Rangers Rumours Archive May 29 2012

29 May 2012 22:39:00
Dont know if it is me or the wine but after today there may be a wee chink of light at the end of this tunnel, CVA proposal finally issued, now up to ticketus and HMRC to vote and result by 14th June, SFA embargo illegal and ice cream all melted. Just hope after one step forward today its not two steps back tomorrow

JG

Trouble is you now have Fifa on your case. Expect SFA to impose tougher sanctions or risk the fury of Fifa. Look what happened to Sion for going through the civil courts.

Green is going to pay �5 million for assets previously valued at �115 million? Sounds a bit fishy to me. I know they wont be sold for that but I'd be very surprised if �5 million was all they would fetch on the open market.

R you for real?? The SFA were doing you a favour. All yaz had to do was sit the year out with out signing anyone. But talk about shooting yourself in the foot now UFEA and FIFA want you punish more for going to court. I've my fridge full of ice-cream for us in euros and rangers going bust. ;) come on you's bhoys in Green. Bigirishmac

Trust me, that ice cream is still sitting nicely in the fridge, after today it will be getting enjoyed shortly. Enjoy your false dawn, makes it all the sweeter for the rest of us when the inevitable happens.

Great victory today.

Back to the disciplinary panel again to see what they can legally impose on RFC rather than their weak light touch punishment invented specifically for RFC.

I suspect a victory which will turn out to be a poisoned chalice.

Add to that the fact that the whole profile of your mess has been raised with world footballs governing bodies.

I think that the SFA will ban Rangers from the Scottish Cup and hope that that will keep UEFA/FIFA off their backs - what do other Scottish football fans expect,' justice' you jest this is Scotland for goodness sake.

After everything dont you see the patern.....when you have good news then the next you have really bad news and yet yous com on and try and rub it in other fans faces, seem you will never learn, which it seems that is what has your club has left you with....heavy penalties coming your way with the big ones watching.
the transfer banned could have helped yous by saving money and offering young talent around the world game time but now you in alot of mess...but go ahead and gloat for your short mindedness

Rangers could exit administration on 12th July..........................and you wonder why it's not just the Bhoys, but everyone else hates everything that you 'Bears' stand for

29 May 2012 21:04:03
Green says he will make money if he succeds, i dont have any problem with that if he can get us out of this hole. {Ed039's Note - What money is there to be made? If there is serious investment out there then where does the return come from in Scottish football?)

How can he make money no euro football 4 3 years gutted bear

Green's got a booklet out there to attract gullible money people. He's a fly by night and he'll walk as soon as he gets enough of their money to satisfy his needs.

Green is really only putting up �200k and providing a loan for �8.5m with interest and he will own everything and how can d&f fees be �5.5m

Save the club stabilise it then sell on to grateful fans in share issue. just a mirror image of what happened on the other side of the city. A proper share issue not a rights issue

It never fails to amuse me how people on this site cant bring themselves to write the word Celtic - how childish - its the same with some Celtic fans cant say Rangers. It really makes me think how good an independent Scotland would be without this football (but its not football, is it) nonsense its bigots!

Wee Fergus did it by making THEM sustainable. Why not someone else being sensible with the gers?

Ed 39, think green is the front man for the consortium, if you watch his interview he says he has earned more money for less work previously. he is obviously on a fee to get us out of administration and will not be staying around when the consortium take over. Thats where he will make his money and i have no problem if he pulls it off

JG

Ed for �5.5 m he gets Ibrox, MP and everything else. He could get a fair sum for Ibrox just for highway foundations.

29 May 2012 20:05:02
Would it not be a solution to this transfer embargo to allow us to sign the same amount of first team squad that leave this summer,we could agree a sum that we would be allowed to spend,this would make both sides feel as though they had won some sort of victory,or is this too simple?

Probably. But that's another sanction that the SFA isn't allowed to hand out. That judgement has helped nobody.

That isn't a punishment, thats called living within your means! An alien prospect to Rangers fans I know but its what every other club in scotland has done for years!

I honestly laughed so hard I nearly choked on my coffee.

Mac {Ed039's Note - Every club, really? Nobody else has debts, I know the level of debt is a different thing altogether but Scottish clubs have been consistently living outside their means for a long time)

How would that be a solution? If you hadn't broke the rules regarding player payments etc you wouldn't have a transfer embargo. Take your punishment and stop moaning

No, because it's not in the rules remember, can't make up rules as you go along now can you

Why not just allow u18s and free transfers. That way no transfer fees are involved.

BECAUSE ITS A PUNISHMENT THAT NOT ALLOWED,,WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN ALL DAY

Good idea. The total spend to include transfer fees and wages could be set at �5(FIVE POUNDS) ie more than some of the current lot are worth.

Mate. as a Celtic fan I have been saying that since day one. f, say McGregor leaves, sign a goalie! and so on. I always felt a total ban was harsh in the extreme, but that Rangers should be punished! Concern though is that with court involvement FIFA get involved, and that can only be bad news.

OP i had thought along those lines as well as an acceptable compromise for the SFA to save some face, but if a transfer embargo is not legal then a half baked embargo is not legal as well

JG

And if the SFA hadn't broke their rules we wouldn't have a transfer embargo :) We shouldn't break rules but they can ?

ED, you mean along time since SDM & SOUNESS came along, resulting in the rest of the SPL directors spending way over their limit to try and keep up? {Ed039's Note - We all know who started it mate, did it mean everyone else had to follow suit? SDM has been taking a grilling so why does nobody else, it has to go both ways, although before you remind me, I have acknowledged that the debts are on a different level)

A sum of money to spend,try saying to creditors you want to spend money when your club offered them 9p in every �

"Ed039's Note - Every club, really? Nobody else has debts, I know the level of debt is a different thing altogether but Scottish clubs have been consistently living outside their means for a long time"

Ed I dont think many Scottish clubs have a positive net spend averaged over recent years. They may be operating at debt levels higher than they should be but I'm struggling to think of a club who has spent more than they have brought in which was my point. There is a big difference between operating at the limit of your financial capabilities and operating far beyond what you can realistically sustain like Rangers have.

Do you agree with the OP that this would be a suitable punishment?

In my opinion the sooner the FFP rules are brought in and rigourously enforced the sooner footballs ridiculous financial side can be brought back into this universe.

Mac {Ed039's Note - I dont have all the answers as to what is fair and what is not because its such a complex situation, but clubs have been consistently spending more than they bring in, but yes I for one agree with you, the sooner the FFP rules are brought in the better for football not just in this country but globally as there is some major bubbles ready to burst)

How about doing the honourable thing and agree to pay back a pound for every pound that's owed that way I'm sure not only the football authorities but people in general would see that as a club you accept your responsibility as a family club and are administering your own punishment rather than blaming everyone else and expecting punishment that you think acceptable.

The transfer embargo was imposed for non payment of Tax (Craig Whyte) and failure to pay other clubs monies owed, nothing to do with so called player payments etc.

I know what you mean Ed, the top clubs like Barca/Real/Man U have eyewatering debts.

The way I see it when the FFP regs come in the players will be just as talented but the money involved in buying/paying them will come down, hopefully leading to decreases in ticket prices. Hopefully this in turn will lead to increased gates and a more sustainable long term future for the game.

Mac

Ed039 and Mac. I agree with you about the Financial Fair Play rules but ways of circumventing them are already being discussed by the top clubs and it will probably end up only adversely affecting the smaller teams in the major leagues who don't have the same pulling power. For the big guns it will be business as usual and the gap between the have's and the have not's will widen instead of shrinking because of it. Man City, for example, are apparently considering renaming their stadium every few years which will allow them to 'legally' pump hundreds of millions into the club each time which would officially be classed as generated revenue. This would be used to offset the players wages and allow them to continue signing the best players available to them. And that is only one example of a 'legitimate' way around the FFP guidelines that is doing the rounds. I'm sure plenty more equally inventive 'legal' methods will be adopted to try and gain an unfair advantage over the other teams in the leagues around Europe (a bit like Murray with the EBT's).

Mac. It might be pedantic in your eyes because the EBT's aren't being considered within the following but Rangers' debt was proven by Lloyds to be serviceable (�70m down to �14m in three years). It wasn't until Whyte took over and failed to actually pay anyone that, like Motherwell, Dundee, Airdrie, etc, before us (and if the 'Bunnet' hadn't ridden to the rescue at the last minute in 94 Celtic would have found themselves in the same boat) we find ourselves in administration. Celtic's debt is in the teens of millions - what happens if Desmond walks and you have a few lean years? Your debt is serviceable now just as Rangers' was last year.

Incidentally, I totally agree with you that the financial side of the game is ridiculous and no player for me is worth 30k a week let alone the 300k a week some of them are on. The problem is getting something agreed to in terms of limiting the spending that cannot be creatively worked around.

As for the original post: I thought, given the crimes, that the embargo was a relatively light punishment and would not have contested it. Common sense never seems to prevail in football.

Brian

Ed you maybe have acknowledged that the debts are on a different level but you haven't acknowledged the way the money was spent was wrong ie double contracts �5 for every �10 and all that !! Forcing the wage levels up across the whole of Scottish football ! {Ed039's Note - I think that the majority of players no longer play for the love of the game and more for significant financial gain and that has forced football on a whole to spend more, I have never shied away from the wrong doings of rangers and never will)

Brian,

I would think that if Desmond was to walk away from Celtic that the board would do the sensible thing and sell off some of the better players.

If I remember correctly Celtic's debt is in the region of �17-19 milion(?) so the value of the current squad would comfortably cover that.

The most galling thing about the Rangers situation is that they were made aware in 2010 that HMRC were chasing them for the EBT money but instead of selling players and tightening the budget in an attempt to prepare for it they signed Jelavic for �4 million. That says it all about the mentality of the custodians of the club. They would rather face extinction than put a weakened team on the park to face Celtic.

Yes Celtic were in a similar situation but to use them as an example is to ignore the fact that they have been an exceptionally well run club since 1994.
Motherwell now seem to run quite a tight ship as well although I must admit I know nothing about their finances.
Dundee was a train wreck right enough. Canniggia and Ravanelli at a provincial Scottish team?

As for the methods to circumvent the FFP regulations I am saddened but not surprised that they are appearing. The governing bodies are going to have to play a blinder to make it work.

Mac

Mac,

You make some really good points. On the Celtic page I have stated on numerous occasions that Rangers need a Peter Lawell type figure at the helm (not that I agree with everything he says or does per se) and that the Celtic model since 94 is the way forward for the club (as galling as that would be for the diehards to accept). However, the point is Celtic were facing the same situation and had a narrow escape otherwise a CVA would have been the likely route there too. Also Celtic used EBT's for a period of time but those in charge were smart enough to realise the potential risks outweighed the benefits, paid up and stopped using them - otherwise we would not be the only club in Scotland being chased by the Taxman just now. This point is not an attempt to justify EBT's or Rangers continued use of them, far from it. I wish our board had applied the same common sense approach that they were too risky and would come back to bite them one day as yours appears to have done. It is raised merely to highlight that we were not the only club looking at ways to gain an unfair advantage over the others in the league - we were just stupid about it and continued on regardless. Unfortunately financial mismanagement and underhandedness is rife in football (particularly at the top end of the major leagues in Europe) and the FFP will not change that as much as I would like it to. In essence we are reliant on two of the most corrupt and self serving governing bodies in the world to provide and police a more level playing field within the game. They will have to play a blinder right enough but I just can't see it working. The gap will just widen as I said. For me it would be better to have a handicap system, or similar, in place (a bit like horse racing) whereby if you win the league one season then you start the next one on minus points, finish second etc then slightly less minus points and the newly promoted teams start on zero - that would give us a fair, highly competitive and interesting league irrespective of any financial chicanery whereby any team could win the league if they put a good run together. That might bring supporters back through the door but I doubt anyone in power would go for it, as they would see it as receiving a punishment for winning something and a limitation on their power. Sorry, just thinking out loud, lol.

Brian

Brian,

You are probably right about FIFA and UEFA not being capable of changing the game but I am heartened by the fact that they are even looking at ways to improve it. I hope you are wrong about the gap widening but I cant fault your logic.

That is an interesting idea about starting the season on minus points relative to how high you finished in the previous season. I really like the American draft system where the team who finish bottom get the first pick. Of course it could never be implemented here but it shows some initiative in making the game more competetive.

As to Celtic's use of the EBT scheme I am led to believe that it was used to provide part of Juninho's 'golden handshake' payout when he left and not to pay wages but I don't know for sure. It was very lucky for Celtic that they had Quinn on the board, a director at the bank of England who decided that the EBT's were too risky.

One thing I think would benefit the Scottish game enormously would be play offs. When there is something to play for the fans do turn out in force. A perfect example of this was the 15,000 crowd at Easter road for the relegation decider with Dunfermline.

Mac

29 May 2012 19:48:07
Rangers bidder Charles Green has offered a £8.5m loan to buy the crisis-hit club dependent on them staying in the Scottish Premier League (SPL).

The administrators Duff and Phelps said that the proposed company voluntary arrangement (CVA) could result in £4.9m being made available to pay unsecured creditors.

According to the report released on Tuesday, administrators claim the alternative newco route for Rangers would result in creditors receiving around £950,000.

Mr Green�s Sevco consortium has agreed to buy Craig Whyte�s 85% stake in the club for £1, the only part of the proposed deal that does not involve the group getting repaid. The £8.5m loan to cover administration costs of around £3m, as well as all creditors, and will be repaid by the club with interest by 2020.

The deal is secured against all of the club�s assets, including Ibrox stadium and Murray Park, and is dependent on Rangers staying in the SPL and continuing their membership of the Scottish FA. If the club did not have to cover any further HMRC liabilities by winning the first tier tribunal appeal, this offer by Sevco represents around 9p in the £1 for unsecured creditors.

Administrators also state that should the CVA fail, on July 23, Mr Green is "contractually obliged" to purchase the club�s assets for a newco for £5.5m. Whether this cash is also in the form of a loan is unclear and details of this proposal are "confidential".

According to the report, the CVA offer would be supplemented by outstanding transfer fees owed to the club, as well as any money raised from the £25m court action Duff and Phelps have raised against Collyer Bristow and owner Mr Whyte�s Rangers FC Group.

The administrators state that creditors will not be paid under the CVA until both this action and the "big" tax case are known.

Paul Clark, joint administrator, said: "This proposal offers the best return for all stakeholders given the position the club is in. If approved by the creditors, the CVA proposal will rescue the club and finally enable the company to exit administration."

Shortfall

What cash Mr Whyte could claim as a result of his floating charge over the club is still unclear as administrators have reported the amount he could claim for as a secured creditor is "to be confirmed".

However, a footnote in the report adds: "The joint administrators understand that, in respect of this security: group has confirmed that no debt is secured and group has agreed to release the security concurrently with the approval of this (CVA) proposal."

HM Revenue and Customs are owed more than £18m in unpaid VAT and PAYE dating from Mr Whyte�s takeover of the club last May. It is owed a further £3m at least in respect of the 'wee' tax case, for the use of the discounted options scheme to pay players Tore Andre Flo and Ronald De Boer from 2000 to 2003.

The club is also facing a tax bill of up to £75m from a first tier tribunal case over the tax avoidance employee benefit trust (EBT) scheme Sir David Murray used to pay players and staff from 2001 to 2010. Duff and Phelps noted in the report that no payment towards the CVA would be made until the big tax case result was known, and the legal battle with Mr Whyte and Collyer Bristow - due to recall at the High Court in London in Ocotber - are concluded.

Administrators list their fees as £3m for a CVA, but including legal fees and other costs would total £5.5m, compared to the estimated £3.6m trading shortfall of the club by June 6. If the newco route is taken, the overall costs for the insolvency move would rise to an estimated £6.2m.

Former directors Alastair Johnston, Ali Russell and Gordon Smith have all submitted claims as creditors, with the amounts owed still to be confirmed by administrators, according to the report. Former player Nikica Jelavic and current director Dave King are also listed as creditors owed an unconfirmed amount by the 140-year-old club.

Ex-director Phil Betts, who was part of Mr Whyte�s takeover group last May, received a £234,000 payment from money held by Collyer Bristow in relation to Rangers, according to the report by Duff and Phelps. This is being pursued by the administrators now.

Last August Regenesis Holdings Limited "appears to have received a payment of £250,000" from the funds. This company is linked to Mr Whyte�s business associated the Earley brothers, who are also involved in Banstead Athletic amateur football club in Surrey.

As the CVA details were released, Mr Green released a statement on the Rangers website. He said: "Today is an extremely important milestone for Rangers to begin the journey back to where the club belongs - as a leading sporting institution that can hold its head high both on the field and off it.

"I have great sympathy with creditors, particularly small local businesses in the community around Ibrox, who have suffered in the lead up to administration. However, I fervently hope that creditors will form the view that the best interests of everyone will be served by Rangers continuing as the successful club it is and recovering as a business in the forthcoming seasons. The consortium I am leading can only do so much to heal the wounds of the past, but we can do something about the future and that is where our main focus must lie. I hope creditors will approve this proposal and we can begin the task of rebuilding Rangers in earnest."

Thanks a very easy read. To date Green does not have the readies, what happens if he can't raise the funds?

This is a total farce. Accept the CVA or I'll make sure that their is less available in the pot. Is this even legal. In the event of liquidation, surely the administrators have to sell the assets at the best price.
Also, there is the unknown pot, depending on what additional money they get in from law suits etc. Not to mention that the share may go down depending on the result of the BTC.
I thought the BKs were trying to get the club on the cheap, but the Green Knights seem to be even worse. They want all the money back with interest, not just a return on investment.
Don't know what you rangers fans think, but I think the whole thing stinks.
Al {Ed039's Note - Something not quite right but we all have the right to be sceptical after the last year or so ........... well last decade in fact)

So after all the crap for past few months we end up with a conditional preferred bidder which D&P always said was unacceptable.

Does this mean the original money green was supposed to be paying is actually a loan and prob good interest rate for him. Even Whyte (through ticketus) paid bank off �18m.

29 May 2012 18:49:00
3.) Explain how backwards?
SFA hit Rangers with the maximum fine, so cant hit them for more money, kick Rangers out of the Scottish Cup for x amount of years, if that happen's why didnt the SFA do that at the start.

Das Shadow

the reason the SFA didnt boot us out the Scottish cup is quite simply MONEY rangers not participating in the SC would affect gate receipts sponsorship and probably tv revenue every punishment they have come up with is geared to hurt Rangers (and rightly so) but also to insure that any sanctions have no financial effect on any other team or competition.

Lochaber Bear

I was responding to a reply that someone made to my first post, who made out it was a backward step with today's result. So i ask why it was backwards.

Das Shadow

Two Ranger's gate monies till they get knocked out might pay peanuts to two clubs but what do the others lose by your not being involved. Its only in the later stages that gates are pooled. (Or they used to be.)

Good comments. Being out of the Scottish Cup would not be such a bad thing. Less games, less chance of injuries and allow you to concentrate on the league (whichever one it is)

29 may 2012 17:15:11
ed, with the court of session ruling that the sfa didn't have valid grounds to impose the transfer embargo, do you think this has opened up a can of worms?

is there a major backlash from fifa?uefa awaiting?

ttg {ed039's note - check this link regarding fifa http://goo.gl/wd0cc )

Surely they have no case as the SFA gave a punishment that wasnt within the guidelines though? Rangers being punished for the SFA's incompetance? {Ed039's Note - Who knows mate, that is the way I see it but there are rules and regulations between member associations and I think FIFA can punish the SFA perhaps not Rangers but then in turn the SFA will look to pass some sort of punishment on)

Yes, you have now p**sed off FIFA... Top marks for effort quote "Prior to the court's decision, the world governing body Fifa said: "Fifa will ask the member association (SFA) to take action so that the club withdraws its request from the ordinary courts.

"Fifa will closely monitor the situation so that the issue is resolved as fast as possible."

Your link was mingin mate. Check it and correct it

Could not open the link ed {Ed039's Note - I don't know what's wrong with it guys it worked earlier, it's stv football website)

Yes fifa do state that the sfa should take the necessary action to make sure they aint taken to court.But they did not because the appropriate action would have been to drop the transfer embargo but they did not lol.You all wanted rangers to die but guess what the whole of scottish football is about to die.

Appeal should have gone to the CAS not the scottish courts. Serious problem for FIFA.

You're probably right re the can of worms. Heavier sanctions will follow as FIFA will be watching now, and the club will become less attractive investment - perhaps this was the plan all along? BTWm here is a link to the stv news on FIFA:

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/rangers/103811-fifa-warn-scottish-fa-they-must-punish-rangers-for-using-law-courts/

Didn't Terry Butcher, Chris Woods and Duncan Ferguson end up with criminal records for things that happened on the football pitch?
Was it ok for football to use external courts then but not now?

"Didn't Terry Butcher, Chris Woods and Duncan Ferguson end up with criminal records for things that happened on the football pitch?
Was it ok for football to use external courts then but not now?"

Neither FIFA or the CAS deal with assault charges mate, only sporting matters.

29 May 2012 17:06:02
After the court of session ruling this afternoon expect the
Sfa to hit us with no Scottish cup next season it's the easy
way out

No Scottish cup, ban on rangers players for Scotland, both for 1 year, 100 k fine for each of the 5 charges, payable over 2 years, no 'prize money' (if any) for 3 years - all monies to be ring fenced for future incidents by any other team ( which there will be)

bil72

Oh, I think that it will be much more than that - then again this is Scotland.

Totally agree SFA will back done and take easy option RST wanted to pull out of cup anyway

Yes you are quite right after being reprimanded by FIFA for cheating the only option for the disgraced SFA will to be to ban us from Scottish Cup they could obviously ban us from league but that would be taking money out their pockets not lining them and that would just not be good at all for Mr Corrupt cricket

Rebuilding our squad for the future or playing in the Scottish cup! Tough choice!
WATP

29 May 2012 16:21:49
Judge sends back decision to ban transfers to Tribunal they will need to reconsider their decision as they had no right to impose a ban under the rules. They can of course now consider kicking us out all together! that may happen with UEFA and FIFA looking on because we have breached their rules by raising an action.

Could somebody clear this up for me.

Who actually took this to court, I was under the impression it was the RFF, so am not sure if FIFA/UEFA could punish Rangers the club for taking the matter to court. BB

So now we get punished for standing up for ourselfs come on surely we should be made to pay outstanding transfers then we can buy players cooperboy

Yes, D&P pull a master stroke, by contesting a locally imposed sancation which gets thrown out only to have the full wieght of UEFA and FIFFA impose the worst of all suspension when you cant paly, sell, buy or trade players, yes, brilliant play

Suicidal decision by D&P as they have forced the authorities to take even harsher action. Remember Sion? The Swiss FA were eventually forced by FIFA to take draconian action against them which involved a 38 point deduction! I get the impression D7P are forcing the authorities to pull the plug on their behalf! Silly silly move i'm afraid.

Honestly don't think FIFA & UEFA give a toss about anything happening inside Scottish Football.
Have we actually seen any statements where they are ready to pounce if RFC case falls in their favour?

bil72 {Ed039's Note - http://goo.gl/wD0Cc )

This could lead to Scotland and all other Scottish clubs getting kicked out of all international and club competitions by UEFA and FIFA. If the SFA do not impose an even harsher sanction than a signing embargo then Scottish football is finished - it will look to the world and his Aunty that Rangers attitude is 'if you don't play things our way then no one will play'!

The QC was present to state the defence of the club, as he was instructed to do by Duff and Phelps.

It could yet prove to be the biggest case of "becareful what you wish for"!

Regarding Sion....completely different.

Sion were given a transfer embargo which they ignored and then signed 6 players, whilst under that embargo. Again...completely different scenario

It is my understanding that the RFFF money was used by the administrators to pay the legal cost on behalf of Rangers - a bit ironic as this may sink us beyond sight!

Surely it must be taken into consideration, that Rangers had no need to take this to court if the SFA had done their job properly and under their own rules??

SFA get rid of Rangers now before they cause anymore harm to our beautiful game that we love and cherish. I have supported my team for 24 years and we have won nothing. Glory at any cost or we will destroy the lot of you. Get rid of them NOW!!!!!!! Or the game is finished in this country with no return.

Rangers will be kicked out of football . It is what everyone in Scotland wants. I am a rangers man and I have been for 60 years but I am sick and tired of every one of the coffee shop laywers in this country sticking the boot into the Club, the people that created this mess should be punished, not the club. Rangers will always be the greatest Club that Scotland has ever had and will always remain so.

29 May 2012 16:18:39
Read in the press that if CVA not
accepted then a deal is in place
to buy Ibrox and the training ground (refuse to
for £5.5m to Green & Co.
If that is correct then clearly it is
better for creditors to accept
CVA, more money back.
Therefore if this is correct all the
tic liquidation and tax experts are
wrong, what a surprise.
My view is that the CVA will be accepted

The CVA requires 50% of all 273 creditors to agree plus 75% of the debt to agree.
If the CVA isn't accepted, Green's offer for the assets can be improved upon by anyone who wants to bid higher.
Greens booklet says the assets r worth �113m so I guess others could beat �5.5m easy.
The players alone are worth more than Green's CVA offer which I find remarkable, why the creditors would not liquidate and sell the assets against such a small CVA is baffling.

Its either get something or get nothing. The smaller companies will take what they can, they need it. It hinges on HMRC I guess, could go either way. Nice to see duff and duffer get over �3million for their "hard" work......complete farce from start to finish

Ibrox and Murray Park should be sold to pay creditors before any warchest for players is even thought about!!!!!!! {Ed039's Note - But who will pay for assets just to own them? CVA serves the same purpose, if it's not accepted then this is what will happen through liquidation process)

29 May 2012 16:19:13
Judge Lord Glennie has ruled that a transfer embargo imposed on #Rangers by the SFA was unlawful,following a hearing at the Court of Session @BBCLiamMcLeod

29 May 2012 16:31:48
Transfer ban lifted....

A judge has ruled that the Scottish Football Association (SFA) acted beyond its powers in imposing a year-long transfer ban on Rangers FC.

The ban was given, along with a fine of £160,000, after the club was charged with bringing the game into disrepute.

Rangers challenged the ban at the Court of Session in Edinburgh, on the grounds it was not one of the sanctions listed in the SFA's own regulations.

Judge Lord Glennie agreed and said the ban should be lifted. {Ed014's Note - The embargo is NOT lifted.It has been sent back to the SFA tribunal for another hearing.

Ed, please don't you start, the embargo is lifted and the case referred back to tribunal to make a ruling within their powers to do so, which will mean a higher fine. {Ed039's Note - Was �160,000 not the highest fine within their remit and thats where that figure came from?)

Eh, no, the case was won. You may remember Sion won there case as well, now UEFA will become involved just like in the Sion case.

In meantime, cannot sign players whilst in administration. So no sneaking new signings in Bears.

Won't take SFA too long to rule on new punishment I would think.

The only 2 punishments open are expel rangers or suspend them uafa will force the sfa to apply one of them sounds like yous shot yourself in the foot again and as far as a newco is concerned you cannot transfer a share from one club to another if your suspended

"Judge Lord Glennie agreed and said the ban should be lifted. {Ed014's Note - The embargo is NOT lifted.It has been sent back to the SFA tribunal for another hearing."
--

Didn't say it is, said it should be. As it was unlawful. {Ed039's Note - You can see where there might have been some confusion)

It has to be an advantage in getting the embargo lifted though no doubt other measures will be applied by the SFA As long as we are competative then we will continue to keep the fans behind us..Clearly Duff and Phelps made the right call in lodging the appeal - some might say not before time but give them some credit. Up the Teddies

Keep explaining things ED the penny will drop sooner or later - or perhaps not!

Rangers deliberately withheld �13m last season (this year) in social taxes, national insurance and Paye, taken from employees earnings. These funds were used to deliver second place in the SPL and collect second place prize money. Rangers should have been dropped to last in the SPL and relegated. They had a �13m cash advantage over all other SPL clubs whom were paying their taxes and NI.
In addition rangers fielded a squad last season they could not afford. Paying only 25% salaries to again give them advantage over all other SPL teams.

29 May 2012 15:33:55
let me get this right, d&p tried to sign cousan, d&p applied to uefa to grant rangers entry next year, d&p said a cva was almost certain when they were appointed, d&p have had 4 final deadlines for bidders, d&p have applied for a cva but cant tell creditors how much they will get, oh and i forgot d&p have just handed in a 3 million bill for all there hard work!! am i missing something here?...

Yes, charged �300k alone in fees so far for not finding a buyer! Dread to think how much they will have charged by the time they do find one!

Yes you are missing a small point Green hasn't produced the money

29 May 2012 16:11:13
Rangers win high court appeal, referred back to sfa appeal tribunal.

On the surface this appears to be great news...but now just watch what FIFA and UEFA do to us!

Welcome good news.

How do you think they've won. I reckon they've shot themselves in the foot. FIFA/UEFA will get involved now. HA HA

This is not good....did SFA not say the appropriate sanction was expulsion? What have we done!?

Wait for the FIFA hammer to fall on us. It is coming. The have rules in place, look what happened to Sion.The SFA could well expell us now so the transfer embargo may not have been so severe!

So the SFA/SPL have only one option to go with what is actually showing in black and white on their rule book.....Suspension, Expultion from the SC and termination of membership?
They have already fined the club.
As the commitee advised this was nearly as serious as match fixing and so the punishment should match the crime.

What will FIFA and UEFA do to us? The court is passing it back for appeal. No idea what you are on about. Different if the court overturned it and the SFA rule book did allow it. All the court is doing is upholding the law. In this case in regard to the organisations own rules that all of it's member clubs are signatories to. If they got away with this they could basically just make up sanctions for any member club. This was a good decision.

I don't know if this is true or not, but i was told that the action was raised by Duff n Phelps not Rangers. As the action was deemed as unlawful then it clearly impeded Duff n Phelps from doing ther job. Personally i dont know (or claim to know) what the ruling is, just passing on what i was told.

To reply above, and others Ive read through the threads re RFF not Rangers appealing, figure this. Rangers found guilty by SFA. Rangers punished. You numbnuts think a third party appealed?? Something like I get done for assault, Alan Sugar hears about it in the London Evening Times and decides thats not right, I'll appeal it!! Duff and P"�s appeal as interim controllers of Rangers, i.e. as Rangers. RFF might finance the appeal, don't know or care if they did, but they certainly can't appeal a punishment not handed to them. Duff and Phelps and Rangers fans. One is dumber and one is dumber, just struggling to decide which is which!

29 May 2012 15:17:43
No actual pence in the pound offer made by D&P.... Can anyone indicate why this normal practiced had not been formalised.

Think it means they don't want the CVA accepted, and plan for a newco.

Sorry Hector fans but this does not read well.

The are basically offering a scale of potential dividends to creditors based upon different assumptions, ie winning �25m against Collyer Bristow. It's down to the creditors now to vote on whether they believe the best and worst scenarios in terms of potential dividends are acceptable.

Fine for big companies, but clear as mud for small/medium size creditors who don't have any experience of this type of process.

They cannot offer a figure because the figure is unknown, both the tax liability and the court cases against Collyer Bristow. Ridiculous that tax case has taken so long

I agree looks like a newco to me.

Oh but they do want the CVA. ANd I reckon they'll get it.

The reason it has not been offered is the same reason that the accounts weren't submitted and every other thing that happens to allow Glasgow Rangers to survive without being a newco, they do NOT want Rangers to survive, Whytes agenda from the start was Liquidation so he could fill his pockets. Each and every time there is light at the end of the tunnel from prospective buyers n stuff in steps Duff n Phelps to ruin it (orchestrated probably by Whyte) its as if they are pushing the SPL into banning them by not giving them what is required to have league status. I'm no expert but how hard is it to supply audited accounts, they have been through all the books so why cant they submit them ? Answer: because they are trying to piss everyone off to push closer to just being liquidated and then a newco.

They cannot offer a figure because the figure is unknown, both the tax liability and the court cases against Collyer Bristow. Ridiculous that tax case has taken so long

Eh?

how can they offer pence in the pound when...

they dont know result of the btc

they dont know exactly how much will be in creditors pot as the majority will come from the proceeds of litigation.

what we do know is that regarldess of outcome more is available through a CVA than any other outcome as cost of asset sale is allready agreed to be lowered in the event of CVL, by some 3m.

and we also know that in all scenarios the pot will contain the proceeds of the sale of assets, the monies due into club and the proceeds of litigation.

losing the btc will only dilute what creditors recieve.

the CVA realistically gives creditors the best possible return and theres every reason to be confidant it will be agreed.

29 May 2012 14:33:35
can someone tell me what the 25 million is all about />>???? ... As the High Court Proceedings are continuing, the Joint Administrators do not wish to
potentially prejudice those actions by revealing their details in this Proposal. However, the
Joint Administrators can confirm that the value of the Claim and Fund Proceedings could be
in excess of £25,000,000.

Sell some players, and this will bring in some dosh for the cash pool.

Im answering my own post lol... looks like if we win the 25million (still i dont know what thats for lol), it will be added to the cva pot of 8.3 million
also So ignoring the BTC there is �4.9m in the pot after D&P have been paid. That's to pay around �55m worth of creditors, so approx 9p in the �...jsm

Claim against Collyer Bristow

�25m speculative claim less costs they mean.

Bulk of the claim is the �15m working capital injection Whyte was supposed to put into RFC that he detailed in his bid offer to MIH over and above the �18m to pay Lloyds off. The remaining �10m is compensation for CW/Collyer Bristow allegedly "duping" everyone.

D&P already on record as to how they calculated the Collyer Bristow �25m. What are they talking about. What they mean is it's a pie in the sky number that they can't support but hey it looks good to beef up the CVA proposal!

Dunno but everything points to numbers in this region - CW's "floating charge", Ticketus' money.

They are suing Collyer & Bristow for �25million. Take it that's where the get the �25million plus figure.

29 May 2012 10:42:55
just got a tex from my brother whos in newyork that rangers was used as a money laundrin pit its been on the sports channel over ther that this is why rangers dont want to hand over the paper work to the sfa couse then its in the hands of the athorities reckon murray was up to his neck in it ,this could be bigger than whats going on at the momment and thats why big bill ran a mile

'sniff sniff sniff'...I smell Craig Whyte.

TTG

If something like this is being branded about the sports channels surely there must be some reference to it on the internet. That's a huge allegation to be made by tv networks

What sports channel ?

An old friend of mine told me about this about 8 years ago, he worked for Rangers at the time. There is also the phone hacking which will come out within the next 2 weeks. Rough times ahead Bears.

Strange that np other media picked it up.

Money laundering pit for who? the Mafia,the Triads, maybe even the Vatican, get real timmy.

Very serious allegation if true - can the poster not offer the source at least (name of the TV company)?

This is a mixture of two stories picked up by the BBC documentary - dual contracts and MIH borrowing from bank to inject into RFC and then RFC paying the bank back. Neither illegal nor money laundering. Dual contracts a breach of SFA rules both contracts not lodged with relevant authority and potentially a breach of tax rules if not run in accordance with tax rules.

Miller withdrew when he saw size of working capital required to run club and rebuild team (�30m) versus reduced future revenue (no Europe).

So nothing we hadn't already heard, just the yanks media mixing two stories together and trying to link to Miller story.

Have heard this rumour about Murray and King being involved in money laundering but find it hard to believe it's been reported in America before any arrests have been made.

So for me the money laundering accusation is only a rumour for the time being. BB

America sports fox transworld soccer news from fox channel 2 is gona send it to me i will put it up and give ya the addr

If Murray was laundering cash (for who exactly?), you'd have heard about it long before now - also, if he was laundering cash, why did he need to borrow so much money from Bank of Scotland? Surely he'd be trying to dispose of the laundered cash first, no? Perhaps the original poster doesn't really understand what money laundering is?

Weird, nothing on the sports channel over here about, live in Toronto but get all the American sports channels. although i do agree Murray is up to his neck in it

das shadow

The op is merely reporting a rumour. Looks like he will back that up with the original source. This rumour seems to have some legs. As for 'get real Timmy' where have we heard that before ?

I'm sure there are all sorts of dodgy goings on but not money laundering. Not as defined in law anyway, where the proceeds of crime are distributed into the financial system.

So who's phones were hacked? This rumour been around for a while now.

It's hard to get large sums out of s. Africa. I was asked in a hotel to take a painting out of Durban once. Not saying its got something to do with king ! Not at all. No definitely not.

Same rumour been on other forums for past couple of days.

Nothing would surprise me anymore - including money laundering; I heard someone say that it another Glasgow teams owner who's phone got hacked which allowed bids for players to be bettered by another Glasgow club. {Ed014's Note - If there was any proof of that surely a few doors would be getting knocked on by the police.

So who were these players that the Glasgow clubs were going for?

I did consider that ED014 but, i believe that, they would only knock on doors if the individual who's phone was hacked registered a complaint. {Ed014's Note - I'm still not convinced that there is any truth in it.

Although I find it very hard to believe that there has been any form of money laundering going on involving Rangers, to be honest with the revelations that have been surfacing over the past few weeks nothing would now surprise me.
To the poster above, can you think of an easier way to launder money than getting a large bank loan then paying it back with dirty money?
Personally I think if Fox has put out this story it would be a case of “altering fact and muddying the waters to suit the story” something the media is very good at..

I have been on this all day and ther was talk of this but nothing strong something to do with some couple from s.africa but peaple are supose to be looking at it but then every thing starts with a wisper scary

29 May 2012 00:46:49
Not a rumour Eds but a FACT duff + Duffer have missed yet another deadline surely they must be removed with the BBC allegations of them being involved in the Ticketus deal and also the fact that other potential bidders weren't even considered when Miller put his bid in

Frustrated bear

D and p removed so everybody keeps saying like every 10 mins but the are still there

Deadlines are set by third parties, seeing that D&P set their own they can move it about as much as they want. They do have a deadline for the 15th June which they must hit but other than that, just there usual slap dash drip feeding of info. Also removing them now will be a very bad move. They have engineered themselves into a position that if they were removed the deal would in all probability not be achievable. Whilst the creditors meeting on the 14th important the  15th to supply the SPL with the End of year accounts is critical. Changing companies now would make that very difficult. Stick it out bears as the end game is being played. Then when the dust has settled you can go after D&P, Whyte, Et all afterwards, whilst playing football as a club.

D&P have secured first �2million of any rescue package, and clinging on for the next million from all the legal shenanagans

claims thier legal team did not know about concerns with court of session case with regards to EUFA/FIFA ? who are these legal people who dont understand football?

Their legal team must be really rubbish then. Everyone following football in the last year or two would have known that rule, or at least enough to find out more about what's at stake.

According to some media (BBC, Scottish Sun) the information about the CVA proposal will be sent out to creditors today. If Ticketus and HMRC agree then we can exit administration and start life again!

In the Daily Rangers this morning....Green and other alleged investors to make 100% profit by the autumn on their investment. 10 million pounds.

Typical Hectot attitude, we screw all our ceditors, give them a few pence in the pound, then screw the fans for 10 million, but giving them a club with no debt....

Hope this points have been highlighted by D&P to the HMRC.

Sounds like you have men with high morals in line to run ibrocksx again.

Will c u here in admin in 12months time.

Love the point no European football saves 7 million on wages.... would have thought ten million plus a year income would benefit the revival of rangers.

Duff and Phelps are working for the Creditors.
The secured creditor owed the most money is Craig White. Everything else D & P have done is pure theatre. Whyte has to agree to a CVA for it to happen. He won't, he will liquidate. D & P will get their fees. Ticketus will have to go after Whyte for the money and it is in their best interests to see that he gets as much as possible, to recover what their due. Whyte will drag this out for as long as it takes, 'cause he's a horrible wee s***e!

You would think they would at least forfeit some of there earnings, as they have missed sooooo many deadlines!

Not knowing rules, regulations and laws is not a defence when you break them.

Rangers FC as a club cannot afford for D&P to be removed as creditors, we must stick with them until the sale is complete.

Then an investigation should take place and action taken against them if its found they have harmed the club in any way due to their "conflict of interest".

So be please be careful what you wish for, I was also shocked to see the RST also calling for this action, IMO it would absolutely guarantee the liquidation of the club.

They are answerable only to the court and that profession is not famous for its speed.

"In the Daily Rangers this morning....Green and other alleged investors to make 100% profit by the autumn on their investment. 10 million pounds.

Typical Hector attitude"
--

Why do some of you continue to believe every single report in a paper? You should know better by now.

CVA details this afternoon. So next week, then.