Guest Post by James Forrest
Those who like to read the techno-thrillers of Tom Clancy will remember well the scene in The Sum of all Fears, when the nuclear bomb explodes in Denver, outside the stadium where the Super Bowl is being played. Clancy handles the moment in two very distinct chapters. The second is a vivid and frightening examination of the explosion’s terrible effects as they are felt, firstly in Denver and then experienced around the world.
Before that, he devotes an entire chapter to the mechanics of the explosion itself. Chapters like this are either what attract readers to Clancy in the first place or turn them off entirely. It is technical, it is complex, and the layman who reads it and fully understands it is indeed a massive geek. Of all the times he has loaded the reader with technical detail, this is probably when he risked most in terms of keeping you interested in the story. Yet it works. The chapter is not long, but nor is it short. And the events in it span not seconds but fractions of a second
It was in that chapter I first learned the term “shake”, so named for the old aphorism “a shake of a lamb’s tail”. A “shake” is a term used in nuclear physics. It represents ten nanoseconds. To grasp fully the size of that, consider that there are a billion nanoseconds in a second. The chemical process involved in a nuclear detonation involves a number of “shakes”, with a chain reaction usually completed in 50.
Clancy’s decision to devote an entire chapter of the book to a few nanoseconds came back to me over and over again during the weeks and months of the Rangers crisis. It became clear to me that, drawn out though the events following administration were, what we were seeing was not the effect of the explosion but the explosion itself. Those months were our nanoseconds. Every day, every revelation, every moment we thought was a separate event, was merely a peek inside the bomb case, at the chemical process of a chain reaction.
I would say the chain reaction was completed on the day HMRC announced they were refusing the CVA proposal. That was the detonation. It’s only now we’re witnessing the explosion, and its effects, and in my view we are still a long way from the end of that process. We have had the initial double flash thermal pulse and we’ve seen some EMP effects, but the real damage is still to come. The shock wave and the fireball have yet to spread, and their cumulative effects could yet annihilate Ibrox and extend as far as Hampden.
Am I making claims of “financial Armageddon”? No, I’m not. I never believed the collapse of Rangers would devastate Scottish football. I thought then, and now, that it was scaremongering nonsense to even suggest it. It didn’t matter to me whether the authorities were spreading those stories because of a deep-seated love of the Ibrox club, or because they had bonuses at stake, or out of their own internal, personal weaknesses. Those stories were inconsistent, based on worst case scenarios which were never likely to materialise, and insulting. The notion that the game in this country amounts to no more than one or two teams is offensive.
I love football. I always have. I’m a Celtic supporter, but my interests in the game extend far beyond my own club. At its best, football is a tremendous unifier of people, from those wonderful stories about Christmas Day in the trenches of World War I to the matches organised every year between Palestinian and Israeli children. The game has the potential for tremendous good. I am proud that my own club’s supporters have honoured the dead of Hillsborough and Ibrox. I am proud they unfurled a banner to the Benfica player Miklos Feher, and invaded Seville and showed that city how to party. I am proud of every moment when the supporters of a club applauded an injured player, or staged a silence to honour an official or competitor at another team. Although there are some who would use this sport in a divisive way, who would hijack it for their own ends, I believe this game can still be an inspiration, and find the best in all of us.
I think what happened during this summer, as the fans of every club in the land made their voices heard, was one of the greatest moments in Scottish football’s recent history. I believe it will have an impact far beyond one season. I think it was special.
My concern, as I’ve said, is that the appalling effects of the detonation at Ibrox are still to be fully realised. I am worried about the impact they could yet have on all of us.
Let me be quite specific about the two things that worry me most. They are to do with the decision to grant Sevco/Rangers a license to play in the Scottish Football League this year.
First, I believe the license was granted without sufficient guarantees being given by Charles Green and others that they would respect the decisions taken by the independent judiciary panel of the SPL in relation to EBTs, and secondly, I am concerned that not enough is known about Green and his financial backers, or plans for Rangers, for the authorities to be satisfied that the club is in good financial health. I don’t believe for one second anyone can allay my fears in these two areas. It is obvious to all that due diligence has not been done, and the entire situation at Rangers/Sevco is still shrouded in doubt, and that anything may yet happen.
The independent panel investigating dual contracts is going to have to make the most momentous decision in the history of the game in the UK. I do not believe what Rangers are accused of has any precedent. We are talking about a decade or more in which the results of every single match might be in doubt. Every single game. The rules were not written to envision such an appalling breach of faith. It would seem almost inevitable that stripping of titles will be the smallest of Charles Green and Ally McCoist’s concerns if this verdict goes against them.
Frankly, I don’t see an alternative to suspending Rangers membership of football in this country for at least two years, with points deductions and monetary fines to follow when the suspension period is done. This is not harsh; in fact it falls far short of the maximum penalty, which is expulsion from the game altogether, and as it is the authorities are going to have to do a damned good job of setting out the reasons why that ultimate sanction is not applied. It will not be enough to say it would damage the game in Scotland to wipe the club away. To allow a decade of malfeasance to pass without that ultimate sanction would create the perception that Rangers is above the law, and I cannot think of anything that would do the game more harm than for any club to be considered too big, or too important, to be subject to the regulations.
With their money on the table, I don’t see any way Charles Green and his cohorts will accept the judgement of the independent panel if it has an impact on their plans to recoup their investments. With the way he’s rallied the Rangers fans behind him recently, by essentially talking about a conspiracy against them, I don’t see how he convinces them to accept sanctions, even if he personally was inclined to do so. He has painted himself into a corner where now, if he wants his money at all, he has to fight, and keep on fighting. Without the written guarantee that the club would accept whatever the panel decides, without recourse to the law, I will be shocked if this matter doesn’t end up in the courts somewhere down the line, because I don’t think for one second he signed up to that particular demand.
I think the SFA backed down on this, the most fundamental matter of them all.
Which isn’t to say the due diligence matter isn’t worrying, because, of course, it is. Again, no-one is going to convince me that the SFA has conducted proper due diligence on Charles Green and his backers. No-one will convince me they are satisfied that this club is in safe hands, and that the game in this country will not be rocked by a further implosion at Ibrox. They failed to properly investigate Craig Whyte, because of lax regulations requiring disclosure from the club itself, regulations which are just a joke, but they can be forgiven for that as the press was talking sheer nonsense about him having billions at his disposal, and a lot of people (but not everyone!) were either convinced or wanted to be convinced by him.
To have witnessed what Whyte did, to have witnessed the Duff & Phelps “process” of finding a buyer, and having Green essentially emerge from nowhere, with a hundred unanswered questions as to his background and financing, for the SFA to have given this guy the go ahead, only for it to blow up in their faces later, would annihilate the credibility of the governing body and necessitate resignations at every level. There would be no hiding place.
At an early stage in the Rangers crisis, a couple of people told me they thought the club would not play football for at least a year. I told them of all the possible scenarios that was the most unlikely, because I honestly could see no way back for them once they had gone. There is no precedent I am aware of, anywhere, for a football club taking a “year out” only to return. Certainly, in the context of the Scottish game I didn’t see how it could be done without creating one almighty shambles, or by bending the rules until the elastic snapped.
Yet I’ve since become convinced that it was the correct course of action. The club calling itself Rangers FC is still in a state of flux. The issues still surrounding it are enormous and potentially devastating. There are any number of ways in which the entire edifice could utterly collapse. The liquidators and HMRC could yet challenge the takeover, or the coming share issue. Craig Whyte may yet emerge and take a claim to the courts. The share issue itself could be an utter failure, leaving the club unable to meet annual running costs. All of this, even without the vast effects of the EBT case, which has the potential to wash the whole club away.
Had Rangers been out of the game for a year, these issues could have been properly explored, dealt with and put behind them, and the game as whole.
Of course, it’s just possible that the worst is over. It’s possible that this particular nuclear detonation, like the one is The Sum of All Fears, is an enormous “fizzle”, that the appalling destruction unleashed will not be on the thermonuclear level which could obliterate our hopes of a fresh start, of forward motion for the whole game. It might be that everything at Ibrox is hunky-dory, that this, all I’ve written, is the product of a febrile imagination, on the same level as the financial Armageddon nonsense we spent the summer hearing about.
It may well be, but only if the people who’ve been right all along have suddenly gotten it wrong. The evidence all points to something big, and bad, coming this way.
The smart folks will be hunkering down in their shelters for a while yet.
James is a co-editor of the Famous Tartan Army Magazine, latest issue out 17th October (digital, and free), featuring women’s football
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 13:56
‘..Is there any evidence that Green accepted anything other than the transfer ban?
According to Charlie he did not accept anything and the SFA folded to allow them to play in the Ramsdens cup.’
—-
This is Green’s own statement:
“The Board has had to take some very difficult decisions to gain SFA membership, including accepting the delayed transfer ban and paying outstanding financial penalties. ‘
I take that as a clear agreement that CG accepted ( albeit he might have been blackmailed into it) that the SFA were happy to treat the new club as inheritor of the old club’s debts.
And there’s no way the SFA can avoid following through and attaching (in regards to footballing consequences) the verdict of the FTTT ( which we are all assuming will be’guilty’) to CG’s ‘new club’, whether or not HMRC wil be legally able to try to get the unpaid tax from him.
ekt1m says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 14:31
Just going over McCoist’s interview of yesterday again, It beggar’s belief that he takes the view that CW failure to pay £14m to HMRC was a personal decision and not one carried out in the “club’s” name.
========================
TheFTT has already discussed that type of scenario, very recently in fact.
http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2012/TC02262.html
27. The situation is rather different in regard to Mr Craig. Firstly, since he was Managing Director, he was in fact “the Club” and his actions in that role were as the Club. Accordingly, the fact that he did not ensure timeous payment, knowing as he did the problems in the previous year and the availability of TTP would make it very difficult to argue that he was unaware of the potential problems caused by late payment of PAYE. The Tribunal finds no reasonable excuse in his actions.
Oh and that let’s you see what such a Tribunal decision normally looks like. Bearing in mind the Rangers one will be sanitized.
john clarke says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 14:42
And there’s no way the SFA can avoid following through and attaching (in regards to footballing consequences) the verdict of the FTTT ( which we are all assuming will be’guilty’) to CG’s ‘new club’, whether or not HMRC wil be legally able to try to get the unpaid tax from him.
=========================
HMRC won’t chase the New Club for the debt agreed by the FTT. I have seen no evidence of phoenix trading from the New Club so it really is a non-starter. On the same basis, they won’t even be asking for security against future tax liabilities.
They are more likely to chase the people who operated the Old Club. Again depending on the exact circumstances. They may well wait until BDO have carried out their own investigations into how the business failed so spectacularly. Bearing in mind they will not only be looking at the finances and the club, the actions of the board will be under scrutiny as well.
ekt1m@ 14.31
and no amount of “I DIDNAE KEN” from him will wash with fans or the general public…
“WRONG” !!!!! it,l wash with “the fans” and “the media”
Has anybody on here looked at Kevin McCabe as a possible source of funds for Green?
Have I taken that too far? Extra points for a (-S)DM© connection.
agrajag@14.57
I have seen no evidence of phoenix trading from the New Club so it really is a non-starter…..
ehhhh ??? what exactly constitutes ” no evidence” they are acting like “same old” sounding like ” same old” calling themselves “same old” smelling like” same old” playing in “same old”(colours and stadium) claiming to be “same old” triumphing like “same old” da de da de da etc etc etc…
troubledfan says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 15:14
agrajag@14.57
I have seen no evidence of phoenix trading from the New Club so it really is a non-starter…..
ehhhh ??? what exactly constitutes ” no evidence” they are acting like “same old” sounding like ” same old” calling themselves “same old” smelling like” same old” playing in “same old”(colours and stadium) claiming to be “same old” triumphing like “same old” da de da de da etc etc etc…
============================
None of that is evidence of phoenix trading.
ekt1m says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 14:31
0 0 Rate This
Just going over McCoist’s interview of yesterday again, It beggar’s belief that he takes the view that CW failure to pay £14m to HMRC was a personal decision and not one carried out in the “club’s” name. McCoist has spent the vast majority of his life involved in football, and know’s fine well how football clubs are run at board level, and no amount of “I DIDNAE KEN” from him will wash with fans or the general public.
—————————————–—————
Agree. Outwardly, at least, the view seems to be –
if it’s bad, one guy did it so nothing to do with us
if it’s good (titles etc), it was the club and, furthermore, continues with the new club.
The SFA have allowed this schizophrenic attitude to prevail by their fudging of and silence over the situation – other than to suggest we “move along – nothing to see, here”. They may soon be right – only not the way they meant it.
McCoist’s statement really does bring into question his understanding of the whole situation.
As quoted in this story http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/scotland/20010606 he said
“Why was there non-payment of PAYE and National Insurance? That, from what I was told, was the reason we went into administration.”
To paraphrase Jimmy Sanderson, “were you at the interview, caller?”. Craig Whyte clearly explained why there was non-payment of PAYE and National Insurance, if he’d paid them there’d be no money left to pay the other bills and administration would have happened in October. If you watch it again Ally, he even tells you why there wasn’t enough money to pay everything, because you got put out of European competitions by Malmo and Maribor when he’d budgeted for that income coming in.
So if you want to know the real reason you went into administration Ally, the answer is you. Your ineptitude as a manager meant the club’s revenue was suddenly far lower than that required to keep going. Your European failure was the reason PAYE & NIC then didn’t get paid in a vain attempt at stopping the wheels falling off the bogey. Has this registed with you at all Ally, your ability as a manager is what caused Rangers FC to go into administration mid-season.
It was going to happen eventually and it may have all been part of an orchestrated masterplan but thanks to Ally McCoist it happened sooner rather than later.
Looks like Ally is losing the fans on RM – because he’s not wearing a suit !! They really don’t see the bigger picture do they.
Schneeb says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 15:40
Looks like Ally is losing the fans on RM – because he’s not wearing a suit !! They really don’t see the bigger picture do they.
==========================
Maybe he is seen as an embarrassment to the cardigan and brogues combo.
Ally might not have the suit on and a shell suit instead but surely,surely he has put the brogues on,please dont tell me there are no brogues in the dugout,can someone check this out,or is it simply a squeaky bum moment happened when he heard the tax news and he does not have a spare suit at the ground ,plausible,but we should be told.0-0 at half time ,I hope he doent have another squeaky as he might not have a spare shellsuit
Aye, RM are really getting fired up about Sally’s clothes. Beggars belief, really. What planet are these peepil on?
Select contributions to the match thread over there:
——
I have seen it all now, no matter what mess we may have been in or be in just now, our manager should never ever be dressed in a track suit. Its put me off watching this game now.
——
100% agree mate
I’m more f*cked off with that than the shitey football being served up
Get the suit back on ally
—–
Me too… i f*ckin love super, but this is disregarding tradition, tbh i can’t believe it, it sets us apart from others, that suit and tie are part of Rangers Managers duties and it should be an honour and NEVER a chore.
Ally : Sort it (please)
——
clyde ssb – delahvunt and delzeil creamin themselves since sevco scored – lee mClydesdale !!
john clarke says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 14:42
===========
I thought it was only football debts that he was talking about.
Just noticed that EBTS is in debts. Funny that.
The Daily Ranger @DailyRangerRFC 2h
It appears that only actual 3rd Division teams are allowed to
tackle like 3rd Division teams. When Rangers try it it’s a foul.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
“only ACTUAL 3rd Division teams”?
Not only do they believe it’s the same club, but presumably they believe it’s still an SPL club that just happens to be playing 3rd Division clubs week-in week-out. That’s Sevco logic that is.
First time listener to Jabba’s ‘Your Call’ today.
Cosgrove to Jabba: “..have you ever been remunerated by Rangers…”
Jabba: “haha…no…”
=================
Well done Cosgrove for at least asking the question !
I have just heard Jabba suggest, live on Your Call, that he knows nothing about the suggestions that the findings of the FTT have been sent to the relevant parties.
He then went on to say that he “expected it to be published last week but it wasn’t because it is over 200 pages long and has not been typed up yet”.
He then states that no names of individuals will be used and numbers will be used instead to protect individual identities.
Has his credibility ever been lower?
This man is truly an oaf.
angus1983 says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 16:01
Aye, RM are really getting fired up about Sally’s clothes. Beggars belief, really. What planet are these peepil on?
Select contributions to the match thread over there:
——
I have seen it all now, no matter what mess we may have been in or be in just now, our manager should never ever be dressed in a track suit…
=====================================
‘Shell Suit Sally’…yes has a certain ring to it ! [‘SSS’ ?]
He can’t produce decent football, and now he has a serious ‘wardrobe malfunction’ which infuriates the Sevco fans. He can’t really win, but at least he is consistent…
‘SSS’. 😉
TallBoy Poppy (@TallBoyPoppy) says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 15:10
0 0 i
Rate This
Has anybody on here looked at Kevin McCabe as a possible source of funds for Green?
Have I taken that too far? Extra points for a (-S)DM© connection.
Definitely an avenue worth exploring. I attempted to explore it a few months ago on RTC, as there is a strong link to Gavin Masterton ex CE of BoS, and McCabe’s companies were involved in the administration of Livingston back in 2002, which was also caused by ludicrous DM Hall property valuations propping up an insolvent balance sheet, at the instruction of BoS. Unfortunately, the BVI brick wall props up again when you get as far as Charlotte 18, a mysterious company controlled by Masterton.
Listening to Your Call tonight was a laugh, After Scotland’s national team, coaches and systems had been dismembered and stitched back up again, we got a caller trying to get Hearts problem paying their playing staff lined up with RFCs predicament, even JT had to put him right and then SC asked him to comment on the non tax paying at Ibrox, His reply was “I can’t talk about that”. He could’nt put the phone down quick enough. JT and SC burst out laughing at this. Now I may be wrong, but could the bears be being told by FF and RM “Don’t answer any questions about our situation”. Just wondering.
ekt1m says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 18:34
the first rule of sevco is, dont mention sevco! http://image.spreadshirt.net/image-server/v1/compositions/106509510/views/1,width=280,height=280,appearanceId=66.png/sevco-shite-club_design.png
Just finished listening to Super?scoreboard first in a very long time,how many times was the crowd at the derby game mentioned today by all that spoke on this excuse for a national radio programme ,the quality of the phone in punters was another shocker ,unbelievable how this programme has come down ,from 17.00 until 17.50 it was all about a 3rd division match ,no indepth report about the biggest game in Scotland today ,the new firm clash at tannadice ,then the horse trader that fronts the show mentions the premier league champions who only happen to be playing in the champions league against some Spanish outfit and asks for calls regarding this match ,did he get any before lights out ,no he didnt ,was it the case that the Celtic supporters where smart enough not to lower their standards by calling this omnishambles ,we even had Graham Spiers who was at Perth chipping in his tuppence worth about the 3rd division match while waiting on a lift down the road on the visitors team bus ,the horse trader cuts in ,Graham thats your car at the front door .aye right.One of the only interesting snippets was the cash cow that came on and told us that his match ticket was 21GBP including a booking fee and was well worth it ,oh dear, Charlie is making more money than we thought ,on average 17,000 booking fee’s at a time,nice one Charlie ,you are not getting the credit you deserve,anyone update on Radio Scotland .
Latest from Charlie.
“There has been renewed speculation and media comment recently regarding the current shareholders in The Rangers Football Club.
“A full list of current shareholders will be published in the share prospectus which will be issued within the next few weeks.
“A lot of attention has focused on investment funds which have taken a shareholding in the Club to date.
“For example, I would like to clarify that in the case of Blue Pitch Holdings, the legal beneficiary is Mazen Houssami and not Arif Naqvi of Abraaj Capital.
“Mr Naqvi is a personal friend of mine and I approached him early on in the process about a shareholding but he has not proceeded on the basis that the investment fell outside the core geography he invests in.””
nowoldandgrumpy @ 18:42
“Mr Naqvi is a personal friend of mine and I approached him early on in the process about a shareholding but he has not proceeded on the basis that the investment fell outside the core geography he invests in.””
In other words, he took one look at the proposal, and said you have got to be joking 🙂
Just watching Ch 4 News. They gave the results from the SPL and didn’t mention any other teams in Scotland. Clearly CH 4 are not overly worried about losing any of Sevco’s 500 million world-wide fan base.
doontheslope @ 18:59
Contrast that with the STV news on just before which flashed up the SPL scores on a card and then skipped to the 3rd Division scores.
It seems that no games took place today in Scotland in the 1st or 2nd divisions and apart from the Rangers/Queen’s Park game all of the 3rd Division games were also postponed. Not sure why, must have been waterlogged pitches or something.
Even if STV feel they have to give the Rangers score every time they play can they not at least pretend they care about the rest of the lower leagues. To have a graphic for Scottish Div 3 results and then include only one game on it is the most disrespectful thing I have seen on the news for a long time.
Agrajag says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 15:27
troubledfan says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 15:14
agrajag@14.57
I have seen no evidence of phoenix trading from the New Club so it really is a non-starter…..
ehhhh ??? what exactly constitutes ” no evidence” they are acting like “same old” sounding like ” same old” calling themselves “same old” smelling like” same old” playing in “same old”(colours and stadium) claiming to be “same old” triumphing like “same old” da de da de da etc etc etc…
============================
None of that is evidence of phoenix trading.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Please explain your understanding of the term Phoenix trading?
Current shareholders in The Rangers Football Club and soon to be new shareholders ,but in the same ,The Rangers Football Club ,here we go ,2 trains on the same track and 3 if Craigy is still stoking his choo choo,lets hope they are not all wanting to arrive on platform 1.
StevieBC says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 18:19
18 0 Rate This
First time listener to Jabba’s ‘Your Call’ today.
Cosgrove to Jabba: “..have you ever been remunerated by Rangers…”
Jabba: “haha…no…”
=================
Well done Cosgrove for at least asking the question !
—————————————————————–
Perhaps he should have asked have you or your company skoosh ever been remunerated by David Murray?
agrajag 14.57.
None of that is evidence of phoenix trading….
what is their primary trade ?? putting ar##ho##s on seats (literally) to watch fitba..
claiming to be , sounding to be etc etc etc same old etc etc etc isnt pheonixing ???
yourhavingalaugh says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 19:46
0 0 Rate This
Current shareholders in The Rangers Football Club and soon to be new shareholders ,but in the same ,The Rangers Football Club ,here we go ,2 trains on the same track and 3 if Craigy is still stoking his choo choo,lets hope they are not all wanting to arrive on platform 1.
===============
They were heading for platform 1 but some bogoted signalman shunted them onto platform 3
🙂
PS….the mere fact that they claim to be ” same old” whilst performing “same old” ????
come on ????
According to RTC and others the decision in the BTC has been intimated to the parties involved.
As far as I can see or hear there has not been a mention anywhere in the MSM.
I would have thought that at least a wee bit of investigative journalism would have been appropriate, if only to elicit a ‘No comment’ from everyone involved.
i await with interest the slow but sure drip feed of information over the next week prior to publication.
Posters earlier today have no doubt got it right. ‘ it wisnae our fault we took advice and thought EBT’s were lawful. ‘It was wee Craigy’
Anyone expecting an ounce of contrition will be seriously disappointed.
Even when the decision is publicised IMO it will take some deep forensic examination before we get to the bottom of it.
Since the hearing was in private I would doubt that we will be able to readily identify parties who received loans or payments from the scheme. It is apparently how the system operates. They will not however be able to hide the sum due, with interest. Penalties I believe are for another day.
At this very moment my guess is all the lawyers are huddled round their copies of the decision prior to a meeting at the beginning of the week with their clients. Tactics will be discussed and agreed, answers to pertinent questions pre determined.
Cant wait.
rab says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 00:10
Can any of the parties publicly announce the result before the ten day rule is over
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Yes they can if they so wish…the 7 day notice is to allow for either party to ask for corrections to be made etc before publication.
troubledfan says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 19:54
PS….the mere fact that they claim to be ” same old” whilst performing “same old” ????
come on ????
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Inded it is phoenix trading in any measure you care to look at…
Apparently the FTT decision is over 200 pages long…which is why it has taken a couple of weeks longer to produce..the typist has been working overtime…
Here’s a question for you all. Purely hypothetical you understand and I’m not sure if it’s been asked previously on here or RTC’s blog.
With regards to the money deposited into the EBT scheme by Rangers/MIH how certain are we that all of the money deposited was then, in turn, paid on to players, managers, service providers (whoever they may be). Is there any possibility that some of the money was still in the trust funds, say £18m.
And if it was, is it within the trustees powers to invest this money if they think it is in the best interests of the eventual beneficiaries? eg by investing the money with Octopus investments, say in a Ticketus company.
Is there any possibility that the cash injection that Ticketus got, just before they needed cash to then give to Craig Whyte in exchange for 3 years Season Tickets actually came from the money previously paid by Rangers/Murray into the EBT scheme?
I know I’m just causing mischief on a Saturday night but legally is there any reason why this could not have happened?
I have a vague recollection that someone on RTC previously advised that the scheme had now closed down
Phoenix company? Here”s HMRC’s view.
“Phoenixism is a term used to describe the practice where directors carry on the same business or trade successively though a series of two or more companies. Each of the companies in turn becomes insolvent, leaving large unpaid Income Tax PAYE and NIC debts. A company will typically transfer its business, minus its debts, to the next company. Only essential trade suppliers will be paid in full before the transfer, so that Income Tax PAYE and NIC often remain deliberately outstanding.
The above example is typical of the type of case that HMRC is particularly interested in but it must be remembered that not all phoenix companies are ‘rogue companies’.
A Personal Liability Notice can be considered in situations where the directors attempt to ‘walk away’ from the debts of a failed company and resume management with a new company, sometimes indirectly as a ‘shadow director’. The new successor company will often trade from the same premises, using a similar name and with the same assets as the failed company.
Whilst not conclusive the following may indicate phoenixism and a potential Personal Liability Notice enquiry:
Rapid build up of NIC debts
Payment of selected debts e.g. trade creditors at the expense of HMRC liabilities
Transfer of assets, or sale of the assets by the liquidator to a new company or connected officer of the company, possibly at a lower than expected value. This may include transfer of work in progress.”
Hope this helps.
Yes, the scheme was closed in as much that Rangers were no longer paying money into it but that doesn’t necessarily mean that all money paid in previously had been given out by the trustees (at their discretion of course).
troubledfan says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 19:50
agrajag 14.57.
None of that is evidence of phoenix trading….
what is their primary trade ?? putting ar##ho##s on seats (literally) to watch fitba..
claiming to be , sounding to be etc etc etc same old etc etc etc isnt pheonixing ???
=============================
The comment I made was specifically in relation to whether of not HMRC would view it as phoenix trading.
Like I said, none of the things mentioned above, or in your previous would constitute phoenix trading.
If I buy a paper shop, sell all of the same goods, to the same customers, with the same staff would you consider I was a phoenix trader. HMRC wouldn’t. Not based on those factors alone. That would include so many businesses it would be ludicrous.
HMRC’s interest is in protecting the revenue, and that is based on who owns and operates a business. Not where it trades from and who it’s customers are.
gie’s a gonk says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:19
I asked this a while back. How many of the 111 beneficaries have actually confirmed that they “actually” got their EBT? Again, mischief making, 😉 but could it have been used to get money “out” the company/club?
Happy to be TD’d and get back onto FTTT track … whatever track it is that Craigy might have us on ;
Agrajag says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:34
what is their primary trade ?? putting ar##ho##s on seats (literally) to watch fitba..
claiming to be , sounding to be etc etc etc same old etc etc etc isnt pheonixing ???
=============================
The comment I made was specifically in relation to whether of not HMRC would view it as phoenix trading.
Like I said, none of the things mentioned above, or in your previous would constitute phoenix trading.
If I buy a paper shop, sell all of the same goods, to the same customers, with the same staff would you consider I was a phoenix trader. HMRC wouldn’t. Not based on those factors alone. That would include so many businesses it would be ludicrous.
HMRC’s interest is in protecting the revenue, and that is based on who owns and operates a business. Not where it trades from and who it’s customers are.
==============================
Not convinced by that! I think the only saving grace for Sevco not phoenixing is if an ex Director or office bearer is NOT involved Happy to be proved wrong. ;
gie’s a gonk says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:19
‘..And if it was, is it within the trustees powers to invest this money if they think it is in the best interests of the ..’
———-
Nice one!
Short answer ‘NO’.
Disbursements from discretionary trust funds can be made only to named individual beneficiaries. So that would rule out investment in companies of any sort.
The Trustees control the money on behalf of the class of beneficiaries, but not as acting as asset managers managing a ‘fund’ on behalf of potential beneficiaries.
As I see it.
And If I could give a long answer, I’d be in there making oodles of dough as a tax / trust consultant! 🙂
Agrajag says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:34
0 0 Rate This
troubledfan says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 19:50
agrajag 14.57.
None of that is evidence of phoenix trading….
what is their primary trade ?? putting ar##ho##s on seats (literally) to watch fitba..
claiming to be , sounding to be etc etc etc same old etc etc etc isnt pheonixing ???
=============================
The comment I made was specifically in relation to whether of not HMRC would view it as phoenix trading.
Like I said, none of the things mentioned above, or in your previous would constitute phoenix trading.
If I buy a paper shop, sell all of the same goods, to the same customers, with the same staff would you consider I was a phoenix trader. HMRC wouldn’t. Not based on those factors alone. That would include so many businesses it would be ludicrous.
HMRC’s interest is in protecting the revenue, and that is based on who owns and operates a business. Not where it trades from and who it’s customers are.
==================================
HMRC might be interested in Charlie’s role with Rangers prior to the sale of its assets to his company.
With so much else of this administration, D&P created a situation I have never heard of before. By delegating operational responsibility to a prospective purchaser, D&P effectively made Mr Green a de-facto director of a company in administration!!! Potentially creating a phoenixing situation when none previously existed. Which, on the face of it, is utter nonsense.
BDO will certainly be looking at his remit and wonder why he was allowed to vote on behalf of the old club at SPL meetings – where the other clubs were represented (in the main) by their chairmen. I suspect they will seek direction from the court of session wrt Mr Green’s status with the old club.
If the CoS decide that he was a de-facto director, it will get very, very interesting indeed.
forweonlyknow says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:36
0 0 Rate This
gie’s a gonk says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:19
I asked this a while back. How many of the 111 beneficaries have actually confirmed that they “actually” got their EBT?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
I’ve wondered this too. I’m sure that Marvin Andrews said categorically, and without Dodds-style equivocation, that he didn’t.
nowoldandgrumpy says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 18:42
Latest from Charlie.
“There has been renewed speculation and media comment recently regarding the current shareholders in The Rangers Football Club.
“A full list of current shareholders will be published in the share prospectus which will be issued within the next few weeks.
“A lot of attention has focused on investment funds which have taken a shareholding in the Club to date.
“For example, I would like to clarify that in the case of Blue Pitch Holdings, the legal beneficiary is Mazen Houssami and not Arif Naqvi of Abraaj Capital.
“Mr Naqvi is a personal friend of mine and I approached him early on in the process about a shareholding but he has not proceeded on the basis that the investment fell outside the core geography he invests in.””
***********
Corsica posted on RTC back in July that Arif Naqvi was not involved:
“So somebody is behind him but it isn’t going to be Arif Naqvi (just trust me on this – he is not stupid enough to believe anything Green or Zeus will have told him)…no, this is much simpler.”
The key for him was finding out who is behind Blue Pitch Holdings – it’s not Mazen Houssami, he’s just a front – but he was unable to do so. Although he was convinced Dave King is involved in all of this somehow.
HirsutePursuit says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:55
———————————————
Indeed, and that will be a factor. I am quite sure BDO will be taking a very close look at that, and everything else which went on in the run in to the administration, during the administration and how the assets were dealt with (prior to the CVA failure but in force after it)
However not all of the stuff about what they smell like and nonsense like that.
As the one called midcalderen posted, there is a link to the general view HMRC take with regard what constitutes phoenix trading. The main thing, almost a pre-requisite, is continuity of who is operating the business. Mr Green’s position before the administration, and during the sale of assets may prove to be problematic. However I suspect that if it was HMRC would already have demanded security before allowing the business to trade.
Before anyone asks, you can’t really trade as a major football club in this country without a VAT number, and HMRC issue those. If they demanded security then it would have to be paid. This could of course be appealed but I am sure something would have gotten out.
corsicacharity says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 21:07
Mr Charles: “Mr Naqvi is a personal friend of mine and I approached him early on in the process about a shareholding but he has not proceeded on the basis that the investment fell outside the core geography he invests in.””
Corsica: “So somebody is behind him but it isn’t going to be Arif Naqvi (just trust me on this – he is not stupid enough to believe anything Green or Zeus will have told him) .”
——
Personally, I think Corsica’s version was closer to the truth there. 🙂
Aye missed, Corsica.
john clarke says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:46
Thanks John. It was just a random thought that popped into my head earlier.
More info on De facto and Shadow directors can be found here. For what its worth, I think Mr Green’s conduct during the period of Administration, will come under close scrutiny in the coming weeks and months.
http://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/freedomofinformation/technical/TechnicalManual/Ch73-84/Chapter%2075/Part%208/Part%208.htm
forweonlyknow says:
Not convinced by that! I think the only saving grace for Sevco not phoenixing is if an ex Director or office bearer is NOT involved Happy to be proved wrong. ;
———————————————————————————————————————–
I could be wrong,but wasn’t C.Green involved in negotiations with the SFA and such and working behind the scenes with RFC before the sale?….would that not mean he was a shadow member of the board or something or COI at least?
scapaflow14 says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 21:39
Agreed, it was quite an amazing situation.
I always thought that the administrators took over a business and made all decisions for it.
To put Mr Green in the position they did only strengthens the notion that the only concern for anyone involved was the continuity of Rangers in some form or another. The creditors were never considered, even on the failure of the CVA.
HirsutePursuit says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:55
——————————————————————————————————-
This explains what I meant in my last post much more succinctly than I could have!
Caught bit of your call tonight – 18:08 SC noted “internet chatter” and as noted here asked Jim Traynor if he was aware of decision being in the hands of any of the parties.
Jim replied in the negative, although he suggested that the delay is due to the decision being 200 pages long.
If the decision is 200 pages, then more likely than not Jim has either seen it or has been told about it. If he has seen it I wonder if the source may have been (S)DM or Media House?
Agrajag says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 21:34
Before anyone asks, you can’t really trade as a major football club in this country without a VAT number, and HMRC issue those. If they demanded security then it would have to be paid. This could of course be appealed but I am sure something would have gotten out.
================================================
HMRC could also have insisted,as a high risk start up business with no credit line, that T’RFC submit monthly VAT returns rather than quarterly!
Long Time Lurker says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 21:57
Jim replied in the negative, although he suggested that the delay is due to the decision being 200 pages long.
If the decision is 200 pages, then more likely than not Jim has either seen it or has been told about it. If he has seen it I wonder if the source may have been (S)DM or Media House?
——————————————————————————————————————–
no wonder the Rain Forest is dying!….jabba would’ve tossed the 200 pages in the bin and only kept the smallest piece of paper………the cheque!
chris shields (@chrisshields10) says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:00
==========================
Given their turnover won’t they automatically be on monthly payments, with a quarterly adjustment.
No wait, they probably don’t reach that threshold with the new turnover.
Please everyone.
Go to Paul McConville’s blog and read ecojon’s piece on the Spartak Moscow disaster of October 1982.
http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/10/20/thirty-years-ago-today-the-spartak-moscow-disaster-remembered-by-ecojon
Steveo has a comment about having a banner to remember the poor souls who died that night and how a banner should be shown to remember them in our next match.
I humbly suggest that this should go viral and not only banners be raised, but that CFC should hold a minutes silence to honour the dead.
Lets make this happen!
Tweet, toot, blog and spread the word.
Agrajag @ 21:43
This decision by the Double Ds was perhaps one of the strangest in the whole administration process
Appointing Green, who at that time was no more than a prospective purchaser, to sit alongside them and help with the running of the business, was foolhardy in the extreme
It was at that point, that the Double Ds effectively disappeared off the scene, leaving the stage to Charlie
In my opinion, after Green’s appointment, there was a triumvirate running RFC(IA), and I hope BDO will ask the appropriate questions, and get to the bottom of this very strange arrangement
Long Time Lurker,
Did RTC not mention the 200 pages on his twitter account?
I’m sure Traynor will happily ‘chapeaux’ RTC for the heads-up…..
Agrajag says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 21:34
0 0 Rate This
HirsutePursuit says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:55
———————————————
Indeed, and that will be a factor. I am quite sure BDO will be taking a very close look at that, and everything else which went on in the run in to the administration, during the administration and how the assets were dealt with (prior to the CVA failure but in force after it)
However not all of the stuff about what they smell like and nonsense like that.
As the one called midcalderen posted, there is a link to the general view HMRC take with regard what constitutes phoenix trading. The main thing, almost a pre-requisite, is continuity of who is operating the business. Mr Green’s position before the administration, and during the sale of assets may prove to be problematic. However I suspect that if it was HMRC would already have demanded security before allowing the business to trade.
Before anyone asks, you can’t really trade as a major football club in this country without a VAT number, and HMRC issue those. If they demanded security then it would have to be paid. This could of course be appealed but I am sure something would have gotten out.
======================================
Pretty much my own thoughts. Though, for quite a time now – starting from when they allowed D&P the gig – I’ve thought HMRC were giving everyone just about enough rope…
Without a proven link ( a BDO request for CoS determination?) I’m not sure HMRC would ask for security at this stage.To do so would, in effect, be accusing Charles of a criminal offence.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1986/45/section/216
“(4)If a person acts in contravention of this section, he is liable to imprisonment or a fine, or both.”
campsiejoe says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:11
========================
Did he not even go as far as to represent Rangers (as was) in an official capacity.
Agrajag @ 22:19
Yes
If you remember he attended SFA and SPL meetings, although he had as much right to be in attendance as you or I
He also strutted about like the Lord of the Manor at Auchenhowie, and attended the last game of the season as if he was already the owner
It stinks to high heaven and beyond
Paulmac2 &John Clarke
thanks for the reply today, so if the interested parties can divulge the result, what did ally say when he was grilled today after the game, or charlie boy for that matter, he is quite difficult to shut up usually.
Long Time Lurker.
So jabba didn’t know that the result has been known to the interested parties by 6:00pm tonight. I knew at midnight, last night, maybe its time jimbo retired if he cant source the information in todays new instant mediums.
Jim Traynosaurus ex
campsiejoe says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:24
Agrajag @ 22:19
Yes
If you remember he attended SFA and SPL meetings, although he had as much right to be in attendance as you or I
============================
So basically he took on the roles and responsibilities of a director of the business. In fact given that the rest of them were neutered by the administrators he was in reality the only “director”.
At the administrators behest.
They effectively made him a non-exec.
campsiejoe says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:24
1
0
Rate This
Agrajag @ 22:19
Yes
If you remember he attended SFA and SPL meetings, although he had as much right to be in attendance as you or I
He also strutted about like the Lord of the Manor at Auchenhowie, and attended the last game of the season as if he was already the owner
It stinks to high heaven and beyond
===========================
In fact, if I remember correctly he even visited the dressing room after the match at St Johnston (?).
Maybe that’s what persuaded so many to stay on with the new club.
easternexpat says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:17
Just had a look at @rangerstaxcase tweets – could not see any reference to the decision being c200 pages long – that’s not to say that RTC has not commented on this, I just can’t see any reference in the RTC tweets.
I thought JT’s response to SC was very odd – apologies for the paraphrasing [SC] Lots on internet chatter that FTTT decision is with the parties [JT] I am not aware of that, however, I did hear that the reason for the time delay (in publishing) is that it is a long decision 200 pages long.
Other than the reference to the FTTT decision via internet chatter from SC on Sportsound, there has been no other reference in the MSM to the decision having been issued to MIH and HMRC.
AT has tweeted this evening that the MoJ cannot confirm if the parties have had sight of the result. I don’t know if that means the MoJ can’t confirm or that they will not confrm.
I was slightly dissapointed today with the lack of reference to the FTTT on the MSM. Was anything said on SSB today? Much talk on KDS and @rangerstaxcase tweets etc. Is there any discussion on the Rangers fan forums?
Perhaps tomorrow will bring more news.
paranoidmotherwellfan says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 18:28
—————————————————————————————————————————–
……..and, of course, the Sheffield United connection. Perhaps the unravelling of the RBS story might provide us with some traction on that further down the line. I would think that nice Mr Ian Fraser of the Herald has a couple of juicy details he’s just bursting to put into print. Jack “I always get paid” also did the PR for Masterton.
I might have another look at Ashley. I’m sure there’s something else I’ve forgotten.
corsicacharity says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 21:07
—————————————————————————————————————————–
I remember it well, corsicacharity, I think it was as a result of questions over links Insomniac had established. I remember this one from about the same time too:
What do Charles Green, Craig Whyte, Dave King and Andrew Ellis all have in common, apart from all threatening to sue each other at some point, all being in Switzerland at the same time recently and all having property in the RSA?
To quote the great man: “What are the chances of that”
paulmac2 says:
Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 20:17
2 0 Rate This
Apparently the FTT decision is over 200 pages long…which is why it has taken a couple of weeks longer to produce..the typist has been working overtime…
Agrajag @ 22:31
I agree 100% with your reading of the situation as it was at that time
Agrajag says: Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:19
campsiejoe says: Saturday, October 20, 2012 at 22:11
————
I’m sure he was acting for both Oldco and Newco – hence the references to Schroedingers Cat at the time.
Definitely stinks.
If Arif Naqvi isn’t directly involved with investment in T’Rangers why has it taken Mr Charles almost 8 weeks to set the record straight? His name was mentioned on 24 August and even in the last few weeks he was being mentioned in the arab press, which is presumably in the geographical zone in which he invests.
Can anyone with a Twitter account tweet BBC’s Chris McLaughlin as it appears he was the one who broke the story of who the investors were. He surely didn’t just pick Naqvi’s name out of thin air.
Maybe Chris can tell us where Naqvi’s name came from??
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19376352