Printable View
Glad to say I boycotted the Daily ****** some years ago, for just this sort of "reporting", its actually just a news letter for the the huns as much as it was one for the huns.Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
Come on Dundee Utd......................
Of course there's no difference between the SPL and Division 3 - McCulloch scores 20 goals in half a season every year...Quote:
Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens
That was embarrassing even by usual hun standards......Do they really believe the nonsense that they spout????Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevie Reid
Sevco getting the hump.....again :greengrin
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...gers-1-2755684
:lolrangers:
Gorgeous George taking on Sevco.
http://videocelts.com/2013/01/blogs/...n-rangers-debt
Ooooooh, I came over all "would you like me to be the cat" when reading that!:greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by green glory
http://www.parliament.uk/edm/2012-13/913
:worms: this could be interesting. :agree:
Be hilarious if all the dosh was taken off them :hilariousQuote:
Originally Posted by H18sry
Sadly, will never happen. It would need a complete reversal of so many insolvency and company laws.Quote:
Originally Posted by Desperate Dan
There is actually more chance of HMRC getting the cash out of the directors of the old company. That is in the power of the liquidators, if they see fit.
I might have taken this a bit more seriously if it wasn't put down by Galloway. Isn't he Celtc-minded?
Well done George. And Ronnie Campbell, excellent MP.
Death nail for any Scottish MP to sign this unnecessary motion.
Yes, but not as much as he's Galloway-minded.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Indeed. Likes to keep in the background, doesn't he? :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Prof. ****gy
At last Galloway has done something I approve of. No Scottish MP will sign it of course, they are as cowed by hun fear as the media.
Dundee is in Scotland :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Can we sign a petition backing him !!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by H18sry
I see Dundee U have sold 200 tickets to Sevco fans, despite Charles nae Green's boycott. Hope they all get their ****** hieds kicked in, plus Green.
Does Galloway think we are as dumb as the Sevco masses who hang on Charles Greens every word as he plays to the gallery? Gorgeous George is playing exactly the same game here. Nothing more than self serving bawbaggery from the man who's only solid political achievement has been to enrich himself.
There is a serious point to be made here about Phoenix companies. It's just a shame that it hasn't been taken up by serious politicians in the past.
It doesnt matter what his 'self serving' intentions are. Hes launched an Early Day Motion on the subject, and for that he should be applauded.
If its the same list I saw last night, it includes lifelong Cellic fan and ST holder Jim McGovern also.
Is this the culmination of years of campaigning against companies who rise from the dead and continue trading then? Obviously this Early day motion will actually achieve something other than promoting Galloway and I stand corrected. Given his odious utterings the last time he raised his head over the parapet I will applaud nothing he does. Do you really think he is raising this motion in order to change things? I have a healthy contempt for any politician who gets involved in football for whatever reason but I reserve an extra dollop of contempt for Galloway.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
I hear your contempt loud and clear. I dont like him much either. Would you support the text of the EDM if it was introduced by another politician?
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...g-fa-1-2760303
"If Mr Scudamore and his colleagues have, indeed, been saying "no" consistently for 14 years, then the club has been wronged continuously since, at least, 2000 when the Act came into force."
It will would be fun to see The Rangers win their case only to discover that they have no claim to any advantage that the former Rangers Football Club may have had and they start at the very bottom wherever that may be.
Wow, that's even madder than anything Charles Green has come up with. Rangers should exploit EU competition law which, if successful, would compel the Bundesliga to accept Ajax, Serie A to accept Portsmouth and La Liga to accept Hibs. However, if they do, UEFA can impose appropriate sanctions for using the courts anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by CentreLine
Did the guy get paid for writing this guff?
No. It's a meaningless gesture.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
But it still made me smile. Imagine GG and CG debating it on national tv. There would only be one winner. The viewers :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
:agree: It seems to me that Mr MacLean is talking through his learned erse. Regardless of anyone's views on whether or not The Rangers are the same club as the old Rangers, it's very clear that in law they are not. That's the same law that enabled them to evade at least £55m of tax and other debts and the law they would be depending on for any action of this nature. For an Advocate to miss or disregard that basic fact is staggering. There are several other holes in his argument as well but that single point kills it stone dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by CentreLine
I wouldn't. The current insolvency laws are far from perfect, but they are better than they have ever been. For one thing, the concept of the phoenix company protects employment, and helps to minimise the burden on the state of redundant workers.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibsbollah
If they do go down the legal route then they do have a case and would likely win. However they may have to start at the bottom as they are a new club.
Maybe. I don't much care for Galloway either, but I am glad to see somebody at least publicly standing up to the endless threats, bullying, whining and intimidation from Green and his horrible "institution", whether it will succeed or not. Because nobody else seems prepared to do it, on any issue.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Drew 1-1 wi Montrose at the bigot dome. :greengrin:na na: Green's Euro masterplan on course.
I am sure his Bradford constituents agree with you and are delighted to see their MP waste precious parliament time on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
It's an injustice on a massive scale that nobody seems prepared to fight. And MPs don't only concern themselves with issues exclusively from within their own constituency.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
It seems to me, as an ordinary joe whose tax is deducted at source, that the current system is farcical. Liquidation and reincarnation appears to favour the seedy businessman/crook at the expense of those to whom they owe money. The current situation at Ipox underlines the ease with which companies can jettison their obligations and continue to operate....and in the case of Sevco, actually boast of how successful their machinations have been.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
I don't care that it's Galloway who's highlighting this issue, though the man emanates a truly bad smell. I just hope it leads to a shake up of the law. Sadly though, too many politicians are up to their necks in business ventures, while they should be concentrating their minds on running the country for the benefit of the people rather than themselves.
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
Good post. I see marinello's point about wasting Mps time (although I must say I have precious little faith in any of them) but I just want someone, anyone, to flag this up in any way they can rather than just accept it, as so many people who are in a position to do/say something (media) seem to prefer to do.
Well said. :top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by Jack Hackett
..and this. :top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by The Green Goblin
When does the Nimmo-Smith enquiry take place?
It was due to start in November. I don't think it is public, so chances are that it is ongoing at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozyhibby
This week. Tuesday.
Jabba is mouthing off again on the official Sevco site about the investigation. The usual **** about how unfair it all is and how the stripping of any titles will be tantamount to armageddon for Scottish football.
I smell fear. I've been looking forward to this week for a long time. Hopefully common sense will prevail and severe punishments follow.
The interesting thing is you can bet your bottom dollar Chuckles will prefer stripped titles to a financial penalty, and it'll give him another chance to whip the maggot-folk up into another frenzy.
The worse it is for them the better in my opinion.
I forgot to mention I wish them nothing but misery and pain.
Just my opinion. :-D
:top marksQuote:
Originally Posted by green glory
I think you may just find that that opinion is shared by many of your fellow users on this board, myself included. You may also find that sentiment being shared by nearly every fan of Scottish football, except those of a Sevco persuasion
Not sure if this has been posted before but is seems worthy of support to me?
EARLY DAY MOTION 913
RANGERS TAX LIABILITIES
That this House notes that the owners of the club now playing in the Scottish Third Division called Rangers claim that it is the same club with the same history as the liquidated club also known as Rangers; further notes that 14 million in VAT and PAYE was withheld in the run-up to administration by the previous Rangers; further notes that the club is now cash-rich through a share issue which raised in excess of 20 million; condemns the use of insolvency laws to avoid paying tax owed; and calls on the Government to take steps to reclaim the outstanding monies from Rangers and to bring forward legislative proposals to prevent clubs and companies sidestepping their liabilities through liquidation and then carrying on trading with effectively the same name and in exactly the same business.
This could be fun..!
Quite right, if they accepted reality, that they are a different club with no history then that would be the end of it. However, if they wish to carry on insisting it's business as usual, then they should have to deal with the negatives of that, as well as the positives they desire.
Absolutely nothing will come of this, if it's even heard.
Gorgeous George. The Bradford jihadi tim and The Sevco skelper!
I noticed today in the Daily ****** that Jim Traynor was going on about today being the day the SPL decide if they are going to take all Oldco's titles from them. He threatens that if the SPL decide to take away all previous titles won whilst Oldco were playing players paid through EBT's, then no rangers supporter will ever set foot in another club's ground and this would kill the game in Scotland.
They still don't get it do they.
Take their titles off them and let carry out their threat.
Was that a promise..:pray:Quote:
Originally Posted by MB62
I honestly hope so, and I really hope they end up true to their word, pleeeeeeeeeeease.Quote:
Originally Posted by RossHibs
Let them dae just that, I'd be delighted if they chose tae boycott ER, I'm sure the local residents will be delighted too when they dinnae have tae clean up the piss, spew and broken glass from their stairs efter a visit fae the stick twirling, buckie swilling, blue carrier bag jakey brigade. Get the flags oot. :flag:Quote:
Originally Posted by MB62
This would kill the game in Scotland! The same way it died when they got punted fae the SPL! :hilarious GTF Traynor ya fat slavering *** slimeball :bye:
:singing: no-one likes you but you really do care :agree: :hilarious
Traynor rallying the Brown shirts again.:rolleyes:
Pathetic!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
We don't want any The Sevco fans at our ground, and that includes you Traynor you shameless hun blowhard.
I wish there was a way to refuse the them tickets, but I'm sure we're required to allocate a certain % to away fans. 15% if I recall correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
:not worthQuote:
Originally Posted by Hiberlin
You sir, have eyes like a ****hawk :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by reallapsedhibee
and you sir,have the panache of an uberfan :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by Hiberlin
Commission into payments and title stripping has started.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21242267
Interesting to note the language used about the them .....
...
The probe was launched before the company that ran Rangers - Rangers Football Club plc - was consigned to liquidation.
The consortium now running the club, led by chief executive Charles Green, has refused to recognise or co-operate with the investigation.
Kind of implies that it is the same club, just with different people at the top (according to the BBC).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newry Hibs
Let them call themselves Rangers FC, when the titles get stripped they will owe prize money of circa £8m to other member clubs. They'll have to admit they're not the same club officially or pay up. Over to you Chuckles. :thumbsup:
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny Clash
Any news from today? I need cheering up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greenlex
http://www.channel4.com/news/the-unr...-key-questions
Good read here on the The Sevco. Thomson is quite a brave hack to keep the heat on the Mordor undead.
And here is a nice breakdown of the cheated gongs to be stripped if the tribunal verdict goes against oldco.
http://www.channel4.com/news/rangers...mmission-opens
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newry Hibs
Is this the same BBC who continually refer to them as being 'relegated' to Div 3?
14 titles would be stripped if it goes against them....However would the clubs who lost points to derhun during the seasons involved, or the teams knocked out of cups in all rounds by derhun, be entitled to compensation?Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Who could they sue? The Huns are dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy Foghorn
Possibly entitled, but they wouldn't get any. Certainly not from the SPL, SFA or old hun.Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy Foghorn
It might be possible to take new hun to court, but I suspect it would be lengthy, costly and limited chance of success.
Yes I sort of thought that compensation would be unlikely, it would be a real mess to try and unravel all of that, and as you say lengthy and costly...............Shame...Quote:
Originally Posted by StevieC
The money's long gone. I'll settle for the stripped titles accompanied by the sound of Huns and their foul children wailing like Gollum upon realising "the precious is lost"!Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldy Foghorn
By "precious" do you mean one of their 5 stars?Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
:greengrin
Don't think so. Sevco were allowed an SFA licence on condition that they accept the findings of the SPL enquiry. So hitting them for money would be a fine outcome. :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by green glory
And the one Chuckie fears most I'd guess.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
What does he mean by this? Seems to be current tense. Is HMRC still chasing them for money? Are they chasing Sevco??Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Quote:
It is alleged that under Whyte, Rangers stopped making national insurance contributions, and HMRC is chasing the club for a fee believed to be around £3-4m.
Quote:
Originally Posted by green glory
Absolutely! All the noise from our pal Chuckie the *****ie is about these are his titles, this is of course for Orc consumption, the reality is he knows there could be a financial claw back as he's signed to take deadco's penaltys, and this is what he's really sounding off on. I suspect he would fold up The Sevco and head to the Cayman's with his mysteron consortium and the alleged £20m if that happens. Fingers crossed!
It's the OldCo.Quote:
Originally Posted by grunt
It's current tense because they have a claim against the liquidation. That claim may turn out to be against the former directors, but that's the liquidators' call.
Here's the draft agreement between Sevco, Deadco, and the three bodies, SFA SPL SFL, a fine piece of work it is. Suggests collusion and a desperation to get Sevco into the highest possible league. But the stripping of titles seems to be taken as a given, so Sevco can't do owt if it is authentic!
http://kerrydalestreet.co.uk/single/...4473&t=8748656
Is there any update news regarding the alleged Conflict of Interest with Duff & Phelps handling of the administration of Rangers.
Last I heard was at the stage of the Judge (Noble??) getting a copy of the taped conversation between Craigie boy and the senior guy at D & P.
Seems ages ago - have I missed any recent announcements regarding this? :confused:
I really don't understand why all this has to go to courts, hearings, etc. The question to Newco is quite simple,
Do you want to have all the history and titles of Oldco?
If YES - then fine, pay all the debt that Oldco was due and you can keep all the history and titles you want.
If No - then great, their history starts as off summer 2012 and they are debt free.
Shirley it's a simple choice
Not as simple, because the they were only allowed to be in the SFL at all on the basis of a fudge. If the they were a genuinely new entity the they wouldn't have got in at all. So the governing bodies have already accepted there's an element of oldness in the the newco.Quote:
Originally Posted by MB62
:tee hee:Quote:
Originally Posted by reallapsedhibee
Quote:
Originally Posted by reallapsedhibee
Don't be silly, they - SFA, SFL, SPL - bent all the rules to let them in and would have had them in the SPL but for fans saying no. Galloway's motion says it all: they are masquerading as oldco but paying none of the robbed creditors, or 14m in unpaid PAYE that oldco witheld. There's a price for trading as oldco.
Also, the real truth is the stripped titles should go back further than the EBT scam. Murray's club was financially doped by Bank of Scotland right through the 90's - money that will never be paid back by him or deadco. Labour's last act of incompetence was to knight this fraud act.
The SPL commission is hearing evidence this week, do we know when their findings will be made public?
Presumably, George Galloway will put down a motion demanding that Browns Food Group pay the tax debts of Hall's, since they are now operating under that brand.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...tland-21249280
No? :rolleyes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Halls were a subsidiary of the Dutch parent company, Vion, Cropley. Vion continues with liability's of the subsidiary. Rangers FC 1872-2012 (RIP) were not a subsidiary.
Sorry, that's not the case. Brown bought the Hall's brand from Vion. A spokesman for Vion said: "Following their acquisition of the Hall's brand, we would like to wish Browns Food Group every success with their plans for the business."Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
In the same way that Sevco bought the Rangers brand, Browns won't be liable for Vion's liabilities.
Enough sausage talk! Back on topic please, ie our bigoted 'hidden hand of fenionism' papist agenda to destroy the 'traditions' of The The The Rangers and all things protestant. (Apparently).
:-D
There is a link, though :greengrinQuote:
Originally Posted by green glory
Stuff the saving of 50 jobs that this has resulted in. Sporting Integrity demands that they should only be referred to as Halls if they are happy to take on the liabilities of the old company. And any prestigous meat awards gained during Vion's ownership should be stripped from them. Our unbiased moral outrage at the Oldco/Newco/anyoldco situation demands nothing less.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
:tee hee: maybe they could swap to keep everyone happy? halls get several spl titles and a few cups and rangers get the title of champion meat packers 2001 to 2010 bestowed upon them? seems fair to me.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Edited.Quote:
Originally Posted by South Sub
Don't you agree, though, that Sevco are a chipolata off the old block?
:not worth:top marksAttachment 9315Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
The difference is that Brown's have paid for the Hall's brand. Duff & Phelps paid Sevco to take the Rangers brand away if the prospectus was to be believed.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Rusky business saying things like that mate, the sevco masses won't like it, they're heid bangers so watch it or they'll mash you up and batter you.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
So you're saying that the sausages weren't a take-away :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Anyone still eat Hall's Wee Willie Winkies?
And no I'm not a Yam before anyone assumes!
:-D
Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Yeah but Vion are holding the baby. Creditors, including HMRC, can petition Vion for monies. Who can can HMRC and the rest petition over oldco's debt? Not Murray or Whyte or Green.
:confused:
The Oldco. They have a claim against that company, in the same way that OldHalls creditors have a claim against OldHalls. They won't have a claim against Vion, since that is a separate company.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
And, if the liquidators see fit, they WILL have a claim against the former directors.
Would that claim only be valid if they can prove the directors let the business trade whilst knowing it was insolvent or is it easier than that?Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
It's basically as you describe.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
It's actually the liquidators, who are there on behalf of the creditors, who would be making the judgement. If they can show that OldCo traded whilst insolvent, the directors can be held personally liable for all debts incurred AFTER the point at which OldCo became insolvent.
I don't have a handle on the history of OldCo's accounts. But, at a rough guess, it could probably be argued that they were insolvent from the point at which the bank started demanding their money back. However, that's obviously a very subjective view, and the arguments on that would keep a lot of expensive lawyers in lamb-gravy for years.