have

Keith is referring to a hypothetical scenario (i.e. SFA implementing 'light' punishments to save Rangers from extinction) thats down the road, so am I.

bobmalooka · 15-02-2012 3:11pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Haven't they done that so far ?
Obviously other punishments can only be done when the case is over, but the 10 point penalty and potential of no European football is what is supposed to happen anyway, I don't know what more they can/will do ?

edit: Ah, the good old Rangers-minded SFA bobmalooka ?

Yep, I can see them completely exposing themselves down the line under the guise of everyone else's best interests.

Jelle1880 · 15-02-2012 3:22pm

bobmalooka wrote: »

Yep, I can see them completely exposing themselves down the line under the guise of everyone else's best interests.

Ah, is the institutionalised pro-Rangers bias they've been showing for decades ?

Hugh Keevins, leave bob's login alone

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 3:23pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I seriously wish you would stop posting that site as the be all, end all of this case.
The amount of times they got it wrong is staggering, constantly coming out with 'It's a matter of weeks/months' and when that deadline passed they came up with another date.

They got more wrong than right, the fact they wished for the worst and it's about to happen doesn't mean they're right.
A lot of people called this months ago, both in the press, the club and message boards.

Looks like they were right though eh?

Out of curiosity what did they get wrong?

bobbysands81 · 15-02-2012 3:25pm

Dempsey wrote: »

Rangers need to be punished to the full extent of the rules, it should be made very clear to everyone what happens to cheaters. If its proven that they have outstanding tax liabilities (which means you shouldnt be granted a european licence) going back to 2001 then I believe that Rangers should be stripped of all titles they won to show clubs that this sort of carry on has no place in Scottish Football. Scottish Football has enough problems without financial doping.

I would be pissed off if Rangers survived because the SFA/SPL didnt punish them to the full extent of the rules. The rules have to apply to everyone, equally.

Agreed but... they as the case is still ongoing the SFA/SPL cannot punish them in any way. What actions they take against Rangers when the result of the tax case comes through remains to be seen.

Unless a buyer comes in I cannot see how Rangers won't go into liquidation.

bobmalooka · 15-02-2012 3:28pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Ah, is the institutionalised pro-Rangers bias they've been showing for decades ?

Hugh Keevins, leave bob's login alone

correct, wait till we see their treatment of Rangers compared to say Dundee for example.

You ever find that IRA chanting you heard at the Hearts game?

Dempsey · 15-02-2012 3:29pm

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Agreed but... they as the case is still ongoing the SFA/SPL cannot punish them in any way. What actions they take against Rangers when the result of the tax case comes through remains to be seen.

Unless a buyer comes in I cannot see how Rangers won't go into liquidation.

I'm not suggesting that they be punished in advance.

Rangers have admitted that they have a tax liability but dispute the amount. I'd like all the details to come out in court so the SFA/SPL can implement retrospective punishments.

Rangers FC lodge papers to go into administration

Comments