Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[nacho]

Don't worry Nacho. I'd never accuse you of being dismissive. The extent of you're engagement is in fact mind boggling. Your insecurity about things Rangers related, is absolutely towering.

 

insecurity i am secure in the knowledge that my club survived, laughing at you new club fuds is the reason im here

 

[nacho]

With Newcastle being relegated we now have some interesting rules about to come to bear.

 

The punishments for flaunting these can also be quite severe.

 

This of course goes beyond having to offload Rangers and Rangers retail shares, he also has commercial interests in Oldham.

 

98.1 Except with the prior written consent of the Board no Club may, either directly or indirectly:

98.1.1 hold or deal in (or make any application to hold or deal in or underwrite any issue of) the securities or shares of another football club; or

98.1.2 be a member of another football club; or

98.1.3 be involved in any capacity whatsoever in the management or administration of another football club; or

98.1.4 have any power whatsoever to influence the financial, commercial or business affairs or the management or administration of another football club; or

98.1.5 lend to, gift money to, purchase future receivables from or guarantee the debts or obligations of that football club (or any other arrangement of substantially similar effect).

......

 

105 Powers of The Board in Event of Default

105.2 Any breach of any of the foregoing Regulations 98 to 101 inclusive, including without limitation knowingly rendering incorrect or incomplete information pursuant to Regulations 101 and 103, shall constitute misconduct.Without prejudice to the range of other sanctions that may be imposed in respect of such breach, any Club in breach of any of the aforesaid Regulations may with the sanction of a special resolution passed at an Annual or Extraordinary General Meeting of The League, be expelled from The League. There shall be no right of appeal against such expulsion.

cant see this happening at all in regards to getting the fat scumbag out or our club

[nacho]

Didn't FIFA allow players registered to the old club to transfer for free?

Is that not official enough for you?

nope , as that is based on the fallacy that club is the same as company which the facts contradict, the only available info from fifa regarding the status of the club are news articles on their website of which 5 say same club and 1 says new club - hope that helps

[nacho]

Reply from The offshore game.

http://www.theoffshoregame.net/a-correction-and-statement-regarding-our-report/

 

http://www.theoffshoregame.net/the-uefa-licence-issue/

 

 

On a side note i find it hilarious that the bloggers are the only ones making legit money from tainted fc

 

doesnt really address the points raised on rangers media unsurprisingly

 

i also find it hilarious that the bloggers are making money from gullible celtic fans by feeding them a load of nonsense on this issue and the various other issues

[nacho]

So basically, thanks for all your hard work corresponding, but we disagree with what you say, and here's why. To appease you, we'll change the wording on two lines.

 

 

I like this line...

 

The history and the spirit of the club remain with the fans, not with any company.

 

 

 

ETA: Has the guy on RM posted anything for our wee Nacho to cut n paste?

 

thanks for corresponding but we will ignore most of what you say as it doesnt suit us , is more the gist of it, i cant imagine anyone is really surprised with that  as the ususal suspects like ill phil etc are behind it, the latest attempt to kid on that its an impartial viewpoint when we all know its celtic fans behind it - like the scottish football monitor, rangers tax case etc

 

[nacho]

Rangers fan posts rangers fans blog/report/reply from Rangers website on Rangers about tax dodging from some tax dodging site, but blames Celtic fans....buffffffff!!!

 

I'd imagine thats because a quick search of the twitter timeline of that website shows its infested by the celtic twatteratti and the guy running it says that it was celtic fans that gave him  the information

[Monkey Tennis]

insecurity i am secure in the knowledge that my club survived, laughing at you new club fuds is the reason im here

Ah, smiley faces and insults.

That's definitely how to win an argument.

Anyway, I'm not a "new club fud". I'm an "it's all a bit murky and indistinct" fud.

[Monkey Tennis]

the only available info from fifa regarding the status of the club are news articles on their website of which 5 say same club and 1 says new club - hope that helps

It really does help in establishing that it's all a bit murky and indistinct, even in the view of the corrupt governing body whose verdict you wish to cling to.

Thanks.

[The DA]

Ah, smiley faces and insults. That's definitely how to win an argument. Anyway, I'm not a "new club fud". I'm an "it's all a bit murky and indistinct" fud.

 

You forgot 'immoral'.

[stonedsailor]

nope , as that is based on the fallacy that club is the same as company which the facts contradict, the only available info from fifa regarding the status of the club are news articles on their website of which 5 say same club and 1 says new club - hope that helps

Have you read the FIFA transfer regulations I posted earlier in the thread? According to FIFA players are contracted to a club.

UEFA defines a club as the legal entity which is responsible for the fielding of a team.

The falicy is that club and company are seperate.

Edited May 13, 2016 by stonedsailor

[Monkey Tennis]

You forgot 'immoral'.

Oh, I never forget that.

[nacho]

It really does help in establishing that it's all a bit murky and indistinct, even in the view of the corrupt governing body whose verdict you wish to cling to.

Thanks.

No problem

[nacho]

Have you read the FIFA transfer regulations I posted earlier in the thread? According to FIFA players are contracted to a club.

UEFA defines a club as the legal entity which is responsible for the fielding of a team.

The falicy is that club and company are seperate.

Not according to Scottish law as Lord glennie and Nimmo established, not according to the sfa, spl, spfl, uefa, the Eca and the sfl as they all officially recognise us as the same club, not according to hmrc, bdo, duff and phelps and the stock market who all say the club has survived, ditto the asa, not according to the 20 other teams who have gone through the same process as Rangers and have remained the same club, the fallacy is that club and company cannot be separated, as for your source send me a link and I will have a look at it

[The DA]

Not according to Scottish law as Lord glennie and Nimmo established, not according to the sfa, spl, spfl, uefa, the Eca and the sfl as they all officially recognise us as the same club, not according to hmrc, bdo, duff and phelps and the stock market who all say the club has survived, ditto the asa, not according to the 20 other teams who have gone through the same process as Rangers and have remained the same club, the fallacy is that club and company cannot be separated, as for your source send me a link and I will have a look at it

 

nacho, you've just gone up in my estimation.  A Rangers fan who is actually prepared to look at evidence.  Good lad.

[stonedsailor]

Not according to Scottish law as Lord glennie and Nimmo established, not according to the sfa, spl, spfl, uefa, the Eca and the sfl as they all officially recognise us as the same club, not according to hmrc, bdo, duff and phelps and the stock market who all say the club has survived, ditto the asa, not according to the 20 other teams who have gone through the same process as Rangers and have remained the same club, the fallacy is that club and company cannot be separated, as for your source send me a link and I will have a look at it

UEFA FFP rules state that a club cannot change legal form in the case of insolvency, these rules came into force in 2011 any clubs with recognised continuation after an insolvency prior to that cannot be used as evidence.

FIFA, as stated allowed transfers from the old club without fees being paid to the new club.

There has been no ruling under Scots law, any law lord who has ruled have ruled based on SPL rules.

Duff and Phelps are implicated in a fraud trial involving old Rangers and the creation of new Rangers.

The stock market, HMRC and BDO have said no such thing.

The ECA are the equivalent of a union for clubs and as such only interested in the fees garnered from members.

The SFL, SPFL and SPL are hardly impartial given the "armageddon" that they foresaw.

As for the link just google "FIFA transfer regulations or look back in the thread.

[nacho]

I wonder if our nacho here held up a red card at ibrokes during the no to newco debacle and if so what was his reasons for doing/not doing so...

 

weve covered this numerous times before, i was there , i held up the red card, i knew however that liquidation wouldnt mena the end of the club as we had numerous interested buyers at that point, i wanted to avoid liquidation due to the many other negative consequences that it involved, possible demotion, loss of players due to tupe etc

 

[nacho]

UEFA FFP rules state that a club cannot change legal form in the case of insolvency, these rules came into force in 2011 any clubs with recognised continuation after an insolvency prior to that cannot be used as evidence.

FIFA, as stated allowed transfers from the old club without fees being paid to the new club.

There has been no ruling under Scots law, any law lord who has ruled have ruled based on SPL rules.

Duff and Phelps are implicated in a fraud trial involving old Rangers and the creation of new Rangers.

The stock market, HMRC and BDO have said no such thing.

The ECA are the equivalent of a union for clubs and as such only interested in the fees garnered from members.

The SFL, SPFL and SPL are hardly impartial given the "armageddon" that they foresaw.

As for the link just google "FIFA transfer regulations or look back in the thread.

yep you are talking pish on every single point, all of them say we are the same club, each one individually is better than any bit of evidence you have been able to provide for your new club pish and officially we are the same club, your post is a mixture of lies, smears and nonsense, i would love to be able to attck your evidence but as the last 4 years have proved you dont have any

 

 

"UEFA FFP rules state that a club cannot change legal form in the case of insolvency, these rules came into force in 2011 any clubs with recognised continuation after an insolvency prior to that cannot be used as evidence."

 

no they dont, what they actually state is “Clubs are not allowed to change their legal form or structure in order to obtain a licence, simply by ‘cleaning up’ their balance sheet while offloading debts – thus harming creditors (including employees and social/tax authorities) as well as threatening the integrity of sporting competition. Any such alteration of a club’s legal form or structure is deemed to be an interruption to its membership of a UEFA member association and consequently three years must pass before a club can apply again for a UEFA licence. " - note the apply again bit - same club

FIFA, as stated allowed transfers from the old club without fees being paid to the new club.

 

fifa allowed transfers from the old company without fees being paid to the new company, its your interpretation that this was the club not the company but you dont have any evidence to support it,  the fifa website site has stated we are the same club numerous times - same club

 

There has been no ruling under Scots law, any law lord who has ruled have ruled based on SPL rules.

 

two law experts have stated according to the law club and company are seperate entites, neither ruling was based on spl rules (lord glennies ruling was in a court) - you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support your claim that club and company are the same thing

 

Duff and Phelps are implicated in a fraud trial involving old Rangers and the creation of new Rangers.

 

they are experts in the area of admin and liquidation and state the club survived

 

The stock market, HMRC and BDO have said no such thing.

 

qhere three quotes from them saying we are the same club and proving you are talking pish

 

HMRC - “the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club. This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.â€

“Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox. It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA. Rangers can make a fresh start."

 

the stock market -

“Rangers International Football Club plc following admission will own and operate The Rangers Football Club Limited. Rangers Football Club, based in Scotland, has become one of the world's most successful clubs, having won 54 League titles, 33 Scottish Cups, 27 League Cups and the European Cup Winners' Cup in 1972. Playing at the 50,987 seater Ibrox Stadium, Scotland, and benefitting from the world class 37 acre Murray Park training facility, the club has been a dominant force in Scottish football for decades.â€

 

bdo - "The joint administrators intend to complete a transfer of the business and assets to a new company in the coming days, putting the future of the club on more secure footing.â€

"It's important to understand that the appointment of liquidators will not mean the end of football at Ibrox - only the end of the company that ran the club,"

 

The ECA are the equivalent of a union for clubs and as such only interested in the fees garnered from members.

 

and they have stated that accoridng to its members including hearts, celtic and aberdeen, rangers are the same club

“Rangers are permitted to hold associate membership, which holds no voting rights, as they are one of the founder members of the ECA. The organisation considers the club’s history to be continuous regardless of the change of company.â€

 

The SFL, SPFL and SPL are hardly impartial given the "armageddon" that they foresaw.

 

they are impartial and all have stated rangers are the same club

 

spfl -

"Yes, it's the same club, absolutely.  The member club is the entity that participates in our league and we have 42 member clubs. "Those clubs may be owned by a company, sometimes it's a Private Limited Company, sometimes it's a PLC, but ultimately, the company is a legal entity in its own right, which owns a member club that participates in the league."

 

sfa, sfl and spl

 

“joint statement on behalf of The Scottish FA, The Scottish Premier League, The Scottish Football League and Sevco Scotland Ltd. -“We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club.â€

[stonedsailor]

yep you are talking pish on every single point, all of them say we are the same club, each one individually is better than any bit of evidence you have been able to provide for your new club pish and officially we are the same club, your post is a mixture of lies, smears and nonsense, i would love to be able to attck your evidence but as the last 4 years have proved you dont have any

"UEFA FFP rules state that a club cannot change legal form in the case of insolvency, these rules came into force in 2011 any clubs with recognised continuation after an insolvency prior to that cannot be used as evidence."

no they dont, what they actually state is “Clubs are not allowed to change their legal form or structure in order to obtain a licence, simply by ‘cleaning up’ their balance sheet while offloading debts – thus harming creditors (including employees and social/tax authorities) as well as threatening the integrity of sporting competition. Any such alteration of a club’s legal form or structure is deemed to be an interruption to its membership of a UEFA member association and consequently three years must pass before a club can apply again for a UEFA licence. " - note the apply again bit - same club

FIFA, as stated allowed transfers from the old club without fees being paid to the new club.

fifa allowed transfers from the old company without fees being paid to the new company, its your interpretation that this was the club not the company but you dont have any evidence to support it, the fifa website site has stated we are the same club numerous times - same club

There has been no ruling under Scots law, any law lord who has ruled have ruled based on SPL rules.

two law experts have stated according to the law club and company are seperate entites, neither ruling was based on spl rules (lord glennies ruling was in a court) - you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever to support your claim that club and company are the same thing

Duff and Phelps are implicated in a fraud trial involving old Rangers and the creation of new Rangers.

they are experts in the area of admin and liquidation and state the club survived

The stock market, HMRC and BDO have said no such thing.

qhere three quotes from them saying we are the same club and proving you are talking pish

HMRC - “the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club. This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.â€

“Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox. It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA. Rangers can make a fresh start."

the stock market -

“Rangers International Football Club plc following admission will own and operate The Rangers Football Club Limited. Rangers Football Club, based in Scotland, has become one of the world's most successful clubs, having won 54 League titles, 33 Scottish Cups, 27 League Cups and the European Cup Winners' Cup in 1972. Playing at the 50,987 seater Ibrox Stadium, Scotland, and benefitting from the world class 37 acre Murray Park training facility, the club has been a dominant force in Scottish football for decades.â€

bdo - "The joint administrators intend to complete a transfer of the business and assets to a new company in the coming days, putting the future of the club on more secure footing.â€

"It's important to understand that the appointment of liquidators will not mean the end of football at Ibrox - only the end of the company that ran the club,"

The ECA are the equivalent of a union for clubs and as such only interested in the fees garnered from members.

and they have stated that accoridng to its members including hearts, celtic and aberdeen, rangers are the same club

“Rangers are permitted to hold associate membership, which holds no voting rights, as they are one of the founder members of the ECA. The organisation considers the club’s history to be continuous regardless of the change of company.â€

The SFL, SPFL and SPL are hardly impartial given the "armageddon" that they foresaw.

they are impartial and all have stated rangers are the same club

spfl -

"Yes, it's the same club, absolutely. The member club is the entity that participates in our league and we have 42 member clubs. "Those clubs may be owned by a company, sometimes it's a Private Limited Company, sometimes it's a PLC, but ultimately, the company is a legal entity in its own right, which owns a member club that participates in the league."

sfa, sfl and spl

“joint statement on behalf of The Scottish FA, The Scottish Premier League, The Scottish Football League and Sevco Scotland Ltd. -“We are pleased to confirm that agreement has been reached on all outstanding points relating to the transfer of the Scottish FA membership between Rangers FC (In Administration), and Sevco Scotland Ltd, who will be the new owners of The Rangers Football Club.â€

Note the bit about interuption to membership. Means the membership of the SFA stopped. To be a club under UEFA rules you must be a member of an FA ie Rangers stopped being a club then became a new club.

[Ken Fitlike]

let me get this straight.....

 

nacho actually believes all this 'still the same club' stuff and is not just posturing in order to maintain the WATP  wet dream?

 

goodness me.

[aofjays]

Note the bit about interuption to membership. Means the membership of the SFA stopped. To be a club under UEFA rules you must be a member of an FA ie Rangers stopped being a club then became a new club.

Well done nacho for finally laying this to rest with evidence both sides seem happy with. Sevcorangers are a new club - case closed.