The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland


Rangers FC RIP

Posted on June 12, 2012 by

Rangers Football Club, formed in 1872, will formally cease to exist later this week. In a surprise development (in terms of its timing, not its content), HMRC have officially stated that they will reject the club’s proposed Company Voluntary Arrangement at the creditors’ meeting scheduled to take place this coming Thursday, June 14. The news was confirmed when the club’s administrators Duff & Phelps issued a press release stating their intention to go ahead with a plan to sell Rangers FC’s assets to a consortium led by businessman Charles Green for £5.5m.

There is, however, a great deal of debate about whether such  plan can go ahead. A fascinating blog by Scottish lawyer Paul McConville last week observed that HMRC had already put in place its own preferred liquidators should the CVA proposal be rejected, and it’s hard to see how Duff & Phelps can go ahead with the asset sale in the event of a legal challenge from creditors. Since HMRC has rejected the CVA and has its chosen liquidators standing ready, it seems highly likely that it, or some other creditor/s, would mount such a challenge.

There can be little doubt that the assets of Rangers FC – the playing staff and property portfolio, including Ibrox Stadium and Murray Park – ought to be able to realise significantly more than the £5.5m Green is offering. (Since the money Green proposed to use to buy the club with was in the form of a loan to be recouped from the survival and continued trading of the club, it’s also uncertain whether it’s actually on the table in any real sense.)

Even if the players’s contracts are held to be voided by the liquidation of the club (also the subject of debate) and they can move on without any transfer fees, it’s difficult to see how the property alone, even allowing for its partially- listed status, could fail to be worth at least double the supposed sale price, and the liquidators will be duty-bound to maximise the returns for creditors by at least opening the sale process up to competing bids, including those not seeking to use the property for football purposes.

Duff & Phelps and Charles Green have both insisted that despite liquidation Rangers Football Club will survive, under the same name, and continue to play at Ibrox. Such claims, stated by both parties as certainties, seem to lack any credibility. Further intriguing developments, we’re sure, are not far away.

6 to “Rangers FC RIP”

  1. Bugger (the Panda) says:

    Duff and Phillips are now saying that there is a binding contract to sell the assets to a new entity under the control of Green.
     
    Rev Stu says that HMRC will attempt to appoint another liquidator, rather than D & P.
     
    So, how can D & P sell Rangers’ assets and at the price stated, which could be much less than could be achieved and considering that the sales price is in fact a loan and HMRC will get nowt of that?
     
    I can see this staggering through the Court of Session

    Reply
  2. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “Rev Stu says that HMRC will attempt to appoint another liquidator, rather than D & P.”

    Well, not so much that I say it as that someone far better versed in Scots law than I says it, and not so much “will attempt to” as “already has”. Do read Mr McConville’s blog, it’s very informative.

    Reply
  3. Bugger (the Panda) says:

    I have been reading the blog by Mr McConville but my damn browser (Firefox) crashes when I try to follow some of the links within.
     
    Somebody is talking waffle and I suspect the it is D & P; they have form you know.
     
    The BBC is suggesting that HMRC will go for David Murray and the Whyte Night.

    I wonder if that other rumour on an earlier blog of a South African connection could have substance.
     
     
    Popcorn and a (neverending) sixpack called for.

    Reply
  4. Jim says:

    Sorry. Get facts right. The business is liquidated. Not the club or the history of the club. So take RIP and shove it as far up your ………..

    Reply
    • Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

      The business is the club. The clue is in the name of the business: Rangers Football Club PLC. It’s not exactly cryptic.

      It’s all pretty academic, because one way or another there’s absolutely no chance now that any kind of Rangers is coming out of this alive. If the Appellate Tribunal doesn’t do the job and the SPL members bottle it, the dual-contracts case will fill the coffin full of nails and dump it out at sea. And even if it somehow floats back to shore staggers on like a zombie Rasputin after that, Green will sell out to Tesco, because the last thing he ever wanted was to be lumbered with a loss-making football club. It’s worth far more to him broken up for parts than anyone will ever pay for it as a going concern.

      Jim McColl and Douglas Park are worth close to a billion quid between them – £20m is pocket change. So why haven’t they just paid up if they love Rangers so much? Answer: because since the dual-contracts announcement they know it’s doomed beyond salvation. Start making alternative plans for your Saturdays.

      Reply
  5. Bandage says:

    Rangers can’t have it both ways. They want to get rid of the debt but keep thehistory. The debt was used to fraudulently buy every title since the late 80s. 

    Reply


Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.


  • About

    Wings Over Scotland is a thing that exists.

    Stats: 6,785 Posts, 1,221,477 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • agent x on Too Tight To Mention: “” Northcode says: 2 July, 2025 at 12:24 pm I am descended of the Danaans. When we first arrived here…Jul 6, 15:53
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: “Great stuff, NC. Looking forwards already to your first post in Brittonic. Be sure to make it a belter. This…Jul 6, 15:13
    • Andy Ellis on Too Tight To Mention: “….even if this genetic heritage is invisible and rarely acknowledged. Surely given recent scientific advances in DNA sampling and technology…Jul 6, 14:35
    • James on The Con Merchant: “Nice to see the Rev named this post after “Aidan”….Jul 6, 14:31
    • Mark Beggan on Too Tight To Mention: “And Edinburgh is the branch office.Jul 6, 14:24
    • Mark Beggan on Too Tight To Mention: “Hey you’ve been Colonized twice.Jul 6, 14:22
    • Northcode on Too Tight To Mention: “It turns out Cináed mac Ailpín was described by the Irish annalists as rex Pictorum ‘King of the Picts’. In…Jul 6, 14:03
    • James on The Con Merchant: “Andy, I haven’t got tourettes. Fuck off.Jul 6, 12:44
    • Andy Ellis on Too Tight To Mention: “@Dan Yet more of your disingenuous misdirection on your part. Same old, same old. I’ve frequently taken issue with the…Jul 6, 12:31
    • TURABDIN on Too Tight To Mention: “DUCK.AI ON AN OVERVIEW of MONEY LAUNDERING in London London is often referred to as a major hub for money…Jul 6, 12:19
    • Dan on Too Tight To Mention: “@Anne Unless there’s been a change in the last 6 months, that’s a different Liz Lloyd. https://www.thenational.scot/news/24712043.liz-lloyd-responds-liz-lloyd-gets-top-job-keir-starmer/Jul 6, 11:43
    • Aidan on Too Tight To Mention: “@Dan – it’s a fine article by Barrhead boy. I particularly liked the description of the “vicious” attacks by independence…Jul 6, 11:32
    • Captain Caveman on Too Tight To Mention: “@Aidan So is it the definitively the case that Baird’s petition to the UN has officially been rebuffed/rejected? If so,…Jul 6, 11:19
    • Anne on Too Tight To Mention: “I believe L.L.also works as a policy advisor for the Labour government.All her past efforts are bringing home the gravy.Will…Jul 6, 11:12
    • Captain Caveman on The Con Merchant: ““This is quite the corner of concentrated wit and wisdom…” Well, quite. There’s something ghastly yet inexorably compelling about it…Jul 6, 11:12
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: “Sorry, Dan, nothing personal, but I can’t let that one go unanswered. “Over the decades, 5.5 million folk in the…Jul 6, 10:54
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: ““Groundhog day” Clear case of cultural colonisation there, Dan. Anyway. Didn’t some famous boy once say that most people sincerely…Jul 6, 10:23
    • willie on Too Tight To Mention: “Tax Payer facing the bill to fund Peter Murrell’s legal defence against fraud charges screams the headlines very much typifies…Jul 6, 10:17
    • TURABDIN on Too Tight To Mention: “MEANWHILE elsewhere in the British Banana kingdom. https://archive.is/QImRZJul 6, 09:58
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: “Look at Starmer. Look at Farage. Haud oan though, that’s England. And this is Scotland. Nothing happens here in years…Jul 6, 09:53
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: “You can never hae too mony flags, x. You can use them tae keep warrum in the winter. Wrap one…Jul 6, 09:47
    • Sven on Too Tight To Mention: “100%Yes @ 09.33. OldJapanese saying, “Even monkeys fall out of trees”. Let’s just hope it’s a very long drop onto…Jul 6, 09:46
    • 100%Yes on Too Tight To Mention: “Liz Lloyd appointment, FFS what can you say. The SNP are the biggest threat to Scotland and our people, they…Jul 6, 09:33
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: ““same lunatic asylum as the rest of us” No way TH. There’s “lunatic asylums”, and then there’s lunatic asylums. Most…Jul 6, 09:27
    • Dan on Too Tight To Mention: “Lolz at waking up to another groundhog day with Andy accusing and complaining of others mischaracterising folk when for years…Jul 6, 09:24
    • Hatey McHateface on The Con Merchant: “This is quite the corner of concentrated wit and wisdom. The fat winker, the passed over for promotion, closet lurking,…Jul 6, 09:10
    • Andy Ellis on Too Tight To Mention: “Sarah, you’ve been banging on about the petition for months now. This – as we’re often reminded – the most…Jul 6, 08:58
    • Hatey McHateface on Too Tight To Mention: “Dial 999. Paramedic needed. Suspected overdose of castoreum 🙂Jul 6, 08:53
    • Andy Ellis on Too Tight To Mention: “You seem to have a real bee in your bonnet about Stu’s lack of support for “cunning plans for indy”.…Jul 6, 08:45
    • Andy Ellis on The Con Merchant: “Glandular…uh huh? That right…? Does that account for the tourette’s as well?Jul 6, 08:32
  • A tall tale



↑ Top