Whyte's Creditor Position

[MikeBlue 136]

I hesitate to start another thread, but this'll just get lost otherwise. As I understand it, Rangers basically owe Whyte a sum of around 18M making him (in his eyes at least) the "preferred creditor"

As far as I can see this position was obtained by selling assets of Rangers FC (future STs) to a third party, but ensuring that the funds were paid not to Rangers, but another company owned by Whyte. These funds were then used to take on bank debt to Lloyds, which Rangers now owe to Whyte. It seems reasonable to assume that in any future sale (or CVA) of the club Whyte would expect to recover part or all of this money.

I don't think you have to be a member of the SWP to think that this is basically fraud. This supposed debt to Whyte is essentially bogus as it is the club's own assets which have been used to generate it.

My question to the more business orientated forum members - is this actually fraud (or does it just seem like it to me)

[Mikhailichenko 90]

Depends how he has gone about it. If all the paperwork is in place it is perfectly legitimate. If he has tried to hide it from the authorities he could be looking at a fraud charge.

[Ricky_ 893]

well it could be, im led to believe there is a companies act which means it's illegal for someone to buy a company, buy raising cash from assets of the same company.

the whole thing is as clear as much though, because Whyte claims the Ticketus money is secured against him personally, so if Rangers did go to the wall, he'd lose 24m as hed need to repy the loan from his own pocket. As preffered creditor though, he could own the stadium i think. So effectively he'd be 24m in debt to Ticketus but own a football stadium which wouldnt really be much use to him....

[DIESEL RFC 32]

Its fuckin brutal thats what it is!

Whyte deserves to be shot

[DIESEL RFC 32]

well it could be, im led to believe there is a companies act which means it's illegal for someone to buy a company, buy raising cash from assets of the same company.

the whole thing is as clear as much though, because Whyte claims the Ticketus money is secured against him personally, so if Rangers did go to the wall, he'd lose 24m as hed need to repy the loan from his own pocket. As preffered creditor though, he could own the stadium i think. So effectively he'd be 24m in debt to Ticketus but own a football stadium which wouldnt really be much use to him....

Unless he sells it!

Its not illegal if you get the right authorisation for it

[Ricky_ 893]

Unless he sells it!

Its not illegal if you get the right authorisation for it

isn't it a listed building though?

so it only be useful to football team, based in govan, with 50,000+ supporters....

seems like the only way he could go with it would be to try and flog it to someone like Paul Murray with the intention of re-forming Rangers.

[Guardian 4,281]

I raised this point yesterday.

Whyte may have paid off LBG with our money but claiming it as his.

We end up owing Ticketus AND him.

He just doubled our debt at a stroke and is in line for a £20m odd payment.

[Ricky_ 893]

I raised this point yesterday.

Whyte may have paid off LBG with our money but claiming it as his.

We end up owing Ticketus AND him.

He just doubled our debt at a stroke and is in line for a £20m odd payment.

no i dont think this is right.

if the worst were to happen and we went to the wall, we wouldnt owe ticketus a penny if what whyte is sayin is true. Theyd have no standing to come after us for the outstanding loan - the loan is secured to Whyte (as he claimed in his statement) - so if the worst did happen, Whyte would repay them 24m out his own pocket. He must have that money available in assessts aswell, as surely Ticketus wouldnt be so stupdit to hand out that much cash without proof Whyte had the means to pay it back.

[DIESEL RFC 32]

Even at that whyte should get fuck all,hes robbing us off our money!

Hes went drom being skint to a multi millionaire at the rangers expense.

Absolutely shocking!

[StudsLonniegan 9]

I would think someone should insist on seeing the proof of funding for the original £33 million that was said to have been proofed to LBG, they must have it in their file if they don't all and any debt to them from us should be quashed, we should as a club also sue them for damages including any tax liability if this all goes pear shaped.

[Guardian 4,281]

no i dont think this is right.

if the worst were to happen and we went to the wall, we wouldnt owe ticketus a penny if what whyte is sayin is true. Theyd have no standing to come after us for the outstanding loan - the loan is secured to Whyte (as he claimed in his statement) - so if the worst did happen, Whyte would repay them 24m out his own pocket. He must have that money available in assessts aswell, as surely Ticketus wouldnt be so stupdit to hand out that much cash without proof Whyte had the means to pay it back.

"if what Whyte is saying is true"

Your theory sinks right there, much as I wish it was true.

[markybear 136]

http://www.ibblaw.co.uk/downloads/brochures/2010-05-27-15-06-39-financial_assistance.pdf

[boss 1,941]

I had a long chat the other night with a (Rangers supporting) insolvency high heid yin with many years experience and who has been keeping up with the saga. Even he could not say with certainty whether Whyte's security would stand up. In his words, this has the potential to be a "bun fight", in other words legals flying about all over the place.

So none of us plebs are in a position to call the security one way or another - all we can do in that respect is remain patient and see what transpires.

He is also skeptical (for a few reasons) whether Ticketus will have any recourse to the season tickets, which is good. But he is also doubtful whether a CVA will happen without HMRC's sanction and without a conclusion to the big tax case, which could put it back months.

[Ricky_ 893]

"if what Whyte is saying is true"

Your theory sinks right there, much as I wish it was true.

i think im one of the very few people left who are still a little optimistic about the situation with Whyte.

When he took us over i tried t ofind out a little about him - but getting information on him online or in relable news sources is almost imposible.

So right from the off i thought the whoel thing stank - i simply believed he had no money. How can anyone make over 100m and no-one has a clue how you made a penny of it? When you have that sort of cash, people know about it, and they know where it comes from.

However, it would seem from whats went on:

1. he has at least 5m+ for his home he recently baught in Scotland

2. at least 24m+ in assests that he secured the ticketus loan from

3. he provided proof of funds to murray & his legal team during the takeover

So im uncertain on Whyte, his funds, how he made his money etc....

1 thing is for certain though, he doesnt have then integrity to be our owner.

It also eems fairly logical to me that it's in Whytes best interests to do everything in his power to sort us out of this mess. What exactly would he have to gain from liquidating us and running off with the stadium, carpets & boot laces?

To me it seems far more beneficial to sort the club out then sell it for a profit. The 18m lloyds debt, effectivly he's just conjoured up a repayment plan for that debt, the plan is that we pay Ticketus 60% ST's for 3 years and in return we cleared the debt & got an additional 6m "running costs". I dont think there woudl have been much of an issue if Murray put this plan in effect when he was still owner and Lloyds were threating us with legal action & putting there guys on the board.

I think Whytes plan from the start was to inherit Murrays big fat fucking mess, restructure the debts (job done with Lloyds, although we all feel aggreived Whyte or Murray have not forked out for that debt themselves). Resolve all the issues with HMRC to something that is reasonable and realistic for the club (this clearly is the sticking issue and i dont think Whyte ever expect them to play such hard ball) - and ultimately sell us on at profit, or perhaps run the club for a couple of years then sell it on, with the club having a clear business plan and sound finances. In which case he would the be owner of 1 hell of a business he baught for a quid.

I think given the reaction of us going into admin, the constant dirt published in the media on him, Whyte position within the club is untenable - so i expect him now to try to sort this mess out as quickly as he possibly can, sell us on, release a statement to the fans about all the good he doen and how he "saved" the club, then we'll never hear abotu him again.

[The_Muher 0]

i think im one of the very few people left who are still a little optimistic about the situation with Whyte.

When he took us over i tried t ofind out a little about him - but getting information on him online or in relable news sources is almost imposible.

So right from the off i thought the whoel thing stank - i simply believed he had no money. How can anyone make over 100m and no-one has a clue how you made a penny of it? When you have that sort of cash, people know about it, and they know where it comes from.

However, it would seem from whats went on:

1. he has at least 5m+ for his home he recently baught in Scotland

2. at least 24m+ in assests that he secured the ticketus loan from

3. he provided proof of funds to murray & his legal team during the takeover

So im uncertain on Whyte, his funds, how he made his money etc....

1 thing is for certain though, he doesnt have then integrity to be our owner.

It also eems fairly logical to me that it's in Whytes best interests to do everything in his power to sort us out of this mess. What exactly would he have to gain from liquidating us and running off with the stadium, carpets & boot laces?

To me it seems far more beneficial to sort the club out then sell it for a profit. The 18m lloyds debt, effectivly he's just conjoured up a repayment plan for that debt, the plan is that we pay Ticketus 60% ST's for 3 years and in return we cleared the debt & got an additional 6m "running costs". I dont think there woudl have been much of an issue if Murray put this plan in effect when he was still owner and Lloyds were threating us with legal action & putting there guys on the board.

I think Whytes plan from the start was to inherit Murrays big fat fucking mess, restructure the debts (job done with Lloyds, although we all feel aggreived Whyte or Murray have not forked out for that debt themselves). Resolve all the issues with HMRC to something that is reasonable and realistic for the club (this clearly is the sticking issue and i dont think Whyte ever expect them to play such hard ball) - and ultimately sell us on at profit, or perhaps run the club for a couple of years then sell it on, with the club having a clear business plan and sound finances. In which case he would the be owner of 1 hell of a business he baught for a quid.

I think given the reaction of us going into admin, the constant dirt published in the media on him, Whyte position within the club is untenable - so i expect him now to try to sort this mess out as quickly as he possibly can, sell us on, release a statement to the fans about all the good he doen and how he "saved" the club, then we'll never hear abotu him again.

That looks pretty much the same as I was thinking!

[TheLawMan 6,240]

I had a long chat the other night with a (Rangers supporting) insolvency high heid yin with many years experience and who has been keeping up with the saga. Even he could not say with certainty whether Whyte's security would stand up. In his words, this has the potential to be a "bun fight", in other words legals flying about all over the place.

So none of us plebs are in a position to call the security one way or another - all we can do in that respect is remain patient and see what transpires.

He is also skeptical (for a few reasons) whether Ticketus will have any recourse to the season tickets, which is good. But he is also doubtful whether a CVA will happen without HMRC's sanction and without a conclusion to the big tax case, which could put it back months.

I have one of the big 4 in now closing last years off and I described the situation to a partner. He reckoned, though he said it was only from the info I gave him, that whyte would not even be a creditor if it could be proven that the money was an asset purchase in the primary company.

He also said that technically speaking and again subject to more info whyte might even be a debtor and that the club could potentially have a claim against him hugely dependent on the asset purchase documentation.

The only thing to bare in mind is that he has absolutely no prior knowledge so a lot of ifs and buts but certainly made sense, if he got my description correct.

[BlueThunder 8,454]

But he is also doubtful whether a CVA will happen without HMRC's sanction and without a conclusion to the big tax case, which could put it back months.

Everything I've read so far seems to suggest a verdict in April. This is to HMRCs advantage as we need to be out of admin by the 31st of March, and it would be senseless to leave admin without reaching an agreement with HMRC as we'd go straight back into admin or even be liquidated should the case go against us.Admin offers us some protection prior to the verdict supposedly.

[Incisive Pass 8]

isn't it a listed building though?

so it only be useful to football team, based in govan, with 50,000+ supporters....

seems like the only way he could go with it would be to try and flog it to someone like Paul Murray with the intention of re-forming Rangers.

Tha facade is grade B listed. As was the facade at Highbury, they'e retained the facade and built flats behind it.

[WWTC 2,247]

isn't it a listed building though?

so it only be useful to football team, based in govan, with 50,000+ supporters....

seems like the only way he could go with it would be to try and flog it to someone like Paul Murray with the intention of re-forming Rangers.

It is, but its a common misconception that as its a lksted building, it cant be altered. Nothing could be further from the truth, infact, although it could prove to be a long and expensive process, some listed buildings can even be knocked down. I dont think that would happen, but far too many people jump on the "its a listed building, you cant touch it" notion for their own comfort.

[jonbryce 63]

isn't it a listed building though?

so it only be useful to football team, based in govan, with 50,000+ supporters....

seems like the only way he could go with it would be to try and flog it to someone like Paul Murray with the intention of re-forming Rangers.

There would be no restriction on using it as a Rugby stadium, or for some other sport, but yes, it is listed, and you can't just knock it down and build flats there.

[Gash07 26]

I have one of the big 4 in now closing last years off and I described the situation to a partner. He reckoned, though he said it was only from the info I gave him, that whyte would not even be a creditor if it could be proven that the money was an asset purchase in the primary company.

He also said that technically speaking and again subject to more info whyte might even be a debtor and that the club could potentially have a claim against him hugely dependent on the asset purchase documentation.

The only thing to bare in mind is that he has absolutely no prior knowledge so a lot of ifs and buts but certainly made sense, if he got my description correct.

Finally some financial opinion that would appear logical.

The idea that some clown can buy a business by somehow flogging said business' assets before hand, then liquidate that business and be first in line to collect the dough that was never his in the first place defies logic.

Criminal.

[gunslinger 270]

can't see it to be honest.