dave.j Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 I asked for something substantive to coo berate this speculation, I even gave examples, I really do not know why you would have a problem with this. Because there was no need for it, to be able to enter into a conversation on the topic. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 (edited) I do not think that is correct at all. The Ltd Company was acquired by the PLC on a share for share basis, the bottom line is as I understand it, that any major asset disposal would need shareholder notification. I am not disputing the leaseback deal could not be proposed and voted through but doing this without notifying the shareholder would be impossible I think. So what if a week or two down the line the shareholders are notified, its proposed and there is a majority to allow it to pass? Edited August 15, 2013 by dave.j 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 15, 2013 Share Posted August 15, 2013 The other camp have made it clear the club needs more investment and that they are willing to do this, but only by issuing more shares thereby diluting everyone's shareholding, the shareholders have to decide if they are in it for the long run or do they cut their losses now, selling the stadium for a quick £7M now, leasing it for silly amounts would be crazy, I doubt more than 1 years lease payment would be made before a default occurred, that is of course if all the financials out being put out there by the same sources are correct. I'm sorry I must be so far off the boil I don't actually know who the good guys and bad guys are anymore. So one camp is only willing to put more money in, if they get shares in return? Is this the camp already taking a wage from the club, or another camp? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I disagree, I have no interest in discussing unsubstantiated claims from Paul and CQN, quite happy if there is another more reliable source that gives some credence to it all, as I said earlier if this proposal was real and it was out there then the shareholders would have been informed, have we any evidence of this? But you are discussing it right now... I don't know who Paul and cqn are, sorry. We are discussing the potential, the possibility of it being real, and if so, what if... It is possible to have a conversation and discuss an outcome of something that might happen... Don't be afraid, the other 3 won't black ball you for it... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 You are suggesting this would happen within 2 weeks, sorry I think your timescales are a bit off, 2 weeks would suggest an immediate need for cash, Rangers still have 10 mill in the bank, I agree the company needs more operating capital but they have time to discuss several possibilities. Tedi I wad pulling a number out the air... Not literally 2 weeks!!! Do you wonder why folk get frustrated with you... Just let the conversation flow. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I do not think that is correct at all. The Ltd Company was acquired by the PLC on a share for share basis, the bottom line is as I understand it, that any major asset disposal would need shareholder notification. I am not disputing the leaseback deal could not be proposed and voted through but doing this without notifying the shareholder would be impossible I think. No Tedi the Club "Ltd" has the same amount of shares as the "International PLC" and they are linked only in number of shares only,if you bought a share in the holding company you got a share in the club "Ltd" exchanged remember. If you had followed the thread earlier this was discussed that the holding company actually holds the shares to the club and the fans bought into the holding companies shares which were a one for one exchange remember ?. The shares in the holding company are what the fans actually have and do not actually own a share in the club "Ltd" as they belong to the holding company and the club is an asset of the holding company to which the fans bought into. Now to your point after that about asset disposal,the club is the actual asset here of the holding company and the club has assets of it's own ie stadium,training facilities and others.If the club sold it's own assets on leaseback then the holding company stills has it's main asset "THE CLUB",the assets of the club can be sold by the club but the holding company still has it's main asset the club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Simmer, you are completely unable to hold a discussion without losing it. If you stop being a fanny by employing silly,daft,stupid & diversionary manoeuvres with every post I make then I'll stop the name calling. It would appear that you look at my posts only to look for faults,flaws or something contestable instead of replying directly to my posts actual contents without the usual shite you post to deflect,ignore or rubbish just because you can and are not willing to discuss anything of relevance because your club is heading into shit creek and you can't either handle it for obvious reasons or just want to stick your head back into the sand. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I believe its been well publicised that we have Green and co on one side and Murray, Blin (back by Mcoll) on the other trying to oust the current board via an EGM. I dunno why you have introduced good guys and bad guys, can we try and leave the silly stuff out? Not being silly at all, I genuinely thought there was a one or the other... There's been so many names linked to the boardroom, it really is hard to keep up... Bear in mind I only came back in here last week after a bloody well earned break! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I know you are discussing the potential situation dave in the potential situation the shareholders would need to be informed, do you accept that? I am just trying to find out how far down the road we already are as a starting point. We Tedi, we are discussing it, I've already accepted it and in an attempt to move the conversation along provided a completely rhetorical time free. That seemed to be stumbling block however. I don't think you need to know how far you are down the road to discuss it... All you need is an admittance that it may happen... Which you have... I therefore discussion should be in full flow by now. It's not. As usual. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Sorry I am just not buying this. I get the leaseback stuff could be real, not disputing that. However the prospectus detailed the assets which included the stadium and so on, these are the major assets and no major assets can be disposed of without notifying the share holders first, has this been done, do you have proof of this? I have just looked at the prospectus and can only see that the PLC has acquired the Ltd club as it's only asset,because the Ltd club is the only asset the PLC can only list the Ltd clubs financial goings on and what the Ltd clubs assets are,and states that the club has assets of this amount of value.The PLC & Ltd companies are linked together because Green couldn't issue shares by the club itself because the original PLC would have had the same name as the new one. I cannot find any shred of evidence that it's the PLC that owns the assets solely out with the Ltd club,and have heard Green in an interview that the club itself still owned the stadium and assets back before the IPO was issued. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Ok then lay the situation out, lets assume for the sake of argument we have passed the planning stage and the proposal has been sent out. What are the financials and the agreed payback schedules? I would need this to give it serious consideration, the club needs cash and this is an option but how serious an option is it? You need this information to give it serious consideration? You know what, Ok, you win, you've ground down and beat the life out of another subject. Big pat on the back for you. I'm away to bed, I do hope that one day you will be able to have a conversation about rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 As I said simmer Go throw shite at yerself, this is what this post deserves. ????? why bother when you post shite all the time stinky 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Ok then lay the situation out, lets assume for the sake of argument we have passed the planning stage and the proposal has been sent out. What are the financials and the agreed payback schedules? I would need this to give it serious consideration, the club needs cash and this is an option but how serious an option is it? When the club faces insolvency Tedi there will be no other option but to sell the assets on leaseback if none of you wealth of the fucking radar Rangers minded men don't stump up the cash to keep the sinking Titanic afloat. It beggars belief that The Rangers fans can be so fucking stupid to the point they can't see what is actually in front of them !,it's all over the media Tedi ! Rangers are running out of money at around a million a month ! £10 million in the bank ! how long do you expect that to last ?. Will the actual accounts be like a huge brick to the head when they get released that how bad things really are ?,and all you can do is make a fanny out of yourself in a cheap game of I'm gonna point score over Hellbhoy because he is saying bad things about my club. This shit is real Tedi you could lose another club and all you want to do is trade insults ! well done stupid . -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Just for reference before I nod off. I think you're misunderstanding a lease back tedi. It's not a loan against an assert. The assumption is your stadium would never be your clubs again. And you would pay to play there... Forever. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 As I said the PLC acquired the LTD company on a one for one share exchange, everything owned by the LTD company is therefore also an asset of the PLC. FFS !, RFCL acquired the assets and business of the Club on 14 June 2012 from RFC 2012 plc and now operates the Club and other ancillary businesses.Immediately prior to Admission, the Company will acquire RFCL pursuant to the Share Exchange Agreement The company up there ^ ^ ^ is the International PLC. The Club’s primary asset is Ibrox Stadium, situated 2.5 miles south-west of Glasgow city centre and has been home to the Club since 1899. The all-seated 50,987 capacity stadium is owned by RFCL and houses a retail outlet,restaurants, function rooms and executive suites. On matchdays, the Club can accommodate and entertain up to 1,500 corporate clients and provides a variety of hospitality packages ^ ^ ^ that was taken from the prospectus section B3.So who actually owns the stadium ? as I said the club and will be in the clubs records as it's own asset along with other assets. The holding company owns the club which owns the assets and by proxy the holding company owns the stadium but only via the club which is the PLC's only asset. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 No Dave, I believe the idea put forward by CQN, which is after all what started all this speculation (you should have read this if you wanted to discuss it) stated that a buyback would be on the table from the start, any lease deal can have a buyback clause inserted. EH ! WTF ?,this leaseback scheme was peddled around as far back as December 2012 and was discussed on this very forum ffs. So the notion that this is a relatively new concept peddled by CQN is complete bollocks Tedi. Any buy back is going to cost a lot more than the club got for selling it in the first place and not that your cash crippled club could afford to buy back for at least 10 years . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 If you are trying to suggest that the LTD company is which wholly owned by the PLC, could dispose of a major asset without PLC shareholder notification, then I would have to disagree, it is my understanding this simply could not happen. Yes theoretically the Ltd club can if it felt necessary to raise capital by selling off some of it's own assets to keep the club afloat,it happens in businesses all the time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 has it, I think the CQN guy has only found out the supposed financials now. Are you suggesting the CQN figures are real? EH ??? if you could kindly find one of my posts containing any of CQN's figures then do so,if not then what the feck is this pish you claim I suggested. If you had understood my original QUESTIONS about IF the stadium was sold on leaseback then you'd have got what I was actually discussing ! IF IT HAPPENED and no mention of any financials you dobber.So stop creating an argument about feck all I never ever suggested FUD. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 Ah well I do not agree, guess we will see within time who is correct. I suppose it won't matter who owns the stadium if after it gets punted which is a real possibility with the clubs current financial savy . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted August 16, 2013 Share Posted August 16, 2013 I notice that we are all just accepting the £10m figure as read, did he show your mob a mini-statement? It just seems that "over £10m" is the kind of number you would pluck from the air to appease idiots as "10 mill does sound like a lot of money, aye tell them that." Is this the currant account or the superally squirrel savings account? Is it 10mill before or after Ally's standing order at Greggs? When was this snapshot taken? What would be really interesting is asking the club what is in the bank now, a week or so after they chose a number that sounded nice, but on reflection and since they were making things up, should really have been quite a bit higher. Of course I have no reason to suspect another figure may be true and no I cannot provide a link Tedi but since just about every single word that flows out of Ibrox is bullshit you have to wonder. And its not like they haven't been caught being totally disingenuous with the demanding clarification shite recently, a total embarrassment and were it not theTHEtheRangers that were responsible for it you would expect shame, disgrace and sackings over that farce. All this makes you think that Jabba's ability to control the bullshit is almost as effective as the sevco supports ability to organise themselves and that it seems not impossible that they made up a figure that actually paints them in a bad light. 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.