Interesting discussion with him on Keyes and Gray show at
lunchtime. He is the guy who oversaw the administration of
Leeds, Luton, Crystal Palace and Plymouth.
His big problem with Plymouth was he was brought in after
the transfer window. This meant he was unable to sell any players
as their contracts were protected under TUPÉ.
Although this presented issues with things like payment of players
wages, their valuable assests were retained until the end of the
season.
It raises the thought that part of Craig Whytes calculations may have
been that if he can keep the club out of administration until February then
he would be able to retain the squad intact for the whole season. Now with
the tax case outcome not know until possibly after the end of January,
then there will be a couple of weeks of horse trading. It could be as late
as mid March before any move to administration is made.
Clearly as fans that would be a more palatable outcome as we are only
interested on the on field outcome. I have been of the view that Jelavic was
a certainty to be sold in January, this possibility makes it less likely.
It would seem that Rangers could soldier on virtually financially crippled but
with the preffered team on the pitch. Players may be requested to play
without pay in the short term, with the guarentee that in the Summer they would get all the money owed. Players cannot lose out financially under
the regulations, neither can any other clubs under the football debt legislation. Rangers could battle on -10 points till the end of the season
then if they come out of administration with no settlement start next season
-15 and of course a European ban. Obviously not ideal but equally
better than the worst case scenario of losing three or four players in January AND suffering a points deduction.
Having said all of the above the tax case is still live and there is always
the possibility of a) Rangers winning it outright or b) as has been rumore
a deal being struck. Time will tell but as long as the players can keep the
focus on the job in hand on the pitch that is all we can ask.
Brendan Guilfoyle
posted on 15/11/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 15/11/11
brotheryoung That's what I mean mate, nobody has a clue what is going on really, Hence why it is all ifs and buts.
posted on 15/11/11
It's our title.
Sorry mate, change it to could and may be then
posted on 15/11/11
I am not giving as fact that wages have not been or will not
be paid, you cannot though dismiss the gravity of the situation
should we lose the case.
posted on 15/11/11
It raises the thought that part of Craig Whytes calculations may have
been that if he can keep the club out of administration until February then..............
You may have misread the 'may' or you may have misinterpretated the entire paragraph.
posted on 15/11/11
FS man, the whole saga is ifs and buts. That's what I mean.
posted on 15/11/11
Let's be absolutely clear here:
Administration does not suit HMRC. The footballers followed by Craig Whyte are the preferential creditors at Rangers.
They cannot be disadvantaged by administration and as they have preferential status, they must be paid in full before 'unsecured' creditors (i.e. HMRC) can be paid.
With Whyte secured to the tune of £18m plus the players due wages/ pay-off clauses, how much do you reckon would be left over to spread amongst HMRC and all the rest of the creditors (like Council rates, utility suppliers, legal fees, normal employees)?
Answer: A pittance.
Never mind that if HMRC were to do that they also lose the current income they receive in terms of current PAYE and NIC contributions.
Administration is a no-win, huge PR disaster for HMRC and that is thanks to Craig Whyte for how he has structured the deal.
Unless HMRC really want to be hard nosed and take a lot of flack, my best guess is that if we lose the case then HMRC will negotiate with Craig Whyte on the final actual bill and the period over which it will be paid.
Craig Whyte will still hold a lot of the cards because he can ultimately threaten to not deal and let HMRC go through the PR nightmare of putting Rangers under.
In the end, if Rangers lose I think we'll see a negotiate settlement which will probably result in some 1st team players being sold to finance it and perhaps some £1-2m payment over 5 years or so.
posted on 15/11/11
"Craig Whyte will still hold a lot of the cards because he can ultimately threaten to not deal and let HMRC go through the PR nightmare of putting Rangers under."
PR nightmare for who?
How many folks in the UK care about Rangers?
I'd wager more people care about not letting spivs cheat the taxpayer than a football club in Govan.
But then, you are the people.
posted on 15/11/11
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 15/11/11
are the players not considered as super creditors? and as such their contracts are protected.
no.
as secured creditor whyte should easily be able to secure ibrox, doesnt leave a lot.
Close Bros. now hold a fixed charge they get first dibs at any assets to the value of what they are owed.
Administration does not suit HMRC. The footballers followed by Craig Whyte are the preferential creditors at Rangers.
Utter pash.
Administration is a no-win, huge PR disaster for HMRC and that is thanks to Craig Whyte for how he has structured the deal.
PR? HMRC? Get a grip ffs.