Macshimmy

Good to see the the Rangers fans united, and focusing on their real enemies, the ones who put them in the situation they are in today: David Murray Craig Whyte Charles Green Walter Smith Ally McCoist The RST Hearts Hibs

(substituting 'Rangers fan' for 'Roman Catholic' and allowing that you did say 'from birth'. Apart from that, it's bang on.) Interesting point you raise (inadvertently) What age can you be said to have 'chosen' your football team? How many kids get a choice?

I understood you perfectly. You meant something very much like this:

Has anybody else noticed that the website advertising those Black and Red 'Nike' strips was built by a web design company... who don't yet have their own website, are based in Yorkshire, and are called - "sneaky trick" seems legit. http://www.sneakytrick.com/?tmpl=comingsoon

Strikes me that the RST is as keen as anyone to hail the next Millionaire Messiah. Get your club back? What does that mean in all honesty? Its a little too close to the 'get back where we rightfully deserve to be' nonsense. Look at the similar campaign at Man Utd - when they realised they couldn't buy or starve the Glazers out, they made something new, and remarkable: http://www.fc-utd.co.uk/m_story.php?story_id=5536

That is pretty interesting reading - every dissenting voice has subsequently been banned - no wonder the support has achieved feck all.

not yet: Edit - Field Fisher Waterhouse! I didn't understand that bit, so I googled it - They are the stockbroker who valued RIFC at 22m for the IPO, it's that figure which determines what Worthington/Whyte get in the event of them winning the case.

Easy! Just buy shares in Worthington grp PLC*, currently available at a knock-down price: *Okay, so there is a little gossip on the markets about a small irregularity in the pension fund they manage (£3m missing) but if they win their case against Green, you are a shareholder in the company who owns the assets! (subject to further litigation)

so many jackals ... If the sale from Sevco 5088 to Sevco Scotland is deemed to be null, then the new owners of the assets would be this mob: That was their most recent statement to the Stock Exchange. This is their website, so you can find out all about them: http://worthingtongroupplc.com/

If the case detailed in the herald goes for Whyte against Green, then 'new' company at the time of liquidation had the same owner as the 'old' one. - that would make the liquidator's postition very difficult, I would think. I don't think I quoted the whole thing - It is worth chewing over: Whyte partner banned after probe into £2m asset switch Martin Williams Senior News Reporter Saturday 17 May 2014 A BUSINESS partner of disgraced former Rangers owner Craig Whyte has been banned from being a director in Britain for five years. CRAIG WHYTE: Came under fire during ownership of Rangers. But in a rare move, Aiden Earley has been given sanction to remain for the time being as a director of Sevco 5088 Limited, the firm that bought the liquidated assets of Rangers oldco. It is understood this is connected to his joint court battle with Mr Whyte as directors of Sevco 5088 over the ownership of Rangers. It has emerged that the directorship ban for the 46-year-old came into force in February after a seven-month fight to clear his name with the Insolvency Service (IS). The ban came after the IS found more than £2 million in assets were switched out of three companies on the same day and out of the possible clutches of creditors as they entered voluntary liquidation, to other firms he was in control of. In October, last year, auditors Deloitte flagged up the legal battle over ownership, saying it was a key uncertainty hanging over the Ibrox business. Rangers have consistently said Mr Whyte's claims have no merit. Mr Whyte has always insisted he was the main driver behind the Sevco 5088, the firm that bought the assets and business of RFC 2012 plc he had put into administration and is now in liquidation. Days after the sale, the assets - which were bought for £5.5m in June 2012 - were transferred to a different company called Sevco Scotland, which then became The Rangers Football Club. Mr Whyte's main argument is that the transfer was illegal and Sevco 5088 remained the rightful owner of the club's assets. Forms lodged with Companies House that appear to show Mr Whyte and Mr Earley were directors of Sevco 5088 were referred to police by legal firm Pinsent Masons. Former Rangers chief executive Charles Green, who fronted the Sevco consortium, denied in April last year that Mr Whyte or Mr Earley were involved in Sevco 5088 and said the documents were not valid. But Mr Whyte produced recordings of a conversation between the pair, where Mr Green admitted he had told him: "You are Sevco, that's what we are saying." Documents relating to Mr Whyte and Mr Earley's directorship remain lodged in Companies House. The IS confirmed that while the directorship ban is in force, Mr Earley is allowed to remain as a director of Sevco 5088 Limited, a position expected to be reviewed in August. Mr Earley, who as a teenager was dubbed ­Goldfinger in the City as investors believed he had the Midas touch, was made personally bankrupt in 1989 with debts of around £1m. He had been linked to Whyte and Rangers, initially through a bizarre tie-up with the Surrey non-league football club Banstead Athletic, which he sponsored through his business Regenesis, and which was mooted as the site for a possible feeder academy for Rangers. In February 2002 the club ­chairman and owner Terry Molloy, who confirmed he and Mr Earley were having discussions about being joint owners, denied receiving a £250,000 payment from Rangers, after the transaction was flagged up by the club's administrators. "Aiden Earley has an interest in Banstead. Where any money comes from I don't know: you would have to ask him," Mr Molloy said at the time. According to IS documents, investigators found that the assets switch on three companies Wood Hall Realisations Ltd, C4E Realisations Limited and Set Meals Realisations Limited resulted in creditors losing over £2m.

Well, by your logic on the club surviving liquidation - This can't happen - as long as there is anyone ready to 'reform' the club. The trouble might well arise from multiple entities doing this, and each claiming the 'history' of Rangers 1873 - what could each do to deny the others?

Yeah I think you are right on that - looks like they had to pay all creditors 100 pence in the pound - the new company was actually a genuine restructuring rather than a mechanism to avoid debt. Interesting that they took on the '1986' crest voluntarily then - they actually wanted it to serve as a momento of their close call, and a sign that they were entering 'a new era':

A quick browse through Middlesborough forums turns up lots of their fans referring to the club being 'saved out of liquidation' - the club's own site has this: 1986: Bruce Rioch takes over the helm as coach. A last day defeat at Shrewsbury sees Boro relegated to Division Three and the club goes into liquidation in July, suffering from massive debts. A consortium consisting of ICI, Scottish and Newcastle Breweries, Bulkhaul and Henry Moszkowicz saves the club and forms Middlesbrough Football and Athletic Company (1986) Ltd. The truth? Or wishful thinking? I'd suggest the latter. There is the odd slip - in a few places the club is described as having 're-formed' in 1986 - the club crest for season 86/87 had 1986 as the date of formation. With the passing of time, they seem to have tip-toed towards the idea that 1986 never happened - which perhaps explains why they are again steering into financial trouble. BDO are unlikely to act I think - although they may pass info to SARS and other external entities. However, the Sevco case is definitely alive and kicking. From last weeks Herald:

It's not really that black and white - Liquidation appears to be a very murky area of law, and was even more so at the time Middlesborough were going through it. I don't think the Rangers/"The Rangers" case is either tbh - particularly as newco may yet prove to be legally associated with some of the individuals involved with oldco. Remember, BDO still have the power to 'turn back time' on a lot of the transactions of the old company - it's not quite dead yet in some senses. The fact that we are having this debate so many months on demonstrates the vagaries perfectly I would say - It's not something which is for us to decide, there are some pretty strange court cases still ongoing. I won't pretend to understand exactly what the following statement to the Stock Exchange implies: http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail.html?announcementId=11552960

Ah well... since that was written they've wandered off the straight and narrow path again: http://www.gazettelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/boro-record-loss-14m-last-6879534

Middlesborough? Now there's a club determined to live within it's means, after their own near-death experience: http://twohundredpercent.net/?p=14955

a couple of intriguing questions in Hansard, be interesting to see what he thought was dodgy about the owner: Banks: Metro Bank Questions Asked by Lord Myners (Banking committee Chairman) To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether the appointment of Mr Vernon Hill as chairman of Metro Bank has received Financial Services Authority (FSA) approval; whether the FSA has previously rejected or discouraged the appointment of Mr Hill to that position; and if so, what were the reasons for doing so.[HL4373] 22 Jan 2013 : Column WA190 The Commercial Secretary to the Treasury (Lord Deighton): This issue is a matter for the Financial Services Authority (FSA). This question has been passed on to the FSA, which will reply directly by letter. A copy of the response will be placed in the Library of the House. Asked by Lord Myners To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have investigated, or have any plans to investigate, loans and transactions between Metro Bank and its directors and their associates.[HL4374] Lord Deighton: This is a matter for the Financial Services Authority (FSA), whose day-to-day operations are independent from government control and influence. This question has been passed on to the FSA, which will reply directly by letter. A copy of the response will be placed in the Library of the House.

Pedantic? I disagree. Understanding that he didn't actually lose anything he didn't already know he was likely to may well be critical to sussing out what his game is. Sorry for steering the thread off topic, won't happen again, get back to yer handbags and that.

He didn't lose anything. The £20m was money he should have paid in tax, but he found a convenient place to stash it instead. It wasn't Dave King who was the shareholder in Rangers - it was 'Ben Nevis': You can confirm this here: http://www.murray-international.co.uk/news_archive/rangers_football_club/news02.htm The shares 'Ben Nevis' owned were frozen, and then seized by SARS along with all the other assets - and while the court case was playing out, Rangers went into admin and were then liquidated. So, the cash was stolen, and he would have got away with it if it wasn't for those pesky SARS kids - but once they were onto 'Ben Nevis', it was gone.

By the way, the keeper who was your hero in that game is getting the 'shifty eyed dug' treatment from the fine citizens on Rangers Media. Neanderthals:

Not technically correct. King didn't put a penny of his money in the club - he put SARS money in, through a false identity called 'Ben Nevis', which the implication he probably got most of it back - but nice and clean. I would hazard he is playing a similar game, it probably amuses him to do it in broad daylight this time. I would say 'beware', but I think you've had your 20 million warnings already. Follow the money!

By my understanding, anything short of a security is meaningless. Their 'legal undertaking' would just be cancelled in the event of admin, like the Ticketus deal.

All of them are being touted in the press, doesn't mean to say it isn't a load of pish - fits the template though, wouldn't you say?

Flicking through Rangers Media, you do get the impression there is a constant desire to 'out' people as not 'true' Rangers fans, almost as though there was a contract you had to sign when you became a supporter, with all the things you had to agree to believe. The thing I find interesting is that its obvious that many of the people on there don't share a lot of the beliefs that the hardcore think they should, particularly in regards to politics, religion - and whether these are things which should be associated with football at all. I would even hazard that the majority think most of the 'traditions' associated with the club are nothing more than negative baggage.