The former chairman of the Westminster treasury select committee has called for the financial regulator to probe Craig Whyte's takeover of Rangers. John McFall said the Financial Services Authority (FSA) could help answer questions about an apparent shortfall of cash at the Ibrox club. Rangers appointed Duff and Phelps to act as administrators on Tuesday. The firm has denied having any conflict of interest arising from its links to Craig Whyte prior to his takeover. Rangers was placed in administration on Tuesday after a legal stand-off at the Court of Session in Edinburgh. Owner Craig Whyte lodged papers at the court on Monday indicating that the club was considering administration within 10 days. When HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) - one of the club's main creditors - filed to have its own administrator appointed on Tuesday, both parties agreed that Duff and Phelps would be appointed. Joint administrators Paul Clark and David Whitehouse, from Duff and Phelps, later confirmed HMRC's action stemmed from the alleged non-payment of £9m in VAT and PAYE dating back to last year when Mr Whyte bought the club from Sir David Murray. Angry fans have since demanded answers from Mr Whyte over what has happened to all the cash which has apparently passed through Rangers since then. Mr Whyte claims to have injected £33m of his own money to pay off the club's bank debt and fulfil the other obligations of the takeover. Ticketus borrowing Going on previous seasons, Rangers income for the nine months Mr Whyte has been in charge should be about £26m. It has also been reported that he borrowed about £24m from Ticketus against a share of season ticket sales for the next four years. David Grier helped Craig Whyte during his takeover of Rangers The club is also said to have received about £5m for the sale of top goalscorer Nikica Jelavić to Everton in the January transfer window. The combined total of these figures is £55m. Mr Whyte has publicly stated that the monthly cost of running Rangers is about £3.75m. Based on this figure, the cost of running the club during Mr Whyte's tenure would have been about £34m. In theory, that should leave a surplus of £21m. If the £9m figure claimed by HMRC over alleged unpaid VAT and PAYE is added, then the surplus cash figure would stand at £30m. Working with these figures, some fans have been asking why Rangers was placed in administration. John McFall, the former Labour MP who chaired the House of Commons treasury select committee, said the matter should be investigated by the Financial Services Authority. He said: "When you spend money you don't have and you use HMRC and the taxpayer as your private bank then it has tragic consequences for Rangers as an institution, Scottish football, fans and for Scottish community. "Rangers are on the stock exchange and there is a renewed case for the FSA looking at this issue. Parliament is just giving the FSA the opportunity to have what's called judgemental discretion. That means looking at the business models of institutions and Rangers is a good case. "Did the directors do their duty? And, if they did their duty legally, were there any corners cut as a result of that? "It's the taxpayer who's on the hook here and the taxpayer has got to be paid and football clubs have got to realise that they have got to comply with the regulations that are laid down by parliament and HMRC. "There's lots of questions around here, there's no specific answers so the case for a renewed investigation by the FSA is something that supporters and those with an interest in Rangers should be looking at as well."
Fishier and fishier - one can almost smell the pong in the air. [video]http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2012/02/14/rangers-in-crisis-administrator-in-waiting-david-grier-will-be-faced-with-biggest-decisions-in-club-s-history-86908-23748131/[/video]
Yeah I read that today on the advice of my mate who's a Gers man. Not sure if the article seems overly optimistic about Whyte's chances of success. Especially this: Sykes said there would be no need for Rangers to change the club’s name. He said: “Whatever happens, they will apply under the Insolvency Act to continue using the same name, Rangers Football Club, without changing it. “Because of the history of the club, they would get leave from the court to continue to use the name. Now call me an old cynic but what is his field of expertise, why is this self confessed CROOK disclosing the dirt on Whyte and then as repayment he is given free reign to indulge in fantasies and if's and but's?
I think the point coming across in all of this is that Whyte and his cronies would appear to have seen Rangers' predicament as an opportunity to make a packet while at the same time paying nothing or as little as possible to creditors and have planned their strategy from the outset. It remains to be seen whether or not HMRC are resourceful enough or there is sufficient natural justice within the legal system, to prevent them.
I think the same EC, I believe that was Whyte's "original" plan but he seems to be in over his head. If this was the plan all along with nothing but the best of intentions then he would not have looked like a rabbit caught in the headlights when he spoke outside Ibrox the other night. He was bricking it.
Indeed, but he looked as if he would have jumped into the arms of the nearest pal if a fan had said so much as "BOO".
If you're right, Whyte must really have pulled the wool over Murray's eyes. I have problems with that - it could be that Murray was blinded by his desire to get rid of the club as quickly as possible, knowing that HMRC were approaching fast and he didn't do his homework on Whyte......although I would have thought that even a cursory glance at Whyte's background and specialism should have given cause for Murray to be concerned.
Whyte is nothing but a sneaky **** who tends to get found out quite often for being a sneaky **** and I suspect he will be found out for being a sneaky **** yet again... i guess hes not that much of a sneaky ****
