Henrik's tongue Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 hour ago, Bearwithme said: Actually Lord Bannatyne made it clear in the ruling about the bet that Rangers continue, having been sold to the new company. It is correct that we weren't relegated, meaning in this case that we didn't enter the other league due to our points total. We left the SPL and joined the SFL following votes - and votes are no proof of anything other than the opinions of those voting (or their fans). This is a fucking fairy tale. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wellwoodpar Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 On 14/03/2017 at 18:04, Dindeleux said: I read Kings statement as: "legally I need to offer you 20p for these shares but please god do not accept as I can't afford and would need to kill the club" No fan would ever sell shares in their own club/company. Think Dave's problem is that he must have funds/ show he has funds, to cover the full amount. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milton75 Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 minute ago, weirdcal said: Daft question i am sure... but do the ebt side letters say rangers football club plc or just club when it indemnifies the player? If its the former, then different company argument will hold. If its the latter, will we see a massive backtrack on continuity? Well, this one for Flo says "the club", although the fact that the first sentence says Rangers Football Club may be grounds to consider that the established entity being discussed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dindeleux Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 hour ago, wellwoodpar said: No fan would ever sell shares in their own club/company. Think Dave's problem is that he must have funds/ show he has funds, to cover the full amount. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong. Will bow to your knowledge, Dunfermline fans will have more experience with things Sevco deal with (financial problems/shitness) than I would. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MEADOWXI Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 (edited) http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/15158881.Matthew_Lindsay__The__quot_Big_Tax_Case_quot__offers_a_timely_reminder_that_Rangers_must_count_their_pennies_not_splash_the_cash/?ref=mr&lp=11 A reasonable piece on the insanity of listening to people like McCoist & Johnston (the last two that have) screaming for 'Bigger Investment. Matthew Lindsay: The "Big Tax Case" offers a timely reminder that Rangers must count their pennies not splash the cash The gates of Ibrox. 15 hrs ago / Matthew Lindsay, Chief Football Writer / @MattLindsayHT 22 comments IF Rangers received a pound every time that someone, a former player, an ex-manager, a television pundit, a radio shock jock, a newspaper columnist, popped up and wailed “Dave King needs to splash more cash” they would have enough money to table a bid for Cristiano Ronaldo. Just this month, two prominent figures from the Ibrox club’s past, Ally McCoist and his old strike partner Maurice Johnston, have made the back page headlines in national newspapers by urging King, the chairman and major shareholder, to plough in more of his millions. The same views have been aired frequently since Rangers took their place in the Ladbrokes Premiership at the start of the season. The difficulties they have experienced coping with life in the top flight have increased the regularity with which the opinion is expressed. Seeing the Govan club struggle and drop points against Hamilton, Ross County, St. Johnstone, Dundee and Inverness Caledonian Thistle has been unusual for both their own followers and fans of other clubs. Without being disrespectful to the members of the first team squad at Rangers - who are all, to a man, honest and hard-working professionals – the current players lack the ability and star quality of their predecessors. Watching the likes of Jason Holt, Rob Kiernan and Josh Windass scrap to overcome lesser opponents who the likes of Paul Gascoigne, Brian Laudrup and Giovanni van Bronckhorst used to demolish has been too much for many to bear. It is little wonder that attention has turned to, and in some cases anger directed at, the man at the top. But the appeals for more money to be forthcoming so Rangers can challenge Celtic for the Scottish title are as misguided now as they have always been. What Rangers need is the exact opposite of what so many are crying out for. Namely, sensible stewardship which, in time, enables Rangers to live within their means. Only when that is achieved should they contemplate vying for the league. Have no lessons been learned from the past? Has everybody forgotten where spending money they didn't have got them before? Was the scandalous mismanagement of recent years and the serious repercussions of it all just a bad dream? King declared when he and his associates seized control at Ibrox two years ago that, initially, they would have to “over-invest” as they rebuilt. That is exactly what they have done. The club continues to make a loss and is only kept afloat due to the ongoing benevolence of wealthy fans like King, Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor. Now, you could argue about the levels to which the custodians of the club “over-invest”. Cries of “where is the £30 million” have abounded. That is how much King estimated would require to return them to their previous position at the forefront of Scottish football. However, spending recklessly and plunging tens of millions of pounds into debt - even if that is to supporters like King, Letham, Park and Taylor - in order to enjoy short-term success on the football field is not the route for Rangers to go back down. It is worth asking this pertinent question. Who exactly is “splashing the cash” across the city at Celtic? The answer is nobody. Yes, their bitter rivals spend more, considerably more, on both signing players and paying their wages than they do at Rangers. But that isn’t because Dermot Desmond, the billionaire Irish businessman and financier who is their major shareholder, is reaching into his very deep pockets and lavishing extravagant sums on Brendan Rodgers’s targets. No, they are simply using what comes in. Indeed, they even made a slight profit in the last financial year. “Mr Micawber economics,” is how Desmond once described the business plan. The fact they can afford to lavish more on better footballers and perform at a significantly higher level as a result is simply because they have operated wisely and prudently for the last decade. There was certainly a time when the Parkhead club spent big. Martin O’Neill was given a far greater budget than Rodgers during his five seasons at the helm. He brought in Chris Sutton (£6 million), John Hartson (£6 million), Neil Lennon (£5.75 million) and Joos Valgaeren (£3.8 million) in the space of little over a year. That enabled them to reach the UEFA Cup final in 2003 in what was one of the greatest achievements in Celtic’s history. But there was a downside to that European run. They made a massive and unsustainable loss as a result. Gordon Strachan’s remit when he succeeded O’Neill was to substantially reduce the wage bill at the same time as achieving on-field glory. He managed both. The so-called “Big Tax Case” is being considered by the Supreme Court this week. BDO, the liquidators of oldco Rangers, have appealed against a Court of Session ruling on the use of now-outlawed employee benefit trusts. That should serve as a reminder of, however difficult their current travails are for many to take, just where being rash with money can land a club. Edited March 16, 2017 by MEADOWXI 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingBeastie Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 4 hours ago, Bearwithme said: Actually Lord Bannatyne made it clear in the ruling about the bet that Rangers continue, having been sold to the new company. It is correct that we weren't relegated, meaning in this case that we didn't enter the other league due to our points total. We left the SPL and joined the SFL following votes - and votes are no proof of anything other than the opinions of those voting (or their fans). You let your club die. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dindeleux Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 You let your club die. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingBeastie Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, Dindeleux said: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
senorsoupe Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 I think that Matthew Lindsay's article is a reminder that maybe Ibrox needs some adult intervention at the boardroom level to stabilize the ship. Celtic needed the tough love of Fergus McCann in the 90's to fix the problems left behind by the old board while Hearts needed Ann Budge to clean up the Romanov mess. Another shyster with purported deep pockets will not fix the problem 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 That's the BTC done. Not sure how long it will take for the verdict - probably a while. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Brees Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 That's the BTC done. Not sure how long it will take for the verdict - probably a while. I heard October 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCelt67 Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 5 hours ago, Bearwithme said: Actually Lord Bannatyne made it clear in the ruling about the bet that Rangers continue, having been sold to the new company. It is correct that we weren't relegated, meaning in this case that we didn't enter the other league due to our points total. We left the SPL and joined the SFL following votes - and votes are no proof of anything other than the opinions of those voting (or their fans). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 10 hours ago, Bearwithme said: We left the SPL and joined the SFL following votes - and votes are no proof of anything other than the opinions of those voting (or their fans). Is it not surely the case, that Rangers left the SPL due to liquidation? Their failure to join the SPL or SFL1, but success in joining SFL3, came about as a result of votes. These votes of course reflect mere opinions; as do any of the readings offered by any organisations or individuals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Round and round and round again . Seek help people 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Forever_blueco said: Round and round and round again . Seek help people I suspect even you know where the help is really needed. We diddies are just having fun - no help needed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, The DA said: I suspect even you know where the help is really needed. We diddies are just having fun - no help needed. Arguing the same shite day after day seems the dictionary definition of fun . Following tweets and whipping yourself into a frenzy over courts cases regarding things such as disputed bets sounds like Such glorious fun . Can see where I have been going wrong all my life . Edited March 16, 2017 by Forever_blueco 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 Just now, Forever_blueco said: Arguing the same shite day after day seems the dictionary definition of fun . Following tweets and whipping yourself into a frenzy over courts cases regarding things such as disputed bets sounds like Such glorious fun . Have you got even an amoeba's understanding of what happened in the Supreme Court over the last couple of days? Even an inkling of the possible repercussions for your clubs' treasured discontinuous history? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 3 minutes ago, The DA said: Have you got even an amoeba's understanding of what happened in the Supreme Court over the last couple of days? Even an inkling of the possible repercussions for your clubs' treasured discontinuous history? Couldn't give a shiny shite to be honest 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 1 minute ago, Forever_blueco said: Couldn't give a shiny shite to be honest Fair enough. At least you're honest. Deluded and in denial, but honest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Forever_blueco Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 2 minutes ago, The DA said: Fair enough. At least you're honest. Deluded and in denial, but honest. For what it's worth I had a quick look and first report I read contained this "It is, as always, very difficult to make an assessment of the mood of the court, but the impression given is that the court was unwilling to entertain HMRC’s argument that the employee had immediate access to the EBT assets and was less than wholly convinced that their arguments on diverted earnings were correct." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.