Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[Bullyforyou]

If you want, I've been called worse before.

What, like Benny? Only joking.

[hellbhoy]

Well, either those are the real emails, or somebody has a hell of a lot of time on their hands.

There is an internet paper trail of sorts meaning everything ever sent over the internet can be found if you are clever enough to find it.

[bennett]

There is an internet paper trail of sorts meaning everything ever sent over the internet can be found if you are clever enough to find it.

Hellboy the expert computer hacker, is there no end to his many skills?

Edited May 17, 2013 by bennett

[Bullyforyou]

There is an internet paper trail of sorts meaning everything ever sent over the internet can be found if you are clever enough to find it.

It will be interesting to see if the 5 way agreement surfaces.

[bennett]

AWRA was a clown. There was a great deal about him that deserved to be laughed at. It's kind of fitting that he got banned for his ludicrous fondness for Chelsea.

The half-wit never noticed the irony of posting in favour of a club bankrolled by a Russian oligarch, above a signature bemoaning the evils of modern football.

The forums are better without him.

Banned for liking Chelsea?

Aye that makes sense.

[hellbhoy]

Hellboy the expert computer hacker, is there no end to his many skills?

You do know that everything you have ever sent or received over the internet has been stored on servers owned by the government ! should you worry Benny ?.

[AberdeenBud]

Banned for liking Chelsea?

Aye that makes sense.

AWRA was banned for anti-Semitic bigoted behaviour. Bennett's continuing defense of this creature is extremely disturbing.

It's pretty obvious he's now posting as Forever Blue, someone care to report him?

[AberdeenBud]

[captain kirk]

Banned for liking Chelsea?

 

 

Aye that makes sense.

 

 

AWRA was banned for anti-Semitic bigoted behaviour. Bennett's continuing defense of this creature is extremely disturbing.

 

It's pretty obvious he's now posting as Forever Blue, someone care to report him?

Maybe idiots like bennet should be banned too ..defending bigots shoud be treated the same as the bigots themselves.

[-ForeverBlue1872-]

AWRA was banned for anti-Semitic bigoted behaviour. Bennett's continuing defense of this creature is extremely disturbing.

It's pretty obvious he's now posting as Forever Blue, someone care to report him?

I joined on Monday and said poster got banned yesterday or the day before but I am him? If you want to believe that be my guest lol

[Burma]

I joined on Monday and said poster got banned yesterday or the day before but I am him? If you want to believe that be my guest lol

Yep....thats AWRA/bennet

[Henrik's tongue]

AWRA was banned for anti-Semitic bigoted behaviour. Bennett's continuing defense of this creature is extremely disturbing.

It's pretty obvious he's now posting as Forever Blue, someone care to report him?

In fairness, AWRA was the only one who took bennett seriously on here.

[AberdeenBud]

Rangers in Crisis: The Hunt for Whyte October and a Pretty “Poison Pill” Woman

18MAY

12 Votes

WEB3dLAW is back with a significantly shorter blog post today. I have been waxing lyrical lately about popular films. One of my favourite of all time is The Hunt for Red October – the film adaptation of the Tom Clancy novel about Cold War era submarine warfare between the Yanks and the Russians. In one of the latter scenes, former US senator Fred Thompson asks the protagonist Dr Ryan, played by Alex Baldwin, “What’s his plan?” To which Dr Ryan retorts, “His plan?” The Captain points out that “a Russian submarine captain doesn’t take a dump without a plan”.

One of my partner’s favourite films is the Richard Gere/Julia Roberts RomCom,Pretty Woman. Do you remember this scene from Pretty Woman when Gere takes Roberts to a dinner meeting with the father and son owners of one of Gere’s takeover targets?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkKviMfi24s

Gere wanted to buy a large family owned ship building business and in what is commonly referred to as a “hostile takeover”, the duo had come along to the meeting to persuade Gere’s character to end his bid for their family business.

I mention these because both films lead into my nice little transition into a discussion about the business concept called “poison pills”, something I mentioned yesterday.

“Poison Pills” and “Shark Repellents” sound like they belong in a James Bond film, but they are actually generic terms for business strategies to repel or reduce the attractiveness of a business to hostile takeovers. I often wonder, “What was Craig Whyte’s plan?” He doesn’t look like a man that takes a dump very often, or without a plan. I have been thinking about this for a long time. Something doesn’t sit right in this whole thing, so I will give this idea a whirl. It is an idea, but would love to hear your input on its feasibility or accuracy. If I have missed anything out, let me know.

A “poison pill” is a generic term used to describe shareholder rights plan, and is a type of defensive tactic used by a corporation’s board of directors against a takeover. Shareholder rights plans, or poison pills, are controversial because they hinder an active market for corporate control. They also devalue the company and benefit the directors. A poison pill also has other meanings:

It is sometimes used more broadly to describe other types of takeover defences that involve the target taking some action. The broad category of takeover defences (more commonly known as “shark repellents”) includes the poison pill.

Other anti-takeover protections include:

• The target business adds to its charter a provision which gives the current shareholders the right to sell their shares to the acquirer at an increased price (usually 100% above recent average share price), if the acquirer’s share of the company reaches a critical limit (usually one third).
• The target takes on large debts in an effort to make the debt load too high to be attractive—the acquirer would eventually have to pay the debts.[1]

Let’s look at the facts.

• CW bought Rangers from Sir David Murray’s company for £18,000,001.00. There was a £1 transaction between the two men. Craig Whyte then paid off Lloyds TSB debt at HBOS by wiring £18,000,000 fromCollyer Bristow to an account at Lloyds.
• CW then had Lloyds assign all relevant securities over to him or his company Wavetower, now “Rangers Group FC”. Although it is widely accepted that Craig Whyte used Ticketus money to fund the purchase, what is important to remember is that Craig Whyte and Sir David Murray valued the company at £18Million + £1 or £18,000,001.00.
• Ticketus becomes an unsecured creditor after Rangers enters into administration and is owed £26.7 Million.
• Rangers cannot raise money from season ticket holders for the next few seasons.
• Charles Greene and his “20-man consortium” buy Rangers from CW for the nominal charge of £2. There is no agreed £18M paid into a lawyers account to pay off a debt to HBOS this time. The £8.4M is set aside for the creditors’ pot IF a CVA can be agreed to. If the CVA can’t be agreed to, is there any contractual obligation to put the £8.4M into the club’s coffers? NO.
• A new only comes in and cancels the Ticketus deal altogether. They sue the old owner – Craig Whyte. The Ticketus deal is null and void, and CW only pledges his shares and debenture if a CVA goes through.
• I may be wrong, but I have seen no-one from the MSM ask this question. If the CVA is not agreed, then what happens to the £8.4M held for the creditors? If the answer is nothing, and it doesn’t go into the CVA pot, then it means…

Charles Green bought the club, Ibrox, Murray Park, and the car parks for £2.00. If a CVA cannot be agreed to, and the club has been sold to a 20 man consortium in equal shares that RFC have been bought for 10p each share! Any new owner could come in and buy these shares in a newco company – a debt free football club playing in the SPL with a TV contract with Sky and ESPN. A rights issue WOULD make the original owners a tidy profit on the stock exchange.

I want to be clear this is me hypothesising. However, it is very suspicious to me that a company that was sold a year ago for £18,000,001.00 has been sold again in less than a year for £2.00. It is worth knowing if the Ticketus deal was a double poison pill– not only did it fund the purchase of the club, but it effectively ensured that “the target company takes on large debts in an effort to make the debt load too high to be attractive. It would be so unattractive that no acquirer would want to pay the debts.”

Here is a classic anti-shark repellent move! This strategy also assumes that the club pays their debts in the long-run. However, under today’s company laws, in particular the Enterprise Act, struggling businesses can continue in new forms as government would rather see businesses keeping jobs going at the expense of toxic debt – which keeps far less in employment.

A plan to shed my business debts in a morally ambiguous, but legal way might look like this:

Run up massive debts and get served with massive bill from more creditors including, hopefully HMRC! Be unable to service those debts. Limit the ways the company can gain access to working capital. Then bankrupt your own business by putting it into administration. Make the company unattractive to legitimate parties of interest by taking on massive amounts of debt. Hire the same people who advised you on this strategy to run the company during the administration process. Offer to sell to a buyer (outside of the circle) to make the whole thing seem legitimate, but as soon as he sees the financial picture, he walks and walks away. Make it as unattractive as possible to any other potential buyers by having an element of your customer base threaten any potential buyers, but at the same time pay for the Old Guard (fine gentleman like Sandy Jardine, Andy Kerr and Mark Dingwall) to wax lyrical about how great Rangers is to anyone eager to lap it up.

Forego your debts to the tax man other legitimate creditors and form a “newco”… Get a slap on your wrist from the regulatory organizations. Cancel all of your debts. Buy your partners in consortium out. Return to the glory days of the past.

Smell a rat now?

[Bullyforyou]

I joined on Monday and said poster got banned yesterday or the day before but I am him? If you want to believe that be my guest lol

Ah but.... outed as Benny Doppelgänger preceding weeks, opens new account Monday, gets AWRA account deliberately banned Wed. Is that how the conspiracy theory goes?

[-ForeverBlue1872-]

Ah but.... outed as Benny Doppelgänger preceding weeks, opens new account Monday, gets AWRA account deliberately banned Wed. Is that how the conspiracy theory goes?

You've got a crazy imagination i'll give you that haha

[Bullyforyou]

You've got a crazy imagination i'll give you that haha

Thanks Pet, I try hard.

ETA And you can cancel out that Helen you gave me before your ban.

Edited May 17, 2013 by Bullyforyou

[energyzone]

Popcorn in for tonight folks ?

 

 

Is Neil Selling his teeth? 

 

'Charlotte Fakeovers' Such a credible person for anyone to believe......

 

Sevco Scotland bought Rangers, it's been proven on many occasions.

 

Do any Celtic fans have jobs? Or do they spend their time talking about Rangers fiances? I find your lot weird. 

If only Rangers fans had shown as much interest in Rangers' finances as Celtic fans do....

[flyingrodent]

And theres more

@CharlotteFakes 1m

Random emails re access to the Data Room - A free for all or significant payment required? Skali138 = Rafat Rizvi.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/142111149/data-room-access

Jesus. Assuming these are real - and it would take a sad, sad man to fake them - this is like the scene in Jaws where they gut the shark to see what it's eaten, except twice as gruesome.

[Fotbawmad]

Deary me you cant have it both ways...We have had SFL 3 supporters complaining about our ticket prices being too expensive. My season ticket price for the SFL 3 was roughly £270...Tedis was over £500. I would think Raith Rovers were charging something similar for SFL 1.

A stadium that holds around 50,000 is going to be considerably more expensive to run and maintain than an 8000 seater. Not to mention bringing in players who can deliver the near certain glory. Yes my team charges more or less the same for tickets right now, but the fixed costs and overheads are nowhere near the same. Aren't you the people who taunt us with the "Rangers fans without the bus ticket"?

Well, either those are the real emails, or somebody has a hell of a lot of time on their hands.

Either its real or an uber obsessed Tim. Either way, we can't lose :lol:

Hellboy the expert computer hacker, is there no end to his many skills?

I thought that was Dhenbhoy

Edited May 17, 2013 by Fotbawmad

[hellbhoy]

If these are not real someone needs sectioning I wont get too excited yet but anything that winds up the bears is fun ta watch.

Even if they are real they a pretty useless unless they have been acquired by a legal method of disclosure you would think,but like you say it's fun fun fun as long as you are not a bear .