p&b is a disgrace Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Do they have enough reddies to cover the next tranch of tax? that I am sure somebody said was due 17/05??? that MUST be paid, and wages get paid when in the month? 22nd if paid by same day transfer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Just think at this point in time 4 years ago the Rangers fans were having a party in Manchester. CAPTION TIME ha ha WE'RE CLOSING DOWN THE BIG HOOSE 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 22nd if paid by same day transfer. ta 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 (edited) Do they have enough reddies to cover the next tranch of tax? that I am sure somebody said was due 17/05??? that MUST be paid, and wages get paid when in the month? You can only trust H&D who have stated they've enough to cover all until the end of May. Again I would contend that unless the new investors agree to meet all running costs after then, that H&D have a duty to liquidate on June 1 Otherwise, H&D as the effective custodians are themselves running up new debts they know they cannot meet Edited May 14, 2012 by Claymores 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 @davidhillier's proclamation that HMRC are likely to agree a CVA on the basis that the regime has changed concerns me greatly: "HMRC CVA policy: when an insolvent firm has new owners, history of nonpayment is not important. New owners are what matters." I am always hearing how HMRC consistently reject CVAs, but the above statement could be significant. No it couldn't - David Hillier is just another Strathtech academic happy to say to the media whatever they want to be said, just as John Curtice is wheeled out whenever there's some brown-nosing of Labour and SNP bashing to be done. This muppet has been popular with the Daily Retard lately to talk sunshine and roses to the orcs, and every time he's got it woefully wrong. You only have to look at the last time he looked at the bidders to see he's not one for facts to get in the way of keeping things sunshine. He said last time round regarding Bill Miller that "Rangers’ major income stream is match day" - um, the match day where the catering (one of the big money spinners in most top tier clubs) was all mortgaged off by Murray to outside contractors and Rangers don't see a penny of it? He also barfed off about Rangers future“It needs far more fan involvement" - at a time when it was already clear the fans willingness to help raise cash to merely keep the club alive was shown to be all talk and no action. And out of Bill Ng, Bill Miller and the Blue Knights, which one did he say had the best business plan for taking over Rangers with? The Blue Knights - “For the club’s long-term sustainability I would opt for Paul Murray." - whose credibility has been torn to pieces as one massive joke since Friday. Back to sleep Hillier! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 (edited) If I'm not mistaken, during the press conference yesterday, D&P made reference to Green having forked out for a period of exclusivity. For me, this doesn't square with anything being legally binding as claimed (the 'no reverse gear' pish Green rambled on about). I asked about this yesterday, but didn't read any answer. What exactly has he signed up to that is legally binding? What is the contract? And if he has done such a thing, then surely any period of exclusivity is entirely pointless. Did I imagine the reference to aperiod of exclusivity? ETA: one of Duff & Phelps’ men inside Ibrox, issued a statement which read: "Mr Green has secured, via a substantial financial commitment, a period of exclusivity to complete the purchase of the club and this is expected to be finalised at a creditors' meeting on 6 June Telegraph Link Edited May 14, 2012 by Drooper 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 don't bank on it, charles green has offered nothing but soundbites and certainly no substance. his backers remain mysterious, he talks about taking anybody's money as long as it's clean, and his track record is nothing for the orcs to get excited about. i won't be one bit surprised if charlie boy doesn't leave the orcs harking on about the good old days under craigie whyte. He's already telling the Rangers support that they will not like everything he is going to tell them. Hardly the moonbeams or 25 mill for new players type rhetoric of the charlatans that got Rangers into their current predicament. If someone like Green hadn't emerged Rangers were in very real danger of doing a Third Lanark. What was needed was somebody with the cojones to tell a support that has been spoiled for 20 years that certain fiscal realities will finally have to be faced in future. They appear to have that now hence why I think people will need to come to terms with the continuing presence of Rangers in Scottish football. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 If I'm not mistaken, during the press conference yesterday, D&P made reference to Green having forked out for a period of exclusivity. For me, this doesn't square with anything being legally binding as claimed (the 'no reverse gear' pish Green rambled on about). I asked about this yesterday, but didn't read any answer. What exactly has he signed up to that is legally binding? What is the contract? And if he has done such a thing, then surely any period of exclusivity is entirely pointless. Did I imagine the reference to aperiod of exclusivity? I might have missed this (because I'm a dozy pillock), but if Green has signed some sort of legally binding, no-reverse deal to become the new Rangers owner - we know he's merely part of a 20 or so investor consortium - who are at present anonymous. How can he have signed a legally binding deal with 20 unknowns in the shadows funding it? Where are the SPL and SFA on this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 If I'm not mistaken, during the press conference yesterday, D&P made reference to Green having forked out for a period of exclusivity. For me, this doesn't square with anything being legally binding as claimed (the 'no reverse gear' pish Green rambled on about). I asked about this yesterday, but didn't read any answer. What exactly has he signed up to that is legally binding? What is the contract? And if he has done such a thing, then surely any period of exclusivity is entirely pointless. Did I imagine the reference to aperiod of exclusivity? ETA: one of Duff & Phelps’ men inside Ibrox, issued a statement which read: "Mr Green has secured, via a substantial financial commitment, a period of exclusivity to complete the purchase of the club and this is expected to be finalised at a creditors' meeting on 6 June Telegraph Link AGREED - I don't see what financial commitment he has made......none by the looks of it. H&D better have a water-tight binding contract that he'll proceed one way or another regardless or else Green is no different to Miller . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 one of Duff & Phelps’ men inside Ibrox, issued a statement which read: "Mr Green has secured, via a substantial financial commitment, a period of exclusivity to complete the purchase of the club and this is expected to be finalised at a creditors' meeting on 6 JuneTelegraph Link Translated: New made up piece of Haudit & Daudit psychobabble for "Preferred Bidder". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 He's already telling the Rangers support that they will not like everything he is going to tell them. Hardly the moonbeams or 25 mill for new players type rhetoric of the charlatans that got Rangers into their current predicament. If someone like Green hadn't emerged Rangers were in very real danger of doing a Third Lanark. What was needed was somebody with the cojones to tell a support that has been spoiled for 20 years that certain fiscal realities will finally have to be faced in future. They appear to have that now hence why I think people will need to come to terms with the continuing presence of Rangers in Scottish football. ..he has also mentioned the ludicrous figure of £1 billion in investment and hasn't actually committed to anything other than a period of exclusivity. I take your point, but until he comes up with the hard cash from his anonymous "backers" and puts that serious money into the club I'll continue to view him with quite a bit of scepticism. Green may well have this money, but there's a more than even chance he'll withdraw, as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I might have missed this (because I'm a dozy pillock), but if Green has signed some sort of legally binding, no-reverse deal to become the new Rangers owner - we know he's merely part of a 20 or so investor consortium - who are at present anonymous. How can he have signed a legally binding deal with 20 unknowns in the shadows funding it? Where are the SPL and SFA on this? Indeed. Something smells.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 He's already telling the Rangers support that they will not like everything he is going to tell them. Hardly the moonbeams or 25 mill for new players type rhetoric of the charlatans that got Rangers into their current predicament. If someone like Green hadn't emerged Rangers were in very real danger of doing a Third Lanark. What was needed was somebody with the cojones to tell a support that has been spoiled for 20 years that certain fiscal realities will finally have to be faced in future. They appear to have that now hence why I think people will need to come to terms with the continuing presence of Rangers in Scottish football. ????? "I can raise up to £1billion to make Rangers solvent again" "There is no reason this club cant come through this and be a top European force again.." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 I take your point, but until he comes up with the hard cash from his anonymous "backers" and puts that serious money into the club I'll continue to view him with quite a bit of scepticism. Green may well have this money, but there's a more than even chance he'll withdraw, as well. This quote is also in the Telegraph link above: "If the creditors do not approve the Company Voluntary Arrangement, the agreement obliges Charles Green's purchasing vehicle to acquire the business and assets of the club on agreed terms, through a newco structure. It is Mr Green's strong preference to achieve a CVA." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pansypotterthedirtyrotter Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 He's already telling the Rangers support that they will not like everything he is going to tell them. Hardly the moonbeams or 25 mill for new players type rhetoric of the charlatans that got Rangers into their current predicament. If someone like Green hadn't emerged Rangers were in very real danger of doing a Third Lanark. What was needed was somebody with the cojones to tell a support that has been spoiled for 20 years that certain fiscal realities will finally have to be faced in future. They appear to have that now hence why I think people will need to come to terms with the continuing presence of Rangers in Scottish football. this is the same guy who said that "if he tells his backers to spend big bucks on three or four players they will make £20m profit by getting to the later stages of the champions league", hardly proposing that they live on the breadline. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted May 14, 2012 Author Share Posted May 14, 2012 Breaking news: 'For every one billion Green spends, we will spend two billion.' - Stewart Gilmour, chairman, St Mirren FC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 He's already telling the Rangers support that they will not like everything he is going to tell them. Hardly the moonbeams or 25 mill for new players type rhetoric of the charlatans that got Rangers into their current predicament. If someone like Green hadn't emerged Rangers were in very real danger of doing a Third Lanark. What was needed was somebody with the cojones to tell a support that has been spoiled for 20 years that certain fiscal realities will finally have to be faced in future. They appear to have that now hence why I think people will need to come to terms with the continuing presence of Rangers in Scottish football. YIP they will still be around but they will be wounded financially with the Green reaper and will deffo not have the players to make a decent challenge for the title. If the orcs do boycott away games and ra gers are rotten and get beat often then the other clubs home attendances might increase dramatically.Just so they can really stick the boot in and slagging them off.PLEASE PLEASE let this be so 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 He's already telling the Rangers support that they will not like everything he is going to tell them. Hardly the moonbeams or 25 mill for new players type rhetoric of the charlatans that got Rangers into their current predicament. If someone like Green hadn't emerged Rangers were in very real danger of doing a Third Lanark. What was needed was somebody with the cojones to tell a support that has been spoiled for 20 years that certain fiscal realities will finally have to be faced in future. They appear to have that now hence why I think people will need to come to terms with the continuing presence of Rangers in Scottish football. They have nothing other than a guy who claims to be fronting a bid from 20 (nice round number, that ) anonymous entities. Oh aye, they also have a guy who claims that he can raise £1billion. That's patently absurd. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 Here's a sneak preview of the newly prepared office from which Charlie Green will liase with the 20 investors as they raise £1 billion for Rangers and acquire a CVA in record time for season 2012/13, and start making Rangers Football Club a global brand. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lithgierose Posted May 14, 2012 Share Posted May 14, 2012 cant be arsed trolling back todays posts,my eyes have been bleeding to much lately. did i hear on the real radio news snippet today that MR saviour if needed, would be selling the top players and raising st prices to help ballance the books ? anybody else hear this or was it a dream 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.