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 (mainly) Scottish political media digest and monitor, which also offers its own commentary. (More)

    Stats: 6,718 Posts, 1,214,083 Comments

  • Recent Posts

  • Archives

  • Categories

  • Tags

  • Recent Comments

    • Ian Brotherhood on Signal and noise: “Sorry Sarah, didn’t see your reply until now. I suppose we could ask it about what it does know about…Mar 14, 23:42
    • Alf Baird on Signal and noise: “And with a decent franchise.Mar 14, 23:39
    • Anthem on Signal and noise: “GF. On the SNP, aye. On Independence naw. Events dear friend, Events.Mar 14, 22:11
    • Anthem on Signal and noise: “Sorry, but I think you are wrong. Scotland, as a nation, is older and has more independent history than England.…Mar 14, 21:44
    • Anthem on Signal and noise: “Yoon Scum. That’s your belief and you’re welcome to it. Almost 50% of the country don’t.Mar 14, 21:31
    • George Ferguson on Signal and noise: “@Sarah 6:47pm I know nobody wants to admit the ba is burst on Scottish Independence and the SNP.Mar 14, 20:11
    • sarah on Signal and noise: “This is extraordinary, IB. It comes across as rational, reasonable and informed – some MSP/MPs could do with Grok’s assistance.…Mar 14, 19:40
    • sarah on Signal and noise: “O/T and funny! Jim Sillars says that Sturgeon once said [in her usual charming and polite manner] to Margot Macdonald…Mar 14, 18:47
    • william campbell on Signal and noise: “It was pathetic to watch FM question time a couple of days ago. There she sat gurning behind Mr continuity…Mar 14, 18:46
    • Mia on The tint of rose: ““You’re (I feel deliberately now) misunderstanding Clause XXV” Now you are using the strategy of dishonesty to get around this,…Mar 14, 18:14
    • George Ferguson on Signal and noise: “After decades of Irish Republic strategy and many people dead. The Irish after all their Britnat hatred have handed over…Mar 14, 18:05
    • Xaracen on The tint of rose: “Aidan said; “@Xaracen – there is no distinction between constitutional law and domestic law, constitutional law is domestic law by…Mar 14, 16:40
    • George Ferguson on Signal and noise: “@Sarah 4:02pm Sure a 25% turnout but you can’t argue with the consistency of the SNP. Freebies that other people…Mar 14, 16:37
    • sarah on Signal and noise: “25% turnout. It’s not apathy, it is frustrated fury – a 75% vote for None of the Above.Mar 14, 16:02
    • Aidan on The tint of rose: “@Mia – again you’re (I feel deliberately now) misunderstanding Clause XXV. At the point at which the Treaty of Union…Mar 14, 15:57
    • George Ferguson on Signal and noise: “So my latest by election results are in, a wee council by election. An SNP win. Labour second and Reform…Mar 14, 15:32
    • Mia on The tint of rose: “@Aidan You said: “The treaty explicitly provides for the new parliament of Great Britain as the national legislative body” Nope.…Mar 14, 15:22
    • Young Lochinvar on Signal and noise: “Yes indeed. One to add to the risks section though; All the paid grifters who have made a cosy career…Mar 14, 15:19
    • Mia on The tint of rose: “@ Aidan You say: “It does not say anything about limiting the powers of the new parliament” And it does…Mar 14, 15:15
    • Mia on The tint of rose: “@ Aidan you say: It’s 180 degrees the other way” I disagree. It is as it is. You say: “The…Mar 14, 15:13
    • Mia on The tint of rose: “@ Aidan I have tried to reply to your comment several times now, but it comes back as being in…Mar 14, 15:06
    • Ian Brotherhood on Signal and noise: “Wow, yon ‘Grok’ is impressive. It answered this question in approximately 3 seconds. If you were a supporter of Scottish…Mar 14, 14:44
    • Aidan on The tint of rose: “No Mia, it’s 180 degrees the other way. The treaty required the two separate parliaments each to dispose of incompatible…Mar 14, 13:49
    • Mia on The tint of rose: ““If the authors of the ToU intended to impose that significant restriction, they would have done so explicitly” And they…Mar 14, 13:17
    • Young Lochinvar on Signal and noise: “Aha! Press reporting that SHE whose name shall not be uttered is still under investigation in Branchform. “Timing” again anyone?Mar 14, 13:09
    • Aidan on Signal and noise: “A combination of very little going on in the pro-Indy front, and the deluge of cranks and trolls who, like…Mar 14, 12:38
    • Aidan on The tint of rose: “@Mia – no it doesn’t stand to reason at all, that implication would have an enormous impact on future union…Mar 14, 12:31
    • Chas on Signal and noise: “Very few comments being posted on Wings nowadays. Even the nutters and cranks who posted umpteen times, every day, now…Mar 14, 11:36
    • agent x on Signal and noise: “I saw reports that Sturgeon had put her name forward for re-election in 2026. Was it published anywhere that she…Mar 14, 11:35
    • willie on Signal and noise: “So Swinney has had tea and biscuits with Eric Trump. Not bad for a man who only a few weeks…Mar 14, 11:25
  • A tall tale



↑ Top