Rangers Tax Case

[Spot Ton]

Go read the SFA'S Articles of Association and count the number of times Rangers gave two fingers to the SFA.

If your a member of any club or association anything that has rules and you break the rules you should get punished. Rangers have been giving the SFA two fingers for years. "We want to play in the Premiership" being the obvious.

So what happens if the SFA give Rangers a easy ride, which is what they have done so far, it wont only be Celtic and Rangers that think they are bigger than the association, everybody will think they can have a go and before you know it we will have UEFA and FIFA laying down the rules and barring Scotland from all European and international competitions.

The SFA have to come down hard on Rangers or else the whole of Scottish football will pay the price for their cheating and blatant disregard of fairplay, sportsmanship and integrity.

 

And they are not alone, there are other clubs who are sailing close to the wind.

 

 

Oh dear, where to start with this absolute disaster of a post?

 

First of all, before telling me to "Go read" any rule books, you could perhaps do me the courtesy of reading my posts on the matter- you know, the ones that said they should get punished? Don't know how many times I have to repeat myself in saying that there is a difference between punishment and expulsion.

 

There is no difference between punishment and expulsion if expulsion is the punishment and it’s within the SFA’s remit to do so.

 

As for giving Rangers an easy ride, if you read the reply to one of my posts outlining the sanctions I would impose on the top of this very page of the thread you'll notice another poster observing that,

 

"What you propose would no doubt ensure this sort of thing would not happen in the future."

 

Of course, I take on board your point about Rangers sticking two fingers up to the authorities by trying to piss off to the Premiership. Let's kick them out on those principles. So what league do you propose Morton play their football in next season? It wasn't very long ago that I remember sitting in the Cappielow board room and questioning Mr Rae about the morals of his proposal for Morton to discard the rest of the SFL and form SPL 2 with the other First Division clubs. If we're going to sit and slate clubs for having no thoughts for their weaker peers, I'd suggest we look slightly closer to home than Govan. People in glass houses and all that....

 

There is a big difference between walking away from your country of association and re-organising leagues. I don’t happen to think creating an SPL 2 is tantamount to “discarding the rest of the SFL” if the teams in the lower leagues who aspire to promotion have the opportunity to do so. The whole league set up needs radical re-organisation and SPL 2 is only one option. Your right some of the smaller teams will suffer but maybe they will, like Morton at this moment in time, find their level and that could be in the junior leagues.

 

Keep kidding yourself on that there's no middle ground between letting them off and expelling them completely, but there are a whole host of sanctions that could be implemented which aren't simply designed to fit with the agendas of people who merely want to see Rangers go bust because they're a shower of bastards.

 

I for one don’t have an agenda, I just believe that Rangers have done so much that is wrong that they need to be suitably punished. The punishment must fit the crime or as I already said in my post, and is now being widely reported, that FIFA will step into this and they won’t give a damn about Rangers their history or their place in Scottish Football. If that happens “Oh dear, where to start with this absolute disaster “. The whole of Scottish football will end up being punished for the inability of the SFA to deal with Rangers transgressions.

[Dougie]

You're the one who brought up TV and commercial revenue. Gate reciepts are far more important to the finances of a football club than the other two. As a consequence, Scottish clubs will always be able to offer far more money to generally better players than a minority sport in a smaller country. But without Rangers dragging 7,00 knuckle draggers along twice a season, not including the cup revenue, then that figure will drop. That you're now clinging onto Shamrock Rovers' solitary good run in a cup competition highlights how weak the rest of your argument is. Wasn't that long ago Derry City pumped Gretna. Was that the last competitive meeting between Scottish anxd Irish club sides? While I agree with Toby about some poor players leaving Scotland and looking good, there are also really good players to have played at that level with the likes of James McClean, Paddy McCourt and Seamus Coleman, recent examples of guys who have went the other way and been far higher standard than Greacen and Gary Twigg.

 

Scottish football has been punching far above its weight in Europe for decades and Rangers going will make no difference to a period of sustained decline of the country's standing in Europe to where it ought to be. Rangers themselves have won only one of their last 25 matches in Europe, so it's clear to see that they're the diddies who have been dragging down the co-efficient.

 

Yes and no. The draws that Rangers have had have helped the co-efficient. In fact, Rangers for a while propped up Scotlands co-efficient, while the others, Celtic included struggled season in season out. To suggest that Rangers have dragged the co-efficient is madness. You are better than that.

 

Domestically, after a period of re-adjustment, there will be little to no difference. Scottish football is already one of the highest-attended leagues in Europe per capita and the loss of Rangers will make little difference, whether those fans slink back to the provincial sides they deserted a generation ago or not.

 

Two things here. Scotland will lose 50,000 fans every second week. So that statistic will change dramatically. And secondly. Do Morton Fans really want Rangers fans to come and support there club? Bearing in mind the reputation they bring with them?

 

 

[Toby]

There is no difference between punishment and expulsion if expulsion is the punishment and it’s within the SFA’s remit to do so.

 

It's really not the punishment though, is it? It's an option that's available to the SFA and there are far more options available to them than to expel a club for their crimes. As I said the other day, the SFA have already gone on record as saying the only crime worse than this could've been match fixing.

 

UEFA and FIFA were quite happy with the FIGC's decision to relegate and deduct 9 points from Juventus for that very crime. A year later they were back in Serie A and now, 6 years on, they're the champions of Italy having gone a whole league campaign unbeaten. Don't kid yourself for a second that the SFA's hand is being forced into expelling any football clubs.

 

There is a big difference between walking away from your country of association and re-organising leagues. I don’t happen to think creating an SPL 2 is tantamount to “discarding the rest of the SFL” if the teams in the lower leagues who aspire to promotion have the opportunity to do so. The whole league set up needs radical re-organisation and SPL 2 is only one option. Your right some of the smaller teams will suffer but maybe they will, like Morton at this moment in time, find their level and that could be in the junior leagues.

 

No, there's a slight difference. And a massive similarity. Morton, by trying to jump into bed with SPL 2 were trying to leave behind their peers in the SFL to chase the money available from a more attractive set up to them and with scant regard for those left behind, a bit like..... I'll let you fill in the blanks.

 

Smaller clubs finding their level? You've taken the words right out of Dougie Rae's mouth from that AGM. And what he said was bollocks too. So, we're now at our level? And the opportunities to progress wouldn't have been more plentiful if there was an equal distribution of sponsorship and TV revenue that has been hoovered up by the SPL? Or a restrictive one up one down format with a parachute payment to soften the blow for their pals so they can get back quickly? A club's level is distinguished by a number of factors, i.e. Rangers would be in a much better position to shell out the wages they were had they been in the English Premier League, whilst we would be in a better position to progress had we not been cut off by the SPL with no share of their relative riches.

 

That's not finding levels, it's stifling competition and it stinks.

 

I for one don’t have an agenda, I just believe that Rangers have done so much that is wrong that they need to be suitably punished. The punishment must fit the crime or as I already said in my post, and is now being widely reported, that FIFA will step into this and they won’t give a damn about Rangers their history or their place in Scottish Football. If that happens “Oh dear, where to start with this absolute disaster “. The whole of Scottish football will end up being punished for the inability of the SFA to deal with Rangers transgressions.

 

I can only speculate about whether or not you've got an agenda, only you know for certain if you do or not, although I suspect most that want them expelled want that purely because they don't like them. Strange that only one person has admitted that though.

 

You haven't even mentioned any possible punishment whatsoever other than expulsion from the SFA though. Have you even considered any? Financial? Relegation? Embargos? Scottish Cup bans? Points deductions? Seems a bit strange to me that someone with no agenda whatsoever can think of one possible sanction and not even contemplate any alternatives.

 

And the punishment for the whole of Scottish Football should the SFA fail to expel Rangers? What, like the ban the Italian international team suffered from international competition when they went on to win the World Cup that very summer? Like the ban from European football that saw AC Milan win the Champions League the same season that Juventus won Serie B? And Inter Milan winning it two years later?

 

Keep scaremongering about how the end is nigh if Rangers aren't expelled, once they are satisfied with a relegation of some sorts the only thing anyone at UEFA will read about it will be on the wrapping of their fish suppers.

[Tonsilitis]

It's really not the punishment though, is it? It's an option that's available to the SFA and there are far more options available to them than to expel a club for their crimes. As I said the other day, the SFA have already gone on record as saying the only crime worse than this could've been match fixing.

 

UEFA and FIFA were quite happy with the FIGC's decision to relegate and deduct 9 points from Juventus for that very crime. A year later they were back in Serie A and now, 6 years on, they're the champions of Italy having gone a whole league campaign unbeaten. Don't kid yourself for a second that the SFA's hand is being forced into expelling any football clubs.

 

I think the problem that the court of session highlighted is that the SFA rules set out a range of specific punishments/penalties and that they could not invent others. As far as I am aware, relegation as applied to Juve is not one of the options. The SFA are caught as the punishments available go from relatively mild straight to the nuclear options of suspension or expulsion. I think they will opt for a suspension and if they do, it will be a case of Rangers reaping what they sowed themselves in going to court.

 

 

No, there's a slight difference. And a massive similarity. Morton, by trying to jump into bed with SPL 2 were trying to leave behind their peers in the SFL to chase the money available from a more attractive set up to them and with scant regard for those left behind, a bit like..... I'll let you fill in the blanks.

 

Smaller clubs finding their level? You've taken the words right out of Dougie Rae's mouth from that AGM. And what he said was bollocks too. So, we're now at our level? And the opportunities to progress wouldn't have been more plentiful if there was an equal distribution of sponsorship and TV revenue that has been hoovered up by the SPL? Or a restrictive one up one down format with a parachute payment to soften the blow for their pals so they can get back quickly? A club's level is distinguished by a number of factors, i.e. Rangers would be in a much better position to shell out the wages they were had they been in the English Premier League, whilst we would be in a better position to progress had we not been cut off by the SPL with no share of their relative riches.

 

That's not finding levels, it's stifling competition and it stinks.

 

I don't disagree altogether but I would also have continued supporting Morton had SPL 2 gone ahead. If the introduction of SPL 2 had been allied a to a proper pyramid structure then clubs would have found their level for sporting reasons. There are many non league clubs who have better facilities and are better supported than teams like, for eample, East Stirling. Thats not to say they could not develop and improve and provided any new structure gave that opportunity, why not?

 

I can only speculate about whether or not you've got an agenda, only you know for certain if you do or not, although I suspect most that want them expelled want that purely because they don't like them. Strange that only one person has admitted that though.

 

You haven't even mentioned any possible punishment whatsoever other than expulsion from the SFA though. Have you even considered any? Financial? Relegation? Embargos? Scottish Cup bans? Points deductions? Seems a bit strange to me that someone with no agenda whatsoever can think of one possible sanction and not even contemplate any alternatives.

 

And the punishment for the whole of Scottish Football should the SFA fail to expel Rangers? What, like the ban the Italian international team suffered from international competition when they went on to win the World Cup that very summer? Like the ban from European football that saw AC Milan win the Champions League the same season that Juventus won Serie B? And Inter Milan winning it two years later?

 

Keep scaremongering about how the end is nigh if Rangers aren't expelled, once they are satisfied with a relegation of some sorts the only thing anyone at UEFA will read about it will be on the wrapping of their fish suppers.

 

I think you are being a bit unfair here. Firstly, I will lay my cards on the table. I detest the old firm and I would be happy for Scottish football to take its chances without them.

 

That though is irrelevant. As I have said above, the court of session determined that the SFA could only use the sanctions set out in its rules. These do not include relegation, the financial option is limited to a fine of £100k which is already applied and, as we have seen, embargoes are not an option. I think relegation and points deductions are options open to the SPL and or SFL, not the SFA. The only other option the SFA have is ejection from the Scottish cup but even that is unusable because you cannot eject a club from a competition which has not started.

 

Have a look at this

 

Clicky

 

I interpret this as meaning that the only options open to the SFA are to either back down or impose a suspension. Suspension gives its own problems. If they were out for a year suspended, that gives its own problems - what happens in the league meantime? Is an extra club promoted/Dunfermline save or do the play as an 11 team league?

 

Nothing is straightforward!

[Rasta Ton]

I think the problem that the court of session highlighted is that the SFA rules set out a range of specific punishments/penalties and that they could not invent others. As far as I am aware, relegation as applied to Juve is not one of the options. The SFA are caught as the punishments available go from relatively mild straight to the nuclear options of suspension or expulsion. I think they will opt for a suspension and if they do, it will be a case of Rangers reaping what they sowed themselves in going to court.

I don't disagree altogether but I would also have continued supporting Morton had SPL 2 gone ahead. If the introduction of SPL 2 had been allied a to a proper pyramid structure then clubs would have found their level for sporting reasons. There are many non league clubs who have better facilities and are better supported than teams like, for eample, East Stirling. Thats not to say they could not develop and improve and provided any new structure gave that opportunity, why not?

I think you are being a bit unfair here. Firstly, I will lay my cards on the table. I detest the old firm and I would be happy for Scottish football to take its chances without them.

 

That though is irrelevant. As I have said above, the court of session determined that the SFA could only use the sanctions set out in its rules. These do not include relegation, the financial option is limited to a fine of £100k which is already applied and, as we have seen, embargoes are not an option. I think relegation and points deductions are options open to the SPL and or SFL, not the SFA. The only other option the SFA have is ejection from the Scottish cup but even that is unusable because you cannot eject a club from a competition which has not started.

 

Have a look at this

 

Clicky

 

I interpret this as meaning that the only options open to the SFA are to either back down or impose a suspension. Suspension gives its own problems. If they were out for a year suspended, that gives its own problems - what happens in the league meantime? Is an extra club promoted/Dunfermline save or do the play as an 11 team league?

 

Nothing is straightforward!

 

I'm sure I read somewhere that the SPL does not require members to be SfA members and that they could compete in the SPL but would not be allowed in Europe or the Scottish cup. Presumably the SFA wouldn't recognise any registrations held by Rangers and that their players would be Ineligible for international selection. Not sure how it would work with the refs although I believe they are supplied under contract from the SFA.

 

[Tonsilitis]

I'm sure I read somewhere that the SPL does not require members to be SfA members and that they could compete in the SPL but would not be allowed in Europe or the Scottish cup. Presumably the SFA wouldn't recognise any registrations held by Rangers and that their players would be Ineligible for international selection. Not sure how it would work with the refs although I believe they are supplied under contract from the SFA.

The SFA supply referees which is maybe not an insurmountable problem but also the SFA are the governing body so far as Europe is concerned so if the SPL admit Rangers against the wishes of the SFA, all the clubs in the SPL would presumably find themselves banned from Europe.

 

Its as good an illustration as there is that Scottish football needs its governance consolidated into one body. A situation like Rangers is made even more complex than it is through the need to deal with at least two bodies and maybe three if relegation is considered. I think there will be more clubs going down also - Hearts spring to mind.

[Alibi]

The pragmatic solution, which I saw suggested by someone somewhere, would be for the SFA to impose a suspension on Rangers for a period of one year, but to offer to suspend the punishment if they agreed to a voluntary ban on signing players. That would in effect mean that the SFA's more lenient punishment as prevented by the court was implemented. Rangers would have the choice of a transfer ban or suspension and it is unlikely they'd opt for suspension.

[Toby]

I think the problem that the court of session highlighted is that the SFA rules set out a range of specific punishments/penalties and that they could not invent others. As far as I am aware, relegation as applied to Juve is not one of the options. The SFA are caught as the punishments available go from relatively mild straight to the nuclear options of suspension or expulsion. I think they will opt for a suspension and if they do, it will be a case of Rangers reaping what they sowed themselves in going to court.

 

However, for all it may not feel like it, we're still at the very early stages of the disciplinary process. Rangers may well have successfully appealed the embargo, but now FIFA are involved, it isn't in Rangers interests to see Scottish Football banned from Europe as they too would suffer. You'll find in time Rangers will be a hell of a lot more cooperative when a body that is significantly stronger than them is involved. They're playing hard ball just now whilst they can get away with it. With the involvement of UEFA and FIFA, you'll see that change pretty quickly.

 

I don't disagree altogether but I would also have continued supporting Morton had SPL 2 gone ahead. If the introduction of SPL 2 had been allied a to a proper pyramid structure then clubs would have found their level for sporting reasons. There are many non league clubs who have better facilities and are better supported than teams like, for eample, East Stirling. Thats not to say they could not develop and improve and provided any new structure gave that opportunity, why not?

 

I think you know me well enough to know that I would also continue supporting Morton regardless- however, that doesn't make it right and your point about "sporting reasons" is pretty much null and void. I'm right in saying you're pretty heavily involved in the Academy at Morton, yes? I remember writing in JonaTon's blog a few years ago that,

 

"Stuart did say that the SFA employ a tick list to audit facilities - basically the better the facilities, the more money you get."

 

...in relation to how much grants and funding is given to clubs for their youth facilities. Link here. So sporting reasons are dictated by how much money is thrown at a club to allow them to improve facilities, and with lower league clubs excluded from the funding, the chasm grows.

 

Might seem irrelevant to the debate, but the clubs who have had the bigger slice of the cake for years now have had the fortune to be able to stretch ahead of the rest. "Sporting reasons" are intrinsically linked to financial ones.

 

Little point in going into the debate about a pyramid system as we agree on that matter, but I've answered your bolded point above. The reason "why not" is because the more powerful clubs are doing everything they can to stifle competition and make themselves richer, at every level of the game. Don't kid yourself about developing and improving- under a system like the one Morton were all for, the opportunities for that happening were severely depleted.

 

I think you are being a bit unfair here. Firstly, I will lay my cards on the table. I detest the old firm and I would be happy for Scottish football to take its chances without them.

 

That though is irrelevant. As I have said above, the court of session determined that the SFA could only use the sanctions set out in its rules. These do not include relegation, the financial option is limited to a fine of £100k which is already applied and, as we have seen, embargoes are not an option. I think relegation and points deductions are options open to the SPL and or SFL, not the SFA. The only other option the SFA have is ejection from the Scottish cup but even that is unusable because you cannot eject a club from a competition which has not started.

 

Have a look at this

 

Clicky

 

I interpret this as meaning that the only options open to the SFA are to either back down or impose a suspension. Suspension gives its own problems. If they were out for a year suspended, that gives its own problems - what happens in the league meantime? Is an extra club promoted/Dunfermline save or do the play as an 11 team league?

 

Nothing is straightforward!

 

You've tip-toed around my question about agendas. Many of us would like to see Scottish football without the Old Firm, but only Dougie has related it to this issue and said he wants Rangers to be expelled for purely selfish reasons rather than because they've broken the rules.

 

Not much more I can put to the rest of this part of your post, given that, whilst you answered my points, I've also countered your own above by suggesting that Rangers will become a lot more cooperative by the time the push comes to shove. It's not in their interests to see Scottish clubs banned from European competition so will at some point accept the happy medium between what UEFA and FIFA deem as appropriate and the ultimate penalty.

 

FIFA have form for suspending FAs at convenient times anyway, I remember the Greeks being suspended throughout a summer that there were no fixtures to be played because of government intervention in footballing matters. Little surprise that the suspension was lifted in time for the autumn qualifiers.

 

I'm sure I read somewhere that the SPL does not require members to be SfA members and that they could compete in the SPL but would not be allowed in Europe or the Scottish cup. Presumably the SFA wouldn't recognise any registrations held by Rangers and that their players would be Ineligible for international selection. Not sure how it would work with the refs although I believe they are supplied under contract from the SFA.

 

To my knowledge, the independent FAs nominate clubs to compete in Europe every year. This is normally a straight forward process i.e. Champions in the Champions League, then places determined on league positions and cup wins.

 

I can't see why players wouldn't be eligible for Scotland though- Craig Gordon wasn't attached to any club yet eligible to travel to the USA game last week.

 

The pragmatic solution, which I saw suggested by someone somewhere, would be for the SFA to impose a suspension on Rangers for a period of one year, but to offer to suspend the punishment if they agreed to a voluntary ban on signing players. That would in effect mean that the SFA's more lenient punishment as prevented by the court was implemented. Rangers would have the choice of a transfer ban or suspension and it is unlikely they'd opt for suspension.

 

Yup, quite a likely scenario, as is relegation if it's not the ultimate penalty. As suggested above, Rangers will eventually accept what's coming to them if it prevents any sanctions on the SFA because they have to. There'll be a point in the not too distant future that they'll be looking to again compete in the Champions League or Europa League, so aban on Scottish clubs is a massive consequence should they fail to back down.

[Tonsilitis]

However, for all it may not feel like it, we're still at the very early stages of the disciplinary process.

That is true and it remains to be seen what additional penalties happen if its proven (as seems likely) that their players had dual contracts. It will also be interesting to see what happens to Campbell Ogilvie. Surely if the dual contracts thing is true, he can't remain president of the SFA?

[chrissiboi]

That is true and it remains to be seen what additional penalties happen if its proven (as seems likely) that their players had dual contracts. It will also be interesting to see what happens to Campbell Ogilvie. Surely if the dual contracts thing is true, he can't remain president of the SFA?

Don't be too sure of that he is using the Rupert Murdoch defence of I didn't know and I did not ask as I believed the people who were at the club had the best intentions.

 

It seems to absolve anyone from any wrong doing.

[Stuart Duncan]

"Stuart did say that the SFA employ a tick list to audit facilities - basically the better the facilities, the more money you get."

 

...in relation to how much grants and funding is given to clubs for their youth facilities. Link here. So sporting reasons are dictated by how much money is thrown at a club to allow them to improve facilities, and with lower league clubs excluded from the funding, the chasm grows.

 

The SFA employ a whole host of criteria and each year produce a terms of reference document which is around 20 pages thick. That document contains all you need to know about qualifying for either the SFA Initiative or Performance leagues. Training facilities, as you can imagine, are only one of the criteria that you have to meet. If I could find the document on the SFA website I'd post a link!!!

 

So its not true to say that sporting reason are dictated by how much money is thrown at a club to improve facilities.

One of the most successful clubs at getting the full SFA grant was Stenhousemuir!!! Therefore the lower leagues, if they get their act together, can and do get big grants from the SFA.

 

Hopefully the new Morton youth set up will meet the criteria, which is by no means easy, for the full SFA grant.

[Toby]

The SFA employ a whole host of criteria and each year produce a terms of reference document which is around 20 pages thick. That document contains all you need to know about qualifying for either the SFA Initiative or Performance leagues. Training facilities, as you can imagine, are only one of the criteria that you have to meet. If I could find the document on the SFA website I'd post a link!!!

 

So its not true to say that sporting reason are dictated by how much money is thrown at a club to improve facilities.

One of the most successful clubs at getting the full SFA grant was Stenhousemuir!!! Therefore the lower leagues, if they get their act together, can and do get big grants from the SFA.

 

Hopefully the new Morton youth set up will meet the criteria, which is by know means easy, for the full SFA grant.

 

Think I'm right in saying that Stenhousemuir, like Falkirk have benefited from a tie up with Stirling University for the use of their facilities, much like Falkirk?

 

They've had fortune that we haven't with university sports coaching students, one of whom posts on here incidentally, acting as youth coaches as part of their degree courses at no or little expense to the clu. Whilst they may not have thrown a lot of money at youth development, they've certainly had breaks and savings from external sources that we haven't.

[Rasta Ton]

Think I'm right in saying that Stenhousemuir, like Falkirk have benefited from a tie up with Stirling University for the use of their facilities, much like Falkirk?

 

They've had fortune that we haven't with university sports coaching students, one of whom posts on here incidentally, acting as youth coaches as part of their degree courses at no or little expense to the clu. Whilst they may not have thrown a lot of money at youth development, they've certainly had breaks and savings from external sources that we haven't.

Fortune or good foresight and initiative by the club? We have a world class coaching school on our doorstep and Alan Moore himself was a lecturer in sports science and coaching at North Glasgow college where I'm sure the students would be delighted to get some hands on experience.

[chrissiboi]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18360427

 

More goings on.

 

 

[Spot Ton]

It will be a miracle if they don't end up in liquidation. Even if they manage to get out of administration they could be plunged straight back in should they lose the "big tax" case and then it's curtains.

[Rasta Ton]

It will be a miracle if they don't end up in liquidation. Even if they manage to get out of administration they could be plunged straight back in should they lose the "big tax" case and then it's curtains.

 

Surely a settlement on the big tax case would be part of the CVA proposals?

[BishyTON]

It will be a miracle if they don't end up in liquidation. Even if they manage to get out of administration they could be plunged straight back in should they lose the "big tax" case and then it's curtains.

 

I think the CVA will fail, but the point in bold is not the case. The big tax case is in relation to sums owed prior to Insolvency and it will be included in the CVA, if passed.

[Alibi]

I think the CVA will fail, but the point in bold is not the case. The big tax case is in relation to sums owed prior to Insolvency and it will be included in the CVA, if passed.

 

So if that's the case, not only does the 5.5m to Duff & Phelps get deducted from the amount due to creditors, but creditors would also see their payouts reduced to next to nothing as their claims would be a far smaller percentage of the total debts. Can't see why any creditor would be prepared to let them off the hook for what would be a fraction of a penny in the £ when they could at least get the satisfaction of killing them off.

[Tonsilitis]

I think the CVA will fail, but the point in bold is not the case. The big tax case is in relation to sums owed prior to Insolvency and it will be included in the CVA, if passed.

Absolutely! Anyone would think you knew something about insolvency! I see also HMRC have lined up BDO to do the liquidation which is not a good sign with regard to the CVA flying.

 

Duff and Phelps have taken a lot of flack in this case. Usually there's some sympathy for the insolvency practitioner from me because fundamentally most people don't understand insolvency law and what they are trying to do. D & P though have not covered themselves in glory in that in my opinion:

 

1) It is highly questionable whether they should have taken the case in the first place

2) There are a number of, errm!........unusual aspects to the way they have handled it. Anyone else remember a trading admin order where nobody got made redundant in the first few days?

[Youngsa]

Absolutely! Anyone would think you knew something about insolvency! I see also HMRC have lined up BDO to do the liquidation which is not a good sign with regard to the CVA flying.

 

Duff and Phelps have taken a lot of flack in this case. Usually there's some sympathy for the insolvency practitioner from me because fundamentally most people don't understand insolvency law and what they are trying to do. D & P though have not covered themselves in glory in that in my opinion:

 

1) It is highly questionable whether they should have taken the case in the first place

2) There are a number of, errm!........unusual aspects to the way they have handled it. Anyone else remember a trading admin order where nobody got made redundant in the first few days?

That has been the standout in the last couple of days and I can't believe our media have not made more of this. I think the posturing going on now by Dave King and earlier by others is the start of the Newco endgame. It appears that Green may not have the money after all (quelle surprise) after being told to do one when he asked Park to invest. I reckon we'll see all the 'rich Rangers fans' now position themselves to try and buy the assets on the cheap and start again. Green is meant to have some sort of first refusal on a newco but I would also expect this to be challenged along with various other Duff and Phelps decisions.