Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,138
- Location
- Paisley
Its not just a Scottish thing, Leeds effectively did the same thing.
The Rangers Saga and Fallout Thread
- Thread starter Ace Modder
- Start date
- Status
Its not just a Scottish thing, Leeds effectively did the same thing.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,138
- Location
- Paisley
I think its possible that this is being looked at, Rangers Newco takes over, transfer of spl membership done at the same time, Rangers can then be given a nominal penalty, say 50 points for creating a newco, have it applied this season but since 7th cant finish above of 6th because of the split, the worst Rangers would get is 6th in the league.
Ah the knives come out now.
Even one of you bleating on about 100 million ??? where did you pick that figure from Mark?
So far the gers owe less than 20 mil to the taxman. An amount which a properly run Rangers would pay back in 3-4 years once it's up and running again.
Rangers paid tax for 139 years earning the taxman 100s of millions of pounds.
For one (YES for 1 year) have they failed to pay their tax and owe the taxman. The previous wee taxcase was acknowledged by RFC plc and was even in their books as a debt but it was only last year that it wasn't paid.
Even the stupidest of forum users would agree that once Rangers get back to working again the paye and tax generated year on year will soon make this tax blip a meanless amount.
Yet some of you would rather that instead of the exchequer losing 1 year's tax it looses that tax for ever more to make some sort of absurd statement.
Note here I'm not talking about EBT (big tax case) I'm talking about the last year only which is why Rangers are in administration which is the title of this thread.
I will say though that I think it right and proper that Rangers have a transfer embargo until such times as they have paid off their football debts (amounting to just under 4 million if I'm right?) I also think it was right that they were punished this season by being dropped 10 points and punished for the next 3 seasons with no european football. Yet you seem to want more and more punishment. Where were these threads when Motherwell went into administration did they start again in Div 3?
Or is it only your clear hatred for Rangers that makes you demand this punishment?
Even one of you bleating on about 100 million ??? where did you pick that figure from Mark?
So far the gers owe less than 20 mil to the taxman. An amount which a properly run Rangers would pay back in 3-4 years once it's up and running again.
Rangers paid tax for 139 years earning the taxman 100s of millions of pounds.
For one (YES for 1 year) have they failed to pay their tax and owe the taxman. The previous wee taxcase was acknowledged by RFC plc and was even in their books as a debt but it was only last year that it wasn't paid.
Even the stupidest of forum users would agree that once Rangers get back to working again the paye and tax generated year on year will soon make this tax blip a meanless amount.
Yet some of you would rather that instead of the exchequer losing 1 year's tax it looses that tax for ever more to make some sort of absurd statement.
Note here I'm not talking about EBT (big tax case) I'm talking about the last year only which is why Rangers are in administration which is the title of this thread.
I will say though that I think it right and proper that Rangers have a transfer embargo until such times as they have paid off their football debts (amounting to just under 4 million if I'm right?) I also think it was right that they were punished this season by being dropped 10 points and punished for the next 3 seasons with no european football. Yet you seem to want more and more punishment. Where were these threads when Motherwell went into administration did they start again in Div 3?
Or is it only your clear hatred for Rangers that makes you demand this punishment?
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,138
- Location
- Paisley
Thats the figure being touted if Rangers lose the big tax case. (with penalties)
Are you actually suggesting that Rangers will repay 20m in tax? Dont be silly.
Rangers didnt pay their tax for 139 years, that is a fact.
Its not a punishment not having european football, its not a given that Rangers automatically have this every year.
Anyway, its far from cut and dried, we still have to see what the creditors think to this laughable proposal, despite what is being peddled, they have not agreed to this when the assets are worth a damn site more than 11m.
Last edited:
Ah ok then Mark.... yes the big case is still pending but never mentioned by D&P nor by the preferred bidder it's like it doesn't exist
Also I am not suggesting for a minute that Rangers will pay this money what I am suggesting is that over the next few years once Rangers get back to normal they'll pay more than this over the next few years.
ie HMRC can either wind the gers up and get a % of the assets sale (probably very low amount since no transfer window!) + under liquidation rangers players have no contract so cannot be sold as assets they simply walk away....
or they can take the hit knowing that a prosperous rangers will earn them more in the long run...
Last edited:
How so Jokester?
I'm really confused as to why no one came forward with this idea a year ago. Would have saved a lot of hassle...
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,138
- Location
- Paisley
Ah ok then Mark.... yes the big case is still pending but never mentioned by D&P nor by the preferred bidder it's like it doesn't exist
Also I am not suggesting for a minute that Rangers will pay this money what I am suggesting is that over the next few years once Rangers get back to normal they'll pay more than this over the next few years.
ie HMRC can either wind the gers up and get a % of the assets sale (probably very low amount since no transfer window!) + under liquidation rangers players have no contract so cannot be sold as assets they simply walk away....
or they can take the hit knowing that a prosperous rangers will earn them more in the long run...
Players are not listed as assets on football clubs books. The assets would be the stadium and the training complex and such like, if Miller was bidding 50m then it would be reasonable (even 30m say), 11m is far too low a valuation though, as I said earlier, Love Street was sold for 11m for the ground its on.
HMRC can block the sale if it wishes, say Rangers lose the big tax case, it would be in the taxman's interest to take ownership of Murray park and hand it to the Scottish government as a footballing academy for Scotland, it doesnt have to go hand and hand with Rangers.
You mentioned earlier that people obviously hate Rangers, this is not the case, Im not either of the old firm's biggest fans, partly because my club live (almost physically) in the shadow of Ibrox and Parkhead, I have no desire to see Rangers go out of business, I just want to see them punished fairly, and when Rangers own manager says that they should perhaps be sent to the third division but are a special case, it sticks in your throat.
If we are told that we cant have a league without Rangers or Celtic because of the TV deal, it means neither can ever get relegated, obviously in normal cases a likely scenario but what happens next year, if this all goes through and the transfer ban is in place? What if Rangers entire first team choose to leave for free as is their right and Rangers have to field a team of kids? Are we saying that finishing 12th would mean reconstruction? You just cant have a sport where the outcome is predetermined.
HMRC says there has been no contact about a CVA so dont see how they can agree to somethingt that hasnt been put forward.
Same thing with the SPL...no assurances have been given. Considering the SPL are investigating Rangers over alleged dual contracts, it would be shocking if no further punishment was guaranteed before the investigation has been completed.
So, as since Feb 14th, everything is still as clear as mud down Ibrox way.
If the "Incubator" thing goes ahead, i've read D&P will continue to work away at a CVA for the debts...wont they just get shafted as it relates to the "oldco"?
Same thing with the SPL...no assurances have been given. Considering the SPL are investigating Rangers over alleged dual contracts, it would be shocking if no further punishment was guaranteed before the investigation has been completed.
So, as since Feb 14th, everything is still as clear as mud down Ibrox way.
If the "Incubator" thing goes ahead, i've read D&P will continue to work away at a CVA for the debts...wont they just get shafted as it relates to the "oldco"?
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Dec 2005
- Posts
- 16,138
- Location
- Paisley
HMRC says there has been no contact about a CVA so dont see how they can agree to somethingt that hasnt been put forward.
Same thing with the SPL...no assurances have been given. Considering the SPL are investigating Rangers over alleged dual contracts, it would be shocking if no further punishment was guaranteed before the investigation has been completed.
So, as since Feb 14th, everything is still as clear as mud down Ibrox way.
If the "Incubator" thing goes ahead, i've read D&P will continue to work away at a CVA for the debts...wont they just get shafted as it relates to the "oldco"?
No, the administrator is first to get their money, they are never shafted.
But surely if the newco is formed befoer the end of the season and the asset purchase carried out befoer the end of teh season then the team cannot play in the SPL as it will not own the SPL share and therefore have no right to play in the SPL.
Perhaps what Mark says is most likely route. Would you be happy with that punishment though?
The EBT case is for the oldco win or lose. The reason it wasnt done is 3 years euro ban. plus no-one likes the sound of liquidation. Me included.
They only get all their money is creditors agree I think. Not quite sure how it works but I'm sure when there was a live blog from another admin firm regarding this and said their fee's would have to be justified and agreed by creditors. Or something like that.
I do feel sorry for all involved it's amazing how much damage one person can do to a club in such a short space of time yet still manage to remain on the side of legality.
You have on the one hand the 11 other SPL clubs asking for fair punishment (but even they can't decide what it should be!)
You have the SFA who punish rangers up to the maximum financial penalities allowed in their rule books then take it a step further by imposing a transfer embargo. This hasn't been sorted out however pressure must be now put on the SFA to rescind this since it's paramount to the saviour of Rangers.
You have the fans of the other clubs demanding the strictest possible sanctions on Rangers but again views differ as to what they should be.
You have the creditors some of whom will probably be bankrupt because of Rangers.
Finally you have the current owner, how can his assets be taken and put into a newco without his consent? If this is the case then why doesn't every business do this with their assets when in debt?
I wouldn't want to be any of the above in this sorry affair there doesn't seem to be a one fits all solution to this.
You have on the one hand the 11 other SPL clubs asking for fair punishment (but even they can't decide what it should be!)
You have the SFA who punish rangers up to the maximum financial penalities allowed in their rule books then take it a step further by imposing a transfer embargo. This hasn't been sorted out however pressure must be now put on the SFA to rescind this since it's paramount to the saviour of Rangers.
You have the fans of the other clubs demanding the strictest possible sanctions on Rangers but again views differ as to what they should be.
You have the creditors some of whom will probably be bankrupt because of Rangers.
Finally you have the current owner, how can his assets be taken and put into a newco without his consent? If this is the case then why doesn't every business do this with their assets when in debt?
I wouldn't want to be any of the above in this sorry affair there doesn't seem to be a one fits all solution to this.
Football sanctions against oldco from the SPL would appear to be transferred with the SPL share (hence the 1 year transfer ban also applying to the newco). The oldco could finish the season and hence not be punished for not fielding a team (an extremely serious offence that would get the oldco relegated as far as I'm aware?) in the last couple of games, the share sold to the newco who are then eligible to play next season in the SPL. Interestingly, the newco could sign a squad prior to this share transfer occuring and hence get round the transfer ban.
- Status