hellbhoy Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 There is. Neither you nor your fellow diddies and plastics can agree to the simple, inaliable truth that, "A club's existence is not coterminous with its associated PLC." This is obvious yet in practise you all deny it. Thank f**k I am neither a P nor a D.but an ongoing supporter of the club that first kicked a baw in 1872 on Glasgow Green and played our latest match in Ayrshire on Saturday. Seriously Kinky ?, you keep posting that quote but you do not even admit to where and how this quote you grasp onto comes from to further the debate. Your quote was first coined in the SPL commission circa 2012 and does not come into any equation until then. So why would the SPL commission use that particular phrase for the first time ever in Scottish football ?, could it be that Rangers were heading into liquidation at some point in the future and the legal beagles at both associations had to concoct some pish to make it easier for the likes of you to be conned into believing a lie. An associated PLC is not an actual company ffs, it is only a legal status/entitlement to be known as a PLC company owned by the public at large by a set amount of shares in issue in the public domain to be bought and sold openly on the stock market. Being a PLC means a company is owned by the public at large and feck all else in between. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=265220&st=0 Why am I reminded of a scene from Blazing Saddles? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 of course..... So that's the bookies effectively saying it's 33/1 against the company going bust! Well, them being experts 'n all, that's me convinced - Rangers will make it into next season and I'll need to find a new comedy show to see me through to the summer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotbawmad Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=265220&st=0 Why am I reminded of a scene from Blazing Saddles? According to that site they'd rather stop the Tíms doing TIAR even if it meant suffering long term domination for years to come 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasma ex machina Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 So that's the bookies effectively saying it's 33/1 against the company going bust! Well, them being experts 'n all, that's me convinced - Rangers will make it into next season and I'll need to find a new comedy show to see me through to the summer. That was Sept/Oct/Nov til they spend spend spend as that wifie said.....then bet wasn't available , Paddy knows..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 http://forum.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=265220&st=0 Why am I reminded of a scene from Blazing Saddles? smartypants Richard Gough True Blue 2,421 posts Gender:Male Location:glasgow Posted Today, 04:36 PM Thomasmrfc, on 17 February 2014 - 04:33 PM, said: It was from a secret rangers group that I'm in I can't give u link because of tht if u want the ban me for my honest mistake go on I'm sure I'll live The PM Crew? Hiya Smartypants you complete bellend 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasma ex machina Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 And on a day like this, you go to the swamp and see that old bigot, the scumball Sam_Cooke giving it this... Not giving a hoot when his new club goes down the shitter as long as he can be a bile filled Orangeman 'Tards, the lotta them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Your quote was first coined in the SPL commission circa 2012I very-much doubt that it was. I'd go as far as to say this: If you find "the SPL commission circa 2012" saying "A club's existence is not coterminous with its associated PLC." then not only will I sook Neil Lennon's boaby but add his smegma to a ham, cheese and mushroom omlette and post pics of me eating it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 AWRA Banhammered pleasing indeed . I wonder what the next alias the chump will return on will be ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasma ex machina Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I very-much doubt that it was. I'd go as far as to say this: If you find "the SPL commission circa 2012" saying "A club's existence is not coterminous with its associated PLC." then not only will I sook Neil Lennon's boaby but add his smegma to a ham, cheese and mushroom omlette and post pics of me eating it. In the early part of 2012, Rangers were a Football Club. What the feck has that to do with now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 And on a day like this, you go to the swamp and see that old bigot, the scumball Sam_Cooke giving it this... orange bigot...should be prosecuted.....jpg Not giving a hoot when his new club goes down the shitter as long as he can be a bile filled Orangeman 'Tards, the lotta them. I get a bit worried when I think about what these idiots will do with all their free time once their team nosedives again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I get a bit worried when I think about what these idiots will do with all their free time once their team nosedives again.Acht maybe they'll follow the example of the P&B diddies and spend their time posting about Rangers 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasma ex machina Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I get a bit worried when I think about what these idiots will do with all their free time once their team nosedives again. There is better....... I hope I don't blow this deep cover boy.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Acht maybe they'll follow the example of the P&B diddies and spend their time posting about Rangers Anything to keep them off the streets. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 AWRA Banhammered pleasing indeed . I wonder what the next alias the chump will return on will be ? What was his latest guise and how can you tell he's been banned and why? I've never understood this side of things on here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasma ex machina Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Another year at least of laughter at the diddies Secret recordings released by the anonymous @CharlotteFakes Twitter account can be given in evidence in a £28m legal action brought by the liquidators of Oldco Rangers against Craig Whyte’s former lawyers, a judge ruled today.The suit against Collyer Bristow centres on claims that the legal firm, which acted for former Rangers owner Craig Whyte, is partially responsible for the subsequent administration and liquidation of the company and is alleged to have been involved in conspiracy, negligence and breach of trust.Collyer Bristow denies the accusations and suggests all it did was assist its client in a normal "leveraged takeover".The "Charlotte" material in question consists of voice recordings involving Whyte and others involved in the takeover. Cyril Kinsky QC, for Collyer Bristow, told the pre-trial hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice that much of the media had decided that the material "may have been unlawfully obtained" and that in a "post-Leveson world the press are not as fulsome as they were in the past."However the QC showed the court postings from football blogs and other "chatter on the web" discussing the recordings and argued that this consisted of publication and therefore confidentiality was lost.Responding for the claimants, Mark Phillips QC told the judge that police objections to using the material had been dropped on 13 February and that Craig Whyte himself had emailed stating he had no issue with the tapes being used in evidence.Phillips did argue that that tape transcripts should be partially redacted to remove any references to confidential legal advice given to Whyte as this was covered by privilege. The presiding judge, Mr Justice Newey, agreed that the material was relevant and admissible and ordered that an edited transcript of the recordings be made available to the court.In the wake of the judge's decision, questions were already being asked if it would lead to a change of attitude by the Scottish media to the "Charlotte" revelations which they have been so far reluctant to publish. Alex Thomson, chief correspondent for Channel 4 News, tweeted: "So - finally some of the Charlotte Fakes material may be legally published by the MSM."The full trial is due to begin in January 2015 with Cohen & Stephen (the liquidators of Rangers 2012), Trustees of the Jerome Group plc Pension Fund and HMRC all expected to be represented in court. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 What was his latest guise and how can you tell he's been banned and why? I've never understood this side of things on here. The Hammer's been hammered. It's obvious it's him every time he comes back. The guy's a semi-illiterate moron and stands out a mile. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phasma ex machina Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 What was his latest guise and how can you tell he's been banned and why? I've never understood this side of things on here. He is on a hotline to Keef on his hols........ie the forum_suggestions page..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Did the BRALT make an appearance in court today? I demand to know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 The Hammer's been hammered. It's obvious it's him every time he comes back. The guy's a semi-illiterate moron and stands out a mile. He is and he does. The amusing thing about today is that he got at least 50 bites from his tawdry pish. 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.