rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont An SPL board meeting taking place now regarding Rangers dual contracts allegations. Hopefully an update later ^^^^beat me to it 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont If clubs don't pay taxman on time there'll be a transfer embargo Very good,the innocent diddies suffering short term cashflow problems will get hammered while the biggest cheats in Scottish footballing history get their boaby sucked rotten. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 ^^^^beat me to it Lightning @ C&P's 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebeneezer Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 What's this about the cash from Green being A LOAN to Rangers FC? He wants to acquire the club with cash that he will take back at a later date. If his CVA is agreed, he will basically have got the club for a steal. That aint right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hughsie Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Realistically, how much heat are UEFA/FIFA likely to place on the SFA/SPL behind the scenes on this issue? I need to adjust my Rangers death optimism level accordingly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamontI asked Neil Doncaster if Charles Green was casting Rangers' votes today. He said combination of Green, admin and Andrew Dickson, head of .. Why????? he doesnt own Rankeers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spain Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 (edited) Very good,the innocent diddies suffering short term cashflow problems will get hammered while the biggest cheats in Scottish footballing history get their boaby sucked rotten. Depends if it's relevant to the amount/time unpaid. We haven't seen the details yet. The transfer embargo may be relevant to the monies with-held, it could be only until the full monies are paid, or it could be a set in stone timescale for every missed payment. Edited May 30, 2012 by Spain 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 SPL board meeting now re dual contracts investigation. Update later possibly. DVD player on.. Then questions "so Neil, your team learned nothing in three months and Mark Daly had all that?" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross. Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamontI asked Neil Doncaster if Charles Green was casting Rangers' votes today. He said combination of Green, admin and Andrew Dickson, head of .. Why????? he doesnt own Rankeers If he is an appointed representative of the club, I imagine that would mean he was free to help. Most of the guys involved in the voting don't own the clubs either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 No point in holding the vote while there is still a Rangers around, because any reform vote would lose (by winning 10-2). But by the AGM, there may not be a Rangers, which would allow the "diddies" to win 10-1 or 11-1 depending on the circumstances. This. The one vote I'm happy for them to delay till the time's right, even if it's a theoretical time gap during a transfer of the share between the Oldco and Newco.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Dunno if as cut and dried as that. He's got a controlling interest to sell on. Oh, completely. I merely said it was nice to see. Even if it's lip service it's a lot better to palette than Danny's comments about needing Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/?p=9345&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter apparently cockwomble will be crying tiny tears 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supras Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 On SSN now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 http://www.celticqui..._medium=twitter apparently cockwomble will be crying tiny tears GIRUY cockwomble 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hipster Dufus Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Alasdair Lamont @BBCAlLamont If clubs don't pay taxman on time there'll be a transfer embargo What is the punishment if clubs don't pay taxman at all ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RotWeissEssen Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 My understanding is that the new co vote failed. It has also now been approved that 8-4 vote to allow a new co in rather than the board. If the SPL had voted through new co punishment then that would be it. Rangers would get entry to the SPL as a newco with the punishments. In fact any club could do a newco if a member of the SPL and get through. As the vote has not gone through if a rangers new co applies then they will need at least 8 clubs to side with them or they are down to 3rd division. This seems positive to me. They could not get 8 clubs to agree to allowing any newco in the SPL even with the punishments. Would be funny if quite a few clubs have changed there mind based on rangers taking the SFA to court. People overall seem certain they will get the 8 votes if newco comes to pass I am not so sure. Many on this forum have commented that no club would vote against rangers being allowed back in. If this is true then why did they not vote through the new co punishment today. That would be it done agreed. If they had agreed the punishments today new co was in , it was over. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GirondistNYC Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 1338380053[/url]' post='6287126']What's this about the cash from Green being A LOAN to Rangers FC? He wants to acquire the club with cash that he will take back at a later date. If his CVA is agreed, he will basically have got the club for a steal. That aint right. Well, he'll be putting more money in than TBK or Whyte and it will be very much at risk. By structuring the purchase as a loan, however, he can take a security interest / floating charge over Ibrox and other assets. That means that if they get the CVA and subsequently go bust again he can recover some of the cash by being first in line for the proceeds of sale. By the way, since it keeps cropping up, the BTC amounts ARE included in the CVA. If it goes through, HMRC can't come back and try and extract cash after the judgement - the CVA specifically makes creditors wait until the BTC is resolved to get paid. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 So the clubs voted down the cockwomble's proposal to let in a Newco without punishment? 8-4 vote? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 My understanding is that the new co vote failed. It has also now been approved that 8-4 vote to allow a new co in rather than the board. If the SPL had voted through new co punishment then that would be it. Rangers would get entry to the SPL as a newco with the punishments. In fact any club could do a newco if a member of the SPL and get through. As the vote has not gone through if a rangers new co applies then they will need at least 8 clubs to side with them or they are down to 3rd division. This seems positive to me. They could not get 8 clubs to agree to allowing any newco in the SPL even with the punishments. Would be funny if quite a few clubs have changed there mind based on rangers taking the SFA to court. People overall seem certain they will get the 8 votes if newco comes to pass I am not so sure. Many on this forum have commented that no club would vote against rangers being allowed back in. If this is true then why did they not vote through the new co punishment today. That would be it done agreed. If they had agreed the punishments today new co was in , it was over. Because they will want to agree every newco on their merits. Big club = hi you're most welcome. Wee club = fcuk off you insignificant bawbags. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted May 30, 2012 Share Posted May 30, 2012 Well, he'll be putting more money in than TBK or Whyte and it will be very much at risk. By structuring the purchase as a loan, however, he can take a security interest / floating charge over Ibrox and other assets. That means that if they get the CVA and subsequently go bust again he can recover some of the cash by being first in line for the proceeds of sale. How would that work with Whyte's existing floating charges? By the way, since it keeps cropping up, the BTC amounts ARE included in the CVA. If it goes through, HMRC can't come back and try and extract cash after the judgement - the CVA specifically makes creditors wait until the BTC is resolved to get paid. Hmm, a strange structure to that CVA, assuming its accepted. 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.