Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Phil macs the celtic equivalent of that nutjob that hides in the bushes at east mains with the breaking rumour nonsense no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Taking that blog, adding in the charge against Green....stirring a bit....we come up with the idea that CG has purloined Murray Park for himself.

It's a bit fanciful....but, if it's true...Ashley 's lawyers, Rangers ex-auditors and Rangers current Board will all be cacking themselves for different reasons.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

Crops, maybe it's just me, I'm now totally confused with this whole thing, since Whyte bought from Murray.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr White

Phil macs the celtic equivalent of that nutjob that hides in the bushes at east mains with the breaking rumour nonsense no?

---

Actually, I am now running with Phil's thoughts now.....the telly is crap.

Maybe we're getting to the bottom of why Deloittes resigned as auditors. Maybe they realised that they f'd up.

Or maybe I'm turning into Phil? [emoji6]

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Actually, I am now running with Phil's thoughts now.....the telly is crap.

Maybe we're getting to the bottom of why Deloittes resigned as auditors. Maybe they realised that they f'd up.

Or maybe I'm turning into Phil? [emoji6]

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

Reading that last blog post it seems hard not to dismiss it as assumption based on currently reported fact dressed up as look at me I'm itk. Mind you even a broken clock etc... him not you btw :greengrin

What I really want is a full court case where there is full disclosure and the SFA must give evidence on the nature of their involvement.
My only other wish would by an insolvency event this season and the 25pt penalty that goes with it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr White

Reading that last blog post it seems hard not to dismiss it as assumption based on currently reported fact dressed up as look at me I'm itk. Mind you even a broken clock etc... him not you btw :greengrin

---

Yeah that's what the head is saying. But there have been so many twists in this case......

The film is going to be a belter.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

What I really want is a full court case where there is full disclosure and the SFA must give evidence on the nature of their involvement.
My only other wish would by an insolvency event this season and the 25pt penalty that goes with it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Far too lenient

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

Far too lenient

---

You know me Bill, always been the forgiving type. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yeah that's what the head is saying. But there have been so many twists in this case......

The film is going to be a belter.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

Question:

Are any of the current shenanigans likely to have any impact on the club known as the rangers?

If so how?

While I appreciate you normally answer such questions in accounting terms ... ;-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack

Question:

Are any of the current shenanigans likely to have any impact on the club known as the rangers?

If so how?

While I appreciate you normally answer such questions in accounting terms ...

---

It's very doubtful. For one thing, the Court cases won't start until well into next year.

However, IF Phil is right and CG has snaffled Murray Park without telling anybody. ...MA will call in his loan, which might trigger an insolvency event and Ozy will get half his wish.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Actually, I am now running with Phil's thoughts now.....the telly is crap.

Maybe we're getting to the bottom of why Deloittes resigned as auditors. Maybe they realised that they f'd up.

Or maybe I'm turning into Phil? [emoji6]

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

As you are neither paranoid or criminally insane I very much doubt you are turning into Phil.:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

As you are neither paranoid or criminally insane I very much doubt you are turning into Phil.:wink:

---

Thanks for the compliment.... I think :greengrin

Actually, been turning over the question of the charge against CG of transferring the "company property". I do find it hard to believe that he could transfer a building (Phil reckons Murray Park), without the auditors/MA's lawyers/Rangers' current Board/Rangers' current lawyers/diligent journalists/the general public/Green Ginger being able to find out.

It would be "easier" to do it with something less tangible.... say, the badges and stuff.

However, we're now getting into the area of speculation about the trial. The Crown office issued a warning the other day about that, so maybe we should stop. Any admin thoughts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

As you are neither paranoid or criminally insane I very much doubt you are turning into Phil.:wink:

---

I think we all know your feelings re Phil, but " Criminal " is going a bit far.

Phil is a bit paranoid I agree, but I think your equally paranoid about his paranoia. :greengrin

Phil has got a few gems of info. long before other media, you've just got to ignore his infuriating writing style, recognise his agenda and his target audience .

Regarding transfer of property, it is up to a purchaser/new owner if and when they register the new title with the Registers of Scotland. There is no legal requirement.

A signed , witnessed document with RIFC Company stamp on it may be lying in a lawyers office awaiting presentation as evidence of actual property ownership.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Regarding transfer of property, it is up to a purchaser/new owner if and when they register the new title with the Registers of Scotland. There is no legal requirement.

A signed , witnessed document with RIFC Company stamp on it may be lying in a lawyers office awaiting presentation as evidence of actual property ownership.

---

So how would MA's lawyers or RIFC's auditors establish title?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Regarding transfer of property, it is up to a purchaser/new owner if and when they register the new title with the Registers of Scotland. There is no legal requirement.

A signed , witnessed document with RIFC Company stamp on it may be lying in a lawyers office awaiting presentation as evidence of actual property ownership.

---

Which is what has been alleged by Phil for a long time along with his allegation that the new Rangers have to pay £278,000 a month in rent for whatever it is that has been transferred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Which is what has been alleged by Phil for a long time along with his allegation that the new Rangers have to pay £278,000 a month in rent for whatever it is that has been transferred.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

And it was shown that that lease was for catering equipment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

And it was shown that that lease was for catering equipment.

---

Hmm. I remember that discussion a few pages back (then you destroyed my illusions! :greengrin ) ......... But....... On 2nd thoughts, over a quarter of a £million per month on a few cookers, a kettle and a micro!!!! :cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

And it was shown that that lease was for catering equipment.

---

That's a lot of catering equipment?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

That's a lot of catering equipment?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Yep, but the accounts are quite clear. "Hire of plant and equipment". Not "rent of property". They then explain it as "The finance leases relate to funding of the refurbishment of the stadium fast food outlets."

The accounts go on to say that the Properties (plural) have been valued by.... etc etc.

And the leases are nowhere near what Phil says. £477k pa according to the accounts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

And it was shown that that lease was for catering equipment.

---

Everything changes so quickly in this saga. It was also shown on here a few months back that all the assets were in fact owned by Rangers and that you only had to check to see the title deeds or something.
Now Green ginger is saying that it's possible someone else owns them and they have not registered them and that there is no requirement for them to do so?
Given that the law are now involved, I think it would be difficult to rule anything out. I just hope that it has a disastrous effect on the new Rangers as I have come to dislike them as much as the old Rangers.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yep, but the accounts are quite clear. "Hire of plant and equipment". Not "rent of property". They then explain it as "The finance leases relate to funding of the refurbishment of the stadium fast food outlets."

The accounts go on to say that the Properties (plural) have been valued by.... etc etc.

And the leases are nowehere near what Phil says. £477k pa according to the accounts.

---

Difficult to say it's the same thing if the amounts are different, no?
It is surely possible that there are two amounts leaving the club?
I'm pretty sure these guys could find a way of hiding the money given that it's estimated they spent about £70m in the two years after the ipo and nobody seems to know what on?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Difficult to say it's the same thing if the amounts are different, no?
It is surely possible that there are two amounts leaving the club?
I'm pretty sure these guys could find a way of hiding the money given that it's estimated they spent about £70m in the two years after the ipo and nobody seems to know what on?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I'd prefer to let the auditors, the property valuers and MA's lawyers make a judgement on that. Thus far, Phil has only speculated, with nothing in the way of hard evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I'd prefer to let the auditors, the property valuers and MA's lawyers make a judgement on that. Thus far, Phil has only speculated, with nothing in the way of hard evidence.

---

I agree on that although I hope it's more that just MA's lawyers that eventually pass judgement.
I'm not saying that Phil is correct, just that it's hard to say with any certainty what is correct in this whole thing.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I have too much time on my hands today :greengrin

The accounts have the following statement:-

At 31 August 2012 the Directors valued the Freehold Properties, comprising Ibrox stadium and Murray Park training facility based on a value in use calculation of the net present values of future operating cash flows.

They don't mention the car park or Edmiston House. Two thoughts:-

1. those may be included as "the stadium", since they're adjoining.

2. they may not be, and RIFC don't own them any more. In that case, either the reports of MA having security over them are wrong, or (as was discussed earlier) his lawyers really have f'd up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yep, but the accounts are quite clear. "Hire of plant and equipment". Not "rent of property". They then explain it as "The finance leases relate to funding of the refurbishment of the stadium fast food outlets."

The accounts go on to say that the Properties (plural) have been valued by.... etc etc.

And the leases are nowhere near what Phil says. £477k pa according to the accounts.

---

Sigh...... Every time I get all exited YOU come along and burst my bubble with the pesky truth!! :grr:







PS keep up the good work, glad someone can get a handle reality :aok:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I have too much time on my hands today :greengrin

The accounts have the following statement:-

At 31 August 2012 the Directors valued the Freehold Properties, comprising Ibrox stadium and Murray Park training facility based on a value in use calculation of the net present values of future operating cash flows.

They don't mention the car park or Edmiston House. Two thoughts:-

1. those may be included as "the stadium", since they're adjoining.

2. they may not be, and RIFC don't own them any more. In that case, either the reports of MA having security over them are wrong, or (as was discussed earlier) his lawyers really have f'd up.

---

Rather than any hiving by CG once installed in Ibrox as chairman, is it not more likely that the ownership of *all* the assets is questionable because of dodgy dealings in the acquisition of the Hun brand and assets by Sevco? If it's proved that Duff, Duffer, CG and CW were all in cahoots, could that purchase be challenged and the assets returned to the liquidator? Thus putting MA's security in doubt and making him more likely to try and get his money back sharpish.

Glasgow Rangers - Always the flippin' victim :rolleyes:

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...robe-1-3877838

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

Rather than any hiving by CG once installed in Ibrox as chairman, is it not more likely that the ownership of *all* the assets is questionable because of dodgy dealings in the acquisition of the Hun brand and assets by Sevco? If it's proved that Duff, Duffer, CG and CW were all in cahoots, could that purchase be challenged and the assets returned to the liquidator? Thus putting MA's security in doubt and making him more likely to try and get his money back sharpish.

---

They wouldn't be returned to the liquidator. The liquidator has never had them in his possession.

If they were to be returned to anyone, it would be the administrators to redo the whole CVA process. In your scenario, that's not an option.

As I mentioned earlier, if it's proven that the creditors have been shafted.....either through incompetence or fraud....the liquidator can sue the administrators.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

I have too much time on my hands today :greengrin

The accounts have the following statement:-

At 31 August 2012 the Directors valued the Freehold Properties, comprising Ibrox stadium and Murray Park training facility based on a value in use calculation of the net present values of future operating cash flows.

They don't mention the car park or Edmiston House. Two thoughts:-

1. those may be included as "the stadium", since they're adjoining.

2. they may not be, and RIFC don't own them any more. In that case, either the reports of MA having security over them are wrong, or (as was discussed earlier) his lawyers really have f'd up.

---

Pretty sure the Registers of Scotland shows both EH and the car park as belonging to Rangers. It's also a matter of public record that MA does have security over them.

What has NEVER been properly established is who really owns Ibrox itself, as if the Rangers did there would, surely, be no harm, or shame in mortgaging it to provide much needed capital.

I still say that MA is looking for a watertight loan default condition in order to tighten the screw.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yep, but the accounts are quite clear. "Hire of plant and equipment". Not "rent of property". They then explain it as "The finance leases relate to funding of the refurbishment of the stadium fast food outlets."

The accounts go on to say that the Properties (plural) have been valued by.... etc etc.

And the leases are nowhere near what Phil says. £477k pa according to the accounts.

---

So, how would say a royalty fee show in the accounts....?

Let's suppose that an offshore company has a contract whereby they're legally entitled to a percentage of the gate, or in return for some 'service' they receive a 'royalty payment' based on attendance and/or which Division the team plays in.

Bear in mind that Green and Co set up 'onerous contracts' deliberately so as to avoid any specific detailed inspection and more importantly to benefit themselves...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

They wouldn't be returned to the liquidator. The liquidator has never had them in his possession.

If they were to be returned to anyone, it would be the administrators to redo the whole CVA process. In your scenario, that's not an option.

As I mentioned earlier, if it's proven that the creditors have been shafted.....either through incompetence or fraud....the liquidator can sue the administrators.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

BDO seem quite good on the litigation front. What would happen to the assets if BDO won? Does RIFC get to keep them? Aren't they effectively stolen goods at that point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

BDO seem quite good on the litigation front. What would happen to the assets if BDO won? Does RIFC get to keep them? Aren't they effectively stolen goods at that point?

---

And maybe someone should sue BDO for the fiddled result on the vote in favour of Heart of Midlothian's CVA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Yeah that's what the head is saying. But there have been so many twists in this case......

The film is going to be a belter.

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

Unfortunately, John Candy won't be able to play McCoist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JeMeSouviens

BDO seem quite good on the litigation front. What would happen to the assets if BDO won? Does RIFC get to keep them? Aren't they effectively stolen goods at that point?

---

Rangers will be unaffected.

This is a dispute between Administrator and Liquidator. BDO would sue D&P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

Rangers will be unaffected.

This is a dispute between Administrator and Liquidator. BDO would sue D&P.

---

More than likely, but until it is sorted out I think a fresh share issue is out of the question and loans from Real Rangers men will be thin on the ground.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

More than likely, but until it is sorted out I think a fresh share issue is out of the question and loans from Real Rangers men will be thin on the ground.

---

Do Rangers need loans? I have no idea.

They have a much cheaper squad than last season and they're playing to 45k crowds. Income must surely be up:dunno:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

Do Rangers need loans? I have no idea.

They have a much cheaper squad than last season and they're playing to 45k crowds. Income must surely be up:dunno:

---

I can't see the 4 guys they brought up from England being cheaper than Boyd, Dailly, Black etc and Warburton and Weir , who knows. I would guess £ 1 million for the manager and £ 0.5 m for the assistant.

Last season they were toiling for cash by December and that was starting with £ 5 million of share issue money still in the bank.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

Rangers will be unaffected.

This is a dispute between Administrator and Liquidator. BDO would sue D&P.

---

If the assets of the new Rangers were incorrectly represented in the ipo then surely some of the institutional investors may have a case against the new Rangers?
I think it's too early to say that new Rangers will be unaffected.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

I can't see the 4 guys they brought up from England being cheaper than Boyd, Dailly, Black etc and Warburton and Weir , who knows. I would guess £ 1 million for the manager and £ 0.5 m for the assistant.

Last season they were toiling for cash by December and that was starting with £ 5 million of share issue money still in the bank.

---

King has said they will need external finance to finish the season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cropley10

So, how would say a royalty fee show in the accounts....?

Let's suppose that an offshore company has a contract whereby they're legally entitled to a percentage of the gate, or in return for some 'service' they receive a 'royalty payment' based on attendance and/or which Division the team plays in.

Bear in mind that Green and Co set up 'onerous contracts' deliberately so as to avoid any specific detailed inspection and more importantly to benefit themselves...

---

Not sure if royalties need to be separately disclosed in the accounts. Cav will know.

Decent scam, though.

Edit. If the offshore company has a connection with the club, it would have to be disclosed as a Related Party Transaction


Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

It must be desperate times in the world of Chartered Accountancy.

Campbell Dallas have accepted the role as auditors to the Rangers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

It must be desperate times in the world of Chartered Accountancy.

Campbell Dallas have accepted the role as auditors to the Rangers.

---

Everybody does dirty things for money. Some of us haggle about the price....

Where are you reading that?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Everybody does dirty things for money. Some of us haggle about the price....

Where are you reading that?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

---

I saw it on the web. Maybe the Evening Times. On my phone now so can't link.

I googled Rangers and limited the search to 24 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Golden Fleece

I saw it on the web. Maybe the Evening Times. On my phone now so can't link.

I googled Rangers and limited the search to 24 hours.

---

Just back in the office, and found it, cheers for that.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...tors-1-3877773

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Just back in the office, and found it, cheers for that.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...tors-1-3877773

---

Yes that looks like it.

If it's proved that the assets were fraudulently acquired surely the subsequent share issue would also have been fraudulent which would mean that the sale to the Easdale's would be suspect too.

Quote:

---

award-winning, progressive and dynamic

---

Wow! Not words usually associated with the world of Chartered Accountancy! :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Wow! Not words usually associated with the world of Chartered Accountancy! :greengrin

---

Square go?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Square go?

---

No you're too big for me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

No you're too big for me.

---

Just as well this is a family board :)

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the...tile-takeover/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/the...tile-takeover/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Ozy, is the cash flow problems on this article nor worse that most experts were reckoning?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

Ozy, is the cash flow problems on this article nor worse that most experts were reckoning?

---

Hope so

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

Ozy, is the cash flow problems on this article nor worse that most experts were reckoning?

---

Up until now most estimates were that they had money till November. Not sure why it would now be brought forward. Either way, they still appear to need external finance. Doesn't look like the 3 bears are up for lending anymore and there is little chance of a share issue while there are ongoing court cases casting doubt on the ownership of assets (that may also make admin difficult).
In short Billy, I've not got a clue but my fingers are crossed. We could do with a break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Up until now most estimates were that they had money till November. Not sure why it would now be brought forward. Either way, they still appear to need external finance. Doesn't look like the 3 bears are up for lending anymore and there is little chance of a share issue while there are ongoing court cases casting doubt on the ownership of assets (that may also make admin difficult).
In short Billy, I've not got a clue but my fingers are crossed. We could do with a break.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

November was what I had read, but it looks like they are going to need some serious funding sometime soon. However the more they win, the more fans will roll up to Ibrox for the home games. A nice little defeat sometime soon wouldn't go amiss

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Hope so

---

Pray so

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

November was what I had read, but it looks like they are going to need some serious funding sometime soon. However the more they win, the more fans will roll up to Ibrox for the home games. A nice little defeat sometime soon wouldn't go amiss

---

Even if they sell out every week they will still run out of cash. They have almost burnt through the season ticket money already.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ally and The Rangers agree to terminate contractearly , dave king claims Hibs approached The Rangers over Scott Allan and The Rangers to win premiership next season.


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...ract-1-3883084

Deluded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonty

Ally and The Rangers agree to terminate contractearly , dave king claims Hibs approached The Rangers over Scott Allan and The Rangers to win premiership next season.


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...ract-1-3883084

Deluded.

---

Didn't see the bit about SA - retracted?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonty

Ally and The Rangers agree to terminate contractearly , dave king claims Hibs approached The Rangers over Scott Allan and The Rangers to win premiership next season.


http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...ract-1-3883084

Deluded.

---

Can only see the story about AMcC nowt there about SA or winning premiership next year.

Raman Bhardwaj‏@STVRaman 43m43 minutes ago Dave King claims Hibs came to Rangers asking if they wanted to do business to buy Scott Allan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Raman Bhardwaj‏@STVRaman 43m43 minutes ago Dave King claims Hibs came to Rangers asking if they wanted to do business to buy Scott Allan.

---

It's great of King to acknowledge that we stitched them up a cracker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Raman Bhardwaj‏@STVRaman 43m43 minutes ago Dave King claims Hibs came to Rangers asking if they wanted to do business to buy Scott Allan.

---

... and the follow-up?

Rangers... "yes, please."

Hibs.... "thought so. Beat it."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Raman Bhardwaj‏@STVRaman 43m43 minutes ago Dave King claims Hibs came to Rangers asking if they wanted to do business to buy Scott Allan.

---

Would expect nothing less from King. He is a glib and shameless liar after all and he needs excuses to keep the knuckle draggers thinking of things other than where the money is going to come fro to keep SS sevco afloat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Raman Bhardwaj‏@STVRaman 43m43 minutes ago Dave King claims Hibs came to Rangers asking if they wanted to do business to buy Scott Allan.

---

They will probably rise above it, but, if I were in Dempster and Stubbs' shoes, I would be all over that like a ton of bricks. Don't let King have the last word.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

They will probably rise above it, but, if I were in Dempster and Stubbs' shoes, I would be all over that like a ton of bricks. Don't let King have the last word.

---

Shameless liar Mr King......Thought they would have more pertinent things to worry about at the moment......:rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

They will probably rise above it, but, if I were in Dempster and Stubbs' shoes, I would be all over that like a ton of bricks. Don't let King have the last word.

---

I think they probably have to respond given their stance over the summer.
Given that the club are trying to rebuild the trust between the club and the fans, they can't allow this to go unremarked upon.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baldy Foghorn

Shameless liar Mr King......Thought they would have more pertinent things to worry about at the moment......:rolleyes:

---

They do which is probably why he has said it. He knows it will keep our hapless press busy for a few days while he is here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

They do which is probably why he has said it. He knows it will keep our hapless press busy for a few days while he is here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

It's not on the STV site, and only been Tweeted by Bhardwaj.

I'm guessing that, if DK did say it, he's retracted it.

In a normal environment, other media people would now be asking him about it. In other words, don't expect anyone to follow it up. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

It's not on the STV site, and only been Tweeted by Bhardwaj.

I'm guessing that, if DK did say it, he's retracted it.

In a normal environment, other media people would now be asking him about it. In other words, don't expect anyone to follow it up. :greengrin

---

It's on the STV news app and he is adamant the initial approach came from Hibs and then our stance changed.

FROM STV NEWS APP

Hibs made initial approach to Rangers over Scott Allan, Dave King claims
Thu, 10 Sep 2015 14:18:00 BST


Rangers chairman Dave King has claimed that Hibernian made the initial approach to the Ibrox club over the transfer of Scott Allan.

Highly-rated midfielder Allan moved from Hibernian to Celtic in August after weeks of uncertainty over the player’s future.

Rangers had made multiple bids for the 23-year-old before his switch to Glasgow’s East End but Hibernian rejected their offers, insisting they would not sell to a Championship promotion rival.

When confirming that Allan had submitted a written transfer request after a second Rangers offer was knocked back, Hibs had said that they had rejected two "unwelcome and uninvited" bids for the player. The club explained that they had "no wish to transfer a valuable player to strengthen a major rival in the battle to win the Championship and gain promotion to the Premiership".

Now, King has questioned the Edinburgh side’s public stance, claiming that Hibs had contacted Rangers to initiate talks over the possible sale of Allan.

When the initial bid was made from Rangers and rejected by their rivals, he said that the reply surprised him. He added that he was "very, very grateful" to Celtic for eventually signing Allan, saying the Parkhead club had "done Rangers a favour".

"Where I viewed it differently from Hibs was that the initial approach had really come from Hibs," King said.

"They said ‘we know you’re interested in Scott so if you do want to do business let’s do it quickly so we know where we stand’.

"We proceeded to do it quite quickly.

"We were therefore surprised when Hibs’ official response was ‘we will not sell to Rangers under any circumstances whatsoever’.

"We initially took that as a negotiating position to increase the price. It was only after another couple of rounds of negotiations that we understood they were really serious. No matter what we did they were not going to sell to us.

"Therefore, I’m very, very grateful to Celtic for taking him away from Hibs. They did us a favour rather than leaving him behind."

While saying he understood Hibs' eventual stance, he insisted they had initiated discussions.

"The initial one was a discussion with Hibs saying ‘Look, we’ve heard you’re interested in Scott Allan," King repeated. "I think [Rangers director] Paul Murray had made a statement to the media.

"[They said] ‘If you are interested, please come in and do business quickly so we know where we stand and can get a replacement’.

"That’s the invitation that we acted on. Clearly, at a later stage, someone at Hibs [changed that].

"As far as I’m concerned, Rangers acted correctly in all aspects and we’ve put it behind us.

"I’ve had a change of correspondence with them and I think we’re both happy there’s no issue to be carried forward.

Hibernian have yet to respond to King's claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

It's not on the STV site, and only been Tweeted by Bhardwaj.

I'm guessing that, if DK did say it, he's retracted it.

In a normal environment, other media people would now be asking him about it. In other words, don't expect anyone to follow it up. :greengrin

---

http://m.stv.tv/sport/football/clubs...e-king-claims/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://m.stv.tv/sport/football/clubs...e-king-claims/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Your technical capabilities are clearly better than mine. :greengrin Thanks for that.

Okay, I'm with you... Hibs should respond.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

http://m.stv.tv/sport/football/clubs...e-king-claims/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Any possibility King might not be telling the truth? is it in his character?

Another attempt to put a wee bit pressure on Hibs now that the transfer window is shut? Ignore him. He will go away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

Any possibility King might not be telling the truth? is it in his character?

Another attempt to put a wee bit pressure on Hibs now that the transfer window is shut? Ignore him. He will go away.

---

SFA should be looking at this odious institution, new club, same drivel, same bully boy tactics.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Baldy Foghorn

SFA should be looking at this odious institution, new club, same drivel, same bully boy tactics.......

---

More chance of a fish riding a bicycle, especially now that he has been approved as their latest fit and proper person.

Either we did make an initial approach or we didn't make an initial approach. After all that happened, I think we all want to know from the horse's mouth that we didn't. There's a simple way to get the facts straight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Either we did make an initial approach or we didn't make an initial approach. After all that happened, I think we all want to know from the horse's mouth that we didn't. There's a simple way to get the facts straight.

---

There are no facts to get straight Jim. King is a liar

I suspect if hibs do respond it'll be another well worded statement. I'd like to see them name dropping the south African judge that labelled king a glib and shameless liar.

https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/i...BqoJaHYQIE5nIt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bostonhibby

More chance of a fish riding a bicycle, especially now that he has been approved as their latest fit and proper person.

---

Odd you should say that, as this chap lives right outside my office!

Attachment 15420

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sylar

Odd you should say that, as this chap lives right outside my office!

Attachment 15420

---

Is it moving or welded to it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Your technical capabilities are clearly better than mine. :greengrin Thanks for that.

Okay, I'm with you... Hibs should respond.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

Either we did make an initial approach or we didn't make an initial approach. After all that happened, I think we all want to know from the horse's mouth that we didn't. There's a simple way to get the facts straight.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr White

I suspect if hibs do respond it'll be another well worded statement. I'd like to see them name dropping the south African judge that labelled king a glib and shameless liar.

---

Dempster has now responded confirming it's rubbish.

Its' on the Record Website now but I cant post links for some reason....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SmashinGlass

There are no facts to get straight Jim. King is a liar

---

I don't doubt that and that's not the worst of his 'frailties'. I just wouldn't like him to have the last word and the issue left hanging in the air. Looking at the other recent post, LD has responded so matter closed as far as I'm concerned.

Sky Sports ScotlandVerified account ‏@ScotlandSky 9m9 minutes ago Hibernian Chief Executive Leeann Dempster says Dave King’s claims regarding Scott Allan are "not correct." @HibsOfficial @RangersFC

Capital City Press‏@CCP_sport 22m22 minutes ago Dempster said: "I took the initial call from Rangers. I can confirm that Mr King's version of events is not correct."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Victor Park

Dempster has now responded confirming it's rubbish.

Its' on the Record Website now but I cant post links for some reason....

---

Dempster being quoted on Twitter too. "I can confirm that Mr King's version of events is not correct." More glib and shameless lying from The Lying King.

Hibs chief executive Leeann Dempster said: "I took the initial call from Rangers.

SNS Group Dave King claimed Hibs had tried to sell Scott Allan to Rangers
Dave King claimed Hibs had tried to sell Scott Allan to Rangers

"I can confirm that Mr King's version of events is not correct."

Hibs boss Alan Stubbs said: "There is not much I can say to that.

"I think everybody knows what the facts are.

"I have said all along that we do not speak about players from other clubs and Scott Allan is not our player any more. I find the timing of it all a bit strange."

It wouldn't surprise me if Hibs contacted Rangers after all the leaks to the press & said something along the lines of, " If you're interested in SA please go through the official channels & make a formal approach/offer. Please stop using the media to undermine our player." The glib & shameless liar then distorts such a statement.

Excellent. An adequate response delivering the contempt King's statement deserves. If they're doing stuff like this now with a 9 point lead I hate to think what they'll be like when the wheels come off their title bid and we've caught them up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brog

It wouldn't surprise me if Hibs contacted Rangers after all the leaks to the press & said something along the lines of, " If you're interested in SA please go through the official channels & make a formal approach/offer. Please stop using the media to undermine our player." The glib & shameless liar then distorts such a statement.

---

Or.... given the crap advice SA got from his agent..... it's not beyond possibility that the agent got in touch with Rangers, either telling them porkies that Hibs wanted to sell or, worse, masquerading as Hibs.

Unless there is documentary evidence out there, this is one that isn't going to be proven either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Or.... given the crap advice SA got from his agent..... it's not beyond possibility that the agent got in touch with Rangers, either telling them porkies that Hibs wanted to sell or, worse, masquerading as Hibs.

Unless there is documentary evidence out there, this is one that isn't going to be proven either way.

---

Might not be able to be proven either way but one statement comes from a known tax cheat and someone who a judge called a glib and shameless liar. The other from a well respected and thought of business woman with no records for tax fraud or lying 😉

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Or.... given the crap advice SA got from his agent..... it's not beyond possibility that the agent got in touch with Rangers, either telling them porkies that Hibs wanted to sell or, worse, masquerading as Hibs.

Unless there is documentary evidence out there, this is one that isn't going to be proven either way.

---

Dempster or King not telling the truth ?

Now, who has got previous for this sort of thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jim44

I don't doubt that and that's not the worst of his 'frailties'. I just wouldn't like him to have the last word and the issue left hanging in the air. Looking at the other recent post, LD has responded so matter closed as far as I'm concerned.

---

Spot on 👍🏻👍🏻

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vince1973

Might not be able to be proven either way but one statement comes from a known tax cheat and someone who a judge called a glib and shameless liar. The other from a well respected and thought of business woman with no records for tax fraud or lying 

---

Exactly ...... though I would have preferred LD's response to have said 'Mr King's claim is nonsense'

Whatever happened we win either way: If Hibs did make the initial approach to Sevco, then our position afterwards can only mean we did so to provoke a bidding war and we have made them look a right bunch of mugs. If we didn't and King cant prove we did then once again he confirms his reputation as a proven liar is well founded and well deserved.

My money is on option 2 ....... Though I would prefer option 1 :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BBC

Meanwhile, King indicated there's no need for further investment from shareholders this season unless it is to bolster the playing squad. At the moment we are well funded through to the end of the season, we are ahead of where we thought we might be.

---

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/34212152

So the stories of them running out of cash are rubbish, then?

STOP PRESS

Dave King to be known as Walter Mitty.King says "he was my hero and I always wanted to tell stories like he did."

The lying King or Leeann Dempster? Take your pick.

have you ever heard someone who is telling the truth, use the phrase "where I differ from X is?"

It's a strange turn of phrase -- not one that is in the least bit convincing from someone trying to make a truthful point

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Dempster or King not telling the truth ?

Now, who has got previous for this sort of thing.

---

My thoughts exactly, he's not exactly known for his honesty. It has to be said that of all the total ****ers who have been associated with Rangers/Sevco over the years, he surely has to be the very aptly named King ****er :agree: