Rangers Banter Archive June 05 2012

05 Jun 2012 21:44:17
So the SPL clubs would survive
without Rangers.
Thought I would do a bit of checking,
I have taken Aberdeen as a middle
team, they have a middle placed
team, I could have taken St J, Dundee
Untd, St M any of them.

Rangers at Aberdeen, gate 15000.
Assuming 9000 (our tickets) at £25
(last years price) plus 6000 at £18
which is what they charge other teams
(except Old Firm), that totals
£333,000.

If we are not there and they got their
average, would remind you that the
average includes our gates, but assuming
they did, their income would be £108,000
A reduction of £225,000. That is one
game, so double that and the loss
is £450,000.

This does not include food, progs etc,
say another £50k = £500k.

There is no doubt that the TV deal
would suffer, without 4 Old Firm games,
I would be surprised if Sky wanted
the deal at all but lets assume they
halved the deal, that is £1m loss.

We have no league sponsor and the
chances of getting one would be greastly
reduced if rangers not there. Lets say
that is another £100k.

So Aberdeens income drops by £1.6m
with their players on long term contracts
based on current income, which they
cannot tear up, how do they make
this income up?

The league would need to expanded
to 70 plus games.

Those that are anxious to get rid of us
should think long and hard what that
means. It means a far poorer standard
of football that is at a low ebb anyway.

Even Celtic would suffer, there would be no
need to sign £3m players when £300k
players would do the job. Then qualifying
for the CL would be much harder and
every year our co-efficient falls, it becomes
harder. they would have qualifying rounds
in June.

Rangers (Whyte & Murray) have done wrong
we know that, but be careful what you
wish for because its not attractive.

this is not England or Spain or even Italy
where if a club is demoted where there
are enough other big teams able to fill
the gap.

When was the last time you were at Aberdeen? Rangers don't get 9,000 tickets for Aberdeen last time I was up it was 3,000.

OP - pretty good, nice one. The spl teams would have the crowds they have this now. Nothing more unless they challenged for a euro spot say 2,000 extra. The big loss will be celtic, their fans would see less of a real opposition and no need to renew season tickets as they would buy as you go for the bigger type games. This is basically why celtic fc are actively trying to get into the English league system. They will put forward an argument that a club like celtic cannot survive in scotland and should be allowed to move, basically.
What you mention about co efficient is probably correct, not just affecting the club teams but the international team.
What I would like to ask all non RFC fans is when did Scotish football peak, what decade, what year, what season?
And what was won?

I have always argued that Rangers should be punished for the wrongs carried out by previous office-bearers at RFC. Remember, they were responsible for the theft of money from HRMC ( that is from all of us ) as well as other potential misdeeds e.g. double contracts etc. No one has ever argued that Rangers supporters are responsible.
The OP seems to suggest that Rangers are a special case and should be treated differently from others because of the financial consequences others in the SPL may suffer. Indeed McCoist , the Killie chairman and others share a similar view.
Most right-minded people agree Rangers should be punished for their fraudulent behaviour. Punishment should contain elements of retribution, deterrant and rehabilitation.
The SFA judicial panel tried to punish RFC with the transfer embargo, which was subsequently deemed outwith the sanctions stated in the SFA rules. It seems that the only options left are expulsion or suspension from the SPL. Suspension from the Scottish cup seems to me as very lenient. It seems only right that the SFA put sporting integrity above a temporary loss of revenue within Scottish football. Let's see if they have the courage to do it.
Liah Smit

Yawn...not this boring argument again! However, if Aberdeen increase their average gate by 400 people per game over the season then that compensates for the 2 visits by Rangers....not insurmountable given there might be something more to play for! Scottish football survived when Rangers were pish and it will survive this time around as well.
Another thing for you to contemplate before doing your sums would be the clubs would simply alter their budgets to live within their means...a concept totally lost on Rangers and it's supporters!

Can you name any clubs who have been relegated from the spl and have ceased to exist because rangers fans dont swell their crowds twice a season?

OP read The Scotsman's piece on it last Sunday, they reckoned the league as a whole would take a hit of £5.8m. 9,000 at Pittodrie erm, no.

4) Aberdeen average crowd is 5950, their highest was against Rangers at 14900. From their web site. Aberdeen have players on long term contracts, what happens to them?
They have based these contracts on income, they won't have that income, so what do they do?
You state that they need 400 more in, but their average includes two games against Rangers, take them out and the average reduces substantially, so they need nearer 1000 more. You state they may have more to play for so may get more people in, and that was the case with Motherwell last season, but that will only affect the clubs going for second. I would argue that Aberdeen may get less fans in as there is less quality in a league void of much quality. Do you think Celtic will sell the same number when the league is over before it starts?
I hear they are already struggling with season tickets, no doubt because of the uncertainty.
As a Rangers fan who watched during nine in a row, it was pretty damn boring winning four nil every week, in fact my pals used to hope the opposition scored first to make a game of it. Whether you support Rangers or Celtic really decides who's view you agree with, and that won't change.

When rangers were winning 9 in a Row Murray was pumping in money the club didnt have. So that wont be happening again any time soon. Due to aberdeens dislike of rangers their fans turn out in large numbers for that match. Murray distorted scottish football so badly that clubs couldnt afford to challenge for the league any longer. That will change as it did from 66 to 86 When rangers only won 3 titles When they used their own money.

The 5.8m could be offset a bit by returning fans and those who wont go to watch rangers when they come.

9000 Lollol we wish we got that many tickets for up there

In stead of putting your hands up and saying rangers were wrong it was bang out of order and asked the spl clubs to put in with some feedback on how to sort this out ,yous would rather go down the rout of threats ,i for one didnt want rangers to die but peaple like this just turns it round for me

I too never wanted Rangers to die but appropriate punishment dished out, but with the arrogance of some people like OP and the lack of integrity of people like Kilmarnock chairman among others I feel the SFA are being left with little options. With UEFA watching the punishment will be dealt out and clubs will initially suffer financially but the will recover, may take a few years and I believe we should look to Germany as a model with standing and fair pricing encouraging people to support their clubs and take along youngsters ensuring Scottish football WILL have a future.

Aberdeen average more than 5950 fans i know what your saying but get your stats right

Instead of doing the math for yourself and just use random numbers, why dont you look at some articles that were done by ppl who know and are closer to the figures then you.....it was shown that yes the clubs would lose money but it would not brong an end to them because they would just have to readjust. find it funny how now your thinking of other clubs and how they would suffer then pretty much say rangers need to stay to keep them 1mill. why dont your club give them the money they have been stealing for years now and let all be because if you are that concern then the money would help them get that money back.
your gone! its all over, stop coming on and making things up and more excusses of how the league needs you. once the league cleans up all the cheating and corruptness from sfa-spl-clubs-refs then it wil be more atractive and with clubs knowing and fans knowing they can win somthing and possible europe the fans will grow and profits will grow....simple! op, tell the truth you dont caare about the rest of the league you only want your club around even though yous all know how they stole from the clubs and your own fans and for anyone to defend that type of club deserves to leave wth it because the sport needs a fresh start without any seed of cheats. BYE BYE RAGCHEATS!

05 Jun 2012 20:28:07
Rangers were charged with bringing the game into disrepute. Why because Whyte failed to pay PAYE or NI.

How does that bring Scottish football into disrepute? In my opinion that brings Rangers into disrepute, Celtic, Motherwell etc are not in disrepute are they?

Would Rangers have been charged with disrepute
Had the money been owed to Scottish Power or the
Likes? I think not.

What has Rangers not paying a bill, got to do with SFA?

Surely HMRC are the people to take action, why do they need SFA fighting their corners? If Rangers owe my business money, I take the necessary action to recover that, I don't contact the SFA and demand that they are charged with bringing the game into disrepute.

I know Whyte has done wrong but don't see the reason for this charge. You could understand it if we had not paid other member clubs that makes sense but the charge is based on us not paying HMRC. We have not paid other clubs but this is not the reason.

This bringing the game into disrepute seems to cover anything that SFA deem appropriate at that particular time.

Good point

Eh, the SFA doesn't want any of its teams not paying the taxman as that looks bad for Scottish football. Ergo, it brings the game into disrepute. Just like when players are charged with bringing the game into disrepute it's not just them or their clubs whose reputation has been affected.

All clubs in the sfa and uefa must submit accounts and pay their taxes. Rangers have signed up to it. Stop this nonsense.

2) If we didnt pay scottish power is that bringing the game into disrepute ? I know we should all pay our taxes but really what right have SFA to decide which is disreputable and which not?

To OP and 4... they also owe money to other teams and companies, and are you saying all this hasnt went around the world and NOT tarnished scottishfootball at all??

R u having a laugh? That's tax layers money u's have cheated hmrc out off! Hospitals, schools etc r being affected by ur tax dodging! Sfa have every right to step in! Crooks running ur establishment for far too long!

Byars38625

05 Jun 2012 19:55:16
Opening fixtures for season 12/13

Celtic v ross co
hearts v ict
motherwell v aberdeen
kilmarnock v hibs
dundee utd v st mirren
St johnstone v ????

Does anyone in their right mind believe the sfa can afford to have the above scenario? If the verdict is expulsion then good luck to scottish football is all i can say. im not being arrogant by claiming no rangers means the end of scottish football, id be saying the exact same if it was celtic. Scottish football would survive if any other club went but not an OF club. No old firm = no product = no sponcers or tv deal = no money......simple.
J1985

Well said

Might i suggest you try a bit of research? scotland on sunday went through the figures and reckon all clubs(excluding celtic) would lose around 6% of their income.Hardly gonna put anybody out of business.This is a tired argument with no credence at all

J1985 I don't know what will happen, I have no real clue how it will affect Scottish Football but one thing I do know is that from February till now I have scarcely saw one ounce of humility coming out of Ibrox. Daniel Cousin, tainted title, boycotts on certain SPL teams, boycotts on SFA sponsors, delays in handing over documents, marches, demands for panels to be outed, appeals to the courts, it has been an absolute PR disaster and whatever friends, sympathisers you had in the Scottish game are fast running out of patience with you. There is no doubt clubs will take a financial hit if Rangers aren't in the SPL/Scottish Cup or suspended or expelled but I cant think of one ocassion since February 13 where you have attempted to garner sympathy or support through your actions.

Sponsors will still sponsor the game and there will be TV money, just not as much - clubs will just downsize - it's not difficult. If your income was reduced and you couldn't afford the car you currently drive, would it mean you never went out? No, you would either downsize to a cheaper car or use public transport.

Research?? I'll go with common sense on this one if you dont mind pal. Take the points gap between 1st n 3rd over the past say 5 years. then take rangers outa the picture......who'd pump money into a league that celtic would stroll by 20/30 points year after year?? As for the other guys comparison about down sizing like you'd do a car......again that would just make celtics competitors weaker n contribute to an even poorer product.
J1985

J1985 did any Rangers fan care about the league's competitiveness when Rangers waltzed to nine in a row. Celtic weren't even within sight during most of them, the bulk of which were during the 2 pts for a win days. Please don't dare feign concern in that regard.

From memory i found the 9IAR years very competitive. I was lucky enough to see a see the likes of Gazza and Laudrup week in week out and come every OF game although we had guys like these available to us i looked at Celtic and saw a forward line of consisting of Di Canio, Van Hooijdoink and Cadete.......What a time for scottish football. I remember the 3-3 game at Ibrox when Goram produced one of the best saves i have ever seen in my lift from a Van Hooijdoink volley from 3 yards out, the game had everything. Same could be said for the 1-0 game at Parkhead when Laudrup scored and Van Hooijdoink and i think Gazza both missed penalties and of course the Van Vossen miss......Personally i thought those days were great. Great players and great entertainment what more could you ask for??!!
J1985

To number 7 post the forward line you mentioned for Celtic was indeed a good side only at the very end of 9IAR before wee Fergus saved Celtic it was grossly one sided and at that time every rangers supporter i knew was calling for a move to England with no consideration or thought of 'Scotland needs Rangers' so from your memory your full of it.
DB77

@ post 7 agree totally sadly those days alike the 67 to 73 days 3 4 euro finals and old firm BOTH in top 10 in the world club teams, YOUTH and local talent was reason for earlier and money for the gasgoine/larson years NEITHER of which likely to ever happen again which is just a sad fact of life, if rangers are relegated or worse expulsion the death of scottish football in EURO terms will happen in a few years , again very sad

I'd see a doctor regards your memory J1985 Rangers gained NINETY NINE more points than Celtic over the nine in a row years, as I said earlier in mostly two points a win campaigns.

@8......Well we've been on our knees for the past 4 seasons and still managed to win 3IAR so don't play the auld Fergus McCann excuse ya roaster.
Agree that we will never see the calibre of player such as Gazza, Laudrup, Larsson or Di Canio which is a shame but a reality we've had for some years now. So with that being said, with the lack of quality individuals in scotland i just can't see any argument against loosing the OF derby from Scottish football to boot.
J1985

@11: funny that while on its knees the club managed to buy so many players, including one at £4m. Not really on its knees then. Or just guilty of financial doping?

05 Jun 2012 19:05:51
Are we hallucinating!
Do we really imagine a blind 34 yo who has only played 8 times in a year. is the way to make progress .
What next Sandy Jardine leading out the team
Waken up and smell the roses we are not even certain to be playing in the SPL.
Both were legends but lets get a life and and face reality.
Talking of reality, would any sane person commit to spending on a season ticket until we are aware at which competition(s) we are playing.
Anybody know what a season ticket at Berwick Rangers costs

05 Jun 2012 17:19:08
Make no mistake as we head towards Friday. It is the integrity of the SFA governance system that is under scrutiny here. One more soft touch for Rangers and the game is over in Scotland.
For Rangers FC ( in administration) The writing is on the wall!

I concur. The whole notion of fair play, justice, sporting integrity and honesty is in jeapardy of being sold out.
Such fragile things.
Priceless.

Integrity does not mean making unlawful decisions.

You wouldn't be a Celtic supporter who is starting to worry you might have to fight to get another title if we stay in the SPL?

@2) quite correct! That's why this SFA oversight has been sent back to the SFA to apply one of their officially listed penalties.
Rangers won the issue at the court of session and the SFA is soon to correct the oversight as Rangers wished. Where now is the problem? It's what Rangers fans and management sought.

@2: only 'unlawful' by the SFA rulebook, not the law of the land. And ask yourself, why was that 'unlawful' decision made? Which club forced the panel to have to come up with a new sanction because the rule book didn't have one as the SFA never envisaged a club breaking the rules in such a way.

Finally, were the panel not being lenient on Rangers? So doing the club a favour, in their eyes, is unlawful? Be careful what you wish for.

5) the judge used the word unlawful, despite what you want they have to stick by their rules that they wrote. And dont blame us because sfa did not have rules in place, thats their fault nobody elses. Incidentally the rules broken are for not paying HMRC, and as we have had numerous clubs in admin where there is a good chance that HMRC will suffer , they should have rules in place. you think that transfer embargo is lenient, not so lenient if players walk away at reduced prices. They want our money but want us to be not competative. I dont consider that to be lenient, anyway that is not the point, they were in the wrong and well pay the price of their inability to read their own rulebook

@6: there were no provisions in the rulebook for what Rangers did so to meet an unprecedented crime, the panel tried to issue an unprecedented sanction. Is that so bad? It all boils down to the fact that this is ALL Rangers' fault - without the club doing what it did, there would have been no need for a panel to decide on a punishment.

05 Jun 2012 14:24:45
I used to think james traynor was a very good sports reporter. His article in todays record has now proved to me how much he has gone native with the tabloids. His arguement is that rangers have been punished enough and the appropriate punishment for going to Cof s is a suspension from the Scottish cup . It is an appauling artice writen to appease the baser elements of the rangers support. A once fine journo who has lost all credibilty. Even me rangers suppoting pals think the man is sot !

Traynor never has been or will be a journalist.Like the rest of the shoddy scots tabloids he is a reporter,theres a big difference.He has always championed the "a source told me" type of reporting.This will be yet another bit of deflecting the blame for rangers woes from his pal murray.

You appear really desperate for us to go under. You were pinning your hopes on liquidation which is now getting more unlikely so you want the SFA to do the business for you and put us out of the league. Do you think that will benefit scottish football or just help your lot win more titles more easily. Are you afraid of the competition? or just blinded by hatred for your neighbours and want to put your interest before the whole of scottish football

JG

At last a journalist who has got a bit of common sense,he knows that by killing Rangers you will ultimately kill of the Scottish game

3#Thats a really tired argument with no foundation in fact.Yes,there wont be the money on offer there once was,but is scottish football thriving at the moment?Clubs,including celtic,will have to develop and play their own young players,selling them on for profit.Example: USA 5 Scotland 1.Canada 0 USA 0(with a stronger USA side).The point is moot as rangers wont vanish,at worse they drop to div 3.

Studeis have been done on the outcome if rangers do leave the spl and it isnt all doom and gloom as people say..... does anyone have research to prove that scottish football will die?? i would like to read it if they do.

Answer me this then,who do the teams from the lower divisions want to draw in the Scottish cup and league cup,YES Rangers and celtic away,a game against any of these two usually doubles a teams earnings for a year,so how can the cash raised from games against Rangers not be missed,its obvious that the game needs both the Glasgow giants

Traynor was on record a couple of weeks ago stating quite convincingly that Rangers should go to the third SFL league!?! So with this article he's done a complete flip!?!
Whatever will his mood be tomorrow? He's clearly confused or conflicted.
Regardless of Traynors opinion he has no influence anywhere least of all forming public opinion. It's suspension-- no alternative.

A football club is a business to every chairman. so as a chairman you need to have a plan B.

scottish football WONT die,green is playing this card to the sfa in hope they panic ! people rely on celtic/rangers on coming to their home ground as it brings in money.but since feb 14th everyone had to draw up plan b.

overall i do hope rangers go down because then we need to sell kayal etc which overall will make money but its (as above) will give scottish youth football a chance.im sure people on here buy the rangers view & read about the ins & outs & how the under 19s etc are doing. if not i do with the celtic view,after 19 they either get a professional contract or shown they door. its not saying there a bad player but its just too hard of a team to get you into.

this is where rangers could execel! go into div 3 play youths,may take 3-5 years to get back into the spl but overall you would haave a really young team with others coming through ready to make the step up.

lets be honest,its better than what we have just now

lenny

Suspension means Extinction!
Please stop trying to make it sound like a slap on the wrist.

Scottish Cup ban = 3 years, Transfer ban till January 2013 window, & increase fine to 250 k
There not so difficult was it

bil72

@9: so the club went to court about a 12 month transfer embargo because they thought it was not in the rules and you want another punishment that's not in the rules in the form of a 6 month embargo?

Yes smaller clubs may have wanted to draw Rangers away once but not now. They don't pay their way. United are still waiting for their cut of the cup tie last season.

05 Jun 2012 13:12:29
Strong rumour that it is suspension on Friday for indeterminate period. So we might get a few months.

Logic is that expulsion/ termination is for the worst crime of match fixing. Suspension is for next crimes down and SFA tribunal written judgement stated rangers crime was one level down from match fixing.

In addition, going to civilian court, marching on SFA offices and Rangers manager demanding to know identities of tribunal members which resulted in threats to them exacerbate the situation.

Suspension is unworkable and undesirable for the other teams, it would have to be at least half the fixture card. The clubs don't want that either as no income, don't see suspension as a likely option. I think the transfer embargo will be changed to only signing free agents and cup ban. I don't think anybody wants expulsion or suspension, and if they do then they want their clubs affected too because that is what will happen.
The bottom line is that depending on who you support is what you want to happen, we will just have to wait and see.

How the hell can we be suspended for "a few months" what do we join in the league in november? crazy. The only people exacerbating the situation are all the desperate timmys and the media, calm down dont panic and except we are here to stay

JG

What would be the point in suspending a club for half a fixture list?

C'mon folks, start talking sense.

TTG

You forget that suspending Rangers is also hurting all the other clubs in the league,now why should they suffer less income and therefore making them weaker for the following season,which will make the league easier for tic to win it the following season so the attendences will fall as they will have won it by Christmas and so the vicious circle will go on

3) so how long would this suspension be that does not affect other teams unequally? Think it would be half the season or the whole season. If its five games then five teams get victories, think that keep the other half happy, so you talk sense!

05 Jun 2012 12:51:21
What I can't understand is that the small tax case pertaining to two rangers players 2000-2003, was it Ronald de boer and either Arthur Neumann or Stefam Klos? Anyway that's been accepted by all parties as illegal tax evasion and illegal offshore payments.
Why hasn't SPL SFA and FIFA UEFA not stripped the titles from these years and awarded 3-0 results in all games these players were fielded?
Rangers accepted this tax case and admitted wrongdoing. Surely these years can be sorted outside the BTC?
Can someone explain why nothing is being done about 2000-2003?

Who has said and accepted it was illegal tax evasion and illegal offshore payments?
I'll explain why nothing is being done about 2000-2003 it's 'cos there is nothing to explain and nothing to be done.

The previous owner SDM, the chairman Alastair Johnston and CEO Martin Bain admitted the 2000-2003 wrongdoing and fully accepted HMRC financial penalties. Besides the 2000-2003 offshore model used, being declared fully illegal, was the trigger for the new EBT scheme which Rangers now find themselves embroiled in with this big tax case. The OP is 100% correct.

05 Jun 2012 11:50:51
Why dont rangers as a club,contact all creditors and agree a payment schedule over how many years it takes? Leaving out the BTC the total debt is around 50m.Why not pay this money back over ten years at 5m per annum? With interest frozen it equates to around 100k per week,in other words McGregor,whittaker and davis's wages?It would of course mean massive downsizing and a drop in squad quality but would make rangers a very attractive proposition to young players.If the BTC bomb hits,HMRC would look on this as good and proper practice and be much easier to deal with.No newco,no dodging debt,just a club who was shafted by dodgy owners trying to fight back,with honour and dignity intact.I am sure the real gers fans would accept some tough years to emerge fresh from the previous regimes mess,and every fan in the country would have to say fair enough,they are doing whats right.

Sensible post,if rangers pay their debts in full the credibility of the club will be restored in many peoples eyes,but when rangers expect to get every penny of the jelavic cash from everton then try to offer pennies in the pound to hearts(and every other creditor)for lee wallace their credibility drops like a stone.

Many fans would agree with this, some of us have morals and believe that if you have debt that you should pay it back.
However when business men get involved with no love for the club get involved, all they want is to get as much as possible for as little outlay as possible. Profit is their only goal, they couldn't care if the clubs name is tarnished, the cheaper they buy, the more they can make when they come to sell. I would much rather sell the whole first team, sell Murray Park and any other disposable assets and come to an agreement to pay our bills. If that takes ten years or more so be it.
Some of us still have morals!

I am a real gers fan and i dont agree to your point.

The bottom line is we have been mismanaged by certain individuals over the years, hence the fact we have ended up in admin.

I am afraid football is just like any other business, so if you end up in admin you pay the going rate i.e agreed pence in the pound.

Rangers have landed in admin so just like the thousands of businesses previous should pay agreed pence in pound.

Thats the law i am afraid and i dont see why we should do it any diffrently to all those companies who have found themselves in the same situation and came out the other side with a CVA.

Is there any truth in the rmour that Duff and DUFFER have not paid the tax or national insurnce since they took over as administrators? If so surely they are as bad as Whyte and should be chased out of IBROX now. A novelist couldnt write this nonsense that is going on if thta is true, how can they say they have the club working to a budget if they have,nt paid the taxes??AGAIN. {Ed039's Note - It's a rumour, as insolvency practitioners they should be paying taxes when due)

If you wish to come out of this by abandons 273 financial victims, who provided Rangers FC with products and services in good faith of being paid, then you must quietly with dignity accept the punishments from our governing sporting bodies who don't allow sports clubs to proceed in this fashion without deserving penalties.

05 Jun 2012 10:41:32
All we can do is sit back and await the SFA appeal tribunals new punishment.
I am very worried that this guy Green is likely to drag the sfa back to the court of session and make an appeal there. He seems to be unhappy with Lord Glennie's decision and wants him to send it to original SFA tribunal!
After all the fake denials they didn't know UEFA & FIFA get upset at civilian court cases, they are going back to court?
Insane.

Who is this Charlie guy from Yorkshire? He's come up here and told numerous lies and has proceeded to tell the SFA and SPL how to run the game and hes not even Scottish nor any previous connection at all with rangers. And what about his backer who goes by numerous names in Indonesia? One of the worlds most corrupt nations if not previously number one.

05 Jun 2012 09:29:28
Ban from Scottish Cup? With what could/will be limited resources they may well exit 1st Rounds therefore ban meaningless. Similarly dont you have to be good enough to qualify for Champions League. Therefore Euro ban also meaningless.

So by that logic you might as well scrap the league because Celtic are going win it then
And ban hibs from the Scottish for 100 years because they are not good enough

05 Jun 2012 00:55:46
When will all the wounded bears realise that once again the pr pi$$ is keeping yous with a glimmer of hope..2weeks& rfc are no longer in existence!!Liquidation has always been coming.Green& his invisible consortium will pick up ibrox,murray ark etc for 5.5million,yet a few weeks ago stated rfc assets were worth 113million!!!Do the maths...CVA will never work,EBT BTC still to come,& remeber whyte kept rfc alive by not paying tax vat ni to get to end season....stevo,,

05 Jun 2012 00:39:38
Since holding his first press conference 21 days ago, Charles Green has only become a more elusive figure. His plans for Rangers remain vague, he has yet to provide any funds, and he cannot declare with any certainty which backers, if any, are committed to his loose consortium.

Only Duff & Phelps, the administrators, appear to have any faith that Green will be able to complete his £8.5 million deal to buy the club.

In 11 days a creditors' meeting will be held at Ibrox to determine if Rangers exit administration through a Company Voluntary Arrangement. Should that vote fail, Duff & Phelps claim they already have a binding agreement in place for Green's consortium to buy the assets for £5.5m in a newco scenario.

Yet it is not even clear if they have received the authority from the creditors to sell those assets without allowing bids from an open market.

The Sunday Herald also understands that Green's consortium has not committed any funds beyond the £200,000 exclusivity fee, despite the fact that the CVA proposal being sent out was due to trigger a seven-figure payment.

Green has contradicted himself throughout the past three weeks, talking of 20 investors, then five or six; talking about playing a long-term game then admitting he will try to turn around a share issue in the short-term; talking about having £20m in place but seeking significant investment from local Rangers-supporting businessmen; and talking about the club never being in debt again, then trying to buy it with a loan that carries 8% interest.

The only certainty is that Green has seen an opportunity to exploit the club's circumstances.
"He is playing an immaculate hand as an acquirer from distress," an insolvency expert told The Sunday Herald. "He came in late; he came in apparently high; he came in at the point where the leverage had switched in favour of the acquirer from the administrators.

"He has not, of course, backed his words with cash. Weeding out tyre-kickers is an essential skill of insolvency practice: finding the buyer with the passion and the willingness to complete often outweighs the top-dollar hold-out; failure to go with the most willing buyer at best prolongs the deal and at worst creates a Dutch auction."

Rangers fans were initially cautious about Green. As the buyer Duff & Phelps had chosen, he represented the club's best hope of finding a way out of adminis-tration. Yet that tacit acceptance is beginning to erode; Green has so far failed to convince.

The CVA proposal published last Wednesday was the final proof for many supporters that it was time to make a stand for their club.

The proposal is worth demonstrably less to creditors than other offers Duff & Phelps received. All four bidders were told they must provide funding from June 1 – last Friday – yet Green has not.

Instead, £3.6m is being deducted from the creditors' pool to cover the Administration Trading Shortfall. Rangers are also due £3.7m in transfer fees, but this has been written down in the proposal to £2m.

Duff & Phelps claim that funds are in place to pay running costs until mid-July, when Green would be expected to finally pay some money, so where has that come from?

A number of players can leave for set fees when the transfer window opens, yet at least a percentage of any transfer income should have been offered to creditors as part of a more viable CVA proposal.
Supporters have also grown alarmed that season ticket money would be used to cover running costs and are now demanding that Green meets them to provide credible proof of funds, or they will not back the season ticket campaign, which is due to begin before the CVA vote.

Sales would normally bring in £16m – with 75% of the income normally received by now – but fans do not want their money to be used to buy the club, which was effectively what Craig Whyte did.

"If he can prove that the wherewithal is in place to see us through then take us forward, we'll be encouraging people to buy season tickets," says Andy Kerr, president of the Rangers Supporters Assembly.
"If people are being asked for the season ticket money based on the circumstances we have right now, I would imagine that the vast majority would say, 'you ain't getting a penny until I know that you are holding up your part of the bargain'.

"That might make us appear dogmatic and challenging, but it's our club and we're the biggest investors in it. I read the CVA proposal and it just seems as though we will be paying for it. But if this guy drops the ball, there is somebody waiting to pick it up."
The administrators know two other bidders are ready and able to step in right away should Green's deal collapse. A third is also prepared to move.

All three believe Green does not have the funds and want to save the club, with at least one confident the CVA proposal can be picked up and altered to make it more attractive to creditors without delaying the process.

Let's not listen to Andy Kerr of RST because they have proved to be totally inept. They are a disgrace with one cock up after another. His only interest is ten minutes on the telly. I do not know how an organisation with 1500 members can hold such sway. They are an irrelevant organisation and do not speak for any fans I know. They are more a hindrance than a help, and if one lesson had come out of this mess is that they should be replaced by a more meaningful supporters body.

Three bidders in the background? That wouldn't be those who repeatedly put in 'best and final offers'? And those offers were way too little too form a CVA?
Paul Murray, The blue Knights and Brian Kennedy were shown up and all stated it was too late for a CVA. So it can't be any them?

If season ticket sales only brings in £12m right now and it takes over £40m to operate Rangers over a year, average £3.5m a month, season tickets only stabilises the club for 3 months. If Rangers exit admin via a CVA, green will do a rights issue, pocket the fans money for worthless paper shares, walk away and it'll be back into admin within months.

How can there be three bidders awaiting Greens CVA failure?
We have been categorically told that green owns the rangers shares, bought for £2.
Green is the owner or we've been lied to which is it? {Ed039's Note - The transfer of whytes shares are dependent on cva being agreed, he is not yet the owner of RFC)

@4 Ed, this is a later rumour. Green did not personally go public with that.
What Green went very public with was that he owned the shares, he bought them for £1 and gave Whyte 100% profit with another £1 out of his pocket.
Now if you're right Ed, green is a liar isn't he? {Ed039's Note - Sounds like it, my understanding is the transfer of shares are dependent on cva, otherwise the shares would be worthless)

He told us he owned the shares