Jump to content

The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.


Sergio Garcia

Recommended Posts

Incredible that there are actually people who believe this crap.

Failing to pay your tax bills because you have run out of money is not 'tax fraud'.

What 'unfair advantage' did we gain exactly? If he means spending money we didn't really have, so has every other SPL side.

No idea what he means by 'improper registrations'. All the players loaned to us from Kaunas was weird, no question, but nobody has ever claimed it contravened the rules. You can bet your bottom dollar the SFA would have put a stop to it if they could have found a rule we were breaking.

moreover, the main reason clubs overspent was to try to compete with Murray's Rangers. But we now know the coffers ran dry there and they had to cheat the taxman to try to maintain the big spending they began. Total Catch 22 situation they got into. The entitlement of the fans who got used to big signings did for then. Bosses cheated to try to keep up the charade.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not so sure.. The 11-1 is in place so as to prevent the "diddies" from trying that.

 

I think the change could be made to 9-3 with the voting.. That would still leave Celtic, Aberdeen and ourselves who would be against it with Rangers probably up again next year as well..

 

A change all bar 2 clubs could get behind is gate sharing for anything over 20,000 in attendance.. That should allow the medium sized clubs to strive for the top while the Old Firm were kept at a safe advantage.. (It's never going to happen though since it benefits Hearts, Aberdeen and possibly Hibs the most)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambo, Goodbye

Gate sharing and summer football? No thanks

Quite right, much rather be out in tonight's weather watching football than in the sun. 

 

On topic when is the next date to look forward to with Oldco? 

Edited by Jambo, Goodbye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh

Devil's advocate here... When would the winter break take place? Mid Dec - mid- Jan ? Or January ? Or mid Jan- mid - mid Feb ? Or would it be a 8 week break?

 

Id see it happening after the New Year games for 3 weeks more to give the players a mid-season rest than avoiding bad weather as that can happen any time from November to April. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst

It seems that it was TRFCG (aka Wavetower) who were pursuing BDO at this week's CoS hearing, rather than BDO seeking to exclude them.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14040737.Craig_Whyte_could_get___6m_from_claim_on_Rangers_oldco_creditors_pot/

 

 


Craig Whyte could get ?6m from claim on Rangers oldco creditors pot

 

A CLAIM over the whole of the ?18 million creditors payout pot of the liquidated Rangers oldco could earn Craig Whyte ?6 million, it has emerged. The company formed by Craig Whyte to buy the club off Sir David Murray for ?1 four years ago, is taking legal action over the claim which has been rejected by liquidators. Rangers FC Group, formerly Wavetower, is now contesting the decision by liquidators BDO through the Court of Session. The Rangers FC Group has taken over the claim from Law Financial Ltd, a company previously linked to Whyte, that it is owed up to ?25 million, saying it holds the security over the assets of the in-liquidation Rangers oldco RFC 2012 plc.

 

The Herald revealed last month that new documents show that LFL had now taken control of Rangers FC Group which held the security. New documents show that ultimate controllers of LFL and the action are the Worthington Group, an investment firm also once connected to Mr Whyte and who in October last year said would continue to stake a legal claim over Rangers? business and assets. Worthington Group plc, confirmed in filings two years ago, that when it had the option of purchasing a 100 per cent stake in LFL, it was obliged to pay Whyte ?1 million in unsecured convertible loan notes and one third of the proceeds of any assets, claims or rights owned by his companies.

 

An interim ?10 million payout to unsecured creditors of the in-liquidation oldco was due to have been made at the end of July to the tune of around seven pence, but it is still held up. The claim if successful, would make Rangers FC Group the only secured creditor and first in line ahead of HMRC, despite last week?s victory in the Big Tax Case involving Employment Benefit Trust payments to former Rangers staff.

 

It has been confirmed that Rangers FC Group have begun a Court of Session appeal against the BDO decision to reject the claim. Both sides have until December 28 to make clear the extent of the appeal and for BDO to lodge answers to that. BDO has previously asked the court to dispense with the any potentially time consuming and potentially expensive future hearings to settle the issue and approve a deadline for a full claim to be submitted to the liquidators. The liquidators had previously indicated to creditors that if the claim was pursued, as it has been, it could hold up payouts for some time.

 

Rangers FC Group says they hold the security over the assets reassigned to the company run by Mr Whyte that paid off an ?18m bank debt as a condition of his purchase of the club from Sir David Murray for ?1 in May 2011. He raised funds by organising a deal to sell off three years of future season ticket rights to Ticketus activated when he became owner. Mr Whyte said his company had a legitimate claim over Rangers? assets, including Ibrox Stadium and Murray Park, because he had underwritten the London ticket agency Ticketus?s investment through his offshore company Liberty Capital and was ?on the line? for ?27.5m in guarantees and cash.

 

Filings show that Craig Whyte is no longer a director of Rangers FC Group, and the four directors are Worthington Group executives Doug Ware and Richard Spurway, LFL and Liberty Corporate. Craig Whyte?s father, Thomas Whyte, was the sole director of Liberty Corporate until January, 2014. It is now controlled by LFL. Mr Whyte was a founding director of LFL, which claimed to have former Rangers newco Sevco 5088 as a subsidiary, but stood down from the board in August, last year.   In April, 2013, Worthington revealed it had been granted an option to acquire the whole of Law Financial Ltd which included Sevco 5088, which it said held a claim ?independently reviewed by leading counsel?to all of the business and assets of RFC 2012 plc which were purchased by Sevco 5088 Limited or Sevco Scotland Ltd from the administrators? in June of 2012?.

 

BDO declined to comment on the case. Worthington director Richard Spurway refused to comment.

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambof3tornado

You cannot have gate sharing just for over 20k fans. What about when our capacity pushes us to say 20,200 and we suddenly see ourselves being punished by having to share the gate when 90% of the attendees are jambos??

 

Either all gate sharing or not at all (not at all for me!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cannot have gate sharing just for over 20k fans. What about when our capacity pushes us to say 20,200 and we suddenly see ourselves being punished by having to share the gate when 90% of the attendees are jambos??

 

Either all gate sharing or not at all (not at all for me!).

I think he means that the surplus over 20k would be shared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Joey J J Jr Shabadoo

Quite right, much rather be out in tonight's weather watching football than in the sun.

 

On topic when is the next date to look forward to with Oldco?

There's quite a number of fans against summer football for a variety of reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jambof3tornado

I think he means that the surplus over 20k would be shared.

So it only impacts on the gruesome twosome. Cant see that ever coming in.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Id see it happening after the New Year games for 3 weeks more to give the players a mid-season rest than avoiding bad weather as that can happen any time from January to December. 

 

FTFY

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Devil's advocate here... When would the winter break take place? Mid Dec - mid- Jan ? Or January ? Or mid Jan- mid - mid Feb ? Or would it be a 8 week break?

Most frequent suggestion I've heard is whole of January following new year fixtures. Nothing to do with the weather just folk are skint post holidays.

 

Sent from my ZTE Blade Q Mini using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most frequent suggestion I've heard is whole of January following new year fixtures. Nothing to do with the weather just folk are skint post holidays.

 

Sent from my ZTE Blade Q Mini using Tapatalk

and yet, in the past when walk up was the name of the game, Scottish cup games in January would bring large increases to attendances at all games and that was despite limited transport options and less frequent service than we have now, we also havn't had a new year game for years so waiting for that is a nonsense, anytime will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot

This thread typifies the problems the sfa have.

 

To many opinions, different ideas and agendas, ultimately leading to nothing, just debate and piss ant changes.

 

The sfa need a leader, who takes us by the baws and makes big changes whether some like it or not.

 

Thatcher, Merkel, putin style leadership. Dare I say budge/ dempster!

 

No one can agree on the colour of shite, time for leadership on this debacle and our game in general.

 

It won't happen, to much pandering, short sightedNess and general incompetence.

Edited by hotcurrie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So it only impacts on the gruesome twosome. Cant see that ever coming in.

 

Errrmmm - don't Hibs have a capacity of > 20k?

 

Surely they'd potentially be affected by such a move...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:rofl:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Either all gate sharing or not at all (not at all for me!).

On get sharing I think it depends on how it is done. I can't see many certainly of the larger clubs agreeing to a 50-50 or 60-40 split. But I'm sure if it was done by a percentage of the travelling support based on percentage of away fans at the opposition ground, if that makes sense.

It might encourage more travelling fans as their club would benefit as well as the home club.

 

So for example: 40% of the gate of away fans goes to the away team, upto the percentage of their stadium they give to the home club fans.

 

Would need to run the numbers on it to see if it makes sense, but as a principal with something along those lines I wouldn't object.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allowayjambo1874

On get sharing I think it depends on how it is done. I can't see many certainly of the larger clubs agreeing to a 50-50 or 60-40 split. But I'm sure if it was done by a percentage of the travelling support based on percentage of away fans at the opposition ground, if that makes sense.

It might encourage more travelling fans as their club would benefit as well as the home club.

 

So for example: 40% of the gate of away fans goes to the away team, upto the percentage of their stadium they give to the home club fans.

 

Would need to run the numbers on it to see if it makes sense, but as a principal with something along those lines I wouldn't object.

 

Would that not result in the polar opposite of what people are discussing, I.e more distribution of money to the poorer clubs? Your suggestion means that teams with bigger away following will take more cash away from the smaller clubs when they get a large gate thanks to away fans.

Or have I misread?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On get sharing I think it depends on how it is done. I can't see many certainly of the larger clubs agreeing to a 50-50 or 60-40 split. But I'm sure if it was done by a percentage of the travelling support based on percentage of away fans at the opposition ground, if that makes sense.

It might encourage more travelling fans as their club would benefit as well as the home club.

 

So for example: 40% of the gate of away fans goes to the away team, upto the percentage of their stadium they give to the home club fans.

 

Would need to run the numbers on it to see if it makes sense, but as a principal with something along those lines I wouldn't object.

cant work, the whinging from Dundee's ambassador of away fans on another thread highlights the problems this percentage mark could have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon tinted glasses 2

So regarding the latest claim to the "assets" of the old Rangers, if it is proven that those companies have the relevant documentation in place to say they own these assets then how would this have an impact on the current shareholders/owners? 

 

Also if the current group are found to not actually have any legal claim on the assets how would this impact the loans given where the assets were used as security?

 

Would MASH be able to immediately demand the repayment of his loan 9with interest) as the current setup didnt actually hold the rights to the things they have used as security?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So regarding the latest claim to the "assets" of the old Rangers, if it is proven that those companies have the relevant documentation in place to say they own these assets then how would this have an impact on the current shareholders/owners? 

 

Also if the current group are found to not actually have any legal claim on the assets how would this impact the loans given where the assets were used as security?

 

Would MASH be able to immediately demand the repayment of his loan 9with interest) as the current setup didnt actually hold the rights to the things they have used as security?

if they lost the assets, there would be nothing for Ashley to claim, they have no cashpot, there would only be a lot of unsecured loans and debts left and I think they would have player value but that would disappear if admin was entered as they would be free from contracts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if they lost the assets, there would be nothing for Ashley to claim, they have no cashpot, there would only be a lot of unsecured loans and debts left and I think they would have player value but that would disappear if admin was entered as they would be free from contracts.

 

Could Ashley sue King, or the board of TRIFC, as they have secured a loan using assets that they do not own.  Is this fraud, for example?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could Ashley sue King, or the board of TRIFC, as they have secured a loan using assets that they do not own.  Is this fraud, for example?

might well be fraudulent but think it may be done in the clubs name(board decision) so may not fall on the individual

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maroon tinted glasses 2

I suppose if MASH doesnt have anything secured against the loan then King could effectively tell him to bolt as there would be nothing to lose however this would then force Ashleys had to try and push for administration. 

 

WIN WIN for everyone really

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diadora Van Basten

Just reading that.

 

Imagine ... IMAGINE ... the seethe if Craigy wins!

Cant see it! If there was such a charge it would be lodged at Companies House.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagar the Horrible

The securities that Mike has over zombieco are legit, because it was the Newco that later bought the house and the carpark,  mike took out security on this new set of assets with the loan,  Oldco did not own them at the time of going bust.  Murray park might be debatable however,  Also there is no claim by the worthington group or wavetower about the naming rights and the club name and crests.  mike has those in his impregnable safe  (his back pocket).  Mike also has the shirts sewn up.  There is no scenario possible that Mike will not win?  he has already received return on his investment, His loan repayment or full ownership is a bonus now

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure there was a story going around sometime back that Livingston used their stadium as security for a loan with the BOS despite West Lothian being the owners.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I P Knightley

Errrmmm - don't Hibs have a capacity of > 20k?

 

Surely they'd potentially be affected by such a move...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

:rofl:

:biglaugh:

 

Green.

 

Wi white sleeves...

:biglaugh:

 

Boof's on a hat-trick!

 

Cant see it! If there was such a charge it would be lodged at Companies House.

Aye, 'cos filing of corporate paperwork has been a strength throughout this whole saga :)

 

Seriously, I'm not certain that filing or otherwise of the charges at Companies House affects their validity. It sounds right but if it were so straightforward, surely this motion wouldn't come to court?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AllyjamboDerbyshire

Ashley's security over the carpark and Edmiston House appear watertight, and he will gain total ownership of the IP (at a relatively small cost) of Rangers FC in the event of administration. I'm sure he would value the IP quite highly, as it might well be the only remaining link to RFC after an insolvency event, with any successor club desperate to wear the badge etc, and strip manufacturing would be tied to SD forever, or, at least, SD would receive a copyright payment for all merchandise sold regardless of who the manufacturer is. Add to this any dividend from a liquidation and MA probably isn't too worried about his ?5m as he probably views it as an investment in strips bearing the 'Rangers' logo.

 

While MA would probably prefer to see TRFC continue in it's current form, I doubt he is too worried over taking action that might lead to the club going into administration, or even liquidation!

 

Besides, a very strong, and very public, message of 'don't mess with Big Mike' would be sent out to all future targets of the SD juggernaut!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diadora Van Basten

Ashley's security over the carpark and Edmiston House appear watertight, and he will gain total ownership of the IP (at a relatively small cost) of Rangers FC in the event of administration. I'm sure he would value the IP quite highly, as it might well be the only remaining link to RFC after an insolvency event, with any successor club desperate to wear the badge etc, and strip manufacturing would be tied to SD forever, or, at least, SD would receive a copyright payment for all merchandise sold regardless of who the manufacturer is. Add to this any dividend from a liquidation and MA probably isn't too worried about his ?5m as he probably views it as an investment in strips bearing the 'Rangers' logo.

 

While MA would probably prefer to see TRFC continue in it's current form, I doubt he is too worried over taking action that might lead to the club going into administration, or even liquidation!

 

Besides, a very strong, and very public, message of 'don't mess with Big Mike' would be sent out to all future targets of the SD juggernaut!

 

?5m for Rangers strips is a lot considering he bought the naming rights to Ibrox for ?1.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AllyjamboDerbyshire

?5m for Rangers strips is a lot considering he bought the naming rights to Ibrox for ?1.

But it won't cost him ?5m. It would be ?5m less the proceeds from Edmiston House, the carpark and any dividend from a CVA or liquidation. But for someone of the business style of Mike Ashley, the 'don't mess with me' message could be worth the ?5m alone! Oh, and he did give those naming rights back to the club without charge, for some reason! Possibly for the same reason he didn't take security over Ibrox, itself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But it won't cost him ?5m. It would be ?5m less the proceeds from Edmiston House, the carpark and any dividend from a CVA or liquidation. But for someone of the business style of Mike Ashley, the 'don't mess with me' message could be worth the ?5m alone! Oh, and he did give those naming rights back to the club without charge, for some reason! Possibly for the same reason he didn't take security over Ibrox, itself.

if the assets were sold fraudulently, then Ashley has no claim and all would revert to BDO as this pre dates ashleys involvement. whether this would also encapsulate merchandise I wouldn't know as the details of the sale are a bit sketchy. bricks and mortar assets are easy to define but without seeing the contracts/agreements how do you quantify things like history etc, to me you cant buy the deeds of others. were the copyright of strips/logos at the time of sale the same/similar enough, as now to be reversed in ownership its hard to tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AllyjamboDerbyshire

if the assets were sold fraudulently, then Ashley has no claim and all would revert to BDO as this pre dates ashleys involvement. whether this would also encapsulate merchandise I wouldn't know as the details of the sale are a bit sketchy. bricks and mortar assets are easy to define but without seeing the contracts/agreements how do you quantify things like history etc, to me you cant buy the deeds of others. were the copyright of strips/logos at the time of sale the same/similar enough, as now to be reversed in ownership its hard to tell.

As has been mentioned here a few times before, Edmiston House and the carpark were both bought from MIH some time after Sevco bought RFC(IL)'s assets. As far as we know there is no hint of fraud in these transactions, so, on the face of it, MA's security over these assets is good.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst

Further CoS hearings re the MASH & Ashley petitions on Tuesday.

 

LADY WOLFFE ? R Martin, Clerk

Tuesday 24th November

By Order

 
P989/15 Pet: Michael Ashley for Judicial Review - Brodies LLP - Burness Paull LLP
 
P1039/15 Pet: Mash Holdings Ltd for Judicial Review - Brodies LLP - Anderson Strathern LLP  Burness Paull LLP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

disgruntledfan

Further CoS hearings re the MASH & Ashley petitions on Tuesday.

 

LADY WOLFFE ? R Martin, Clerk

Tuesday 24th November

By Order

 

P989/15 Pet: Michael Ashley for Judicial Review - Brodies LLP - Burness Paull LLP

 

P1039/15 Pet: Mash Holdings Ltd for Judicial Review - Brodies LLP - Anderson Strathern LLP  Burness Paull LLP

Has there been any news yet on Chuckles written verdict that you know of FF ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst

Has there been any news yet on Chuckles written verdict that you know of FF ?

 

I wouldn't expect a decision for another week or two at least, although it might be expedited for Green's next appearance in court on 6th December.

 

If the decision is made public it will be posted here https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/court-of-session

 

Note that only selected CoS decisions are published in this way.

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

disgruntledfan

I wouldn't expect a decision for another week or two at least, although it might be expedited for Green's next appearance in court on 6th December.

 

If the decision is made public it will be posted here https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/court-of-session

 

Note that only selected CoS decisions are published in this way.

Thanks FF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagar the Horrible

?5m for Rangers strips is a lot considering he bought the naming rights to Ibrox for ?1.

The ?5m loan is that, just a loan, however getting the house and the carpark is extra as because he also increased the amount he get for every shirt sold 75p in the ?1 of profits, and what is even better is all unsold shirts at the end of the season, Fraudco have to pay for these at full price? I would say Mike has already had the cost of the loan paid back? Admin v2.0 Liquidation Version 1.1 or even a new sugar daddy riding a white charger with no surrender tattooed across his chest willing to ploght gazillions into the club, these is no scenario where Mike wont now make ?millions more? Having that badge and the club naming rights is owning the club! Ibrox is worthless without a Club calling itself Rangers playing at it!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agent Whyte again stating that he owns Ibrox.

 

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/14042244.Revealed__Craig_Whyte_could_get___6m_from_claim_on_Rangers_oldco_creditors_pot/

 

The company formed by Craig Whyte to buy the club off Sir David Murray for ?1 four years ago, is taking legal action over the claim which has been rejected by liquidators.

Rangers FC Group, formerly Wavetower, is now contesting the decision by liquidators BDO through the Court of Session.

The Rangers FC Group has taken over the claim from Law Financial Ltd, a company previously linked to Whyte, that it is owed up to ?25 million, saying it holds the security over the assets of the in-liquidation Rangers oldco RFC 2012 plc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agent Whyte again stating that he owns Ibrox.

 

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/14042244.Revealed__Craig_Whyte_could_get___6m_from_claim_on_Rangers_oldco_creditors_pot/

The company formed by Craig Whyte to buy the club off Sir David Murray for ?1 four years ago, is taking legal action over the claim which has been rejected by liquidators.

Rangers FC Group, formerly Wavetower, is now contesting the decision by liquidators BDO through the Court of Session.

The Rangers FC Group has taken over the claim from Law Financial Ltd, a company previously linked to Whyte, that it is owed up to ?25 million, saying it holds the security over the assets of the in-liquidation a oldco RFC 2012 plc.

Soap Opera doesn't even come close to the twists and turns at "Rangers"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

b84312251bd026f3944829b88dc42eaa.jpg

 

The last paragraph raises questions about the decision to transfer the licence over to Sevco.

You need 4 years of accounts before you can get a licence, which means what exactly? if they are good accounts your in if they are bad accounts your barred. Now in transferring the licence what the procedure? do accounts matter, well it seems they don't.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Maple Leaf locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...