Duff & Phelps

[NorthUistBear 86]

I have alot of respect for Duff & Phelps. They have come in as administrators and really showed respect to Rangers (Players, Management, Fans and all) They could have come in and sacked 10, 15, 20 people on the spot, but they have not. WHEN The Rangers are saved they deserve credit for the way they have handled us in administration.

My opinion anyway.

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

I have alot of respect for Duff & Phelps. They have come in as administrators and really showed respect to Rangers (Players, Management, Fans and all) They could have come in and sacked 10, 15, 20 people on the spot, but they have not. WHEN The Rangers are saved they deserve credit for the way they have handled us in administration.

My opinion anyway.

I was very very sceptical but fair playe to them.

The mess needed sorted out one way or another and I think they are doing it.

Don't think they realised what kind of task it was when they started right enough.

[j1mgg 3,766]

At the end of the day their job is to get the business in the best shape for it to be sold and get creditors their money back. By selling loads of staff may not have been as much as a benefit as the cost saving would be by not having them.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

There will be time enough for counting when the dealings done

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

There will be time enough for counting when the dealings done

I know exactly what you mean but the alternative was unthinkable.

[Orangeclement 578]

they've made a few bucks in the process

[caseyjones 3,009]

I know exactly what you mean but the alternative was unthinkable.

The alternative will need to be addressed again in 3 months time. They have only put in a short-term plan in order to see out the season.

[Sicknote 26]

In my opinion, they have killed the slim hopes we had of getting a CVA by not making redundancies. HMRC will not agree to a CVA when the wage bill will jump by £12M per year in 3 months time. They had to make cuts, they failed to do that.

[harry handsome 629]

In my opinion, they have killed the slim hopes we had of getting a CVA by not making redundancies. HMRC will not agree to a CVA when the wage bill will jump by £12M per year in 3 months time. They had to make cuts, they failed to do that.

I don't think they have, there job is to deal with the here and now. It's up to the new owner to manage the future business.

Remember we are trimming the costs to suit the cash scenario, which at the moment is poor due to funds missing.

[BRICKY1872 118]

There will be time enough for counting when the dealings done

I see what you did there

[Ozblue 4,332]

The alternative will need to be addressed again in 3 months time. They have only put in a short-term plan in order to see out the season.

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't grasp this reality and think that everything will be back to "normal" once we come out of administration and have a "new owner" in charge of the club.

As Douglas Fraser,the business and economy editor pointed out in an article I read; "I'm not the first to point out that Paul Murray was the one asking why Craig Whyte would want to take over Rangers under these circumstances last year, yet he's up for doing so now, when the debt cloud remains."

We are in for a long hard road of it no matter who takes us over if they are going to run us as a profitable business,or at least one that can operate within our budget.

[Guardian 4,281]

Unfortunately, there are a lot of people who can't grasp this reality and think that everything will be back to "normal" once we come out of administration and have a "new owner" in charge of the club.

As Douglas Fraser,the business and economy editor pointed out in an article I read; "I'm not the first to point out that Paul Murray was the one asking why Craig Whyte would want to take over Rangers under these circumstances last year, yet he's up for doing so now, when the debt cloud remains."

We are in for a long hard road of it no matter who takes us over if they are going to run us as a profitable business,or at least one that can operate within our budget.

Good post.

The admins have taken a lot of stick, but they seem to be doing a good job. Rangers were left in an unholy mess, but they seem to be steering us out of it.

They have (reportedly) managed to deal with HMRC over the tax cases, when all previous owners and boards failed miserably to deal with one.

That puts us in good shape for attracting a buyer and investment.

I'm not expecting a rich arab to appear, but if we can get in someone to run us as a business, organise paying off our debts over time and put some money into the kitty for players, then the admins will have done a grand job.

We should show them our support until there is reason to do otherwise.

[Sicknote 26]

I don't think they have, there job is to deal with the here and now. It's up to the new owner to manage the future business.

Remember we are trimming the costs to suit the cash scenario, which at the moment is poor due to funds missing.

Trimming the costs - no we're not! we've just put some on hold.

Missing funds - there may be some money to be found, but it won't plug the £12M running cost hole, nor will it pay off our existing debt, and there is also the small matter of 'the light at the end of the tunnel'(a 75M TON train)

[Sicknote 26]

Good post.

The admins have taken a lot of stick, but they seem to be doing a good job. Rangers were left in an unholy mess, but they seem to be steering us out of it.

They have (reportedly) managed to deal with HMRC over the tax cases, when all previous owners and boards failed miserably to deal with one.

That puts us in good shape for attracting a buyer and investment.

I'm not expecting a rich arab to appear, but if we can get in someone to run us as a business, organise paying off our debts over time and put some money into the kitty for players, then the admins will have done a grand job.

We should show them our support until there is reason to do otherwise.

"Asked about the possibility of a "deal" being made with HM Revenue and Customs, Clark replied: "We're not at the stage where we can go to any of the creditors with any specifics and so I think that it would be too early for me to say what the chances of a deal with any of the creditors are."

Duff & Phelps own words - BBC

[delamonty 992]

In my opinion, they have killed the slim hopes we had of getting a CVA by not making redundancies. HMRC will not agree to a CVA when the wage bill will jump by £12M per year in 3 months time. They had to make cuts, they failed to do that.

Good point. But if we're still in Admin (or out and still under Whyte), the wages are not going back up. The only way they go back up is under new ownership. Given that it will be a slimmer Rangers then with an owner who actually has real money and cares...,

D&F are doing what they have to do. Keeping us afloat until we can get new ownership. IF the players did not agree to the cuts, then redundancies would have happened. D&F seemed to give the players ample opportunity to make the deal. To the players great credit, they did.

Feel good about where we are and where we are heading.

This year will never be forgotten.

[Ozblue 4,332]

Good post.

The admins have taken a lot of stick, but they seem to be doing a good job. Rangers were left in an unholy mess, but they seem to be steering us out of it.

They have (reportedly) managed to deal with HMRC over the tax cases, when all previous owners and boards failed miserably to deal with one.

That puts us in good shape for attracting a buyer and investment.

I'm not expecting a rich arab to appear, but if we can get in someone to run us as a business, organise paying off our debts over time and put some money into the kitty for players, then the admins will have done a grand job.

We should show them our support until there is reason to do otherwise.

While it appears normal for any administrators of a club (business) to get beaten by a big stick due to the hard decisions that have to be made,we have to remember that the Rangers are NOT your "normal club in trouble" so these guys have not only a club to look after,they have an institution where our outcome has massive repercussions for the whole of Scottish football,and indeed the whole of Scotland whern the big picture is looked at.

If they can get us to a sound reasonable footing with a decent chance of a favourable outcome for the club, then as far as I'm concerned,they will have earned their fee, so until I have proof they are coming the raw prawn with us, I'll not be critical of them.

[Sicknote 26]

Good point. But if we're still in Admin (or out and still under Whyte), the wages are not going back up. The only way they go back up is under new ownership. Given that it will be a slimmer Rangers then with an owner who actually has real money and cares...,

D&F are doing what they have to do. Keeping us afloat until we can get new ownership. IF the players did not agree to the cuts, then redundancies would have happened. D&F seemed to give the players ample opportunity to make the deal. To the players great credit, they did.

Feel good about where we are and where we are heading.

This year will never be forgotten.

This season is a dead duck, all players (McCulloch, Healy, Papac etc) whose contracts are up in 8 games time should have be released.

[Thommo 708]

They've handled things well so far, let's hope they continue to do so while they are at the club.

[caseyjones 3,009]

Good point. But if we're still in Admin (or out and still under Whyte), the wages are not going back up. The only way they go back up is under new ownership.

The wage cuts are only in place until the season is over, unless a new owner is in place before then.

[harry handsome 629]

Trimming the costs - no we're not! we've just put some on hold.

Missing funds - there may be some money to be found, but it won't plug the £12M running cost hole, nor will it pay off our existing debt, and there is also the small matter of 'the light at the end of the tunnel'(a 75M TON train)

The wages are cut not deferred, taking into account the cash in hand status of the business.

[OceanRain 2,845]

I know exactly what you mean but the alternative was unthinkable.

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSH!

[Crespie6 334]

There will be time enough for counting when the dealings done

are they perchance on a train bound for nowhere?

[WWTC 2,249]

In my opinion, they have killed the slim hopes we had of getting a CVA by not making redundancies. HMRC will not agree to a CVA when the wage bill will jump by £12M per year in 3 months time. They had to make cuts, they failed to do that.

The wage bill will only jump £12M a year if and when we find a buyer. This is quite simple: HMRC, amongst others, want money from us. If they demand the full amount, no one will buy us, the company will be liquidated, and they will be lucky to see 1% of the money they are after. So when we offer even 15%, or 15p in the £, what do you think might happen?

The key to the CVA is finding out what % is owned to whom. If we're lucky and 75% of our debt can be traced to one, we'll only have one creditor to deal with, the rest must follow suit.

And its my understanding that, should a CVA be agreed before the tax case verdit is given, HMRC may well have to acceot the tems set out in the CVA. Im sure someone will correct me if im wrong here.

[Sobatai 70]

are they perchance on a train bound for nowhere?

Probably looking for the coward of the county ... might find him holed up in Castle Grant.

[caseyjones 3,009]

The wage bill will only jump £12M a year if and when we find a buyer. This is quite simple: HMRC, amongst others, want money from us. If they demand the full amount, no one will buy us, the company will be liquidated, and they will be lucky to see 1% of the money they are after. So when we offer even 15%, or 15p in the £, what do you think might happen?

The key to the CVA is finding out what % is owned to whom. If we're lucky and 75% of our debt can be traced to one, we'll only have one creditor to deal with, the rest must follow suit.

And its my understanding that, should a CVA be agreed before the tax case verdit is given, HMRC may well have to acceot the tems set out in the CVA. Im sure someone will correct me if im wrong here.

If we have no buyer, the wage bill will rise to previous levels at the end of the season. There will then need to be another wage cut/injection of cash. This week's measures merely allow us to get through the next three months.