Rangers go into administration

[Yngwie]

When I saw the headline yesterday "Gers out of European competition" it struck me that that makes it 3 European exits in one season

I don't think they would have been in administration yet if they had got a few million quid from a European run, but as it is they fell at the first hurdle to Malmo (Malmo!) in the Champions League and then parachuted into the Europa where they fell at the first hurdle to Maribor (Maribor!).

To cap off a miserable run of cup defeats they also went out of the League cup to Falkirk (Falkirk!) and then the Scottish Cup at home to Dundee Utd.

All in all it has really been one of those horrible anus thingies that their beloved Queen once talked about.

[PaderbornCaley]

[Sorted]

The radio today claimed that HMRC are willing to settle if Craig Whyte is no longer part of it. I know this will enrage some but HMRC won't get any money if they go into liquidation. As dispassionate neutrals, it has to be the line they follow.

I found it very difficult to believe that Whyte didn't have some gameplan for resurrecting a phoenix Rangers debt-free and with millions in the bank, plus a healthy sell-on profit for Whyte. It just seemed incredulous, after so many months of due dilligence, that this would happen. But, amazingly, Whyte does seem to be a complete Walter Mitty figure (perhaps even a thief). Surely, this will have a major effect on both his business standing and ability to enjoy a private threat-free life? Did he really not understand the big impact this could have?

I would suggest that Craig Whyte's plan is entirely on schedule.

He has no interest in football or Rangers (his former father in law has remarked on this in several media articles and been joined by others) and merely views this as another financial transaction. His plan now depends on liquidation and he will do everything in his power to ensure this happens whilst protesting the contrary. His administrators ( and remember he appointed them despite HMRC seeking others) have procrastinated and delayed long enough to ensure that liquidation is almost a formality. If anyone else can show me an example of a business, never mind a football club, that is saddled with the debt and potential liabilities that Rangers are, were the administrators haven't taken immediate steps to reduce costs I would be amazed.

Liquidation affords Whyte, thanks to his secure and preferential creditor status, the perfect vehicle for asset strip and value realisation. How can Rangers 2012 (Sponsored by Kleenex0 Ltd function without Ibrox Stadium, the car park and, to a lesser extent, Murray Park?

Whyte is bang on track to deliver exactly what he set out to do.......................asset strip and financial gain.

[PaderbornCaley]

The radio today claimed that HMRC are willing to settle if Craig Whyte is no longer part of it. I know this will enrage some but HMRC won't get any money if they go into liquidation. As dispassionate neutrals, it has to be the line they follow.

I found it very difficult to believe that Whyte didn't have some gameplan for resurrecting a phoenix Rangers debt-free and with millions in the bank, plus a healthy sell-on profit for Whyte. It just seemed incredulous, after so many months of due dilligence, that this would happen. But, amazingly, Whyte does seem to be a complete Walter Mitty figure (perhaps even a thief). Surely, this will have a major effect on both his business standing and ability to enjoy a private threat-free life? Did he really not understand the big impact this could have?

I would suggest that Craig Whyte's plan is entirely on schedule.

He has no interest in football or Rangers (his former father in law has remarked on this in several media articles and been joined by others) and merely views this as another financial transaction. His plan now depends on liquidation and he will do everything in his power to ensure this happens whilst protesting the contrary. His administrators ( and remember he appointed them despite HMRC seeking others) have procrastinated and delayed long enough to ensure that liquidation is almost a formality. If anyone else can show me an example of a business, never mind a football club, that is saddled with the debt and potential liabilities that Rangers are, were the administrators haven't taken immediate steps to reduce costs I would be amazed.

Liquidation affords Whyte, thanks to his secure and preferential creditor status, the perfect vehicle for asset strip and value realisation. How can Rangers 2012 (Sponsored by Kleenex0 Ltd function without Ibrox Stadium, the car park and, to a lesser extent, Murray Park?

Whyte is bang on track to deliver exactly what he set out to do.......................asset strip and financial gain.

Spot on. I think you've hit the nail in the head. There's no other reason why the (Whytes) administrators are holding off.

[Alex MacLeod]

Am I missing something here. My understanding is that if a company goes into liquidation the assets are sold off and the funds raised shared among the creditors proportionately. Reading what I've reproduced below I cant see how Whyte can make anything out of liquidation. He's more likely to make money out of coming out of administration. Club would be debt free and a big desire to potential buyers.

Some cut and paste:

GENERAL LIQUIDATION QUERIES

What does liquidation mean?

Liquidation is a formal procedure whereby a liquidator is appointed to ‘wind-up’ the affairs of a limited company, which involves selling the company’s assets and paying creditors. When all the assets have been sold and the money distributed, the company is dissolved, which means that it no longer exists.

How do you put a company into liquidation?

There are two ways to liquidate a company:

• Compulsory liquidation: this is where someone, usually a creditor, presents a petition to the court and gives evidence that they are owed money which the company cannot pay, and so the court makes a winding-up order. The Official Receiver is normally appointed liquidator of the company. It is usual for a creditor to instruct a solicitor to act on his behalf because of the legal nature of the proceedings.
  
• Voluntary liquidation: this is where the company itself decides to go into liquidation, usually because it cannot pay its debts, and an insolvency practitioner is appointed liquidator of the company.
  

How much does it cost?

If you want to put a company into compulsory liquidation, you have to pay £1000 deposit to the court, plus a £220 court fee, plus the cost of advertising the petition in the London Gazette and any costs of instructing a solicitor. If you want to put a company into voluntary liquidation, the costs vary depending on which insolvency practitioner you use.

The forms to put a company into compulsory liquidation can be found on our website at www.insolvency.gov.uk in ‘Forms’ and then ‘Forms for England and Wales’.

What happens to the company directors?

When a company goes into liquidation, the directors cease to have control of the company, and the liquidator takes over. The directors have a duty to co-operate with the liquidator to identify all assets and liabilities of the company and provide details of its affairs. The liquidator has to make a return under the Company Directors’ Disqualification Act 1986 about the directors’ conduct in relation to the company.

[CaleyD]

Alex, secured creditors get paid before unsecured creditors....Craig Whyte would (maybe) fall into the secured creditor category.

The only thing that will stop him walking away untouched is if it can be shown that he is/was in some way in breach of contract and not honoured the terms of the takeover agreement. Further to that, if it can be shown that he used his status as a Director to manipulate the situation to his advantage without the knowledge and agreement of the rest of the board then he could also find himself facing criminal charges.

We are still far from the endgame on this and I would be reluctant to guess at the outcome.

[Alex MacLeod]

Just read something on preffered creditor. If Whyte is such them he actually only gets preference over unsecured creditors. There are two classes that take preference over all others in liquidation. Employee's and HMRC. These two are entitled to their money in full before any others are paid out. I wonder if thats the stumbling block with players. If they agree to a wage cut they lose out. If they hold out for liquidation they eventually get all they are due provided the sell off of assets covers this.

[Sorted]

As I understand it, the structure is such that Craig Whyte has effective ownership of the assets mentioned previously and they cannot be touched by HMRC or any other creditor.

[Alex MacLeod]

So your saying that Whyte owns the stadium etc as a seperate entity to owning Rangers PLC. I thought he only bought David Murrays majority shareholding in the club.

[Charles Bannerman]

All in all it has really been one of those horrible anus thingies that their beloved Queen once talked about.

Yes, very good! But as it happens "anus" with one "n" is also the Latin word for an old woman, so in classical terms, HM actually is... an "anus".

[Sorted]

So your saying that Whyte owns the stadium etc as a seperate entity to owning Rangers PLC. I thought he only bought David Murrays majority shareholding in the club.

From what I am lead to believe, Whyte has control and title of all the property assets. As long as the company continues to trade be it in a normal format if someone were daft enough to buy the club as it stands or in administration, these assets remain with the company. The minute this ceases to be the case i.e. liquidation, then they effectively become the property of Whyte to dispose of as he sees fit.

As CD rightly pointed out, the only potential pitfall is to prove he as acted illegally in his role as a company director. This will be extremely challenging as, until February 14th no one was suggesting this was the case and since then, the club has been run by the administrators. And, despite all the hot air to the contrary, no suggestion of charges have been made by anyone in authority.

Makes sense to me. The only man that doesn't seem to be concerned is Whyte!

[Alex MacLeod]

My understanding, having trolled all the news footage etc is that Whyte only has the control and title you mention as the majority shareholder of Rangers PLC. I dont think he has seperate title to that that the company has. Indeed looking here I would suggest that Whyte has no seperate control of the assets: http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2012/03/08/rangers-in-crisis-ibrox-murray-park-car-park-players-could-all-be-sold-off-if-liquidation-becomes-reality-86908-23779714/

[CELTIC1CALEY3]

In total denial - 'we have done nothing wrong, it was the responsibility of Harry's dog, the SFA, Bernie the Bolt'............., 'we is victims, we is'

http://www.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=642:punishing-the-victim&catid=103:board&Itemid=531

Basically saying the world had a duty to warn David Murray that Craig Whyte had been a disqualified director and was not likely to be judged a fit person when it was discovered.

[CaleyD]

No, but he will hold a charge on those assets....in much the same way as a bank holds a charge on your property until you pay the mortgage.

The courts, or in this case the administrators, can force the sale of property to pay for debts...but any money due to someone with a security held against those properties would be paid (in full) first.

Here is what I think will transpire......

Whyte will hold a charge on the properties of somewhere in the region of £18 Million (this being what was needed to pay off the bank). Whyte raised that money from the Ticketus deal and will have needed security for that borrowing. He's unlikely to have given security directly on the assets of the club, partly because of the need to register that with companies house (where everyone would have become aware of it almost immediately) and partly because I believe he wouldn't have the direct authority, on his own, to have signed off on that (if he has then he's committed fraud). Instead he would have given Ticketus some kind of security on the repayments by the club of the 18 Million they owe him for paying the bank....most likely via some offshore business/account so it remained buried, or possibly via this pension fund that are claiming rights to the money being held by the solicitors.

Ticketus are yet to show their full hand in terms of the details of the deal done and who exactly it was done with...and that could prove to be the missing piece of the jigsaw. As they too are claiming rights to the above pot then they will have to fold or show in the next couple of weeks.

For now it's all just hypothesis, and no more so than in the case of much of what is in the press.

The fact that it is all so complicated and messy only, IMO, adds weight to the suggestions that Liquidation was the plan from the outset. Whyte is obviously not co-operating any more than he feels he has to at any given moment with the Administrators. Then again they are "his" administrators and they have been by Whytes side since he took over...which begs the question of whether they are playing dumb. Surely if they have been involved since day 1 of the take over, were giving advice on and helping with the restructuring of the business then they would know what was where and which deals and been done and with who!!!

The fact of the matter is that nobody outside the chosen inner circle has any idea of what the full extent of the situation is....yet.

[Gabby]

Am I missing something here. My understanding is that if a company goes into liquidation the assets are sold off and the funds raised shared among the creditors proportionately. Reading what I've reproduced below I cant see how Whyte can make anything out of liquidation. He's more likely to make money out of coming out of administration. Club would be debt free and a big desire to potential buyers.

Some cut and paste:

GENERAL LIQUIDATION QUERIES

What does liquidation mean?

Liquidation is a formal procedure whereby a liquidator is appointed to ‘wind-up’ the affairs of a limited company, which involves selling the company’s assets and paying creditors. When all the assets have been sold and the money distributed, the company is dissolved, which means that it no longer exists.

How do you put a company into liquidation?

There are two ways to liquidate a company:

• Compulsory liquidation: this is where someone, usually a creditor, presents a petition to the court and gives evidence that they are owed money which the company cannot pay, and so the court makes a winding-up order. The Official Receiver is normally appointed liquidator of the company. It is usual for a creditor to instruct a solicitor to act on his behalf because of the legal nature of the proceedings.
  
• Voluntary liquidation: this is where the company itself decides to go into liquidation, usually because it cannot pay its debts, and an insolvency practitioner is appointed liquidator of the company.
  

How much does it cost?

If you want to put a company into compulsory liquidation, you have to pay £1000 deposit to the court, plus a £220 court fee, plus the cost of advertising the petition in the London Gazette and any costs of instructing a solicitor. If you want to put a company into voluntary liquidation, the costs vary depending on which insolvency practitioner you use.

The forms to put a company into compulsory liquidation can be found on our website at www.insolvency.gov.uk in ‘Forms’ and then ‘Forms for England and Wales’.

What happens to the company directors?

When a company goes into liquidation, the directors cease to have control of the company, and the liquidator takes over. The directors have a duty to co-operate with the liquidator to identify all assets and liabilities of the company and provide details of its affairs. The liquidator has to make a return under the Company Directors’ Disqualification Act 1986 about the directors’ conduct in relation to the company.

His tactic seems to be that he is a secured creditor. This means that he would have first crack at the assets. He was trying to be repaid money that he hasn't actually paid. His number is up. He's done this successfully before but I can't imagine why he would think he would get away with it with a football club.

Whyte wasn't interested in being a Director - his focus was being a secured creditor. And that has failed badly. He thought he could make good coin based on a 1 pound investment.

In breaking news it seems that the wage reduction agreed by Naismith et al is good for 2 months only. They are obviously banking on a quick sale by someone with a lazy 70 million pounds they are happy to p1ss against the wall.

Edited March 9, 2012 by Gabby

[CaleyD]

Looking at the big picture, Rangers only really have two options......

1. Liquidation and setting up as a new company.....this would wipe all debt and take the Big Tax Case out of the equation.

This would mean a fire sale and liquidators would sell anything and everything, the only hope Rangers would have for a quick restart would be if a deal could be done to sell everything as a job lot. Biggest problem would be sorting out who owns what and who has charges over what etc, which could drag on for months in the courts and hinder any new companies ability to trade effectively...especially if those arguments centre around stadium ownership/rights.

2. Remain in Administration until a decision is made on the BTC, lump that in with the rest and settle at Xp in the pound via a CVA.

The more expensive of the two options as HMRC are not going to accept a settlement of anything less than they would get from liquidation. This means that any buyer would have to see/accept additional value/cost being added in order to maintain continuity and club history.

[Gabby]

What I don't understand is how 7 parties think Rangers is a good buy. Murray had to give it away for a pound because nobody would touch it. Now the circumstance are much worse and groups are lining up.

[CaleyD]

News coming through this evening that Paul Murray and the Blue Knights Consortium are, in conjunction with the fans and Ticketus, in the process of finalising an offer to put to the Administrators.

Stinks of Ticketus trying to do a deal that would see them get more than they might from a CVA or liquidation....do Rangers really want another Investor who's main interest is not the club itself?

[PullMyFinger]

If Craig Whyte has any shareholding in RFC as suggested, then he alone is responsible for the monies owed to Ticketus.

[+MrCaleyjag]

If what I have heard proves to be true then the problems purely at Rangers are not all CW has to contend with at the moment. Suggestions have been made to me that just over a week ago CW received a letter from the police warning him that his life was in danger and several threats have been made against it not to mention that a hit has been ordered also.

I believe he massively underestimated the backlash and fallout that would occur through doing what he has done and right from the outset he had it in his mind to go down this exact road. For him the best that can come out of this now, and not what he first set out to do which was liquidation, is for Rangers to acquire a new buyer/owner before it goes into liquidation and then carry on in administration until the big tax case is finished as CaleyD suggested.

Quite when and how he managed to aquire the backing of Ticketus is yet to come out but if he did so before he took control of Rangers then he surely must be liable for that debt as he secured it on his own back outwith Rangers as a viable business at the time to back him. For me there is no way that the Rangers board at the time, remember it included John Greig and Martin Bain, would have agreed to and voted on this ridiculous deal as there is nothing to suggest that it would have helped out the club in the long run. It's like the bank giving me a mortgage based on the fact I have been told that I was due a 50% pay rise but might not actually occur, the same way I cannot see them agreeing to a loan based on future season ticket sales which can't be 100% guaranteed either not to mention the fact they could surely not do without that money to run the club over the three years in question and would be facing an even bigger shortfall in finances as a result.

There are so many ifs and buts still to be answered and they will never come from CW, the best hope Rangers fans have is that the administrators get to the bottom of it and if indeed they were in on it at the start I think they too have now found themselves in a position where they don't want to be and the only viable solution for them is to now find a new buyer/backer and let the club continue.

Do they want to be seen as the company that liquidated Glasgow Rangers Football Club?

Edited March 10, 2012 by MrCaleyjag

[CaleyD]

I wonder if they can be deducted another 10 points for bringing the game into disrepute by screwing up the (not) going into administration process? Also have to wonder if there will be any backlash from actions taken with "administrative powers" when those powers never actually existed!!!

You know it's bad when you feck up fecking up...lol

[Ten4]

So legally they now are back in administyawn.....zzzzzzzzzz

[Yngwie]

So can we deduct another 10 points off them?

[Yngwie]

Here's my bedtime reading, the administrators report and looooong list of creditors. ICT were owed £39,805 when Rangers went into adminsitration.

http://www.rangers.co.uk/staticFiles/fe/a8/0,,5~174334,00.pdf

[Libero]

pennies compared to the £93million they potentially owe the HMRC, Wonder how much of that we'll see back, not much i'd reckon