darylhmfc1 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I take it with Rangers going down the pan we've no chance of seeing the remainder of the Wallace transfer fee?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gregory House M.D. Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I take it with Rangers going down the pan we've no chance of seeing the remainder of the Wallace transfer fee?? The SFA would have to pay it. Eithee that or Hearts should get his registration IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joe.gausden Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I think the spl pay it from tv monies they are due, could be wrong though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johanes de Silentio Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I take it with Rangers going down the pan we've no chance of seeing the remainder of the Wallace transfer fee?? Surely if they don't pay an agreed transfer fee to another member club, that's BAD FAITH? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearty Harry Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Maybe someone with some legal standing can answer clearly but the way I look at it is if you pay a car up in installments and you stop paying then it gets repossessed. I can't see the Wallace deal being any different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Team Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Maybe someone with some legal standing can answer clearly but the way I look at it is if you pay a car up in installments and you stop paying then it gets repossessed. I can't see the Wallace deal being any different. Do we just become a creditor same as anyone else, left to negotiate a pence in pound settlement? I think player contracts and transfers are different but don't know for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylhmfc1 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 Maybe someone with some legal standing can answer clearly but the way I look at it is if you pay a car up in installments and you stop paying then it gets repossessed. I can't see the Wallace deal being any different. Lets send the bailiffs round to Wallaces hoose. Punt his door doon and get him back!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross21 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Don't get your hopes up, there's no chance of his registration being returned to Hearts Hearts will become a creditor, significant one, but no different to HMRC or even the local bakers (imagine they are due money). They will be offered a deal, say so many pennies for every pound they are due, as with every other creditor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juanjo Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 So Rangers have effectively stolen him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaii Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 SPL rules state that Hearts will get the money from TV money due to Rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alwaysinourshadows Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 The money isn't due until July so calm down everyone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allystrachan Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 the SPL should just keep the money and call it credit for the next few years worth of fines that they will give us! haha! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flux Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Just need to add ?1m on to the next player they buy.... .....wait a minute..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 We'd get the money from the SPL according to their rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CBjambo Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 SPL rules state that Hearts will get the money from TV money due to Rangers What TV money? Thought it was all dried up?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pivo Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Almost certain that I read a while back that footballing debts are not treated like all other debts. They get priority and must be paid first. That includes being paid before HMRC, so we will get paid at some point and in full. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dean Winchester Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Almost certain that I read a while back that footballing debts are not treated like all other debts. They get priority and must be paid first. That includes being paid before HMRC, so we will get paid at some point and in full. Not in Scotland. But the SPL will give us money due to Rangers for any outstanding debts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross21 Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Almost certain that I read a while back that footballing debts are not treated like all other debts. They get priority and must be paid first. That includes being paid before HMRC, so we will get paid at some point and in full. When Dundee went into Admin recently, I know for a fact that all the debts were treated the same & that every 'creditor' was treate the same Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 This focus on the Wallace money puzzles me. The SPL rule that requires the SPL to withold money (TV and sponsorship money) from a club which defaults on a debt in order to pay the creditor club has been posted on numerous occasions today. If Rangers survive we will be paid under this rule. Even if Rangers don't survive (oh happy day!) I have no doubt it will be a condition of the entry of Newco that this rule applues to the Newco - clubs may be supine as far as the OF are concerned but not that supine. The Wallace money (hardly enough in any event to be likely to be make or break for Hearts) is safe. I have the impression some people want to find reasons for us not rejoicing in Rangers problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Buck Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Lets send the bailiffs round to Wallaces hoose. Punt his door doon and get him back!! This Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sydney Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I take it with Rangers going down the pan we've no chance of seeing the remainder of the Wallace transfer fee?? If they appoint an administrator, then that's a good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VALDOS Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 What TV money? Thought it was all dried up?! Well it might just be the case, the SPL beeks will be cacking it right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 This focus on the Wallace money puzzles me. The SPL rule that requires the SPL to withold money (TV and sponsorship money) from a club which defaults on a debt in order to pay the creditor club has been posted on numerous occasions today. If Rangers survive we will be paid under this rule. Even if Rangers don't survive (oh happy day!) I have no doubt it will be a condition of the entry of Newco that this rule applues to the Newco - clubs may be supine as far as the OF are concerned but not that supine. The Wallace money (hardly enough in any event to be likely to be make or break for Hearts) is safe. I have the impression some people want to find reasons for us not rejoicing in Rangers problems. This has been answered so many times, on so many threads, over so many months, that I'm starting to think those still asking are either Hobos, Thick, or WUM's, - possibly even all three. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Currahee! Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I think its crazy that a club can come in and buy a player but not pay anything for a year or 2. I know this happens all through life but football is different. Why should a club be allowed to weaken a rival but not have to pay for a few years? If a club bids for a player they should have the money available there and then. Its a nonsense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I think its crazy that a club can come in and buy a player but not pay anything for a year or 2. I know this happens all through life but football is different. Why should a club be allowed to weaken a rival but not have to pay for a few years? If a club bids for a player they should have the money available there and then. Its a nonsense. Which club(s) have done that, and with which player(s)...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dazo Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I think its crazy that a club can come in and buy a player but not pay anything for a year or 2. I know this happens all through life but football is different. Why should a club be allowed to weaken a rival but not have to pay for a few years? If a club bids for a player they should have the money available there and then. Its a nonsense. We could have said no. Regardless this is how a lot if not most big deals are concluded. I know it isn't a big deal on a world scale but for a transfer between 2 SPL clubs then ?1.5m is a pretty big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandt Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 I wonder if they still want Temps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Currahee! Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 Which club(s) have done that, and with which player(s)...? Almost every club but you know what I'm talking about. We could have said no. Regardless this is how a lot if not most big deals are concluded. I know it isn't a big deal on a world scale but for a transfer between 2 SPL clubs then ?1.5m is a pretty big deal. We could have but its still not a good way to do business imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylhmfc1 Posted February 13, 2012 Author Share Posted February 13, 2012 This has been answered so many times, on so many threads, over so many months, that I'm starting to think those still asking are either Hobos, Thick, or WUM's, - possibly even all three. A little Harsh! No?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted February 13, 2012 Share Posted February 13, 2012 A little Harsh! No?? No, not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3,585
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.