Rangers FC On Field Gossip & Rumour Thread 2017 Mod Note in OP(Updated 14/08)

Jelle1880

Today has shown that he's simply a very, very average manager.

The squad should be good enough.

We didn't deserve to win today, 91st penalty though (sure that will piss some people off :pac: ).

CSF

Should it have been a pen?

Jelle1880

Absolutely, Templeton skips past one player and then gets brought down by another one.

bobbysands81

The The Rangers were due to file their accounts yesterday... and didn't.

The mess continues.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

bobbysands81 wrote: »

The The Rangers were due to file their accounts yesterday... and didn't.

The mess continues.

Nope they have to be filed by mid March

Broxi_Bear_Eire

We bit of an update on the accounts Bobby I know you are concerned

The AIM rule is not later than 3 months after the relevant period.

The accounts were to 30th June 2013. 6 months takes us up to 31 December, so the 6 monthly accounts should be released by 31 March.

If they had done 12 monthly accounts from day 1 it would have been yesterday, but it was 13 months so due end of this month instead.

bobbysands81

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

We bit of an update on the accounts Bobby I know you are concerned

The AIM rule is not later than 3 months after the relevant period.

The accounts were to 30th June 2013. 6 months takes us up to 31 December, so the 6 monthly accounts should be released by 31 March.

If they had done 12 monthly accounts from day 1 it would have been yesterday, but it was 13 months so due end of this month instead.

Alex Thompson is tweeting that you guys could be in administration on Wednesday, there's a big meeting tomorrow that's going to decide it. New company in big trouble by the looks of things.

https://twitter.com/alextomo/status/440188079367004160

@alextomo: Rangers to go into Administration on Wednesday? At least one senior Glasgow accountant is saying so tonight.

@alextomo: Why is Jack Irvine contacting journos quite unsolicited tonight to deny possible imminent Admin to people who hadn't asked about it?

@alextomo: Will Rangers deny that Nash and Wallace have met 2 potential Administrators in the past 48 hours? #c4news

@alextomo: And will Rangers further deny Nash and Wallace have settled on one of them as potential Administrator?

@alextomo: Rangers denying rumours of possible Administration. But nothing on the specifics of W and N meeting Administrators in past 48 hours.

Dempsey

First Valentines Day, now Ash Wednesday, LOL!

Considering the stance towards fans & Dave King over the season ticket money, that is unbelievable if true. Surely there would be an element of fraud or deception on the clubs part with their current public stance when trying to get money out of fans.

bobbysands81

Dempsey wrote: »

First Valentines Day, now Ash Wednesday, LOL!

Considering the stance towards fans & Dave King over the season ticket money, that is unbelievable if true. Surely there would be an element of fraud or deception on the clubs part with their current public stance when trying to get money out of fans.

That was the previous incarnation that went on Valentine's Day, nothing to do with this company.

A Dub in Glasgo

There was me thinking that it was Dave King trying to force them into administration / liquidation so he can pick the carcass cheaply

Agueroooo

What happens if Rangers go into administration again?

Dempsey

bobbysands81 wrote: »

That was the previous incarnation that went on Valentine's Day, nothing to do with this company.

Absolutely true but see it from a Rangers fans' perspective for just a second..... :eek:

Their club took a nosedive on Valentines Day and never recovered. Their 2nd club could be taking a nosedive on Ash Wednesday. Maybe their 3rd club, and there probably will be one, will nosedive on Paddy's Day!! :pac::pac:

dundalkfc10

Agueroooo wrote: »

What happens if Rangers go into administration again?

Loads more Jelly and Ice Cream

LiamoSail

Agueroooo wrote: »

What happens if Rangers go into administration again?

I don't think it's been clarified whether they'll be treated as a new entity and hence a 15pt deduction or 25pt deduction for second administration.

Its a new company, so technically it's this company's first administration. Not entirely sure however how its going to be dealt with.

Jelle1880

Lol, Alex Thomson.

Seriously ? His 'senior accountant' contradicting the word of a judge just a few days ago ?
Any change the 'senior accountant' is based in Donegal ?

Don't get me wrong, I think there is still a chance it might happen with the way the club is being run, but I don't for a second believe a word that guy has to say about it all.

I think any punishment (it'll be the 25 point deduction I believe) will only come into play if the club goes into administration and still is there when the new season starts ?

LiamoSail

Would it not be preferable to go into admin this season rather then next?

Dempsey

Do you do anything other than bury your head? Its like a party trick!

I'm not 100% on SPFL rules but last season it was if a "insolvency event" occurs, the punishment is issued for that season.

Jelle1880

LiamoSail wrote: »

Would it not be preferable to go into admin this season rather then next?

I'd prefer not to go into admin if it's all the same for you

But yeah, if it does happen now would be the better option, but I don't trust the current board not to pull the same stunt as Whyte, in appointing their preferred administrators.

edit: It has nothing to do with 'burying blablabla' (it's extremely boring by now, time for some new catch phrases Dempsey), Thomson who was horrendously wrong already on the big tax case verdict now claims we'll go into admin, based on 'one senior Glasgow accountant'.

Colour me unimpressed.

LiamoSail

Jelle1880 wrote: »

I'd prefer not to go into admin if it's all the same for you

But yeah, if it does happen now would be the better option, but I don't trust the current board not to pull the same stunt as Whyte, in appointing their preferred administrators.

Given the absence of any serious level of debt, it's not really conceivable that should they enter administration, it will be anyone other then the boards appointed administrators

Dempsey

LiamoSail wrote: »

Given the absence of any serious level of debt, it's not really conceivable that should they enter administration, it will be anyone other then the boards appointed administrators

Not having money or bank facility to pay the bills is an insolvency event of sorts. Maybe they'll stop paying the players and skip a tax payment or two...

They are all now against SPFL rules

bobbysands81

Agueroooo wrote: »

What happens if Rangers go into administration again?

What do you mean "again"?

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Lol, Alex Thomson.

Seriously ? His 'senior accountant' contradicting the word of a judge just a few days ago ?

There's been no contradiction in the last few days!

Jelle1880

bobbysands81 wrote: »

There's been no contradiction in the last few days!

So saying that Rangers will go into administration in a few days is not a contradiction to a judge saying there is no danger of insolvency ?

bobbysands81

LiamoSail wrote: »

Given the absence of any serious level of debt, it's not really conceivable that should they enter administration, it will be anyone other then the boards appointed administrators

Unless administration is all part of the plan in the first place.

It'll be very strange if they do go into admin only a few days after getting 1.5m sterling. Very strange. Will either of the lenders gain out of being creditors when Clumpany goes into administration?

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

So saying that Rangers will go into administration in a few days is not a contradiction to a judge saying there is no danger of insolvency ?

Did the judge say that? Where's the quote?

Jelle1880

bobbysands81 wrote: »

Did the judge say that? Where's the quote?

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/imran-ahmad-fails-to-ring-fence-rangers-money-1-3319695

The only reason to go into admin is like you say, if it's done on purpose as part of a bigger plan (lease back of Ibrox and Auchenhowie spring to mind).

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

So saying that Rangers will go into administration in a few days is not a contradiction to a judge saying there is no danger of insolvency ?

I think you should check what the judge said again

He said there is no evidence to suggest any debt arising from a lawsuit would not be met. He never said there is no danger of insolvency!

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/imran-ahmad-fails-to-ring-fence-rangers-money-1-3319695

The only reason to go into admin is like you say, if it's done on purpose as part of a bigger plan (lease back of Ibrox and Auchenhowie spring to mind).

So based on that, and what it says the judge said, I'm right.

Jelle1880

Read it again perhaps.

Lord Tyre added that the finances of a company like Rangers were ‘cyclical’, and said that he found no clear evidence that there had been a deterioration in the club’s position since June beyond any normal cyclical effect.

That clearly means that according to him the club is not in any real danger of being insolvent.

edit: http://news.stv.tv/west-central/265368-imran-ahmad-fails-to-get-bonus-money-set-aside-before-rangers-lawsuit/

At the Court of Session in Edinburgh on Tuesday, Lord Tyre ruled against Mr Ahmad, saying there is insufficient evidence that Rangers’ finances have deteriorated to a point near insolvency.

bobbysands81

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Read it again perhaps.



That clearly means that according to him the club is not in any real danger of being insolvent.

No it doesn't.