Rangers Rumours Archive June 13 2012

 

Use our rumours form to send us rangers transfer rumours.


13 Jun 2012 20:31:39
just back from liverpool rumour HMRC to do deals with epl teams who have EBTs {Ed039's Note - Wouldnt be surprised, I have said all along Rangers arent unique in the use of EBTs, difference is HMRC will probably be able to recoup more than 9% of the money they want from EPL teams. I dont know who has used them and who hasnt but I am convinced they have been used and have been used alot more then has been let on by some)

Believable21 Unbelievable11

Cause they can pay it rangers couldnt

Agree0 Disagree0

I thought it was HMRC policy not to do deals.

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers fans......... I hope Green doesn't just eff off with a lot of money like a lot of people say he's going to do, but I think he's going to screw you, he's just another suit lining his pockets. He's not interested in Rangers he's interested in getting what he can get out of this mess just like Whytesnake.

Agree0 Disagree0

Tottenham in serious bother to name but one ON another point is there anything in rule book to stop Rangers 1872 from transferring SPL share to SFL in exchange for a place in their league

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers did EBT's and it was wrong the fact that others too may have used EBT's does not diminish that fact. {Ed039's Note - Nobody said it does)

Agree0 Disagree0

HMRC policy not to accept CVAs from companies that haven't paid tax.

Agree0 Disagree0

What i think we need to see is if any of the EPL clubs try to get out of paying their taxes by appealing. Must not forget the BTC is Rangers appealing not HRMC.

Agree0 Disagree0

The EBT case against Rangers is still with the high court at FTTT (appeal stage) Rangers were liquidated on the small tax case unpaid 3m and the deliberate premeditated non payment over the last 9 months of 21.5m in NI, Vat and PAYE.

Agree0 Disagree0

Am sick fed up with everything thats went on over the last 5 months rangers are done am gutted its just con man after con man everyones doing there damdest to finish gers of once and for all cant take anymore of this

Agree0 Disagree0

They have already done deals on image rights which was pretty much the same thing. newcastle and chelsea were the only teams to have went public (as of a few months ago) that a deal had been done , although most teams are believed to have done deals.

image rights mean that tax is charged at 26p per instead of 50 and were one off payments.

There is a big difference though, hmrc have a policy on accepting and rejecting cva's (which can be found on thier website), rangers dont meet the requirements. no team in england who have done a deal were in admin and deals were done on hmrc's terms.

Agree0 Disagree0

If green as same as whyte then i do feel sorry for rangers fans , truly. Mccann could hav been dubious but was backed by some serious hardcore fans in dempsey haughey and mcglone. desperation has brought rfc to its knees. i am past rejoicing. if rumours are true about hmrc seizing assets and dual contracts guilt next week then you the fans hav my sympathy. hope they do anyone who has done anything illegal but knowing the law it protects the wealthy and prosecutes average joe.

honest fan

Agree0 Disagree0

In 1986 / 1987 & 88 i put money into a self employed pension to cut down my tax bill which was 40% in 1986 ,this wasnt illegal but the money couldnt be touched till i reached 60 ,which paid a lump sum out and a monthly pension which is taxable at current rate of tax doug t.s.o

Agree0 Disagree0

HMRC are allowed to do deals. A deal on the BTC would likely have been successful.

The problem for Rangers was the Tax and NI for this year was deliberately withheld. When this occurs the tax mans rules say they can not do a pence in the pound deal, hence why the CVA was rejected. The rejection of the CVA had nothing to do with the BTC.

Agree0 Disagree0

There was nothing wrong with EBTs if companies used them legally.

Rangers didnt bigtime.

Other teams and companies who didnt will now know HRMC is not rolling over.

Agree0 Disagree0

And now Ally walks..I say forget talk of the third division as this really is the end for rangers. The are too damaged to recover in any form.

Agree0 Disagree0

The EBTs are not the reason that HMRC moved for liquidation. It was the deliberate withholding of VAT & PAYE. if it was just the EBTs they may have done a deal - Jaxie

Agree0 Disagree0

Its not rumours its fact. There are more than one epl team who had ebt's there were at least 3 that i know. HMRC are urging all companies who had ebt's of which there are many in uk not just in football...to settle now rather than in court.

Agree0 Disagree0

Could it be that liquidation was simply a plan to escape the btc? And hmc knew it.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 18:49:37
Rumour BDO have court of session booked with Lord Hodge tomorrow afternoon. Rumour they are moving to protect assets for creditors/ HMRC.

Believable36 Unbelievable18

Here we go, court rumour alert (again) suppose there is extra security at Ibrox as well. get a grip!

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers' liquidators insist the club will continue to play at Ibrox.

Malcolm Cohen and James Stephen from financial company BDO have been appointed as Joint Liquidators.

A CVA proposal from a consortium led by Charles Green was rejected by HMRC forcing the club into liquidation.

“The liquidators will seek to protect any remaining assets, maximise recoveries for the benefit of creditors, and investigate the reasons behind the failure of the company.”

Just wanted to post this to make sure you are clear on exactly what assets they are trying to protect ie those left behind after Green's deal goes through. Not trying to pick holes with the OP or anything but BDO's own statement clearly states what assets they are trying to protect so wanted to make sure it's clear, the last thing we need is more scaremongering(if that was the intent of the OP)

Agree0 Disagree0

Bdo have confirmed green will get the assets so if u r saying they r doing this take the assets of rangers its not possible they have a legally binding contract

Agree0 Disagree0

It was Lord Hodge who authorised D&P to be administrators to the upset of HRMC.

Agree0 Disagree0

Did Ticketus not have a legal and binding contract? {Ed039's Note - As legal and as binding as all the other creditors, the thing for them is CW gave them personal and cash guarantees, not that they will be worth the paper they are written on)

Agree0 Disagree0

There is nothing in the court lisings for this

Agree0 Disagree0

Rumour has it that there are rumours on this rumour site that are not true and just rumours, but then again that may just be a rumour.Get real Rangers FC in our current form are dead and buried, I'm away to buy a Partick Thistle season ticket. See you in Maryhill. {Ed039's Note - I would rather watch Maryhill Juniors, no offense to Thistle)

Agree0 Disagree0

It would be right and proper if they did so.

Agree0 Disagree0

True ed i wont be back the club is dead sad to say gutted ger

Agree0 Disagree0

But will club be sold to newco before liquidators hit the ground? If not then liquidators certainly do not need to honour any contract whatsoever.

Agree0 Disagree0

Greens takeover could be stopped if any hmrc find any wrongdoing in the agreement. also green said he would walk away unless rfc in every home tournament next year.

Agree0 Disagree0

BDO are the real deal as far as admins/liquidators are concerned, not like the chancers of Duff & Phelps.

Agree0 Disagree0

To the Partick Thistle bloke, goodbye, another gloryhunter will NOT be missed!!

Agree0 Disagree0

How can D&P hand over 112m of assets whist in administration to one guy for 5m?? It's surely illegal as their job is to maximize returns for creditors. Even the smallest creditor can challenge this in court.
D&P are putting Assets beyond creditors.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 14:48:10
D&P confirm that Green & Co will get Ibrox/M Pk in next few days but interestingly and new twist to this saga that former directors prior to them are liable for £70m should Rangers lose Big Tax Case.

Believable11 Unbelievable33

If that were true then why is it included in our overall debt?

Agree0 Disagree0

I would be very surprised if HMRC and/or Ticketus don't try and block the automatic "sale" of Ibrox/Murray Pk to Green. Surely the liquidators have a duty to the creditors to sell them on the open market regardless of the impact on Rangers or whatever they are now to be called?

Agree0 Disagree0

If green takes over then in will be administration 2 years down the line agian this mans a con man no 1 is mentioning the club is running at a lose of 10 mil a year no euro money so weres the money to fill the hole its con after con greens a con man

Agree0 Disagree0

Statement by Joint Liquidator Malcolm Cohen regarding Duff & Phelps plan to transfer the business to a 'newco' set up by Green in the next few days

"Once this is done, BDO will determine what can be recovered from the remains of the existing company.

"It is right that there is a full and robust investigation into why the company failed, together with concerted efforts to recover monies for creditors and the taxpayer.

"This may include pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the financial affairs of the company in previous years."

Agree0 Disagree0

Club is running at that cost because we are paying champs league wages.its time to live within our means,stop paying mega wages and get kids in team and cap the wages and bite the bullet and try and build our way back up

Agree0 Disagree0

Champions wages. What planet are you on

Agree0 Disagree0

I strongly beleive that if when the Liquidation company comes in after Thursday's meeting that they will rip up the agreement that Duff & Duffer have with Green and open up the stadium and murray park to ALL bidders who want to take part in the process, selling to the highest bisser, resulting in Green walking away.
What are your thoughts ED? {Ed039's Note - Looks like it after BDOs statement today, only problem is, maybe he is the only person who wants to buy??. Its a huge obligation to take on)

Agree0 Disagree0

Thanks ED for your reply, he maybe the only FOOTBALL minded one to put in a bid, the sad fact is this, at this stage is anyones guess as to buying the properties...BDO i would suggest are not in it for the good of the Football club but for the creditors to get the best price they can leaving it open as I said to ANYONE that puts in the biggest offer for the properties.....worrying times indeed. {Ed039's Note - Unfortunately that is BDOs job)

Agree0 Disagree0

Agreed this could be an option.
Other possible scenario...Whyte is the majority shareholder,and apparently owns the assets,secured in his company in Virgin islands. They may be going for a ruling to void Whyte's entitlement to anything.
P.O.B.

Agree0 Disagree0

Any money received from sale of assets goes to Secured creditors EAX payers get not a penny untill that 40 million is paid as for BTC DOUBLE CONTRACTS BRINGING GAME IN TI DISREPUTE RFC 2012 LTD and as a new entity in the eyes of UEFA cannot be charged with any of it as Charles Greens Lawyer (official adviser to UEFA) has no doubt informed him

Agree0 Disagree0

I see Mr Green running around all day trying to curry favour with the SFA & SPL to getting reinstated back into the SPL as a newco...surely that is a waste of time, for one the authorities knew this day was coming and so passed the buck of actually making a decision by leaving it for the rest of the league clubs to decide the fate of Rangers as they did not have the stomach to make any tough decisions....

Agree0 Disagree0

Any 'newco' will go bust sooner than later not enough coming through the gates 10M loss now no euro matches forget it!

Agree0 Disagree0

SFA and SPL have let every club playing by there rules down. Serious questions must now be asked. Not a glory hunter, wee diddy team supporter till l die unless newco walks into SPL then after over 40 years l will never step foot in a Scottish football ground again and that would break my heart..

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 13:40:32
SPFA and agents will advise players that they can resign on grounds of constructive dismissal when D&P try to transfer contracts to NEWCO. By resigning, the transfer cannot happen and players can walk for free and also put a claim in for compensation.

Believable42 Unbelievable14

Without European football and potentially SPL bonuses either, someone will get crushed in the stampede for the door....

Agree0 Disagree0

Rubbish u cant resign on grounds of constructive dismissal, as constructive dismissal means that the employer has sacked you,

and rangers newco aint sacking anyone they as insisting everyone moves to the new company using the TUPE ruling,

this means that all employees move to new company on same terms as they where on at the old company.

so exactly where are rangers dismissing anyone??

the only thing that can happening is that the players choice not to move over as is their right, this is their choice and is not constructive dismissal.

Agree0 Disagree0

Bollox
Newco - TUPE ALL staff ( not just players) on their current T's & C's, so would be in players best interests to 'take the money'
Only if the contracts are either not honoured or renegotiated can they go down he route you suggest

Agree0 Disagree0

Why would players want to do this ?
all in it together not try and heap more misery aye/no

Agree0 Disagree0

Two weeks tomorrow is pay-day for all Rangers players and employees. Given there is no cashflow, someone needs to underwrite the cheques! We assume that will be Charles Green - self proclaimed saviour and owner in waiting. I can't wait to see if he actually covers the salaries....'cause if he doesn't, HE / the club will be in breack of the employees contracts. Given Green's veiled threats yesterday about players being in breach of contract should they refuse to move over to the newco, it will be an interesting day come the 28th if salaries are not paid on time - and in full!

SPM

Agree0 Disagree0

I understand that Green is concerned about assets leaving for free but could any newco really cope with the liabilities that it would incur if all employees transferred on current T&C's as per TUPE (2006)?

More likely Green would either terminate the contracts of all of those with no sell on value, a la Motherwell, shafting mainly veterans and youths. He will then sell anyone with a value (Davis, McGregor etc.) for anything he could get although nothing like market value. There is no way a newco could absorb the currrent Rangers wage bill and Green doesn't want to he simply wants to wring a few more pounds from the carcass. Rangers fans shouldn't be fooled that he is trying to keep players.
CBP

Agree0 Disagree0

Charles Green says this isn't the case.

So I'm guessing it is, as he's got just about everything wrong so far, hasn't he? BB

Agree0 Disagree0

If a company gets liquidated , it means they no longer exist . ALL employees are free to do what they want AS THE COMPANY THEY WORKED FOR NO LONGER EXISTS. What part of that statement do Duff and Duffer not understand ?

Agree0 Disagree0

If the club is in the 3rd Division for next season, with no European money and lesser crwods watching the games, how can Green, Duff & Duffer say that the players and staff will just transfer over to the newco on the same contracts they have at this point?
Financially that does not make sense, you have to cut your cloth accordingly to live within your means to balance the books.....or is it same old same old?
The definition of a fool is doing something the same way over and over and expecting a different result each time...please learn from past mistakes.

Agree0 Disagree0

"Terminal proceedings (regulation 8(7)).

Where the transferor is the subject of "bankruptcy proceedings or any analogous insolvency proceedings which have been instituted with a view to the liquidation of the assets of the transferor", the employees will not automatically transfer to the transferee, and dismissals by reason of the transfer will not be automatically unfair. Regulations 4 and 7 of TUPE 2006 are expressly excluded.

Non-terminal proceedings (regulation 8(6)).

Where the transferor is the subject of "relevant insolvency proceedings" (those which "have been opened... not with a view to the liquidation of the assets of the transferor"), the employees will transfer to the transferee under regulation 4 and receive unfair dismissal protection under regulation 7. However, some of the transferor's debts in respect of the employees will not transfer to the transferee, but will be taken on by the Secretary of State and paid out of the National Insurance Fund (regulation 8(1)-(5)). Further, the transferee will have greater scope than normal to vary the employees' terms (regulation 9)."

So, seems clear cut, as RFC will be liquidated, the employment contracts cannot be automatically transferred. Any attempt to do so allows the employee to claim contrstructive or unfair dismissal and walk.

Agree0 Disagree0

Been there and bought the t shirt.The players contract will be with the old company,not the NEW COMPANY.They can walk out anytime,and if MR GREEN or MR WHITE dont like it they can take it to court again,FFS they have seen more court action than RAFA NADAL.

Agree0 Disagree0

Automatic transfer of contracts of employment would have applied if a CVA had been agreed, but under the TUPE (2006), there is no automatic transfer if the company transferring is being liquidated. So SPFA would be correct in their interpretation.

Agree0 Disagree0

Green says 3 spl clubs have been in same position as rangers and applied to spl under a newco ?? does this guy make this rubbish up hes starting to show cracks

Agree0 Disagree0

"Protection of employment regulations suggest that employees must be offered but are under no obligation to accept the terms of transfer to a new company and the players' union has echoed this sentiment.

The issue is further complicated with player contracts under Fifa, Uefa and Scottish FA regulations."

Source: BBC

Players can't be forced to be employed by a company that doesn't hold any FIFA, UEFA or SFA licences. That would be grounds for constructive dismissal surely as you couldn't play professional football FFS!

Agree0 Disagree0

The registrations revert to the SFA, not any other company. The players are not contracted to the SFA, however, and the SFA cannot and will not pay them. The players, therefore, become free agents.

Agree0 Disagree0

Employment law is such that the new co must offer the players contracts at the same going rate....however the players do not need to move. Any new co will not get many of the senior players to sign up, especially if they get big fat juicy signing on fees elsewhere. I assume the players wont get paid this month after reverting back to full pay ? They wont be happy about that. Some of the young lads might play for the jersey, but that jersey isn't the rangers jersey it's the 'rangers united' jersey. Arsenal just signed a player for 12 million quid....they could have bought rangers lock stock and barrel for half that....says it all really.

Agree0 Disagree0

The players are not employees in the sense we arw. they are more like contractors. as for constructive dismissal you do need to resign to be able to claim it.

Agree0 Disagree0

Players are PAYE, so are normal employees.

Agree0 Disagree0

As has just been mentioned. Any TUPE offer is non binding, ie you cant just be transferred over, you have the right to say no. Also I would expect the liquidation to only happen after the Newco has been created, TUPE completed and any other loose ends with regards to contracts sorted. However as I see it, someone who has been TUPE'ed 3 time, both as a long term contractor and a permanent employee, I have always had the right to accept or walk away.

Agree0 Disagree0

Not wanting to argue about tupe but my work was bought outright by spainards ... I tupe over on existing T&C's and was never given the choice to walk ??

Agree0 Disagree0

TUPE does not appply to liquidated companies.

Agree0 Disagree0

"Rubbish u cant resign on grounds of constructive dismissal, as constructive dismissal means that the employer has sacked you."

Clearly no idea what constructive dismissal is then.

Constructive dismissal is when an employee is forced to quit their job against their will because of their employer's conduct.

I.e. a serious breach of your contract (eg not paying you or suddenly demoting you for no reason)
forcing you to accept unreasonable changes to your conditions of employment without your agreement (eg suddenly telling you to work in another town, or making you work night shifts when your contract is only for day work).

That's on the directgov website therefore in layman terms, so I assume you may be able to understand. {Ed039's Note - You can sue for constructive dismisall if you feel that you had your rights breached to such a point that you had to quit but none of it applies to this situation)

Agree0 Disagree0

The SPFA position on players rights are correct! End of and I wish everyone of them all the very best for the future - not many employees would have taken such a huge cut in wages to help a failing company.

Agree0 Disagree0

Agreed, was just pointing out the error of the statement; "you can't resign on grounds of constructive dismissal". You do resign and state you believe the company has acted constructively to force you put.

Rangers haven't been trying to force players/staff out, it's just the situation they find themselves in.

Agree0 Disagree0

Complete and utter rubbish to claim for constructive dismissal they would have to be on short pay for a period of no less than 24 weeks on the second point if they refuse to tupee over it will put them in breach of contract leaving them liable for the full amount of contract (contracts are a two way street and cant see any of them having get out clauses inserted in original contracts they signed except for the original buy out clause not the discount one)

Agree0 Disagree0

Constructive dismissal is when your employer singles u out and makes your job so untennable that u have no option but to resign. The inference has to be that the employer wanted rid if the employee but didn't want to sack them

Agree0 Disagree0

PFA Scotland as the trade union for Professional Footballers in Scotland is the only body involved in the Rangers FC insolvency whose paramount concern is the safeguarding of the rights and interests of the Players.   

We are delighted therefore to note that both Mr Charles Green and Duff and Phelps agree with the union’s position that that the Transfer of Undertaking (Protection of Employment) Regulations 2006 (“TUPE”) applies to the Players’ contracts of employment in the event of a transfer from The Rangers FC PLC to a newco.

The purpose of TUPE is to protect employees’ terms and conditions of employment in exactly this type of situation.

Should the Players wish to transfer across to the newco, TUPE ensures that they do so on their existing contractual terms.  Equally TUPE affords every employee the statutory right to object to the transfer; employers cannot select which parts of TUPE they wish to apply.

If a Player wishes to object to being transferred his contract of employment would immediately come to an end leaving him with no contract, no dismissal and no right to compensation from either oldco or newco.  Both the Club and the Player are then free from their contractual obligations.

With regard to the question of registration, we are unclear on what legal basis the football authorities would be entitled to withhold the transfer of registration of any Player in this situation. The European Court of Justice ruling in the case of Bosman is authority for the view that professional footballers are workers like anyone else and are entitled to exercise their right to Freedom of Movement when out of contract.

PFA Scotland’s role is to ensure that whatever the decision of each individual Player, they are furnished with expert advice and guidance. Our members have the benefit of specialist employment law advice from the union’s Solicitors Bridge Litigation and our appointed Counsel, Brian Napier QC. Our legal team considers that there are a number of legal remedies open to a player in the event of their Registration being withheld including the right to petition the Court of Session for a fast track Judicial Review Hearing.

It may well be the case that all of the Players wish to transfer across to the newco and if that is the case then PFA Scotland will ensure that their rights are protected. The players however are becoming increasingly unhappy at having to operate in an information vacuum whilst their futures are portrayed by others as being a fait accompli with no proper communication and consultation taking place.

The players are being asked to decide upon their future with so many uncertainties involved . Unanswered questions such as which division the new club will actually play in, whether there be any sporting sanctions against the club, whether the club be eligible to play in the Scottish Cup and whether  there will be a registration embargo. One or more of these factors may have an influence on a Professional Footballer’s career – particularly since it a career that is relatively short lived.

TUPE also places a legal obligation on both the existing company and the newco to formally consult with the union/its members over a proposed transfer. Accordingly, PFA Scotland now looks  forward to hearing from Mr Green and being furnished with information regarding the proposed transfer together with details of his plans for the future of the club.  

Agree0 Disagree0

It's amazing how some people don't get it, even when they are shown the relevant statutory provisions!

YOU CANT BE IN BREACH OF CINTRACT WITH A COMPANY YOU'VE NEVER SIGNED A CONTRACT WITH, is that simple enough?

Tupe provision in terms of transfer of employment is primarily an employee protecting one. Your right to refuse to tupe'd is unambiguous. Greens banking in the fact that the SFA will hold the contracts and will refuse to allow the players to register elsewhere. Expect this errant tosh to be given short shrift at the COS, but at least it will give the RFF something to spend your money on!

Agree0 Disagree0

The alleged breach of contract is with RFC, not Newco. The constructive dismissal claim would be against RFC on the grounds of trying to force a transfer of employment to Newco in breach of TUPE. Any transfer is optional under the Act.

Agree0 Disagree0

Employment lawyer Mark Hamilton of Maclay Murray & Spens agrees with the trade union's interpretation.

He told BBC Scotland: "Liquidation acts as a termination of their contracts by itself and they would be able to say Rangers had breached their contract by going into liquidation and they would be free from their contract at that point.

"There is no automatic transfer in a liquidation sale."

Agree0 Disagree0

Looks like Ally is first one not to transfer.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 13:36:01
Bbc news now- BDO release statement saying selling assets to maximize returns for creditors.

Believable29 Unbelievable8

You're worse than the press, you are sensationalising the truth of the story.

Agree0 Disagree0

Despite the line that the media's been trotting out over the Green deal I expect BDO won't allow the D&P/Green stich-up to take place.

Green maintained last week that whatever the outcome of the CVA he would 'own' Rangers by Thursday. He also claimed he would name his consortium when the result of the CVA was known either way.

I'm guessing he will 100 per cent NOT own Rangers and I'd also very much doubt we'll be hearing the names of his consortium. Thoughts guys?

BB

BB

Agree0 Disagree0

Well BB Green shouts a lot but I can see him walking away here. Rangers seems to be moving slowly away from him and unless he can regain the initiative he's over. He's already annoyed everyone - the SFA, SPL, SPFA, playing staff, HMRC - all for a cut price, debt-financed takeover which could still go horribly wrong even if he finally gets hold of the club.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 12:10:51
Having spoke to a number of high profile figures in the game they are convinced that Aberdeen, Dundee Utd and Hearts will vote against Rangers playing in the SPL next season.

Have to hope we get 8 votes.

Believable35 Unbelievable10

Can't believe old Rangers get to vote on new Rangers.

Agree0 Disagree0

I've heard it's dundee utd, hibs, and aberdeen. would be surprised if others oppose.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why should you care mate? By the time we come back these 3 teams will either no longer be there or will heading to oblivion.
BR

Agree0 Disagree0

Hearts? Hearts are on their knees, just directly we will be having these same discussions about them!

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers going to div 3 would be the best thing that could happen to scottish football, even if celtic were the best team in the league the race for second third spot would be really competative , it would also give more chance to young scottish players as all teams would have more oppertunuity to blood them , it would also ease fears of relegation somewhat producing more chance of good football being played .......

Agree0 Disagree0

I would be surprised if this was the case, judging by the statements made to the media so far i would say the most likely clubs to knock us back would be dundee utd, celtic and hibs. Unfortunately the rest of them will lose there nerve when the time comes.I say unfortunately because i firmly believe the way ahead for us is the third division, not playing in the SPL where we would be nobbled with points deductions and other penalties for years so we will effectively be subsidising a league that the the other clubs will make sure we cannot possibly compete in.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why wouldn't they?
Would you vote for someone who ripped you off?

Agree0 Disagree0

To be honest, that really does not surprise me...we owe Hearts money for Wallace, and all 3 don't like us anyway

Agree0 Disagree0

Yeah maybe, but Hearts haven't cheated every other team in the league like you did.

Agree0 Disagree0

Just let them do that & watch all teams in the spl suffer

Agree0 Disagree0

Does this vote really matter?

What happens if we fail in the EBTs, Double Contracts charges amongst others etc etc. We are not even half way through punishments.

Agree0 Disagree0

Hearts are owed money they wont be getting.they wont be voting for rangers.rangers wont be getting a vote!

Agree0 Disagree0

Hope nothing, if we don't get in then GOOD! Let the SPL suffer, because Hearts will be next!

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with Post 3....what I heard at the recent FWA Dinner was RFC were dicounting getting any support from Dundee Utd, Hibs and Aberdeen. St. Mirren were also making noises to vote against RFC. That said, the only clubs RFC were confident would stand by them were Motherwell and St. Johnstone so there were a lot of "floating votes" unknown.

This was of course before the SFA / Court of Session debacle which I belive has upset clubs who perhaps still had some sympathy!

For what its worth, I think the SPL is all about self-preservation and therefore the new Rangers will win the vote BUT they will be burdened by a number of sanctions.

SPM

Agree0 Disagree0

We won't get 8 votes - end of
We would be better to get acceptance into div3 before Jim McInally starts to galvanise clubs down there against us!
Sell off the big earners, tie as many of the young guys down as possible and start again. After all the club was originally set up for the love of the game.

bil72

Agree0 Disagree0

Owe Hearts 800,000 amongst a handfull of others.

Whats going to happen with the EBTs and double contract punishments. Will we aloud to play football next season?

Agree0 Disagree0

As it stands RFC don't have a licence for this season, so how can they have a vote?

Agree0 Disagree0

Hibs will vote no along with Tic, Aberdeen & Dundee Utd.

Dont think Hearts will. Still go through 8-4

Agree0 Disagree0

Would turkeys vote for xmas... ?

If they vote gers out - they can win more games, win some cups, get more fans, make more money

If they vote gers in - those clubs who do will more than likely go bust next season, cos they will loose more games, win no cups, and have no fans.

GERS in SPL has NOT stopped clubs going into admin - its increase it.

ego

Agree0 Disagree0

Are Celtic fans going to hound Lawwell out when he votes "yes" for a Rangers newco?

Agree0 Disagree0

Hearts are already in debt and are trying to trim the wage bill to nearer what they can actually afford, which is what all Scottish clubs should be doing. However Romanov has already shown that he hates both of the old firm and he will be desperate to punish Rangers for essentially stealing Lee Wallace from him.

From all the statements it looks like Hibs, Dundee Utd., St. Mirren, Hearts and Celtic will all make things very uncomfortable. I don't necessarilly expect them to say no but Rangers will have to accept heavy punishments and show a good deal of humility and contrition to be voted back in. This way the clubs can sell this to the fans as just punishment to placate any protests or boycotts. There is no way anyone in charge of Rangers will seriously consider Division 3 it's only a bluff, ultimately they will have to swallow any punishments the clubs dish out.
CBP

Agree0 Disagree0

Celtic Hibs dons and well fans have told their chairmen not to let rangers return. Once out you have to play your way back.
Well and dons fans have had signs at their turn styles. Wells fans are in the process of taking complete fan ownership.
Lawwell will have to vote no. His fans insist.
I really don't think rangers 2012 will get 8 yes votes I really don't considering all the cheating years in the SPL and taking 2m for first place five times fielding illegal players.

Agree0 Disagree0

Clubs to reject us will be celtic, aberdeen, dundee utd & hibs..

all it takes is one more & its div 3 ..

Agree0 Disagree0

As if Romanov is going to vote to keep Rangers in SPL when you have just bumped him out of 800k for Lee Wallace. I can assure you he will be one of the few voting against. Add Aberdeen because they hate Rangers and there fans would go tonto if they voted in Rangers favour, Then Celtic for the exact same reason. Thats 3 already, if as you lot expect Dundee Utd vote against then thats your 4 almost definite's already. Not looking good.

Agree0 Disagree0

This SPL vote will make Eurovision Song Contest voting look like a walk in the park !.

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with the above post. Getting back in the SPL is the least of your worries . The BTC and the double contracts have the potential of getting rangers expelled The SFA will say they had no choice as UAFA and FIFA will be watching what they do very closely.

Agree0 Disagree0

Handcuffed with massive points/financial deductions and in all probability we will be celtic's whipping boy in SPL, or a fresh start from Div3 ? With no european football for 3 years i'd take Div3

Agree0 Disagree0

"even if celtic were the best team in the league the race for second third spot would be really competative"
--
Why? If Rangers are in the spl the race for third and fourth would be no different.

"it would also give more chance to young scottish players as all teams would have more oppertunuity to blood them"
--

Again why? There will still be relegation.

"it would also ease fears of relegation somewhat producing more chance of good football being played ......."
--

No it wouldn't there would still be relegation!

Add to the fact the other 11 clubs would need to reduce their annual budget by about 30-50% as a result of the reduced gate receipts, tv deal and drop in sponsorship monies all leads me to believe you are deluded!

I will however happily go because my ticket money will not be used to subsidise other teams, whilst there are embargo's, points deductions and a 75% reduction in TV money.

I do totally agree that we should still pay the footballing debts and IMO that is guaranteed to be a condition of SPL entry.

Agree0 Disagree0

The only way forward for Scottish football is to vote Rangers out, this will send a message to SKY telling them the clubs have at last put their fans first for a change.

Agree0 Disagree0

I think you have the Tic vote as a Celtic fan I think they see that the rest are after the OF

Agree0 Disagree0

Why does every1 keep mentioning double contracts & EBT punishments. As a newco they can not be punished for these. As every1 keeps pointing out we have lost our history. You can't take away history & at the same time punish them for history.newco no history no double contract sfa punishment. I do think SPL chairman will want a shake up of the voting structure & change in the share of money though. I would prefer to go to 3 rd division start over again. Win our way back to the SPL. No matter if the newco get back in to SPL straight away or not voting & money share will change anyway. Celtic will see big changes regarding these issue's as the old firm had all the clout before and could out vote any changes other SPL teams wanted to make. as regards European football if a newco aren't in SPL co-efficient will drop to the state of SPL winners only will be able to qualify for champ league from the first qualifying stage. 1 Europa qualifier aswell from first round. This is the only reason newco should stay in SPL. A very hard decision for Lawell to make stay on side with the fans or look at the best interests of the club & shareholders.

Agree0 Disagree0

I can understand when you say show sky put the fans first. In an ideal world yes totally right. With most clubs in SPL owing the banks how do they maintain the payments to them if turnover drops by over 50percent. You could have no club to support if the chairmen go with the fans. Very hard decisions to be made for the chairmen.

Agree0 Disagree0

Because, it's an sfa requirement to accept any penalties as a condition of the transfer of any share and the granting of a license to play. If you want to be a newco playing at ibrox without any cinjection to the old club then it will have to be an application to the sfl to join the 3rd division with a completely new set of contracts for your newly signed players.

I'm afraid Charles green's dream of a newco, at ibrox, debt and punishment free with the same squad you had in may is ludicrous. Any acceptance back into the SPL will be under some pretty eye-watering conditions. Charles cares not about the ability of the team to compete but only the ability to get bums on seats. He's happy to give home ticket money away because he'll be gone by the time the realisation that the cost of staying in the spl will in the long term hurt Rangers much more than the short term cost of starting again.

If you stay it really is over, if you go it's over as we know it but the game will have a chance to recover. That Green is the only show in town for Ranget's is a more shaming indictment of the club and than anything that the sfa or the rest of football could come up with. Celtics largest shareholders worth 1.35billion euri's and a man who's struggling to raise 5.5million is the only hope. Whatever he can offer the other clubs, do you not think that Peter and dermott can do better?

Agree0 Disagree0

Regarding - double contracts & EBT punishments.
..................................................
Newco cannot be hit with Tax fine or any fines but can be hit with SFA, UEFA and FIFA penalties. These if any will probably be in the form points deduction , revenue lost , restrictions etc.

We are also still waiting for the 1 year over 18 year old ban outcome.

Agree0 Disagree0

The co-efficient is screwed either way man, FFS, you can't play in Europe for at least 3 years so the other clubs will have to carry our hopes regardless of the division rangers are in!

Get it into your heads, Scottish football is at the edge of an abyss! It's choices are integrity and the hope that the fans that have demanded it support the clubs as a result, or perceived financial gain based on the hope that the fans of every other club just suck it up!

Yesterday was a Berlin wall collapsing moment for all Celtic fans. Rangers imploded and died spending money they didn't have whilst failing to eclipse and destroy their enemy. They'll be back but not for a decade and all Celtic fans will know that they won the war between the clubs.

We welcome the chase from any newco.

Agree0 Disagree0

"Why does every1 keep mentioning double contracts & EBT punishments. As a newco they can not be punished for these."

You said Newco , meaning New Company.... read on...

"As every1 keeps pointing out we have lost our history. You can't take away history & at the same time punish them for history."

You are now a Newco - New Company, you have no history. In a past life I was William Wallace, why am I not being hailed as the saviour of the Scots... Get my drift? Newco, new history.

"newco no history no double contract sfa punishment. I do think SPL chairman will want a shake up of the voting structure & change in the share of money though. I would prefer to go to 3 rd division start over again."

No SFA, SFL, FIFA, UEFA, or any other type of license. Whos to say Rangers will even be allowed back into the SFL at the lowest tier?

"Win our way back to the SPL."

You're hopeful. All Rangers fans do is piggyback on success. You can't handle it when your team fails to turn up on the day. The SFL has many good teams, I am a fan of one of the SFL teams, so what makes you think you have guaranteed chances of winning every league? You honestly think high earners will want to waste part of their short career is the lowest leagues in Scotland?

N!

Agree0 Disagree0

Celtic-related organization employee here.
You may think this is bogus but I happen to know for a fact that Celtic will be voting FOR newco Rangers in the SPL. Which is going to be hell of an ironic situation if they still don't get enough votes. I have no info on how others will vote.

Agree0 Disagree0

Sorry having a wee laugh to myself.Honestly i worry who are all these vendictive evil people going to moan about next season.Most decent rangers fans except that its the 3rd div next season and the only way it wont be is through other clubs seeing pound signs.I for one wont support the newco rangers if we remain in SPL for the simple reason we will still only be there through greed And being scared of the unknown we will be heavily penalised so what would be the point in being there none.

Agree0 Disagree0

Hope so take ure medicine

Agree0 Disagree0

Motherwell supporters almost 100% against newco walking straight into SPL. When Rangers were trying to get into EPL did they have any worries about the rest of Scottish Football. Can't believe Mr. Green and a minority of disillusioned Rangers fans think the will get any votes outside Celtic.

Agree0 Disagree0

Reading the posts above I cannot beleive the attitude of some Rangers fans, they seem to have no remorse for any of the actions there club have taken and rules/laws they have broken. "Let the SPL suffer" It is no1's fault but your own. Take ur punishments even if it is on your Newco and pay for ur crimes!!!

Agree0 Disagree0

As regards to "high earners wasting short years in the lower leagues" Gretna did it & nearly pulled it off - sorrelly so. However we are not Gretna & could afford "high earners" for quite considerably longer & support a cause. So the sky is the limit not to mention SKY being the measure stick WATP.

Agree0 Disagree0

That's exactly what I said newco no history. So no punishment from sfa or urfa as they are not the same club. If the history of the club is taken away as a newco how can the newco be punished for the financial dealings of Rangers.
As for wining our way back I never said the newco would do it with back to back promotions learn to read

As for co-efficient Newco maybe banned for at least 3 years.Though the clubs in the SPL who would get in to Europe would be financially better off. Celtic included with a newco (rangers)in the SPL. Tv money and sponsorship will dry up. Celtic won't pay to have players on big wages with income to match. So if newco not in SPL it affects co-efficient wether they can play in Europe or not.

Agree0 Disagree0

Hearts are not on their knees or about to go under or next up. Romanov wants to reduce running costs in order to help sell the club and invest instead in his Lith' basketball club. He is spending 15 mill on them reportly this season. You will not get a Yes vote from Hearts as they will lose to many of their Season Ticket Holders by doing so. The same applies to many of the other clubs in the SPL.

Agree0 Disagree0

Reading the posts above guy you make me laugh.What should we be remorseful for what guilt do we as fans have to admit to none.The only thing that this saga has left me is ANGRY.Angry with stupid little know it alls who have nothing better to do with there lifes than hope then gloat about our demise.Honestly i think its time all you hate filled people took a couple of days of you got what you wanted or wait is that still not good enough.

Agree0 Disagree0

Newco means new operating company not a new football club. The FOOTBALL CLUB remains with a newco managing it & the finances. {Ed001's Note - you seem to have missed the point, the football club hasn't existed since the day it became a company, as anything other than a company running a sports team. It is a football team, not a club, these days.}

Agree0 Disagree0

On the plus side going to division 3 will save the fans a right few quid, season tickets on average are just under 100, happy days :)

Agree0 Disagree0

I work in dundee ,i do have links to dundee utd officals. the fans say 3rd div a massive % . the chairman who knows how mutch money is at stake has a different view . united fans will not renew season tickets until we are in 3rd. i get the feeling this is the same all around.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 10:36:50
Ed I posted last week saying KPMG will take over administration as the CVA will be rejected there for ousting d and p. this got shot down by my fellow bears. They are planning to take over soon but CE is planning a court battle to stop this as he is going to lose out. What's your thought on it?

Believable4 Unbelievable13

KPMG? Its BDO who are liquidating not taking over administration.Have you been on the moon?

Agree0 Disagree0

What happens with BDO who are legally agreed ?

Agree0 Disagree0

Who is CE?

Agree0 Disagree0

Who is CE?

Agree0 Disagree0

I assume you mean Craig Whyte, how is he losing out, he was getting nothing out of a cva ?

Agree0 Disagree0

Utter Tosh Mate

BDO

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 10:30:34
I see HMRC have just cut a deal with Goldman Sachs to let them keep £10 million pounds in back taxes and waived interest and penaltys. Not condoning what went on at Ibrox but how can this also be in the public interest. I have no doubt that there is politics involved with rangers tax situation

Alexmci

Believable20 Unbelievable13

Goldman have paid loads for tax for years, and will do going forward, they also help hmrc with tax advice....

What do rangers have to offer hmrc other than sacrificial goat

Agree0 Disagree0

10 million is a far cry from the supposed 75 million Rangers owe

Agree0 Disagree0

Wake up mate , goldman sachs tell goverments allover europe what to do, they are POLITICAL, you cant compare that with with rangers a football team from a tiny country like scotland , welcome to the real world !!!!!!!!

Agree0 Disagree0

To those that are condoning goldman sachs NOT paying their tax..........

Where exactly is the difference in you lot telling us to 'pay yer taxes' and not telling others to.

The hipocracy of some football fans is astronomic......just the same as a certain Mr Lennon bleating about financial doping, then it turns out that he himself was part of a tax evasion scheme....but i dont see anyone telling him to pay his taxes.....do you???

I will be so glad to get out of this mire that is called Scottish Football!! Liquidation cannot happen a second too soon for me!!

Agree0 Disagree0

Let's not forget RFC are a test case before they hit the big hitters in EPL. Make an example then go for the real money with a precedent... That is what is about to happen. Yes RFC broke the rules but lets see it all out in the open

Agree0 Disagree0

Tax man cuts deals every day here are past examples
When Luton Town went into administration in 2007 it owed 2.5m to the taxman, but paid back just 275,000. Leicester City owed 7m but paid 700,000, and Ipswich Town had unpaid tax debts of 5m in 2003, but reached a settlement of 391,000.

they may not be on the same scale but the principle is the same

JG

Agree0 Disagree0

Goldman Sachs are a huge financial company who for a while had more clout than most countries do! Compared to Rangers its laughable, ^above post get a grip these teams didn't commit any of the crimes that your directors did! Plus with latest ruling it's clear HMRC are looking to get these guys up in court! Thank GOD!

Agree0 Disagree0

Theirs a difference between clubs in administration having difficulty in paying tax and a club in administration because it didnt pay their tax the taxman might do deals but not when its them thats been ripped off

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers could have offered the taxman 20m cash and they would have accepted. I think you will find goldman sachs have paid money just not the total ammount. So are you telling us the british government have it in for a bitter backwater football club, get a grip fella.

Agree0 Disagree0

To be honest the money offered up in the cva was an insult. But hmrc are equally guilty of playing games here too. They are using Rangers predicament big time! Who else are they going after in the same manner? But without David Murray the club would not be in this position, he alone must be held accountable.

Agree0 Disagree0

Isn't Goldman Sachs a bank/financial institution. Rangers are a football (were a football/sporting club) Theres a little bit of a difference between a bank and a sports club....

Agree0 Disagree0

As stated by hundreds of people on here before the taxman does do deals, however anyone looking for clarity on why rangers cva was rejected follow the link below.

http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/helpsheets/vas-factsheet.pdf

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 09:44:55
Prior to Whytes takeover at Rangers, the company (Rangers PLC) only had 14million debt and was working the debt; in essence the club was solvent.

Since Whyte took over he has racked up around 40-45 Million in debt, surely there must be a full investigation into this charlatan and asset stripper.

SDM should have his Knighthood rescinded as it was his blind ambition and EBT Scheme that could be costing us as much as 90million in tax evasion and penalties.

The club will remain via a new-co route and the history will stay intact, it is just the Company (Rangers PLC) that will liquidate and the club transfers to a new owner, we must ensure the new owner is fit and proper.

In regards to Charles Green As fans we have to be very wary of this man, wants a CVA of pennies in the £ (On HMRCs website it clearly states NO CVAs FOR BLATANT TAX EVASION) therefore the CVA route was never going to happy, CG was paying us lip service. He also makes silly comments like we have a war chest; we will buy players etc., for a team trying to work debts these comments only hinder the process.

As loyal fans all we have done is follow our team and pay season books, away games, Europe trips and merchandise when all along the club has been run poorly, will the person or person responsible be brought to task over this, we can only hope so.

I hope we can come out of the dark period of history, go to the 3rd Div and get some moral dignity back, while working to build the club and Good name back to former glories, we are under no illusions this will take time and some heartache but lets stay strong, together and build from the bottom up

Believable23 Unbelievable12

Craig White has duped all of the Rangers fans....but David Murray is the main man to Blame for this situation!

Agree0 Disagree0

In the REAL world SDM has not been found guilty of anything to my knowledge , all he did was rid his business of a toxic asset ie RFC to CW , so what grounds is there for him to be stripped of his knighthood?

Agree0 Disagree0

Have said this all along that DM and CW must be investigated the Jelavik transfer money and ticketus are obvious examples of wrong doing, Dm has been proven to have built up his empire and Rangers by borrowing, borrowing and borrowing again hardly the kind of thing a Knighthood should be given for

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers had an 18 million overdraft, a business model that lost 10 million if no CL group stages, and a 75 million liability looming.

SDM did not sell this company for 1 because it was 14 million in debt.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

He never got the knighthood for RFC!

move on guys - we still have problems in front of us

bil72

Agree0 Disagree0

SDM cheated and knew it. The payments were part of thewages and they knew this was cheating.

Agree0 Disagree0

What you on about 14m in debt, murray sold it for 1 and to , the bank off 18m. They were losing 1m per/mnth, + 20m in debt, humped out of europe (and if it wasnt for admin mccoist would have been sacked) but for me d&f have not paid tax since taking over which is criminal.

Agree0 Disagree0

Does liquidation mean btc goes away? If so, maybe murray got whyte to do his dirty work for him after all. Call me para but I always smelt a rat when that Donald muir lloyds arrived. Old school pals with whyte and Grier! {Ed039's Note - Newco Rangers are not liable for BTC, but by rejecting the CVA it allows HMRC to go after SDM and CW directly)

Agree0 Disagree0

Yeah I think Whyte was not the only crook in this mess and unfortuantely, although we will still be together as the same support behind the new team we will be starting with a clean slate in terms of not only finances but also trophies.

Agree0 Disagree0

In the Real WORLD did you not watch the TV program 'Who Sold The Jerseys'?

Davie Murray Illegal use of EBTs and Double contacts.
He even gave himself mega millions in EBTs.
Never bought or put his own money into Rangers but just kept borrowing from Bank Of Scotland.
He's guilty as sin. Funny dont hear much from him these months.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 09:27:37
new strip void, we go newco can void tennents sponsor etc.

Believable14 Unbelievable3

OK, It funny because Green is buying the assets of Rangers which included all titile deeds, srtip rights etc, we could only loose sponsordhip if tennents pull out (Not going to happen) it will still be Rangers, just under a new company.

Agree0 Disagree0

Challenge will be finding new sponsors for what is now a toxic brand.

Agree0 Disagree0

Form a new co all sponsors can be made void mr green or the sponsors can cancel and look for new sponsor of strips fact.

Agree0 Disagree0

To the poster (toxic brand ) you cant have it both way's either rangers newco has no past or in your eyes carries there past over meaning 54 league titles you choose?....mark.

Agree0 Disagree0

Nice one Marky boy ;)

Agree0 Disagree0

In the eyes and minds of most football fans and most consumers it will still be the same rangers they will not disassociate any new co with the wrong doing of the past, therefore they will be the wrong club for anyone wishing a positive image for their sponsorship, sponsors will know this and if they don't a few test groups of consumers will soon reveal this to any prospective sponsor, therefor a toxic brand........ simples

JoeBhoy

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers dont own the merchandising rights such as strips , they were sold off to JJB a few years back .

Agree0 Disagree0

Mark, you saying the brand isn't toxic? Head out of sand. Rangers as a brand is screwed for years to come, history may die with old co, but the stench of the carcass will be over Ibrox for a generation.

Agree0 Disagree0

Correct jjb did own the rights. Newco no they don't. Same with catering etc . Lots of law suits ahead for the bears

Agree0 Disagree0

Head in the sand come up wit summit new boring. its about making money plain and simple lot of newco rangers fans out there. i live in england next to nobody going on about rangers troubles maybe you should look beyond the gold fish bowl that is glasgow. as the song goes its all about the money...mark.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 09:07:02
The SPL chairmen won't have to worry as the SFA will suspend Rangers for a year.

Believable13 Unbelievable16

I thought something like this would have been the punishment dished out, but it also creates more grey areas. AS i will try and explain (probably badly bear with me)

This leaves a space at the bottom of the league set up. Do they introduce spartans for example to fill this gap? as they will apply on the basis that there is now a free slot in the SFA structure.

Basically means after rangers served this ban there would then be no way for them to get back into the league setup at any level. Unless major league reconstruction is undertaken across all football in scotland.

IMO a year ban for rangers without league reconstruction or expansion next season really is the death of anything Rangers.

This said, If it is a newco and this newco has none of the liabilities of the old co then they cannot be punished for misdemeanours of the old co. And likewise cannot take any of the history and claim it to be their own.

Grey areas r us at the minute i think with absolutely everything.

Evinguu

Agree0 Disagree0

I think you will find that the SFA will now not have a meeting regarding how to punish Rangers fro going into ADMIN, as there is no company/club to punish. Only decision is whether to allow newco into SPL.

Agree0 Disagree0

Which Rangers?

Agree0 Disagree0

SFA must continue its disciplinary process against Rangwrs 1899 for the integrity of the governance of the SFA and for the historical record.
The SFA can carry sanctions across also and should do so!

Agree0 Disagree0

Newco entry with punishment tied to their tails as condition of entry.

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers newco can walk away from the debt but not the punishments, fact.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

Suspend rangers watch every 1 else falling apart through revenue tv deals sponsors etc just watch :)

Agree0 Disagree0

Why the hell is green and others tied to the club pi55ing people off for, Rangers NEED THE SPL MORE THAN SPL NEED RANGERS! The sooner all the idiots in charge, ex players etc & watp mob realise the better.

Agree0 Disagree0

If rangers had accepted the punishment,stopped harassing people, offended everyone and just appologised for the previous owners, they would have been voted straight into spl, but now clubs will lose more money through supporters if they keep rangers in spl. Rangers are in no position to demand anything from spl or clubs.

Agree0 Disagree0

Anorak,

I found your use of the word 'fact' interesting when related to future punishments. I haven't seen you use that word on here before. Punishments in what respect? If you mean in relation to sanctions imposed PURELY for being a 'Newco' unfairly gaining direct acceptance into the top league in Scottish football then I would agree as they would be a necessary deterrent to any other SPL club looking for a quick way out of their debt in the future and would be entirely justifiable. If you mean sanctions related to any misdemeanours committed by the 'Oldco' (dual contracts, tax evasion, disrepute charges...) then I would say no as, if Rangers' history does end on Thursday, they would not be applicable to the new company for the exact same reasons the debt isn't. It is a new company which will be operating under new management. The only evidence I can see supporting your argument, if you do mean the latter, is the comment made that each future 'newco' application will be examined on its merits by the SPL members. But since it wasn't elaborated on further at the time then we are left pondering what was meant by the word 'merits'. Does it refer to how poorly the previous club was run determines whether they gain entry and what level of sanctions are imposed upon them or is it more to do with what revenues and benefits its inclusion can bring to the league in order to enhance it? Guess we will soon find out but the definition of the word itself would suggest the latter. This is the reason I think set and consistent guidelines should have been in place before now as whichever way it goes few fans will be happy with the outcome (severe or not).

Brian

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 08:33:32
Green says the players contracts are transferred over to the NewCO. So that would mean that the creditors of the existing wound up Rangers get "pence" in the pound of the monies due to them...AND Green and Newco get ownership of the players which they could sell for Millions 5 minutes after NewCo is formed..and pocket that...with NewCo only having a debt of the purchase price of Ibrox..and Green thinks the rest of Scottish Football ( to say nothing of the creditors ) will just accept that as fair and being the way of the world.
I am a Celtic man and was very sympathetic to the position Rangers (fans) found themselves in ...I am not one of the nutters...but I am getting a bit fed up with the crap coming out from Ibrox blaming everyone else for their problems( now its the Revenue misleading Rangers fans!...no its Green and all who have mislead Rangers fans)..where the words " we are 100% at fault and apologise to everyone" are the only words not being used.
Wake up and smell the roses...My sympathy has expired.

Believable20 Unbelievable4

Any new company would have to offer brand new contracts signed by the chairman or CEO of the new company offering the job. The player would then need to sign up to those terms and conditions. This is unlikely and players should have everyone's best wishes.
The old contracts do not simply transfer. D contracts are null and void on liquidation.

Agree0 Disagree0

The contracts would have to different as the company , conditions, wages , bonuses would have changed.

Old contact is now duff.

New contract has to be agreed with and signed by New Co employer and player.

Cant see players running to sign. They dont know what Div they will be playing and what wages they will be on.

Or whatever further punishments are coming before beginning of season.
EBTs, double contracts, Ban from Domestic Cup or 1 year suspension etc.

Agree0 Disagree0

You cannot sell players from a former club when starting a newco, the players contracts are terminated as soon as the club is liquidated. The players are free to join any other club unless a new contract has been offered and signed which i cannot see happening when the newco will not have the money to pay wages to the high earners.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 08:23:42
Tic man. Not here to gloat. Just here to spare a thought for the people at Ibrox losing their jobs ,not the players but the groundsman , cleaners etc some of whom I hear have been their for three generations. Sickening. The greed of some people is staggering. How they can sleep at nights after destroying the livelihoods of normal people ,our neighbours with families already struggling to get by? not to mention your history is beyond me. Shame on them. Not on you. Joe

Believable29 Unbelievable6

Their not loosing there jobs, there contracts are being transfered over to the new co, the only thing that will not exists anymore is the old company.

Agree0 Disagree0

Thankfully all employees have to be transferred over to the newco, so jobs shouldn't be lost. If we got to sfl 3 then there will be cuts

Agree0 Disagree0

Contracts maybe transferred but still the stigma of being linked with the club!

Agree0 Disagree0

There's NO income available to pay these poor people never mind the players and the greedy b*st*rds who will jump on the bandwagon to scew as much as they can!

Anyway BDO who are replacing D&P will immediately tear up the agreement with Green and invite offers for the club as a whole or the assets.

It beggars belief that anyone could get these assets for 5.5 million.

There's been collusion betqween D&P, Whyte and Green and this will all come out in due course.

SDM was foolish and painted himself into a corner but Whyte and his friends are plain criminal and saw a chance to make a few quid for themselves.

I don't believe there will be a Newco either - it's extinction I'm afraid.

Agree0 Disagree0

The ibrox job losers will join the list of Rangers FC victims. Which stands at hundreds if not millions considering all tax payers.

Agree0 Disagree0

If Greene was to fail to transfer any non playing contracts then he would have no defence if the players chose to walk - sauce for the goose - Jaxie

Agree0 Disagree0

Spoken like a true football supporter. We want to win when everyone plays by the rules but its the people who have no clout who suffer. All those players (and agents) hide behind bits of paper they knew were illegal but raked in the cash at the expense of the loyal workforce and supporters who thought the garden was rosy. Not a time for crowing for CFC were very close to this (mind you, no mention of illegal practices, just a dumb board)

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers deid. Who would have thought it.
Newco Rangers will be the same club, though in the eyes of supporters. You can't sell that.

Agree0 Disagree0

I am an accountant and would like to comment on all the c**p being written about the liquidation:

Please everyone stop reading the tabloids!

There is no TUPE transfer of contracts in a liquidation. TUPE transfers only occur in a transfer of a going concern. By tomorrow morning, rangers will not be a going concern and will be in full liquidation. NO STAFF, be they admin or players will be obliged to go to the newco, this is a simple LEGAL FACT.

What to do?
You the fans must unite. Put your season ticket money together (about 20M) and BUY THE ASSETS YOURSELVES. You will then own the club and will not have to buy a small part of it back from Greene through a share issue down the road. Greene will cobble together a share issue that will value the club at 40M or 50M and make a handsome profit, or you can but it today for 6M and have 14M left over for running costs.
STOP arguing about SPL OR SFL3 and save the club first, or there will be no club left to save and all these debates will be irelevant.
WISE UP GERS FANS, act now or your club truly will be dead.

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 07:59:17
3 new bids expected today , not sure who though , rumour has it that Green is struggling to raise the £5.5m . Not sure what to believe in the press these days with the amount of doom and scaremongers out there having a pop at Scotland's number 1 institution .

Believable5 Unbelievable17

Is it like Top Of The Pops? "Number one instituition" what exactly does that mean OP?

Agree0 Disagree0

What instatution ther bis no more rangers as we know it stop living in a bubble

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers no more and green is another crook,it can and will get worse bears

Agree0 Disagree0

Green has paid 200k deposit and enough to cover D&P's bill todate. Further payment due to be made today which is for the creditors pot. If it doesn't arrive the writing is on the wall.

Next 48 hours will confirm one way or another whether Green is still for real.

Agree0 Disagree0

If Green is struggling to raise 5.5 million investment then how is he going to raise money to cover Rangers losses over the next 3 years. Does he really believe the average attendance over the next 3 years will be 46,000 ?

Agree0 Disagree0

He plans to sell top players

Agree0 Disagree0

30 million share issue or does he intend to walk with that in his pocket?

Agree0 Disagree0

13 Jun 2012 00:15:49
Hmrc rejected cva due to craig whyte being involved with a investor.
Green does not on 5.5 million.
Thursday no sale will happen

Believable18 Unbelievable21

Craig whyte is not involved with charles green

Agree0 Disagree0

Green has already paid D&P 5.5m. Craig Whyte has nothing to do with the deal ... do you see the news, read the paper .. perhaps you should start

Agree0 Disagree0

Some of these so called rangers fans who are big players in the business world should hang their heads in shame they say they care about the club but have done nothing to try and save it instead we had bill ng who's bid was never serious bill miller who was just a laughing stock and blue knights who are just as bad as whyte and sdm. i wish someone would come in and somehow offer hmrc and ticketus most of their money but this is a dream and as for charles green he can f*** off back to england he does not care about our club at all and all these so called investors none of them exist and i firmly believe whyte is still involved. its fair to say i am raging with whyte sdm blue knights and every other person who supposedly cares about our club well where is the money to prove it. you cannot make big profits out of scottish football but if you love a club as massive as rangers money should not matter. this has serious consequences for scottish football and we will see in the coming month's the liquidation of other clubs they will not survive without us and you lot at parkhead enjoy your laugh's just now but you will be watching celtic games in front of 10'000 fans at parkhead next season.

Agree0 Disagree0

So sad am gutted what happens to this great club now its been a nightmare last 5 months i just want rangers back were we belong

Agree0 Disagree0

Thats nonsense, takeover will def happen. Were in a horrid place but will come out stronger, obv gonna take a few years. positivity is the only thing allowing me to sleep lately..... rangers till i die!!!!!!!!

Agree0 Disagree0

If the players contracts don't transfer, then Green will be off. He needs the contracts to transfer in order to use the transfer fees to recoup his money. Murray used a Bank of Scotland loan, Whyte used Ticketus now Green is using players contracts to buy Rangers. And still they get away with it.

Agree0 Disagree0

There is a big question mark over the sale to Green and Co because I've read many blogs/rumour clips etc hinting that Green's consortium may not put up the funds required to complete the purchase. They were only interested in buying into a CVA - NEWCO has no appeal to them as an investment.

Agree0 Disagree0

So a debt free club the size of rangers with european football in three years has no appeal really?...mark.

Agree0 Disagree0

So a debt free club the size of rangers with european football in three years has no appeal really?...mark.
----------------------------------------

Hello Mark,

Rangers average attendance will shrink without European incentives and that has financial consequences. There are more sanctions to come which may prevent Rangers from competing with Celtic for trophies for 3 years, this also will affect attendances with more financial consequences.

Bank rolling these losses does not appeal when the prize at the end of 3 years is break even. The risk outweighs the reward, an unaffordable team couldn't get to the CL group stages on a regular basis, what chance do you think an affordable team has ?

46,000 fans are not going to watch Rangers play for nothing for 3 years.

Agree0 Disagree0

I thought the CVA was rejected because Green was offering HRMC and others 9p in the pound.

Would u except that?

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent