Gabby

I have been messaged by a couple of folk on here and one suggestion mooted was that some of us who are overseas or otherwise not at the TCS on a regular basis could possibly club together and buy 'some' season tickets (quantity obviously depends on level of interest and how much was pledged). These tickets could then then be used by others (perhaps on payment of a portion of the equivalent match fee directly to ICT (?)) or maybe given out for charity or something like that ..... Like the person who suggested it to me I havent thought through the specifics yet, but we will be happy to try and drive any fundraising ideas, or to publicise and push those ideas towards the Supporters Trust if the management of them is more appropriate that way. If the site members feel it is warranted, perhaps - in this new spirit of unity - we might want a small sub-forum for fundraising ideas and such like ? Definitely a thread of its own though rather than getting lost in here ! Of course, for our own part, CTO will now go ahead and try to get names of site members who want to re-subscribe to or rejoin our player sponsor group so we can also contribute to the club this way and we will likely make our own contribution on top of that. If ever there was a time for all of us to dip into our pockets and help the club that time is now. We can all do our part, no matter how large or small that assistance is. Let me know, i will be happy to contribute. Mrs Gabby is in Inverness for the next couple of weeks, she has a shopping list for me for the club shop. I think I will give her a call and add a few extra things to the list.

The main league sponsor, Clydesdale Bank, has one more season to run. They are not pulling out early. Sky TV have a deal in place. They have publicly said they wont be pulling out. They may renegotiate but they wont pull out. Motherwells figures are based on neither of those two puting the cash up. They are over dramatising because the Grand Master says they should. Sky don't have a deal in place, what they have said is they won't walk away. My word Sky will re-negotiate, and while they won't walk away, the deal will be worth a small fraction of the original terms. It would be commercially irresponsble for Sky to continue with the original terms, they simply will not get the same return on their investment without Rangers. If I had to guess I would say that Rangers' supporters would represent 40% of their viewers. 40% would be Celtic and 20% would be all other clubs combined. I don't believe that Motherwell are overstating their financial situation. If anything, they are planning on a worst case scenario which is the only finacially responsible thing to do at the moment. The difference is that Motherwell are being up front about it. Let's be clear, every Chairman in the SPL is doing the exact same thing.

Good luck with the jump Julie!

It is because the SPL share cannot be sold as an asset without the approval of the SPL. So oldco has the players and the SPL share but no ground to play at and newco has a ground to play at with no membership to a league or players. It is also important to remember that Rangers aren't liquidated yet - this is still a few weeks away - technically they are still in administration so therefore the SPL share is theirs and they get to vote on admitting newco despite the massive conflict of interest.

I understand what you are saying however Green is trying to play a clever game here. He is trying to claim Rangers history/trophies when talking to fans, but says it is a different club for the purpose of punishment and re-introduction to SPL. Below is an article worth reading suggesting there is still come confusion around the transfer of history/trophies of rangers to newco (even if they are in Div 3) http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/06/18/why-rangers-can-vote-on-4th-july-and-how-the-spl-and-rangers-are-in-error/

See previous post

Tough on this. I think they should be stripped of titles (if found guilty after due process) for 2 reasons: 1. It acts as a deterent in the future. 2. It is part of the healing process. Justice is seen to be done and everyone can move forward from there. We had a similar situation in Aust a few years ago where a team was found to be cheating the salary cap by asking sponsors and other third parties to make payments to players outside of their contracts. They were operating dual contacts offering extra paymentd not outlined to the governing body (NRL) They were stripped of the titles they won during the period. From a player and club point of view this is a severe penalty. As a result I see no reason why the SFA/SPL can't investiage transgressions of the past while planning for the future.

I actually thought it was a very sensible idea. However, I will be more interested to see the draw when it comes out to see if 12th Team has a home game on the same weekend as Celtic or Dundee Utd.

No they don't. Yes they do. See, I can play this game as well. Rules attached.....H5 is the one you need. RULES EFFECTIVE 14 MAY 2012.pdf H5 says: H5 If any Club in the League ceases to operate or to be member of the League for any reason, its playing record in the League may be expunged and the number of relegation places from the League shall be reduced accordingly. H5 only applies during the season, and since Rangers survived to the end of the season, Dunfermline has been relegated. Once Rangers reached the end of the season, H5 no longer applied. The Gretna situation is a more appropriate example of the application of H5. Must try harder. So with the liquidation of Rangers the discussion changes from who will get releated to who will be accepted into the SPL. May I be the first to suggest some type of X Factor type format.

No they don't. Yes they do. See, I can play this game as well.

The news isbad for dunfermline. the spl rules say that once relegation is confirmed, any subsequent place is filled by the team that finished 2nd in Div 1

He scored some cracking goals for Wellingon this seasn

Sky/ESPN will reduce the amount they are prepared to pay for a Rangerless SPL. Significantly, I believe. Rightly or wrongly, having both of the OF clearly means an awful lot to them. That's why the expiring contracts had a clause specifying 4 OF derbies a season. That's why they haven't signed any TV deal for the new season, and won't sign anything until they know whether Rangers will be in it at all, and whether they will be in a position to compete. You are right that the SPL is a small part of Sky's operation, and your average English punter doesn't give two hoots about the SPL (but probably watches the odd OF derby). However, there must be tens of thousands (at least) of Rangers minded people throughout the UK who subscribe first and foremost in order to watch their own team, perhaps paying around £300 a year to do so. Even if only a proportion cancel, that's still £millions a year lost to the TV companies, which then reduces the amount they are willing to pay the SPL. Lower viewing figures also have a direct impact on Sky/ESPN's advertising revenues. None of us know the value of a TV deal without Rangers, but I suspect the club chairmen have an inkling and are very concerned about the consequences. Sky/ESPN will have a very good idea what a TV deal without Rangers is worth and as a result they will drop a lot of zeros of the end of the original number.

They are appealing on the grounds that they didn't expect to be caught.

The appeal is on the basis of diminished responsibility....i.e. Rangers defence is one of "we didn't know we were breaking the tax laws". The job of the tribunal is to ascertain whether or not (on the balance of probability) that is true. HMRC do not have to prove that it was deliberate in every case, they just require enough to show that Rangers knowingly and purposefully broke the tax laws as part of the scheme. In other words, do the claims of ignorance hold water. It comes down to whether or not the payments were discretionary or non-discretionary (was it part of a salary package or not). If the existence of side letters can be proven (and the BBC claims would suggest it can) then it's case closed as that would be as damming as it gets. On top of that it throws open the player registration breaches with the SPL/SFA...and I have to say that I believe the SPL & SFA have been negligent in their handling of that to date. For a start, the SPL didn't begin looking in to it until March when they should have been investigating it in parallel with the Tax Tribunal. We then learn this week (although we kinds knew before) that Rangers have not released the required information to them...why have they waited this long before setting a deadline? Furthermore, as it involves player registrations then why have the SFA not been investigating? UEFA have to be looking at all this and wondering if these associations are fit for purpose, if they're not then it's more than just Scottish Football that's screwed up. No it's not. They are appealing the amount of the penalty and interest. Regardless of the result on the FTT, the original tax owed from the EBT's will stand. This seems to be a fairly common error amongst the scottish media.

I see that Kenny Cameron has made a statement: http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/spl/4337032/We-must-act-now-on-Gers-crisis.html

Let's be clear. Rangers have been found guilty of the Big Tax Case and they have admitted guilt. The appeal is against the size of the peanlties and interest on top of the outstanding tax. The result should be that all games where a player was illegally registered result in backdated 3-0 losses, which would result in handing back titles. This is cheating of the highest order and the SFA should expell them

I know it will happen, but I am having trouble working out how they will bypass the SFA club rules. They still need three years of audited accounts (this is not just a requirement for UEFA). the only way they can really do this is by doing an Airdrie and buying a club like clydebank ansd relocating it. So let's say that newco doesn't happen, the SFA are quickly running out of time to advertise, receive, assess and promote a new club to Div 3 to replace Rangers. I'm not sure how they will do it but Govan Rangers are a dead set, 24 carat certainty for the SPL next year - and it stinks.

Here comes Summer Football. Newco won't be ready for next season so what's the bet the season is delayed to accommodate Summer Football and Govan Rangers?

Not by a long long way!............be patient comeuppance is still on the cards! If they get this CVA, then they will get away with it. End of the day, HMRC will have to accept CVA because they risk not getting a penny if the Old Co is liquidated. HMRC do not have to accept the offer, and I am willing to bet they won't accept it.

You made me bleed my own blood! (with apologies to Zoolander) Edit: Actually I think it was Dodgeball not Zoolander

Fair point. I stand correct. Cheers

I'd forgotton about County Air. Best post ever!

That prudent fiscal action was to transfer the debt and stadium to a "newco". My argument is that the actual mechanism is the same. yes, we did not owe people all over the country, it wasn't a debacle, it wasn't done at the very last minute to save the club - all I am saying is that the mechanism that Rangers are suggesting is basically the same as we used to remove the stadium debt from our books.

Hang on. ICT do not own the stadium, the trust does. Therefore the debt and asset were transferred to the Trust. So ICT aren't paying rent to reduce their debt. They are paying rent to a third party so they can manage their debt. This has nothing to do with administration - Rangers are in administration because they failed to recognise/manage their debt. Sutherland recongnised that the situation needed to be dealt with and as a result transferred the asset and debt to a "newco" - the Trust. I seem to remember a lot a noise around that time asking where the debt went and that he could allegedly use the land for other purposes. While the amounts of money are vastly different, the situation is similar.