This tax case may not be as bad as first thought.

[keithgersbear 3,225]

We'd only be one point behind, so I dont know where you get that from. But we aint going to lose.

But think of confidence in the squad, the confidence of the whole club. But if we did go into admin and still won the league, it would destroy them.

[nemisis 358]

I'd agree with that, it would be our u19's for the remainder of the season.

No it wouldn't.

[Blueshoff 11,814]

Not quite but almost.

Rangers owe Whyte £28m

If we go down that route then the first £28m raised from the sale goes to Whyte.

If Whyte2 was to offer £28m to buy the entire club, then there would be a wooden dollar transaction and he would own the club lock stock but with no debt to HMRC.

All other creditors would get nothing, including Bond holders, Season ticket holders etc.

However if the administrator decides that he could get more for the creditors by piece selling all the assets, thats more dangerous.

An administrators duty is to get the most for the creditors as possible

I thought that HMRC always came first in the list to be paid?

[nemisis 358]

But think of confidence in the squad, the confidence of the whole club. But if we did go into admin and still won the league, it would destroy them.

Indeed.

[Marco Negri's Beard 1,423]

Weissman? Do you work in that field or something?

[markybear 136]

Not quite but almost.

Rangers owe Whyte £28m

If we go down that route then the first £28m raised from the sale goes to Whyte.

If Whyte2 was to offer £28m to buy the entire club, then there would be a wooden dollar transaction and he would own the club lock stock but with no debt to HMRC.

All other creditors would get nothing, including Bond holders, Season ticket holders etc.

However if the administrator decides that he could get more for the creditors by piece selling all the assets, thats more dangerous.

An administrators duty is to get the most for the creditors as possible

Seeing this In black and white gave me a shudder doon my spine just now, whyte bought us for a quid and "could" theoretically walk away with £18million bangers if he's a right proper, out for himself thieving gypsy bastard lying scumbag

[TheLawMan 6,240]

How do you know all about this?

Its connected to my job, but i have been reading up on a lot of it since it became apparent that we were involved in it.

I also work very frequently with auditors who are full of information, including Grant Thornton who are Rangers auditors

[TheLawMan 6,240]

He's actually phil mac

Some people actually believe that

Others know it not to be true though

[Colonel Mustard 380]

Not necessarily mate. The very fact we are moving into week 5 of evidence suggests to me that nobody has proven beyond doubt yet that what we did was right or wrong.

The down side to that is that clearly we didnt have a strong enough argument to get it thrown out right away.

Its still up in the air, but its my belief we will be hit with a bill, the size of which is unknown.

And its fair to say that Mr Whytes position has changed considerably since May in my opinion, so dont know what to read into that.

Any links to this information?

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Maybe i'm over simplifying things but - if the advisors were correct then happy days. If they were wrong and gave incorrect advice then we can go after them (or more accurately in view of the amount their Professional Indemnity insurers).

We can yes. Unfortunately PII is normally restricted to a limit of £1m or £2m so wouldnt cover the entire bill

[FirrhillLoyal 318]

Just can't wait till all this is over.

[Sicknote 26]

Not quite but almost.

Rangers owe Whyte £28m

If we go down that route then the first £28m raised from the sale goes to Whyte.

If Whyte2 was to offer £28m to buy the entire club, then there would be a wooden dollar transaction and he would own the club lock stock but with no debt to HMRC.

All other creditors would get nothing, including Bond holders, Season ticket holders etc.

However if the administrator decides that he could get more for the creditors by piece selling all the assets, thats more dangerous.

An administrators duty is to get the most for the creditors as possible

Your very specific with £28M, someone posted the figure to be £30M today. How did you arrive at this figure?

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Seeing this In black and white gave me a shudder doon my spine just now, whyte bought us for a quid and "could" theoretically walk away with £18million bangers if he's a right proper, out for himself thieving gypsy bastard lying scumbag

No. Not true. Remember he had to get the £18m from somewhere so he would be paying that back.

[Sicknote 26]

No. Not true. Remember he had to get the £18m from somewhere so he would be paying that back.

Not wholly related to your comment. But, follow your posts as you have greater depth of knowledge and understanding with financial/legal matters than the vast majority on this forum. Was doing a little research regarding other clubs that have entered administration. Was English clubs and when it came to creditors, it said football debts(transfer fees, wages etc.) were settled first and foremost even before the secured creditors. Does that apply in Scotland?

[Colonel Mustard 380]

Not necessarily mate. The very fact we are moving into week 5 of evidence suggests to me that nobody has proven beyond doubt yet that what we did was right or wrong.

The down side to that is that clearly we didnt have a strong enough argument to get it thrown out right away.

Its still up in the air, but its my belief we will be hit with a bill, the size of which is unknown.

And its fair to say that Mr Whytes position has changed considerably since May in my opinion, so dont know what to read into that.

Any links to this information?

Any pointers yet, as to where there is news of the case being heard for the last 5 weeks?

Cheers.

[markybear 136]

Also a few folk have mentioned that we'd have to change our name to start again as a business, did Dundee have to do this when they went to the wall?

[RFCstuart 317]

we should look intae if we wur mis-sold PPI

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Your very specific with £28M, someone posted the figure to be £30M today. How did you arrive at this figure?

Our current debt to him is:

£18m paid to Lloyds

£5m investment in the playing squad (irrespective if he has put it in or not)

£1.7m for the refurbishment of the stadium

£2.8m for the small tax bill, once/if it gets paid

£27.5m total + any penalties on the small tax bill.

[Colonel Mustard 380]

Also a few folk have mentioned that we'd have to change our name to start again as a business, did Dundee have to do this when they went to the wall?

Even if it was true, it could be a good thing.

The end is nigh, for threads asking "Are we Rangers FC, or The Rangers FC?".

In one fell swoop, we change from The Rangers, to Rangers.

[Sicknote 26]

Our current debt to him is:

£18m paid to Lloyds

£5m investment in the playing squad (irrespective if he has put it in or not)

£1.7m for the refurbishment of the stadium

£2.8m for the small tax bill, once/if it gets paid

£27.5m total + any penalties on the small tax bill.

Cheers.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Not wholly related to your comment. But, follow your posts as you have greater depth of knowledge and understanding with financial/legal matters than the vast majority on this forum. Was doing a little research regarding other clubs that have entered administration. Was English clubs and when it came to creditors, it said football debts(transfer fees, wages etc.) were settled first and foremost even before the secured creditors. Does that apply in Scotland?

My understanding is that the footballers creditor rule is specific to England.

In Scotland, Craig Whyte has first dibs on all money up to the value of the debt owed to him

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Also a few folk have mentioned that we'd have to change our name to start again as a business, did Dundee have to do this when they went to the wall?

This is where the water gets muddy and i do go out of my comfort zone.

A very weak opinion, but if done right, i dont think we do need to lose our name or history. Dont hold me to that one though.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Any pointers yet, as to where there is news of the case being heard for the last 5 weeks?

Cheers.

It hasnt been heard for the last 5 weeks. As posted above, the first session was held in Oct/Nov of last year and the second session was held in April. Each session is 2 weeks long and if the evidence hasnt been concluded then a new date is set.

The next date is in November and that will be the start of week 5 of evidence and will again last 2 weeks. Hopefully we will get a decision in that time, or at least a nod that the evidence is now complete and that a decision will be forthcoming eithout the need for another date in April 2012.

[Colonel Mustard 380]

Our current debt to him is:

£18m paid to Lloyds

£5m investment in the playing squad (irrespective if he has put it in or not)

£1.7m for the refurbishment of the stadium

£2.8m for the small tax bill, once/if it gets paid

£27.5m total + any penalties on the small tax bill.

What did we use our season ticket money for, and also the likes of Tennents sponsorship money, etc.?

[Sicknote 26]

Also a few folk have mentioned that we'd have to change our name to start again as a business, did Dundee have to do this when they went to the wall?

Don't totally understand it, but administration would mean a cost-cutting exercise to save the company, and receivership would mean going out of business. The bit I don't understand is why we would end up in the latter.

Your question, a new company would need a new name.