Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Printable View

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

12-01-2015, 02:20 PM
southsider

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

If he bought existing shares in us, then yes, the money would go to the existing shareholders.

He can buy 50% of mine (400 shares). All for a total price of £2,000,000. I am sure AS will spend it wisely.
12-01-2015, 02:33 PM
kaimendhibs

Someone like me who knows nowt about business and corporate finance could almost believe Sevco would welcome another insolvency event as they seem hellbent on making things worse/not making improvements
12-01-2015, 02:43 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaimendhibs

Someone like me who knows nowt about business and corporate finance could almost believe Sevco would welcome another insolvency event as they seem hellbent on making things worse/not making improvements

Amongst all the theories and guesses that are going around, this is as valid as any.
12-01-2015, 05:55 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunt

The £18m would have gone to the shareholders, not to the club.

Only some of it.

A large part of his offer was new funding. He has an interview in the Record this afternoon which clarifies things a bit.
12-01-2015, 05:57 PM
ancient hibee

Rumour has it that Mr.Sarvar was unable to sing all the verses of The Sash when auditioned.
12-01-2015, 06:53 PM
Deansy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iain G

They wanna keep feeding at the trough instead of sorting out the club, fat gorged parasites that they are.

And hopefully when the trough's empty, they then start to eat the trough until it's beyond repair and scrapped !
12-01-2015, 07:04 PM
jacomo

Quote:

Originally Posted by kaimendhibs

Someone like me who knows nowt about business and corporate finance could almost believe Sevco would welcome another insolvency event as they seem hellbent on making things worse/not making improvements

For the record, I'd welcome such an event too.
12-01-2015, 09:51 PM
monktonharp

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iain G

They wanna keep feeding at the trough instead of sorting out the club, fat gorged parasites that they are.

long may they feed:cb
12-01-2015, 10:26 PM
ballengeich

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Keith Jackson's take on the current situation:-

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/f...battle-4941494

So Rangers needed £6.5m within 48 hours. 4 days later, they haven't received £6.5m and they aren't in administration. Those of us who were sceptical about how a previously unforeseen need for this amount could have suddenly sprung up seem to have been justified in our doubts.

I can understand how Jackson got this wrong. He could have been given wrong information, either deliberately or in good faith, or he could simply have misunderstood something he was told. What I don't understand is his total lack of willingness to investigate the details of what the money was needed for, given that salaries are paid near to the end of the month. Now that his article appears to be wrong, he's behaving as if it had never been written.

That's not how a top journalist should do his job. The same goes for Keevins who was spinning the same line on Radio Clyde on Friday, but had forgotten about that by this evening. They're a pair of incompetents.
12-01-2015, 11:10 PM
Peevemor

Quote:

Originally Posted by ballengeich

So Rangers needed £6.5m within 48 hours. 4 days later, they haven't received £6.5m and they aren't in administration. Those of us who were sceptical about how a previously unforeseen need for this amount could have suddenly sprung up seem to have been justified in our doubts.

I can understand how Jackson got this wrong. He could have been given wrong information, either deliberately or in good faith, or he could simply have misunderstood something he was told. What I don't understand is his total lack of willingness to investigate the details of what the money was needed for, given that salaries are paid near to the end of the month. Now that his article appears to be wrong, he's behaving as if it had never been written.

That's not how a top journalist should do his job. The same goes for Keevins who was spinning the same line on Radio Clyde on Friday, but had forgotten about that by this evening. They're a pair of incompetents.

It's obviously a case of sports hacks being out of their depth when trying to report on business matters.
12-01-2015, 11:16 PM
steakbake

Chick Young will have the scoop after a day's seat sniffing in "the corridors of power" at Ibrox.
12-01-2015, 11:19 PM
Dashing Bob S

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peevemor

It's obviously a case of sports hacks being out of their depth when trying to report on business matters.

Wouldn't trust Jackson to get the score of a game right, never mind read a set of accounts.
13-01-2015, 07:34 AM
Iain G

I assumed the 6.5 million was to cover operaing costs to the end of the season?!
13-01-2015, 01:52 PM
ScottB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peevemor

It's obviously a case of sports hacks being out of their depth when trying to report on business matters.

Which shows how poor our media is, that they haven't sent a decent business minded journalist in to do a report.

They aren't interested in the facts.
13-01-2015, 02:03 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottB

Which shows how poor our media is, that they haven't seen a decent business minded journalist in to do a report.

They aren't interested in the facts.

Neither it seems, is Phil McG.

Subtle, and not so subtle, promptings on his blog have been unsuccessful in establishing the exact nature of the fabled £6.5m.
13-01-2015, 02:59 PM
ScottB

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Neither it seems, is Phil McG.

Subtle, and not so subtle, promptings on his blog have been unsuccessful in establishing the exact nature of the fabled £6.5m.

His agenda is even more obvious than the Jackson's, Traynor's and Young's of the world haha
13-01-2015, 03:18 PM
monktonharp

Quote:

Originally Posted by ballengeich

So Rangers needed £6.5m within 48 hours. 4 days later, they haven't received £6.5m and they aren't in administration. Those of us who were sceptical about how a previously unforeseen need for this amount could have suddenly sprung up seem to have been justified in our doubts.

I can understand how Jackson got this wrong. He could have been given wrong information, either deliberately or in good faith, or he could simply have misunderstood something he was told. What I don't understand is his total lack of willingness to investigate the details of what the money was needed for, given that salaries are paid near to the end of the month. Now that his article appears to be wrong, he's behaving as if it had never been written.

That's not how a top journalist should do his job. The same goes for Keevins who was spinning the same line on Radio Clyde on Friday, but had forgotten about that by this evening. They're a pair of incompetents.

much can be said about any one of our so called journos, conveniently forgetting things said. the speeches and statements made from our former prime minister Brown for example about full home rule. suddenly he did not say half of that, despite it being said on TV, and in the full view of our nation, in front of all the press 2 days before the referendum.
13-01-2015, 03:19 PM
monktonharp

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peevemor

It's obviously a case of sports hacks being out of their depth when trying to report on business matters.

not just sports hacks:wink:
13-01-2015, 03:20 PM
monktonharp

Quote:

Originally Posted by ScottB

Which shows how poor our media is, that they haven't sent a decent business minded journalist in to do a report.

They aren't interested in the facts.

:agree:
13-01-2015, 03:58 PM
AndyM_1875

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Neither it seems, is Phil McG.

Subtle, and not so subtle, promptings on his blog have been unsuccessful in establishing the exact nature of the fabled £6.5m.

As I've said repeatedly about him he is a bigoted agenda peddler and it's all about him and punting his appallingly written books. The Celtic Twitterati appear to be blind to this but we certainly should not be.

He has no interest in reporting 'the facts' (and he's gotten the major ones wrong) unless it gives him an axe to grind. Mind you neither was the Scottish MSM prior to the Rangers meltdown but at least they had the excuse of not doing so because they were scared of getting sued.

ScottB & yourself are right that the Rangers situation need a proper business journalist to cut through the nonsense and emotive agenda rubbish spouted by the myopic Old Firm muppets. Douglas Fraser at BBC Scotland has looked at the issue on and off but that he got so much abuse online from witless halfwits from both sides he appeared either to get bored or walk away from it.
13-01-2015, 05:18 PM
greenginger

Well, just to annoy you, here's Phil's latest piece,

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/security-problem/
13-01-2015, 05:38 PM
Iain G

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenginger

Well, just to annoy you, here's Phil's latest piece,

http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/security-problem/

It is so badly written it's almost unreadable, all short statements, misplaced hyperbole and hackneyed illiterate imagery. Would say it was written by a 12 year old if he didn't have a photo on his blog!

Wonder if he, Jackson or Keevins will discover the paragraph first?!
13-01-2015, 06:41 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iain G

It is so badly written it's almost unreadable, all short statements, misplaced hyperbole and hackneyed illiterate imagery. Would say it was written by a 12 year old if he didn't have a photo on his blog!

Wonder if he, Jackson or Keevins will discover the paragraph first?!

There's a few choice paragraphs in there.

This one sticks out :- "to be the largest unsecured creditor makes you king of the hill in an insolvency event".

Right. :rolleyes:
13-01-2015, 07:15 PM
cabbageandribs1875

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...-west-30798934

Former Rangers owner Craig Whyte has attended another court hearing in London amid ongoing efforts by Ticketus to recover about £18m damages from him.

when exactly is this little crook going for a stint in one of lizzies prisons, we all know it's him underneath that face fungus

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...7_80236381.jpg

:grr:
13-01-2015, 07:19 PM
monktonharp

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

There's a few choice paragraphs in there.

This one sticks out :- "to be the largest unsecured creditor makes you king of the hill in an insolvency event".

Right. :rolleyes:

excuse my ignorance, but even the smallest secured creditor, would be above this "king of the hill" , correct Crops?
13-01-2015, 07:22 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by monktonharp

excuse my ignorance, but even the smallest secured creditor, would be above this "king of the hill" , correct Crops?

Every insolvency is different, but in the "normal" type, yeah you're absolutely right.

There's no point in being the largest unsecured creditor if there's F all in the pot. (see Midlothian, Heart of....)
13-01-2015, 07:40 PM
Ozyhibby

Quote:

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Every insolvency is different, but in the "normal" type, yeah you're absolutely right.

There's no point in being the largest unsecured creditor if there's F all in the pot. (see Midlothian, Heart of....)

Would it not depend on whether anything is secured on Ibrox? If there is no security against it, then the largest unsecured creditor would be in the best position to control it?
13-01-2015, 07:45 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Would it not depend on whether anything is secured on Ibrox? If there is no security against it, then the largest unsecured creditor would be in the best position to control it?

McGilliven made a sweeping statement about insolvencies which was exactly that, general and (for the most part) crap.

In RFC's case, Ashley has a security over the car park and Edmiston House. His debt is £3m.

We don't know who the largest unsecured creditor is. Neither does McGilliven.
13-01-2015, 07:58 PM
Billy Whizz

[QUOTE=CropleyWasGod;4272548)

We don't know who the largest unsecured creditor is. Neither does McGilliven.[/QUOTE]

Why don't we know this. Is their something fishy about the secrecy of this?
13-01-2015, 08:04 PM
CropleyWasGod

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

Why don't we know this. Is their something fishy about the secrecy of this?

There's no need for anyone outside of the Big Hoose to know, TBH.

We would only find that out in the event of an insolvency.

Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page