Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

I'm guessing you think dubunked = dismissed :1eye

Yeah, when sevconians decide to ignore facts, they then decide to refer to those facts as "debunked".

It's their way of deflecting away from the truth, not a very bright bunch.

Like when they refer to P&Brs in a derogatory manner while posting on P&B. (as WRK pointed out earlier)

Like when they slag off bloggers as being discredited, while quoting bloggers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, when sevconians decide to ignore facts, they then decide to refer to those facts as "debunked".

It's their way of deflecting away from the truth, not a very bright bunch.

Like when they refer to P&Brs in a derogatory manner while posting on P&B. (as WRK pointed out earlier)

Like when they slag off bloggers as being discredited, while quoting bloggers.

Also: Like when they slag off bloggers Chas Green and his gang as being slightly dubious discredited, while quoting bloggers the new Messiah and his acolytes (acolytes pronounced assholes).

And now Jabba is the all seeing eye and can say nowt wrong. :1eye I thought for years he was of the wrong persuasion?

Pretty fickle these new breed of supporters of Scotlands biggest small team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually,this bit,

(viii) The interest element was designed to be rolled up indefinitely, to remain as a ‘paper’ debt and to augment the overall indebtedness of the employees’ estates, thereby conferring a bigger reduction against inheritance tax.”

sounds to the layman (me) the sort of perfectly "legal' thing that tax dodgers get up to.

Time will tell. Still 'cheating' from astrictly football point of view.

Hey! Strictly football? Good tv series of a bunch of B celebs getting their legs kicked every week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, when sevconians decide to ignore facts, they then decide to refer to those facts as "debunked".

It's their way of deflecting away from the truth, not a very bright bunch.

Like when they refer to P&Brs in a derogatory manner while posting on P&B. (as WRK pointed out earlier)

Like when they slag off bloggers as being discredited, while quoting bloggers.

My favourite is the titles one - the thing about how the SPL can't take the SPL titles Rangers won, because Rangers aren't subject to the SPL's jurisdiction. The SPL have no power over Rangers' titles because Rangers "have never played in the SPL".

Only team in history to win a league championship that they've never competed in - another new world record.

Edited by flyingrodent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

My favourite is the titles one - the thing about how the SPL can't take the SPL titles Rangers won, because Rangers aren't subject to the SPL's jurisdiction. The SPL have no power over Rangers' titles because Rangers "have never played in the SPL".

Only team in history to win a league championship that they've never competed in - another new world record.

 

I admire how even the most minor of points is quibbled over as if to get just this one thing correct destoys the credibility of all the shit stacked up against them.

My personal fave was about 5 rabid pages to prove that The Big Hoose guy actually said 'house' instead of 'hoose'... ha ha GIRUY, P&B diddies and plastics etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My personal fave was about 5 rabid pages to prove that The Big Hoose guy actually said 'house' instead of 'hoose'... ha ha GIRUY, P&B diddies and plastics etc etc.

You're right - that one was a barn-stormer. Because the difference between the two was a matter of world-historical importance, or something - you know they're flailing, when that's the best they can do.

If we're talking about the pettiest bit of deflection, I always get a laugh whenever somebody only quotes the bit of a comment that they want to respond to, and then some desperate Ted uses that as an excuse to deflect and avoid the point by spending five pages greeting about how they're "being misquoted".

It's so precious - it's what the internet must have been like back in about 1999.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So has any P&Ber came up with anything on this mysterious £8.5m lease yet?

doesn't look like it. but then again, have any bears came up with the origins of the 3.5m figure.... or between 3m and 5m figure as Tedi suggested.

i asked BWM where he had seen the 3.5 figure, but he never replied, not as any sort of "if you can't provide proof, it's shite" type stance, purely out of interest as the larger figure quoted at least comes with individual lines on how it was calculated.

the fact that includes a line that even rangers fans can't explain, i would hope that rangers fans would want to try to look in to it... but i imagine the rangers fans stance is... "posted on a tarrier blog = lot of shite"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So has any P&Ber came up with anything on this mysterious £8.5m lease yet?

I'm not going to get dragged into give or take a million here or there. I freely admit its guess work, but it was based off statements and documents from D&P. The first accounts released by Chuckie will no doubt be massaged, so we might have to wait 2-3 years to have a clearer picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only thing that occurs to me is the mysterious "heads of terms" document that did the rounds last year where the end sum of a lease and buy back of the stadium, training park and car park was £8.5m

I'll leave the debate around whether there actually was such a document to the learned scholars of this thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dave posted this after liquidation had been confirmed 8)

Worst case scenario for me, they end up in Div 3.

Best case scenario, they die for ever.

My wean is due to be born on the 12th of July, and there is nothing i would love more, than to introduce them to a world, and life, without Rangers in it!

no i didn't, i posted it 2 days before liquidation was confirmed... http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/mobile/news/140-years-of-rangers-liquidated-after-just-8-minutes-of-meeting.17875998

this is an interesting article from the 12th of June on what will happen upon liquidation.... http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/18413384

So i'm afraid you got that wrong Tedi...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...