nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 That's where it starts to get complicated - for me, at least. Who is it has to meet the FFP rules? Is it RIFC (the parent company) or TRFCL (the club)? If it's the club, I'm not sure they can claim for Auchenhowie - isn't that owned an operated by the parent company? But, you're right - they've probably not overspent by FFP-testing amounts. If it's the parent company (my guess), haven't they lost more than 30M euros over the last 3 years? They may not owe anyone that much but they must have come close to over-spending by that much - can the share issue money be counted as income in this context? I almost hope they do win the Cup, just to see the answer to these questions. as far as i can see, there shouldnt be an issue with us being eligble for europe next year 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 I I thought TRFCL was the company that runs the club. RIFC being the parent company of the company that runs the club. Surely? yep - a similar structure to celtic and other clubs 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Companies do not do it all the time. That would be illegal. The controlling mind of a company's persona us it's board of directors, if a company becomes defunct and it's brand is bought by another company then the board of directors (the previous company's controlling mind) are banned from taking part in the new company. they can get involved at a later date, the wife or another relative is often appointed as a director in name only - it happens all the time 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 But they are not the same company as the one which went defunct, as was alluded to. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_company by whom? the two companies are totally seperate as i have mentioned numerous times 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 ^^^Admission that the club and the company are synonymous. :lol: :lol: in your crazy mind only 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Do you want to explain how a body with no legal personality, which just 'is', can be bought for £1? someone offers a quid for it and its accepted, in whytes case the company also came with the club - hope that helps 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 This is a new club. You know it. We know it. we know that its the same club and all the evidence backs us up, you claim we are a new club based on 4 year old newspaper comments , a few comments from ex pros with no expert knowledge and thats it- officially we are the same club in the eyes of all that matter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nacho Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 You haven't grasped what liquidation means,eh? feel free to enlighten me then 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 There really is no hope for this thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranaldo Bairn Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 someone offers a quid for it and its accepted, in whytes case the company also came with the club - hope that helps Buy a club and get a company free? Bwahahahahahahha!! What if I just want to buy the club? How can you buy something that just floats around going "woooOOOOoooo!" ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 because it was a new company and players have the choice to tupe over or not So the players are not part of the club? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranaldo Bairn Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 we know that its the same club and all the evidence backs us up, you claim we are a new club based on 4 year old newspaper comments , a few comments from ex pros with no expert knowledge and thats it- officially we are the same club in the eyes of all that matter Those 4 year old reports were written before the event, and they were fully accepted by everyone, including Rangers fans, as being correct. That's why you all waved big red cards, and were correct to do so, because you knew that your club was at risk of going down the stank. If you can provide evidence prior to 2012 that even Rangers fans thought liquidation was an irrelevance, then please do. The fact that Rangers fans wish to have continuity is completely understandable. The fact that the governing bodies wish to perpetuate the myth is wrong, but understandable. The fact that the media have rewritten history to pretend that nothing really changed with liquidation is utterly, utterly, pathetic. And also worrying. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 we know that its the same club and all the evidence backs us up, you claim we are a new club based on 4 year old newspaper comments , a few comments from ex pros with no expert knowledge and thats it- officially we are the same club in the eyes of all that matter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
energyzone Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 we know that its the same club and all the evidence backs us up, you claim we are a new club based on 4 year old newspaper comments , a few comments from ex pros with no expert knowledge and thats it- officially we are the same club in the eyes of all that matter Why did Rangers play in Division 3 in 2012/13 then? The fact of the matter is that everyone was in consensus that Rangers were a new club until someone with a bit of savvy realised not enough people were buying season tickets and decided to proclaim that they were the same club all along and all that liquidation stuff didn't really matter. A quick risk assessment and analysis of the extra cost of x-ray machines for Royal Mail deliveries at Hampden meant that the SFA decided to go with the lower risk option and agree with you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 we know that its the same club and all the evidence backs us up, you claim we are a new club based on 4 year old newspaper comments , a few comments from ex pros with no expert knowledge and thats it- officially we are the same club in the eyes of all that matter Did the club supporters that bought a 35 year right to a specific season tickets (in the form of a debenture) to watch the club play in the club's stadium keep this right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 "Mike Ashley's Sports Direct empire has seen shares slump for a second day after the business issued a "clarification" on profits following media interviews given by its controversial founder. The stock fell by more than 5%, adding to a decline of more than 10% in the previous session. It means the company has dropped by more than 15%, seeing around £400m wiped off its value, since Mr Ashley's interviews with a series of outlets including Sky News on Monday" Oor boycotts working well (wee joke)lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) Nacho can't get enough of the new club/old club stuff, can he? He never leaves it alone. Such towering insecurity about it. The reality is of course that the current Rangers is new in some ways, old in others. He's got a point about the morality of clubs that entered admin though. Anyone wanting to defend Dundee for going into admin twice in a handful of years and settling at 6p in the pound, must enjoy a challenge. Edited March 24, 2016 by Monkey Tennis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 "FORMER Rangers stars who were locked in a landmark legal dispute with the club have dropped their case for unpaid holiday pay.[/size]Kyle Hutton, [/size]Ian Black, Richard Foster and Steven Simonsen were seeking payouts totalling a five-figure sum from the Ibrox side after their contracts were not renewed when the club failed to gain promotion to the SPFL Premiership.[/size]The footballers were part of a group of 12 players who were released by Rangers in the immediate aftermath of the play-off defeat to Motherwell in the 2014/15 season...."[/size] And? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 "FORMER Rangers stars who were locked in a landmark legal dispute with the club have dropped their case for unpaid holiday pay. Kyle Hutton, Ian Black, Richard Foster and Steven Simonsen were seeking payouts totalling a five-figure sum from the Ibrox side after their contracts were not renewed when the club failed to gain promotion to the SPFL Premiership. The footballers were part of a group of 12 players who were released by Rangers in the immediate aftermath of the play-off defeat to Motherwell in the 2014/15 season...." Rumours are the Rangers second claim for compensation for the tupe rebels international clearance compensation was dropped. Can you shed any light on that? Why would they drop it? New club? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Why was the first claim dropped again? Wasn't it something to do with new Rangers not inheriting the right to old Rangers' rights of arbitration? 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.