the gunslinger

dissolution of LitigationCo. CVA Assets If the Conditions are satisfied and the Sevco loan is drawn down, the CVA Assets available to creditors will comprise: 5.9.1 5.9.2 5.9.3 £8,300,000; The Player Transfer Fees; Any sums awarded and paid (less applicable costs) to the Company in respect of the High Court Proceedings less costs and expenses of the Administration, or of the Joint Administrators, and CVA Trading Costs; The Excluded Assets will be excluded from the CVA, as they are required to be utilised by the Company for the purpose of continued trading of the Company. For the avoidance of doubt, the proceeds of all sums due from the SPL together with any broadcasting monies payable to the Company will be payable to the Company but for the benefit of Sevco (in the event that this Proposal is approved and the Loan drawn down) and shall be Excluded Assets. The SPL season has finished and as a result, the Company‘s trading revenue has dropped sharply. The Company must still continue to trade, and in particular it must continue to pay its players, to remain as a going concern. As such, the Company will incur the CVA Trading Costs. It is unclear at the date of this Proposal the period over which the CVA Trading Costs will be incurred and therefore a definitive figure cannot be provided at present. It is estimated that, if the loan is drawn down on or around mid July 2012, the CVA Trading Costs may be in the region of £3,000,000

13 In order to satisfy the CVA Trading Costs, the costs or expenses of the Joint Administrators, Nominees‘ Remuneration, the Supervisors‘ Remuneration and / or continue to prosecute the High Court Proceedings, the Joint Administrators will, within 30 days of approval of this Proposal, discount or factor (on such terms as they consider appropriate) the Player Transfer Fees. 5.14 5.15 5.16 5.17 5.18 5.19 5.20 5.21 5.22 During this period from 6 June 2012, a number of receipts may be received by the Company, in respect of: 5.14.1 Outstanding Player Transfer Fees; 5.14.2 The sales of season tickets for Ibrox Stadium, in respect of the 2012/13 season; 5.14.3 player transfer fees with respect to players sold after 12 May 2012; and 5.14.4 the proceeds of sums due from the SPL together with any broadcasting monies payable to the Company. In accordance with the Offer Letter, any monies received in respect of paragraphs 5.14.2 and 5.14.3 will be paid into a bank account (―the Account‖) held by the Joint Administrators‘ solicitors and it is intended that the monies in the Account will be an Excluded Asset as provided in paragraph 5.11 above. However, in the event that the Company‘s trading revenue is insufficient to meet the CVA Trading Costs, and subject to the appointment of Charles Green being made in accordance with paragraph 4.21, the Joint Administrators may request Sevco to consent (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld) to the use of monies in the Account to meet the CVA Trading Costs, as is anticipated. If a request for consent is made by the Joint Administrators pursuant to paragraph 5.15 above (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld) and there are insufficient monies in the Account to meet CVA Trading Costs, then the Joint Administrators may require that the sums paid to their solicitors pursuant to paragraphs 4.20.2 and 4.20.3 above be used to cover CVA Trading Costs. In the event that any sum is released pursuant to this paragraph, the Conditions are subsequently satisfied and the Loan is formally drawn down, any sum available for the purposes of the CVA would be reduced accordingly. The sums referred to in paragraph 5.14.4 above are Excluded Assets, for the Company‘s ongoing benefit, and will not be paid into the Account. Save as set out elsewhere, any sums received by the Company for the purposes of the CVA shall be held on such accounts and in such manner as the Supervisors consider fit. Save as set out in paragraph 5.9 above, no property other than assets of the Company are proposed to be included in the CVA or made available for distribution to Creditors. Application of the CVA Assets of the Company

"It is the Club's view that the matter should in fact have been referred back to the original tribunal which imposed the transfer ban because the appellate tribunal in its written judgement made clear the view they held on the appropriate alternative sanction to be imposed in the event that the transfer ban was successfully challenged."

 

Can someone translate this for me? Baffled.

didn't they say expulsion was in their thoughts but they did this instead.

hope they win as if not rangers may well be liable.

I think he should piss off but I could not care less where or who he marries.

greens not financing us and rangers don't get the Collier Bristow money.

they eithe haven't read their own cva or they think were daft.

Ok, can you copy and paste for me mate as i really did not see that part. Would be interested to see.

sure mate. I'm in work just now ill find it later. esentially it says green takes responsibility for cost from July 30th. making the first wage the august payment.

How do you know this? Please tell what exact details and evidence you have mate.

its in greens cva proposal.

Thats a lie and you know it mate.

 

If his group have not put any money in how are the wages going to get paid?

 

Or are D & P lying when they said he has put money in place for the club to run?

 

As i have said, change the record because your starting to sound like you need to convince yourself never mind other people with your hate and rantings.

I did say if true.

in fairness one of the few things we know is green won't be paying the wages until august.

also d&p said cash was there for June. not greens cash just cash.

most likely tv cash etc.

could issuing us with a second embargo lead to criminal charges?

Most of the article paints it as bad as it can get. Whether all the above is indeed "fact" remains to be seen. I for one can wait till the CVA is going through or not ere jumping on either bandwaggon.

the only problem with that is the weeks delay waiting on green to stump up makes it impossible to cva if it fails.

if its going to he should walk now.

several is misleading sorry say an average of 2-3.

Are you sure? On average, not all of our games are screened live, not all of our games are at home (where the money is made ... and split in half in the cup?), there is no guarantee that we actually get all the way ... and the prize money is? ... Just saying/asking.

well this year it would be very little. conversely last year we had two games against the yahoos grossing over 5 million in ticket sales alone.

it will settle out at a few million a year.

on another point if its true we ate collecting season book money from next week. what happens if we newco. surely that money has to stay behind?

if its true its shocking that greens been allowed to continue without putting any money in. indeed its incredibly dangerous to our very survival. if this collapses d&p must go.

also as I have said previously of the face of things the blue knights bid seems larger. if so its time for them to speak out.

the s ottish cup is worth several million pounds on average a season to us.

when the money is in the bank green can start talking like he owns us.

I can't believe we would be so stupid.

its a successful hoax if it is. jig knows about it.

I have never said that Green is our only hope or a good one, all i have said is give him a chance.

 

As for TBK, come on mate you cant honestly still think they were for real?

 

PM is a chancer and BK was in it for the press. Also i would not trust him one little bit.

I gave green a chance. I've seen his offer for us its terrible.

we fund the club while he's buying it. we pay him back after he buys us.

its better than liquidation is about as nice as I can be about it.

we disagree on Kennedy and p Murray of course but its easy to see why you say that.

here's what I would do buy the club. 8.5 million plus fees. say 9 bar.

sell the club to the fans 50k members at a grand a piece. match the fans pound for pound.

cost 50 million.

but insist that a great deal of the 100million raised is used sustainability. ie invested. or used to generate cash for the team.

museum extra seats companion businesses etc.

we just see what's best for rangers differently. you say tbk are skint I say they will put us back on our feet and invest the required sums.

you say greens our only hope and a good one. I say he's investing nothing and would be no loss.

you might well be right. but so might I.

you could easily lose a lot of money fast but you don't have to.

rangers need 20 million put in to sort them out after that running within our means will be fine.

at the euromillions figures you could throw that 20 away. though in fairness you would be getting a club worth twice that probably for your money.

I think I will continue to post how I feel until admin say otherwise.

Yet more rubbish made up by you mate.

 

Can you please stop posting this anti Grenn stuff in every thread mate, over and over again. It's really not needed, we know what you think and just repeating it over and over again is not doing anything other than wasteing threads.

you questioned me about it so I replied.

the interest parts definately true. how do you think he's going to fund any shortfall?

I never understand people who complain about what other people post. if you don't agree say so and why.

if your right I will change my mind. back on topic I see no reason to let fear cloud our judgement of this deal. its a shit deal for rangers. but its better than a newco which is something.