I see Leeds United are being held up as a model for Rangers to liquidate and emerge as a new club. Leeds United’s circumstances are highly unlikely to bear any relationship with those at Rangers unless Duff and Phelps can agree a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement.
Leeds United AFC Ltd entered administration in the control of KPMG Restructuring on 4 May 2007 and on the same day were sold to a new company Leeds United Football Club Ltd subject to a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) being agreed. Both Leeds United AFC Ltd and Leeds United FC Ltd were controlled by Ken Bates.
A CVA requires 75% of creditors (by value) to vote to accept a reduced percentage of the money they are owed. The company was forced to act as HMRC, who were owed in excess of £6m, had issued a winding up petition which was due to expire on 25 June 2007.
Before creditors voted on the CVA several other bidders came forward with offers for the club, however, the vote, on 1 June 2007, returned 75.02% of creditors accepting the CVA offer (75.20% after a recount).
Creditors can challenge a CVA within 28 days of the vote. On the 28th day, 3 July 2007, HMRC challenged. With the CVA subject to a challenge, KPMG asked for further offers for the company to be submitted by 9 July 2007. Despite the extended offer period, the administrators still accepted the offer from Ken Bates Leeds United FC Ltd.
With a CVA agreed, subject to challenge, the Football League transferred Leeds United AFC’s league share to Leeds United FC Ltd under its “exceptional circumstances” provision. The League imposed a 15 point penalty on the club for the 2007-08 season for failing to satisfy the outstanding legal challenge in time, necessitating the ‘exceptional circumstances’ rule.
HMRC withdrew their objection to the CVA the following month. Leeds United subsequently appealed against their 15 point penalty citing a CVA had been agreed and that the league programme does not allow time for spurious challenges to be dealt with. The Football League refused the appeal.
Believing Football League procedures were at fault, not their own behaviour, Leeds United served the League with a High Court writ to challenge the points deduction, however, both parties agreed to abide by the findings of an arbitration panel hearing.
The arbitration panel found against Leeds United citing the following two reasons:
A director of Leeds United FC signed an earlier agreement not to commence any proceedings against the League.
Leeds United waited 7 months before commencing the action, which brought unnecessary sporting consequences on other promotion chasing clubs, specifically Doncaster Rovers, who would no longer be in an automatic promotion spot if Leeds’ 15 points were restored.
In summary:
Leeds United AFC Ltd’s administrators achieved the necessary 75% support for a CVA.
They withstood the challenge from HMRC, paid creditors and concluded the transfer of assets, including League share, to Leeds United FC Ltd, according to the terms of the CVA before winding up the old company. No loose ends were left.
This is not a Liquidator’s Charter. Provisions in football only exist to transfer a League share from one company to another if creditors are satisfied, either by being paid in full or, as with Leeds United, with 75% agreeing to accept a diminished amount.
Click here to read CQN Magazine.
Thanks to everyone who has bought a hard copy of issue 7. Order your copy for delivery by clicking on the link below for news and views from Celtic supporters.
Pay by card or Paypal.
1,227 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
Posted by
Paul Wilson
Wednesday 4 April 2012 14.10 BST
guardian.co.uk
Article history
Here is what Arsène Wenger had to say, in the press conference after the game, when asked why he had waited on the pitch to speak to the referee Damir Skomina following Arsenal’s 3-0 defeat of Milan at the Emirates last month, the one that wasn’t quite enough to repair the damage of the 4-0 defeat in the first leg at San Siro.
“I was not happy with the referee because he gave them many free-kicks in the centre of the park,” the Arsenal manager said. “Every time a player went down it was a free-kick to them. The [Milan] players sensed that very quickly on the pitch and used it well.”
And here is what the manager of Porto, Vítor Pereira, had to say about Mario Balotelli being subjected to racial abuse, ie monkey noises so loud they were picked up by viewers watching on television, when substituted late in the game Manchester City won 2-1 at the Estádio do Dragão in February. “I think there might have been a misunderstanding,” Pereira and other club spokesmen insisted. “The crowd were chanting Hulk, Hulk, Hulk.”
Hard to know why they would do that in the 78th minute of a game when the Porto striker had just been switched from the centre of the attack to the wing, but that is not the point at issue. The point at issue is that Wenger has just been handed a €40,000 (£33,100) fine for his conduct regarding Mr Skomina, and ordered to serve a three-match touchline ban in Europe. Whereas Porto, for what appears a much graver offence even without the club excuses that insulted everyone’s intelligence, got away with a trifling €20,000 fine.
There’s something not quite right there, and it may not be the usual Uefa weakness at dealing effectively with offensively racist attitudes. Both Uefa and Fifa are fairly hopeless at even recognising the seriousness of racism in football let alone dealing with it, as we know from a series of ineffective wrist slaps down the years. In England, of course, we can sort this type of thing out in no time. That’s why we have just lost our national team captain and national team coach because of an alleged remark that took place between two players last October and which will take the best part of a year to come to court. But that is not the point at issue either. Anti-racism campaigners are arguing among themselves about whether the Porto fine is sufficient. The Kick It Out campaign considers the Uefa punishment too lenient and complains it does not send out a strong enough message, which is par for the course. Whereas Piara Powar of Football Against Racism in Europe more or less welcomed Uefa’s action, arguing that it sent a clear warning, was a sufficient amount for a first offence and that the club would be told further transgressions would be dealt with more severely.
While noting that it may be unduly lenient in itself to allow that this actually was a first offence at Porto – unless a similar incident involving William Gallas and Didier Drogba in 2004 is too long ago to count – it seems possible to embrace both these responses. While no one wishes to see matches played in closed stadiums, no one would like these unpleasant situations to go unchecked or unnoticed either, and the football authorities must steer a course between the two extremes, taking into account the quite noticeable differences in attitudes towards racial integration even in countries within Europe. At least Uefa is doing something and not pretending the problem does not exist, and that is a start. A fine of £16,700 is not exactly chicken feed, it just looks puny when set against Wenger being asked to cough up double that amount.
Here is the anomaly. While it may appear to be the case that Uefa considers racial abuse less of a crime than questioning a referee’s ability, it is possible to look at the situation the opposite way round and wonder why it is that such a high tariff is set for remarks made to or about Champions League officials. How come Wenger came to be fined £33,400, in other words, when all he did was criticise the referee’s performance? Had he been told to stump up £5,000, or just asked to watch the next match from the stands, it would have been perfectly commensurate with the offence and made the Porto fine look relatively severe. It could be argued that Wenger has previous in this area, though it could also be argued that he has reason to be unhappy with some of the referees that Uefa has sent along. It would have taken the patience of a saint, for example, to remain calm and dispassionate after what happened to Robin van Persie against Barcelona last season.
As we are not only approaching the third anniversary of the absolute nadir of Champions League refereeing – the unforgettable performance by Tom Henning Ovrebo in Chelsea’s doomed attempt to overcome Barcelona at the semi-final stage at Stamford Bridge – but there is also the possibility of the same teams meeting at the same stage, perhaps Uefa should bring in everyone’s favourite Norwegian official for old times’ sake. Ovrebo’s career did not exactly take off after the Chelsea debacle: he supervised another Champions League miscarriage of justice with Bayern Munich and Fiorentina two years ago, and after complaints in qualification games for the 2010 World Cup did not make the cut for the finals in South Africa. So he quit international football and now just referees in Norway, which is more or less what he was doing when he first came to prominence for all the wrong reasons.
Chelsea were fined £85,000 for improper conduct for their wholly understandable disappointment and frustration at the end of that memorable match, when Uefa should really have been apologising for its own bungling and paying the club a much larger sum in compensation. Uefa gets things wrong, referees get things wrong, but it is only ever clubs and players who are fined or banned.
The Champions League this season is building to what seems certain to be a memorable climax, there are some great sides in it and Uefa is to be congratulated on improving an already magnificent spectacle year on year, though one consequence of the greater number of games now played in the tournament is that not every top match gets a top referee. Whereas managers used to be full of praise for a higher standard of referees in Europe, now they wonder where some of them come from. Uefa, to judge by the size of the fines it imposes for even gentle criticism of referees, seem to be aware of this problem. But if Wenger so much as makes a peep next season he will probably cop for a six-figure sum, which is silly.
There are worse things going on in football than managers complaining about refereeing decisions. Disgruntled managers will always want to do that, it is part of the game, but Uefa does not want to know. One’s sympathies lay entirely with Wenger when he said recently that referees had become the new untouchables, especially in Europe. “I believe that they have transformed Uefa competition referees to be untouchable icons,” he said. “Now you cannot even have a word.”
The Letter referred to by Avocado (specially for SNP voters!) :
“Dear Mr Clark & Mr Whitehouse,
RANGERS FC
I am writing in relation to the current situation of Rangers FC.
I am MSP for Mid-Scotland & Fife and also Convenor of the Scottish Parliament’s Economy,
Energy and Tourism Committee, although I am writing this in a personal capacity. I am also
a debenture holder at Rangers FC and therefore technically a creditor of the company.
I know that as administrators you are currently considering bids for the company. I believe
that it is essential that any bidder considering liquidation is ruled out of the process. I say
this for two reasons – firstly, liquidation would deprive HMRC of funds properly due to the
taxpayer and, secondly, liquidation would jeopardise the future existence of an institution
which means so much to so many people across the world.
It is in the interests of HMRC that Rangers FC exit administration through a Company
Voluntary Arrangement and therefore I believe that only bids that offer this course of action
should be taken forward by the administrators.
You will welcome the support from the fans of the Club, including the three supporters’
groups coming together to raise funds and who have now made payments to Dunfermline FC
on behalf of the club. If Rangers FC is liquidated and a new club is established I fear that
some of this support may disappear, which will damage the Club’s revival.
It is a fact that Scottish football needs to change and adapt. It is in the interests for Scottish
football for there to be a strong SPL, and having a strong Rangers FC in the top flight”
JJ
Good Morning!
Aw ma heid.
Happy New Tax Year to everyone.
Have they paid any taxes this year yet? Or last year or the year before that or the year…….
Any relevance to why the bids had to be in before tax year end?
Where’s that Rioja..
Summa of Sammi….
Afraid I don’t have full squad figs to hand but will see what I can dig out and do something either today or tomorrow.
Mort
Summa of Sammi…. on 5 April, 2012 at 10:12
Below is an updated list of win percentages per games started. As you can see, Sammi is in the top 11. His % dipped a lot in the early part of this season but rallied when he became the driving force behind Celtic’s winning run. I don’t think it really represents the worth of a player, but – what can I say? – I love stats.
McCourt ……… 93.94% 31/33
Loovens ……… 84.95% 79/93
Izaguirre ……… 84.40% 119/141
Stokes ………… 82.18% 143/174
Forrest ……….. 82.00% 123/150
Rogne ………… 80.56% 87/108
Zaluska ………. 79.49% 31/39
Hooper ……….. 78.67% 177/225
K Wilson ……… 78.43% 40/51
Samaras …….. 77.78% 126/162
Brown …………. 77.60% 142/183
Kayal ………….. 77.16% 125/162
Cha ……………. 75.92% 82/108
Commons ……. 76.67% 69/90
Wanyama ……. 75.86% 66/87
Majstorovic ….. 74.60% 141/189
Matthews …….. 74.44% 67/90
Forster ……….. 74.12% 189/255
Ledley ………… 73.68% 168/228
Mulgrew ……… 73.23% 145/198
M Wilson ……. 69.17% 83/120
Lustig ………… 66.67% 4/6
Blackman ……. 66.67% 4/6
Ki ………………. 65.41% 104/159
Bangura …….. 16.67% 1/6
Should have added ALL matches under Neil Lennon.
Remarkable stuff from the Tory MSP. After laying out his credentials as a Tory big cheese, he does try to say that he’s writing in a personal capacity as a debenture-holder and “technically a creditor” of Rangers, (so that’s all right then).
But he gives his official Holyrood email address for contact and the letterhead has his Holyrood office address. It’s not really in a personal capacity, is it?
Another inherent and calamitous contradiction is that he pleads for the administrators not to allow the club to be liquidated as this “would deprive HMRC of funds properly due to the taxpayer” (correct).
But he then goes on to say: “It is in the interests of HMRC that Rangers FC exit administration through a Company Voluntary Arrangement and therefore I believe that only bids that offer this course of action should be taken forward by the administrators.”
Well, pardon me for pointing out the bleeding obvious, but unless the CVA he is referring to is an agreement to pay all of the tax from tax cases Big and Wee, a CVA too “would deprive HMRC of funds properly due to the taxpayer”.
What’s the matter with these people?
NEW ARTICLE CHAPS…….
1888 1888 1888 1888
Antifa @ 1.32,
I said what needed to be said last night & have no wish to prolong the debate, but I see that you’ve made a dishonest attack on me.
I suggest that you check what I said about Kojo. I didn’t, never have & never will defend rascist views: you owe an apology for misrepresenting me.
As I DID say, I’ve seen nothing by Kojo that merits deletion. I HAVE seen the Hunnish clown lie & post obscenities – which he has followed up with threats – on this blog. You obviously know nothing of this, but then you don’t appear to think that lies, obscenities & threats towards Celts matter at all. You should hang your head in shame.
Someone posted up an article earlier but some chap called STUART BATHGATE. No idea what publication it comes from but in it he makes reference to Cloud 9’s statement the other night. In their statement they basically said two things:
1) We are not solely bidding for Rangers but are part of a consortium that is
2) Liquidation isn’t really a bad thing as it allows us to stiff the creditors and carry on as if nothing has went wrong.
From this communication, Stuart Bathgate has concluded that:
1) Cloud 9 are not bidding for Rangers so the American bid must be someone else; and
2) Cloud 9 do not want to liquidate the Gers, but instead arrange a CVA and keep the current company going.
How incredibly, unfathomably, obnoxiously stupid is this Stuart Bathgate character?
new post im off !