Ross. Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 I sort of agree with Kincardine. Rangers are Rangers. They're just not Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Unlike you I don't have to wait on what KDS or CQN says to form my own opinion. I am perfectly happy to reach my own views and to voice them and am happy that others may disagree. Nor need I fret over what one law lord said versus a quote from another law lord as posted on a forum. That our continuing existence is true should be no surprise nor even a point worth contending. That football clubs have a life that is not coterminus with their associated company is, again, beyond contention. We all, in every day life away from football, accept that brands/clubs/legal entities/incorporations are loosley coupled and can go through legal change without the product/brand being affected. I mentioned Horlicks yesterday who are a good example of that. Rolls Royce (the company that makes cars rather than the Rolls Royce of football which is Rangers) is another. The company went tits-up in 1971 and had to be rescued by the government. Not even a fool would have said thereafter that a car made in the same factory by the same workers and using the same components was anything other that a Rolls Royce. Mind you, I wouldn't put it past a BRALT wag to say something like, "Rolls Royce? They even came out with a car called a Phantom and another called a Wraith. This proves they're deid. Zombie cars for a Zombie company" This is a logic that we live with every day. Sadly, though, the Ps&Ds have replaced logic with schadenfreude, much to the detriment of their ability to cogitate.. That is amazing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Phil McUnpronounceablename latest :- http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/dave-king-makes-his-move/#more-4414 According to this, Sevco will commence administration next week. How many times has he claimed it's coming 'next week', 'within two weeks' etc now? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Unlike you I don't have to wait on what KDS or CQN says to form my own opinion. I am perfectly happy to reach my own views and to voice them and am happy that others may disagree. Nor need I fret over what one law lord said versus a quote from another law lord as posted on a forum. That our continuing existence is true should be no surprise nor even a point worth contending. That football clubs have a life that is not coterminus with their associated company is, again, beyond contention. We all, in every day life away from football, accept that brands/clubs/legal entities/incorporations are loosley coupled and can go through legal change without the product/brand being affected. I mentioned Horlicks yesterday who are a good example of that. Rolls Royce (the company that makes cars rather than the Rolls Royce of football which is Rangers) is another. The company went tits-up in 1971 and had to be rescued by the government. Not even a fool would have said thereafter that a car made in the same factory by the same workers and using the same components was anything other that a Rolls Royce. Mind you, I wouldn't put it past a BRALT wag to say something like, "Rolls Royce? They even came out with a car called a Phantom and another called a Wraith. This proves they're deid. Zombie cars for a Zombie company" This is a logic that we live with every day. Sadly, though, the Ps&Ds have replaced logic with schadenfreude, much to the detriment of their ability to cogitate.. Legal change?? Rangers were liquidated! This is different to being nationalised, ie bought by the government, as per your ridiculous comparison with Rolls Royce! Despite the continuing use of big and clever words, you are having a serious wobble on here. Is the choice of spivs getting to you? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Algorithms Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Phil McUnpronounceablename latest :- http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/dave-king-makes-his-move/#more-4414 According to this, Sevco will commence administration next week. Does he even read over his work after bashing it in? Some horrendous stuff on show there. Don't get me wrong, I think Sevco will head into administration but he's constantly trotting the same line. Rangers fans are right to point out he's been saying this for months on end. When it does inevitably happen, he'll no doubt be holding a victory parade for himself claiming he was the one who got it right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 So, what is the position regarding being fit and proper? I seem to remember dangerous Dave's last visit back to Scotland where he intimated he had a nod and a wink from the SFA but Regan then contradicted that when he was chinned about it on Sportsound. Irrespective of who takes over at The Deathstar, the SFA / SPL blazers will guzzle any amount of jizz, swim any river of piss and eat any amount of shit in order to extend the intensive care unit existence of Sevco. Isn't that right, Campbell ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloomogganners Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 How many times has he claimed it's coming 'next week', 'within two weeks' etc now? 5hit throwers only get remembered for the 5hit that sticks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Florentine_Pogen Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Does he even read over his work after bashing it in? Some horrendous stuff on show there. Don't get me wrong, I think Sevco will head into administration but he's constantly trotting the same line. Rangers fans are right to point out he's been saying this for months on end. When it does inevitably happen, he'll no doubt be holding a victory parade for himself claiming he was the one who got it right. Hey, he's probably got a copy of Jim Traynor's "Succulent Lamb" on his bedside table. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 When you say tits up and rescued by the government .. were they liquidated? Edit: You have proof of this liquidation? Rangers were liquidated! This is different to being nationalised, ie bought by the government, as per your ridiculous comparison with Rolls Royce! Here're 3 bits confirming RR's liquidation to help you along: http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1946&dat=19711005&id=4oY1AAAAIBAJ&sjid=5qEFAAAAIBAJ&pg=6911,7051305 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Plastow http://janus.lib.cam.ac.uk/db/node.xsp?id=EAD%2FGBR%2F0014%2FPRSN%201%2F14 So can we all lay this "yer deid" bollocks aside and can the Ps&Ds try and apply the same logic to Rangers as they apply to other entities in everyday life? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Unlike you I don't have to wait on what KDS or CQN says to form my own opinion. I am perfectly happy to reach my own views and to voice them and am happy that others may disagree. Nor need I fret over what one law lord said versus a quote from another law lord as posted on a forum. That our continuing existence is true should be no surprise nor even a point worth contending. That football clubs have a life that is not coterminus with their associated company is, again, beyond contention. We all, in every day life away from football, accept that brands/clubs/legal entities/incorporations are loosley coupled and can go through legal change without the product/brand being affected. I mentioned Horlicks yesterday who are a good example of that. Rolls Royce (the company that makes cars rather than the Rolls Royce of football which is Rangers) is another. The company went tits-up in 1971 and had to be rescued by the government. Not even a fool would have said thereafter that a car made in the same factory by the same workers and using the same components was anything other that a Rolls Royce. Mind you, I wouldn't put it past a BRALT wag to say something like, "Rolls Royce? They even came out with a car called a Phantom and another called a Wraith. This proves they're deid. Zombie cars for a Zombie company" This is a logic that we live with every day. Sadly, though, the Ps&Ds have replaced logic with schadenfreude, much to the detriment of their ability to cogitate.. Spoken (or typed/posted) like a true disingenuoune. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Oh Kinky, hoist by one's own petard. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Again I'll ask you to confirm ... liquidated. A company can enter the liquidation process and not be liquidated. From your own third link .. (Tedisque moment there Kinky) ... You see Kinky, it appears RR was sold rather than resurrected. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 How many times has he claimed it's coming 'next week', 'within two weeks' etc now? Just about every week for the last 6 months. If I had a pound for every time that bloke with the name said Rangers would be in administration the following week, I'd be able to buy a majority shareholding in Rangers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Again I'll ask you to confirm ... liquidated. A company can enter the liquidation process and not be liquidated. ... Yes, liquidated. As it says on RR's website: http://www.rolls-royce.com/investors/share_information/faqs/about_your_shareholding/#11 11. I have a Rolls-Royce Limited share certificate; is this worth anything? Rolls-Royce Limited went into liquidation in 1971 and shareholders received distributions totalling 64.5p for every £1 unit of stock held. The final distribution was made in 1982. The funds relating to uncashed distribution cheques were passed by the liquidators to the Insolvency Service. If you have the certificate in your possession it is unlikely that any distributions are still owed to you as the certificates were returned to shareholders after the final distribution was made. However, if you would like to check this, any queries should be addressed to The Insolvency Service, PO Box 3690, Birmingham B2 4UZ, England. What's more they say the following on their website: Since 1904 Rolls-Royce has created instantly recognisable motor cars that have made the marque an enduring icon all over the world. Inspired by some of the most evocative cars ever built, we have the great privilege of taking this legacy into the future. I now expect you to do the decent thing and: 1. Tell your chauffeur not to buy a Rolls Royce when you lend him your debit card to go and purchase a new motor. 2.Write to RR and tell them they are deid and tell them you can put them in touch with Lord Tyre to confirm this. 3. Write to The ASA and the Irish Embassy to complain. Be sure to include loads of smilies in your correspondence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Oh Kinky, hoist by one's own petard. You see Kinky, it appears RR was sold rather than resurrected. A wee bit premature there, boys. Nae surprise 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 The company was NOT liquidated, it was sold on. Right you are then Dhen. Obviously we'll all believe you rather than the RR site that said, "Rolls-Royce Limited went into liquidation in 1971 " Clearly you know much better. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BossHogg Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 How many times has he claimed it's coming 'next week', 'within two weeks' etc now? Does he even read over his work after bashing it in? Some horrendous stuff on show there. Don't get me wrong, I think Sevco will head into administration but he's constantly trotting the same line. Rangers fans are right to point out he's been saying this for months on end. When it does inevitably happen, he'll no doubt be holding a victory parade for himself claiming he was the one who got it right. He has always added the caveat,,(If they don't get funds) to his prediction of Administration, But he has been spot on about rangers having no money , getting no credit from anyone, and when exactly they would run out of cash , and he did say that it would all come to a head in Feb! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Right you are then Dhen. Obviously we'll all believe you rather than the RR site that said, "Rolls-Royce Limited went into liquidation in 1971 " Clearly you know much better. I'll vouch for him. He's a Celtic fan and my team have a very special relationship with his team. Very similar to the one I have with my female Jack Russell. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Very nice from Mr Kincardine. I was completely unaware of this with regard to Rolls Royce, but thanks to his investigation I'm taking back my motor as my Ghost is actually a Zombie. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BossHogg Posted February 28, 2014 Share Posted February 28, 2014 Right you are then Dhen. Obviously we'll all believe you rather than the RR site that said, "Rolls-Royce Limited went into liquidation in 1971 " Clearly you know much better. RR were placed into Receivership you fukin moron!? I wish you idiots would stop trying to compare English law to that of Scots ...did Tedi give you lessons on how to make a c**t of it? 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.