Stag Nation

I don't think you'll evidence of Dave King paying cash for anything. OldCo Rangers may have paid for PR, but not in cash. NewCo may well pay. If the PR company have any sense it will be in cash.

I'm sure you're right, but the same is true of Dave King. But while they may both be unpopular in some circles, there are differences. One of them is successful, law abiding, and pays his debts. The other is Dave King.

Probably Brixton or Pentonville. It's in London, not Glasgow.

DK has already been sentenced to jail in SA for contempt of court, although the sentence was suspended. The judge here may well conclude that the GASL does not take courts seriously, and sentence accordingly.

The accounts are still available on the web. They simply show a global figure for "contributions to employee trusts".

1. "To be fully honest" and "Rangers board" is a classic oxymoron, given that their chairman is a proven glib and shameless liar. 2. How are the Rangers board qualified to make that pronouncement? They're not even involved, it's a matter between the SPFL and the OldCO.

There has been a lot in the news about players, ex-players and managers losing huge sums in various tax-avoidance schemes. However, I've seen no reports that any of those were connected with their employers - have I missed that? AFAIK it was simply some dodgy geezer advising them of a wizard wheeze to avoid tax, and there seems to be no parallel with the EBTs used by Rangers (and, to be fair, some other clubs).

So it's not a foreign country for the purposes of any law, even though it really is a foreign country. The guys who wrote that would have no trouble in believing that Rangers are still the same club ....

No, according to Judge Brian Southwood and his two colleagues, who also said 'the court had seen King testify for four days and “are unanimous in finding that he is a mendacious witness whose evidence should not be accepted on any issue unless it is support by documents and other objective evidence”.'

I think you mean "King has influence because he is a glib and shameless liar and is trusted by other shareholders, successful business men and fellow board members despite all the evidence"

I don't see him as a hero. He is, however, AFIK a law-abiding citizen. That alone puts him several steps up the moral ladder from a convicted criminal and glib and shameless liar.

Mr Ashley brought the action, but only because Mr King was in breach of contract. If King had maintained confidentiality, as the contract obliged him to, then Ashley would not have needed to go to court. If there's anything stereotypical here it is the convicted criminal's continuing disregard for the rule of law.

He's not a pedant - pedants get it right. It was the High Court in London wot done it.

But Stevie the IT guy is too busy running the scouting department

As I understand it, Rangers did not lend the cash to the players (and ex-managers etc.), but paid the money to a trust (EBT) set up for the recipient's benefit. The cash was then "lent" by the trust, not by Rangers. So if DeB was to repay the loan, the money would still be in his trust fund.

1. In his statement King said "As the one individual who was a major shareholder ... throughout the period". He wasn't. The shares in question were owned by a company called Rangers Investments (or similar) which in turn was owned by a Murray Group company. Shares in that company in turn were owned by an offshore company which Dave may have owned. DK never invested a penny in Rangers - his "£20 million" went to whoever sold him the Murray shares. Maybe someone called Murray. 2. He said "... the shareholders were committed to providing funding to the Club." They weren't - that's the whole point of limited liability. And in Dave's case they didn't, and still haven't!

According to last week's judgement "RFC 2012 PLC are now the only party opposing the appeal.". In other words, the "others" have already accepted HMRC's position, and can't now appeal. Oldco/BDO are on their own.

Don't you think both sides asked "tax experts"? If it was that simple, they'd all have agreed and it wouldn't have ended up in the Court of Session.

Even by the dismal standards of football reporting in general, and Scottish in particular, this is grade A rubbish. If there was indeed sectarian singing/chanting, and I don't doubt it, it must have been heard by the media and the general public to have caused offence. How then can this official possibly be accused of "leaking"? Could it be that 100 Rangers fans were singing the Billy Boys sotto voce, and heard only by the nearby linesman? I don't think so. Meanwhile, the Bears are probably asking what school Sotto Voce went to.

What makes you think King isn't stupid? Consider the evidence: - Allegedly lost £20 miliion in the old Rangers. - Tried to beat the SA legal system - lost again, cost millions - Back again to "invest" in the new Rangers This doesn't suggest he's any sort of genius.

According to today's Record "Dave King could receive a £1.4 million payout through the liquidation of the club's former operating company. It’s all the South African businessman will claw back from the £20 million he’s listed as being owed by The Rangers Football Club plc." and "King said he ploughed the money into the club 14 years ago when Sir David Murray in charge. At the time it led to him being made a non-executive director on Murray’s board and its thought much of the money was put towards bringing down the Ibrox side’s then debt." I may be wrong, but I don't believe King ever ploughed money into the club. AFAIK he bought shares (through one of his off-shore companies) in Murray Sports Ltd., which owned another company called something like RFC Investments, which in turn owned shares in Rangers. This meant that he indirectly owned about 5% of Rangers, and got him his seat on the board. It also meant that he never actually invested the fabled £20 million in the club, but used it to buy those shares in Murray Sport. That money went to whoever sold him those shares (David Murray?), not to Rangers. If he actually paid £20 million for those shares in 2001, then that valued the club at about £400 million. So either Murray saw him coming, or he's exagerating the amount (surely not?). If any money does go to shareholders, it won't go to Dave King but to RFC Investments, and may eventually get back to him though the chain of holding companies. But do all of those companies still exist?

500,000 shirts . One shirt for every ten men women and children in Scotland. Seems glib and plausible.

This is patently fictitious. Everyone knows that the Germans hang out their washing on the Siegfried line.