Concern About Rangers As A Going-Concern?


Yesterday, one of our regular contributors, Adam, provided news that Rangers may have finally persuaded an auditor to sign-off on their 2011 accounts.  With a raft of legal issues related to holding an Annual General Meeting late (and the need to have audited financial statements released prior to an AGM), it is important for Rangers and its directors that they do not add to their already complex compliance problems. Thus, it would make sense for directors Craig Whyte, Gary Withey, and Phil Betts to want to minimise any further damage.

Adam and I have had some”off-line” correspondence and I see him as someone willing to ‘call it as he sees it’. As one of this blog’s most vocal Rangers-supporting contributors, Adam and I often disagree on how to interpret data.  However, I can vouch for his scrupulous adherence to factual analysis. (Some would argue that we are both selective in the facts we use, but that is a separate issue). Therefore, unless this is an effort to flush out a source of their many leaks, it does seem probable that Rangers will finally release audited accounts shortly.

In reviewing various Rangers’ fan messageboards, it appears that this issue is the subject of a lot confusion and false information. The intolerance of dissenting voices within the online Rangers community has stifled contributions from accountants and the financially literate within their support. To help fill the factual vacuum, this post shall attempt to provide an explanation of an auditor’s role in context with Rangers’ current difficulties and the likely issues behind the delay.

First, we should address the unaudited numbers released by Rangers on 30 November.  The financial statements presented at that time are largely in accordance with accounts leaked to me several months ago.  It is unlikely that any major irregularities or changes to the basic financial statements will be reported. The issue is almost certainly related to the issue of “going-concern”.

The accounts of every company should include a statement from the board of directors indicating whether the accounts have been prepared on the basis of the business being a “going-concern”.  This basically means that the directors must make a statement that “there are no material uncertainties related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt about the ability of the company to continue as a going concern“.  In plainer English, they have to certify that they do not know of any events which would cause the company to file for insolvency within 12 months of the accounts being issued.  (Asset values would have to be written down to their current liquidation value if it is believed that the business will cease trading in the immediate future).

Obvious question: if it is the directors who certify the going-concern status of a company, why is there a fuss about the auditors signing off the accounts?

The chartered accountants tasked with auditing a company are required to provide an opinion of as to whether they agree with the directors or not.  There are  three basic boilerplate phrases that directors can choose from:

  • the use of the going concern basis of accounting is appropriate because there are no material uncertainties related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt about the ability of the company to continue as a going concern. This is the standard phrasing that accompanies most audits.  Its use- without auditor modification- signifies that the directors and auditors do not see a significant risk of insolvency within 12 months of the opinion.
  • the going concern basis is not appropriate. This is used when insolvency is a virtual certainty and that assets will be liquidated.
  • the use of the going concern basis is appropriate but there are material uncertainties related to events or conditions that may cast significant doubt about the ability of the company to continue as a going concern.  This is most likely to fit Rangers if the auditors are primarily focused just on the Big Tax Case. The probabilities of Rangers winning or losing the case can be debated and rely upon non-public information to form an opinion. Depending on what facts are available, your view of Rangers’ likelihood of success will vary dramatically. This provides the tissue behind which Grant Thornton (presuming that they are still Rangers’ auditors) can hide and claim that the outcome of the First Tier Tribunal is uncertain.

However, such an opinion would require disclosure of the risks. Rangers have previously only admitted that there is an on-going dispute with HMRC.  The club have not formally admitted that the scale of the tax assessments are unpayable. This blog provided the world with confirmation of the scale of the problem with our identification of where the Bain Papers could be found online [subsequently redacted on legal advice].  The Bain Papers claimed that Rangers faced bills of £49m.  This amount will be found to be high and the actual amounts should Rangers lose the case are more likely to be in the region of £36m.  (The difference is due to a technical argument over whether the EBT contributions should be considered pre- or post-tax).  The penalty would be determined in a separate tribunal and would likely be an additional £12-18m given the strength of evidence related to Rangers’ willfulness that exists.

With the FTT(T) scheduled to conclude (finally!) on 18 January, we can expect their findings to be published sometime in March or April.  (There is no set schedule.  They publish when they are ready.)  If the FTT(T) goes against Rangers, the amounts deemed liable become due and payable immediately.  HMRC can exercise discretion in enforcing payment during an active appeals process when payment would result in bankruptcy.  However, the right to demand payment is in HMRC’s hands and that cannot be ignored by an auditor.  The history of this case- Rangers’ evasiveness and extreme efforts to avoid admitting the truth when questioned may not bode well for HMRC’s patience.  Normally, a new owner would be cut some slack, but when the new owner has a questionable past himself, his involvement may be more hindrance than help.

If the auditors are more concerned about a basic lack of cash to fund Rangers’ immediate obligations, it is possible that they will indicate that a going-concern is not appropriate. This would require a write-down in Rangers’ asset values and would precipitate balance sheet technical insolvency.  Hence, it seems unlikely at this time. I suspect that Whyte will have secured some form of short-term funding prior to any audited statement release.

The impact for Rangers in having “modified in relation to going concern” audited accounts is that they will have to release quarterly financial statements to the public.  This would make it very difficult for Whyte’s ‘below the radar’ style to continue. Number crunchers would be able to discern how Whyte is financing Rangers- questions over whether Whyte has made good on his contractual promises to invest £6.7m would be answered.  Whyte’s record on paying suppliers would become transparent. Using cash saved by failing to remit the correct PAYE, NIC, and VAT amounts to HMRC on time would not only be obvious, but would become a legal hazard under quarterly reporting. In short, Whyte and his fellow directors would lose a lot of flexibility.

There are many mysteries surrounding Whyte  & Co. Their reasons for buying Rangers at an enterprise value at which few others can see them realise a profit is the central issue. Their baffling behaviour in the last seven months has set debate raging as to whether they possess a financial acumen unseen in Scottish business or whether they are incompetents who are in over their heads. A modified opinion from an auditor is unlikely to provide an explicit answer to that question, but we will certainly look for clues within the footnotes.

About rangerstaxcase
I have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications are for one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

2,050 Responses to Concern About Rangers As A Going-Concern?

  1. CMC says:

    If Whyte was to appeal any verdict by the eff tee tee (tee), what’s the (Latin term for score)??

  2. jean says:

    Dave B says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:16 am

    BB would send me to sleep! and thank god for laptops too:)

  3. jean says:

    Well I’m off to bed guys ……Tomorrows another day and all that! Hope you all have a good night:)

  4. OnandOnandOnand says:

    Corsica

    Publish the letter from Companies House that says that they are aware of CW’s past. Anonise it

  5. corsica says:

    gunnerb says:

    06/01/2012 at 12:11 am

    corsica says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:05 am

    Edit ….”“I promise to tell the truth but it is up to you to check it”; “I promise to tell you everything but I can’t be held responsible, if I forget to tell you something”; “it’s up to you to check everything yourself and you can’t rely on anything I say”; etc.”
    _________________________________________________________________________

    Caveat Emptor….its like buying a used car from a dodgy dealer…hmmm
    ******************
    Indeed, thank you. I was trying to keep it simple as per our new plain english rules (see above).

    I’m with Jean on the cricket…except I would rather watch paint dry!:)

    Goodnight all.

  6. andy says:

    CMC says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:11 am
    Many felt in their bones that HMRC would settle for about £7-10M.

    Aside from an all out win, what straws to Rangers fans have to clutch onto now??
    ____________________

    Apparently its a timmy conspiracy that they are not allowed to do a deal when everyone else has

  7. Dave B says:

    jean says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:19 am

    Siddle just did a great “leg cutter”.

    She’s still sleeping!

    And to think I was complaining about trolling this afternoon!

  8. Slimshady says:

    Jean

    Your philosophy is similar to mine which is – assume everyone else is smarter than you are, that way you won’t be disappointed and, quite often, you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

    Onand x 3 – your comment whilst not intended to be patronising, was very patronising x 3

    And to close on a lighter note, quote from Alastair McCoist on the BBC website (funny, I thought he wasn’t talking to them)
    “Jelavic is a little bit better… the groin injury is not as bad as it was….too early to say whether he will be available for our Scottish Cup tie at Arbroath”

    Well it’s not too early for me say it for you Alastair, Jela won’t be available for your Scottish Cup tie at Arbroath – he’s the only valuable thing the MBB has left in his possession apart from the floating charge, so Nikita will be wrapped in the proverbial r,w&b cotton wool until QPR / Birmingham / Leeds / Colchester finally sign on the dotted line….. Mark my words

  9. steven doyle says:

    let the january sales commence

  10. rab says:

    MWD on 05/01/2012 at 8:02 pm said:

    ====================================

    As a few regular posters backed up my comments, i guess we will have to leave it to the readers to decide whos argument was ripped apart.

    Regards my right of reply, my problem was more with being pre warned that my response was invalid. But you should feel free to jump in and respond to any discussion you want with personal insults

  11. Ian Ferguson says:

    Hugh McEwan says:

    05/01/2012 at 6:47 pm

    rangerstaxcase says:
    05/01/2012 at 6:13 pm

    ==========================

    No one ever said that they, or anyone else, was not entitled to have or express an opinion.

    I took your advice and ignored them, it’s your blog so your rules.

    However that does not mean that I did not see the character who called himself curious onlooker continue with the snide digs and the trolling. Trolling is not disagreeing with people it is deliberately winding people up and using emotive terms to illicit a response.

    Putting :wee smiley face: at the end of it or falsely proclaiming that “Oh no, I was only joking, I’m the real victim here.” doesn’t change that.

    Nothing to do with being a Rangers supporter or a supporter of any other club. Everything to do with how you deal with other people.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    Hugh, EXACTLY,
    I don’t actually care if I am in a minority of ONE.

    I will try & explain what I mean & listen or read what the other guy is saying.

    If I find an area of agreement I will expand it, if not, I don’t mind agreeing to disagree.

    What I can’t be Ars*d with is a non reply, the ” I died a little, Wow just Wow, or tonight’s effort, about resisting posting IN A POST, no answer, just mince, then another load of posts on the same subject, it end’s up death by a thousand BORING repititions. or as you say a barb & a smiley, so that if pulled up about it it’s “oh poor me, you are picking on me or you can’t take a joke” with a fecken smiley.

    Maybe that is the object of the exercise, to dampen down the blog & bore the posters to a point they chuck it?

    How do you do they wee feckers 😉 if that didn’t work… B*gger.

  12. gunnerb says:

    A clip from Ranger media concerning disaffection with Whyte and I note the poster joined April last year.
    …………….

    “Could it be he is preparing us for the worse case scenario.
    Treated different from every one else, and being made an example is what we have been going through for years as Fans .Murray and his cronies put us in this mess,I am sure Whyte is the man to take us through this.
    We as Fans must stick together, and if Administration comes then we must and will deal with it,and come back even Stronger .
    I will support the Rangers till the day I die ,and I am sure they will be here when I am gone .
    Follow Follow. ”
    _____________________

    Got to admire the forward planning if nothing else.

  13. TheBlackKnight says:

    Ian Ferguson on 06/01/2012 at 12:43 am

    I don’t believe that warrants a response

  14. TheBlackKnight says:

    Ian Ferguson on 06/01/2012 at 12:43 am
    😉

  15. gunnerb says:

    Dave B says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:27 am

    jean says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:19 am

    Siddle just did a great “leg cutter”.

    She’s still sleeping!

    And to think I was complaining about trolling this afternoon!
    __________________________________________________________

    He is the only danger to Sachin…given the scores it will be a long drawn out 100 but I expect he will get there.. with enough partners…and SOooo off topic that its now bed time..:-)

  16. Dave B says:

    gunnerb says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:48 am

    Tendulkar on 50.

    Her Ladyship has awoken.

    Is electric blanket on?

    Bottle of water?

    Time for bed…

  17. OnandOnandOnand says:

    Slimshady says:

    06/01/2012 at 12:36 am

    Jean

    Your philosophy is similar to mine which is – assume everyone else is smarter than you are, that way you won’t be disappointed and, quite often, you’ll be pleasantly surprised.

    Onand x 3 – your comment whilst not intended to be patronising, was very patronising x 3

    ____________

    I apologise X 3

  18. Johnboy says:

    If that Rangers Supporters Association report is correct, then it appears Whyte has told them on two occasions: “It would not be the end of the world if Rangers Football Club PLC did NOT survive an administration event.”
    He’s telling them straight that he’s about to head down NewCo Avenue.
    I hope Hector is paying attention . . .

  19. CMC says:

    I like cricket and I think the majority don’t for 2 reasons.

    1. They don’t know the rules and have no wish of knowing them as……
    2. It’s perceived to be an elitist sport

    In saying that, I prefer art that purely is pleasing on the eye, rather than cos one knows about and understands the concept that the artist is wanting to construe.

  20. reilly1926 says:

    I might be wrong but was MBB not banned from being a company director for not producing satisfactory accounts on time and for unpaid taxes ?

  21. wattyler says:

    TheBlackKnight says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:47 am

    Ian Ferguson on 06/01/2012 at 12:43 am😉
    ——–
    :)

  22. TheBlackKnight says:

    reilly1926 on 06/01/2012 at 1:07 am said:
    I might be wrong but was MBB not banned from being a company director for not producing satisfactory accounts on time and for unpaid taxes ?
    ==================================
    if The Whyte Knight can’t remember in Court what chance have you got? :)

  23. Ian Ferguson says:

    rangerstaxcase says:

    05/01/2012 at 7:57 pm

    Billy McCafferty

    You could well be right that Adam was just the “reasonable” manifestation of someone trying to mix it up here.

    What the other guises lacked was an extremely detailed knowledge of Rangers finances.

    Either way, it didn’t bother me. As long as he argued- as he did- with facts and data, that was fine.

    The other characters? No doubt Eddie is a troll and we will not be hearing from him again. There are some digital fingerprints left by the various attackers. In many cases, it is possible to positively determine that individuals are distinct and separate. Other times we can prove that personalities are in fact belonging to one person. And of course, at times we do not have the data to be conclusive.

    So I think that there is more that one person behind the monikers mentioned.
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    I don’t think Adam is a Troll, I don’t agree that he is one person though…. cof, cof.

    When he is on stats he is very good explaining figures & correlations & highlighting the facts that don’t add up. Also on things like hidden items in declared club results & how the clubs present unbalanced, but acceptable results to the powers that be , Here he is in his element.

    When he was opposing the Phil Mac October stuff he was on the ball, in that personage he brings a lot to the table.

    It is his doppelgänger who is a pain.

    When he plays the hurt innocent or refuses to answer facts, by dying a little, or having a wow just wowmoment he is a pain in the a*se.

    I think there are a few who deserve more criticism than him. & are trolls.

    I would prefer he sticks to his factual contributions if he comes back instead of the other junk.

  24. Barcabhoy says:

    Whyte may be planning going down the Newco route, however he won’t be on the board of a Newco and neither will Withey or Ali Russell.

    The extract below is from the SFA articles of association, and is on pages 96 and 97 section 10 , point (10)

    http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/resources/documents/SFAPublications/SFAHandbook/09Articles.pdf

    The Board must be satisfied that any such person is fit and proper to hold such position within Association Football. The Board hereby reserves its discretion as to whether or not such a person is fit and proper, as aforesaid, after due consideration of all relevant facts, which the Board has in its possession and knowledge, including the undernoted list which is acknowledged to be illustrative and not exhaustive:-

    (10) he has been a director of a club in membership of any National Association which
    has undergone an insolvency event within the five year period preceding the said insolvency event.

  25. Tommy says:

    from the RSA meeting with Chairman Craig Whyte –

    “No scope for negotiating a settlement with HMRC due to the criticism they have had from MPs and the Media about some high-profile “deals”. That means the case could take even more time to resolve as any outcome is likely to be appealed by either party”.

    I understood Whyte was quoted in the rags a week or so ago that he was in discussion with HMRC on a daily basis – thus giving hope to the Peepul of a meaningful settlement. What is the point of Media House going to the trouble of telling the nation this good news only for the Marty Feldman lookalike to say the opposite to the very same audience at the first opportunity?

  26. JoeMc says:

    George A on 06/01/2012 at 12:10 am said:

    I suspect that the old s177 or it’s successor relates to ‘group relief’ which still exists today. It’s not relevant to rangers as you can only group relieve current year losses and not carried forward losses that rangers will have accumulated throughout the Murray years.

    The restriction I’m referring to is in the context of the hive down/up being suggested earlier today. Essentially if rangers has 60m of losses and transfers the trade and assets of the club to newsub of wavetower but leaves behind liabilities such as £50+m due to tax man then £50m of the losses would be extinguished.

    This obviously ignores the legalities of asset stripping a company without some form of insolvency procedure – i’d imagine this is surely illegal/contrary to company law etc but I’m not a lawyer.

  27. BLF says:

    With respect to pre-pack admin/newco, just so I’m clear what is being suggested:

    Whyte has currently inversted ~£23m into Rangers, presumably in the form of soft loans.

    He sets up Newco and puts Rangers into administration after the FTT(T) concludes.

    Whyte makes a bid to the administrator for Ibrox, Murray Park and the copyright etc associated with the Rangers brand in exchange for the monies owed to him.

    Assuming no counter offer, Whyte has bought “Rangers FC” debt free for £23m. The only down side is they have to start in SFL3 (assuming they get elected into the league!).

  28. stunney says:

    gunnerb (quoting an FFer):

    “I will support the Rangers till the day I die ,and I am sure they will be here when I am gone .
    Follow Follow. ””

    It’ll be awfully funny if RFC dies before he does.

    Johnboy: “If that Rangers Supporters Association report is correct, then it appears Whyte has told them on two occasions: “It would not be the end of the world if Rangers Football Club PLC did NOT survive an administration event.”
    He’s telling them straight that he’s about to head down NewCo Avenue.”

    Yup, spotted that. However, I do not get the sense that the C(o)unt of Motherwellian Gestation is really sure what exact garden path he will lead The People up yet. Everything about his modus operandi to date has been shambolic, which suggests he likes keeping his options open and has a dreadful habit of doing things two minutes after the last moment.

    As for his confidence about the Light Blues’ cash flow, this is belied by the fact he admits that the minus-17-point turnaround specialist extraordinaire, Sir Alistair McCoist, will not be getting the full amount of income from player sales in the present transfer window. A sensible question would be, why not? And a sensible answer would be, because the cash flow’s shyte and we’ve got no proper bank credit and we’ll have Close breathing hot air down my badly knotted necktie if I handed it all to yon numpty! Get real, People!

    As an earlier poster suggested, I have long held the belief that CW’s source of takeover funding—the 18 million—-was directly or indirectly associated with Lloyd’s itself, who went with him so that they could in effect exercise their loan security via an obscure 3rd party rather than do the dirty work themselves in the full glare of adverse publicity. And so I’d love to know if Group is encumbered with a preferential charge tied ultimately to Lloyd’s, as a sort of replacement for the charge they once held over The Rangers, and to make sure they’d be repaid by Group once a historic insolvency event crystallised in southwest Glasgow. Though that is still unevidenced speculation on my part.

    Anyone up for some historic Arbroath Haddies this weekend? :-)

  29. Jonnybhoy says:

    Just a couple of thoughts, is there any legal obligation on auditors to make their concerns about the company known to the shareholders in order that they may afford them some level of protection from vultures like TGEF.

    Also this hiving business – regardless of how he does it the plan is still to get all the assets of oldco to newco then let oldco die therby shafting the small shareholders?

    How will he capitaise newco – what numbers are we talking about?

    How will he get a line of credit from an institution that doesn’t want to break your legs?

    Is newco’s business plan sustainable or will they be back baws deep in debt in a couple of years?

    Is HRMRC aware of all the engame gambits? Are they powerless?

  30. duggie73 says:

    Let’s try to keep this simple.

    The only asset Whyte is interested in is Ibrox.
    Ibrox shows up in accounts as worth (iirc) around £120mil.
    Whyte has spent around £18mil during his time at Rangers.

    Whyte will emerge after RFC’s insolvency with control over an asset which shows a book value of £120mil having paid around £18mil for it, with no associated debts.

    The appearance of a greater value than its true resale value is only of use to a scamster. Imo, it seems reasonable to suggest that Ibrox will continue to be owned by a Whyte and associates owned company.

    There’s no reason to expect Whyte to have any future involvement with a NewCo other than to charge it rent for the use of Ibrox.
    Player contracts are not transferrable from old RFC to new Co- it is impossible for the 2 clubs to simultaneously hold a license.
    While Whyte may wish to cash in on players by selling, this may well prove impossible as buying clubs are aware that when old Rangers goes under, these players are available as free transfers.
    ____________________

    (As a footnote….
    The hypothetical new co starts at the cost of buying the Rangers name from an insolvency practitioner with no assets whatsoever and faces paying whatever Whyte chooses to charge as rental for Ibrox as an additional cost per year compared to the old club, between £1mil and £3mil are the figures so far suggested.
    In my completely unqualified opinion, which goes against the grain of what the overwhelming majority of posters assume, New co is a bad enough business proposition to make it rather presumptious to assume that it is a guaranteed dead cert to happen. There’s just no money to be made from running it. So only a fool (or a fan) would attempt to run it.

    Were one to attempt to, it seems to me to be more likely than not that the combination of no European football for 3 years, a near complete change of playing personnel, increased overheads, a possible 3rd division start and the trauma of the death of the old club would make the new club unrecognisable to anyone- including current Rangers fans- as a seamless continuation of the same institution, while anyone attempting to run it likely faces accusations of involvement with the previous Ibrox regimes
    For all intents and purposes, Rangers as we know it ceases to exist with the winding up of the old club.)

  31. Jonnybhoy says:

    “New co is a bad enough business proposition to make it rather presumptious to assume that it is a guaranteed dead cert to happen. There’s just no money to be made from running it. So only a fool (or a fan) would attempt to run it”

    – so who is he going to rent iPox to?

  32. Torquemada says:

    duggie73 says:

    06/01/2012 at 6:05 am

    Let’s try to keep this simple.
    __________________________________________

    It may be simple, Duggie, but I think that’s a much more likely scenario than the ones postulating about Newco galloping debt-free into next year’s SPL — or even the following year’s.

    And it gave me a stirring in the loins! Woohoo! (It’s been a while! lol!)

  33. tenerifetim says:

    Slimshady says:
    06/01/2012 at 12:36 am

    I can just see Craigie sitting there with Jellylegs ,chained up like a gimp, stroking him a la Smeagol/Gollum saying “My precious, My Precious ” as Mordor starts to crumble all around him !
    Meanwhile Hector/Gandalf is rushing towards him on his white charger ( now that would be irony!) to deliver the final coup d’etat !

    Arbroath Haddies ?- Smokin’ !!

  34. duggie73 says:

    Jonnybhoy says:
    06/01/2012 at 6:34 am
    – so who is he going to rent iPox to?
    +++++++++++++++
    It’s newco or no-one.
    In theory it’s a good move for a scamster, in practise….well, the jury’s still out seems an appropriate phrase….

  35. Tommy says:

    If a fan consortium took over The Rangers then they might find it much cheaper to ground share at Firhill, Hampden or Broadwood. That might bring Whyte & Co down to earth with a bang regarding rent levels. Remember, Ibrox needs some £12 – 15 m work done on the stadium in the immediate future, so that cost would have to be met by the MBB before he could even consider renting out the ground.

  36. The Whisperer says:

    “calm bull” the common denominator

  37. Night Terror says:

    Gwared says:
    05/01/2012 at 7:19 pm

    Rab,
    “A competitive league of crap teams is not the answer. We need to improve the footballers in this country.”
    Two sentences which destroys todays arguments, everyone should try and get as good as us rather than dilute our product.
    ——————————————————————————————————-
    I would say it doesn’t even address the earlier argument. Nobody is going to argue that improving footballers in this country isn’t a worthwhile endeavour, but we’ve been saying this for decades and even if we did achieve an improvement, we should still be saying it.

    Even taking the “A competitive league of crap teams is not the answer” at face value – I’d prefer that to an uncompetitive league of crap teams, which is what we have had for a while, and particularly since both of the OF have started to operate more in the vicinity of their means.

    Anyway, is an uncompetitive league of better teams what should we be aiming for? Let’s assume Wotte and Cathro at the SFA spearhead a marked improvement in youth quality (of which I have genuinely high hopes – finally – not the same old ex-pros with the same old outmoded methods and stunted brains). How will this make the league more competitive if the OF still have a structural financial advantage and the Diddy Clubs are in such a state that they can’t afford to keep anyone decent they develop (cf Scott Allan & Dundee United)?

    I guess it all comes down to whether you support the best interests of Scottish football or are purely interested in the success of your club. I can understand the urge to protect the status quo if you support the team at the top of the tree, but that sort of attitude has been precisely what RFC have been so dispicably good at, and I find it perverse that Celtic fans would want to behave in a similar way once they see a chance to be the top dog after years of wailing at the unfairness of it all. From the viewpoint of a Diddy Club fan, can you at least understand that, looking in on the Old Firm, and looking from one to the other and back again, they both look pretty much the same?

  38. Wullie Langdon says:

    I have to take umbrage with Davie B pointing to the fact that TBK recounted and ammended Salvomontalbano suggestions for book/ film titles. He had an issue with him listing ‘An Inspector calls’….twice. Well he did….didn’t he?

  39. Night Terror says:

    V for Vendetta says:
    05/01/2012 at 9:22 pm

    Night Terror says:
    05/01/2012 at 12:33 pm
    ___________________

    Why now is it a once in a life-time chance? Is it because Rangers are skint?

    I don’t remember this clamour for reorganisation being mooted when Celtic were on their knees (Oh, by the way that was also in my lifetime). SEE WHERE I’M COMING FROM?

    No? Thought not!
    ————————————————————-
    Hmmm, finding it difficult to respond civilly, but here goes…

    Don’t be silly. Just because someone suggests something that isn’t to the glory of Celtic doesn’t mean they’re a Ranger. Suggesting, nay, insinuating it make you sound ridiculous – to me, at least. Just say clearly what you mean, why don’t you.

    I don’t remember a clamour last time either, because there wasn’t one – but then that was almost 20 years ago, and the league hadn’t been total crud for decades yet. Indeed, Scotland were still qualifying for the World Cup and the Scottish Premier Division was still around – you remember that got reorganised, yes? Not that it made things much different or any better. I’m of the view that Scottish football needs a decent level of competition as well as a decent level, and given the choice of one or the other I’d, regretfully, choose the former. If Old Firm fans are happy finishing 30-odd points ahead of the best Diddy Club decade upon decade, forgive me if I view that as a problem, and a reason to think the OF may be happy to allow Scottish football to be emaciated so long as they retain unchallengeable superiority.

    Anyway, if you’re keen on the unfounded insinuation towards the poster rather than engaging with the argument, why stop at Rangers Sock Puppet or whatever you’ve imagined? Really go for it. Let it all out, V. You’ll surely feel better.

    One of the Old Firm are significantly weakened and lacking in influence – it’s an opportunity to improve Scottish football without the OF in lockstep resistance. And in fact I’m glad it’s Rangers that are the weakest, as if it were they and not Celtic who might be the last OF standing, I have no doubt they would use that position to try and kill Celtic and shore up their position of total control of Scottish football. I may be naive, but I slightly higher expectations of Celtic. Your reaction notwithstanding.

  40. Night Terror says:

    duggie73 says:
    06/01/2012 at 6:05 am
    In my completely unqualified opinion, which goes against the grain of what the overwhelming majority of posters assume, New co is a bad enough business proposition to make it rather presumptious to assume that it is a guaranteed dead cert to happen. There’s just no money to be made from running it. So only a fool (or a fan) would attempt to run it.

    Were one to attempt to, it seems to me to be more likely than not that the combination of no European football for 3 years, a near complete change of playing personnel, increased overheads, a possible 3rd division start and the trauma of the death of the old club would make the new club unrecognisable to anyone- including current Rangers fans- as a seamless continuation of the same institution, while anyone attempting to run it likely faces accusations of involvement with the previous Ibrox regimes
    For all intents and purposes, Rangers as we know it ceases to exist with the winding up of the old club.)
    ———————————————————————–
    Would that it were, Duggie, would that it were.

    Sadly, much as I would delight in such an outcome (for either, or *dreams* both of the OF, for the sake of neutrality) and wish it would happen, I cannot see it.

    It will be interesting to see how loyal the RFC1873 support remain if they do take a dip into the lower divisions.

  41. JD says:

    The way Wee Craigie is going he will name the book himself
    A Boy named Sue.

  42. Night Terror says:

    Oh @Ian Ferguson, sorry if I offended you. My resistance to replying to your post was more to do with that particular strand of discussion being shouted down as being off track and a distraction from the facts of the tax case, and I had just previously agreed, along with one of my fellow debators, to pipe down for a bit and let the real discussion take place.

    Nothing personal against you – you made some cogent points with which I thoroughly disagreed, but had, I thought, touched on them already. If it wasn’t so bloody difficult to find old posts on here I’d go and reexamine it. Feel free to repost if you really want a response now that this thread has been superseded.

  43. duggie73 says:

    Night Terror says
    Would that it were, Duggie, would that it were.
    ++++++++++++++++++
    Would that what were? Genuinely don’t know what you’re disagreeing with man.

  44. Night Terror says:

    @Duggie
    Apols. Must have listened to more Robert Robinson than you, I guess.

    “If only that were true, Duggie, if only that were true”.

  45. duggie73 says:

    Night Terror-
    nope, still don’t get what actual part of the original post you are saying is untrue, or won’t happen, RR, RIP besides…
    Could you clarify?

  46. Night Terror says:

    @Duggie
    “still don’t get what actual part of the original post you are saying is untrue”

    Err, all of it?

    How about “New co is a bad enough business proposition to make it rather presumptious to assume that it is a guaranteed dead cert to happen. There’s just no money to be made from running it.”

    A debt-free newco with the fanbase of the current RFC could make money in any Scottish Division whilst being successful. Sure, they couldn’t be run in the way they have in the past, but there’s a massive latent demand from people willing to pay several hundred pounds per year to watch 11 men in blue, red and white, calling themselves Rangers, and blootering a ball around the various football pitches of Scotland.

    I wouldn’t preclude a fool or a fan (the two not being mutually exclusive) attempting it, but I could see someone much more savvy also licking their lips at picking up an obligation-free Rangers business. And the business wouldn’t have to turn a profit for it to be a profitable investment for the savvy owner.

  47. TheBlackKnight says:

    Wullie Langdon on 06/01/2012 at 2:12 pm said:
    I have to take umbrage with Davie B pointing to the fact that TBK recounted and ammended Salvomontalbano suggestions for book/ film titles. He had an issue with him listing ‘An Inspector calls’….twice. Well he did….didn’t he?

    =====================================

    Lol Wullie! Twice so far!!!! Duly noted and amended

    ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

    List of book titles/ film names thus far:

    The Side Note
    Dreams and Downfall: The demise of SS Dignity (Chapter One: Struth! Bowler hats were obligatory)
    Craig Whyte, My Part In His Downfall
    The Unlikely Billionaire
    The Truth Was in The P[L]ies All Along [We just Could Not Swallow it]
    The Rise and Fall of The Doughman Empire
    Decline and Fall
    Occam’s Eleven
    Exodus 2
    Firm & Infirm
    Silence of the Bams
    Strictly Business
    The RTC Identity
    Dummies guide to EBTs
    Establishment Tradition (a sudden demise)
    A Tale of Two Diddies
    Death and Taxes
    Folly, Folly
    The Demise of Dignity
    The Good, the Bad and the Fugly
    An Inspector Calls (twice)
    Gone with the Wind[bag]
    Maybes Aye, Maybes Naw.
    The McCoist/Lennon Season
    It’s All Lennon’s Fault
    Out of the frying pan,
    They think it’s all over
    He came, he saw, he paid no cvnt
    Only An Excuse!
    Still Game !
    It will be all Whyte on the night?
    1% TRUTH IS ALL IT TOOK
    To kill a dirty club
    Minty Moonbeams and Whyte Lies
    The Satanic Verses HMRC
    The men who stare at goats….
    Blue Fuds
    Triple Wood: The Balvennie incident; Tinker,Tailor,Utter wanker? ; touting for freebies
    Blue, Whyte and Dead / Dead, Whyte & Blue
    The Silence of the Succulent Lambs
    Pretty Fly For a Whyte Guy
    The Silence of the Succulent Lambs
    (H)undercover
    (H)unforgiven
    Lies, damned lies and Scottish football journalism
    Little Whyte Lies
    Rangers dEBTs
    Swindler’s list?
    The great f*** you all swindle
    The King Whisperers: Power Behind the Throne
    The Loan Ranger(and Pronto)
    Rangerstaxcase.con
    The Truth about Charlie
    E.B.T. (The extra big testicle)
    Dial M for Murray
    Rangers on a train
    Waiting for Hector ( Godot )
    All the non residents men!
    Who wants to be a Billionaire?
    Whyte mischief!
    Far from the Taxing crowd
    Double Identity!
    The taxman always rings twice!
    The man in the Whyte suit.
    The Whyte Runner
    Alias Smith and Whyte
    Disclosure!
    Hectors House
    The Borrowers
    Surrender No Tax
    Fit & Proper
    Rangers FC – Readies
    Her Majesty’s Service
    If They Knew Their History…
    Good For Scottish Football
    Champions On The Never Never
    Champions On Tick
    No One Left To Bail Us Out
    He’s Not The Messiah
    Rangers – Off The Radar
    “You’d Be Within Your Rights To Tell Me To F*ck Off”
    Credit To The National Game
    THE GREAT ESCAPE
    99%CRAP
    The Story of Craig Whyte: If I Was A Rich Man
    Mr Murrays Media: See No Evil, Hear No Evil
    Hullo, Hullo….Bye, Bye…….
    The crook, the thief, his wife and……………….
    Only Fools and Halfwits
    The Cry was no Assessment.
    CW and The Floating Charge
    CW and The Chamber of Horrors
    CW and The Prisoner of Edmiston Drive
    CW and The Goblet of Love / Loving Cup
    CW and The Order of the Eastern Star
    CW and The Half-Wit Sportswriter(s)
    CW and The Deathly Tax Tribunals
    Six Degrees of Desperation
    The Daft Man’s Contract
    A Pound and Two Noughts
    Drowning By Numbers
    RTC – A web of Denial, Lies, Exposure & Truth
    Gorillas in the midst…..
    The Lyin, The Stitch up & The £25 mil in the Wardrobe? – The Chronicals of Ibrokes
    The Liar, The Which name? and The Warchest
    to kill a mocking turd
    Fahrenheit 1873
    Indignity
    Dirty Laundry
    The Death by the Taxman
    On Borrowed Time
    See No Peepil, Hear no Peepil
    False Profit
    It’s Fun To Pay-up To HMRC
    When Murray Met Paulie
    Vatman and Robbin
    Close Encounters of the Fixed Charge Kind
    Our Man Craig
    The Abyss
    billy liar
    Fiddler on the hoof
    The Whyte Washing Machine – From front loading to liquidation story.
    Down to Division 2: Electric Boogaloo?
    R.IP. R.F.C. by R.T.C.
    How the West Went Bust
    From no danger at all – to no Rangers at all
    No dangers to No Rangers

  48. Moomins says:

    Night Terror says:

    06/01/2012 at 3:36 pm

    A debt-free newco with the fanbase of the current RFC could make money in any Scottish Division whilst being successful. Sure, they couldn’t be run in the way they have in the past, but there’s a massive latent demand from people willing to pay several hundred pounds per year to watch 11 men in blue, red and white, calling themselves Rangers, and blootering a ball around the various football pitches of Scotland.

    History shows that when RFC are unsuccessful, then the fans desert in droves. (see the majority of the 80’s).

    What makes you think they’d continue supporting the team in the 3rd division with no prospect of winning trophies? There is latent demand to watch a team winning trophies, and earn the bragging rights that goes with it – without that I suspect the Rangers support will disintegrate pretty damn quickly.

  49. Night Terror says:

    Moomins says:
    10/01/2012 at 1:40 pm

    Night Terror says:

    06/01/2012 at 3:36 pm

    A debt-free newco with the fanbase of the current RFC could make money in any Scottish Division whilst being successful. Sure, they couldn’t be run in the way they have in the past, but there’s a massive latent demand from people willing to pay several hundred pounds per year to watch 11 men in blue, red and white, calling themselves Rangers, and blootering a ball around the various football pitches of Scotland.

    History shows that when RFC are unsuccessful, then the fans desert in droves. (see the majority of the 80′s).

    What makes you think they’d continue supporting the team in the 3rd division with no prospect of winning trophies?
    —————————————-

    50k wouldn’t turn up in the 3rd, but enough people would turn up to see a winning team I reckon. When Rangers crowds slumped in the 80s, they were losing as often they were winning and not really playing for anything much. They’ll at least be winning regularly and challenging for trophies & titles Celtic have never won for 3 or so seasons.

  50. Night Terror says:

    Edit : Oh bollocks, forgot to edit the word “hundred”.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 23,484 other followers

%d bloggers like this: