dave.j Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 1359072560[/url]' post='7014836']As it is The Rangers Football Club PLC (the PLC stands for PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY),then it's very evident that the debt was that of the PLC (the company). Recognised as such by BDO in their correspondence(RFC 2012 THE COMPANY). So the club was a company, there was no separate club so to speak, as the club was a PLC? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 So the club was a company, there was no separate club so to speak, as the club was a PLC? No,that's nothing remotely like what i said. The PLC is in the process of being liquidated,they were the former owners/operators of Rangers F.C. as stated by two law lords in seperate summations. As stated also in summation,The Rangers Football Club Limited are the new owner/operators of Rangers F.C. As also stated by various football authorities,the club is one and the same since 1872 going forward and as such this will be recorded in the Annals of Scottish Football in the years to come. Now whether you or anyone accepts this or not is irrelevant as all that is needed is recognition by the footballing authorities. As Monkey Tennis said earlier this is all getting rather tedious and we will all just go round in circles so as i've said,i'll go with the recognition from the footballing authorities,you go with your own opinion,makes no difference to the record books. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 I am happy to admit that a company started running the club in 1899. Again I never said they did, thats 3 times you have just made stuff up and you moan at me for deleting your completely irrelevant comments Absolutely fucking outstanding piece of stupidity there Tedi,you have gone right out of your way in showing either how thick you can be or the length of WUM you won't go out of your way for. PLEASE PLEASE TEDI ! help me out here will you post some undeniable evidence that a company approached Rangers to run it's affairs or something that says that Rangers approached a company to run it's affairs.I can't find any fucking scrap or piece of piss anywhere that even remotely gives a hint to a company running Rangers other than Rangers ran it's own affairs by creating inside the club a finance department and a legal department and many other departments which could be separated from the company by Rangers newly adopted philosophy. And for your information Tedi ! Rangers were already a company before they became a limited company.If I set as a sole trader in the eyes of the law I am a company lodged in the companies house registrar and when I employ people then I have to become a limited company as I employ people and are liable for their safety. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWoodburn Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Do you know where hell is 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 No,that's nothing remotely like what i said. The PLC is in the process of being liquidated,they were the former owners/operators of Rangers F.C. as stated by two law lords in seperate summations. As stated also in summation,The Rangers Football Club Limited are the new owner/operators of Rangers F.C. As also stated by various football authorities,the club is one and the same since 1872 going forward and as such this will be recorded in the Annals of Scottish Football in the years to come. Now whether you or anyone accepts this or not is irrelevant as all that is needed is recognition by the footballing authorities. As Monkey Tennis said earlier this is all getting rather tedious and we will all just go round in circles so as i've said,i'll go with the recognition from the footballing authorities,you go with your own opinion,makes no difference to the record books. So, can you clarify when you changed your stance on this, I'm struggling to understand your posts from April that I quoted earlier... The ones where you discuss every bit of shit that was flying about, EBTs, dual contracts, liquidation... And at every opportunity you describe them as that of the club's. Not once did you consider using the term PLC or company, or mention to separate parts within Ibrox. How come for you it was all the club, at the start of April? What changed? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Do you know where hell is Yes I've been to and worked in Ibrox why ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 So, can you clarify when you changed your stance on this, I'm struggling to understand your posts from April that I quoted earlier... The ones where you discuss every bit of shit that was flying about, EBTs, dual contracts, liquidation... And at every opportunity you describe them as that of the club's. Not once did you consider using the term PLC or company, or mention to separate parts within Ibrox. How come for you it was all the club, at the start of April? What changed? My stance hasn't changed,why would it? If you want to be pedantic about this,be my guest as referring to the club re; EBTs and dual contracts. As the formal liquidation procedure didn't begin until July why would i refer to companies. I think though somewhere in this thread i stated that if transfer of assets took place within a 21 day period after formal liquidation procedure was started then continuation may be recognised,as this is or was the case under the FA ,whether that applied under the SFA i was unsure but the transference of SFA membership ensured continuation. If you want to search my posts,search away,it still makes no difference as to the continuation being recognised by the footballing authorities and this will be borne out in the records and annals of Scottish football. As i stated earlier this is all getting rather tedious now so i'll go with the recognition given by the football authorities,you hold whatever opinion you want. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 After some digging around I have found the English FA's view on football clubs becoming limited companies. English FA's view on clubs Now noticeably you'll note why Rangers became a limited company. A, It becomes a recognised entity within the law and can create an accounting department to file accounts as well as a legal department or one guy to run both. B, If the club becomes insolvent the owners are not liable for the clubs debts ? sounds like a good reason the clubs founders to become one. No where in the FA's guidelines says the club has a separate company to run it's affairs at all other than the club will now have the capacity to legally run it's affairs and will be recognised by the law as a company,companies house do not list football clubs as clubs they are legally recognised as a company as the UK law requires.For tax purposes only as well as legal protection in courts for the owners. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 As the formal liquidation procedure didn't begin until July why would i refer to companies. Because according to you, rangers had a club and a company. I find it interesting that with every breath rangers fans will use this club and company shite. That the club was a separate entity, that all responsibility lay with the company. Yet, through my life time I had never once heard this uttered by a single rangers fan until last summer. When you guys were stood cowering in April, holding your red cards up to liquidation, no to newco. Not once did anyone turn round and say, listen lads, f**k it, it's the company that runs the club that's got to deal with all this, the clubs fine. You all sat there fuckin shitting it, your club was dying, not one rangers fan piped up in my work, that valentines 2012... None of you said, eh no, the clubs fine, it's the company that's in admin. So lets not kid ourselves on here youngsy, read your posts I quoted, get to your bed and think it over, and you know, no matter what public face you all put on, no matter what party line you all walk now, that back at the start if 2012. This was all about the club. There was no separate company. Rangers football club plc. You can't start fuckin removing the first 3 words whenever you want to talk about the bad stuff! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
youngsy Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Because according to you, rangers had a club and a company. I find it interesting that with every breath rangers fans will use this club and company shite. That the club was a separate entity, that all responsibility lay with the company. Yet, through my life time I had never once heard this uttered by a single rangers fan until last summer. When you guys were stood cowering in April, holding your red cards up to liquidation, no to newco. Not once did anyone turn round and say, listen lads, f**k it, it's the company that runs the club that's got to deal with all this, the clubs fine. You all sat there fuckin shitting it, your club was dying, not one rangers fan piped up in my work, that valentines 2012... None of you said, eh no, the clubs fine, it's the company that's in admin. So lets not kid ourselves on here youngsy, read your posts I quoted, get to your bed and think it over, and you know, no matter what public face you all put on, no matter what party line you all walk now, that back at the start if 2012. This was all about the club. There was no separate company. Rangers football club plc. You can't start fuckin removing the first 3 words whenever you want to talk about the bad stuff! As i said,when the SFA membership transference took place that ensured recognition of the historical timeline as recognised by various footballing authorities. Whether you want to hold another opinion on that,then that's your choice but going forward the continuation is recognised and will be recorded as such in time to come. Now as i said hold your own opinion but for me this is getting quite tiresome now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 I find it interesting that with every breath rangers fans will use this club and company shite. And it's the very stuff of the lying dullard that argues that club and company are one and the same. As if that's all a fitba team is to a supporter. It's an ideal, a feeling, an experience, a hope - much more important than any balance sheet or set of stats. You can't kill an idea. No matter how hard you try. I easily - and accurately - remember a time when the companies, the accountants and suits were never the conversational centre-piece of talk amongst fitba supporters. Now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThirdrockfromtheSon Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Company? Club? Clumpany!!!! Sorted!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 So we are pretty much agreed. Green's Govan Galloots are a new club. I'm glad that's settled. We should now let them quietly get on with climbing the leagues and making new friends wherever they go. Best wishes and all that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 And it's the very stuff of the lying dullard that argues that club and company are one and the same. As if that's all a fitba team is to a supporter. It's an ideal, a feeling, an experience, a hope - much more important than any balance sheet or set of stats. You can't kill an idea. No matter how hard you try. I easily - and accurately - remember a time when the companies, the accountants and suits were never the conversational centre-piece of talk amongst fitba supporters. Now? Yes, Bendarroch, we all can. You're not really keeping up to speed here, are you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 (edited) No,that's nothing remotely like what i said. The PLC is in the process of being liquidated,they were the former owners/operators of Rangers F.C. as stated by two law lords in seperate summations. As stated also in summation,The Rangers Football Club Limited are the new owner/operators of Rangers F.C. As also stated by various football authorities,the club is one and the same since 1872 going forward and as such this will be recorded in the Annals of Scottish Football in the years to come. Now whether you or anyone accepts this or not is irrelevant as all that is needed is recognition by the footballing authorities. As Monkey Tennis said earlier this is all getting rather tedious and we will all just go round in circles so as i've said,i'll go with the recognition from the footballing authorities,you go with your own opinion,makes no difference to the record books. The word you're looking for is "opinion", Youngsy. Judges offer Opinions all the time, which are just that, and in no way definitive. There's a long way to go before that happens. Strange as it may seem, legal opinions are not the be all and end all, and have been known to be changed or retracted in the face of new evidence or circumstances. Something a bit more current would help your argument - so would not having posted what you did in April. See, opinions change with circumstances....yours as well, apparently. Lets start with the EBTs. First of all the club have not been accused of breaking UK Tax law with the EBTs,that would have constituted Tax evasion,a criminal act which would most likely have seen prosecutions against individuals. This hasn't happened. HMRC has put forward a case for payment of unpaid tax on the EBTs on the way Rangers operated them as regards a tax avoidance scheme. Rangers have disputed this by stating the advice they received was that the club operated them correctly. That is the clubs stance on the issue,further to that the EBTs over the period they were operated,2001-2010,are being assessed on a yearly basis,in that way the findings could go Rangers way for all years looked at,HMRC for all years looked at or part Rangers,part HMRC,something that many people fail to recognise. If the club are found to have a tax deficit on the EBTs,either for the full term or part term of them,then of course they are duty bound to rectify this in agreement with HMRC.As for the SFA investigation on double contracts,this has all came about because of former director Hugh Adams' allegations that such a thing happened during his time at the club,he may be correct on them but why then did Adam not oppose this practice at the time by bringing it to the attention of the full board of directors or indeed to the shareholders as was his duty as a sitting board member at the time.I,like everyone else outwith the inner circle at Ibrox at the time,have no idea whether these contracts were in place to certain players or not but fair enough,if they were in place as Adam has intimated,and if they are found to be against SFA rulings then the club has to accept whichever penalties imposed upon them.As for Craig Whyte,at the moment, under administration, he is not regarded as the owner of the club,majority shareholder only,moot point but that is his position. His acts since he took over the club and up until the club went into administration have been reprehensible, to say the least,that have taken the club to the brink of liquidation,no argument from the vast majority of Rangers fans about him,certainly none from myself. Since he came into the club he has driven a sustainable debt of £18 million up to a figure in the region of £50 million since last May and as regards the £9-15 million Tax/N.I. that he has held back from paying,without a doubt he shoud be taken to task for that. Without Whyte doing the deeds he has done Rangers would not have been in administration today as the £18 million debt was being serviced before he took the club over,we were in financial trouble,no doubt about that but not to the extent he brought the club to. So anything negative happening to him is all good as far as i'm concerned. Sorry, Youngsy, but I can see no evidence in this to suggest that you had the slightest notion that the company and club were separate. In actual fact, you don't even USE the word "company" - and why would you? As for recognition from the football authorities, would that be the spineless SPL, the corrupt SFA, or the b*****ds in the SFL that vetoed SFL1? Funny how opinions change with circumstances, isn't it? Edited January 25, 2013 by WhiteRoseKillie 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 So we are pretty much agreed. Green's Govan Galloots are a new club. I'm glad that's settled. We should now let them quietly get on with climbing the leagues and making new friends wherever they go. Best wishes and all that. Christ, Ken - one of your posts from August has just appeared on the thread this morning! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Company? Club? Clumpany. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Clumpany. That sounds wrong 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Yes, Bendarroch, we all can. You're not really keeping up to speed here, are you? Your stinking thinking only ever requires crawling pace to overtake let alone keep up with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted January 25, 2013 Share Posted January 25, 2013 Your stinking thinking only ever requires crawling pace to overtake let alone keep up with. MUSSUS BUNFIELD 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.