Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Does exactly what it says on the tin - the forum for football-related discussion.

Moderators: Romford, Rio, Gnome, Northern Paulo, Lost Hammer, bonehead, chalks, goes2eleven, Alf Garnett's (Ex) Missus, bristolhammerfc, Wheels, sicknote

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Wembley1966 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:34 am

Antwerp_Lad wrote:As for other creditors: You mean how the club has now fully paid all clubs it owed money to ?

Not all of them:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/rangers/9798913/Rangers-on-course-for-title-but-still-need-recruits.html
Green has a talent for delivering soundbites which tell the fans what they want to hear but his throwaway comments have a habit of coming back to bite him.
Last week he claimed to have settled the debts to European clubs run up by the oldco, only for Rapid Vienna to state on Sunday that they have yet to receive the balance of the transfer fee for Nikica Jelavic, subsequently sold on at a profit to Everton.
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby QuintonNimoy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:33 pm

Johnny Byrne's Boots wrote:Why does Scottish Football still think England wants to get them out of the stinking mess they have created?

Colonial loyalists, what can you do? The mother country really doesn't care even if it is next door, it's always a harsh lesson to learn.

Perhaps it's the same mindset that has them all ****ing to a newly formed club that bought all their old club's trophies and copied the name. Apparently you can barely tell the difference.

Edit: ****ing is a swear now? OK, how about "turning up to".
QuintonNimoy
 
Posts: 7957
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:42 pm

Wembley1966 wrote:Not all of them:


Seems we're both wrong, Green never said all the money was paid, simply that some were paid (All Scottish clubs), others had a settlement in place (like Rapid for example).

CHIEF EXECUTIVE Charles Green has revealed that European club debts of the oldco Rangers have been paid or settled.

There was no compunction for newco to pay or contribute to any monies owed by the former owners.

There was money owed, for example, to Palermo for Dorin Goian and St Etienne for Carlos Bocanegra.

However, Green has decided that the honourable thing to do was to come to arrangements with all of the clubs who were owed money and he has done that with liquidators BDO.

He said: “What we have done since we came to Rangers was to act properly and not just for the best interests of Rangers but for football as a whole.

“We have a fiduciary duty and a responsibility to our share-holders and we want to run this club honourably and be fully transparent.

“Coming to agreements with all of the European clubs where we paid all of the debts or reached settlements with them is another example of the commitment ‘new’ Rangers have made and not turning our back or walking away from oldco’s responsibilities.

“So we have put down a marker in that regard and what we want to do now is get UEFA and FIFA onside. I have spoken to both organisations informally and in the next few months we will have some formal conversations.”


edit: Seems like some here can't accept the fact it's the same club, as has been confirmed time and time again.
You sound like Celtic fans 8-)
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2329
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Happyhammer52 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:04 pm

It is a new club though...
User avatar
Happyhammer52
 
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Inverness

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby QuintonNimoy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 1:27 pm

Antwerp_Lad wrote:Seems like some here can't accept the fact it's the same club, as has been confirmed time and time again.
You sound like Celtic fans 8-)

Confirmed by who? The bought-off tin pot puffed up blazer wearing micro-tyrants that pass for an FA north of the border, or the bewildered staggering buffoons that appear to make up the judiciary, the majority of whom can't even tell the difference between a tax dodge and a legitimate loan?

I'll make my own judgement on which club is Rangers, mainly due to one being out of existence as it was run into the ground. If the vomited up detritus of a dead old club with the same name slapped on it convinces you, then that's your business.
QuintonNimoy
 
Posts: 7957
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Wembley1966 on Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:25 pm

Antwerp_Lad wrote:Seems like some here can't accept the fact it's the same club, as has been confirmed time and time again.

I would have thought that an ideal person to ask would be the Rangers director of communications James Traynor as to whether it is a new club - he certainly seems to think that it's a new club.

Back in June when the CVA was rejected and he was writing for the Daily Record he said:
Yesterday the CVA proposal put forward on behalf of Charles Green by administrators Duff and Phelps was rejected by HMRC.

They didn’t even wait until tomorrow’s creditors’ meeting, although that will still go ahead.

But Rangers FC won’t. They’ll slip into liquidation within the next couple of weeks with a new company emerging but 140 years of history, triumph and tears, will have ended.

No matter how Charles Green attempts to dress it up, a newco equals a new club. When the CVA was thrown out Rangers as we know them died.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/james-traynor-spl-will-not-be-able-1129166
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Mon Jan 14, 2013 2:33 pm

QuintonNimoy wrote:Confirmed by who? The bought-off tin pot puffed up blazer wearing micro-tyrants that pass for an FA north of the border, or the bewildered staggering buffoons that appear to make up the judiciary, the majority of whom can't even tell the difference between a tax dodge and a legitimate loan?

I'll make my own judgement on which club is Rangers, mainly due to one being out of existence as it was run into the ground. If the vomited up detritus of a dead old club with the same name slapped on it convinces you, then that's your business.


ECA, SFA, SPL, SFL,...

But yeah, you go ahead and make up your own judgement, your last sentence doesn't come across as bitter at all :lol:
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2329
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby QuintonNimoy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:12 pm

Antwerp_Lad wrote:ECA, SFA, SPL, SFL,...

But yeah, you go ahead and make up your own judgement, your last sentence doesn't come across as bitter at all :lol:

Yeah that's right, I'm in the pay of the roman catholic church at this very moment. I'll just check with the fella that lives in the art gallery to see how to deal with being unmasked.
QuintonNimoy
 
Posts: 7957
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:30 pm

So you automatically connect being bitter to being a catholic ?

What a bigoted thing to say, I'm absolutely appalled.
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2329
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby QuintonNimoy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:43 pm

Antwerp_Lad wrote:So you automatically connect being bitter to being a catholic ?

What a bigoted thing to say, I'm absolutely appalled.

No, I automatically connect New/Old Rangers supporters' paranoia about completely impartial observations of the state of their old club and their new club somehow being motivated by Celtic with their far out paranoia about the Pope turning the football world against them.
QuintonNimoy
 
Posts: 7957
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:51 pm

Impartial, the ****ing cheek of you :lol:
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2329
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby QuintonNimoy on Mon Jan 14, 2013 3:55 pm

Antwerp_Lad wrote:Impartial, the ****ing cheek of you :lol:

So what exactly is it I've written that isn't impartial?
QuintonNimoy
 
Posts: 7957
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Antwerp_Lad on Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:01 am

I'll make my own judgement on which club is Rangers, mainly due to one being out of existence as it was run into the ground. If the vomited up detritus of a dead old club with the same name slapped on it convinces you, then that's your business.


Those aren't the words of someone impartial or neutral.
User avatar
Antwerp_Lad
 
Posts: 2329
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:37 am
Location: Cork.

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby QuintonNimoy on Tue Jan 15, 2013 12:31 pm

I'll make my own judgement on which club is Rangers, mainly due to one being out of existence as it was run into the ground. If the vomited up detritus of a dead old club with the same name slapped on it convinces you, then that's your business.

Antwerp_Lad wrote:Those aren't the words of someone impartial or neutral.

They must be because they're my words, and I am both impartial and neutral. Rangers football club had a long proud history until it was destroyed by disasterous ownership decisions. Now a lookalike with the same badge is digging up the corpse.

The idea that it 'lives on' in a new form is purely down to the imagination of those that want it to, it's a mass delusion. It can be argued that the imaginitive aspect of the club is the most important amongst supporters, it's the history that lives on in the imagination that creates the idea of the club. But from a neutral outsiders point of view (i.e. mine, and certainly not a Celtic supporter's who have as big a stake in it as Ranger's fans) there is no such compulsion to recognise it for anything but what it is.

There is no official structural framework for the new Rangers to be considered the same thing, there's no franchise system, no registration system that makes "Rangers slot" a thing that can be preserved outside the club, there is just the business and the league it's in. The business is gone. If the league and various bodies surrounding it's administration want to pay lip service to the 10s of thousands of supporters who have just been robbed of their club (in which the league have some complicity as they let it happen) by saying "this new thing is Rangers" then so be it. It doesn't change what objectively happened, which is Rangers went under, and a completely new company just bought up the silverware whilst adopting the name.

If I was a Celtic supporter I'd have too much invested in hating Rangers to genuinely consider them to be seperate. There's too many decades of mindless hate involved to let it go that easily. However, I am a fan of real life bizarre behaviour, and I think the Rangers delusion makes for interesting viewing from afar.

It'll be interesting to see which bits of this the Rangers/Celtic paranoia identify as proof I am in some way an undercover Tim.
QuintonNimoy
 
Posts: 7957
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby buckshammers on Thu Jan 24, 2013 7:48 pm

Antwerp_Lad wrote:Seems like some here can't accept the fact it's the same club, as has been confirmed time and time again.
You sound like Celtic fans 8-)


We Are The People. 54 titles, still going strong!
User avatar
buckshammers
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Mon Jan 07, 2013 2:39 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Wembley1966 on Tue Feb 05, 2013 7:00 pm

Just a reminder of the story so far - back in September:
dub wrote:As for that lad Green, I still think he is up to something and would not be at all shocked to see the new club go tits up too.

Wembley1966 wrote:Of course he is - he's all part of the master plan concocted by Murray over the last 3+ years after his share subscription offer flopped and there was no more cash available from the banks. The original plan was to liquidate Rangers and start afresh in the SPL with no debts. Murray sold Rangers to Whyte for £1 and paid off the £18m debt to Lloyds (who were demanding the debt to be repaid and who had a charge over Ibrox and the Murray Park training ground). Murray or his associates didn't want to pay the £18m and not get it back if Rangers liquidated, so they invested in Ticketus who bought 4 years of season tickets in return for giving Whyte's Rangers £20+m. Whyte also sold off the future catering revenues to Close Brothers in return for a few £m that provided some of the working capital they needed for last season. The plan was to see through last season, quickly liquidate the club and their friends in the SFA/SPL would just transfer the SPL licence to the new club who would start with no debts. The plan went wrong when they didn't make it past the very first preliminary match in the Champions League (nor the resulting Europa League preliminary) and with no European revenues they resorted to not paying income tax and VAT to provide them the cashflow they needed. As a result HMRC forced them into administration and they've been on the back foot ever since.

Duff & Phelps were appointed by Craig Whyte - they had previously advised Rangers on the sale to Whyte, so they are possibly complicit in the scam to sell everything to Green for £5m. Green is creating a siege mentality and the notion that everyone is out to get Rangers. He needs to get the Rangers support on his side and to create the 'hard done by' feeling amongst them all. As a result of this he's managed to get them to buy season tickets and turn up for matches - but where's that money going - Ticketus are still involved and want their money back, Close Brothers want their money back and Craig Whyte wants paying for all his troubles.

Although there was a court hearing and the resulting judgement that said under Scottish law the Ticketus agreement could be deemed invalid, this is no longer the case as the agreement was willingly transferred from old Rangers to Sevco 5088 Ltd, an English company who had bought all the old Rangers assets. So now the agreement is between 2 English companies where it is valid. Sevco 5088 Ltd then transferred some of the assets (but not the Ticketus agreement) to Sevco Scotland Ltd (a Scottish company) who are the new Rangers. There has to be a Scottish company as license holders to play in Scotland - but they now owe Sevco 5088 Ltd for the Ticketus money. That's why Rangers were briefly known as Sevco 5088 Ltd rather than the sale being directly to Sevco Scotland Ltd.

So how are they going to pay these people off and still try to run a club whose expenditure still outstrips their income. A share offer! Who's going to buy the shares - the supporters? What are they going to buy shares in - the Club or the Company (unfortunately the Company, so if that goes bust they've lost their money again). How's Green going to persuade them to invest - increase the siege mentality. He knows the titles will be stripped - but stir enough sh!t about them and declare that you'll never take away our titles and the supporters think he's even more of a hero. If the share offer fails, he'll walk away and they'll liquidate the company - he'll say he tried his best but the SFA/SPL had it in for him - it was their fault not his. They'll eventually sell Ibrox to someone so Ticketus and Close Brothers get their money back - it's worth more if it can be sold to a football club that will play there, which could be another new incarnation of Rangers or someone buys Cowdenbeath Rangers and relocates them to Ibrox, changes the strip and drops the 'Cowdenbeath'.

And Whyte - well his dad still holds the floating charge over the Murray Park training ground which is worth a few bob.

What's happened since then - the siege mentality continues, the latest being the club-led boycott of fans from attending the cup match at Dundee United.

Green acquired some of the debt from the oldco, so as well as buying the oldco for £5m they took on some of the debts which helps so as not to be accused of getting £80m of assets on the cheap. In December was the Initial Public Offering of shares that wasn't even in a company that owned the Club - it was in a holding company that owned the company that owned the club. Much easier to get rid of assets and the club without pesky shareholders getting in the way! So for this very "successful" IPO - who actually bought the shares in the holding company - looks like it was just the supporters. Some of the other 'institutional' investors backed out of their conditional offer to buy shares before they recently went unconditional; others exchanged their shareholding in Sevco for shares in the holding company - or they were 'internal' debtors of the new club (which has no 'external' debt) such as Ticketus, Close Brothers and Craig Whyte who swapped debt for equity. So instead of getting £22m from the share issue, they'll see less than £9m with which to pay for the IPO floatation costs, pay off the loans outstanding that were used to buy the 'club' and its assets from Duff and Phelps, and also pay the salaries of the 2nd most expensive team in Scotland.

What's going to happen - as per dub's comment above - don't be shocked!
Wembley1966
 
Posts: 2623
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 1:48 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby M*A*R*C on Thu Feb 07, 2013 4:46 pm

User avatar
M*A*R*C
 
Posts: 928
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 8:19 pm
Location: stranded in Frankfurt

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby Happyhammer52 on Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:06 pm

Not with Sir Charles at the helm.
User avatar
Happyhammer52
 
Posts: 2353
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Inverness

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby portline KGV on Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:12 pm

This is part of Charles Green update to Rangers fans in Perth Australia : 6. Naismith actually signed for West Ham before switching to Everton, Is this true ?
portline KGV
 
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue May 08, 2012 5:43 pm

Re: Rangers in administration (Non WHU)

Postby York Ham(mer) on Thu Feb 07, 2013 11:39 pm

portline KGV wrote:This is part of Charles Green update to Rangers fans in Perth Australia : 6. Naismith actually signed for West Ham before switching to Everton, Is this true ?

Loads of b*llocks. We may have talked to him but we certainly didn't sign him. Charles Green is as delusional as ever.
User avatar
York Ham(mer)
 
Posts: 6726
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 7:15 am
Location: In exile up north

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: amsterdhammer, Bitter 'n' Twisted, Browndog, Denali, Dwight1970, fjthegrey, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], HalfTimePie, Julian's Dick, kayahammer, kel, Kevin Harriott, kitthehammer, M*A*R*C, m0nkey, mushy, Nesticles, njewhu, Paddy O'Hammer, Rogue Trooper, Smudger1, Stevey, Swiss Pauli, thick-soup, tonka_tonka, Whitters, Wotton Hammer and 122 guests