WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 :lol: Apart from a legal agreement signed in order to obtain a licence from the SFA On top of that at some point I assume Chuckie will want to reapply for a UEFA licence ... not likely to happen while they owe monies accrueing interest. Why do you keep posting Green's fairy tales Tedi? It's not the posting that's funny - it's Tedi then trying to defend them as if they were Tablets of Stone, even though Charlie Boy can express three different views in two sentences. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 RANGERS chief executive Charles Green has warned six players who left Ibrox last summer that they could be forced out of action for their new clubs by his bid to secure compensation for their departures.Green has been encouraged by the outcome of a preliminary meeting at Hampden on Monday that has allowed Rangers to continue their breach of contract claims against the players through SFA arbitration. Allan McGregor, Steven Naismith, Steven Whittaker, Kyle Lafferty, Jamie Ness and Sone Aluko are all being pursued for leaving Rangers in the wake of the club’s failure to come out of administration and Green’s purchase of its business and assets. The players declined to have their contracts moved to Green’s new company under TUPE legislation. Goalkeeper McGregor joined Turkish club Besiktas, while his fellow Scotland internationals Naismith and Whittaker moved to the English Premier League with Everton and Norwich City respectively. Over to you, Tedi.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 What about the rest of the creditors? Don't they count Ah right, they are only doing it for the benefit of FIFA & UEFA. It would be handy if someone had a list of all those creditors.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 lol who is in complete meltdown tonight? pleasing Actually you didn't answer my question did you !. How does a club acquire a separate company to run it's affairs ? remember your a keen advocate of the club and the company are separate. Can a club depart from the company if the club decides the company is not to the clubs best interests ? If the company is separate from the club then how could Green purchase the business side of Rangers when it's the company that is responsible for the business of Rangers ?. Why isn't the business side of Rangers still with the company the PLC in admin as the business side has feck all to do with the club ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Over to you, Tedi.... Also this WRK from WIKI for Tedi to try and debunk Incorporation to limited company and then to a PLC Rangers Football Club became a limited company on 27 May 1899[76] when it was incorporated as The Rangers Football Club Ltd. It continued in this form until, in 2000, David Murray decided to list the company on the stock exchange, making it a public limited company. The name of the company was therefore changed to The Rangers Football Club PLC.[13 Notice how it states the club itself became and was incorporated into a limited company meaning the club transformed into a company.It doesn't state that a company approached Rangers the club and asked to run the clubs affairs like Tedi seems to think has happened. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 We can have a debate or we can trade insults, but not at the same time, take yer pick I believe that the club has existed since 1872, I believe that a company runs and operates that club. Lord Glennie agrees, you can either agree with him or disagree I am not really bothered either way but this argument is old and quite frankly really boring. Anyway here is lord Glennie's statement again which pretty much covers my entire view on the matter. -"This is a petition for judicial review by The Rangers Football club plc, a company presently in administration, That COMPANY presently OPERATES Rangers Football CLUB (to whom i shall refer to as "rangers"). Rangers ARE members of the Scottish Football Association ("the SFA") If it is ''beliefs'' .... I ''believe'' your club was cheating. I ''believe'' your club was bigotted. I ''believe'' your club was populated by retarded shoites. I ''believe'' your club is dead 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 fixed, do you need help with the plc abbreviation? It was your quote..... , do you need help with the ''The'' suffix? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Then why miss the bit containing the word Company when referring to the club ? Wasn't needed, the word ''The'' was what caught you out 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Then why miss the bit containing the word Company when referring to the club ? Maybe because every sane person in the civilised world can see there's no fucking difference? Even your Glorious Leader is trying to stop innocent professionals from plying their trades with their new clubs because they declined to TUPE across to his new company. If Naismith, Shagger et al had stayed, would they be playing for the same club? If so, why would they have needed new contracts? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Then why miss the bit containing the word Company when referring to the club ? Incorporation to limited company and then to a PLC Rangers Football Club became a limited company on 27 May 1899[76] when it was incorporated as The Rangers Football Club Ltd. It continued in this form until, in 2000, David Murray decided to list the company on the stock exchange, making it a public limited company. The name of the company was therefore changed to The Rangers Football Club PLC.[13 Then why miss out the truth completely Tedi ? there's no point arguing when the facts are that the club became a company and not that the company is separate from the club when it was the club that became a company. And don't quote Lord Glennie again or you will end up looking as stupid as fcuk after the Lord Nimmo roasting you got 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Maybe because every sane person in the civilised world can see there's no fucking difference? Even your Glorious Leader is trying to stop innocent professionals from plying their trades with their new clubs because they declined to TUPE across to his new company. If Naismith, Shagger et al had stayed, would they be playing for the same club? If so, why would they have needed new contracts? ^^^ they were the last ''loyal'' servants, the rest took the cash and jumped to a new club,,,,,,,,,,, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 ^^^ they were the last ''loyal'' servants, the rest took the cash and jumped to a new club,,,,,,,,,,, New company, surely? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Maybe because every sane person in the civilised world can see there's no fucking difference? Even your Glorious Leader is trying to stop innocent professionals from plying their trades with their new clubs because they declined to TUPE across to his new company. If Naismith, Shagger et al had stayed, would they be playing for the same club? If so, why would they have needed new contracts? They would have been employed by a different company. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 They would have been employed by a different company. And which company employs Naismith now? None of my Evertonian buddies (OK, neither) see their club as anything but that. A bit like you and the rest of the berrz before the shit hit the fan. Open question to any poster: I've only been on here 11 months. Many have been here longer. Can anybody find a post pre-2011 referring to rangers the club and rangers the company? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 And which company employs Naismith now? None of my Evertonian buddies (OK, neither) see their club as anything but that. A bit like you and the rest of the berrz before the shit hit the fan. Open question to any poster: I've only been on here 11 months. Many have been here longer. Can anybody find a post pre-2011 referring to rangers the club and rangers the company? Ah well, sometimes a difficult situation teaches you things. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 If club & company are both separate and the company is just "operating" the club, then why does this "same club as always" now have a different name ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bearwithme Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 If club & company are both separate and the company is just "operating" the club, then why does this "same club as always" now have a different name ? I don't see a different name on the fixture lists or on the SFL's website. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dirty dingus Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 Good laugh on the clyde phone in the night with DJ greeting and agreeing with the loony orcs. They are of to the conference, little do the know the conference they are invited to is one at a Premier Inn with a porn stars a trucker a big fat DLA recipient and a party clown, let's talk turkey. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beermonkey Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 I don't see a different name on the fixture lists or on the SFL's website. That because you lot only see what you want to see & dismiss anything else as "timmy propaganda" or some other shite. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted January 11, 2013 Share Posted January 11, 2013 As you wish cunto -"This is a petition for judicial review by The Rangers Football club plc, a company presently in administration, That COMPANY presently OPERATES Rangers Football CLUB (to whom i shall refer to as "rangers"). Rangers ARE members of the Scottish Football Association ("the SFA") OK I'll bite So the source here you quote from ! who is the petitioner here ? Lord Glennie or Rangers PLC ? as with the Lord Nimmo roasting you got here we have the words of the administrators NUFF n HELPS themselves in the petition. At this point it's fair to say that the legal or judicial system haven't a clue about that the club itself is in fact the company,and that NUFF n HELPS have scripted the petition that Lord Glennie ruled upon.The ultimate goal of the petition was to get the transfer embargo deemed illegal as it wasn't in the list of punishments and was succeeded only to have it imposed when Green wanted a licence. Now at the top Tedi it clearly states that it is Lord Glennies OPINION and opinions are not the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And as with your believe or opinion that the club is separate from the company it means nothing and is the some of feck all. So I'll replace opinion or believe with the truth here and will quote to you again. Incorporation to limited company and then to a PLC Rangers Football Club became a limited company on 27 May 1899 when it was incorporated as The Rangers Football Club Ltd. It continued in this form until, in 2000, David Murray decided to list the company on the stock exchange,making it a public limited company. The name of the company was therefore changed to The Rangers Football Club PLC. So when you quote Lord Glennie who is only a judicial judge you are quoting an opinion and you are not stating facts of truth unlike the quote I have supplied above 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.