There's absolutely no need for that. CWG has done nothing but post facts in this thread and if you don't agree with those facts there's nothing he can do about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Printable View
There's absolutely no need for that. CWG has done nothing but post facts in this thread and if you don't agree with those facts there's nothing he can do about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
So do you think they should not have been asked to repay these debts? Also, if the dual contract investigation finds that Rangers had been fielding ineligible players for years, should the new company be exempt from any football penalties going forward - fines, point deductions etc?Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Rangers are going to be Rangers no matter how much you, me or Crops likes it. Live with it. You are not disagreeing with him, you were abusing him, learn the difference then trot back. This place is quiet?????? Wow, just wow.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
WTF :rolleyes: FH have you been using strong glue in an unventilated room. Both Crops and Cavs well informed and educated input on this thread has been a pleasure to read and appreciated by everyone on here. For you to come out with a comment like that is way out of order and you should hang your head in shame.Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
I think poor CWG and Cav have become victims of people's disgust at the machinations and dirty dealings of the business fraternity. They have both expertly guided us through the administration/liquidation process and their insight has been invaluable on this thread.
The bad taste it has left in peoples mouth when Rangers have avoided massive debt yet with a little tweek to the name can carry on as if nothing has happened and with new owners getting valuable assets at a knockdown price is not CWG's fault. However I'm sure it riles folk when he informs us that "it's all done perfectly legally",and "it's common business practice".
This is not CWG condoning it but merely telling it how it is.
Still as we sit here with Rangers on radio and tv, buying more players than any club in Scotland and arrogantly spouting in every interview how they won't accept this or that , it is clear that yet again administration has allowed a poorly run, indebted, cheating football club to simply get away with it and the business sector is treating us all like mugs again.
Total plum :idiot:Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
You have to be on the wind up:lolyam:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Rangers (the football club) was owned lock, stock by Craig Whytes company (Wavetower) which subsequently changed its name to Rangers FC Group Limited. Rangers (the football club) were the property of Whytes Rangers FC Group Limited and were sold as such.
Similarily Hibernian FC were owned by a company called Forth Investments and while the parent went bust, Hibernian FC continued, as they and their assetts were bought independently by STF, and are now owned by Hibernian Holdings Ltd.
The reasons both parent companies folded was radically different but, I suspect, the reasons both football clubs survived are, technically, the same.
Edit; Interestingly STF paid around £3.35m for Hibs in 1991 and Chuckie pays £5.5m for Rangers 21 years later. (CWG?)
Rangers haven't survived though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
Mike Ashley to buy <10% of Sevco, loan them up to 9 Newcastle players and take over their replica strip selling, according to the BBC.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19225698
Quote:
Originally Posted by wee_hibee
So what did the administrators sell to Sevco?
I though he bought the "goodwill and intellectual property rights" ?
Is there not a FIFA rule that you can't be an owner of 2 clubs?Quote:
Originally Posted by Beefster
He wouldn't be the owner, he'd be a shareholder.Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenhibby
Only in the same country or league if i remember correctly.Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenhibby
Robson was manager of NUFC at the time. NUFC (and Liverpool, and loads of other EPL clubs) were alerted by Boumsong's agent (the odious Willie Mackay) to his availability with him running down his Auxerre contract. Robson and one of his staff went to see Boumsong a few times in France and decided he was no better than what we had, so we left it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
Fast forward six months. Robson sacked, Souness new NUFC boss and Boumsong arrives from Ipox with £8m going the other way for a player who looked to be of a similar standard to Sol Bamba.
The Boumsong sale stank at the time and still does, but it happened after the EBT payment to Souness (a decade after his leaving RFC under a cloud... hmm.)
Sevco still waiting for their first league win. So much for winning every game as the carrots on Clyde predicted. :thumbsup:
http://z5.ifrm.com/5902/57/0/e5032433/e5032433.gif
As far as i'm aware, they've sold them the rights to use their name and their badge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaiser1962
They can't however sell their history and acheatments.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wee_hibee
Exactly my point to venerable and respected Cropley. They cannot sell the past, it dies with the soon to be dead old company. The newco, incorporated 2012, hasn't got a league win never mind titles.
That is not what I said. "Try and read what is being said."Quote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
Agree in theory, however looks like a hun, acts like a hun, talks like a hun and cheat like a hun the sad fact is they are still THE HUNSQuote:
Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby
We are forever telling folk that it is the fans that make the club. The board are just custodians, players come and go, we are the club etc etc. If that's the case for Hibs then it equally applies to Rangers.
As someone said earlier, they play in the same stadium, same strips and same fans. Same vile club as far as I'm concerned.
Take it there is no Rule about wearing the stars on therangers strips then, even if they have won eff all.
Think seven stars would look good on our jerseys.....
Forgive me for being thick but how then did Hibs, Motherwell and Dundee keep their histories intact?Quote:
Originally Posted by wee_hibee
Only Fat Sally could have Sevco running fifth in a one horse race :greengrin :lolrangers:
None of them were liquidated as far as I am aware. Hibs weren't even in administration.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Falcon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adminis...tish_football)
Rangers are not liquidated yet. They will, at least the parent company will, when liquidators are appointed. Hibs did enter administration, briefly, in 1991 which allowed STF to split the football club from the parent company, Forth Investments who were, like Rangers FC group will be, liquidated.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z0pcQsAf8oM
Two minutes in STF explains.
As Spike said, none of these clubs have ever faced liquidation. (Although Hibs have been in Administration, but were saved when placed into Receivership).Quote:
Originally Posted by The Falcon
The real Rangers haven't yet been liquidated, but will be soon enough. There can't be 2 Rangers, therefore the Rangers in DIV3 aren't and never will be the real Rangers.
They'll take the exact same ugly form as the original Rangers, but will never be the original Rangers by law.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wee_hibee
I am sorry again but what is the difference between the administrators for Rangers FC Group, who are about to be liquidated, selling Rangers and their assets to Charles Green and the administrators for Forth Investments, who were about to be liquidated, selling Hibs and their assets to Tom Farmer?
We kept our history all right, including the Sc*tt"sh C*p record. :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by The Falcon
Seriously, though... I can't remember the exact facts of our experience. However, if they are as you say, there is no difference.
The vast majority of debt in which Forth Investments were in, was due to a chain of pubs that they owned and not the club. When they sold Hibernian to STF, the vast majority of debt was no longer the clubs problem as they were no longer connected with the chain of pubs. The club accounts no longer had any ties with the accounts of the pubs.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Falcon
The only debt that Hibs needed to take care of was a small overdraft that belonged to the club itself in the clubs own account. STF took care of it with ease. The club wasn't in any danger of being liquidated when STF took ownership.
Rangers are a completely different case as the huge figure ran up was a result of them vastly overspending. The massive debt figure belongs in their account, not in the accounts of any other companies that the Whyte may have owned.
I'm sorry if I haven't explained that too well. I'm sure somebody else would be able to explain it better.
Have nothing to offer or add to this debate. Just wanted post 666 on a Rangers thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by wee_hibee