The Rangers Saga and Fallout Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
I think its just trying to say that D&P had agreed a fee for the administration and have gone so far 11x over that, you cant say its not a story.

In his reply, the Duff and Phelps senior partner agreed to try and keep the administration process as short as possible and proposes to cap fees at £500,000 with the caveat that the firm can discuss "an additional payment in respect of our total time costs".

Perhaps the caveat has been enforced no???

Seems a bit of a nothing story.
 
In his reply, the Duff and Phelps senior partner agreed to try and keep the administration process as short as possible and proposes to cap fees at £500,000 with the caveat that the firm can discuss "an additional payment in respect of our total time costs".

Perhaps the caveat has been enforced no???

Seems a bit of a nothing story.

you never said what was made up in the links I posted?

Obviously its a story, or it wouldnt be published, admittedly, its not as juicy as one could have perhaps expected but its most certainly in the public interest.
 
Seems a bit of a nothing story.

It is....

It's simply a poor excuse for the reporters name to be in the papers..

Makes you wonder why the story about the racial abuse of 3 rangers players, by a celtic supporter on twitter, hasn't been followed up further....

I would have thought, that would have been a bigger story..
 
Whats made up?

Do you actually read what your posting about? Or do you just post links that may be relevant?

You could do your own sketch on the CVA document alone.

“Charles Green has 20 investors?”

“Er, no, it’s five or six.”

“But he said he had 20.”

“He seems to have lost 14 or 15 of them since he said it.”

“They’re gone already before we even knew who they were?”

“That’s if they were ever there in the first place.”

“At least his backers are offering HMRC some money…”

“Which the club has to pay them back, with interest.”

“And they’re throwing Ticketus a few quid…”

“And they want that back, too. Apparently 8 per cent on top, thanks very much.”

“Duff and Phelps said his was the best deal for creditors…”

“The best deal for Charles Green more like. And for Duff and Phelps, of course. They’re getting every penny of their multi-million pound fee, which is about 91p in the pound more than the people whose corner they were supposed to be fighting.”

“But what about the creditors?”

“Who?”

“The £55, 415, 632 the club owes to all manner of different people?”

“Yeah, shame about that. There’s about £5m left for those guys.”

“That’s feeble. When are they going to be paid?”

“Sometime.”

“When?”

“Later.”

“So Duff and Phelps, the champions of the creditors, are getting almost as much as all the other creditors put together?”

“It’s business, baby. They might get more in any case.”

“Ah, right. If they sell a player some of the money goes to the creditors…”

“No. It goes to the club.”

“The TV money, then. They’ll hand some over to the poor saps they’re shafting…”

“No, it goes to the club. Nothing personal. They could get an extra £25m from a law suit against Collyer Bristow.”

“Could?”

“Maybe. Possibly. In theory.”

“When might they get it?”

“Whenever o’clock.”

“Well, the creditors can tell Green they’re not having his CVA…”

“Yes, they can. And so it’s liquidation-time and a newco and the stadium and the training ground and the Albion car park and all the rest of it that has a book value of more than £112m immediately becomes available for £5.5m”

“Result! To who?”

“Charles Green.”

“Ah.”

This was made up..
 
I think its just trying to say that D&P had agreed a fee for the administration and have gone so far 11x over that, you cant say its not a story.

And at the time of administration, Whyte proposed that the administration process would be very short and perhaps even over by the end of March. I.e 6 weeks. We are now approaching 16 weeks, so it is hardly a surprise that expenses are more than that email states.

Also, the £5.5 million isn't D&P fees, as I have already pointed out. Those are £3million, with an additional £0.5million as supervisors of the CVA. The rest of the money is made up of other expenses of realising the CVA. Regardless of what Eurosport or Mark Daly claims, the numbers are in the CVA proposal.
 
Last edited:
It is....

It's simply a poor excuse for the reporters name to be in the papers..

Makes you wonder why the story about the racial abuse of 3 rangers players, by a celtic supporter on twitter, hasn't been followed up further....

I would have thought, that would have been a bigger story..

What is the relevance in that?

You need to stop seeing everything as green and blue, everything is black and white ;)
 
What is the relevance in that?

You need to stop seeing everything as green and blue, everything is black and white ;)

The relevance is that it would be a piece of journalism... A story if you like..

One which would be more interesting to find out about.. rather than an out of date email about a situation that had obviously changed.
 
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2012/0...-ibrox-club-don-t-get-in-line-86908-23880097/

Headline
FIFA chief Jim Boyce insists governing body will step in if Ibrox club don't get in line

Quotes:

Former Irish FA boss Jim Boyce has warned that the stricken club risks dragging SPL rivals and the national team down if they persist in fighting their transfer ban through the law courts.

However, Boyce also hinted there could be a glimmer of a compromise in the fact Rangers did not argue against the 12-month transfer embargo, only that the sanction was not available to the SFA judicial panel which imposed it.

Rangers have not yet gone as far as FC Sion and the thrust of their successful case at the Court of Session was in arguing the SFA judicial panel acted outwith its powers by imposing a transfer ban.
Asked if that would be taken into account by FIFA, Boyce added: “I’m not a legal expert but it would have to be. I don’t know the legal powers the SFA had to do what they did.”


So FIFA are poised to hammer Rangers (according to the DR) but FIFA think the SFA may have overstepped their boundary and they understand why Rangers took the argument to court...

Interesting reporting again by the Daily Record....
 
"this club will never have debts again".

Lending the club 8.5m with 10% interest to be paid back in 8 years.

"you wont always like what you get from me but you will always get the truth"

Said he had 20 investors which was changed to 5 or 6.
 
"this club will never have debts again".

Lending the club 8.5m with 10% interest to be paid back in 8 years.

"you wont always like what you get from me but you will always get the truth"

Said he had 20 investors which was changed to 5 or 6.

Is that the best you can come up with?
 
"this club will never have debts again".

Lending the club 8.5m with 10% interest to be paid back in 8 years.

"you wont always like what you get from me but you will always get the truth"

Said he had 20 investors which was changed to 5 or 6.

There is a difference between "debt" and debt to parent/ holding company. Nearly every business carries a debt of some description.

He said he had around 20 individuals or groups involved in the consortium, with 5or6 who had put money up front in order to fund the CVA.

At end of day, every Rangers fan has a right to be wary given what the club has been put through. But Charles Green has come in with the best offer in order to salvage the club. Am I happy? Will depend on the outcome.

Personally I would have preferred Brian Kennedy and The Blue Knights to have gotten the gig, but their offer was poor with too many contingencies.
 
There is a difference between "debt" and debt to parent/ holding company. Nearly every business carries a debt of some description.

He said he had around 20 individuals or groups involved in the consortium, with 5or6 who had put money up front in order to fund the CVA.

At end of day, every Rangers fan has a right to be wary given what the club has been put through. But Charles Green has come in with the best offer in order to salvage the club. Am I happy? Will depend on the outcome.

Personally I would have preferred Brian Kennedy and The Blue Knights to have gotten the gig, but their offer was poor with too many contingencies.

You know why the Blue Knights was refused dont you, it meant D&P wouldnt get the money they expected out, no other reason.
 
When the first statement is that Rangers wont have debt again and then his offer for the club is not an offer but a loan, then it casts doubt on anything else he says, no?


No because most people can understand the difference between toxic debt and working debt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom