Much has been written on this blog, and previously on RangersTaxCase.com regarding the assets and liabilities of the former Rangers football club – however little has been done to look at the rest of the SPL and Scottish Football as a whole. Was it just Rangers making ridiculous ‘asset’ valuations or is there other clubs in real danger of following RFC to the grave?
Before we get started a quick explanation on the figures. They were all taken from the latest accounts as appearing on Duedil.com, so some are from 2010’s figures. I have also ‘tidied’ them up a little so that they are easily understandable, removing things such as minor stock holdings.
The big story in the Rangers case was how over valued their ‘assets’ were, and especially the freehold property. To remind you Rangers Balance sheet in 2010 was as below:
While on paper the net assets look very healthy, we all now know that the 130m of Fixed assets was in fact worth just 5.5m in the real world. If we change that 130m to the real life figure their balance sheet would have looked like this…
So, how do the rest of the SPL compare? This is a list of ‘fixed assets’ for each club as noted in their last accounts.
Predictably, Celtic lead the way, but a quick scout through the notes reveals the freehold properties are valued at 45m. Dundee prop up the table, but with no freehold properties to their name, this is not so surprising. One thing to note is the difference in value of the assets held by Aberdeen and Kilmarnock compared to clubs like Dundee Utd and St.Johnstone – this is important when we look at their balance sheets.
As you can see above, I have broken the balance sheet down into a few categories. We have the fixed assets we just discussed, followed by the cash in bank. Next is the debtors (money owed to the club within the next year) and then the creditors (money the club owes to others within the next year). A crude calculation gives us the Net Current assets or liabilities. A red number means that club owes more money in the next 12 months than they have in the bank, or are owed.
We then move on to long term creditors (money that is owed but not immediately – more than 1 year away) which will constitute loans from banks, or from shareholders. In the case of Hearts, who have the highest amount of long term debt in the SPL, 98% of this debt is owed to the parent company UAB, controlled by Romanov. This debt attracts a further 4.5% interest a year, while UAB also hold a floating charge over the clubs assets.
The final column gives us the Net assets or liabilities, taking into account the fixed assets of the company. As we saw earlier, Rangers had posted Net assets of 70m, only achieved by their ridiculous freehold property valuation. Are Hearts and Aberdeen doing the same? In the case of Hearts they include in their fixed assets 159,000 worth of ‘Memorabilia’… in addition to 15m of freehold property, while Aberdeen state in their accounts that the valuation of Pittodrie is a ‘rebuild’ value rather than a likely realistic sale price.
By declaring such high values on their balance sheets though, it produces a net asset figure, rather than a large liability that, in reality, is the case. Kilmarnock and Hibs to a lesser extent would also see their figures turn red with asset valuations downgraded.
What is heartening to see though, is two clubs with net current assets, in St.Johnstone and Motherwell. Saints were rescued from near bankruptcy in the 80’s by Geoff Brown and have lived within their means ever since. Motherwell likewise have been in financial trouble in recent times, but the club appears to have stabilized and is now living within their means on and off the park.
If another insolvency event hits an SPL club, the MSM will blame it on the demise of Rangers. What can be clearly seen here though is the damage was done years ago to clubs like Hearts, Dundee Utd and Aberdeen – it will be a battle to get back to the kind of financial position that clubs such as St.Johnstone currently enjoy. However, the message that Saints are currently sending out is that its possible to have a competitive team without breaking the bank, as long as others aren’t artificially inflating wage demands.
The accounts I used to get the above figures are downloadable here: I was unable to find for Inverness – if anyone can find please let me know and I can add them to the table. When time permits I will extend this to include SFL clubs as well.
Aberdeen | Celtic | Dundee Utd | Hearts | Hibs | Kilmarnock | Ross County | St.Mirren | St.Johnstone
scapaflow14 says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 14:48
Lord Hodge did not, could not, sign off on a process that he thought might be compromised. Frankly, the identity of the company would have been entirely irrelevant.
===============================================
Precedents?
timtim
let er niet op! Ik was een ajax seizoenskaart houder voor 5 jaar, maar een saaie ervaring te veel … met een zwakke plek voor de tukkers
allyjambo says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 14:26
While we’re waiting on Lord Hodge.
“Hearts boss John McGlynn says all SPL teams would have chance of claiming title without Celtic in top flight.”
——
Harldy groundbreaking news, is it? I could have said that myself, and I’d be just as perfectly correct as McGlynn.
—-
If there’s one thing we should all have learned on here and RTC and that’s never to take anything the MSM publishes as fact, or at least accurate, before it’s analysed on here.
——
And that doesn’t just apply to the sports pages. If nothing else, hopefully this whole episode has made some of us more aware that when we’re reading the paper we can’t assume that they’re telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth – or, in some cases, anything remotely resembling the truth.
Massive news from Ibrox (apparently)
34 yr old injury prone Lee McCulloch signs 2 yr contract extension
James Traynor now has something to talk about other than Lord Hodge
phew!!
BBC Scotland reports on a suspected conflict of interest by Rangers administrators Duff and Phelps are to be examined at the Court of Session.
Lord Hodge has asked to see the BBC reports and may seek a court order to get hold of the evidence behind them.
Administrator Duff and Phelps is seeking the judge’s permission to end its role and hand over to liquidators.
The process is being held up by a last-minute challenge from Collyer Bristow, former lawyers to Craig Whyte.
The law firm, which is also one of the creditors of the old Rangers, is being sued for about £25m damages by Duff and Phelps over its role in Mr Whyte’s takeover of the club last year.
Ticketus deal
The administrators are seeking to retrieve money, alleging conspiracy and breach of undertakings.
A hearing at the Court of Session on Wednesday has gone into detail about the administration process.
(Start Quote
There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings”
End Quote Lord Hodge)
In June, Lord Hodge asked for a report into BBC allegations that Duff and Phelps had a conflict of interest, as one partner of the firm knew about the controversial Ticketus deal to use advance sales of season tickets to pay off the club’s debt to Lloyds bank.
More evidence that Duff and Phelps was aware of the funding deal at an early stage was broadcast by BBC Scotland last week, including excerpts of a secretly-recorded conversation.
Lord Hodge said: “I have asked the BBC to provide me with a DVD of their allegations in May and October and may be requesting them to give a transcript of the entire telephone conversation so that I can see it in context.
“I may have to make a court order and if I do, I will give the BBC a chance to be represented.
“There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings.”
It also emerged during the court hearing that the administrators have £1.7m in cash.
Meanwhile, the means of agreeing their £3.1m bill for fees and expenses has been questioned by Lord Hodge.
The process of winding up administration is being further complicated by legal action in English courts against Collyer Bristow by Duff and Phelps and by others.
The case continues into Wednesday afternoon.
forget it! I was an ajax season ticket holder for 5 years, but a boring experience too … with a soft spot for the tukkers
I claim my € prize!
I never heard of allegations being “ventilated” before.
Not The Huddle Malcontent says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 10:27
Yeah, the SPL would be more competitive and more people would have a chance to win it….however, Walter Smiths take on it was this
You could have 8 80 year old’s running in the olympic 100M final – it would be competitive, but not really any good!
———————————————————————
So according to Watty a race with 8 80 year olds and a couple of 40-year olds is a good race?
Obnoxiously arrogant and at the same sign showing the huge blinkers people like him have on their psyches.
neepheid says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 14:55
=================
Mate, you think there is something sinister about Lord Hodge not agreeing to end and administration.
I think he is simply not allowing it because he thinks that a, there may have been a conflict of interests which was hidden from him and b, the administration process may not have been dealt with properly.
You would appear to think that he should have agreed Duff and Phelps application to end the administration. I don’t really understand why he would if he thinks it was so fatally flawed.
I think we are just going round in circles from there. In my view for him to think there was possibly a conflict, and the possibility that the administrators had not dealt with matters appropriately and still to sign off on the process would be wrong.
Yes he could probably take action against the administrator later, however a lawyer could probably confirm that either way. Maybe part of ending the administration is to accept that it was dealt with properly. In addition it would limit his actions in what he could do, for example reversing the sale process. That would surely be lost as an option if the administration process was accepted.
Like I said, no point in going round in circles. We can just agree to disagree for now.
Wij zullen voor het spreken verboden worden die Nederlands is op hier, enkel Franse en Latijnse zijn aanvaardbaar
and give thebasharmilesteg a coconut 😉
You should not underestimate how serious this is for D&P that LH would publicly acknowledge that the “probity” of officers of the court is being questioned.
That this was said in open court is frankly, dynamite.
timtim says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:12
Wij zullen voor het spreken verboden worden die Nederlands is op hier, enkel Franse en Latijnse zijn aanvaardbaar
and give thebasharmilesteg a coconut
——————-
well I can manage a bit of French and did one year of Latin at school but I owe the coconut to Google Translate!
Agrajag says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:11
Like I said, no point in going round in circles. We can just agree to disagree for now.
=======================================
Spot on, best I shut up for a bit.
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:19
Indeed, how this proceeding ends, and how it impacts other matters like the “share issue” will be fascinating
To date I am fairly encouraged by proceedings as reported. I think D and P are deep in the brown stuff and LH has no intentions of giving them a lift out. More fun to come. I reckon he will delay the liquidation and send BDO to explore the books from the neginnings of the EBT up until now. With that shadow hanging over him, Green cannot access any investors ( who will invest in a company whose assets may be returned to the seller) nor any lending. It will take years to unwind and to liquidate. SEVCO will be toast.
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:19
A “Wow, just wow!” moment would you say.
Can’t see why some people are criticizing Lord Hodge? There’s no way he could sign off on the liquidation with so many issues still up in the air, among them the dubious role of Duff and Duffer.
The FTT being published anytime soon would certainly put the cat among the pigoens.
Legally, I think this whole saga is what’s known as an absolute clusterf*ck. Will be a long time before we get to the bottom of these murky goings on.
That is if Sevco even live that long. They’ll probably have won the Champions League (ahem) before all the legal wrangling is done.
Simple fact is, we bampots know the truth. And no amount of wishful thinking or outright lies from Sevco and their MSM cheerleaders will change that.
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:19
—
There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings.”
—
You should not underestimate how serious this is for D&P that LH would publicly acknowledge that the “probity” of officers of the court is being questioned.
That this was said in open court is frankly, dynamite.
——
I don’t think so. These boys are very careful in what they say. He said that allegations had been made concerning “proceedings” (not officers of the court), and that there may be an acceptable explanation.
We can infer that he meant D&P, but he didn’t say that. And if he didn’t say that, we can’t infer that. The Law – brilliant, eh?
Neepheid
Dont shut up. This blog is about us understanding what is going on and challenging what some are just accepting as facts.
Judge accepts letter bombers were only arsing around after episode of A-team.
Judge wont accept evidence on tv that Lennon was assaulted.
There are questions of the Judiciary and here is certainly the place to ask them. Its also healthy to see your questions answered on here.
Keep it up.
timtim
Give thebasharmilesteg a coconut? idiomatically speaking, he/she was close, so no cigar in this case; maybe a coconut for best effort. I do prefer the French/Italian…
neepheid says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:20
1 1 i Rate This
Agrajag says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:11
Like I said, no point in going round in circles. We can just agree to disagree for now.
=======================================
Spot on, best I shut up for a bit.
======================
LOL. Please don’t.
Paul has published useful update:
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/31/the-tweeted-report-by-mdkster-on-this-mornings-rangers-hearing/
I think Hodge has been monumentally slow at all points here – so criticism is justified. This hearing should have been held months and months ago. The questions over D and P should have been asked way back in March – not June. His three week report has taken over four months to come to court. His lack of urgency has allowed the fixes to be made and the damage to be intensified.
I am not saying he is complict or part of a plot – merely that the delays to get to this point both with this hearing and the FTT – and the police investigation into the sale to Whyte and the SPL investigation have allowed not so much a window of opportunity as an entire frontage of opportunities for plots to ne hatched.
This may be the pace of the law – if it is, then we need to speed it up – it has been shown throughout this fiasco to be not fit for purpose, unresponsive to the situation on the ground and seemingly powerless to intervene effectively to protect the interests of justice.
This shambles may be a Lord H flawed process orpart of a wider one – but flawed it most certainly is.
scapaflow14 says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 11:54
BBc seem to be following standard line around not handing over material without a court order
“Hodge confirms he’s asked the BBC for the recent stuff. BBC refuses for now and he might have to issue court order for transcripts “
———————————–
I thought BBC had handed over copies, or does “recent stuff” mean stuff they’ve got since the last broadcast and haven’t been able to use themselves yet?
iceman:
I’d imagine Lord Hodge would then say that the whole Scottish legal system doesn’t revolve around the tax affairs of a football club. Even if that football club believes the world truly does revolve around them.
iceman63 says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:54
Rate This
… This hearing should have been held months and months ago.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This hearing could not happen until D&P applied for it to happen.
obonfanti88 (@obonfanti88) says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:58
True, but I think this case has demonstrated to most reasonable people that the whole area of Insolvency is open to abuse, and really needs to be looked at. IPs as a profession, are not any more bent, than lawers, accountants or any other profession, but the profession and the law clearly needs some remedial work….
Chris Graham. Fans’ representative, often to be seen on the telly aiding and abetting the Mr Charles scam.
Anyone who thinks he might just be a reasonable cahp, however, is advised to check out his blog. Apart from the fact that he seems to have no awareness how journalists go about their daily business, he aligns himself with the “tiny minority” in attempting to discredit Alex Thomson for doing just that.
If he is so seriously offended by Alex’s tactics, I recommend that he switches on BBC Watchdog at 8.00 tonight, where that bloke on the motorbike will be seen doing exactly the same thing – as he is every week.
I look forward to Mr Graham’s outraged exposure of Matt Allwright doing his job as an investigative journalist on the television.
neepheid says: at 15:20
NH – step by step here – you raise valid points
It’s coming out in Court – D&P say the main purpose of the administration – “to maintain the company as a going concern” – was not achieved. But they maintain they achieved another “minor objective” of “getting a better return”.
If that`s corroborated – and we`ve been going on about this – it appears irregular.
As I understand it, you put a vote on a CVA to the creditors and its rejected – then it should have gone into Liquidation automatically as you say. But the creditor’s resolutions allowed D+P to conduct a sale without recourse to creditors – so looks like the creditors missed a trick there perhaps. D+P took advantage and had a backup sale to CG for 5.5m if the CVA failed, which as confidently predicted it did. But nowhere I`ve seen in the insolvency rules is there a `Minor Objective` that meets the first precept of administrations – and HMRC probably thought this couldn`t stand.
The CVA proposal with the CG 5.5m back-up plan `Minor Objective` was out on 29th of May and HMRC [from the 31 May BBC tapes] believed there was a potential COI and I think it could be this definition of insolvency law of a `minor objective` and we`re led to believe wanted D+P replaced.
In June 12-14 LH could do [in theory] one of two basic things – Appoint new administrators, or bring the administration to an end and appoint liquidators. But he would need to act within the law.
So you could contend, in principle, that if liquidators had been appointed – and that LH had grounds to do so, RFC would enter liquidation in June, and the CG `sale` would be shelved. OK so far
There would be chaos blah blah and as I previously posted the various knights would see opportunities.
But no matter – I don`t believe LH could interrupt the administration process with a COI hanging etc and I agree with Arajag and Scapa and others – but that`s not the point here.
There`s a difference between `liquidation` – the `process` and – `liquidated` – the end dissolution of the company in the final act of winding up – that may take 2 or 3 years. If it had gone into liquidation in June the oldco company would still exist just as now and its `assets` would still need to be sold off for the benefit of creditors – possibly even to a new buyer who would take on the whole lot including the SFA membership in an open bidding process – or in package job lots. You and I could probably bid a tenner for the SFA membership [no laughing] – or anyone else could.
Now you are correct – according to the rules that if a club is “liquidated” – “When the company is liquidated, its registrations with the Scottish Football Association and the Scottish Premier League will be terminated. The new company will not automatically inherit the old registrations.”
I contend that form of words i.e. “Liquidated” – as in the very final act – would be 1) exploited by the liquidator to receive value for players registrations and value for creditors worthwhile contending in Court if needs be, – and 2) The SFA – take CO for instance – or the Board with the CEO SR could use their legitimate use of `Discretion` to avoid TRFC being out of business for at least three seasons.
If you agree or disagree that`s fine – But all the above is not the surprise neepheid! – A later post to come.
Uh oh
“Douglas Fraser@BBCDouglsFraser
Lawyers trying to block wind-up of #Rangers administration tell court £2m extra outlays only revealed this month, and not to all creditors
“
“Douglas Fraser@BBCDouglsFraser
Oldco #Rangers administrators took £2.5m fee from funds without proper permission, court told. It ‘rectified’ this later.
“
Angus,
you said – ‘allegations had been made concerning “proceedings” (not officers of the court)’
But proceedings can’t happen without someone making them proceed, in this case Duff and Phelps. Crticism of an organisation’s actions is still criticism of the organisation. Im sure His Lordship chose his words very carefully.
Agrajag says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:37
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:19
A “Wow, just wow!” moment would you say.
================================
Given that Lord Hodge had D&P’s report on the potential CoI long before the Whyte/Grier tape became public, he must be deeply, deeply dissatisfied with what they have told him.
“There may be a good answer to these allegations…”
You can almost hear him muttering under his breath; “…but I don’t think so!”
===================================
===================================
angus1983 says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:40
1 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:19
–
There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings.”
–
You should not underestimate how serious this is for D&P that LH would publicly acknowledge that the “probity” of officers of the court is being questioned.
That this was said in open court is frankly, dynamite.
——
I don’t think so. These boys are very careful in what they say. He said that allegations had been made concerning “proceedings” (not officers of the court), and that there may be an acceptable explanation.
We can infer that he meant D&P, but he didn’t say that. And if he didn’t say that, we can’t infer that. The Law – brilliant, eh?
======================================
You’re right, of course. LH did not mention D&P by name.
But then again, Clark & Whitehouse – as joint administrators and thus officers of the court – have been responsible for the “proceedings” so far. And, since the BBC allegations that he refers to are aimed at D&P’s CoI, it does seem a little churlish to suggest that Lord Hodge was not placing a very large question mark on the integrity of (one or more of?) the D&P employees.
BTW, there is nothing wrong with drawing inference from another person’s statements – if the supporting evidence is strong enough to support it.
From what he has said, I’m perfectly happy to infer that LH is currently unconvinced of the “correctness” of the Rangers administration process and of the people responsible for it.
angus1983 says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 16:05
Chris Graham wrote the “Enemies of Rangers” blog. His opinion is no more valid than that of an adolescent Youtube troll. The very idea that Alex Thomson would give a damn what he thinks is hilarious as it is contemptable!
Oooooh just saw that latest tweet, Duff and Duffer just keep digging that whole don’t they? What a bunch of chancers.
of course I meant ‘hole” not “whole”.
Can see Duff and Duffer’s defence to that already:
“The £2million was just resting in our account. Honest guv’nor.”
obonfanti88 (@obonfanti88) says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 16:19
Can see Duff and Duffer’s defence to that already:
“The £2million was just resting in our account. Honest guv’nor.”
—————————————————————————————
The Father Ted defence…
on a lighter note ,Giovanni is now claiming that the new York DA is looking into D&P, episode of Law & order to follow no doubt
be interesting to see reasons
“Cara Sulieman@carasulieman
Lord Hodge granted the petitions and oldco #Rangers are now in liquidation.
“
Cara Sulieman @carasulieman
Lord Hodge granted the petitions and oldco #Rangers are now in liquidation.
Guess we know why Duff and Duffer wanted out “as a matter of urgency”.
Lord Hodge obviously got a lot to do over the coming months! Ahh go on then. Liquidation!
COI issue still to be dealt with
“Cara Sulieman@carasulieman
Lord Hodge also fixed a date for a hearing to impose an order for a transcript from the BBC. #Rangers
“
HirsutePursuit says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 15:19
You should not underestimate how serious this is for D&P that LH would publicly acknowledge that the “probity” of officers of the court is being questioned.
That this was said in open court is frankly, dynamite
,,,,,,,,,,,,,.
One wonders if D&P have already given LH due cause to question their probity
i.e,
LH requested them back in July to confirm in a report that they had taken legal advice on whether the decision to accept the Administration contract could be a COI. This question was so specific it is unlikely LH would accept a fudged response
So the D%P report will either say D&P took legal advice on a possible COI or say that they didn`t.
Either way D&P would be obliged to consult with their lawyers before the report was submitted to Lord Hodge. If this consultation with their lawyers did not include the 31 May taped conversation with Craig Whyte it can only be because D& P were intent on deceiving their Counsel.
Similarly
If LH considers the written report submitted by D&P lawyers directly conflicts with the 31 May taped conversation a much bigger issue emerges
i.e.
Lying to a High Court Judge and possibly/probably lying to your own lawyers
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Time is running out for D&P New York
They need to take a decision on whether to fight the British justice system or feign surprised indignation and fire Greir, Clark and Whitehouse
“Cara Sulieman@carasulieman
Although D&P are no longer administrators they have not been dispensed of liability. #Rangers
“
Cara Sulieman @carasulieman
Colleyer Bristow wanted a delay so D&P could provide a report to the court about allegations on conflict of interest. This was rejected.
Cara Sulieman@carasulieman
Although D&P are no longer administrators they have not been dispensed of liability. #Rangers
BBC
A judge has approved a motion for the former Rangers Football Club to be handed over to liquidators.
Duff and Phelps took over running of the club when it entered administration on 14 February over unpaid tax bills.
Earlier this month, the administrators said the club’s creditors had approved an end to the administration.
At the Court of Session in Edinburgh, Lord Hodge approved a Duff and Phelps motion to hand over what remains of the old club to liquidators BDO.
Moves to end the administration were held up by a last-minute challenge from Collyer Bristow, former lawyers to Craig Whyte.
The law firm, which is also one of the creditors of the old Rangers, is being sued for about £25m damages by Duff and Phelps over its role in Mr Whyte’s takeover of the club last year.
Ticketus deal
The administrators are seeking to retrieve money, alleging conspiracy and breach of undertakings.
The hearing at the Court of Session on Wednesday went into detail about the administration process.
Continue reading the main story
“
Start Quote
There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings”
Lord Hodge
Judge
In June, Lord Hodge asked for a report into BBC allegations that Duff and Phelps had a conflict of interest, as one partner of the firm knew about the controversial Ticketus deal to use advance sales of season tickets to pay off the club’s debt to Lloyds bank.
More evidence that Duff and Phelps was aware of the funding deal at an early stage was broadcast by BBC Scotland last week, including excerpts of a secretly-recorded conversation.
Lord Hodge said: “I have asked the BBC to provide me with a DVD of their allegations in May and October and may be requesting them to give a transcript of the entire telephone conversation so that I can see it in context.
“I may have to make a court order and if I do, I will give the BBC a chance to be represented.
“There may be a good answer to these allegations, but allegations are being ventilated which call into question the probity of proceedings.”
It also emerged during the court hearing that the administrators have £1.7m in cash.
… apologies! D&P’s to be ‘scrutinised’ also. IPA investigation. I take that last statement back! 😉
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain
http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/liquidation-day/ … The ventilator has been switched off… Rangers FC (1872-2012) is no more.
Miles to go yet, before we sleep
“Cara Sulieman@carasulieman
Lord Hodge is letting the IPA investigate claims against D&P and he’ll then look at their report. #Rangers D&P have also promised they still recognise the court has “residual powers” when it comes to certain allegations. #Rangers “
How’d that “show liquidation the red card” protest go?
Be honest now. Two years ago, even a year ago, how many people would have predicted that Rangers would be placed into liquidation on Halloween 2012.
Even though it has been coming for some time, and we all knew it this really is quite a historic day.
Rangers are no more, the club which had existed for over a century is dead. Only the post-mortem and funeral now.
So much for thoughts on too big to die, a part of the fabric of Scottish society, HMRC will do a deal, someone will come along and buy the club, it will never be allowed to happen.
Wow, just wow.
Never in the field of club ownership has so much been done to so deserving by so few
For that act alone
You deserve to keep your knighthood
allyjambo says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 14:26
I read it, copied, and pasted it from this blog from several posts earlier.
I had been following all the previous posts on the subject and was well aware of the MSM twist (or should that be twisted MSM)
I was poking fun at the headline not poor ole John.
I agree with most of your comments.
The “attempt by the press to create bad feeling between Hearts and Celtic”, now who’s going to believe that will ever happen. 🙂
Now if Carlsberg did Haloween
C’mon you ICT!!!!!!!!!!!
There have been no comments on this here as of yet and, given the subject matter, I can understand why but given that this blog is about monitoring Scottish Football, I think it is exactly what should be talked about
http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/4619058/Cops-quiz-ref-Jeff-over-bigot-rant.html
If this stuff is ignored, it will never be dealt with. That is, of course, if there is truth in it.
goosygoosy
‘You deserve to keep your knighthood’
_________________________________
TU for a campaign to have him made an Earl.
BDO prepare to move into Ibrox….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gz3Cc7wlfkI
Am i missing something? I am a bit perplexed.
From where I am standing this looks like a judge has just allowed a gang of criminals to fleece the taxpayers despite knowing exactly how they have operated and despite citicising them in open court.
Has LH ok’d the fees claimed by d and p?
Has he given BDO any locus to investigate or undo any of the conflicted and possibly illegal actions of d and p?
As I understand it he has acceded to D and p’s demands despite the blatant conflict of interest that he made reference to and the apparent and obvious misadministration of the club.
It seems to me that aspects of this have been allowed through on the nod and LH has let them off with it – simply allowing them to be investigated by their own regulatory body – and so a total whitewash in effect. he talked a good game but delivered squat from my angle. Hodge has been deliberately remiss from where i am standing and allowed the perpetration of a fraud in full view and under his nose.
I am appalled – unless i am missing something I am with Neipheid – whole thing stinks and i suspect the judiciary have been bought and sold here!
From KDS:
Into administration on St Valentine’s Day.
Liquidated on Halloween.
I cannot effing wait to see what they’ve got lined up for Christmas!
Must get BDO a welcome to your new home card:
Cara Sulieman@carasulieman
The liquidators are the partners of BDO and take over with immediate effect. #Rangers
I’m not sure about this. Listening to Charlie over the past week he’s convincing one and all that this is still the same Rangers. I believe Mr Spiers announced as much to his approving co-hosts on Clyde 1 the other night along the lines of: they play in blue at Ibrox and they’re called Rangers. The legions feel they’ve started again, history intact, with a clean slate via some justifiable financial jiggery-pokery.
It’s not right. I hope someone can show me the justice in this. What does it matter BDO walk into Ibrox? Sorry to be a chump, but what am I missing?
Iceman:
On the contrary it’s probably the opposite. Yes Duff and Phelps are no longer the administrators but Lord Hodge has made it clear that they will still be held liable for the admin period and what they did or did not do in that time.
This still has a long way to run yet.
A nice read…………..
http://sluggerotoole.com/2012/10/31/rangers-downfall-and-long-tail-journalism/
Reporter on radio scotland just said that Rangers are now finished APART from their history!!!
bill1903:
It’s pathetic isn’t it. It would put North Korea to shame.
I’m deeply disappointed but not surprised by today’s judgement.
Lord Carloway, Lord Hodge, Lord Glennie and soon Lord Nimmo-Smith each and every one of them a part of the establishment that said ‘Rangers are part of the fabric of Scottish society’. Lord Carloway promoted by the First Minister recently to the highest legal job in the land. Our Justice Secretary deaf to sectarian chants at League Cup Final. our Education Secretary a member of the Kyles of Bute lodge
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/msps/currentmsps/28459.aspx
there was no way that Lord Hodge would have been allowed to over turn that today.
There would have been ‘social unrest’ apparently……
twas ever thus
Looks like all those who wanted to know what an Independent Scotland will look like, just found out.
We now look to London and the FTTT to expose this corruption.
doontheslope says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 18:03
Looks like all those who wanted to know what an Independent Scotland will look like, just found out.
We now look to London and the FTTT to expose this corruption.
___________________________________________________
No, we’re actually seeing what a Westminster-ruled Scotland delivers. Though I think your reasoning is complete nonsense, IMHO.
DEID!!! 🙂
Lord Hodge allowed RFC into liquidation today. He has retained the right to oversee the IPA investigation into D&P. Now can some really clever person explain to mister pedantic here exactly why what was done today could not have been done 4 months ago? And what the 4 month delay in liquidation has achieved, except to allow Sevco to have the RFC membership of the SFA transferred to it, so keeping a Rangers team playing in the senior leagues? It stinks of something very very smelly to me.
This afternoon’s proceedings:
Lord Hodge obtained an assurance from Counsel for D&P that they will still be held responsible to answer questions in Court if required to by the IPA investigation, into which he will feed the BBC dvds and phone transcripts.
The ending of Administration does NOT mean that the Administrators are discharged-they will still be regarded as officers of the court.
Collyer Bristow’s objection to ending admin was based on the fact that D&P had helped themselves to about £2M quid without proper authorisation earlier in the year ( and had had their authorisation sorted out ), and on the fact that Grier ( who, Lord Hodge said in clarification, might or might not have been involved in a conspiracy) is a co-defendant in the action brought in the English High Court by D&P, and the dropping of that action by D&P as a result of them ceasing to be Administrators (or by subsequent Liquidators) could be prejudicial to their case.
Lord Hodge said that since all of the creditors ( or the legal majority) had voted for D&P’s proposals, and had not put in any objection, and since all parties had been appropriately kept notified and informed, there was no room for the court to interfere.
Subject to the assurance that counsel for D&P would not later challenge the Court’s ultimate supervisory power in the whole matter( if it found reason to become involved again when the IPA informs him of the outcome of their investigations, Lord Hodge granted the order ending Administration and appointing with immediate effect BDO as Interim Liquidators.
.
He also allowed Collyer Bristow’s costs to be charged against the Administration.
Again, the briefest of summaries, and only the gist of the 2 and a half hours of legal bumph.
For more reasons than I can even remember………………………………………………………………….YESSSSSSSSSS!!!
doontheslope says:
Wednesday, October 31, 2012 at 18:03
Looks like all those who wanted to know what an Independent Scotland will look like, just found out.
We now look to London and the FTTT to expose this corruption.
___________________________________________________
No, we’re actually seeing what a Westminster-ruled Scotland delivers. Though I think your reasoning is complete nonsense, IMHO
__________________________________________-
IMHO Both your HO’s is tosh. This is Scottish law administered by Sccotish judges to save a Scottish sectarian cub supported by a Scottish government committed to Independence, and the remainder of a political elite committed to the Union.
This is how Scotland operates – regardless of Westminster or Independence. In truth it makes not one jot of difference whether or not we are Independent. A small cadre of corrupt individuals run Scotland and all are known to each other.
As regards independence – this case has no relevance. It was conducted under Scots’ law by a Scots’ judge
____________________________________
As regards the “residual” liabilities left – will these not essentially allow SEVCO to continue unhindered and ensure that any actions will simply hold D and P liable?.
Have the crooked administrators been paid? If yes then our judge is party to a fraud?
Can BDO reverse the decisisions and actions taken by D and p? If no then our learned friend is party to conspiracy and corruption.
To me it is that simple.
Redetin
I disagree with you and actually think your statement lacks reason. However, I should not have referred to independence. (Apologies to the blog.)
I wanted to express my feeling that something is deeply wrong in Scottish society and it is going to take England – someone from outside, looking in – to expose it. I fear that we cant trust ourselves to do the right thing.