this is a horrible sign for Scottish football, the SPL is dying fast and there's nothing anyone can do to prevent it. If Hearts weren't propped up by Romanov, we'd be talking about the second and third largest clubs in Scotland going into administration.
this is a horrible sign for Scottish football, the SPL is dying fast and there's nothing anyone can do to prevent it. If Hearts weren't propped up by Romanov, we'd be talking about the second and third largest clubs in Scotland going into administration.
the scottish league was a better league before rangers started illegally spending above their means and killing off competition.
It won't be a league full stop in a few years the way things are going... how interested do you think Sky Sports would be in a league that Celtic wins by 50 points every single season?
It won't be a league full stop in a few years the way things are going... how interested do you think Sky Sports would be in a league that Celtic wins by 50 points every single season?
sky sports gives the spl **** all in terms of money anyway.
£80 million isn't really anything to sneeze at, especially when some reports say ESPN and Sky would be able to get out of their contract should Rangers liquidate... they likely wouldn't pay half of what they currently are, even if a Newco is formed.
the scottish league was a better league before rangers started illegally spending above their means and killing off competition.
The "illegal" spending you are speaking about didn't happen until after Walter Smith was replaced by Dick Advocaat at the end of the 90's. So it was after Glasgow Rangers had "killed off the competition".
The debt of Glasgow Rangers is around £30m and is completely manageable and not a problem for the club.
The issue is about the tax case, where a previous owner bought a tax scheme from a law firm and applied it to the club. However, it does not fit the criteria to be applied to a football club and therefore it has meant it was illegal under UK tax law. Tax and National Insurance that should have been paid on players wages were not paid. That is a tax bill of £24m (£19m PAYE + £5m NI) that players should have paid on their wages, but didn't because of the system of the previous owner. That means the club is responsible. Compound interest is another £12m, and the penalty for avoidance would likely be another £20m. So that is £56m.
There has been talk since the start of the tax case that a number of Premier League clubs also bought this plan from Baxendale-Walker and have used it. The Telegraph ran a story again today saying up to 8 clubs in the Premier League have used it. Glasgow Rangers are a test case, if HMRC won then their next stop would apparently be a number of English clubs with the precedent and I'm sure some bills would be a lot more than the potential £56m they want from Glasgow Rangers!
HMRC have tried to overplay their hand though. The fact the case has dragged on for years has basically suffocated the club, and the position for the club is that it is best to enter administration now as they know they will come out of it quickly and on a very solid financial footing. That is unless HMRC purposely try to prolong the period of administration as a warning to other football clubs.
Glasgow Rangers have been in the wrong with the tax avoidance; however, until HMRC actually has the previous owner on criminal charges of tax evasion, I'll reserve judgement.
As for HMRC as an entity, they are a joke. Why would you pick a club that has limited income and £30m debt as a test case? They must have had a clear idea from the beginning how it was going to end.
But then again, they did let Vodafone walk away from their £6,000,000,000 tax bill for the price of a couple of dinners.
The best thing for the SPL bigger clubs hurting money wise would be to grovel to the EPL and hope they would let them in. even if they played in the Championship for a season or two and tried to make it out, they probably would do better money wise.
The best thing for the SPL bigger clubs hurting money wise would be to grovel to the EPL and hope they would let them in. even if they played in the Championship for a season or two and tried to make it out, they probably would do better money wise.
They would do better financially in the Championship, but a move to England will never happen.
The entire European football system needs to evolve, but it won't happen until the top teams break away, which is inevitable.
They would do better financially in the Championship, but a move to England will never happen.
The entire European football system needs to evolve, but it won't happen until the top teams break away, which is inevitable.
Which will ensure the demise of domestic football, including the 'big' teams'! The Euro Super League or whatever they wish to call it is the worst possible outcome for competitive football & its fans. I sincerely hope the Financial Fair Play rules will actually have enough teeth to quell this bollox. What would evolve the European football system is salary & transfer caps.
UEFA would never let it happen... except for tiny countries that can't afford their own league systems or the very special case of Derry City they'll never allow such a thing, at least not without the other 3 British FAs merging into one. Otherwise, what's stopping Ajax from joining the Bundeliga or Sporting/Porto from joining La Liga?
As for why they picked Rangers as a tax case... they're on the wrong side of the border for anyone in London to care about the impact
The richest clubs won't breakaway. They cannot live without the teams surrounding them in the immediate area of their country. A Super League would be a failure of epic proportions.
The entire European football system needs to evolve, but it won't happen until the top teams break away, which is inevitable.
Needs to evolve how?
If the top clubs break away, surely we'll see more of the "too big to fail" hubris that has brought Rangers to this pass. The problem with Europe's biggest clubs is that they want to spend gargantuan sums of borrowed money but they don't wish to be held accountable for it and a super league would only exacerbate that problem.
These clubs already have a huge advantage over their rivals in terms of gate & TV revenue. If they all stopped trying to screw each other over for five minutes, they'd have less economic problems. But that would involve clubs and their fans accepting that they don't have a divine right to win everything, every season for evermore. Clearly that turn of events would be a disgusting perversion of sport, so the unhinged spending race must continue.
If the top clubs break away, surely we'll see more of the "too big to fail" hubris that has brought Rangers to this pass. The problem with Europe's biggest clubs is that they want to spend gargantuan sums of borrowed money but they don't wish to be held accountable for it and a super league would only exacerbate that problem.
These clubs already have a huge advantage over their rivals in terms of gate & TV revenue. If they all stopped trying to screw each other over for five minutes, they'd have less economic problems. But that would involve clubs and their fans accepting that they don't have a divine right to win everything, every season for evermore. Clearly that turn of events would be a disgusting perversion of sport, so the unhinged spending race must continue.
What path should European football take? I don't know. I know there are a lot of top football people in the Netherlands that have ideas.
Don't misunderstand what I am saying about the top clubs breaking away, I don't think it will be good for European football as they will create a walled garden super league that takes basically all the money. But there is too much money involved in football for this not to be the end result. The thing is that nothing will change for the other clubs until that break away happens, it will be reactive rather than looking for solutions now to prevent it happening.
Your comment on Glasgow Rangers being in this position because of a "too big to fail" hubris is wrong. They are in this situation because their previous owner sold the club for £1 to an asset stripper, who has since stolen from the club. The wage bill last season was around half that of Celtic, they'll sell around 40,000 season tickets a season and are basically guaranteed European football of some sort most years. £30m of debt is easily manageable. Even £50m if someone had been willing to talk to HMRC would be manageable without coming close to administration. The issue at Glasgow Rangers is not about them not being capable of paying the money back, it is only about the fact the man in charge is scum.
Your comment on Glasgow Rangers being in this position because of a "too big to fail" hubris is wrong. They are in this situation because their previous owner sold the club for £1 to an asset stripper, who has since stolen from the club. The wage bill last season was around half that of Celtic, they'll sell around 40,000 season tickets a season and are basically guaranteed European football of some sort most years. £30m of debt is easily manageable. Even £50m if someone had been willing to talk to HMRC would be manageable without coming close to administration. The issue at Glasgow Rangers is not about them not being capable of paying the money back, it is only about the fact the man in charge is scum.
Whether he's scum or not, he refuses to pay back the HMRC money because he's convinced he can wriggle out of it, then profit afterwards on the back of Rangers' standing and remaining assets. He's working on the basis that Rangers is too big to fail.
Whether he's scum or not, he refuses to pay back the HMRC money because he's convinced he can wriggle out of it, then profit afterwards on the back of Rangers' standing and remaining assets. He's working on the basis that Rangers is too big to fail.
Maybe, maybe not.
Since he arrived at the club, there is a £35m income surplus at Rangers. £24m of which, a loan secured against future season ticket sales, never passed through the clubs accounts.
He has his chunk of money now, I wouldn't be surprised if he couldn't care less about the future of the club.
Your history of sectarianism, racism and the general bile that envelops your pathetic club?
The sooner the huns go into liquidation the better.
Well ra shellik know all about racism don`t they. Just ask Mark Walters.
Your club were also Nazi collaborators.
Your club harboured a child molestor and by not reporting it to the police, allowed him to carry on his vile, vile actions. Then your club allowed him back into the fold to further continue his antics.
Your club prides itself on being part of the largest fascist organisation the world has ever known. There was only one club in Glasgow formed on religious grounds and that was ra shellik.
Still want to argue which is most pathetic club? The truth hurt does it?
Big Jock knew alright
Oh.......and we won`t be going into liquidation. You`ve been reading Phil McGobbler too much
