Rangers Have gone into Administration

am i right in thinking Whyte's the first ever owner in British football to be officially deemed not fit and proper? so he's worse than Thaksin Shinawatra :DD

He made a manful attempt to head it off by selling those Arsenal shares to Usmanov

Today so far: "We've struck a deal with the players" "wait, no, we haven't".

Get the fuck on with it. You owe people money! This is taking longer than the takeover!

oh ffs, spoke too soon about not much happening:

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/rangers/2012/03/09/rangers-in-crisis-ticketus-backing-paul-murray-consortium-bid-to-buy-cash-stricken-ibrox-club-86908-23781661/

Paul Murray (ex-director from when some of this alleged impropriety was taking place) and an assortment of supporters clubs/trust/assembly goons are trying to take over. Ticketus are in to try and ensure they haven't shelled out £24m for tickets to a club that doesn't exist. This can only end in hilarity.

One or two things bothering me. Does Whyte have to get out since the SFA have found him not fit and proper? And how do you get his shares off him when trading in Rangers shares is suspended?

I'm not quite sure of the mechanism, but aiui he's lost the club already by it going into administration - it's inherent in the process that the administrator sells the business on, if he can, as the end-point of administration. I assume all share capital becoming vested in him is the first thing that happens in an administration. Whyte's involvement now is as secured creditor only.

(also, the bar on being listed only prevents shares being sold through a public exchange. You can still conduct private sales (and isn't this how Whyte bought the club in the first place anyway?))

Cheers, was just looking into that elsewhere.

So in administration the assets of the club can be sold off to someone else (currently the stadium, training ground and players on some weird-ass contracts) from under him, but he thinks he can get his money back, though it is unclear if he's actually put in more than the £1 he paid for them. If they can trade back out of admin (big if) without a sale of the club, Whyte can still own them but can't sit on the board?

He'd have to buy it from the administrator, same as anyone else. The sale would be done as part of a CVA, and it's got to be unlikely that the shafted creditors would agree to him picking up the club again cheap. I don't know what'd happen if a solvent, unindebted entity were to exit administration - I'd guess it must almost never happen, because such a thing shouldn't be in administration at all.

His interest now is only as mortgage-holder over Ibrox/any other assets aiui, if that's even true.

I thought Motherwell had come back out of administration solvently after a longish period of trading in administration. I accept the chances of this happening to Rangers are slim, just basically doing my working out loud here.

Paying off all debts in full? I imagine that's rare. Calumerio might know a bit more, he seems to work in the area.

http://www.local.stv.tv/motherwell/news/297956-administration-the-two-years-that-shaped-the-modern-day-motherwell-football-club/

http://www.motherwellfc.org/news/apr04/20.htm

25p-in-the-pound. That's quite a nice story though, I can't see this one panning out like that.

Aye, can't see HMRC agreeing to a CVA, but was just throwing it out there in case the administrators could plug the gaps, make some money off player sales in the summer to repay some debts, come to a repayment agreement for other existing debts, operate at reduced levels and win the big tax case. Not that that's going to happen, like...

Football Focus (in a slot lasting about thirty seconds) treated the wage cuts and emergence of the blue knights as if the future was now resolved.

It's ok, most of the press up here doing the same.

http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/dangers-rangers-tax-shambles/850

" Campbell Ogilvie, for instance, is current President of the SFA and was not only a director of Rangers during the period under investigation but also company secretary of the club. It was his job to know about contractual arrangements with players.

So far Mr Ogilvie has not stood aside from his current role whilst the SPL investigation is underway. How many such contracts were signed? How many did he see? Did he know about them at all? If he did, did he sanction them being signed off? If he didn’t – why wasn’t he doing his job? Is there not a conflict of interest in his current position? "

About time mainstream media had a look at this. Still not a peep from Ogilvie.

Was just coming here to post that. Approximately 100000000 times better than the pish spouted by the media up here.

Alex Thomson tweeting that the SFA hung up on him when he phoned for a wee chat about Ogilvie. Regan none too chuffed.

Apparently several media sources have been refused contact with Ogilvie. Pressure's on.

good

id love to get rid of the spl/sfa/sfl suits and organisation and start again with one new body with entirely new and untainted people

Baggsy one of the incredibly overpaid jobs where I don't have to do anything.

The Rangers administrators have applied to the Court of Session to become the Rangers administrators.

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/03/13/rangers-administrators-have-applied-to-the-court-of-session-to-be-appointed-administrators-of-rangers/

idk

lol, what a shower of fannies

http://global-4-lvs-turing.opera-mini.net/hz10-05/28349/0/-1/p.twimg.com/An4bxoUCEAATlwv.jpg_thumb

can't see what that says

me neither

Didn't think that had worked :-(

Is campaign poster for the Fighting Fund, highlighting the option for oversees (sic) payments.

"for oversees transactions"
http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/03/13/article-2114395-1225FCCA000005DC-852_468x454.jpg

also
"assembly@bluenose"

hahaa oversees

maybe someone should have overseen their overseas transactions and they wouldn't be in this shite

So, spelling aside, as I understand it this is yet another way of spending money and keeping the team going without paying any creditors?

bluenose.co.uk isn't even their domain, they're thebluenose.co.uk.

Bluenose.co.uk, appropriately enough, is a domain for clowns.

xpost, you got it.

...thebluenose.co.UK redirects to a Facebook page, btw.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/FightingFund

Walter Smith, Sandy Jardine, Jim
Hannah and Rangers Supporters
Assembly President Andy Kerr will
control the bank account and pass on
donations to administrators Duff and
Phelps as and when the money is
required.

!!!!!!

Ha, this scheme 'compliments' the club's initiative.

With such brains behind, how can this fail?

this thing's off to a great start :)
http://i40.tinypic.com/2d9blsx.png

:-)

just about every user comments been removed
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/2012/03/13/rangers-in-crisis-ibrox-club-launch-fans-fighting-fund-to-help-cover-costs-as-walter-smith-joins-effort-86908-23786731/

And as mentioned upthread there's a very rich clown in Leicestershire tonight :) lololol

Actually, there's not, as he's not got the email address required for getting the paypal money. Someone else does (not me!) so can't access the money as (s)he can't verify the email they just set up on paypal on a whim. Unless they contact Mr Custard for use of the email address, of course...

Not that anyone would exactly be retiring on the amounts involved.

i found myself reading comments on the Record site there. never again.

omg this guy. youtube what have you done to the world?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pDk75Y1SZ4

Have missed a lot here (though see my name has been invoked - yikes). Couple of comments:

Now the security arrangements are opaque to say the least but, on the presently availabel information, it looks like this: CW didn't pay off the debts of Rangers when he took over, he bought them, and is, as everyone knows, the secured creditor. The club (well, the company) is in hock to him to the tune of £18m secured. This means that when it comes to the sale of the company/club, CW has an £18m head start on all the other potential buyers. This is why he is the most likely buyer of the company from the administration. BUT

Yes, the administrators are not validly appointed, which is fucking hilarious (and reflects muy badly on the law firm advising D&P). It's questionable whether the administrators can actually petition to have themselves appointed (appointment of administrators can only be done by directors or creditors, aiui). What is also interesting is that unless and until the appointment fuck up is rectified, they have not been appointed so on a strict legal reading: (a) the points deduction should go back on - technically, rangers are not in administration (b) Wylde and Celik are not free agents, pay cuts have not been agreed etc because the "administrators" did not have the power to agree such matters. Ultra vires. [Disclaimer, the SLT blog may have covered this already - apologies if it did, ilx is more worksafe than slt, so I haven't read slt].

For clarity, I work in corporate (so the takeover would be my area), not so much of the restructuring/insolvency work (so the administration stuff I am not so hot on). However, the whole saga has been like catnip for Glasgow lawyers, so everyone is talking about it (though, of course, not betraying any confidential information), which gives me the benefit of some sound technical analysis (which I miscontrue and fill with errors in the retelling).

omg @ wee wullie bluenose

(a) the points deduction should go back on - technically, rangers are not in administration (b) Wylde and Celik are not free agents, pay cuts have not been agreed etc because the "administrators" did not have the power to agree such matters.

much as I enjoyed the points deduction this might well finish off my aching sides if true

tbf, I can't see the Powers That Be reinstating the points because even if Rangers are not now properly in administration, they will be shortly. Same with the player contract amendments - it would do if the players were to turn round and say "oh hey, legal technicality, pls give me back my cash" when the club is not solvent. It might be a line of attack for any non-footballing staff who've been laid off (if any, don't know) but any claim they would have would be work fuck all in the "second" administration.

calumerio, that's fascinating stuff, thanks. A quick glance through SLT suggests their initial appointment was valid, but I may be misreading this.

The effect of it being granted would be that they become administrators under an administration order, rather than by a notice of appointment. One effect of this would be that they could no longer be removed by the company. This is perhaps an indication that Duff & Phelps (D&P) saw potential conflict with the Company in the form of Mr Whyte.

Query in the comments as to whether HMRC (or Whyte, should he realise he's backed the wrong horse) could apply to have their own administrators appointed instead.

Non-playing staff not allowed to have been laid off -> the return of Gordon Smith!

Would welcome them getting their points back, tbh, would shut up all the mathematically-challenged gimps chuntering on about tainted titles.

id love to get rid of the spl/sfa/sfl suits and organisation and start again with one new body with entirely new and untainted people

Are there any countries with a single governing body covering both the league and the national association? Assuming the SPL member clubs aren't going to resign en masse and reapply to the league, I'm ok with the current setup in principle, but a whole bunch of reform and transparency wouldn't go amiss.

Campbell Ogilvie finally decides he'd better say something.

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1335&newsCategoryID=3&newsID=9490

and says, inevitably, nothing at all.