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

lubo_moravcik

http://soundcloud.com/celticresearch/94-million-reasons/s-Fvekr

What's going on here then? £94,000,000?????????

Broxi_Bear_Eire

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

http://soundcloud.com/celticresearch/94-million-reasons/s-Fvekr

What's going on here then? £94,000,000?????????

Once again HMRC made a clear statement they are not going after the club but going after individuals ie Murray and Whyte and I would put money on others as well but not from the present owners

Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs on Rangers:

"A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company's financial affairs in recent years.

"A CVA would restrict the scope of such action. Moreover the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club.

"This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.

"So the sale is not being undermined, it simply takes a different route.

"Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox.

"It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA.

"Rangers can make a fresh start."

lubo_moravcik

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Once again HMRC made a clear statement they are not going after the club but going after individuals ie Murray and Whyte and I would put money on others as well but not from the present owners

Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs on Rangers:

"A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company's financial affairs in recent years.

"A CVA would restrict the scope of such action. Moreover the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club.

"This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.

"So the sale is not being undermined, it simply takes a different route.

"Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox.

"It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA.

"Rangers can make a fresh start."

So it was the club who were/will be liquidated then? I was so used to hearing in here it was the company and not the club??
The heading in here includes the words football club, you must have forgot to put them in http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/rangers.htm

Broxi_Bear_Eire

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Once again HMRC made a clear statement they are not going after the club but going after individuals ie Murray and Whyte and I would put money on others as well but not from the present owners

Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs on Rangers:

"A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company's financial affairs in recent years.

"A CVA would restrict the scope of such action. Moreover the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club.

"This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.

"So the sale is not being undermined, it simply takes a different route.

"Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox.

"It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA.

"Rangers can make a fresh start."

So it was the club who were/will be liquidated then? I was so used to hearing in here it was the company and not the club??
The heading in here includes the words football club, you must have forgot to put them in http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/news/rangers.htm[/Quote
its been explained time and time again what we say will never satisfy you. If you want to discuss it as the spl sfa or sfl who seem ti have grasped it I aint goung round in circles again

bobbysands81

Au contraire BBE,

I think it's quite clear that the SFL do NOT see you as the same club, if they did then you would have been seeded for the Scottish Communities League Cup and straight through to Round 3.

Peppa Pig

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

HMRC - "A liquidation provides the best opportunity to protect taxpayers, by allowing the potential investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company's financial affairs in recent years."

Can that include players? - if they have documentation showing the correct tax was deducted (ie PAYE) then Rangers witheld it and they will go after the directors. But if the players cannot prove they believed PAYE was collected, could they be in trouble?
Didn't they apply for loans of this EBT thing - they must have known they weren't paying tax. So if the HMRC decides tax is due, surely they could be culpable.

Imagine Gazza getting hit with a big tax bill, he'd have to sell his fishing rod.

Jelle1880

BBE, why bother ?
They're clearly trying to convince themselves Rangers are dead.
Has to be, because I haven't got a clue why else someone would continue to repeat the same old crap.

Unless they would be trolling of course.
Surely not

lubo_moravcik

Jelle1880 wrote: »

BBE, why bother ?
They're clearly trying to convince themselves Rangers are dead.
Has to be, because I haven't got a clue why else someone would continue to repeat the same old crap.

Unless they would be trolling of course.
Surely not

The simple question is was it the club or the company who were liquidated. You insisted it was the company before, the statement from hmrc is in relation the the football club.

Dempsey

Didnt Rangers lawyers argue to the SPL commission that Rangers as defined in the SPL articles of association ceased to exist on the 14th June? Ye are Rangers when it suits ye, tailored club history seems to be the latest craze in football!

Jelle1880

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

Jelle1880 wrote: »

BBE, why bother ?
They're clearly trying to convince themselves Rangers are dead.
Has to be, because I haven't got a clue why else someone would continue to repeat the same old crap.
Unless they would be trolling of course.
Surely not

The simple question is was it the club or the company who were liquidated. You insisted it was the company before, the statement from hmrc is in relation the the football club.

The company, simple.

But we all know that you won't believe that and will keep bitching on about it, so I say: Knock yourself out, you clearly are either at the wind-up or trying to convince yourself we no longer exist.

lubo_moravcik

Jelle1880 wrote: »

lubo_moravcik wrote: »

Jelle1880 wrote: »

BBE, why bother ?
They're clearly trying to convince themselves Rangers are dead.
Has to be, because I haven't got a clue why else someone would continue to repeat the same old crap.
Unless they would be trolling of course.
Surely not

The simple question is was it the club or the company who were liquidated. You insisted it was the company before, the statement from hmrc is in relation the the football club.

The company, simple.

But we all know that you won't believe that and will keep bitching on about it, so I say: Knock yourself out, you clearly are either at the wind-up or trying to convince yourself we no longer exist.

The statement reads Rangers Football Club. BBE chose to leave the words football club out, for what reason I don't know, you insist it was the company and not the club, but its there in black and white from HMRC.
Please don't take this as trolling or just trying to wind you up Jelle, if I didn't think it was valid I wouldn't ask the question.

Jelle1880

You do realise the old company had that name too ?

lubo_moravcik

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You do realise the old company had that name too ?

They did, well kind of. The old Rangers Football Club, weren't they a plc and the new one is a ltd company? Difference is company numbers have changed, wouldn't that mean then that the club has changed too?
“Rangers / the Company / the Club – RFC 2012 P.L.C. (Formerly The Rangers Football Club plc) (In Administration), Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow, G51 2XD (Company number SC004276)”

And the second company is the new one that now runs the team currently sitting second in the fourth tier of Scottish football.
“the Purchaser and Newco – The Rangers Football Club Limited (Formerly Sevco Scotland Limited) of Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow G51 2XD (Company number SC425159)

Jelle1880

True, the old company was a plc and the new one is ltd.

But, as has been mentioned time and time again: A change of company does not mean a change in club.

The club was there before any company was formed and there's tons of clubs that had a company change (whether voluntary, through liquidation of the old company or otherwise) and are still the same clubs.

And so it is for Rangers FC too.

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

True, the old company was a plc and the new one is ltd.

But, as has been mentioned time and time again: A change of company does not mean a change in club.

The club was there before any company was formed and there's tons of clubs that had a company change (whether voluntary, through liquidation of the old company or otherwise) and are still the same clubs.

And so it is for Rangers FC too.

Except for when Lawyers used by Rangers & Sevco argued to the SPL commission that Rangers as defined in the SPL articles of association ceased to exist on the 14th June, i.e. the day that Charles Green bought Rangers assets.

Jelle1880

Ok Dempsey.

TheBuilder

However, he said that the size of the Ibrox fanbase was a factor in what he believed would be the rise of Rangers in the next few years.

“Rangers is a fantastic club with a great history,” he said. “With the support that they have, they will come back.

“They will, in not too long a time, be back in the SPL. I have no doubt about that.

“They’re needed for Scottish football because of their following and the size of the club and especially their history.”

Virtual pint for the person who can guess who said this...

Broxi_Bear_Eire

TheBuilder wrote: »

Virtual pint for the person who can guess who said this...

Make it a real one

TheBuilder

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

Make it a real one

You can't handle a real one :P

Broxi_Bear_Eire

TheBuilder wrote: »

You can't handle a real one :P

OK make it a large Whisky you know I can handle them and you can buy me it a week on Saturday




Its......................................



.........................................

A Dub in Glasgo

Dermot talking with STV

TheBuilder

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Dermot talking with STV

Enjoy

A Dub in Glasgo

I will have it on Friday as I am off the booze during the week (even after watching Celtic yesterday evening !!!!)

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Ok Dempsey.

your waffling on about things that happened in another country with different rules on administration and liquidation, different rules for football clubs etc. i tell you what a law firm did whilst representing rangers and sevco did and you do your best to ignore it. typical tbh!

A Dub in Glasgo

A Dub in Glasgo wrote: »

Dermot talking with STV

Ah yes, figured it had to be someone with a C****c connection.

Stay strong, both of you. For the sake of Scottish football.

Jelle1880

Dempsey wrote: »

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Ok Dempsey.

your waffling on about things that happened in another country with different rules on administration and liquidation, different rules for football clubs etc. i tell you what a law firm did whilst representing rangers and sevco did and you do your best to ignore it. typical tbh!

Are you honestly that stupid, or are you at the wind up ?

It doesn't matter if those countries have different rules, the basis is the same: Clubs who had their holding companies changed yet remained the same clubs with the same history.

Deal with it (however hard it may be for you)

Broxi_Bear_Eire

League cup draw

Aberdeen vs St Mirren
Rangers vs ICT
Dundee Utd vs Hearts
Celtic vs St Johnstone

I will take that

Eirebear

Cue "agent Butcher" paranoia...

lubo_moravcik

Eirebear wrote: »

Cue "agent Butcher" paranoia...

Obsessed much?

TheBuilder

RANGERS Chief Executive Charles Green has released the following statement today.

“I am pleased the judicial panel accepted today that I had not brought the game into disrepute.

“What I said, I said in good faith and I was speaking up for the interests of Rangers. To be critical of the SPL’s handling of the EBT issue, does not mean that I am showing disrespect for the game and that view appears to have been shared by the judicial panel.

“It is my hope that we can all move on from today and start working constructively for the good of the game.

“The creation of the EBT Commission by the SPL following the events of the summer and the Club’s attempts at constructive discussion has been particularly difficult for those of us who are new to Rangers and are trying to rebuild the Club.

“It appears for all the world to be yet another obstacle being placed in our path as we try to rebuild a great Scottish sporting institution.

“I am the first person to accept that there are people who have been associated with Rangers who have brought the game into disrepute, particularly the previous regime whose delinquent approach to paying taxes triggered a series of events that brought the Club to the brink of destruction.

“The consortium I led came to the table with one objective in mind: to save Rangers Football Club and rebuild what is a great sporting institution.

“There has been an enormous amount of goodwill towards us. Rangers fans have shown beyond all measure what loyalty to your team really means. Staff, who have worked through dreadful turmoil in recent years, continue to go the extra mile. Some players have stayed when they need not have and youngsters have become young men in the team.

“There has also been great goodwill shown by investors who recognise the potential of Rangers and sponsors who see the tremendous opportunities at Ibrox. The international media are queuing up to speak to us and chart the recovery of the Club.

“In football too, there has been real goodwill from the Scottish Football League and its member clubs who have taken a view that it is better to look forward than back and that the game benefits from a vibrant Rangers.

“Perhaps it is now time that those people within the SPL who have been pursuing Rangers at every turn take stock. As a member of the SFA, we want to work constructively within its structure and hope that all parties and organisations can take a view that what is of paramount importance is the good of the game.

“To that end, we will be meeting with SFA President Campbell Ogilvie in the near future.

“We want to be a force for good in football and it is surely to the benefit of all that the way forward is not frustrated by continually trying to look back.”