Ally - The Front Man

[pete 2,499]

Are you forgetting that if we enter administration it is likely as a result of losing the tax case ? The biggest creditor will be HMRC and a short administration period is far from being a foregone conclusion with them

 

As far as I was left to believe was that CW has it tied up that so that the HMRC will be playing second fiddle. Is it that we will still need to pay them a percentage or will they lose everything?

[craig 5,199]

As far as I was left to believe was that CW has it tied up that so that the HMRC will be playing second fiddle. Is it that we will still need to pay them a percentage or will they lose everything?

 

In administration the administrators will have to find agreement with the creditors. HMRC will play second fiddle but that doesn't mean they will accept pennies on the pound.

[Ergatrude 0]

The biggest creditor will be Craig Whyte. The way it has been structured is that Glasgow Rangers owe the company Wavetower, or whatever it is called, something in the region of £50m. £18m Lloyds debt, £25m transfer revenue (released by 2016 but still owed to his company), running costs so far (remember the big cleaning & catering deal), players wages, the stadium upgrades & everything else. These costs are being paid & added to the companies tab so that in the event of administration Craig Whyte will be the largest creditor regardless of what happens. He is extremely smart for an 'alleged' criminal failure.

[craig 5,199]

The biggest creditor will be Craig Whyte. The way it has been structured is that Glasgow Rangers owe the company Wavetower, or whatever it is called, something in the region of £50m. £18m Lloyds debt, £25m transfer revenue (released by 2016 but still owed to his company), running costs so far (remember the big cleaning & catering deal), players wages, the stadium upgrades & everything else. These costs are being paid & added to the companies tab so that in the event of administration Craig Whyte will be the largest creditor regardless of what happens. He is extremely smart for an 'alleged' criminal failure.

Where is the proof that This money is being added to the debt owed to Whyte ? The catering kiosk refurbishment is being paid by the caterers, not RFC.

 

It is highy unlikely that things such as players wages are being added to the debt owed to CW unless you believe that the club doesn't have the cash-flow to support it's working capital.

 

Besides, care to tell me what advantage there is in being the largest creditor ? There is no advantage unless you are a secured creditor, which CW's company may be. But by running up a debt to himself I see no real advantage in the event of an administration.

 

By running up bt to himself and not the club it gives e club a healthier look to it - that has no benefit in an administration, all it means is the assets are higher.... And the preferred creditor gets first bite.

 

Running up debts to be the largest creditot serves no purpose at all as far as I can see.

 

Tell me ergatrude, what benefit is there?

[Ergatrude 0]

Where is the proof that This money is being added to the debt owed to Whyte ? The catering kiosk refurbishment is being paid by the caterers, not RFC.

 

It is highy unlikely that things such as players wages are being added to the debt owed to CW unless you believe that the club doesn't have the cash-flow to support it's working capital.

 

Besides, care to tell me what advantage there is in being the largest creditor ? There is no advantage unless you are a secured creditor, which CW's company may be. But by running up a debt to himself I see no real advantage in the event of an administration.

 

By running up bt to himself and not the club it gives e club a healthier look to it - that has no benefit in an administration, all it means is the assets are higher.... And the preferred creditor gets first bite.

 

Running up debts to be the largest creditot serves no purpose at all as far as I can see.

 

Tell me ergatrude, what benefit is there?

 

There isn't really any proof, it's just taken from stuff he & his representatives have said all along at different stages, including before the takeover was complete.

 

Firstly, when I say the catering stuff etc, it is the contract that is paid by his company.

 

The 'debt' to his company isn't really a debt, it's a guarantee. As he has said before, if we win the tax case, it will be written off. He has also said before that Rangers spends more than it makes & this will need to be brought in line, the overspend will be what is added to the holding company.

 

The benefits are that once the company enters administration & CW becomes the biggest creditor then he will have priority over HMRC. We would still owe them their money & they would have to be paid, but CW would be the priority. I think it is merely an effort to buy us some time or to ensure he doesn't end up personally bust in the worst case scenario.

 

Also, as for the secured creditor thing, pure speculation, maybe that is what Ellis & co are involved for?

[craig 5,199]

There isn't really any proof, it's just taken from stuff he & his representatives have said all along at different stages, including before the takeover was complete.

 

OK, supposition. There is plenty of that to go around, from both sides.

 

Firstly, when I say the catering stuff etc, it is the contract that is paid by his company.

 

Huh ? What is being paid by CW's company ? The catering contract ? Surely we are receiving INCOME for that, given we are allowing a catering company to use our premises and obvious revenue to sell their stuff.

 

The 'debt' to his company isn't really a debt, it's a guarantee. As he has said before, if we win the tax case, it will be written off. He has also said before that Rangers spends more than it makes & this will need to be brought in line, the overspend will be what is added to the holding company.

 

It is only a guarantee if we win the tax case, as far as I am aware. So it IS still a debt. How is the holding company paying for this overspend ? How do you know it isnt also being funded by a credit line or bank loan ?

 

The benefits are that once the company enters administration & CW becomes the biggest creditor then he will have priority over HMRC. We would still owe them their money & they would have to be paid, but CW would be the priority. I think it is merely an effort to buy us some time or to ensure he doesn't end up personally bust in the worst case scenario.

 

No, you are absolutely wrong here unless you know for sure that CW has his own company set up as a secured creditor, which he could do. However, from what you state above you are supposing that CW being the biggest creditor gives him precedence over HMRC. That is absolutely NOT the case (unless, as I say, he is a secured and/or preferred creditor). simply put, the SIZE of the debt to each creditor if none of them are secured or preferred has absolutely ZERO relevance to who gets paid first.

 

If all creditors are unsecured then they have to come to an agreement as to what they ALL get as a %age of the amount they are owed. CW would NOT be "priority". He would get the same in %age terms as every other creditor - it is called "ranking". His debt is not superior to any other and therefore he would get what everyone else would get.

 

Also, as for the secured creditor thing, pure speculation, maybe that is what Ellis & co are involved for?

 

I would be surprised if Ellis understands how an administration fully works. That said, I am interested as to what role you think Ellis plays in the whole "secured creditor" thing. I have no idea how Ellis's involvement helps in that regard.

[Ergatrude 0]

Jeez, I think maybe CW should consider hiring you as his lawyer.

 

My entire post was always going to be speculation & opinion based on what I had read. No-one trully knows what is happening at Rangers at the moment as we are only given tiny snippets of information to take as we understand which is what I, like many others, have attempted. From your replies a few things have been taken out of context from how I meant them & since your reply seems not only mocking, but slightly angry I'm not even going to try to fix it. I'm not good at this, I just had an opinion and felt like sharing it. I am sorry.

[pete 2,499]

OK, supposition. There is plenty of that to go around, from both sides.

 

 

 

Huh ? What is being paid by CW's company ? The catering contract ? Surely we are receiving INCOME for that, given we are allowing a catering company to use our premises and obvious revenue to sell their stuff.

 

 

 

It is only a guarantee if we win the tax case, as far as I am aware. So it IS still a debt. How is the holding company paying for this overspend ? How do you know it isnt also being funded by a credit line or bank loan ?

 

 

 

No, you are absolutely wrong here unless you know for sure that CW has his own company set up as a secured creditor, which he could do. However, from what you state above you are supposing that CW being the biggest creditor gives him precedence over HMRC. That is absolutely NOT the case (unless, as I say, he is a secured and/or preferred creditor). simply put, the SIZE of the debt to each creditor if none of them are secured or preferred has absolutely ZERO relevance to who gets paid first.

 

If all creditors are unsecured then they have to come to an agreement as to what they ALL get as a %age of the amount they are owed. CW would NOT be "priority". He would get the same in %age terms as every other creditor - it is called "ranking". His debt is not superior to any other and therefore he would get what everyone else would get.

 

 

 

I would be surprised if Ellis understands how an administration fully works. That said, I am interested as to what role you think Ellis plays in the whole "secured creditor" thing. I have no idea how Ellis's involvement helps in that regard.

 

Quote Originally Posted by Ergatrude

 

Jeez, I think maybe CW should consider hiring you as his lawyer.

 

My entire post was always going to be speculation & opinion based on what I had read. No-one trully knows what is happening at Rangers at the moment as we are only given tiny snippets of information to take as we understand which is what I, like many others, have attempted. From your replies a few things have been taken out of context from how I meant them & since your reply seems not only mocking, but slightly angry I'm not even going to try to fix it. I'm not good at this, I just had an opinion and felt like sharing it. I am sorry.

 

Craig you really need to remember that most of us are Dummies just trying to understand a small part of it when it comes to this subject and post as helping us understand instead of ripping us apart.

[Ergatrude 0]

Nah, I can see his point. Reading my original post even I would assume I was talking matter of factly, which I wasn't supposed to be. I would have a bash at trying to sort my original post out, but after 13 hours at work & a few beers topped off with the fact I'm posting from my GF's rubbish laptop I'd rather not!

[Zappa 0]

Guys, read this section (part III) from the shareholder circular -

 

Part III

Summary of material terms of the Acquisition

 

1. The Agreement, together with a separate side letter between The Rangers FC Group and the

Club, contains a number of undertakings in relation to The Rangers FC Group's commitment

to the Club and these are expressed to be enforceable by both the Club and the Vendor. The

principal undertakings may be summarised as follows:

 

(a) if the Club has not suffered an insolvency event within 90 days of the Club's appeal in relation

to the tax claim brought against the Club by HM Revenue & Customs (the "Tax Case") being

finally determined, then The Rangers FC Group will either waive the debt that it has acquired

or convert it into equity by way of an issue of new voting ordinary shares in the Club. The

acquisition of the debt by The Rangers FC Group is described further at paragraph 2 below.

However, The Rangers FC Group has separately undertaken to the Club that it will waive the

debt that it has acquired and not exercise its option to convert it into equity as provided for in

the Agreement;

 

(b) The Rangers FC Group has undertaken to provide £5,000,000 for investment in the playing

squad;

 

© The Rangers FC Group has stated its intention to invest, or procure an investment of, £20

million by 2016 for investment in the playing squad. If, as part of any player acquisition, the

Club agrees to make a transfer payment in a future year before 2016, The Rangers FC Group

will be obliged to invest cash to cover such transfer payment, up to £5 million per year; such

amounts coming out of the £20 million investment that The Rangers FC Group has stated its

intention to invest;

 

(d) The Rangers FC Group has undertaken to provide or procure the provision of up to

£5,000,000 of additional working capital facilities to the Club;

 

(e) The Rangers FC Group is to contribute to the Club the amount required to meet a liability

owed by the Club to HM Revenue & Customs in relation to a discounted option scheme tax;

 

(f) The Rangers FC Group is to provide £1.7 million to the Club to fund capital expenditure in

relation to improving kitchen and public address equipment at the stadium and meeting other

necessary or reasonable capital expenditure required in the ordinary course;

 

(g) The Rangers FC Group undertakes that, until the debt has been waived, the Club will not be

required to lend money to The Rangers FC Group or grant security in respect of The Rangers

FC Group's borrowings unless the borrowing (and the granting of the security in relation to it)

is principally for the Club's benefit; and

 

(h) a breach of any of the undertakings given by The Rangers FC Group in the Agreement will

result in the debt acquired being automatically extinguished. The terms on which the debt

would be extinguished are to be agreed by the parties at the relevant time.

 

2. Until such time as the debt acquired by The Rangers FC Group is either waived or converted

into equity, if the Club suffers an insolvency event or is unable to pay its debts as they fall, the

debt acquired by The Rangers FC Group shall be deemed to be increased by an amount

equal to the amounts contributed by The Rangers FC Group as set out in paragraphs 1 (b),

(e) and (f) above.

 

The full document is here - www.rangers.co.uk/staticFiles/4d/76/0,,5~161357,00.pdf