Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

Has anyone seen the latest edition of Private Eye? They're saying quite a lot about Rangers in it, part of which being that the people bankrolling Craig Whyte's actions from the off are notorious for buying up ailing companies with large pension pots, killing the company & feasting on the cash - but it all went wrong with Rangers because Whyty boy discovered there's a hole in their pension fund from the days of Murray.

Apologies in advance if this one has already come up, but just when you thought there were no more twists...

Scan it and put it up then.

(thanks if you do)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone seen the latest edition of Private Eye? They're saying quite a lot about Rangers in it, part of which being that the people bankrolling Craig Whyte's actions from the off are notorious for buying up ailing companies with large pension pots, killing the company & feasting on the cash - but it all went wrong with Rangers because Whyty boy discovered there's a hole in their pension fund from the days of Murray.

Apologies in advance if this one has already come up, but just when you thought there were no more twists...

It's already come up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did i mention the SFA in my post. I quoted the SPL Commission that many fans of other clubs were crying out for,unfortunately for all of them it didn't work out for them.

Ultimately Rangers broke both the SPL & SFA's rules & regulations at the same time and it's the SFA & SPL who rewrote their rules to keep your club alive so to speak at the same time in 2011.It wasn't just titles that were at stake was it ? there were Scottish Cups Rangers won on the line as well.

Fortunately for the likes of you BOTH associations colluded together a year before Rangers died and came up with this club is separate from the company pish you so dearly hold onto,but that only resides in the SFA rule book and not the SPL one.

The SPL commission is now a sham to hide Rangers guilt and both the associations are guilty of misleading everyone by handing Lord Nimmo a revised rulebook that Nimmo used to come to his conclusion that Rangers did cheat but it's been classed as administrative error FOR TEN FUCKING YEARS :blink: according to the new revised and revamped association rules.Both associations rulebooks were used in the SPL commission for Lord Nimmo to rule upon ! it wasn't just the SPL rulebook.

The SFA were involved with the SPL commission by supplying the SFA rules & regulations of clubs because all clubs and players are registered with the SFA and they are what kept your club alive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheated, get a grip of yourself :lol: We used a legal tax avoidance system, which was found to be within the law by 2 good blueno.... 2 experienced chaps.

Are other companies cheating by using similar tax avoidance schemes?

Cheating :lol:

You can make a complete arse of yourself at times Benny ! see my signature it mocks everything you have been posting today :lol: .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you found that out. The offence the SPL commission found was not handing over (or delaying handing over) additional documents or information. The team didn't play better because some extra letters or whatever weren't passed over. The EBTs themselves were disclosed in both the published accounts and the submissions to the football authorities re club licensing.

As regards the loans, even HMRC's own lawyer told the tax tribunal that they were not a sham.

Yes Rangers did say in their annual accounts they were implementing an EBT pension fund scheme and how much they were funding it by and is all perfectly legal.

What Rangers failed to disclose is that they were giving select players side contracts of wages and that they were emptying the fund each year to give out loans by contractual nature for players wages which never have to be paid back which is illegal by the SPL,SFA and the HMRC in all counts.FCUK knows how Rangers got away with the FTT ?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect I would disagree with you if only I could understand what you are trying to say.

I hope I can blame your wee screen , bright sunlight, and big thick fingers as the problem rather than a big thick brain. ;)

I suspect I would disagree with you if only I could understand what you are trying to say.

I hope I can blame your wee screen , bright sunlight, and big thick fingers as the problem rather than a big thick brain. ;)

Not so much fat fingers as three broken fingers and a head thick and cloudy with dihydracodeine.

To simplify things my cynical mate thinks that Murray may not have been so much warned about Whyte as had Whyte's CV of making bad debts disappear recommended to him (Murray).

The cynic actually thinks that Whyte makes a living by killing off companies and their debt then restoring them to their original owners via a frontman, either himself or someone like, for example, Green. Daft, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Rangers did say in their annual accounts they were implementing an EBT pension fund scheme and how much they were funding it by and is all perfectly legal.

What Rangers failed to disclose is that they were giving select players side contracts of wages and that they were emptying the fund each year to give out loans by contractual nature for players wages which never have to be paid back which is illegal by the SPL,SFA and the HMRC in all counts.FCUK knows how Rangers got away with the FTT ?.

Probably some sort of conspiracy. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If that's not gaining an unfair advantage over the opposition I don't know what is !.

Your own manager(for now) is a tax cheat.

Your own club used the death of a young footballer to gain a sporting advantage. I don't think using a legal tax loophole is even in the same ball park as that.

You are very keen on having enquiries into all Rangers business. Fair enough but when people ask about the child abuse cover up you go ape shit and complain people are using the actual abuse to point score. The Child abuse could have happened anywhere...ask the BBC,...But the cover up has never been properly investigated by the footballing authorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you found that out. The offence the SPL commission found was not handing over (or delaying handing over) additional documents or information. The team didn't play better because some extra letters or whatever weren't passed over. The EBTs themselves were disclosed in both the published accounts and the submissions to the football authorities re club licensing.

As regards the loans, even HMRC's own lawyer told the tax tribunal that they were not a sham.

Mmmm, not quite. No matter how much lipstick you put on this particular Pig, it remains a member of the Suidae Family.

RFC(1872-2012) were found guilty of deliberately and illegally registering players over an 11 year period. Cheating, to you or me.

Duff and Duffer were also found guilty of failing to hand over documents 'timesously' or at all.

I would also encourage all P&D's to wind their necks, I mean how the hell can an extra £40million or so for a football club holding company, possibly give it a sporting advantage over it's competitors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your own manager(for now) is a tax cheat.

Your own club used the death of a young footballer to gain a sporting advantage. I don't think using a legal tax loophole is even in the same ball park as that.

You are very keen on having enquiries into all Rangers business. Fair enough but when people ask about the child abuse cover up you go ape shit and complain people are using the actual abuse to point score. The Child abuse could have happened anywhere...ask the BBC,...But the cover up has never been properly investigated by the footballing authorities.

Why don't you start a thread about it instead of indulging in the usual mind-numbing whatabouttery.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I am quite sure that would have been the case. It would have been equally fine if Murray took the same position, if only he had been honest about it. He talked the talk and waked the walk of caring about the future of Rangers. Safe hands and all that. He after all had turned people away as would be buyers who didn't meet his criteria of being 'Rangers people'.

 

The word hypocritical comes to mind, but I will leave it to Tedi, Bennett and others to decide on that one.

You know, I thought a hypocrite was someone who espoused one stance whilst acting in completely contrary fashion to that stance? I believe Murray talked big and delivered big.....

Murray's ego drove OldCo Rangers into the wall. His ego, of inter-planetary size, became replicated by vast legions of bears who feasted on the reflected glory, thus buying their unquestioning loyalty regardless of his future actions.

As the debts, inevitably, grew ever larger, the collective ego that was Murray/Rangers (aided and even encouraged by the compliant, lazy press and media) sought to sustain the, frankly, unsustainable.

The final straw? A banking collapse of such gargantuan size that It, finally, brought Murray's insatiable credit line to an abrupt close and the decent into hell involving an impressive array of crooks and shysters, began in ernest.

Hypocritical? Nahhh, egotistical, arrogant, evasive and devious.......oh yes.

Remind you of anyone? Maybe, even, a group of people?

Thought so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mmmm, not quite. No matter how much lipstick you put on this particular Pig, it remains a member of the Suidae Family.

RFC(1872-2012) were found guilty of deliberately and illegally registering players over an 11 year period. Cheating, to you or me.

Duff and Duffer were also found guilty of failing to hand over documents 'timesously' or at all.

I would also encourage all P&D's to wind their necks, I mean how the hell can an extra £40million or so for a football club holding company, possibly give it a sporting advantage over it's competitors.

The players' registrations were found to be valid. There was obviously no sporting advantage from not handing over additional documents (timeously).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish those Rangers fans would stop accusing us 'haters' of regarding Craig Whyte as a hero. That man has saved Rangers twice now, although Green fronted the second rescue for him, how could we possibly worship someone like that? I do understand him getting Green to take the blame second time around us Ps&Ds say some really nasty things about Rangers chiefs online, he must have been so hurt the first time around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see the standard attempts at re-writing history continue unabated.

Craig Whyte was universally(Well everywhere apart from Govan) slated and mocked upon his arrival in Scotland.

The reason some mischievous P&D's now refer to him as Our Hero is a direct mockery of the 'Hero's Welcome' the Motherwell Born Billionaire was afforded down Govan way.

Even when the award winning Mark Daly and RTC blog tried to warn you, what did you do? Oh yeah, protested and shot the messenger.

http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/247628-whyte-arrives-to-a-heros-welcome-at-ibrox/

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/277833-rangers-fans-hold-demonstration-outside-bbc-in-glasgow/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure where you found that out. The offence the SPL commission found was not handing over (or delaying handing over) additional documents or information. The team didn't play better because some extra letters or whatever weren't passed over. The EBTs themselves were disclosed in both the published accounts and the submissions to the football authorities re club licensing.

As regards the loans, even HMRC's own lawyer told the tax tribunal that they were not a sham.

Utter utter drivel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The players' registrations were found to be valid. There was obviously no sporting advantage from not handing over additional documents (timeously).

The only reason they were found to be valid is because they were not declared invalid at the time. :1eye

Genius doublespeak that George Orwell would be proud of.

Senior Management at RFC deliberately and systematically withheld relevant contractual information from the authorities in order to protect what they assumed was a dodgy tax wheeze. I would refer to this as cheating when the pack is already loaded in your favour.

Edited by AberdeenBud
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only reason they were found to be valid is because they were not declared invalid at the time. :1eye

Genius doublespeak that George Orwell would be proud of.

Senior Management at RFC deliberately and systematically withheld relevant contractual information from the authorities in order to protect what they assumed was a dodgy tax wheeze. I would refer to this as cheating when the pack is already loaded in your favour.

You can refer to it any way you like of course and come up with whatever spin on things suits your agenda, but neither the SPL commission nor the tax tribunal found the way you wanted. 8)

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...