Popular narrative would have you believe that Craig Whyte funded his period in charge of Rangers by using monies due to the tax authorities and other creditors as working capital, while securitising future season ticket sales to pay off bank debt and, perhaps, providing a small boost to working capital. This version of events now has to be revised.
As we know, Jerome Group plc Pension Fund, a company connected to Craig Whyte, made a claim for £2.95m on the £3.6m seized by the court from Colliyer Bristow’s client account last week. The money is currently held in the client account of Duff and Phelps solicitors pending a court decision on who is entitled to it, and is also subject to claims from HM Revenue and Customs and another company associated with Whyte, Merchant Turnaround.
Today, Worthington Group plc, who are investors in Jerome Group plc Pension Fund, issued a statement to the stock exchange confirming that they provided investment funds to Collyer Bristow’s client account “when considering the possibility of making a fully secured loan”.
It’s now clear that companies associated with Whyte had deposited some millions with a view to being loaned to Rangers, that such a loan would be secured and that Duff and Phelps claim this money to be Rangers’.
Worthington goes on to confirm Whyte owns 7.54% of their share capital through another of his companies and is not involved in the management of the business. They also confirm that Jerome Group “acted at all times in accordance with very detailed legal advice”.
This demonstrates that notions the security over Ibrox and other properties held by companies associated with Whyte can be easily dismissed are fantastic. This has all the hallmarks of a lengthy and expensive legal battle over Ibrox with several motivated protagonists.
The most interesting comment from Worthington Group today was that the Trustees of Jerome Group plc “now understand that the funds may have been the subject of an unauthorised release to the Club in breach of this undertaking prior to the Club entering Administration”.
Claims that an “unauthorised release to the Club” of £2.95m happened before it entered administration could have acute consequences for those who instructed the release and directors of the club at the time.
Never mind, all this is clear enough for Duff and Phelps to press ahead with a healthy sale of the club, even though the verdict of the First Tier Tribunal is yet to arrive and Ticketus ownership of future season tickets remains.
For a comprehensive rundown on how we got here, read Saturday’s article ‘Rangers, the biggest scandal in the History of Sport and the rest’, which includes gems like:
“Between 1997 and 2003 Rangers lost an eye watering £152.6 Million. Joe Lewis’ £40M was gobbled up in jig time, followed by £20M of Dave King’s tax efficient stash, plus a £32M investment by Murray’s business, £6M from smaller shareholders, and a further £15M of NTL’s investment in the hopeless Rangers Media venture. At its nadir in 2004, Rangers net debt was a staggering £83 Million, a monument to the ego of David Murray and his ‘dream’ for Rangers.”
Support Celtic-Hub’s drive to get the Thai Tims to Celtic Park by buying a tee shirt here.
247 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- »
Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon on 12 March, 2012 at 12:29 said:
Yeah, but Whyte has no control of money in Collyer Bristow’s account, only the parthers have the power to move the funds about (guys like Gary Withey, for example). And they can only do so in accordance with their client’s instructions. For an amount of £2.9m they’d want the instructions to be very clear cut and in writing.
Otherwise it could be an utter mess, if you get my drift.
HMRC £2.8 Million, £15 Million, £50 Million
Ticketus £24 Million
Pension Company £2.95 Million
Whyte £18 Million
Pieman, Polis, etc, etc £?
Dundee Utd, ICT, Dunfermline, GAIS, Rapid… £?
Last but not least Dulph&Phelps at £600+ a day.
Who the hell is going to pump money into all that?
Hi Paul,
Another top article and another strand in the tangled web.
I stated in a post the other day that although CW has been demonised for going back on the terms of the RFC share purchase agreement, this is far from an open & shut case.
If CW was advised that the sellers particulars lacked veracity, he could have grounds for renaging on the deal.
It would seem from Jerome’s statement that he had a duty of care and needed to get approval to release these funds into RFC, if all was not in order throwing good money after bad would be irresponsible.
Interesting Stewart Regan censured CW for not putting money into R@ngers, he may regret making that statement. I’m not convinced CW is going to disappear soon Fit and Proper or not.
A Son of Dan. My thoughts entirely lots of smoke and mirrors and posturing but very little substance. H.H.
Money is drip dripping down the drain.—–Soon they will have no money whatsoever .
Gordon_J backing Neil Lennon
I think D&P are using Aunt Sally as a consultant at £0.60 a day. :)
Poordeadking on 12 March, 2012 at 12:15 said:
Its automatic parsing now. Just type in your URL as you would into an address bar…
http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk
Ernie,
You are right to suggest that when it comes to a fit and proper test, the Meeting will probably take place in 98 George st Edinburgh.
However, given he was part of both regimes, I would have thought his response of ‘I know nothing Mr Fawlty’ , will be subject to at least a degree (no pun intended) of scrutiny.
Paul 67
Thanks for reply.
I might be dreaming but i see the potential league space as a real opportunity based on the folliwing scenario
Scenario 67:
A ‘Celtic friendly’ billionaire (wealth off the radar) applies at the same time as a Rangers 2012 NEWCO to establish a new team in the SPL or SFL
This Celtic friendly billionaire wishes to apply to the third division with a brand new club
This club by the way, ‘might’ be interested in loaning or purchasing many young Celtic players
Is there even a 1% chance this could be possible?
If this application is submitting at around the same time as Rangers 2012Newco, then how would the SPL and SFL decide who to allow entry too
ASonfoDan
Last but not least Dulph&Phelps at £600+ a day.
Change the day to hour and muliply by 8 and you will get 48k a day, then add on expences, 50k a DAY, over 1 mill as we speak.
if they use any more smoke we will never see the mirrors…what is the point of the mirrors anyway…all you would see is more smoke if you looked in the mirror…
Ok a friend just asked me
What are the two or three must sees in the highlands or on the west coast?
AsonofDan – whenever I hear of the Ticketus money being owed by the huns I hear the figure of £24m being mentioned.
However, I think they have the rights to the season tickets for the next three years at full resale value which I believe would total approx £45m (depending on the outcome of these court cases that will no doubt happen)
They’re more goosed than we give the credit for (see what I did there)
HH
ASonOfDan
Just to make matters that wee bit worse for them,D and P are on £600 PER HOUR PER PERSON.
I think there is a team of 8 in total,but would imagine the £600 per hour will only be for the two mouthpieces.
Happy Daze!
ETT
I think you should double check those figures :-)
£600ph x 8 would be £4.8k not £48k, mind you there is two of them and 5 (IIRC) on about £2kpw each as well.
http://www.professionalpensions.com/professional-pensions/news/2158732/scheme-linked-rangers-owner-demands-gbp3m-club
Giving…and giving.
I was keeping this to later but what the hell.
Advised last night that Ellis keeping a close eye on things and when the prospective new owners are much clearer he will step from the shadows and demand his 25% share in rangers as promised by the previous owner Mr Craig Whyte.
Sounds plausible and no reason to doubt person who told me as it was discussed at a meeting not an internet rumour or such like.
Craig Browns funny handshake yesterday at Murderwell
http://i.imgur.com/QHGwN.gif
More shredding getting done at Ibrokes. Well done Puff & Puffer keeping the expenses down and using a wee wumin on a bike.
http://i.imgur.com/7TALF.jpg
medtim
£600 an hour!!
Lol!!
SonofDan,
Last but not least Dulph&Phelps at £600+ a day.
I would imagine the administrators are costing significantly more than that. £600 per hour perhaps.
The last paragraph of that article is amusing.
The guy they refer to is the legal owner of RFC(in administration)
HH
It’s abit
HMRC HAS ATTRACTED “significant media criticism” over its dealings with large corporate clients, a report by the Treasury has warned. The report into the tax-gap, published by a senior Treasury committee, raises concerns that such deals may risk “damage to HMRC’s reputation” and make other taxpayers unwilling to comply with their tax obligations.
The findings come as the relationship between HMRC and large companies is facing increasing scrutiny. A commons public accounts committee last year criticised HMRC for ‘sweetheart deals’ for large companies such as Vodafone and Goldman Sachs. Committee chair Margaret Hodge described a “veil of secrecy” around deals made around the revenue’s dealings with large corporate taxpayers.
The report addresses the secrecy which surrounds dealings between HMRC and large business, suggesting that although the taxman should continue to work closely with such businesses in order to ensure that tax obligations are met, “the processes by which large tax cases are settled must be in a relationship based on openness and transparency and it is vital that appropriate checks be in place so that other taxpayers can be sure that all taxpayers are receiving the same treatment from HMRC”.
The transparency and account that the committee advises may be difficult to achieve given the revenue’s current legal and political status. HMRC officials stated that in order to protect taxpayer confidentiality they could not discuss individual cases with the committee. HMRC, which is a non-ministerial department, is intended to be independent of politicians.
The committee found competing needs for accountability and independence, and raised a number of issues for future examination, including the legal status and corporate governance of HMRC.
Addressing the issue of corporate governance, the report states that “We recommend that the assurance commissioner appear before this committee as a matter of course after the publication of the proposed annual report on the outcome of HMRC’s dispute work.” The committee endorsed plans to create a new assurance role at commissioner level, with a specific remit to challenge decision making on cases. The report goes on to recommend that the assurance committee go in front of the Treasury sub-committee as a matter of course.
The committee was also concerned by incidents where tax settlements had been approved by commissioners who had participated in negotiations. The report condones new arrangements to ensure “clear separation between the analysis and negotiation phase of resolving a dispute and the approval of the proposed settlement”.
The committee has little time for the taxman’s claims that the amounts of money lost in one large tax case was proportionately small, warning that “to ordinary taxpayers, a sum which may run into millions of pounds is not trivial”.
Responding to the HMRC plans to introduce a code of governance for tax dispute resolution, the report said: “We recommend that HMRC’s proposed code of governance for tax dispute resolution be explicit that the same rules apply to settlement of tax disputes with its large corporate customers as apply to settlements with all other taxpayers.”
Sorry, pressed submission in error.
The above post was from Accountancy Age an it’s a bit long.
god bless her majesty
s, revenue & customs
googybhoy-Thanks for posting, a lovely tribute.A sad day.
Add Merchant Turnaround to the list. They only want £1 Million right enough, so they are easily forgotten when listing the creditors…
If Lenny is correct that the legal team are looking into some of the “agreements” reported in the MSM could we maybe have the aforementioned legal team issuing a statement to that effect.
It worked well when Craig Whyte/White said he would take the BBC to court. All of a sudden no one could besmirch the good name of Rangers and all conversations of admin & debts unpaid etc were hushed up and not discused as it “could be subjudice”, even though the court action was never raised.
Awn naw..re must sees in the highlands and west coast
1.The drive from Tyndrum to Ballahulish through the pass of Glencoe.
then
2. The sands of Morar as you head for Mallaig.
Hope that helps. hh
Awe_Naw 12.57
3 things in west coast a must
Parkhead, barrowfield & lennoxtown.
The blue knights are gonnae get checkmated…
by the queen :))
greenjedi
Oops, should have used a calculator :>)
Propaganda the Evening Times way. *** Warning *** The following article WILL make you feel ill. The only thing Matt Lindsay leaves out is a ‘We are the Peeeeppppuuulllll’
DEFIANT Rangers fans today saw the first glimmer of hope in their battle to keep the crisis-hit Ibrox club alive.
The three main Gers supporters’ groups, the Assembly, the Association and the Trust, have thrown their support firmly behind the Blue Knights consortium being led by former director Paul Murray.
SportTimes understands that the Blue Knights – set to comprise TEN major backers – will be ready to table a concrete bid for Rangers by Friday, with a share issue planned for a later date.
Gers supporters met over the weekend to discuss how they can help stop the world-famous, 140-year-old institution, from going out of business.
Rangers Supporters’ Association general secretary John Macmillan has been greatly buoyed by recent developments – and by the 2,000-strong gathering of fans at Ibrox on Saturday.
The lifelong fan is now optimistic the 54-times Scottish champions can survive the ordeal they are currently enduring. Macmillan said: “The tide is now turning.”
He has been impressed with Murray – who was ousted as a director after Craig Whyte seized control in May – since he emerged as a major player in the bid for control of Rangers.
And he is particularly pleased the Borders-based accountant is keen to actively involve the supporters in a new management structure if he is successful.
“Paul seems to be a very genuine person,” he said. “He is a Rangers supporter who has been a member of the board and knows a fair bit about the running of the club.
“Without a doubt, no matter which party is successful in gaining control of the club, has to involve the fans. The Rangers support will not stand for one benefactor running their club in the future after all that has happened.”
Macmillan added: “The fans have been kept in the dark at this club for too long. Now, I realise there are occasions when fans can’t be told everything.
“But they should be involved in the general run of things, consulted on ticket prices and things that are important to them.”
Macmillan added: “Fans and a football club is like any working relationship. If you feel you can approach your boss about things, sit down and have a chat about stuff that is concerning you, you will be happier in your work. If you are kept in the dark, you will be unhappy.
“I think it is absolutely essential that whoever comes in gets fans involved in some way or another. Fans’ representatives must be involved.
“Before the Rangers Supporters’ Assembly was formed, the Association had regular meetings with Campbell Ogilvie. We had a very good relationship with him.
“Things have changed over the years. We must get back to where we were.”
Rangers are massively in debt as a result of the catastrophic stewardship of controversial owner Whyte in the last 10 months and the previous boardroom regime prior to that.
And the Glasgow giants could be plunged a further £50million into the red if they lose the HMRC tax tribunal over their use of EBTs to pay players.
But Ally McCoist’s stars agreed last Friday to take pay cuts of up to 75 per cent in an attempt to keep the club afloat until the end of the 2011/12 campaign.
Macmillan admits the road to recovery will be long and hard, but, after the events of the last few days, he is positive they CAN emerge from administration.
A series of money-making initiatives – set to involve club legend Sandy Jardine, manager McCoist and his predecessor Walter Smith – was devised by the supporters at the brainstorming session and are set to be announced this week.
Rangers could play Bundesliga club Hamburg in a friendly match, possibly at Ibrox on Tuesday, April 17, in one scheme to bolster funds. The German club, who have had a long-term association with their Scottish counterparts, have offered to play in the exhibition match for free.
listen bhoys i am fed up with this rangers thing,we all know what outcome will be ,so lets forget about them ,although it was a good result yesterday,somehow i dont think i would go with the same starting eleven against killie this week-end,like coming to the end of last season i thought that stokes and hooper are not the strikeforce in the latter stages of the season i would go with,but then how would i know ,im only a celtic supporter,but what i can see at times we dont look a good side,and one other thing lenny should stop ranting and raven on the touchline.im sure the team plays better when he looks a lot calmer, but that is just my opinion. ps lenny ,johan and other members of the staff ,time the kit man started to earn his money by making you more presentible on your appearences.
Johan murdoch 13.10
Good shout, also Great Glen walk at foot of Ben Nevis. White sands of Morar is a favourite though.
savo01 on 12 March, 2012 at 12:15 said:
Do the Blue Knights stand any chance folks and should we be worried? The bottom line is HMRC will probably do a deal on the big tax case and i’m sure the powers that be will do what is needed to make any claim ‘The Whyte Knight’ has on the club/ibrox illegal therefore freeing up the assets. For talks sake lets say these investors put £25m in the pot I believe they could raise the same again from a share issue. £50m would probably be enough to clear a lot of debts/do deals and see them emerge without having to become ‘Newco’ would it not? I am forever a pessamist by the way!
=-======================================
I posted this earlier it answers your question.
I had another look a business case where with Rangers carryied the cost of The Ticketus deal (ie repayemnts of % of sales) and a repayment of the full tax amount (£75M from RTC figures) over time. It is illustrative but uses figures from Rangers accounts so not fanciful and its at:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Aq2m3ggkEX2RdDVtcjhQenY2U1pia19GWTJlTi1vSUE
It has to be the full tax amount repaid for the money was never Rangers in the first place and a pence in the £ deal would be making robbery legitimate, so so much for a CVA . I also know HMRC are not a bank but they would probably have to have a look at any business case that RangersIA submit to see if it stands up.
Well I came up with one that seemed at first look to do that. It involved tax repay over 8 years and Ticketus having a 3year recovery from sales from next season. . Why 8? The formula I used could not stretch past 8 but that is the political limit that any deal could survive (and that is stretching it)
To make the bottom line stay black there has to be an average weekly player wage of £2900 in Yr 1, rising to £4605 in Yrs 2 to 4 because UEFA income from EL arrives (and that is a risk) and £5830 from Yr5 after the Ticketus arrangement expires.
The risk HMRC would have to take is that this projection relies on SB sales of 38,000SBs. If that figure drops by 1000 then there is no business case with the bottom line for each year going into the red. With a weekly wage budget of that shown what are the chances of the SB sales required at the price shown (£450) standing up?
There is also the risk of a UEFA ban for bringing the game into disrepute but I have assumed UEFA money the season after next.
The other factor of course is presentational because should HMRC consider a time to pay deal it is tantamount to HMRC providing Rangers with a subsidy to enable wages that can attract the necessary attendance to make the business case stand up.. You might as well put Hector on the Rangers Board to check their “investment” is getting a return.
In short nae chnace of HMRC taking the risks inherent in the business plan illustrated.
Awe Naw:
1) Glencoe ( to get from Glasgow you pass through Loch Lomond) as soon as you climb up onto Rannoch Moor then approach the Glen you see the iconic pyramid of Buachialle Etive Mor guarding the Glen…what an awe inspiring place!
2) Eilean Donan Castle: just north of Fort William (you pass the jaw dropping gtanduer of Kintail)…its the castle used in Highlander.
3) Skye: not much needs to be said about this island…Elgol is a fine spot to view the Cuillens.
Maybe onto the Outer Hebrides? Which- on a sunny day- is as close to paradise as you get on Earth…
All these can be done in one journey.
ASonofDan
I only skimmed that Evening Times piece.
If it’s no trouble, if there is any reference as to how the putative new owners propose to pay the club’s creditors, can you please point it out?