Admin presser empty confidence


There seems to be more confusion than clarity following this afternoon’s press conference at Ibrox where Duff and Phelps gave information on Rangers FC PLC (in administration).

Most important item first.  The administrators confirmed that they will propose a Creditors Voluntary Agreement (CVA) in order to avoid the company being liquidated.  You should ignore sounds of confidence on this matter.  The administrators have to sound confident that they have a good deal for creditors, no point telling everyone, ‘We’ve made an offer, but ooph, don’t hold your breath!”

No indication was given that any creditors were on-side, never mind the 75% by value required.  HMRC will have the casting vote in this campaign and are exceptionally unlikely to set a precedent for football clubs to opt-out of PAYE, NI and VAT.

One fascinating wee snippet is the missing £24m from Ticketus.  Of course, if you believed Craig Whyte, the money went into the club.  Alternatively, the money was paid to Whyte’s solicitors in advance of the club sale and went straight to Lloyds Banking Group.  The remainder will be with one of Whyte’s companies and could well be paying salaries next week. Nothing too exceptional.

How Ticketus secured this loan is more intriguing, but there is so little information published this is not particularly surprising.  Ticketus might have screwed up, but I reckon there is simply a detail not yet revealed to the administrators or public.  A non-committal reply was given to a question on the floating charge over the company originally held by Lloyds, which will possibly reveal more about Ticketus when confirmed.

At some point, possibly next week, the CVA will be proposed.  Once the administrator has a response to this they will be in a better position to suggest how likely the company is to be liquidated. Until then, it’s all cheer leading by the guys from London.

The signed Celtic top we are auctioning on eBay for the Vanessa Riddle Appeal has reached an incredible value. Well done to everyone who participated, you are remarkable ambassadors for Celtic Football Club.

Bid and help send Vanessa for the treatment she needs by clicking here. Only a couple of days left.

If you would like to read CQN Magazine online (for free), click here. You can download a pdf of the magazine using the button at the top of the page, second from the right. Click on the link below to order a hard copy of the magazine.

Ship to:

You can support the online edition by making a discretionary donation here.

Click Here for Comments >

About Author

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. ...
  11. 19

  1. movie on film four called ‘the bad news bears’


    thought for a second it was another documentary on the darkside lol

  2. Paul67 – James Forrest alluded to the Leeds Utd model on here a couple of nights ago.


    I replied saying we should look for inflated and indeed unusual bills when details of the creditors list is published under the CVA.


    Something else could be relevant. When HMRC were fighting the CVA at Leeds, Bates (sorry I meant to say the owners who no-one knew) said they would only accept the Bates bid for the company ( there were other interested parties) or they would liquidate the club.


    Some of the other parties had offered more to the creditors than Bates so it was a little unusual for the biggest creditor to insist on the smallest offer.


    It has since been alleged that Bates owned the club before, during and after administration. It has also been alleged that whilst his offshore company originally lost as much money ( in the pound) as other creditors that this debt has been paid back in the last few years by Bates newco. Only the other creditors were stuffed. Including HMRC.


    I know the above seems a little convoluted so I’ll try it in shorthand, all allegedly of course.


    Bates owned Leeds when they went into admin but via an offshore and hidden company.


    This offshore co was owed money (like other creditors) but obviously had the inside track during admin.


    As the majority creditor they insisted that the deal offered by Mr Bates was the only one they would accept or they would liquidate the club and no creditors would get anything.


    HMRC were forced to accept.


    Bates bought the club for 8p in the £ ( his original offer was 1p)


    After the club came out of admin Leeds Utd have been paying back the other 92p to Ken Bates so he lost nothing at all. Payments via offshore companies.


    He owed it, he owns it. Others have lost.


    Leeds Utd the club do not own the training ground. Bates says neither does he.


    Leeds Utd do not own Elland Road. Bates says neither does he. No-one knows who does.


    However, the club is spending a lot of money tarting up the ground when the fans want a decent team on the pitch instead. If Bates does not own the ground why would he do this?


    It’s the equivalent of having a conservatory and gym built onto your council flat.


    It is to be hoped that HMRC are a step ahead this time having learned the lesson.


    Apologies for this nonsensical and long winded rant folks, but I can see parallels.

  3. Are there any Rangers u19 prospects we could ‘poach’ from them right now?



    Really really sicken them!!

  4. Socks round the ankles and no shinnies on

    Starry Plough at 9.35



    I think the MBB will be heading to the real big hoose in the not too distant future, how much snout will a pound buy in the Bar-l

  5. From Strathclyde Police’s facebook…




    Strathclyde Police


    Strathclyde Police can confirm that we have been passed information regarding the ongoing situation at Rangers Football Club. This is currently being examined and it would be inappropriate to comment further.





  6. PFayr,



    Ticketus secure their risk against a bond, kind of insurance policy which the applicant pays for guesstimates of the cost are between £1-2m.



    This is added to the advance. So the Buns have paid Wavetower to take over their own club AND paid the insurance policy against GEF defaulting!



    Allegedly ;-)



    Hail! Hail!




  7. Whyte will not have given LBoS £18 million for the bank debt. They will have sold it a discount to get it settled but more than they would have got if they were still holding it when insolvency hit.



    If Ranklers don’t have the Ticketus money it suggests the successor of Wavetower has it or it was used to pay off the bank, or Whyte trousered it to replace the money he used to pay the bank.



    Whatever, seems unlikely that HMRCs £9million will be so diluted that a CVA will be agreed

  8. the long wait is over on

    If the Ticketus deal turns out to be unsecured then I’d suggest there’s a firm of solicitors somewhere contacting their Professional Indemnity insurers as we speak.

  9. PF Ayr



    I was not suggesting that the Administrator would make money from his re-sale.



    I was suggesting that his value as an £8k per week contracted footballer would somehow be of value to the secured assets of Craig Whyte within the convoluted fiances of who has first claim on money settlements at Ibrox.



    Willie McKay probably owed the club a favour for their silence about his previous Govan clients.

  10. the long wait is over on




    Ticketus secure their risk against a bond, kind of insurance policy which the applicant pays for guesstimates of the cost are between £1-2m.



    This is added to the advance. So the Buns have paid Wavetower to take over their own club AND paid the insurance policy against GEF defaulting!





    If so and the Insurers who underwrote the bond pay out arent they likely to exercise a right of subrogation and themselves become creditors in the Admin?



    Not the same as being secured of course but still a due debt all the same.

  11. Anybody else get one of these?


    Doesn’t answer my questions, so I’m guessing it’s not a collector’s item.


    I would have thought the broadcasters and sponsors might also be concerned that they’ve been subsidising a corrupt ‘competition’ for a decade. And that Terry the Butcher might have similar concerns:



    Dear Daniel Fergus



    Thank you for your email.



    Football is our national game and the Scottish Government is a committed supporter of Scottish football and all of our football clubs in recognition of the important positive role they play in communities throughout Scotland.



    I fully recognise that it is vital that both individuals and organisations pay their taxes in a timely manner as taxation is essential to the economic and social development of Scotland. In any statements made on Rangers, the Scottish Government has reiterated the importance of an agreement between the club and HMRC being reached which ensures that Rangers meet their obligations, including their tax liabilities and debts as well as securing as many of the jobs as possible.



    As you will know, the club have now entered administration and it is far too early to predict the possible outcome of this but it is less likely that if the club is wound up that tax liabilities will be met. The task for the administrators now is to take forward the process of assessing the business and securing an outcome in the best interests of all of the creditors.



    In a telephone conversation yesterday with the administrator, I reiterated our priorities as stated above. A key concern for us is the future of the over 250 people employed by the club and the potential economic impact of administration. The Government stands ready to offer assistance to anyone affected by job losses at the company and we will stay in contact with the administrator throughout the process to ensure we are informed of any developments. The Scottish Government has offered this type of assistance to a number of companies in the past, including other Scottish football clubs which had gone into administration, and will continue to do so with any company with employees facing redundancy.



    While we are able to offer support as laid out above, I want to be clear that no public money would be offered to bail out any football club and this remains the case with Rangers.



    Finally, the potential impact on Scottish football of losing Rangers was captured very well in the comments earlier this week of Inverness Manager Terry Butcher, when he expressed concern that such a loss would have a very negative impact on already difficult broadcasting and sponsorship deals. I hope you will agree that this is something we would wish, if at all possible, to avoid.



    Yours sincerely









    * * * * * * * * * * * * * *


    From: Daniel Fergus


    Sent: 14 February 2012 00:05


    To: Minister for Commonwealth Games and Sport


    Subject: HMRC / Rangers FC




    Dear Ms Robison



    Further to your statement regarding Rangers FC’s declared intention to go into administration – reported on BBC website as outlined below:



    Sports Minister Shona Robison said: “I understand that Rangers and HMRC are continuing dialogue and we obviously want to see an agreement which will protect jobs and enable the club to stay in business.



    “Rangers is a crucial part of Scotland’s national game, and our interest is ensuring that a resolution can be arrived at between HMRC and the club to deliver these vital objectives.”





    Could you please clarify why it is in the national interest to enable a football club, which has evaded paying income tax / VAT / National Insurance in order to achieve a competitive advantage over rival ‘businesses’, to continue trading?



    In doing so, could you advise what message you think this will convey about the integrity of sport in Scotland? That the Scottish Government supports cheats? That it is acceptable to deliberately avoid paying tax. That it its acceptable to avoid paying bills to people who trade goods / services / players in good faith?



    Finally, if you consider such financial doping to be acceptable, will other forms of doping be okay for those planning to compete at the Commonwealth Games?



    I look forward to your reply.



    Yours in sport




    Daniel Fergus

  12. Sftb/PFayr,



    I reckon that FPLG told the administrator that he was offski if he was once again embarrassed and didn’t get Cousin.



    Hail! Hail!




  13. Daniel Fergus says:


    16 February, 2012 at 21:56



    HCL, a call centre based in the north of Ireland are making 250 job redundancies.



    Same number yet absolutely no government intervention.




  14. Good grief, it’s been hard to keep up these last 4 days! With a 9 hour time difference from Glasgow, I’ve been burning the candle at both ends, losing much needed beauty sleep as I remain glued to CQN till way too late at night & then jump on it first thing for my morning fix. Not to mention, my appallingly poor work output this week; need to come in at the weekend to try & catch up!



    Meantime, I was glad to see the Club statement in opposition of Eck the weasel.


    Pure ragin’ when I read his idiotic but arrogant utterings.


    A complete END to the 1873RFC is the only palatable outcome here.


    And if/when a new hunset emerges from the rubble, then it has to work its passage by the same rules that would oh so rigidly if it were any club other than the great undignified.

  15. Eyes Wide Open says:


    16 February, 2012 at 21:48


    Are there any Rangers u19 prospects we could ‘poach’ from them right now?



    Really really sicken them!!




    Good move, a possibility for cheap quality

  16. Anyone else feel like this whole situation is a Japanese meal? So many courses and just when yir fit tae burst……oot comes the jelly and ice cream :)

  17. If Why/ite is no longer welcome at ibrox then I think we should invite him to our remaining home games from the season. He could do the Paradise Windfall.



    Withouth a doubt, he’d get a great reception.

  18. I’ve dropped Mr Salmond an email expressing my disgust about his claptrap from the last few days – I doubt he’ll be too bothered, but after the ‘offensive song’ debacle and his latest utterings I will never vote for him again. After disowning Labour and Lib Dems and, relucantly, the Greens, I can only hope that George Galloway makes a comeback or Tony Benn moves up here.



    Maybe I am missing something, but why is Salmond pandering to the great unwashed? I know he would sell his granny for a vote and for independence, but are TFOD really that fickle that they would vote for him despite their Unionist tradition? How could a hun sing a song about The Queen and Brtiannia if they also voted for independence? Am i giving TFOD too much credit for an intelligence they dont really have?



    Talking about stupidity, I cannot believe that Ticketus would be so stupid as to give £24m with no security. Someone isnt telling something.



    “David Whitehouse, from administrators Duff and Phelps told a press conference: “Our understanding is that the funds from Ticketus didn’t come through the company’s account, they went through a parent company account so we haven’t got visibility on that. He added that the administrators were checking with Rangers’ former lawyers”. Again, maybe i am missing something, but why dont they just phone Craig Whiter than Whyte and ask him where it went?!??!?!

  19. garygillespieshamstring on

    Paul67 : It has been a particular joy to read the articles this week. Thanks for keeping us informed.


    I am confident that CQN’s position in the football blog world will be unaffected by the demise of Folly Folly.



    Tainted Trophies : I wonder if it goes back as far as 1989. My recollection of the Judas saga was that he signed for


    les orc because “David Murray offered to take care of his income tax on the deal” while Celtic would not. How could they “take care of” his tax bill without it being outside of the legal system. It could not have been expenses for track suits etc as he used to nick them allegedly.


    Was this arrangement a forerunner of the EBT scam? How many of the players signed during the 90s were made the same offer?



    In my view, 8 of the nine titles they won in that period could be deemed to be tainted. Murray and Souness were mentioned as being involved in dodgy transfer dealings in a book I read at one time. Mentioned in the same ways as George Graham, ‘Arry etc, as regular offenders. A heck of a lot of players were in and out of the new Tesco at that time.



    Anyone any thoughts?




  20. Mr Stimpson says:



    16 February, 2012 at 22:05



    On second thoughts the Paradise Windfall would be a bad idea as he’d probably pocket the cheque.



    He could be the ceremonial head of the conga.

  21. TLWIO,



    Yes and no – the insurer retains the right to take action against those parties who cause the claim. So it’s Whytey who needs to look at his P.I. Insurance (or Directors insurance if he paid the premiums!)



    Doubt that they have any claim against the administrators but I may be wrong



    Hail! Hail!




  22. So the enemy of rangers is time, is it? I think they have plenty enemies and sadly many friends, but I think their main enemy has been denial.


    They denied their sectarian policy, costing them evergreen, magical Danny Fergus McGrain.


    They denied, along with the LL, that Gascoigne was a hacking, elbowing toe rag who got off with murder with Scottish refs, but was sent off several times by less compliant refs in Europe.


    They denied Goram’s arm band, the bile in the San Siro, the racism against every Irishman who ever played at Ibrox.


    They denied their draft dodging during the war, damning Celtic for not following the pro-war poppy, and denying that the highest honour to be bestowed on a Scottish footballer was to a Celtic player while Struth had his men all safe in munitions factories.


    Manchester, nazi salutes, dougie dougie, Dallas: denied.


    And when Murray and his cheating was exposed by the excellent cqn, rtc


    And when the press

  23. Could liquidation be the MBB’s ideal exit strategy?



    Is it possible that he could then disappear from the scene with a hidden few million of his favourite coins and leave the scraps to the vultures?




  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. ...
  11. 19