Neil Doncaster of the SPL on BBC Radio Scotland – Transcript 30 April

I have transcribed Mr Doncaster’s appearance on Monday night on Sportsound with the two Jims, Spence and Traynor.

I thought it fairest to do so because, to be frank, much of what Mr Doncaster said seemed to me wrong, legally and factually, and remarkably, as I mentioned early on Tuesday, seemed to give credence to my Bill Miller “Switcheroo” theory.

As I see that Mr Doncaster is a former solicitor, then I accept that he might be right 100%. The reader can judge when I post my comments on what he had to say. That should be up later today (Wednesday).

I think it is fair to say that what he said was very telling, and that Messrs Spence and Traynor did their best to pin him down.

It is clear what message Mr Doncaster wanted to get across, and also what he was not willing to answer.

If I was a Rangers fan, what Mr Doncaster had to say would have had me jumping up and down with delight.

If there are any transcription errors, then they are mine entirely, and I would be happy to correct them. The link to the podcast is here – http://downloads.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/scotland/scotfoot/scotfoot_20120430-1922a.mp3

And now, across to the BBC Sportsound studio!

 

Jim Spence         –             Neil, welcome to the programme. I suppose the first thing to say was this unanimous today? Was this the feeling of all the clubs that we should put this aside?

Neil Doncaster  –              Yeah, there was a general agreement across all the clubs that Scottish football is in a very sensitive position at the moment. There’s a lot of passions that are running high and the right thing to do is to let some more clarity emerge from Ibrox over the next few days and in that context potentially get round the table again next Monday and think again. These aren’t rules that potentially affect one club, but potentially affect all twelve clubs and what is important is that we have a full set of financial fair play rules. Clubs are very keen that there should be financial fair play rules in place that ensure there’s a real motivation to live within your means going forward but equally those rules could apply, would apply, to all twelve clubs.

JS                            –              How badly prepared has the SPL been for this eventuality? Should it have foreseen this eventuality or is this something you think has emerged from, I mean, not too many people probably a number of years ago would have thought Rangers might be a club that would face potential administration and further potential liquidation. Has the SPL been well enough prepared for this eventuality?

ND                          –              Yeah, I think so. The whole financial fair play area is a very new area. I mean it’s something that UEFA have been pushing for a couple of years but it wasn’t that many years ago that clubs could go into administration in Scotland or in England and not suffer any points deductions. It was accepted that clubs could do that if they wished to shed debt. We then moved to a situation where clubs going into administration got a points deduction, ten in the SPL, it used to be nine in the English league and we are now confronting what happens, how you deal with a club, in the event that they can’t agree a CVA and that’s the whole debate around newco.

JS                            –              I know Jim wants to dive in here and ask you something but tell me this. Explain to people who still are not entirely au fait with this, what’s the difference between Rangers emerging from a CVA and Rangers transferring all of their assets to a new club and emerging as a newco?

ND                          –              Remarkably little actually. In Scotland we’ve never had a newco at any time but in England but in England whenever a club goes into administration a newco is a natural consequence. That now seems to be the accepted way that clubs now emerge from administration. So the likes of Crystal Palace recently and Plymouth in the last few years; those are clubs that went into administration., They took their points deduction for going into administration on the first place but in terms of coming out of administration a newco was the preferred route forward.

JS                            –              But it would surely be a new legal body – a new legal incorporated football club?

ND                          –              But clubs continue over a course over many, many years. The fact that those clubs happen to exist within several different corporate structures over the period of their life frankly doesn’t seem to concern people south of the border.

JS                            –              If that’s the situation, how worried are you that you are setting a precedent here that any club with debts they find they can’t pay can simply go into administration, re-emerge through liquidation and come back as a newco. Surely that would be an attractive option to three or four other clubs?

ND                          –              But hold on clubs can do that already. Clubs can shed huge amounts of debt. The amount of debt is neither here nor there. Clubs could theoretically shed £100 million worth of debt, agree a CVA with their creditors of a penny in the pound and come back in with all that debt shed and the can do that…

JS                            –              Would the SPL allow other clubs back in on that same…

ND                          –              But hold on, clubs can do that now within the rules so they simply take their 10-point penalty for going into administration on the first place and they can emerge through a CVA without any further impediment at all.

James Traynor   –              I think there is a general misconception though that if you go into liquidation and come back as a new company that you are not paying creditors anything. You actually have to pay something in liquidation.

ND                          –              That’s the point. Oddly enough you might end up with more money going to creditors through a newco route than through a CVA so actually the differences…

JS                            –              It’s marginal, is it not?

ND                          –              between a newco and a CVA , they are fairly fine. From the SPL’s point of view, we have more of a say when it comes to a newco. If the administrators come forward with a CVA proposal and they agree with the creditors, and they agree a deal with the bidders for a CVA, our involvement is fairly minimal. Our involvement steps up if there is a newco because we would have to, as a Board, give our consent to the transfer of the SPL share to that newco or…

JS                            –              Answer me this one. You met last week with a guy called Bill Kidley who set up a supporters’ survey which showed that 96 to 97% of all Scottish fans outside of Rangers fans and even some of them wanted any newco, and we are slightly ahead of ourselves here, as we don’t yet know what’s going to happen, any newco not to be allowed into the SPL and the argument was that fans are saying, if a new company can simply parachute back in to the SPL, sporting integrity dies.

ND                          –              But what is it that we are trying to stop here. Is it that we are trying to get clubs to live within their means? Because if it is the way to do that is to make sure that clubs pay their players on time, pay the taxman on time and if they should go into administration they get hit with a huge penalty. Actually stopping clubs emerging from administration is another thing entirely so we have to be careful to be talking about what really is going on here and I think once you talk to the supporters, particularly the supporters that were involved in that survey, once you explain the reality of what a newco is and what a CVA is, it does put a different complexion on things and I think people are using terminology like liquidation when liquidation may never happen under either proposal. It may happen but it may not happen. You know, it’s newco and transfer of share or CVA, but the distinction is a fairly fine one.

JT                            –              Why is it Neil that most fans would say if someone suffers this insolvent trauma as Rangers have, this administration and then if they come out of a CVA, then alright they’ve already had their punishment but is they come out  as a newco. If they go into liquidation, come out as a newco, why is it so many fans are saying no, they should not be allowed into the SPL. They should be demoted to the third division. But the SPL clubs themselves want them back in the SPL…

ND                          –              But hold on, this is people…

JT                            –              I’m just asking why the fans have got this different opinion…

ND                          –              but people are drawing a huge distinction between a CVA and a newco when actually the distinction is a fairly fine one. The fact is that clubs can already under the existing rules shed millions of pounds worth of debt, agree a CVA with creditors and come back in without any debt. They can do that under the existing rules…

JT                            –              Yes, yes..

ND                          –              without any penalty other than the 10-point deduction.

JS                            –              The only difference is, one of the great Rangers mottos over the years has been “dignity” . There are other clubs we know in Scottish football who are heavily indebted but they feel a sense of honour and dignity towards local tradesmen and towards local businesses and would not dream of doing other than paying their bills.

ND                          –              Absolutely Jim…

JS                            –              So why should they be treated less favourably than Rangers?

ND                          –              But they, if we wish to stop clubs doing that the way to do it is to heavily punish clubs who go into administration on the first place, not just the 10-point penalty. That’s the way to do it, rather than look at what happens after administration.

JT                            –              That’s what a lot of us have been saying for a long time, even before Rangers went into administration, and you’re saying, in answer to Jim’s earlier, one of Jim’s earlier questions, that the SPL were fairly well prepared for this event. Well is that actually the case because you’ve had clubs in the SPL go into administration before but the punishment wasn’t changed and it should have been. You’ve had Livingston, you’ve had Motherwell. It should have been changed and it should have been ..we should have been at the point where the punishment would have been severe for administration.

ND                          –              I think that’s harsh Jim. The reality is that…

JT                            –              But we’ve had examples…

ND                          –              in the Premier League it was 9 points, the Football League 10 points, we were entirely consistent with that so you could argue the Football League wasn’t prepared for Leeds United..

JT                            –              But you’re saying that the punishment for administration should be severe?

ND                          –              Yeah. I agree.

JT                            –              Why isn’t severe now? That’s my point.

JS                            –              It’s not consistent with the First Division. Dundee got 25 points…

JT                            –              But that was the second time they were in administration Jim.

JS                            –              But the first time it was in the Premier League; two separate bodies.

JT                            –              But it’s the second time for administration. You can understand, but why, if we’ve had clubs go into administration before, why hasn’t the punishment been severe since then?

ND                          –              I think it’s a very fair point but the reality is that the SPL’s rules have been pretty consistent with both the English Football League and the English Premier League on which they were based back in 1998 and it’s actually the SFL which is slightly out of step with the majority of UK football.

JT                            –              So let me get this quite right then. What we’re saying at the moment is that the SPL, if any club that is burdened with debt and is struggling to keep going and we have Rangers in that position just now, any club, like tomorrow, three clubs could say to the SPL, well look, do you know what, we are going into administration, they will take their 10 point deduction because that’s what it is at the moment and we’ll get rid of all that debt. Clubs that are maybe in the league and are safe. We’ll get rid of that debt and pay 10p, 5p in the pound and that’s ok?

ND                          –              Well, it’s not ok. It is allowed under our rules. It’s allowed under the English Premier League rules,. It’s allowed under English Football League Rules. 

JS                            –              Is the key thing that they should do it before the end of the season?

JT                            –              That’s my point. If you have a lot of debt and, say your Dundee United John (John Rankin’s) team, I’m not suggesting they are teetering on the brink but like most clubs, like almost every other club…the message is then Neil, get into administration now. Pay 5p in the pound. Get rid of your debt now and you’re OK. It’s 10 points.

ND                          –              That’s not the message but that’s the reality of where our rules…

JS                            –              So it could be done. Any club, Dunfermline, Kilmarnock, Dundee United, could wash their debts off tomorrow and they could be back in the SPL as a newco next season?

ND                          –              No. Newco’s different. What we are talking about is you go into administration, get your 10-point penalty, sporting penalty…

JS                            –              Effectively  they would then emerge…

ND                          –              But if you can agree a CVA with your creditors, you can shed debt and a number of clubs, a large number of clubs, have done that across the UK over the years. That’s within the rules. It may not be right but…

JS                            –              But ultimately any of these clubs could re-emerge as…

JT                            –              So why then is there this outcry against Rangers, that they must be punished, that they must be sent here, that they must be banished to the dungeons of Scottish football…

ND                          –              I think Jim, it’s because we’ve never had a newco before in Scottish football. The fact is it is commonplace south of the border. Very commonplace.

JS                            –              One of the arguments that has been put forward and that I know the SPL board will have to decide on, on any newco coming back into the SPL, but one argument between financial fair play and sporting integrity/the cost to the SPL of losing Rangers has been that the broadcasting, the television  deal would fall. Is there a clause, is there a written clause in that contract with Sky and ESPN that says that Celtic and Rangers must meet four times a year?

ND                          –              Yeah, we’ve been clear about the situation…

JS                            –              That’s actually written into the contract…

ND                          –              We’ve actually got a new deal from this summer where the long forma agreement is yet to be signed so actually what the detail of that agreement is remains to be seen but…

JS                            –              Does it actually say they have to meet four times per season?

ND                          –              The current contract but the current contract could come to an end at the end of the season.

JT                            –              But the extension which you are saying is still to be fine-tuned and it’s not been signed yet, that won’t be signed in its current form if Rangers are not there surely? You wouldn’t expect Sky to sign that, would you?

ND                          –              I think our focus Jim has to be on coming up with the right way forward in this situation and with solutions to the problems.

JT                            –              But we…

ND                          –              And speculating about where we might be next season doesn’t do anyone any good.

JT                            –              But is it unfair of us in the media to speculate that that extension might not be in place in its current form or the way it’s been negotiated thus far if Rangers are not there. That’s not unfair speculation, is it?

ND                          –              I think it’s your job to speculate. It’s my job to try to solve the problems.

JT                            –              But it’s not unfair speculation, is it, and what I’m saying … but let’s be clear on this as well, there’s a lot of myth and rumour about all of this and misinformation, let’s be fair, but, as it stands Rangers can go into further liquidation, emerge as a newco or an incubator company as Bill Miller prefers to call it, and there will, provided they do that before the end of the season, there will be no further sanctions and they remain on the SPL. Is that correct?

ND                          –              Currently, the current rules of the SPL would apply which means that the SPL board has discretion to deal with an application for a transfer of the share to a newco. The new rules that were due to have been discussed today would have imposed certain sanctions on that transfer of share..

JT                            –              Even if they do it before the end of the season?

ND                          –              Well no, but that would have come in on the first day after the end of the season…

JT                            –              But that’s my point. So if before the end of the season, if for instance it’s Bill Miller and he drops the conditions about looking for further assurances and comfort on the EBT case, if he drops that tomorrow and says OK, then it’s a newco, an incubator company, there will be then..in the SPL… their only decision is do we give them the licence back, their one-twelfth share. That’s the only problem they would have. There would be no further sanction provided they do it before the end of the season.

ND                          –              Well, the current rules would apply to any club, and what’s not fair is to change the rules within the season. The current rules are that is an application for a transfer of a share comes into the SPL board…

JT                            –              So Rangers in a newco before the end of the season only have to hope and make sure that they get their twelfth share back to continue in the SPL as a newco, if they do it before the end of the season, as it would happen to any club?

ND                          –              The current rules give the board discretion.

JT                            –              So there could be further penalties then?

ND                          –              As I said, it’s in the discretion of the board as to how the board would deal with an application for a transfer of share.

JS                            -And just very briefly there have been suggestions that next Monday’s meeting will be delayed again until the Friday after to buy as much time as possible to see what happens, to see if Rangers …

ND                          –              What it’s all about is letting the situation try and become clearer and there’s so much uncertainty and speculation about what’s really going on that, I think, to make decisions in a vacuum of information is never wise and what we need to do is to try and see what is emerging from Ibrox and try and come up with a set of rules that are right for all twelve clubs and not just for one club.

JT                            –              Just to be clear, have either of the bidders said to the SPL, well look then, if we come back in as a newco, what would the board be likely to do. Would it be likely to impose further sanctions? Would they give us the licence back or not? They must have asked.

ND                          –              No. The reality is that most, the vast majority of the discussions that have happened have been between the administrators of Rangers and the bidding parties. We and the Scottish FA have been very much on the fringes of that because ultimately we need to deal with a preferred bidder. At the point when a preferred bidder comes forward then you can have meaningful discussions.

JT                            –              So Nether Miller’s party nor the Blue Knights have come to the SPL and said, look what would the board, what would the likely decision of the board be if we said we are a newco. Can we get back in. They’ve not asked you that?

ND                          –              There’s been some preliminary discussions…

JT                            –              So what was the answer?

ND                          –              We’re very much on the fringe. We can’t have those proper discussions because there is no preferred bidder at the moment.

JS                            –              Two members of the board, Ralph Toping and Stevie Brown of St Johnstone have both been quoted in the newspapers a number of weeks ago talking about the financial effects of Rangers not being in. In terms of natural justice, does that mean they can actually take a fair vote now as part of the six-man SPL board or are they seen to have made their mind up before the event?

ND                          –              No, I think on the SPL board, we’ve obviously got four clubs, we’ve got myself and the Chairman, Ralph Topping, and it’s important that on that board you recognise that there may be conflicts between your own position as a club and as a board acting on behalf of the SPL and you manage those conflicts. You wear your hat. You have a fiduciary duty for the whole of the league and you come up with the right…

JS                            –              One final word…

JT                            –              Let’s be absolutely clear on the way we will speculate after this programme and that is that given what you’ve said about England and newco’s and how they come back in and deal with their debt and all of that stuff Rangers becoming a newco before the end of the season, the strong likelihood is that they would remain in the SPL without further sanctions but any other team doing that after the start of the new season it’s a different matter.

ND                          –              No that wouldn’t be fair Jim, I think the situation at the moment is the existing rules cover the current situation so if we end up with the administrators coming to us and saying we’ve agree a CVA, then pour involvement is fairly minimal. If the administrators come forward and say we have agreed a deal with a bidder and there will be a newco and they are going to request a transfer of share then that will be dealt with in accordance with the current rules which give the SPL board discretion.

JT                            –              What sanctions can you take then?

JS                            –              Your time’s up…

ND                          –              I’m not going to speculate because I thin it would be wrong to do so. We have to deal with any application, any approach by Duff & Phelps to us saying we’ve now got a preferred bidder, here’s the bid, we’re putting in either a CVA and our involvement as the SPL is minimal or there’s, we’re going to pout in an application for a transfer of membership, in the case of the SFA, a transfer of share in the case of the SPL, we’d have to look at it. We’d have a duty to do the right thing by the league overall.

JT                            –              So you would give it?

ND                          –              How Jim can I tell you now what an application looks like. I can’t. I’m not going to speculate. We have to deal with any application on its merits.    

(Exeunt omnes – pursued by a bear.)

 

Painstakingly transcribed by Paul McConville

Advertisements

23 Comments

Filed under Administration, Football Governance, SPL

23 responses to “Neil Doncaster of the SPL on BBC Radio Scotland – Transcript 30 April

  1. John McFarlane

    When I listened to the podcast I felt sure that Doncaster was answering as best he could. i.e. that Rangers are in administration and if they can agree a CVA then they will be allowedd to stay in SPL, as the rules state at the moment. But if they go into liquadation, before there is a vote on new sanctions, then it will be up to the SPL 6man panel to decide their future.

    On the other hand if Rangers remain in administration until the end of the season and then go into liquadation; whatever punishment (for liquadation) the 12 team members vote for will be applied.

    Now that I have read it I am more confused and wonder what would happen if Rangers do go into liquadation on the 11th of May and Turn out to play St Johnstone on the 13th. In my humble, and uneducated opinion the SPL would have to forfiet that match a 3-0 win for St Johnstone.

    Anyway I am tired and have a sore head with all this. Wake me up when Rangers are liquadated

    • kevin mcsherry

      excuse my ignorance but with regards to Bill mIllers plan to purchase all of the assets of rangers leaving rangers as nothing but an empty shell with nothing to their name but a pile of debts. Is this not liable to objection from creditors?
      It seems a fairly obvious way to allow unscrupulous business men to stiff creditors. I would have assumed that for it to be allowed to happen that the creditors would have to agree to the sale of the assets.
      could anybody provide me with an answer?

  2. The Mighty Dosser

    I nearly puked while reading that.

    It’s a done deal as far as ND is concerned. Newco? Not a problem. History and titles? Nae bother, you can still lay claim to them because a company is not the football club, except when it suits us.

    Oh aye, and the fact that they have defrauded the taxpayer? Irrelevant.

    ZERO integrity.

    If H.M.R.C. just sits idly by and does S.F.A. (pun intended) then they can shut up shop too.

  3. greenginger

    Why does Doncaster feel the need to tell lies ? Both Crystal Palace and Plymouth exited administration with a CVA. Their creditors agreed a deal. I would suggest Doncaster is not a fit and proper person to be employed by the SPL.
    I also understand the SPL Chief Exec. spun those same lies to the lads who carried out the fan survey. Sporting integrity ? Doncaster could’nt even spell it.

    • Littlerabbits

      I’d be interested to know how the guys from the SPLSurvey feel now – since they were sworn to secrecy about the meeting and ND is virtually making out that they agreed with his explanation (he almost makes it sound as if they said “Ok Neil we’ll just toss this survey in the bin now you’ve explained it to us”)

  4. TonyD

    Regrettably, what will happen in my opinion is this…

    1) rangers 1872 will form a new company say rangers 2012 (‘incubator’)and transfer its SPL share (each club has 1 share in the SPL)
    2) Duff and Phelps as administrators will sell the ‘Goodwill’ or ‘intellectual property’ of the old club to the new club, probably for a nominal sum. That includes its History of trophy’s leagues etc.
    3) The old company will try and exit administration via a CVA (Company Voluntary Agreement) by way of offering its creditors a ‘pennies in the pound’ deal.
    4) HMRC will NOT settle for 10-15p/£ they will press for upwards of 50p.
    5) If the big tax case goes against rangers HMRC (and Ticketus who are owed £27 Million ) will BLOCK a cva. Result of that will ensure rfc 1872 is liquidated.
    6) Rfc 2012 will continue in the SPL as if nothing happened, with minimal sanctions as there is no sanctions available under the current articles of association. The spineless directors who adjourned Monday’s meeting will reconvene next week and pass new rules for clubs getting in a mess in the ‘future’. This against a backdrop of intimidation and fear not to mention nepotism.
    7) Rfc 2012 will offer shares to the mass of orcs and buy large!….result will be that they’re still up there competing against Celtic. Meanwhile Dunfermline who have been financially prudent all season (closing stands to save money) will be relegated…hence the uproar about footballing integrity, both moral and sporting.
    8) Whyte who has a floating charge over ALL assets as it was assigned to him from Lloyds TSB when he settled the overdraft using Ticketus money. He will either sell to rfc 2012 over a period for many millions or transfer the assets and remain a major shareholder in the new company. Once on their feet he can sell his shareholding…assets restored, whyte walks with Millions…win win.
    9) Ticketus may try and block deal, but Lord Hodge has observed that they are a normal creditor and should be treated as such. An observation NOT a ruling as he had insufficient time and information to make a proper judgement. Ticketus will pursue Whyte separately (which will take years)
    10) SFA meanwhile will uphold partial sanctions (maybe 6 m ban on transfers suspended to see if they pay the outstanding money on players at present) and the semi-derisory fine of £160,000 will be halved.
    11) UEFA will ban rfc 2012 from Europe for 1 (maybe 3) years.
    12) SPL will rule that rfc 1872 broke the rules using EBT’s and may or may not strip them of trophies. It won’t matter as rfc 1872 is in liquidation.
    13) Domestic and European clubs who were damaged with their cheating will desist from pursuing rfc 1872 for damages as they are in liquidation

    Summary

    1) The rangers fans will claim a seamless history despite rfc 2012 having a new company number. (You can change names to the cows come home but it is the number which is important. Celtic FC have had the name number registered at companies house since 1887).
    2) The creditors will be stiffed big style including HMRC and Ticketus.
    3) Business as usual for SPL
    4) Business as usual for SFA
    5) Duff and Phelps will be lauded as geniuses and can take their seats at Ibrox whenever they want…despite the Police warning them that it was unsafe at a recent league match….our old friend Intimidation again!
    6) UEFA may make some noises under financial fair play rules (STILL TO BE INTRODUCED)but will let domestic association deal with it all.
    7) Due to intimidation, threats, aggressive posturing rfc have essentially got their way….the authorities have capitulated.
    8) David Murray absolved…indeed not even questioned.
    9) Whyte seen to be playing ball will be left alone as his actions will have been vindicated…semi heroic status conferred.
    10) The establishment club saved.
    11) Bigger than usual party in Stirling on July 7th 2012……a real ‘we arra peepil celebration’….confirmed by the actions of all involved.

    I personally, will not so much as watch another football match in Scotland let alone spend money to go and see one. There will be many like me…for a short while, then normal service will be resumed.

    • deekbhoy

      TonyD

      If this transpires then it will be a fatal blow to the sporting integrity of Scotland but will only highlight the lack of morality and integrity that has been the basis of the hierarchy of Scottish Football for too long. It would also be damning verdict on the ability of HMRC to protect the public purse and provide all football clubs with an east access from their responsibilities.

      It is that lack of moral compass that has allowed clubs to use vehicles such as EBT’s to cheat the taxpayer and gain unfair advantage. A bit like the Murdoch findings the have been corporately ‘blind’ to this for years and the question is are they ‘fit and proper’ persons to be running our game. I include the SPL/SFA officials in this.

      If this does come to pass then all the directors of the 12 SPL clubs and the SFA should hang their heads in shame. However they won’t because they are only interested in the money within the game and nothing else.

      The only bright spot in all this that the track record of Miller (if successful) as in his previous track record in ‘sporting’ ventures (as highlighted in internet posts) is not great. If both him and Whyte are only in it for the money then I anticipate that we will find that any newco will be back in administration sooner rather than later.

    • Bhoywonder

      Excellent analysis and Summary Tony. This is collusion at it’s worst and I fear this could actually happen. I live in England so don’t get up very often to see Celtic. but I would go with you on that one. Any like minded, level-headed supporter of ANY SPL club should do the same,,,,and let the SFA sweat and eventually capitulate to public opinion…Mahatma Ghandi’s civil disobedience springs to mind because it works. Will Celtic supporters do this? Well, put it this way, If you realise that a large proportion of the money you spend on a ST goes to SFA, SPL, RFC 2012….then why would you support that?

      Scottish football is a farce. I remember in 1994 when Celtic where going through the same thing. There were no MPs or PM’s offering support, no “special case” from the SFA….in fact, Celtic were going under to the delight of the Scottish Media.

      Short memories?….I don’t think so…..bring it on!!!! There’s more than one way to skin a cat (sorry to cat lovers everywhere, and to my cat Sylvester)

    • Michael

      TonyD

      2) Duff and Phelps as administrators will sell the ‘Goodwill’ or ‘intellectual property’ of the old club to the new club, probably for a nominal sum. That includes its History of trophy’s leagues etc.

      and

      12) SPL will rule that rfc 1872 broke the rules using EBT’s and may or may not strip them of trophies. It won’t matter as rfc 1872 is in liquidation.

      How do you reconcile these? In 2 the History and Trophies are preserved and passed to RFC2012 whilst in 12 the SPL “may….. strip them (RFC1872) of trophies”.

    • Fergie

      If Celtic have had the same company no since 1887, what’s this then – http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/1a23062953d5c6a08ae5d46f2e3b4590/compdetails
      Did it supersede this – http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/1a23062953d5c6a08ae5d46f2e3b4590/compdetails
      Not being clever; this is a genuine question.

  5. Dan

    Neil Doncaster uses Crystal Palace and Pymouth as examples of clubs that have become newco’s and kept their original identities. Is this possibly because they emerged from administration via a successful CVA and then the structure of the company was changed by new owners or directors. There is nothing wrong with changing the structure of a club or company while it is a going concern and carrying on as befor. however, He fails to mention , that neither of these two clubs went into liquidation. They agreed with their creditors as to what they could pay back, thus unburdening themselves with their debts and allowing them to continue as a going concern. Many other clubs have went into liquidation and never returned. Take Ardrieonians for example, if memory serves me correctly here, they went into liquidation and tried to have their SFA or SFL share transfered to Ardrie Utd (a newco) and were knocked back from doing so which I believe lead them to buying out Clydebank and changing their name to Ardrie Utd, thus gaining automatic status within the SFL. So there would appear to have been similar cases before. A club emerging via a successful CVA, carry on as before, no further penalties. A club going into liquidation and emerging as a ”newco” must re-apply to the SFA and SFL and start again. ”Simples”

  6. musters

    Paul, if a Newco (Rangers 2012 as TonyD called it) is formed, what is your view on the viability of any future legal action being taken against this new entity in respect to loss of earnings resulting from the financial misdoings of the original club?

  7. NeilR

    Hi Paul, this is my first post on your blog, many thanks for your invaluable addition to the Rangers debate over recent months.

    As I’ve posted over on RTC I think the key issue that Doncaster and others are skating around is that while Newco is legally a distinct entity from Oldco and thus legitimately exempt from Oldco’s debt, if Newco is regarded as Rangers for sporting purposes then it must logically be subject to any sporting sanctions that would have applied to Oldco. If as expected the SPL enquiry on double contracts / improper registration of players (combined with the FTT finding against Rangers) results in a decade of 3-0 losses, that will mean not the loss of 10+ years of trophies AND relegation to the SFL.

    Doncaster’s comments can be read as indicating the SPL will try to gloss over that and keep Newco in the SPL next season, but a massive and unpunished breach of UEFA’s Financial Fair Play principles (UEFA and principles in the same sentence – crazy stuff I know) is in my view likely to provoke a strong response from Nyon.

    There are no certainties in this sporting and legal morass, but it seems likely to me that Newco’s only realistic chance of playing in the SPL next season is to repudiate explicitly Oldco’s history and identity – which as things stand, is not looking likely to happen.

  8. Drew Adamson

    STOP PRESS : Disney Corporation have tabled a last-ditch bid to buy RFC. Murray park to become a football theme park. On entry, each sucker, sorry, guest, will be given a tour of the facsimile trophy room, several of which will have little stars attached to them thus *. Exhibition games will be staged at Ibrox Park, each carefully choreographed with the collusion, sorry, assistance, of genuine SFA referees, to ensure the home team win each time. Catering will be supplied at reasonable prices, £9 for a coffee, and £18 for a burger, to help pay for debts accrued by previous owners. Looks like one Mickey Mouse outfit is going to get involved with another.

  9. vinny

    @musters
    I’m under the impression that Paul’s ‘switcheroo theory’ states that it would not be viable at all, indeeed that its a fundamental part of that whole strategy. Forgive me if I’m wrong.

  10. jim62

    Didn’t heat the interview but saw the squeals in various places..Can’t really saee anything seriously wrong with what Doncaster is saying?

    Basically says current rules give a “discretion” to SPL to admit any applicant and implies that SPL could put any condition(or penalties) on that…the new rules will simply set out specific penalties/conditionds for such a case

    We have yet to hear Celtic’s thoughts on this..presumably if SPL clubs think they can’t survive without “Rangers” then Celtic are in a position to say “well…if that’sthe case you definitely can’t survive without us..here’s our terms for letting “New Rangers 2012” into the SPL…if you don’t agree here’s our resignation”….they are over a barrel??

  11. scotttsukuru

    Celtic are most likely the cheer leaders for getting Rangers back in, though would obviously never admit it publicly. Arguably they have the most to lose in both the short and long term.

    As Dunfermline’s Chairman pointed out recently, they make more money out of Hibs visiting than the Old Firm, when the greatly increased policing costs are factored in. I doubt Celtic make anything like the cash they do from a Rangers game against anyone else, and of course a reduction in TV money would affect their bigger share. Plus no Rangers would see an 11th ‘small’ club to side with the 10 and start changing rules left, right and centre.

    • Bhoywonder

      Celtic is a business as is any other club. Finance through supply and demand dictates events above emotion, but it should not relinquish it’s integrity for the sake of money. The endgame is nigh, so Lawwell needs to make Celtic’s position on a parachuted Newco into the SPL abundantly clear!!

  12. john andrew

    Hi Paul, first time poster here.
    If RFC(IA) get liquidised, why can’t they sell ipox? I know CW is the owner of the stadium but he is also the chairman of rfc(ia). Can the HMRC not demand that he sells the stadium to pay his debt? I know I should know this but its a gate in my head that won’t shut. lol

  13. Doncaster’s wretched interview confirms the appalling truth that he does not give a damn about integrity. He could not care less about the moral issues at the very core of this entire scandal.
    He gives the game away with his assumption that a completely new company which does not even exist yet will be welcomed straight into the highest level of Scottish professional football so long as it claims to have some kind of connection to the stinking corpse of the most corrupt football club in the history of the British game.
    It does not even occur to him to suggest that there could be possibly be anything other than an automatic recognition of this brand new company – which does not even exist yet – as the rightful replacement for Rangers FC once the inevitable process of liquidation completely exterminates that discredited organisation.
    There is absolutely no future for Scottish football while men such as Neil Doncaster have any involvement in its running. Frankly, given its unceasing determination to reject honesty and integrity at every opportunity, the sooner the SPL collapses and dies, the better.

  14. astro

    His comments about the Financial Fair Play principles are way off. UK leagues and UEFA are not the only entities to look at, if you want proper principles, he’d look at the German FA and their Bundesliga. All clubs in professional football have to hand in their budgets for the upcoming season before they get their licence renewed. Punishments might be handed out if the club fails to meet those budgets. Clubs which are in a bad financial state might have to pay money into an account at the FA with that money being released in parts during the season to make sure that the club will have enough money to make it to the end of the season, so that competition won’t be affected by a club having to stop to play matches during the season.
    Administration (which is just the 10 points penalty in Scotland) means automatic relegation to the 4th or 5th league.

    These rules have worked very well, but are a problem when trying to compete with “cheating” clubs such as Real Madrid, Barca, and a few in the EPL.

  15. Pingback: Neil Doncaster – CVA and Newco – What’s The Difference (As Long as Newco Accepts Oldco’s Punishment?) | Random Thoughts Re Scots Law by Paul McConville

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s