ONE of Scotlandâs top restructuring specialists believes liquidation is looming after analysing the statements from the administrators. Our expert, who has an intimate knowledge of Scottish football finances, said the biggest stumbling block for administrators is the lack of clarity from Craig Whyte on where the Ibrox cash is. The expert â who must remain anonymous for reasons of confidentiality â said: Duff & Phelps are saying there are four main reasons why Rangers will not be able to compete in Europe next year. The first one is very clear in that it was always going to be very optimistic they would be able to do that in light of their financial situation. The second point they raise is the company accounts canât be signed off by the auditors, and those accounts are required by UEFA to allow them to play in European competition. The Ticketus deal to mortgage off the season tickets would have to be shown in those accounts. And the last company information filed by Rangers still shows Lloyds Banking Group as holding the floating charge (a security against debt owed) over the clubâs assets, but that must have since been assigned to somebody and it has not been made public who holds that. Has it been assigned to Ticketus? And do Ticketus actually have any rights realistically over season ticket sales for the next three or four years? Rangers would certainly have to disclose if there was any debt owed to Ticketus, but I would say Ticketus would have to be very daft to hand over £20-odd-million without a legally binding agreement â or one they thought was legally binding. But the thing is, what is legally binding with Rangers FC is not necessarily binding on the administrators. So the administrators could turn around and say, "This agreement is null and void." They touch on that in the final paragraph of their statement in reference to Dave King. It says: "We note his comments regarding the Ticketus arrangements but as this issue is subject to ongoing discussion and examination, it would be inappropriate for us to comment further." Kingâs stake in Rangers is potentially worth nothing if the club does go into liquidation. But going forward, if a company voluntary arrangement is agreed, all the creditors agree to accept X pence in the pound and the balance of the debt is written off, and the shareholding remains in place. But to agree a voluntary arrangement, the shareholders have to agree as well and Whyte could, in theory, block that. If Whyte is holding the floating charge, then he is first-in-line as a creditor. The advantage of liquidation is it doesnât matter how much the creditors are owed because they will get what they get when all the assets are sold off. So you will take Ibrox, you will take Murray Park, players and any other assets of value and that money then comes into the administration to pay the creditors, who just have to accept what they get. For a CVA to be agreed, the creditors would have to be satisfied they would get more out of an agreement than they would out of a liquidation. The problem at the moment is, until this tax tribunal is resolved, no one knows how much Rangers will owe â anything between £15million and £75million. The administrators will have to call a creditors meeting at some point and if HMRC arenât happy with the way that is handled, as the largest creditor they may move to appoint their own administrators. Under the third reason outlined by Duff & Phelps, they say all social taxes have to be settled or compromised â at least £5million. The figure I have read on the record is £14million as Rangers have apparently not paid any tax or VAT since Whyte took over. The Revenue said in the Court of Session they were owed £9million, and that excluded another VAT case, I think linked to the Ticketus deal. So saying âat least £5millionâ is not wrong, itâs just in reality around three times that. In essence, what Duff & Phelpsâ statement is saying is liquidation is a distinct possibility. They say: âThere has, perhaps inevitably, been speculation about Rangers FC facing liquidation. As we have stated previously, we remain very confident that Rangers will not cease to exist and the team will continue to play at Ibrox.â That is not saying liquidation is not going to happen but they are saying Rangers will continue in some shape or form. That is almost certainly correct as the idea of Rangers ceasing to exist is inconceivable. Gretna went out of existence because it didnât really own anything of value as it leased its ground from the council and had no one interested in taking it over. It does also seem a bit odd Duff & Phelps were appointed as administrators, given they had worked with Whyteâs companies before and after the takeover, and on the face of it, it is getting very close to being a conflict of interest, though HMRC did approve them. Reading between the lines of the statement, it seems the administrators are seriously considering liquidation. The only way Grant Thornton could sign off the accounts with a going concern qualification â basically qualifying Rangers have enough money to continue to operate â would be if someone was prepared to come forward and put up enough money to agree a voluntary arrangement. Otherwise Rangers are plainly not a going concern and the only alternative is to go into liquidation.
Any tips on the nags today Eddie? I won on a Barca/Spurs/APOEL treble last night and want to keep the profit going.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17300277 £6m missing and that **** Whyte still has the brass neck to contest £1m through another of his companies Edit: * Guess which googly eyed (possible) fraudster is involved in the Jerome Group?
Unlucky Venom, that horse is an arse chaser, has a fair bit of ability but you seen him looking around when he hit the front and he wont be winning many races with that attitude. Only way he will win races is on the bridle against inferior horses, if it comes down to a battle a more genuine horse will beat him every time. Unfortunately I wasnt to know this before the race with it being only his 3rd run over hurdles and the first time hes been involved in a finish. Maybe im being a bit harsh on such an inexperienced horse but I will stand by the judgement till he proves me wrong.
I was on a jammy run anyway Eddie. It had to stop sometime, plus I only put the profit from my 3 team accumulator on.
