Exactly...nauseating listening to them spout absolute pish...they just don't get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Printable View
Exactly...nauseating listening to them spout absolute pish...they just don't get it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
:top marks They just don't get it - thick as ****.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
McCoist, with his TV experience and background, seems to think he talks with authority and gravitas, when in reality, he is a very ignorant, stupid person. I know it was in the DR, but apparently he has made noises about the possibility of 'them' snubbing the SPL in three years time, to teach them a lesson. :rolleyes:
The Rangers con does seem to be working a treat, stole £140m, liquidated as a result, but still called "Rangers FC" and allowed the oldco registration by a compliant, weak SFA. They will always be Sevco from now on to me. Rangers died. UEFA know they died and that's why they are banned from Europe. A shame for them that Messrs Regan and Ogilivie don't run UEFA isn't it! Plague and pestilence is too good for all these DOBS.
Fair and moral to sue? No doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
Sensible and practical? Probably not.
I'm not going to get into the amounts themselves. That sort of spreadsheet-porn would keep some of my colleagues in wet dreams for months. :greengrin
So, the practicalities:-
1. how much are Rangers going to be sued for? All of their winnings and profits during the EBT years? Seems fair. The potential earnings of the other clubs? Much more difficult to establish.
2. is it to be a class action, or is it every club for themselves? If the latter, there will be many actions competing with each other. The former seems more sensible, otherwise it just becomes an intractable mess.
3. how is the money to be shared out? Is it to be shared between all SPL clubs during that period? What about clubs RFC put out of the Cups? And clubs they put out of Europe? That sort of negotiation could take months to sort out, during which time TRFC would be taking appropriate (and legitimate) action to protect their assets.
4. once such an action started, TRFC would probably be required to set aside a sum in case they lost. That action, by itself, might be enough to tip them over into insolvency again. Wouldn't be helpful.
5. all of the above would take time.... for which read "cost a lot of money", with no guarantee of success. So... do Hibs spend money on it, at a time when we don't have much spare?
Finally, what happens if BDO are successful in having the property sale reversed, or in recovering the alleged market value? TRFC would have no cash to pay out in the above cases. RFC(IL) would have the cash, but we wouldn't have sued them. Even in the unlikely event that we could recover something from RFC(IL), it would only be a small percentage once the other creditors took their share.
i look forward to the day the buns get their REAL punishment/s :aok:
Don't hold your breath. As far as the media is concerned, Rangers are back. The BBC are treating Rangers' time in SFL3 as an "adventure" in the same way that Enid Blyton's Famous Five had adventures. The BBC Scotland TV news has even amended their football reporting in the news to show the SPL results and then Rangers result on the same screen below the SPL ones. 33,000 Rangers fans have bought season tickets, Rangers are buying players like there's no tomorrow, and the creditors who lost £134m in this footballing scandal have been forgotten. Scottish football is broken beyond repair.Quote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
Sums it up nicely. I feel most sorry for the companies/people who got hee haw. They then watch them spending money again like there is no tomorrow. The huns then have the cheek to say they have been treated unfairly??? Wtf. They have treated tgeir creditors extremely unfairly and still exist. Ill bet their are a fair few wee companies that have now gone bust as a consequence. Despise that mob to the core.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Interesting, and clearly stated, take on the Dundee Utd £31k due by Rangers.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...making-trouble
Quote:
Less than a month into the new Scottish soccer season and the SFA’s newest member club is causing trouble. Before I go on, you may consider the repeated use of “Rangers Football Club” and “The Rangers Football Club” unnecessary. This is actually a necessary distinction to make as “Rangers Football Club” is the club formed in 1872, which is no longer a member of the SFA and will soon be liquidated.
“The Rangers FC” is the new name of Sevco Scotland, a consortium fronted by former Sheffield United FC Chief Executive Charles Green, which purchased the assets of Rangers Football Club in June this year. They are two separate, unrelated legal entities, one of which has purchased the real estate of the other. A fiction has emerged amongst Rangers supporters that somehow the “club” and the “company” are separate and that The Rangers Football Club Ltd has purchased Rangers Football Club from Rangers plc. This is emphatically not the case. There is no legal distinction or difference between the club and the company. They are one and the same.
In 1872, Rangers Football Club was a club. That is, a group of individuals who have come together to form an association with members and are run by a committee. A club’s members pay an annual subscription, and its members are personally liable for any debts incurred by the club. Around the turn of the 20th century, most soccer clubs in the UK incorporated, partly to raise funds and partly to protect members from having to pay debts from their own pockets. Incorporation means that the club sells shares in itself, and the new directors are not personally liable for any debts incurred. So it was that in 1899 Rangers Football Club incorporated. Investors bought shares in the club, which changed its legal status from a club to a private company limited by shares. The new investors owned shares in Rangers Football Club, which was now called Rangers Football Club Ltd, the wording which to this day adorns the gates of Ibrox Stadium. There was, and is, no separate company and club.
In the early 1980’s, Rangers Football Club Ltd was floated on the stock market. This involved another change in legal status, from a private limited company to a public limited company. In the UK, the names of public companies are not allowed to end in "Ltd,” or “Limited,” so Rangers Football Club Ltd became Rangers plc. As a public company, a controlling interest in Rangers plc could be purchased by anyone with the cash to buy the necessary number of shares and a willing seller. So it was that in 1988 a controlling interest in Rangers plc was purchased by David Murray and Rangers plc became part of Murray International Holdings. Then in 2011, Murray’s shares in Rangers plc were purchased by Wavetower, owned by Craig Whyte. After completing the purchase, Wavetower adopted the name, “The Rangers FC Group Limited.”
Neither of these takeovers required a transfer of Rangers’ membership of the SFA to the new company who had bought Rangers plc.
Charles Green’s Sevco Scotland (now The Rangers Football Club Ltd) consortium did not buy Rangers plc, the legal entity formed in 1872.
They purchased Ibrox Stadium, the Murray Park training complex and a car park. That is why Rangers’ SFA membership had to be transferred from Rangers Football Club to The Rangers Football Club. You cannot "transfer" something from yourself to yourself! The Rangers FC did not qualify for SFA membership as they do not have the three years’ worth of audited accounts required, so in a quirky deal, the SFA agreed to transfer the membership of the now defunct Rangers FC to the company who purchased the assets and business of the old club. As a condition of transferring the membership, The Rangers FC had to agree to pay all debts owed to Scottish soccer clubs by the now defunct Rangers FC.
This week, following rumblings of discontent over The Rangers FC signing several players beyond the price range of most SPL clubs, Green announced that The Rangers FC has paid all debts owed by the now defunct Rangers FC. That it seemed, was that. Until yesterday, when Dundee United FC released a statement that, contrary to Green’s announcement, they have still not received their full share of the gate money for the Scottish Cup tie played at Ibrox in February. This statement has sparked a great deal of confusion, with Green claiming that the SPL had earlier agreed to pay the money to Dundee United, which the SPL deny.
The dispute hinges on a letter written by the SPL to Rangers FC on May 18, informing Rangers that their prize money from finishing in second place in season 2011-12 would be withheld and distributed to those clubs owed money by the now defunct club.
Green stated:
“A letter from the SPL to the club—dated May 18, 2012—stated: ‘The board decided to accede to the application of Dundee United and accordingly, the sum will be withheld from the next sum payable by the SPL Limited to Rangers and the sum will be paid by the SPL Limited to Dundee United.’ Why the SPL have not paid Dundee United the outstanding sum as previously agreed is a question that they need to answer. We wrote to Dundee Utd on Monday explaining the SPL had previously confirmed they would pay it.”Not strictly true. On May 18, The Rangers Football Club did not exist. It was formed on May 29 (as Sevco Scotland) and did not buy the business and assets of Rangers Football Club until June 14. So the SPL wrote to Rangers Football Club at a time when it was still a member of the SPL and clinging on to life by its fingertips. Working on the assumption that Rangers Football Club would still be a member of the SPL this season, the SPL agreed that they would withhold prize money from Rangers Football Club and distribute it to its Scottish soccer creditors.
The SPL’s agreement, then, was with Rangers Football Club. No such agreement was made with The Rangers Football Club, which is a different club, and has no right to the prize money won by Rangers FC last season. Following protracted negotiations, The Rangers Football Club was granted Rangers FC’s membership of the SPL with several conditions, one of which was that The Rangers Football Club would pay any money owed by Rangers Football Club to other Scottish clubs. Charles Green and The Rangers Football Club agreed to that condition but are now claiming that they should not have to pay money owed to Dundee United.
The Rangers Football Club appears to be in clear breach of the agreement by which they were granted membership of the SFA. The SFA must now either act to ensure The Rangers Football Club keeps its agreement to pay Rangers FC’s Scottish soccer debt, or lose control of the situation altogether. Whether there exists the will within the SFA to do so remains to be seen.
Breaking its own rules to admit The Rangers Football Club is turning out to be a major mistake by the Scottish Football Association.
A couple of points on that.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
The fourth paragraph illustrates the difference between Sevco now and Hibs in the early nineties (ref our earlier debate).In our case STF did buy the legal entity that was formed in 1903 from the receivers of Forth Investments, hence there was a continuation of the club.Quote:
Charles Green’s Sevco Scotland (now The Rangers Football Club Ltd) consortium did not buy Rangers plc, the legal entity formed in 1872.
They purchased Ibrox Stadium, the Murray Park training complex and a car park.
On the separation of club and company, the various rules and articles always refer to 'club' rather that 'company' so they could be interpreted as giving clubs a separate identity from their operating companies. I don't believe that was the intention, but I reckon there's a valid legal argument for it and it would really need court proceedings to arrive at a firm conclusion. In any case, as I've said a few times before, they should have taken one interpretation or the other and stuck to it rather than the current quagmire of compromise. The last sentence in the quote is absolutely right.
He's also referred to the SPL when he meant the SFA in the second-last paragraph, but he can be forgiven for that - oh for a single ruling body in this footballing backwater.
Was just considering as many different ways to upset Chuckie and Fat Sally as possible :greengrin
While it is unlikely to be practical it is clearly going to be considered by some, Vlad would be favourite since it could be argued that, other than Celtic, Hearts have been hit hardest financially. This shows what a difficult job the Independent panel have but they should only be considering the facts and not the potential fall out, which could be quite a bit.
For instance Rangers won four SC's and six LC's in their fiscally enlightened years so would these need to be reversed? If the tribunal finds against Oldhun would there be a case for the clubs who lost these final's challenging to reverse the result if the tribunal dosent? We accept, and can probably prove, that Rangers competitors have suffered financially at the hands of Murray's Tax Scheme we could also ask what about player bonuses? I select finals because undoubtedly thats where the biggest bonuses would have been up for grabs, but this could be extended further to league games.
Whilst I am not a gambler I am sure some of the guys on here would have had a bet one way or the other on the outcome of the big games, what does the bookie do? I genuinely dont know but if it's covered in the bookies favour, which I suspect it might, could this also be challenged?
In a fair and just system these matters would be reconciled to the benefit of the victim's of the sting but we all accept this is unlikely to happen in the real world, while Newhun continue paying over the odds wages and fees whilst simultaneously sticking a digit in the air to everybody else.
Just throwing it out there..........................
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
They haven't, though. Their rights will come back into play once BDO start work.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
.... which is perfectly rational and proper :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
Even now, Mr. BDO will be scouring the message-boards, armed with pad and pencil, looking for suggestions......"oh, that's a decent shout. We'll have that one."
Such a shame Mr. MSM hasn't been doing the same.
They also omit one important point which is causing a lot of people the vapours on here, and presumably elsewhere. Along with the physical assets, Sevco also bought the Rangers brand, ie the bit that allows them to call themselves "Rangers" and to wear the same badge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
I know that you know this, Cav, but I am highlighting it for others. :greengrin
Sorry mate, a lot of people will never accept that as fact, no matter how many feckn times they are told!!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I think you're correct about this. It's an established theory in maths/logic that if you start with two contradictory premises you can prove absolutely anything. The SFA and SPL have the starting premises that "The Rangers are a continuation of Rangers" and "The Rangers are not a continuation of Rangers". Where you have logical chaos you find rich lawyers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Lucius Apuleius
Green's latest Orc rabble rousing statement calling the SFA "incompetent drunks". For once I agree with the noob. Giving them the oldco registration when they didn't need to and then overlooking the fact they didn't have audited accounts just to get them in the door, yes, they must have been incompetent and drunk. Well done Green. I hope BDO unravel this spiv's dodgy purchase and give him something to really moan about. :aok:
To be fair to the SFA, it's the SPL that he is levelling the charge at. And, as the article says, either one or the other, not both . :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
A technicality surely :greengrin Doesn't change the SFA should never have given him the oldco registration, they are not the same club as UEFA can attest. I still hope BDO unwind his dodgy asset purchase and get justice for the creditors. Forlorn hope maybe, but they have the powers to see it's done.
Sadly I fear this will never happen. And if any other Chairman called the SPL drunk or incompetent, they'd be had up on disrepute charges, no? It seems that Rangers are untouchable.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Why not?Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
As for the disrepute charge, he's only just said it. The SPL and SFA offices will be open for business tomorrow :agree:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I would like to think so because there are a lot of legitimate points being raised on here, and on other boards and blogs. I can only tolerate their arrogance while living in hope that their greatest pain is yet to come.
:agree: This has been the most outrageous scam of the whole episode for me - the fact that Green and his Sevco were allowed to swan in and get Ibrox, Murray Park AND the Rangers Brand ALL for a desultory £5M!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
This to me is a very clear case indeed of the administrators abusing their position and totally disregarding their primary duty to the creditors. I will be surprised, not to mention angry and disappointed, if the directors of Duff & Phelps do not find themselves facing criminal charges over this, as the tax payer and other creditors have clearly been robbed blind as the administrators bent over backwards to give Zombie Huns FC as trouble free a start to their new life as possible at OUR expense :grr::grr::grr:
PS - who are BDO and how long before this action comes to fruition???
The administrators will get the chance to justify the sale. They may be able to. I'd like to be in that room.Quote:
Originally Posted by basehibby
As for criminal charges, I think that's unlikely. The only criminality that I could even remotely see would be fraud.... but I am struggling to see what they would have gained out of it. Their fees are assured, and I don't see them benefitting from the NewHun scenario.
No, they may have been incompetent (and the jury has yet to report on that), but criminal? Can't see it.
BDO are Binder Dijke Otte, the proposed liquidators of RFC(IA). They haven't been appointed yet. I am surprised they aren't in post yet, but would expect it soon.
Someone linked this to me earlier and I'm really not sure what to make (if anything) of this:
http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-830105
Someone is on the loopy juice!Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
You could print it out and make a nice hat. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
I haven't seen the accounts of Scottish Premier League Ltd, so am only going on that report. However, it's a basic rule of Company Law that once a company establishes insolvency, then it must stop trading and the directors should take the appropriate steps to enter either administration or liquidation. Not to do so is an offence (criminal I think), and it renders the directors personally liable for any debts incurred by the company after the date on which insolvency is established.
Insolvency is defined as either where liabilities exceed assets (although it's fair to say that, in some cases, the accounts aren't the best way to establish that), or where a company can't pay its debts as they fall due.
I find it difficult to believe that, if the company is indeed insolvent, no directors have resigned as a consequence and made known their reasons for doing so. Looking at the current SPL Board reproduced below, there are plenty directors who should know their responsibilities.
"The current SPL Board is made up of Ralph Topping (SPL Chairman), Neil Doncaster (SPL Chief Executive), Eric Riley (Celtic FC), Stephen Thompson (Dundee United FC), Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen FC) and Michael Johnston (Kilmarnock FC)."
EDIT.... after all that, I have just seen JGL's considered response, and think he's probably right. :greengrin
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uuqry9SMjQM
Quoting from the article :- "Rangers were denied their rightful place in the SPL". Also, the phrase Prima Facie is misspelled on more than one occasion as Prima Facia (it's a Latin (i.e. Fenian) phrase). I hope that gives you enough information to identify the general direction of the source of the article and allows you to decide how much respect it deserves.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/inde...ic=235622&st=0
Half time announcer makes joke, Sevco fans descend into racism, sectarianism and hunting down maker of said joke.
:rolleyes:
He's right about liabilities exceeding assets by £196k, but what he omits to tell us us that there's just under £4m cash in the bank and debtors of over £3m (£1.4m of which is prepayments and accrued income). On the other hand, over £7m of the creditors is made up of accruals and deferred income - i.e. non-cash debts. I would guess that the majority of that will fall due to member clubs, and the company is not-for-profit. In short, when you consider the details the company doesn't look anywhere near insolvent.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
Also, the name Dunwilco (597) Ltd looks to me like a shelf company, so the date of incorporation is irrelevant as is the names of the subscribers to the initial shares (I assume that's what the author is talking about re McCann). The rest of his comments are also irrelevant as the events regarding Celtic in 1994 are ancient history.
Yet more pish and wind from the huns.
If you ever need a laugh, rangers media is the place. Full of absolute roasters!
:agree: Dunwilco was/is the name used by Dundas & Wilson, a firm of solicitors, for their shelf companies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
And there was me thinking it was something to do with Livvy cooncilors.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
It's Monday morning... you're gonny have to splain that one to me. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Lucius Apuleius
If you look at that hun website you soon see why they should have been thrown out of Scottish football forever. The lowest of the low support Newco.
Over the last few weeks, I was fearful that RFC would quickly emerge from the lower divisions, cock-a-hoop, debt-free and able to dominate the SPL again (with their twin from across the city). But I'm now increasingly convinced that just won't happen. Their CEO, manager, fans and sympathisers in the media are just incapable of acting like grown ups. Their ignorance, arrogance, lack of remorse and general crass behaviour is just making them more and more hated. Whether it's look at our 45 million fans, look how much money we can spend, Green's drunk SPL comments, McCoist's lack of contrition and the press' complete disrespect for the SPL clubs.... there's not a day goes by without the Huns trying to put the boot in. By the end of this season any remnants of sympathy from other clubs for that bunch will have vanished completely... effectively killing off any chance of them being FASTRACKED back into the SPL.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
The irony is that had they just shut the F up, accepted their fate with a degree of decorum, they might have started to build bridges and a bit of support again from the DIV1 and SPL clubs. But I now rest peacefully, knowing that they will continue to gloat and antagonise the rest of the clubs - and all the fans who managed to see them off first time around - to the point where they have NO CHANCE of being allowed back into the top flight ahead of time.
Dun wil co. Willy Dunn Co.:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
:doh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lucius Apuleius
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Sorry CWG, I just noticed that you asked me a question. It's hard to explain it, but Onion's post helps me a bit. I see all the same issues that he does, but I conclude differently. I see all the arrogance, the continued flouting of rules, the press laying down to them, and I conclude that it seems inevitable they will return, debt free and stronger than ever. I doubt that there's enough money in the liquidation to fund any meaningful review by BDO, and I therefore don't see any prospect of a challenge to the sale of the assets to Green & Co. Plus, as every day goes by, it becomes more and more difficult to unwind that transaction. I see no will power in either the SPL or the SFA to go further than some symbolically significant but actually meaningless punishment for the dual contracts issue. Yes they may have some titles stripped, but in the long run, their fans will ignore that and the rest of us don't really care. So nothing will happen, and they will soon be back, debt free and with 40,000 season ticket holders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Onion
I hope I'm wrong.
http://local.stv.tv/glasgow/186158-f...sevco-comment/
Quote:
A PA announcer for Falkrik FC has been suspended from his job after referring to Rangers as the "Sevco Franchise".
The worker made the comment about the Glasgow club at half-time during Falkirk’s game against Raith Rovers.
On Monday, club chairman Martin Ritchie said an investigation had been launched into the "inappropriate comments about Rangers" made by the Falkirk Stadium announcer.
The comment refers to the previous business name of the newco club, Sevco Scotland, which is the title of the Charles Green-led consortium that purchased the assets of the clubs, that will result in the liquidation of the 'oldco', formerly called The Rangers Football Club plc.
Mr Ritchie added: "We have already apologised to Rangers FC and would now like to apologise to the many Rangers supporters who have been in contact with the club.
"Falkirk FC are treating this incident very seriously and the individual concerned has been suspended from his duties, pending a full investigation by the club."
:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
Sevco fans are the lowest of the low.
Rumours circulating amongst SevcoMedia that if they draw an SPL team in the cup at Ibronx if they get past Falkirk, they'll charge £14 for a programme that contains a voucher to get in for a quid, thinking it means that the other team gets next to nothing on the gate split. Amusing - pretty sure that would make the face value of the ticket £15 still and they'd still have to pay the full whack to the other team. Could be wrong.
Was reading Fat Sally's analysis of the East Stirling game and I'm staggered by his back-patting, "We created a staggering amount of chances" etc.
He's playing the likes of Sandaza, Black, Alexander in division 3. By all means he should have won every game by now and he's not. He's already failed.
It staggers me how simple Sevco fans are. There's no competition for them in D3 (or shouldn't be, thanks Peterhead for a good laugh). It's like playing FIFA on the amateur setting, not fun and just for idiots.
That is a concern for me, I have to say. However, given the circumstances, I would expect that one of the first things BDO will do will be to ask D&P to justify the sale. After all, that is where the most value lies for creditors.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
That, in itself, won't be too costly. Someone on here (maybe via RTC or the like) told me that it is up to D&P to prove THEIR case, rather than BDO to disprove it.
Earlier posts referred to the theoretical possibility of court action against Sevco for damages re playing ineligible players during the financial doping period. I thought this was unlikely but noticed today that West Ham came to an out of court agreement with Sheffield United re Hammers playing an ineligible player - Tevez - and United being relegated as a result. Could the same thing happen here?? I know I forked out circa 10 times £400 for season tickets to watch a rigged league - what costs could the SFL clubs put together?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bythecringe
Could very well happen. Since Sevco are claiming to be Rangers FC (same way as if I bought the brand name to Third Lanark and called my pub team "Third Lanark", which includes the liquidated club's 2 Scottish Cups and 3 league titles :confused:) they are laible for all the prize money won by Rangers FC during the cheating that went on 2001-2012 and damages. I assume Celtic will sue for being cheated out of the CL, and many others will see an opp. Rangers then, Rangers now, Rangers forever... Is that a fact Mr Green, well here is my writ.
Forgot to say £24 million out of court settlement.Quote:
Originally Posted by bythecringe
This is the interesting bit.... especially as the minutes from a Sevco meeting 2 weeks after the sale have a Sevco director "bigging up" their business acumen to the supporters and stating "the club" was worth £55 million..... wonder how they'll explain that way?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
:cb
Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Just my opinion mate but "DOBS" doesn't have any place on this board
I don't think there's any chance of that at all. The SFA and the Scottish media may have crossed its fingers behind its back and tried to swallow the lie that this is the same club but there's no way a court will see them as the same entity. If you don't pay your car loan, its repossessed and I buy it second hand. I don't have to pay your speeding tickets.Quote:
Originally Posted by bythecringe
I see that Falkirk have apologised to Rangers for a comment made by their stadium announcer at their game, does anyone know what was said?
The annoucer annoced the Huns score at half time and instead of calling them Rangers he called them Sevco something.
No idea how Rangers found out about it. The announcer has been sacked apparently. A bit of a joke if you ask me.
Nothing major really, seems a fuss over very little
http://www.falkirkherald.co.uk/sport...ents-1-2478394
When reading out half-time scores from elsewhere in the country, Dave McIntosh referred to Rangers as ‘Sevco FC’ - a reference to the parent company that reformed the Glasgow giants last month following the club’s widely reported financial struggles.
That prompted a flurry of angry comments from Rangers fans on social media sites, including Twitter and Facebook, after the incident was flagged up on a message board.
McIntosh’s personal website has since been taken offline.
The barely literate sevco knuckle-draggers are not too happy. :greengrin
http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/inde...owtopic=235622
Called them the Sevco franchise and called Ibrox Castle Greyskull apparently.
I fail to see the problem myself.
I came to the same conclusion, by another route...see above somewhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
I think you're wrong about the debt part. Hibs reckon to make £200/ST. The Huns are charging a good bit less, so say they get £150.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
150*40000 = £6M
I reckon their wage bill will take all of that plus any commercial income they can scrape together. Plus they have to find a couple of million to pay OldHun football debts and I'd be amazed if the Greenies aren't loading the £5.5M asset purchase onto the club as debt. Green has had to spend big for D3 (and pander to the worst of the bigots) to get Hun ST holders onside. He has to keep spending this side of any potential share issue and the Hun masses will absolutely demand they try and keep up with Celtc on their return. His hope is the share issue enables him to bail with a tidy profit following the Fergus McCann model. Possible, but far from a given.
I expect them to romp through the lower leagues. Huns love winning no matter how non-existent the opposition. Unless Celtc show a considerable decline in revenue in the meantime though, it's going to be a big step for them to try and go from a squad to walk the lower leagues to squad to challenge for the SPL. The Huns will not accept years of second places, no matter how far ahead they are of 3rd. That could do them a lot more damage than their trip through Ds 3,2 and 1.
They cannot do that as the visiting team have to agree to any reductions in admission prices from the normal League price.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
I suspect that Hibs have to cough up a share of the notional cash for season ticket holders with the cup top-ups.
Falkirk's email is [email protected]
Just sent them this:
FAO Martin Ritchie re Stadium Announcer
Dear Mr Ritchie,
As a Hibernian supporter, I write to express my disappointment at Falkirk's decision to investigate your stadium announcer and apologise to "Rangers" over announcing their half time score as "Sevco".
Every fan of every other club apart from "Rangers" that I have spoken to is disgusted at the unrepentant, aggressive attitude of Messrs Green, Jardine and McCoist and their repeated snide remarks about or outright confrontational stance towards other Scottish clubs. The owners of the old Rangers FC got them into the mess they're in, nobody else. In fact the rest of Scottish football has bent over backwards to fast track the new club that took over their assets past the other more established potential applicants for the vacant SFL place just to attempt to placate the fans of the defunct club. Perhaps if they showed a bit more gratitude for that, they might receive an iota of sympathy.
Your announcer made a light hearted remark that doubtless offended nobody present at the game. If "Rangers" fans claim to be offended about it now, then perhaps they should develop a little thicker skin because unless their attitude undergoes a remarkable transformation they will not find much goodwill at any ground in Scottish football.
I believe the correct course of action now is for you to immediately reinstate your announcer with a public apology for any distress your hasty action has caused him.
Yours sincerely,
A few years ago, a BBC weather announcer, possibly Kirstie McCabe, got into a spot of bother when referring to the stadium formerly occupied by some team called Rangers as Castle Greyskull. She was shipped of to Devon I think. I also think she was a Killie fan. Possibly still is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretty Boy
I think their plan is that the ticket is still £15, but the voucher is worth a £14 deduction.Quote:
Originally Posted by jgl07
One of two things happen from that;
The value of the ticket is seen as £1 and Sevco get a charge of bringing the game into disrepute as well as breaking minimum prices.
Or
The value of the ticket is seen as £15 and the voucher has a worth of £14, therefore the share of £15 has to still go to the SPL club.
If this is true, Green is a bigger moron than I thought. They really think they've been hard done by over this. It's incredible.
Take a look as to how they refer to other D3 clubs; arrogant, deluded and full of themselves. They also think that other clubs are "obsessed" with Rangers to the detriment of the support of their own team, whereas people are supporting their teams perfectly well, they're just finding it hilarious to find a team of cheats struggling to beat the likes of Brechin and Peterhead.
Let's face it. They're just dreaming up new ways of cheating. Unrepentant vermin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Northernhibee
Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Good letter mate. I'd no idea they had suspended the guy, absolute disgrace if true but there is a big presence in Falkirk.
On the Sevco / oldco thing. They cannot have their cake and eat it. This is where the issues come in regards court action. Even if it was thrown out it would shatter the establishment myth (LIE!) that nothing has changed at Mordor except the owner.
So Falkirk have suspended their stadium announcer after being deluged by complaints from irate hunnery :rolleyes: i never expect huns to have a sense of humour but still, thats petty.
They should really change their song to 'No one likes us, and we really care. A LOT'.
Yeah, they do care a lot. They are liars as well as thieves and beggars, every one of them. I've just emailed Falkirk FC as a resident of ten plus years to complain about this fellow's treatment. Shabby to say the least. Their name IS Sevco. Holding company of The Rangers FC 2012 is Sevco 5088. So nothing innaccurate or offensive.
There is no company registered under name of The Rangers FC 2012.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
The football club, now registered as The Rangers Football Club Limited but formerly registered as Sevco Scotland Limited, has no holding company. According to Companies House, it has 2 shares in issue, both of which are held by Charles Green.
Sevco 5088 is the company that was used to purchase the assets of RFC (IA). IIRC, those assets were then transferred to Sevco Scotland, now known as The Rangers Football Club Limited.
No matter how many ways you slice it, their name is no longer Sevco.
I realise there's a lot of confusion in this area but "The Rangers FC" is the renamed Sevco Scotland (I think the assets of OldHuns were bought by Sevco 5088 and then transferred to Sevco Scotland).Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Rangers FC plc (OldHuns) was not a holding company (the rather obvious clue being it didn't hold shares in any other company), it was Rangers.
Sevco Scotland, now renamed The Rangers FC Ltd is not a holding company either, it is the new Rangers.
The new Rangers owns the assets of the old Rangers but there is no legal connection from one entity to the other.
And that tells us that the £5.5m paid for the assets of Deadrangers is not share capital. Looks like it's all loan capital, which gives the lie to Compo's claim that the newhuns are debt-free.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Good point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
My only reservation would be that further shares may have been issued since that date.
(I can't remember... do you still have to register share issues between Annual Returns? If so, and shares have been issued, maybe the issue hasn't been registered yet, or perhaps CH haven't published it.)
One also wonders how much TRFC Ltd. paid Sevco 5088 for the assets, and how that was financed? :cb
I believe you do have to register new share issues, it's only changes in the holders of existing shares that can wait for the Annual Return. It is possible that they just haven't completed the paperwork yet, but that seems a bit dangerous given the circumstances.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I notice there's a mortgage registered with what is now Rangers - I'll be away from tomorrow, so I haven't bothered to get a copy.
I saw that, and investigated it further.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
It's in relation to the training ground, so we know that that property, at least, is in the name of TRFC Ltd.
You might remember that the Scottish Sports Council had a charge on OldHuns.... I think it was in respect of a grant that they had given them to buy or refit Murray Park. I don't know the terms of the grant, but presumably it was repayable if certain conditions weren't met within a certain time.
This charge names the SSC, so it looks like NewHun took over that particular part of OldHuns liabilities. IIRC, that was the only secured creditor, apart from the infamous pie mortgage.
Can't see Grren getting away with telling lies. The Scottish press would be all over it. They surely wouldn't let it happen again...........would they?Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Suspended. Deary me.
yep, ridiculous, how dare anyone have a laugh at them. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by 3pm
Can't believe that the vast majority of Rangers fans wouldn't just laugh it off and give the announcer a two fingered salute and a suitable word or two.
Load of nonsense, and just a bit of banter.
I absolutely love how the article explains what Castle Greyskull is. :faf:
On RM they were going to boycott over it. I hope they reinstate him on 31 August.
Why does the article talk about Rangers? They don't exist anymore.
I love that guy. Justice for Dave!
"very serious". :faf:
Is it any worse than the cop showing 5-1 with hands to the yams at the recent derby game? Enough Hibbies got wound up over that .
To be fair, its a bit ironic considering some of the moaning on here regarding the yam security guard who ended up getting suspended. That was equally as petty IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
Humour seems to be dying more and more in the game these days, its a real shame.
Sadly these days Brian banter is not acceptable. Jeezus half of us would not have made it out of Wallyford Primary without the banter. People need to seriously lighten up there are far worse actions taking place under their noses and yet recent stories re Special Constables and Stadium Announcers totally astound me.Quote:
Originally Posted by surreyhibbie
It seems these days that the more criminal your behaviour, the more vile your comments, then the more nobody will say a word. However crack a wee joke or try to have a laugh - and you are sacked, suspended or reprimanded.
What a disgusting wee country we are turning into:boo hoo:
Rant over going to soak in a bath now, 7 a sides tonight taking it's toll:greengrin
McIntosh’s half-time Third Division scores round up is believed to have included “the Sevco franchise 2, East Stirling 1”, while “the final score from Castle Greyskull was Sevco franchise, 5 East Stirling 1”.:faf::faf::not worth
The term has long been used as derogatory name for Ibrox. BBC weathergirl Kirsty McCabe was criticised when she used the term in 2006. She had told fans they should “wrap up warm if they’re heading for Castle Greyskull” when Rangers played Livingston
just :faf:
Rangers fans have reacted angrily to what they feel is an insult to their club.
hypocritical shower o sh@yte
“the final score from Castle Greyskull was Sevco franchise, 5 East Stirling 1”
just :faf:
the boys a good un, well done dave :fenlon
Sounds like Glasgow Rovers or whatever they are called are vying for the nickname "Bairns" now.
Yep, we're a nation of sour puss'. The grey men have taken over and all colour is being squeezed out of life. As I recall that started in Wallyford :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by fatbloke
Isn't it about time someone started a petition
FREE THE FALKIRK ONE
AgreedQuote:
Originally Posted by Pitlochry hibee
That was my first thought. Our faux outrage managed to help get a policeman suspended so I'm not sure we should be throwing stones from our glass house.Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky
:thumbup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky
If he had made some joke about the Scottish Cup Final a few on here would have been calling for him to be hung, drawn and quartered.
Difference is he is an announcer, who clearly supports Falkirk and works to an audience.
A copper, is a copper. They need to be above this. That said, a few coppers having a laugh with fans of the team he supports should not have been taken too seriously.
Anyone know any Hibby coppers?
J
There are a couple of Hibs supporting plods who post on the Bounce, so they do exist!
;-)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bristolhibby
Ask Petrie........ he's in charge of the Hibs coppers. :)
No, the polis said he was suspended because someone made a complaint. No idea who, and most agree it was an over reaction - just like in this case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
What is the world coming too? At the rate this country is going it will soon be mandatory to gag yourself and sit on your hands while attending football matches for fear of offending someone while the crowd control is overseen by robots.
Some people need to get a life.
We are all falkirk stadium announcer
The fairly obvious difference is that Rangers weren't playing against Falkirk on Saturday. Every Hun that has complained must have heard about this second hand.Quote:
Originally Posted by lucky