Rangers Have gone into Administration

HMRC statement: "We can't discuss specific cases for legal reasons but tax that has been deducted at source from the wages of players and support staff such as ground keepers and physios must be paid over to HMRC. Any business that fails to meet that basic legal requirement puts the survival of the business at risk."

it's just dawned on me that we'll maybe win the league when im on holiday now :| solipsist csc.

Accies got a points deduction that relegated us for failing to play a game (players went on strike because they repeatedly never got paid). So Rangers better get a similar punishment if they fail to play at the weekend.

Kinda wish there was an Old Firm game coming up - it'd be mayhem though no doubt

£9m in unpaid tax, VAT and NI since the takeover, HMRC petition for administration had nothing to do with the potential £49m big tax case.

crooked cheating cunts

Bloody hell, I'm actually a bit shocked by that. There's no excuse for not being able to pay VAT.

My face hurts, can't do much more smiling. But I'll try.

There's a world record number of league titles to win, man (xp)

cant smile too much as they will be back as nu-rangers. woulda been better if HMRC had put them into administration, then they would be fucked

they're the floaters of football, no matter how hard you flush they rise back to the top (league)

Scotzine reporting that Rangers' appointed administrators Duff and Phelps are owners of a company called Merchant Recovery. Craig Whyte is a director of Merchant Recovery.

Patter Merchant Recovery morelikeaimrite

is that legal?

http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=2111&newsCategoryID=36&newsID=9316

Shocking statement from the SFA full of regret about the position Rangers "find themselves" in WTF. They put themselves there. No criticism of financial doping. No criticism of failing to pay tax. No sympathy for creditors (including member clubs!).

Simon Kuper had a good piece somewhere recently criticising Bayern Munich as a blot on the game - his idea was that clubs never fail completely, they can always be reconstituted if necessary, so any club living within its means, building sustainable revenues, paying tax, etc. doesn't deserve to be taken seriously.

the sfa cant turn round and say what you want onimo. you wouldnt like it if they criticised the running of your club.

I don't know, they've found it quite easy to criticise Hearts over their finances.

with lots of clubs budgets for this season and next season being based on tv money, money owed by rangers, relying on games against rangers et al, a few clubs might just go bust themselves and its highly unlikely they could just reinvent themselves and start over as they aren't an 'institution' like rangers

And that isn't a reason for the SFA criticise them?

well true. but one rule for big clubs etc

I guess it's too much to hope that Rangers get reinvented as something better, like half-a-dozen smaller, less hateful clubs?

paul murray is now saying he will try to buy rangers from the administrators. So Whyte wont be able to just buy them debt free for buttons and start nu-rangers

pfunk I sometimes think you're on crack. The SFA and SPL have been hammering Hearts for their financial problems. They've just had to pay a £500k tax bill while RANGERS OWE THEM £800K. It is the SFA's job to protect its members. All of its members. Not just "Scottish institutions".

The SFA's statement is a disgraces.

-s

pfunk I sometimes think you're on crack.

that kind of personal abuse is really uncalled for

But I've a sneaking suspicion we might get Hodgson For England after all.

you turned traitor you cunt?

― pfunkboy (Algerian Goalkeeper), Wednesday, February 8, 2012 10:02 PM (6 days ago)

lol

it was a friendly scottish cunt!

"Apparently, from 1997 to 2011, Rangers spent £160M more than they earned and, in addition, dodged a further £45M tax from the use of EBT."

anyway ismael apologies if you were offended by that

wait a min £160m? where did you get that quote from?

Heh no, don't worry xp - it was a bit of surprise, but I took it in the spirit intended (I hope)

I really need to remember to add emoticons when I'm joking. sorry bout that.

pfunk I sometimes think you're on crack ;)

;)

wait a min £160m? where did you get that quote from?

― pfunkboy (Algerian Goalkeeper)

mark donaldson on twitter. u.s. based journo.

BBC Scotland reported tonight David Murray lost £100M over three consecutive seasons.

Or rather Rangers under David Murray, amirite?

£160m over that period = £11.4m per season - that doesn't seem that outrageous when the current owner said they're losing £10m a season as recently as last week. They were £80m in debt under David Murray at one point - only reduced to £30m when Murray's company underwrote a £51m share issue.

Mark Donaldson's wrong about the tax though, they didn't dodge £45m in tax. Their total bill for misusing EBTs is likely to be around £45m but much of that is in penalties and interest. The dodged tax due to EBTs is closer to £25m over ten years.

Whyte's £9m unpaid in 9 months puts that in the shade imo.

£10m a year losses despite cuts is quite astonishing.

That's not so outlandish xp in a business where you're forever hearing at other clubs about the owner 'putting money into the club' with only the occasional reference to it being a loan, rather than a gift. If all these clubs had to pay it back (I assume Murray took a shedload out before he left?) they wouldn't look so healthy.

Are there any clubs living within their means? I think pretty much all scottish clubs owe debts, even if it's to the owners(as in Accies case) rather than banks or whatever.

also hehe xp

Can I just say that this is all brilliantly hilarious.

yes you can

https://p.twimg.com/Alo8fWQCIAAnZhV.jpg

Are there any clubs living within their means? I think pretty much all scottish clubs owe debts

Celtic have been in profit two years running and have reduced debt to a very manageable £7m (from a high of more than three times that in the MO'N era). We also have a first team worth imo much more than it cost. Hence our CEO saying we don't need Rangers.

I'd still like to shift a dozen players on, mind, and so would he. Contracts can be a pain in the arse, unless you're in administration.

I've covered it on the Finances of Football thread, but a club (like any business) should be able to carry debt so long as they can service the interest. With interest rates so low, arguably not having debt is a corporate failure to some degree because they should be able to generate better returns than their interest payments by borrowing to increase capacity or whatever (may not apply to Scotland).

Man Utd ran for years with very little debt. That's what let the Glazers in - they realised the club had so much capacity to carry a debt that they were able to use that debt to fund their takeover, then let the club pay for it.