I suspect that the media ae now becoming aware that trading as the same club could attract the old clubs debts and so they are being more truthful. I am surprised that they can even currently use a name so similar to the old club. It may be that Companys House look differently on football clubs. BDO could well challenge that also, as can some of the creditors. We will have to wait and see, but BDO did say they could be forencic and medieval in their approach.
Basically exactly as Eric said. When the FTT comes back and says that Rangers owe a shed load of money they wont be asking Sevco for a penny. The fallout I speak of would be if they did. Then Charlie Green would disassociate himself as fast as you can say "I'm just a simple Yorkshure lad". I doubt it will happen.
Agree with what you say, but the duty of the liquidators is to get the best deal they can for the creditors and they have the power to recover assets if they feel that they have been undervalued in the sale process. Now whether BDO will do this due to SEVCO being so far down the line now is another issue. The debts cannot be placed at the door of SEVCO, unless they are openly trading as the same company, which as you say Green will disown instantly. BDO will have to decide whether the present situ is the optimum one for all the creditors. If they do....fine, but it would be very bad publicity if Green then does a share issue and brings in £20m or more using the assets which he acquired for only a few million and time period of only months had passed. Unbelievable as it seems, and I find it so myself, the liquidators DO have the power to go to court to recover assets or ask the purchaser to meet a more realistic valuation. Whether they will or not is their decision, but not to do so would certainly raise eyebrows, especially if Green has undervalued assets of a company which left £75m of tax debt and £134m in total behind.
So why have Rangers been punished? Surely a brand new club shouldn't be punished for the crimes of another? Why do this 'new club' have a one year transfer ban? Annan, Elgin, Airdrie et al never had to deal with this. Either it's the same club or the SFL/SFA are hamstringing a brand new member.
First stop must be the SPL to find out why prize money was withheld and went to member clubs and not into the pot of cash available for all creditors.
Because to become part of the SFL you need 3 years of financial records. Sevco don't have that and did a deal with the SFL where they agreed to take on certain responsibilities from the failed company in order to gain a license to play.
They may well ask this question, but as this was prize money and not a debt owed to rfc the SPL can probably do with it as they wish. The PRIZE monies are not like a debt owed to rfc, which being in liquidation would probably not qualify for a prize. Say someone wins a raffle, but dies before it is drawn, the prize money can be given to the next prize winner who has not demised.
TNE these people do not realise that the rules were torn up to allow them into the SFL in the first place. This is the kind of attitude that makes me wish the media had been open and honest in the first place. So many delusions and misunderstandings would have been avoided.
nonsense. Rangers completed the season. Money was withheld when it should have been paid. Rangers' debts to SPL were paid with a portion of the cash. That money should have gone to be divided out as decided by the appointed person. also, why did the spl demand money from a club that had nothing to do with it? Rangers admission was to the SFL. Why were the SPL involved at all?
Aye, there's some might "it's all a conspiracy" nonsense coming from them even after the whole of the Scottish football authority bent nearly every rule to allow them to even kick a ball.
See the above. Deal done to allow the new company to compete in a league it has not right to be in. FFS, when will you get the point. Either the new company has no history and therefore no titles nor right to be a part of the league or it has a history and must therefore pay penance for cheating. The children in the understaffed hospitals would like their answers. The soldiers in the field without proper equipment would like their answers. The pensioner whose real income has dropped yet again would like an answer. The pupils in the schools that have had to close demand an answer. Pay your ****ing taxes or just **** off and die.
Is it not the case that Duff and Phelps would be responsible for undervaluing the assets, if indeed they have been - did Green not just make an offer which the Administrators accepted? By the way what happened in that case where a court ordered Duff & Phelps to provide proof that there was no conflict of interest in their dealings for/with Rangers? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18549293
It's simple really. Rangers entered administration. They were deducted 10 points. They finished second. Prize money should have been paid to the club based on the final league position. After the end of the season liquidation started. The SPL used the prize money to settle the debts of member clubs. They had no right to do this. The liquidators will pursue this with them.
Yes they would, but their purpose is simply to keep the company trading. BDO can def challenge the sale if they consider it to be an undervaluation, which disadvantages the creditors. Don't know if they will, but if they are genuinely going to be forensic and medieval then they will. The whole Admin procedure has been unusual to say the least, given that CW nominate D&P. Got a feeling that there may be political interference behind some of this......along the lines of rfc importance to Scottish culture etc and social unrest which could ensue. Time will tell, but if there is more **** to come out the public may demand that BDO do their duty. FAr from over IMO.
No they won't. BDO won't waste their time chasing money that Rangers were never entitled to. It is up to the SPL how they allocate their prize money. Rangers spent the entire season in breach of their regulations. They cheated. The SPL decided this cheating meant they didn't give Rangers any prize money.
Simple....yes an appropriate word. Rfc were in admin and then went into liquidation before the prize money was due to be paid and so the SPL have a right to do with THEIR money what they want. This was not a debt, so the creditors have no legal claim on it. If in the eyes of those who distribute prize money one of the winners has acted in an untoward way, they can withhold the money, especially if there are claims of cheating hanging over their heads. Count yourselves lucky they SPL don't demand 10 years of prize money backdated as part of the agreement with the SFA to grant SEVCO a licence to play in the first place. Scottish footballing authorities have bent over backwards, issued threats of doom etc to help you. SEVCO should have been told to play at a lower level than div three for three years and then waited in line with everyone else. Don't look a gift horse in the mouth. The membership is only an associate one not a full one and they have kindly agreed to give you a share of tv money you have no right to get.
If I worked for a bank. And bonuses were paid to the best performing staff at the end of every quarter. To ensure that my figures looked the best and that I got the biggest bonus I stole clients off my colleagues. Not only did I steal clients but their figures were calculated after tax and mine were calculated before tax. The bank realised what I was doing and told me that because I had not played to the same rules as everyone else I am not entitled to that bonus. I did complain about it but they did have a rule saying they could withhold my bonus.
Given the concerted effort by practically everyone in authority to keep Rangers/Sevco/Newco afloat in or near the top tier, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if BDO pay no more than lip-service to their role and/or are pressured into simply carrying out the liquidation exercise with the minimum of fuss when enough time has elapsed for them to be able to do so without any media scrutiny. As for Duff & Phelps' duties to creditors - that, to me, is a bit of a joke though it's far from being funny. The Big Tax Case? Is that not now becoming a joke as well - all this time and yet nothing forthcoming ...
