stlucifer

SFA impose a punishment. The appeal fails. Rangers ignore "football bodies rules", takes the case to the courts and claim no organization is above the law of the land. Now he says that if the players don't transfer to any Newco they will be in breach of contract. Well Mr. Green. Stick this in your pipe........ Protection of employment regulations suggest that employees must be offered but are under no obligation to accept the terms of transfer to a new company. AFAIC, You can't have it both ways. Edited to add. On another front. Given that part of the reason for HMRC's opposition to a CVA was to facilitate an investigation and pursuit of possible claims against those responsible for the company’s financial affairs which would include the administrations of David Murray and Craig Whyte. Would it not also include Duff and Duffer themselves, as they have been responsible for the company’s financial affairs for the last four months. If so then perhaps the sale of assets is not such a "done deal" after all.

I was led to believe that HMRC, or ticketus for that matter, could force the amdinistrators to allow BDO to start the break up of assets?

The Administrators are still suggesting that Green can buy the grounds for a fraction of their worth stiffing the taxpayer out of millions. At the end of the day HMRC will get F'all out of Whyte and Murray so surely the assets THEY owned should be auctioned off piecemeal to the highest bidder to maximise the return. Anything less is criminal AFAIC.

It seems that the new CEO of Rangers, (his words, not mine), is already displaying the Rangers' mentality in thinking that they are above the law and can influence the taxman, Green has urged fans to exert political pressure to ensure the tax authority accepts the reduced payments on offer. "Fans should be urging their politicians to apply some pressure so that the CVA is accepted," he said. And so the arrogance continues.

For me the most significant revelation in this whole saga for quite a while is the fact that Duff and Duffer had been usurped as liquidators and BDO put in their place by HMRC. I think this would mean that Green would not have carte blanche to take Rangers fixed assets for a pittance and that the grounds may be sold off to maxaimise the return for the creditors. This may raise enough to pay those owed as much as 90 pence in the pound. A big difference to the 2, 3 or up to 8% the CVA was destined to return. I also suspect that more revealing facts as to the relationships between Green&Whyte and Duff&Phelps is set to come to light. I do hope Whyte's sentences run concurrently as he has been so good to us!

Sounds like an election in a third world puppet democracy!I do hope you are right as, should it come to light, jail sentences may follow...... follow!

It appears the Beeb are quite confident with their smoking gun. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-18175731

Back on topic! The Herald's article http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/what-is-the-true-colour-of-greens-money.17671567 suggests that a decision on Rangers might not be needed by the SP(ine)L(ess) chairmen!

That would just mean the SFA and SPL would add to the list of creditors.After all. Rangers don't do paying their way!

Wasn't that what I said?

They put the Blue knights in, The blue knights out, The blue knights in and they cry a lot and pout. They pull them out againand shake their fist at Duff, That's when we've had enough!

Yes. I agree. But, AFAIK, a newco Rangers, under present rules, would have no voting rights in the first few years. This would allow the ten to fight the one for voting rights enabling a fairer system to be put in place.As an aside I received this from a Saints supprorter and thought I was getting a lesson in history. "The tragic loss of life at Pearl Harbour was indeed a solemn and sobering event; a devastating attack that plunged families into anguish and despair and catapulted the world into total war the like of which had never been experienced before. What was to follow, however, was to be so catastrophic, so unimaginably brutal and horrific as to shock the world for generations to come." It actually turns out to be more a lesson in histrionics It comes from an article written by a Rangers fan as an apparent analogy of the treatment of his club as he goes on to say, "For many the demise of Rangers Football Club would be a spectacle to revel in; a media event to be enjoyed. Indeed, for some it would be the fulfilment of a life-long desire and the culmination of years of work. All those who nurse a consuming hatred for Rangers Football Club believe that the day they have waited and worked for all of their sad and sorry lives may now be close at hand. For them the demise of our great club will not be a, ‘date which will live in infamy’ but, rather, a date to be celebrated much like the sneaky Japanese attack on sleepy Hawaii." Pontifical nonsense of the highest degree. And they wonder why so many are enjoying the self inflicted debacle while not one of their lot admit to it being "their fault" and I include the fans as they bayed for more and more investment in search of a wholy unattainable goal. Hell mend you Rangers and your fans as you slip into a coma at the very least. I had to go searching and I don't blame anyone for not wanting to read the whole article but I assure you, It IS comedy gold!!! http://www.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=737%3Aenemies-within-and-enemies-without&catid=110%3Aother&Itemid=618

Not yet out of the deep pit as all bids appear to hinge on a CVA being approved. From the HMRC site. Introduction to Voluntary Arrangements Occasionally exceptional reasons will cause us to decline proposals.(For a CVA) Examples might include •operating a policy of withholding payment of Crown money A CVA might not be agreed by HMRC.

The new dawn broke, Wee David Blue in, To be, "Simply the best? T'was a shoe in! Threw cash here, there,... and everywhere, The source of which, the fans didn't care. As the years flew in, it became so clear, That the follow brigade, had lots to fear. So off went SIR David, the club sold on the cheap, And the weearra peepul, followed like sheep. A new saviour stands, on the steps and declares, That he, Craig Whyte, would help save the bears. A few months on and it comes to pass, He was talking through, a hole in his ass Like a flash, he was gone. A thief in the night, Leaving Rangers, so deep in the shyte With a tax bill as big as the post office tower, And Rangers chasing, t'wards their final hour. They brought Duff'nPhelps in, the like we've not seen, Administrators, who it seems, don't count the beans? Next through the door, from "over the pond" A man of whom fans, were less than fond Though beggars and choosers should spring to mind, It mattered not, as those same fans would find. After perusing the books and reading them right, he decided buying the h*ns would leave Miller light Now the end is nigh, those fans want to Hurry, And sell the dying club, to a different Murray. But since we know now, that Rangers are skint, The new price might be, just one Murray mint

click ya lazy barsteward

McShane will let no one down if given the opportunity. Dargo would have to be on second string wages, if we took him back at all, as Nigel would always be above him in the pecking order. As would Thompson and, perhaps even McShane as well.

I actually bought into the concept quite quickly but slowly wavered due to the lack of real information and the format of the D.D. I have still to be totally convinced again but I truly believe the catalyst for the recent new direction and spate of quality signings is within the CiC group. That beiing the case I feel they must have some interest in what is best for the football club.

Not quite about turned. More, moved to within a whisker of the dividing line.

St Sid. You have convinced me about the presidency. I vote for POZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Edited to add...............................

That's as maybe but it doesn't fall into the " the CiC looks on paper to be the best deal for everyone concerned" category. I don't know if the other offers are still on the table. In a way I hope they are in case the CiC, which is dependant on many fronts, falls flat. Theory is wonderful and no one can doubt RA's commitment in seeing it through but my doubts lie in his ultimate goal being in the best interest of the club at least in equal part to the community. It appears that you have indeed "bought into the dream" but, unfortunately, my faith has withered somewhat as the debate continues Not so much different questions as much as wary of the answers I'm afraid.Perhaps hearing it from the horses mouth rather than reading protracted claims and counter claims would move me in the other direction but, until then, call me a sceptic.

Made me chuckle. Have a dot of the green variety!

Unless you've been privy to the other deals offered I don't see how you can make an informed judgement on that. I'm not saying it isn't. I just can't say it is as no one has made public the details of any other offers that were put to the outgoing consortium and what was claimed by those bidders, re their objectives and desires for Saint Mirren FC. All I know is the outgoing shareholders are getting their asking price if the CiC succeeds in getting financilal backing. I won't vote here as I said I changed my mind on the OS poll. My decision is based on a lot more than the rantings of hotdiggity and Yul, in case you ask. This could change again depending on the suggested meeting touted by div.

One of my concerns is that, if the CiC were to fail and there were no offers for the club. Or at least none that suited. Would RA/the CiC board be able to sell the shares on the cheap? Perhaps even to themselves? Now. I don't know Richard from Adam and in no way suggest that he would do this but if it is possible then, feasably, 400+ fans and many businesses might pay a lot of money toward someone acquiring 52% of SMFC at a very reduced figure while the present consortium still managed to get away with their pockets fully loaded to the extent they wanted. This might constitute an incentive for someone to start the project to begin with.

Hardly implied ds10. I merely asked if any of them represented his intentions. If not then Div can certainly explain what he did mean and what he did know....... If he so wishes. If not. Then surely it is still valid to ask the questions.

1) I could hardly LISTEN to people on a non vocal forum, and 2) Why would it be that you couldn't be an adult to decide against the CiC? Is it akin to the emporers new clothes? Only the clever will see what's not there? That's quite a diatribe of a statement, not proven in fact. I am being influenced by all sides of the argument. pro and anti CiC. I am being influenced by all I read about the workings of a CiC. I am, first and foremost, making my decisions based on MY interpretations of all I have read. Is that OK Mister?