Jump to content

Macshimmy

Gold Members
  • Posts

    605
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Macshimmy

  1. Pretty good summary of the state of play here: http://rangerstaxcase.com/2012/03/16/illegal-use-of-ebts-other-issues/ But he says it in one line: "only a fool would see any certainties in this mess."
  2. Ibrox Black Sox? http://www.bbc.co.uk...w-west-17405631 Nothing doing today, TicketUS case on ice til Monday.
  3. http://blogs.channel...angers-fans/942 Rangers fans in "playing victim card" shock. Most hilarious line for me: "The SFA and SPL appear to be the only two bodies in world football that do not wish to assist a member club in times of trouble…why is this?" Aye, nice try. You forgot to say: "Who will help the widow's son?"
  4. Hmm Brian Kennedy sounds like a man with plenty of experience of the situation Rangers find themselves in: http://news.bbc.co.u...ort/9371739.stm "The problems started when Mr Kennedy, for some reason, gave the club to the supporters' trust*, people who had no experience and no money." Fan ownership you say... a shrewd strategy I think. *small print in the deal was, he didnt give them the ground, just the "club". They had to pay him >200k a year in rental (they were in League One ffs!) resulting in them going into admin for a year, and dropping two divisions, leading to them dropping out of the league system for the first time in their 110 year history. A Stockport fans spokeperson said yesterday: I don't particularly like Rangers, and I don't particularly like Brian Kennedy, so they could be a good match."
  5. From some wee spikey-haired tosspot in the Herald: "CAMPBELL OGILVIE, the Scottish Football Association president, was last night cleared by Sir David Murray of any involvement in the payment or administering of the controversial Employment Benefit Trust scheme used by Rangers for a decade." Oh well thats all perfectly fine then. Sorry for getting your collar dirty there Mr. Ogilvie Sir. No need to waste any more time investigating him eh? He's in the clear boys.
  6. Edited - thats better. He's hard to recognise without the trademark coke-fuelled grin.
  7. More hilarity from the Rangers Fighting Fund: The paypal address was published as given below: Tragically, they meant @THEbluenose.co.uk Instead, all the donations so far went to the site below: http://bluenose.co.uk/mr.custard.htm
  8. http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/news/2702817/You-wont-get-Rangers-on-cheap.html story ran 28 Oct 2009, you have to say in retrospect David Murray is the most shameless mutha scottish football has ever seen. Whyte might be a spiv, but Murray was a con artist.
  9. Blue Knights plan is to raise limited funds from share issue/supporter ownership and not bankroll the club in an unsustainable fashion. In line with this, they will be reducing the wage bill, paying their dues and generally trying to eat humble pie for their previous uncountable sins. Given this, do they think the average glory hunter from greater govan is going to cough up?
  10. .. and the word from Rangers Meeja: but but but whatabout the Texan billionaire and the Hong Kong shipping magnate and Lawrence Marlborough and George Soros and Milan Mandric and Tavistock? bwah ha ha. Harry Redknapp's dug mair like :-)
  11. Take your celtic and anti-celtic pish to the old firm forum. On with the Deathwatch...
  12. they can't afford liquidation, but there is no way they want to put more money in, they are trying to make sure any buyer can't pull a "pre-pack" sale out of admin for £1 (the going rate I believe)
  13. http://www.dailyreco...86908-23781661/ Looks like the Ticketus deal might save them from liquidation, ironically enough. The venture capital company behind Ticketus will try to keep them on life support. Balls in HMRC's court now...
  14. I quoted it from a paper, but they quoted it from some dude's blog, and he didnt reveal his sources, so: Yep.
  15. Yep. The assumption is that Ticketus wouldn't have been so stupit as to put up the cash up front, but nobody has proof of this as far as I can tell.
  16. The money from Ticketus to Whyte was initially put into an escrow account. (3rd party, inaccessible to Whyte) This means they didnt give him the money prior to him buying the club. He couldn't have transferred a penny out of that account until they got their security, but crucially he could use it to show proof of funds to Murray, before giving him his £1, and becoming the owner of Rangers, and thus the rights to their future season tickets. Then, he handed over the tickets (meaning they are good if the club continues in its present incarnation) in exchange for the £24m Looks kosher. Oh dearie me.
  17. Sounds like the Devil is in the detail regarding the Ticketus deal. They appear to be under the impression the existance of their prior dealings with Rangers under Murray means the deal they signed with Whyte was with the same entity, however Whyte may have conned them by signing the papers on behalf of a hastily re-named shell company, which at a glance could pass for Rangers PLC, but actually owns bugger all. All too murky for any bystander to have a chance of seeing the end of at this point in proceedings I reckon. Meantime, heres something tasty from the BBC on their interpretation of the SFA player registration rules, which any club having players with two contracts has broken: According to the SFA registration rules, payments received by a player solely relating to his playing activities must be fully recorded and declared, otherwise the player has been improperly registered. If a player is deemed to be improperly registered, his team would be awarded a 3-0 defeat for each game in which he played.
  18. Hmm. From the Torygraph this morning: "HMRC will not stand in the way of a Company Voluntary Agreement – through which creditors emerge with a percentage of the cash owed to them – and that this has been sanctioned at Treasury level." Old boy Dave with a pre-election bung for the loyal unwashed of Govan?
  19. Posted Today, 06:17 PM http://forum.rangers...ic=211978&st=20 soulboy, on 23 February 2012 - 05:52 PM, said: How can we be owe £5million in vat ? vat is 20% which means in 9 months we would have had to have sold £100 million worth of assets to be due that ach, they are running out of fingers in Govan now.
×
×
  • Create New...