30% interest! Nice one, Newco Rangers, you’ve got yourself a deal there. Suggestions that your business plan has been, and remains, unsustainable and extravagant are patently absurd when you can borrow at the kind of rates a Zimbabwean pimp would get at the height of the ZWD’s recent hyper-inflation episode, although it’s probably worth noting that Zimbabwean businesses are currently borrowing at slightly less than half of what Laxey are charging Newco, solvent ones, anyway.
An administration would be a severe embarrassment to the Newco, less than two years after its incorporation, but in many ways it would be a boon, allowing the club to offload all the high earners and establish a breakeven trading platform.
It is utterly incomprehensible why they have not called in the admins, which itself shines a light on management processes inside the club. No one seems to be asking, “What next?” Getting deeper into hock with a hedge fund is ruinous. Notions that if the loan is turned into shares would be a soft landing for the club are absurd. This is a hedge fund. A HEDGE FUND!! The more shares they have, the more exposure they have, the higher return they will demand.
Need some new players, tough, pay my money. Ticket sales down, that’s disappointing, cut back and pay my money. Got some maintenance work to do, I don’t care, pay my money then see what’s left.
Keep your eye on the sale and leaseback plan, although not until September. They should commission a brass statue of a Newco season ticket holder, touching his toes, with the motto ‘Brace yourself’ below.
The only question left is who will be the complicit front man for season ticket sales this year?
Most people are only beginning to realise the consequences of the events of 2012, or what it means to be a zombie club, walking around, not quite the same as before, with various groups randomly gorging on you. Nothing will ever be as it was. Ever. They should’ve listened, before high-fiving Sir David Murray, then Craig Whyte, then Charles Green. It’s not like we didn’t tell them.
If you’re in the football business, rule number 1 is: Pay your bills. Every other rule, value and aspiration cannot be met without this rule.
Many thanks to everyone who submitted questions for last week’s Celtic Forum. The minutes have been published, and are available here.
If you would like to read the new CQN Magazine, GO HERE to read properly, and for FREE, the graphic below is just a taster.
[calameo code=0003901710a55b5798f06 lang=en page=1 hidelinks=1 width=100% height=500]
860 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- »
Brogan Rogan Trevino etc
Do you think that Masonic influence will play any part in HMRC’s EBT appeal? Just your opinion please, not asking for any evidence of same.
The reason I ask is – if there are QC’s arguing for the original decision to stand, then who pays their bills?
am in the garden today ….Hedges all around me ….braw that hurried game at Brechin springs to mind …the baw on the hedge …it is a braw world whiles….severe pruning required though …
South Of Tunis, 09:57
On the back of your mention here last week I bought The Cremator –
and what a rather fine and odd wee film it turned out to be (had a similar feel to Performance I thought, which is no bad thing).
I owe you a cyber Peroni my good man
What the lickspittle MSM should be telling the Orcs….but won’t…..
A hedge fund is a pooled investment vehicle administered by a professional management firm, and often structured as a limited partnership, limited liability company, or similar vehicle.[1][2] They are usually distinguished from private equity funds, which use the more illiquid investment strategies associated with private equity. Hedge funds invest in a diverse range of markets and use a wide variety of investment styles and financial instruments.[2] The name “hedge fund” refers to the hedging techniques traditionally used by hedge funds, but hedge funds today do not necessarily hedge.[3] Hedge funds are made available only to certain sophisticated or accredited investors and cannot be offered or sold to the general public.[3] As such, they generally avoid direct regulatory oversight, bypass licensing requirements applicable to investment companies, and operate with greater flexibility than mutual funds and other investment funds.[4] Hedge funds have existed for many decades, but have become increasingly popular in recent years, growing to be one of the major investment vehicles and sources of capital in the world.[5]
Hedge funds are most often open-ended and allow additions or withdrawals by their investors (generally on a monthly or quarterly basis).[3] A hedge fund’s value is calculated as a share of the fund’s net asset value, meaning that increases and decreases in the value of the fund’s investment assets (and fund expenses) are directly reflected in the amount an investor can later withdraw.
Many hedge fund investment strategies aim to achieve a positive return on investment regardless of whether markets are rising or falling (“absolute return”). Hedge fund managers often invest money of their own in the fund they manage, which serves to align their own interests with those of the investors in the fund.[6][7] A hedge fund typically pays its investment manager an annual management fee (for example 1 percent of the assets of the fund), and a performance fee (for example 20% of the increase in the fund’s net asset value during the year).[3] Some hedge funds have several billion dollars of assets under management (AUM). As of 2009, hedge funds represented 1.1% of the total funds and assets held by financial institutions.[8] As of June 2013, the estimated size of the global hedge fund industry was US$2.4 trillion.
Because hedge funds are not sold to the general public or retail investors, the funds and their managers have historically been exempt from some of the regulation that governs other funds and investment managers with regard to how the fund may be structured and how strategies and techniques are employed. Regulations passed in the United States and Europe after the 2008 credit crisis were intended to increase government oversight of hedge funds and eliminate certain regulatory gaps.[9]
yorkbhoy
09:34 on
25 February, 2014
Kitalba
Does that mean that if The Rangers do go into Admin this season and don’t come out of it before the start of the next season, then they will begin that season too having being deducted 15 or 25 points?
No this rule only applies to everyone else…
IMO The huns will not have any punishment to stop them moving on,any points deduction will be retrospective to come off this season’s total.Next year i don’t think they will get promoted if The Snowman is still in charge.Plan B was a play-off place,if at this time next year they are struggling,watch out for League re-construction to accommodate thems.
And if Murray is paying QC’s, and they lose, then after all the appeal processes are exhausted, and assuming HMRC win…. does that leave Murray with liability in any way and would all the recipients of the EBT’s have to cough up the Tax and NIC?
Your personal opinion would satisfy my curiosity.
the sun is out here in the east.
Anyway, I decided lastnight that I am entering the Thames 100k ultra this September.
It got me thinking – its a wee while now since some of us ran Glasgow 10k for Kano. But this (and many other events since) demonstrated the power of this forum to improve the lives of others.
Can anyone suggest a green-related cause which I could seek sponsorship for?
And of course, if anyone wants to…you can always join me – the only obligation is to complete the 100k in under 15 hours…
If the Courts agree with Ahmed and the huns are trading insolvent…………? Over to you Mr Regan…….
Morning Timland from a spring like hun free mountain valley.
FRW
There is evidence that Lord Doherty is a Tim, he admitted in court that he was a season book holder and a modest shareholder.
The artical is on page 10 I think.
HH
!!Bada Bing!!
There is nothing that they can do, (the authorities), that flies in the face of decency, that would surprise me.
You are the effective owner of a Company so you are totally aware of how safe it is to make a loan to them. Secondly as the effective owner you can insist your loan repayment takes precedence, therefore you are 100% certain you will get your money back. Yet you take a lien on the only unencumbered assets of the Company and you charge 30% Interest. I am gobsmacked, funny the Rag’s correspondent didn’t ask Wallace that question.
I can confirm that Lord D is an avid fan…
malceye:
:-) They’ll be marching on Edinburgh and Dumfries if it goes against them.
Twitter from Amhed’s case
https://twitter.com/moo_ted
HH
Hmmmm….
What if….Green’s little Asian friend is being used as a vehicle to bring about an insolvency event,that is outside any control of Wallace and his ludicrous 120 day plan?
Murray,Whyte,Green,Ahmed,King…..all in this together.
The Sleazedale Brothers are out of their league in all of this PLAN.
A plan that was concocted years ago by the way.
Posting on the hoof via phone so Apols for brevity…
The key aspect of the LNS ruling is that Rangers DID gain a competitive advantage, or at least sought to gain such an advantage, by using ebts. They held this to be axiomatic in football.
Crucially, they held that because ebts were ruled as legal at FTT, the advantage sought or gained was NOT UNFAIR, because such a tax strategy, being legal, could have been used by any or all competitors
Should UTT or further appeal overturn the original decision of FTT, then the LNS decision become invalid.
The question then becomes: Does Scottish football have the appetite to open it all up again?
TBB
Kit
I think that the Murray Group have to argue that the FTT decision should stand — suicide not to take that position at the outset.
Rock Tree Bhoy.
I don’t know but I doubt it.
Organisations such as the Speculative Society and some of the other cliques that Tom Minogue highlights are very much class driven I think.
Membership is aspirational.
There is a very definite “Edinburgh establishment” in the legal profession in my opinion ( there is no doubt a Glasgow establishment too — at least in the eyes of those who want to be in it!) — and no doubt that “establishment” feeling will extend to others.
However, way back in one of the very firts CQN Magazines I wrote an article called “Good Morning Fatty” where I recounted my meeting with a guy who was a financial fixer in England. He has experience at Man Utd and Portsmouth, and while at Portsmouth negotiating with the revenue, he was told that HMRC were sick of football clubs– big football clubs– and that they were going to take a big name down– right down– and send a message to all the others.
The club concerned was Rangers who they thought they had bang to rights.
My information is that HMRC in Glasgow were certain that they would win against Rangers.
I was given no detail of their case etc but was told that they were determined to pursue the Rangers Tax Case to the bitter end — which is why when all the papers were saying that there would be a CVA or a deal done with HMRC I was certain that this was rubbish.
I think that the very fact that there is an appeal shows that this attitude still exists.
Also, if you are talking real old fashioned masonic influence which strives to preserve the interests of the “establishment” at all times — who would they be striving to protect?
Murray is not Edinburgh establishment ( not anymore anyway ) and RFC is not a club of their ilk.
If the only thing going for the Murray Group in this case is the reliance on the Scottish Handshake then I think it is more likely that someone with more influential hands will have shaken hands first.
But I actually think the law here is on the side of HMRC and that the first two judges simply got it wrong be thinking too much like lawyers who follow one doctrine to the exclusion of all others.
It does happen — frequently.
Tooting Tim
You’re welcome.
I’m really going to struggle to make kick off but I’ll try to park in the bus park which is right next to the stadium. If you wait at the exit from there it’ll hopefully save time and we’ll only miss the first half hour :-)
THE EXILED TIM
11:01 on 25 February, 2014
Your a star sir :))
Thank you
KIt
If the appeal to the UTT is successful — with Rangers PLC being bust — then I think the recipients of the so called loans had best take some pretty swift legal advice as effectively they will have received contractual benefits Gross of tax.
I think there is every possibility that claims will be made against them which will then be negotiated away in most cases.
Big Numbers victory for HMRC and big message to send to the footballing world.
A related matter to note:
SDM was held at FTT to have been in a conflicted situation as regards his £6m ebt receipts. Being chairman and majority shareholder, he was not in a position to apply allowable ‘discretion’ to his own payments. FTT directed that this be sorted out between the parties. It hasn’t been.
Result is the UTT will be asked to quantify the tax, interest and penalties SDM is personally het for. I understand the last of the Peploes we.t some time ago…
NB This situation is unique to SDM on account of his position in the business and doesn’t apply to other recipients.
Is Ahmed’s maw in court I wonder?
Naebdy able to answer my query re: game on the telly tonight?
HH
it’s comical the millions wasted by Minty & his minions..
We know it stinks,we can see it stinks..
End of..
That it’s taken years to try and get a verdict shows the arrogance and genetic sleekitness that exists..in and around Scottish football and society..
HH
Kit
and Alloa – that’s where we are from…
BRTH thanks for providing such a good breakdown. Your assessment that the matter will either be referred back to the FTTT or HMRC argument upheld sounds positive but if you were mr thornhill (one of the best in his field) how can he counter this?
I don’t know whether I subscribe to the Masonic cabal, establishment circling the wagons or whatever, but they got away with it last time and fear a repeat.
So Lord O’Dochartaigh is a Tim!!
Judge Lord Doherty revealed he was a Celtic season ticket holder and a “modest” shareholder in the club. Both sides said they had no objection to him hearing the case.
Just a question one of our legal eagles may be able to answer. Why would Doherty admit to being a Celtic supporter (conflict of interest with the particular casei am guessing) but if he were a member of the masonic order he would not ,i assume, have to admit to being a member of said association with all the inherent conflicts of interest there?
BRTH
re: “Edinburgh legal establishment” and the “feeling” – what exactly do you mean?
I don’t want to start a war of words about the spec society and masonic conspiracy that Minogue and others proffer – you know I consider it tosh – however, I just wanted clarification of the above.
NatKnow
I believe that the game is being shown in its entirety on Alba at 10pm.
I am Neil Lennon (tamrabam)
LNS would not have known the limitations of his commission because those doing the commission preparation were not provided with what they asked Rangers to provide.
This is key. It is not about LNS did rule on.It is what he could not rule on because it was outside his brief.
Who witheld it and why can be discussed ad infinitum but it is the fact that an already known to be irregular ebt WITH a side letter that Rangers concealed from HMRC was placed outside the LNS brief which is significant.
Lns treated all ebts as continuous and not irregular. DOS ebts differed in nature from btc ebts and were irregular, which undermines his ruling and requires an enquiry into the implications for the commission which imo should be set aside until the UTT rules at least.
If HMRC lose then all ebts but those to De Boer and Flo were regular. If HMRC win then all ebts were irregular and LNS falls anyway as it is no longer a misregistration issue but paying players by unlawful means.
Brogan Rogan Trevino etc – much obliged, thanks for that.
Hamiltontim is praying for Oscar
11:18 on 25 February, 2014
NatKnow
I believe that the game is being shown in its entirety on Alba at 10pm.
———————————————————–
Cheers HT! Local boozer has it advertised on telly at 19:45 – I wondered if it was some kind of Sky Pub-only deal or was being shown on a foreign station.
If the reports are true that McLeish received a flat as part of his “loan” you’d think it would be difficult to argue they were anything other than contractual. Then again, absolutely everyone knows that anyway despite the conclusion of the ftt.
The masons v’s the masons – in mason land !!! ???
Brain-damage Central Quick News. imho
Btw, Leigh Griffiths will be the Sellic fans new
cannonball-kid. imho P.S. remember were ye heard it…
Off oot.
Pharrell ‘Happy’ Williams – CSA
Frank Ryan – the reason is a potential conflict of interest and in these days of openness, it is appropriate that the judge brings this to the attention of parties. It is not uncommon. Turn matters round the other way – if the Macari/Bunnet case had been heard by a judge with an Ibrox season ticket and he hadn’t declared this – well, the conspiracy theories would spread like wildfire.
Not that I am aware of Ibrox season ticket holders within the College of Senators. There are one or two Jambos, a couple of Hibees. There are definite Celtic season ticket holders and, well the man at the top? Is he part of the grand masonic conspiracy? If he is it ain’t a WASP version…
Frank Ryan’s Whiskey
11:17 on 25 February, 2014
So Lord O’Dochartaigh is a Tim!!
Judge Lord Doherty revealed he was a Celtic season ticket holder and a “modest” shareholder in the club. Both sides said they had no objection to him hearing the case.
Just a question one of our legal eagles may be able to answer. Why would Doherty admit to being a Celtic supporter (conflict of interest with the particular casei am guessing) but if he were a member of the masonic order he would not ,i assume, have to admit to being a member of said association with all the inherent conflicts of interest there?
—————————————————————————–
Why would Doherty admit to being a Celtic supporter?
TD67 has the answer – to GIRFU the huns. :-)
Auldheid
i do understand that LNS had a limited scope for investigation,
Howevah…..IMHO
If LNS didnt undertsand that this limited scope would provide a warped judgement then he seems to be a fool
If LNS did understand that this limited scope would provide a warped judgement and he did nothing about it, not even commeneted about it then he is worse than a fool