The DA Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: A fair answer. What do you think the outlay is for then, if it can't really be afforded? Is it to appease fans by getting the club a bit closer to Celtic, or is it a serious attempt to catch and overhaul Celtic and access CL income? I get that you won't have an obvious answer any more than I do, but again I wonder where this can be heading in the medium term if Rangers remain second best. Either they're living within their means or you're right and this is an all-or-nothing attempt to access the CL money. But that's a year away and it looks unlikely that they can last that long while paying these wages. Unless, of course, the current and forecast signings are on lower wages than Joey was. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekorean Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 12 minutes ago, The DA said: But the physical store could become anything at all once the original owner goes bust. A greengrocers, a mobile phone shop, a massage parlour. Are you sure you want to continue with this? In theory they can turn RFC in to a rugby club and play rugby at Ibrox. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, thekorean said: In theory they can turn RFC in to a rugby club and play rugby at Ibrox. That's TRFC Limited to you. The T is important. And, not wishing to miss an open goal, some would say they already have. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 The purpose of a company is to perform the operation of whatever it does to make the owner/shareholders profit. In order to make profit a Company will purchase assets (Like a building) to perform it's principal activities.The sweet shop is a concept to make money and the company is the living sweet shop (the legal entity) and it would own a building (simply bricks and glass, not an entity) to perform it's principal activity to make the owner profits. You are making the mistake of thinking that the building is the actual Entity instead of the Company. How do you not get this? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 28 minutes ago, thekorean said: lol ill equipped. Have yet to provide facts to prove me wrong but yea. Can you provide evidence of the football club being a purchased asset? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said: Can you provide evidence of the football club being a purchased asset? Whyte's pound? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 minute ago, The DA said: Whyte's pound? I think our friend is referring to a later purchase. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepundit Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 20 minutes ago, The DA said: Either they're living within their means or you're right and this is an all-or-nothing attempt to access the CL money. The board said they would invest with the aim of gradually building a team capable of winning the league. They've also said they won't allow Rangers to build up an substantial level of debt in doing so. I highly doubt they've abandoned that strategy. My guess would be your club are closer to going into administration than Rangers..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekorean Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 19 minutes ago, Tartantony said: The purpose of a company is to perform the operation of whatever it does to make the owner/shareholders profit. In order to make profit a Company will purchase assets (Like a building) to perform it's principal activities. The sweet shop is a concept to make money and the company is the living sweet shop (the legal entity) and it would own a building (simply bricks and glass, not an entity) to perform it's principal activity to make the owner profits. You are making the mistake of thinking that the building is the actual Entity instead of the Company. How do you not get this? If you said Tony's Sweet Shop, owned directly by Tony, you would be right. LTD being the keyword... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rory90 Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 26 minutes ago, thekorean said: In theory they can turn RFC in to a rugby club and play rugby at Ibrox. To my knowledge rugby is the sport played at Ibrox already. Am I right. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, thekorean said: If you said Tony's Sweet Shop, owned directly by Tony, you would be right. LTD being the keyword... No it's not, you utter moron. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 If you said Tony's Sweet Shop, owned directly by Tony, you would be right. LTD being the keyword... Haha you're a mad man. I give up 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.A.F.C Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 3 minutes ago, rory90 said: To my knowledge rugby is the sport played at Ibrox already. Am I right. Cheatball 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 The board said they would invest with the aim of gradually building a team capable of winning the league. They've also said they won't allow Rangers to build up an substantial level of debt in doing so. I highly doubt they've abandoned that strategy. My guess would be your club are closer to going into administration than Rangers..... [emoji4] Hmm really? First of all, Rangers have zero credit facilities because they are so badly run they can't be trusted to pay anything back. So your boards attempt to tell you that they won't build on substantial debt is because it's not possible. Secondly, Rangers have substantial debt to their Directors who are providing constant loans to keep the doors open. Do you think these guys will just keep putting their own money in without ever expecting anything back? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nsr Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 I wonder if Dave "I don't have to move my head to watch a game of football" King has shady minions monitoring threads like this, looking for any signs that the Sevconians are beginning to wise up to his dodgy schemes. If so, hi Dave. Nothing to worry about yet. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 2 minutes ago, nsr said: I wonder if Dave "I don't have to move my head to watch a game of football" King has shady minions monitoring threads like this, looking for any signs that the Sevconians are beginning to wise up to his dodgy schemes. If so, hi Dave. Nothing to worry about yet. It's a Friday night and I suspect Dave is deep in his wine-cellar but I'm sure some of his minions are tracking the zeitgeist via P&B. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thekorean Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 24 minutes ago, D.A.F.C said: Cheatball Tax dodgeball 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
senorsoupe Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 56 minutes ago, Tartantony said: Hmm really? First of all, Rangers have zero credit facilities because they are so badly run they can't be trusted to pay anything back. So your boards attempt to tell you that they won't build on substantial debt is because it's not possible. Secondly, Rangers have substantial debt to their Directors who are providing constant loans to keep the doors open. Do you think these guys will just keep putting their own money in without ever expecting anything back? Rangers are a bloke who declared bankruptcy 5 years ago and no bank will give them a credit card, therefore money needs to come from somewhere so either Dodgy Dave pumps money in (which he can only do to a point without busting UEFA's FFP rules) or they are borrowing from dodgy backroom banks at high interest rates. Either way they are pressing the button marked "big risk" that Dave Murray was so fond of and ended up sending his club into the toilet 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drew Brees Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 It's from the sun's twitter feed so..... Carlos Pena to undergo Rangers medical tonight as Pedro Caixinha closes in on third summer signing Spotted at Ross hall earlier, don't know much about him tbh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thepundit Posted June 2, 2017 Share Posted June 2, 2017 1 hour ago, Tartantony said: Hmm really? First of all, Rangers have zero credit facilities because they are so badly run they can't be trusted to pay anything back. So your boards attempt to tell you that they won't build on substantial debt is because it's not possible. Secondly, Rangers have substantial debt to their Directors who are providing constant loans to keep the doors open. Do you think these guys will just keep putting their own money in without ever expecting anything back? Well, Rangers aren't owned by multi billionaires so obviously the investors will expect a return on their investment. Does that mean the club have decided to spend way beyond what they intended to in a risky move to win the league this season?.. I doubt 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.