Duff and Phelps and any prospective Rangers buyer quoted have been making confident noises about a CVA being agree with creditors, we’ve even heard the club could be out of administration next week.
The mood changed yesterday when the SPL announced potential sanctions for a Newco to be admitted to the league following liquidation and increased sanctions for clubs in administration, which would only affect Rangers were they to remain under court protection until the start of next season.
Duff and Phelps now say, “the fact that such measures are being considered at such a sensitive point in the sale process at Rangers is disruptive and regrettable”.
It’s time for Duff and Phelps to follow through with all those confident noises and agree a CVA with creditors. If HMRC are open to the idea, conclude a deal, there is no need to wait for the FTT verdict. If HMRC will not agree to a CVA, which is my understanding, drop the pretence and tell us how you plan to proceed.
Is it too late to suggest they just pay their bills and save everyone all this trouble?
Pay your bills and stop complaining!
More later.
Can you write an article for CQN Magazine? Give me a shout, celticquicknews@gmail.com
Pay your bills!
240 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- »
Lets beat Hearts!!!!!!!
Sound financial practices catches the eye!!!
Ma big pal loves it too!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Foahtz9xnw8
No.7
Meet the New Firm
Same as the Old Firm
BIG BUCKS AGAIN!!!!
If the owner of a club in the SPL is called before the SFA to answer various charges but just turns round and says that he’s not going to show up, having previously ignored all correspondence from the authorities, shouldn’t there be some sort of punishment for that too?
Well, this is what Craigy boy is doing.
I suppose it will all be forgotten about, as it’s Rangers.
ECA Executive Board Members Jean-Michel Aulas (Olympique Lyonnais) and Ernesto Paolillo (FC Internazionale Milano) today participated in the second UEFA Financial Fair Play Media Day, which was held at the House of European Football in Nyon.
The Financial Fair Play Regulations, which were fully approved by the UEFA Executive Committee in May 2010, are designed to protect European football’s long-term health and viability, as well as the integrity and smooth running of UEFA’s club competitions. Moreover, they aim to stimulate long-term investment in areas such as youth development and the upgrading of club infrastructure.
During today’s media event, UEFA took the opportunity to explain to the present media representatives in detail the key milestones and principles of Financial Fair Play and to give an update on its implementation. As the new regulations began to be implemented during this season and will be fully implemented for European competitions as of the 2013/14 season, it is crucial to explain where we stand at this point in time.
Jean-Michel Aulas and Ernesto Paolillo, who are both chairing the ECA Finance Task Force which was heavily involved in the creation of the new rules, participated in a Question & Answer session to share their views and thoughts from a club’s perspective. Both ECA Representatives highlighted that they are very pleased that UEFA took the responsibility to introduce the rules. ECA was always supportive of this initiative and the close cooperation between UEFA and the clubs in this respect was exemplary. With the coming into force of the regulations the close collaboration continues: 38 clubs from 19 different countries are voluntarily taking part in a test exercise, which concerns the financial years 2009, 2010 and 2011.
The Financial Fair Play Media Day coincided with the presentation of UEFA’s Club Licensing Benchmarking Report for the Financial Year 2010. The report gives an overview into the overall health of European football clubs across Europe in 2010. Despite the challenging economic situation, the report highlights that top-divsion clubs in Europe increased their income by 6.6%. However, with reported €1.6bn net loss (which is 36% higher than the 2009 figure of €1.2bn) the financial situation in European football remains problematic. These key figures clearly underline the fact that there is a strong need to introduce more discipline and rationality in club football finances. The introduction of the Financial Fair Play Regulations aims at limiting the financial problems of European club football in the future.
The full UEFA Club Licensing Benchmarking report is available for download on http://www.uefa.com.
Awe naw-I think we might be hearing a fair bit about the Court of Arbitration for Sport very soon.
Alex Thomson’s new blog, complete with hilarious picture of ra peepil:
http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/rangers-morality-repaying-owe/1114
Paul67 or anybody who can answer….
Will Doncaster be on a salary or bonus system were he is rewarded for the income he brings into the SPL.
The higher the TV deal, the bigger the sponsorship deal and the more people through the gates all leading to more money in his pocket.
If so it’s obvious that the newhunco in his SPL ticks every box of the above, so would more suit his pocket.
Is he then in a compromised position where he can try to change the rules to suit his pocket rather than for the good of the game.
Or is the fact these are only proposals a get out clause for him, so to speak?
Cheers.
I am just about at the point of giving up on all of this. Celtic are gonna be the only club seriously damaged by this whole fiasco. I really hope the board and DD have been working on a contingency plan.
ernie lynch on 12 April, 2012 at 13:31 said:
ABZMike on 12 April, 2012 at 13:29 said:
”but the SFA is the overall governing body, and could stop all of this in it’s tracks”
————————————————————————————–
I agree I am sure the new recently appointed president Campbell Ogilvie will be all over this like a rash keen to stamp his authority in his new job etc……..hold on……..wait a minute…FFs
Hmrc have been far to lenient with huns. Im gonna try witholding PAYE for a year and see how they treat me. Gotta be the same rules for all.
Awe Naw
Principles behind the licence?? Tell that to the fokes they stuffed!!!
Scotlands Shame by a MILE!!!!!!
Headtheball on 12 April, 2012 at 14:13 said:
If the owner of a club in the SPL ….
Indeed – RFCiA seem to be immune from all sanctions…
Gordon J
That’s only in the real world.
In LaLa SPL Land (according to these rules) your club survives, your strips survive, your history survives…….. everything except your debts. The newco is a not a new member as it holds a trasferred membership. Therefore rules apply across the span of that membership. Rule 7 applied to oldco. It also applies to newco………..because it merely applies to the actual single membership which is not being withdrawn and re-issued it is merely being passed over.
So, my logic is that rule 7 must still apply and therefore unless any newco pays off the back tax and NI (applicable to this specific membership which remains unchanged) from this season (whether that has died in the real world or not) they can’t sign anyone.
Simples
Paul McConville et al could go to court on this one for starters………
HH
http://www.splsurvey.co.uk/
A share in the spl is basically a license to play within it,transferring that share from a dead club to a new one does not preserve the history of the dead club.
Correct me if I’m wrong.
Alex Thomson
OK. Just to get to some hard facts as the firestorm rages around the new SPL rule-change proposals.
Obviously this is being seen as a parachute back into the SPL for RFC, but in terms of cold, hard facts, away from the emotion, that’s not the way to see it because the parachute already exists.
SPL told me this morning (and I will get more from Mr Doncaster this afternoon) that the SPL board could simply vote a newco Rangers back into the SPL in theory, with no sanctions beyond the obvious ones arising from liquidation in terms of European competition etc.
To be clear: Rangers FC could be back in the SPL having paid nowt to the taxman and without the currently proposed sanctions to be voted on.
So in cold hard facts, the rule changes actually toughen things up for RFC – or anybody else – and not the other way around.
The wider morality of allowing such a newco anywhere near the SPL, having not paid the £75m owed to you, me and every other taxpayer, is a wider argument.
I can certainly tell you from conversations with the administrators and HMRC and Uefa that the very idea is not going to play well – and the SPL would do well to consider their wider constituency as their members approach the vote on this. If there is one story Uefa wants to tell you right now it is financial fair play.
And then there’s the HMRC and their “eleventh commandment”, quoted to me some weeks ago: “Though shalt not get away with it.”
Clearly any RFC parachuting back – and it is not a done deal, although the curious eight majority vote makes it a virtual cert (more on that from Mr Doncaster later I trust) – will involve a club that actually has to live in a more real world financially and actually think about paying back money it borrowed; not paying so much money it does not have; forgetting any notion of playing European football; losing matches with a depleted squad and very limited means to enhance it, and so forth.
Some might consider that adequate punishment for the sins of yesteryear and a new beginning now underway etc. Others will say getting away with not paying the millions you owe is a terrible precedent to set, not just for the governance of our football but for that of our very culture. My hunch is the latter will have the majority.
More from the SPL later in the day and – if Uefa can ever get back to me – the first of two blogs on political interference in Scottish football.
No7
When I went self employed and went to the DSS to see how to pay my stamp and taxes. They told me I can pay my stamp monthly by DD or yearly. So I decided to put it in a wee tin and pay yearly. 2 months later a girl from the DSS chapped my door on a Saturday afternoon wanting to know why I hadnt paid my stamp for 2 months. I owed them £13.20p. I paid it monthly from then on.
I for one love the hilarious illogicality of the “it wisnae The Rangers, it wur Craig Whyte” argument.
When Sone Aluko scores a good goal against Celtic it is for The Rangers, but when Rangers pay Sone Aluko instead of the taxman it is that bad Craig Whyte.
When Nikica Jelavic wins them the league it is The Rangers, but when Rangers don’t pay Rapid Vienna it is that bad David Murray.
When John Greig is the director’s box it is a fitting tribute to a The Rangers legned, but when his contract gets shredded to dodge tax it is that bad Martin Bain.
Paul67, is that what you mean when you say “cognitive dissonance”?
I thought that they needed a 11 to 1 vote to change the rules in th SPL.
How can this not be the case with these proposals?
TT
Strong words in a US article about the SPL’s proposals:
Is Doping Acceptable in Scottish Soccer
Anyone got any views on what sanctions would be acceptable for a newco?
1. Liquidate OldCo and create NewCo. Apply to join Div3. No penalties. New club. Age=0.
2. Liquidate OldCo and create NewCo. Apply to join SPL due to 50k seater stadium and support to fill it. Penalties for gaining jumping 3 divisions. Otherwise a new club, age=0.
3. No liquidation, pay your debts with interest no matter how long it takes. Old club, no penalties other than those mandated for being in administration.
All of these are OK with me.
Jabba back on sportsound tonight. Just in time to tell us how much we need the rangers!!
The Smallest CSC on 12 April, 2012 at 14:46 said:
If they are liquidated, only the first option is acceptable in my opinion.
Lennon n Mc….Mjallby on 12 April, 2012 at 14:32 said:
”A share in the spl is basically a license to play within it,transferring that share from a dead club to a new one does not preserve the history of the dead club”
It would be a bit like buying up a lot of old war medals and calling yourself a hero.
I read something from Speirs last night about the proposed SPL changes. Went along the lines of ” Rangers fans livid – Celtic fans livid so the SPL must be doing something right.”
Like most of us my angst is that they are going to be let into the SPL at all after liquidation. The paltry points deduction for 2 seasons was secondary.
I sort of took it for granted that the huns were going mental about the severity of the proposals. I’ve just had a look at RM. It appears their anger yesterday was because of the timing of the SPL statement. (It stopped D&D announcing the preferred bidder) They are generally of the opinion that the new proposed rules are sort of ok.
ernie lynch on 12 April, 2012 at 14:50 said:
It would be a bit like buying up a lot of old war medals and calling yourself a hero.
It would be more like buying a corpse that had war medals and then claiming to be a hero.
Ernie
And telling everyone else to wear a poppy…
;)
HH
We have had over 18 months of hyperbole about the demise of The Darnel.
It just ain’t gonna happen.
Not too many cries for me to eat tat ties today (:-)
TT
StMichaelsBhoy2 on 12 April, 2012 at 14:45 said:
Strong words in a US article about the SPL’s proposals:
Is Doping Acceptable in Scottish Soccer
Fantastic article, looks like it could have been written by one of the posters on here.
We really need the truth out to as many people as possible but i feel most would just shake their head in disbelief and ignore it as it’s from a corrupt mickey mouse league.
Can somebody send Alex Thomson a copy of the SPL handbook. He seems to think that Neil Doncaster and his fellow SPL board members are honest chaps who would never act out of self interest and next weeks pay packet
my post to him on that blog is still awaiting moderation 30 minutes now MMmhhhhhh………..
So in cold hard facts, the rule changes actually toughen things up for RFC – or anybody else – and not the other way around.
What ? because Mr Doncaster says that the SPL board can behave like the Russian politburo if it likes we have to be thankful for small mercies and believe that ANY option at all never mind a parachute option can always be attempted???
Sorry I do not follow the logic there at all. This article strikes me as an exercise in maintaining journalistic contacts.
If that is indeed the case then as a law abiding citizen who pays his taxes I would fully expect the Serious Fraud Squad to be paying the architects of this Fraud (I.e the SPL board) a little visit
The new Alex Thiompson blog once again shows the media strategy for the Cheats’ Charter at work in what Doncaster has to say.
This isn’t about creating an opportunity for a Newco, he says. No, that was already there apparently. It’s about punishing a Newco. This is actually a bad thing for Rangers FC PLC (in administration).
The current SPL rules state that if a club goes into liquidation during the season the number of relegation places is reduced. So there is no place for a newco. There is some ambiguity about what happens if a club goes into liquidation in the close season, ie after promotion and relegation issues have been settled.
I still want to see the exact text of the proposed rule changes, not just the summaries. What is the process in the case of an Insolvency Transfer Event? Who approves the Transfer? What criteria need to be met for a valid Transfer to take place? I have a bad feeling that the criteria will be minimal and that acceptance by the SPL will be pretty much automatic.
TinyTim on 12 April, 2012 at 14:45 said:
‘I thought that they needed a 11 to 1 vote to change the rules in th SPL.’
Nope.
”Ordinary Resolutions (66%)
(j) any alteration, variation or modification of the Rules, except for Section C and/or any other part of the Rules the alteration, variation or modification of which would have the effect of altering, varying or modifying a provision or provisions in Section C of the Rules or the adoption of a new, substitute or different Section C of the Rules;
(k) any amendment to the criteria for admission to or membership of the League or the introduction of any additional criteria for admission to or membership of the League;”
http://www.scotprem.com/content/mediaassets/doc/SPL%20Articles%20as%
20at%2015-Apr-10%20(CURRENT).pdf
TinyTim on 12 April, 2012 at 14:55 said:
”We have had over 18 months of hyperbole about the demise of The Darnel.
It just ain’t gonna happen.
Not too many cries for me to eat tat ties today (:-)”
You claimed the huns wouldn’t go bust.
You suggested that their triumph of the will mentality would allow them to trade through this.
You were wrong.
You should be big enough to admit that.
I hope Celtic refuse to play ball with sky/espn see what happens with their precious tv deal.
TinyTim
I can back you up all the way on this one.
Not once did you EVER waver from that assertion.
I always agreed with you but I wanted to see a few things
1) Rangers going bust
2) How Scotland would cope with that situation and especially Celtic
We haven´t seen any of that JUST yet.and I will get back to you once these two things are clear which will be soon now.
I am looking forward to it immensely it will be like Dorothy meeting the Wizard for the second time.
Only problem with that scene is that it is near the end.
Hail Hail
TinyTim on 12 April, 2012 at 14:55 said:
Not too many cries for me to eat tat ties today (:-)
We’ve still to see you consuming your last pun a totties in one sitting.
Demanding you eat more while you struggle with what you have on your plate is how rainjurs fans got their club in trouble. ;-)