stefmartin16 121 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Not sure if this has been covered already. Forgive me if it has but how can we agree a cva if the outcome of the btc hasn't been decided yet? Is it the case that hmrc are the biggest creditors so they can agree it whether we owe 5 million or 50 million? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriebluenose 351 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 The big tax case is irrelivant. Ignore it, we currently owe them nothing for this.The CVA is between us and our creditors, we owe HMRC £9m that shyte didn't pay, but we owe them nothing for the big tax case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamMunny 3,251 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Might be a stupid question but can we settle the BTC before its concluded so that it won't be hanging over our head? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aranger 6 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Suppose we could drop the appeal.Ticketus would be the major creditor unless the original tax bill is counted as a debt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriebluenose 351 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Might be a stupid question but can we settle the BTC before its concluded so that it won't be hanging over our head?No offence, but aye that is stupid, of course we can't. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stefmartin16 121 Posted May 16, 2012 Author Share Posted May 16, 2012 The big tax case is irrelivant. Ignore it, we currently owe them nothing for this.The CVA is between us and our creditors, we owe HMRC £9m that shyte didn't pay, but we owe them nothing for the big tax case.I know at the moment we owe them 9 million which would mean ticketus are the biggest creditor so playing devils advocate does that mean if we agree to pay a penny for every pound with ticketus and then we lose the btc at say 80 million, then we would only therefore pay back a penny for every pound of that 80 million?This sounds too good to be true if we could agree a good cva with ticketus. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WilliamMunny 3,251 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 No offence, but aye that is stupid, of course we can't. Thought so. So CVA could be agreed and a few weeks or months later we could be hit with a 50m tax bill? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
allanh91 75 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 We're treating the btc as if we've lost it so that HMRC are the main creditor we have to satisfy.That's my theory on D+P's tactics. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriebluenose 351 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 I know at the moment we owe them 9 million which would mean ticketus are the biggest creditor so playing devils advocate does that mean if we agree to pay a penny for every pound with ticketus and then we lose the btc at say 80 million, then we would only therefore pay back a penny for every pound of that 80 million?This sounds too good to be true if we could agree a good cva with ticketus.No. We agree the CVA (hopefully!) and we exit administration and we go on as normal.The BTC could be decided just after that, or three years down the line.We could get found not guilty, or we could get a fine for who knows how many millions.If we get a fine, we have to deal with it, no matter what, we have to deal with that fine. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriebluenose 351 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Thought so. So CVA could be agreed and a few weeks or months later we could be hit with a 50m tax bill?Yip, although people have claimed that maybe the new owners have some sort of agreement, so that they won't have to face an unexpected £50m bill, they know what the outcome of the big tax case will be. That's only speculation though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stefmartin16 121 Posted May 16, 2012 Author Share Posted May 16, 2012 Doesn't seem fair. If that's the case then hmrc can hold off the outcome until we are back on our feet and then hit us with a bill so big it could put us into administration again. That's fucking bullshit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
showtime69 514 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 No. We agree the CVA (hopefully!) and we exit administration and we go on as normal.The BTC could be decided just after that, or three years down the line.We could get found not guilty, or we could get a fine for who knows how many millions.If we get a fine, we have to deal with it, no matter what, we have to deal with that fine.this is driving me round the bend, cant get my head round itso if we agree a cva and exit administration before the season starts, and say the BTC gets settled in November and HMRC say we owe them £50mdoes that mean we are £50m in debt again? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriebluenose 351 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 this is driving me round the bend, cant get my head round itso if we agree a cva and exit administration before the season starts, and say the BTC gets settled in November and HMRC say we owe them £50mdoes that mean we are £50m in debt again?Well from what I've read, and I've read about it non stop! Then yes, we do. Unless as I said a few posts ago, maybe the new owner has an agreement in place, which I think would be quite likely, as they wouldn't want to take that chance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 we talked about this the other day. many seem to think it will be included in the cva. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
showtime69 514 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Well from what I've read, and I've read about it non stop! Then yes, we do. Unless as I said a few posts ago, maybe the new owner has an agreement in place, which I think would be quite likely, as they wouldn't want to take that chance.i hope your right mate,, i cant see Green and his consortium coming in spending the money and having all these plans about expanding the brand and what not only to be hit with another 50m bill 6 months to a year down the linehopefully there is some sort of agreement Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Army Faction 28 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 we talked about this the other day. many seem to think it will be included in the cva.Wasn't Craig Shyte's main reaon for going to administration now, so that we could get clear of BTC when we came out?I assume by that, that we will either have the BTC rolled into CVA, by accepting HMRC are right, or we will NewCo in which case the BTC is irrelevant as it applies to OldCo.Can't see them bringing us out of Administration with a massive unpayable debt waiting to put us back in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
airdriebluenose 351 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 we talked about this the other day. many seem to think it will be included in the cva.It can't though, we might get found not guilty and owe zero. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brubear 2,930 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 we talked about this the other day. many seem to think it will be included in the cva.Has to be included, or as previous posters have said we leave ourself open to be put right back into Administration. Considering the result of the tax case is 2 month's overdue I think there is a strong possibility a decision has been made but does not need to be made public since we are in administration. If Green genuinely believes we can get a CVA with only putting c. £9m up front would suggest the btc bill at the lower end of the scale and not at the £50m end. If it were our total labilites would be in the region of 80 or 90m and I cannot see HMR&C accepting as little as 10p in the £. This would leave them open to critism from every taxpayer in the country. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGM_72 3,681 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 we talked about this the other day. many seem to think it will be included in the cva.It's strange. I don't see how it can be, really. Unless in amongst all the guilty before proven chat that the papers and opposition fans have been hitting out with for months, they actually did deliver the verdict. Heh. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Carpintero 546 Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 The big tax case is irrelivant. Ignore it, we currently owe them nothing for this.The CVA is between us and our creditors, we owe HMRC £9m that shyte didn't pay, but we owe them nothing for the big tax case.So what happens if we agree a CVA, which we wont, agree repayments for all debt, then a week later find out the big tax case result and we lose? He Green and co took over liability for such a potentially huge bill? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.