aDONisSheep

That'll be a bit of a fvkker because, It'll mean I've been all wrong about the beardy-bloke-in-the-sky! Back to the point. I forgot to add that I agree with you regarding Ogilvie and turd polishing. Ogilvie, Regan et al, must be shytting bricks at the thought of a SevcoRangers collapse. They placed a lot of stock into the Sevco charade. In truth I'd be delighted to let SevcoRangers waltz around the liquidity rules and into the Championship, if it meant that Ogilvie, Regan and Doncaster etc had to fall on their swords. Oh what a beautiful daydream that is! (We all know, they wouldn't do honourable thing though). Yours aDONis

In fairness to those useless corrupt bassas at Hampden. They can't go about publicly speculating about stuff which is all hypothetical at the moment. I'm sure we'll see some leaks about them monitoring the situation soon enough, but at the moment, they have nothing concrete to go on. As far as we're aware, SevcoRangers have paid their taxes and salaries, so nothing to report............ In addition, whether we like it or not (and I don't like it). SevcoRangers are a member of the SFA and league, and they deserve the same rights as others. There have been plenty of rumours about Killie recently and I don't recall the SFA or SPFL speculating about their future. Yours aDONis

DeadRangers fans always make me laugh with their, 'I toughed it out during the dark days' shecht! It shows a certain amount of arrogance, that they claim this 'loyalty' as a badge of honour when the reality is that in the dark days (75/76 to 85/86) they only appeared in 15 cup finals, winning 4 scottish cups and 6 league cups. In addition they won two league titles finished second twice, third twice and never finished lower than fifth. WOULD SOMEONE PLEASE, THINK OF THE CHILDREN! It's almost like they weren't actually there. 'cos if you know your history, 'n all that! Yours aDONis

Good luck with that case. For a start Wallace had only been in post for about a month. It will be incredibly difficult to prove that he deliberately deceived shareholders with what he said only a month after coming into post at the AGM. If nothing else he can use the Fat Sally defense of '(barely) plausible deniability'. In fact maybe he could ask Fat Sally for a few pointers, after all, he is a slimy-twa-faced genius of the teflon-art. Yours aDONis

The ethereal club myth always reminds me of this; I AM THE REAL ROD HULL!

Is it a coincidence that both the home and shytter signs point the same way?

I'll be honest and say that I was worryingly surprised at how well Wallace came across at the press conference. I still think his recovery plan was fanciful (nee ridiculous) but his short term plan is better than anything NewRangers have previously produced (see post passim where Stockbridge was banging on about £100m turnovers etc.). He's got his work cut out to deliver, but if he can keep the ship from listing too badly for another 8-10months, then they could work in alternative exit strategies (if needed). As for King. He needs to feather some spiv nests if he wants to be taken seriously. Then he might have the influence he desires. Yours aDONis

In all honesty, I think the SevcoRangers directors have a tricky job here. They can't simply transfer the assets then put the subsidiary into admin because transferring assets but leaving the debt can be seen as fraud. What might save them is if the only unsatisfied creditors were to be the parent company (the inter co debt). I'm still not sure if that leaves them on shaky ground when trying to break onerous and player contracts (I would think it does). Which is hence why timing may be an issue, and may be why Graham Wallace is saying that he is more confident now that admin can be avoided than he was at the AGM?? I still think, stripping the assets and selling SevcoRangers FC Ltd (the subsidiary) for a peppercorn is a distinct possibility. Yours aDONis

I can't speak for Tedi. But let me be the first to say, that I'm not sure there will be an 'admin'. I do think the assets will be moved to protect them, but I can also see a sale of the football business as a going concern. However, should that fail, then admin could be used as a vehicle for terminating onerous contracts (with players and others if need be). Then selling in a Coventry Shytty style arrangement where the Football business rents from the Stadium owner. However, even then, I don't think SevcoRangersII will necessarily be fleeced under this arrangement. The rentals could be long term and quite reasonable (of course I'm hoping that wouldn't be the case). Yours aDONis

Ah, the halcyon days when SevcoRangers were still under the benevolent eye of "twa-sarks". A hundred million quid you say, no problem for SuperSevco! What with the not onerous at all contracts we're signing up to, and all! http://tinyurl.com/qxbd2mo

Tedi, please feel free to not respond to my posts, it matters not a jot to me. But this board is not just for you, so for the benefit of others; I will continue to differentiate the old and new entities as I see fit (and in order to avoid confusion). I still stand by my assertion that SevcoRangers fans have buried their heads when action was required. I also contend that for a vast majority their stock response is conflict not influence and that has been a blind spot that has done them no good. As an aside I'm listening to Graham Wallace on STV and he's understandably guarded, but he's handled the press conference pretty well (and on his own). For once someone might actually be earning their fee down the Govan Shytyard for a change (see what I did there) . Yours aDONis

How do you know what they will accept, nobody has tried. Some of the major shareholders only paid 1p per share (I think Fat Sally is one of them). You don't need to buy a controlling stake, you need enough to exert influence. The fact of the matter is SevcoRangers fans spent their time, growling and snarling at "enemies" often when those enemies were simply holding up a mirror to show the route the NewCo was going down. I know that some of the fans groups tried to buy shares, but there simply wasn't enough interest from the wider fan-base. They had far more important things such as alleged slights from Stephen Thompson to worry about doncha-know! Yours aDONis

NewRangers and OldRangers fans have made almost no attempt to buy some influence, why havn't they tried to organise and buy the Spivs out. It seems to me, that for to many, it is all about the confrontation. All the would-be suitors have tried to gain control, without putting their money where their mouths were (it is very seldom a winning formula). Instead they've spent their time in a perma-rage at imagined enemies such as Turnbull Hutton, Stephen Thompson or the BBC (often at the behest of a supposedly despised spiv). Oh they can organise, but not in a constructive way. And so here we are, two massive loss making sets of accounts then another disasterous 120 day review, it's been circa two years in the making and the only thing they've organised is a boycott of Tannadice, for reasons unbeknown to them . Yours aDONis

NewRangers financial planning. Graham Wallace "These cards won't scratch themselves and we only need ten jackpots to get us back where we belong". "Nae Bother, cos, WATP & NO SURRENDER!" http://www.national-lottery.co.uk/player/i/article/scratchcards/popup/250000rainbow.jpg

Nae bestert leaves this clumpany till ah hear the Royal Philharmonic!

Bares, have a word with them eh!

Does anyone actually respect Fat Sally? I'll be honest and say that for me, he has shown himself to be a slimy toe-rag. He lives in a world of 'barely' plausible deniability, be it his "who are these people" rant, his "I just signed but didn't look" contract to this latest unbelievable shyte! As John Lydon famously said "Ever get the feeling you've been cheated"? Yours aDONis

Aye, I noticed that as well. Sandy, it's dead easy. The club is some ethereal being that is not of this world. It can exist as the SAME entity under two guises at one and the same time (see RIFC2012(IL) and Sevco Scotland/5088 Ltd trading as The Rangers Football Club). It is not encumbered by the machinations of law or legal status. Although it can it seems, have legal personality (when being discussed by the Union of Fans wishing to hold security over the 'club's'(sic) assets) but does not hold legal personality when having to pay debts due to face-painters etc. It has a separable history which can be bought for less than £1 (courtesy of Charlie 'Chuckles' Green) but that history does not include liquidation or the racking up of massive debts (that is the old companies history and not to be confused with the other-worldly club)! I think we can now close the thread. Yours aDONis

Assuming they can get past the likes of Dundee Utd first. They've had two stabs at it in their history, and I believe they've won neither. Yours aDONis

If you're going to do it on an industrial scale, it would still be problematic. Banks have a duty to notify the authorities if they suspect some of the actions their customers undertake (see Shah v HSBC). In addition, the law holds the senior management and directors (for both companies and auditors etc) now have an oversight role, for detecting things such as money laundering and are held accountable (See Habib bank). As for bookies, well small time owner-operated entities may find it relatively easy to conceal cash transactions, but larger entities would fall foul Anti-Money Laundering regs as well as gaming board controls. Yours aDONis

Not only that, you get a bulk discount, and other privileges (first option on tickets for euro games for example...... stop laughing at the back).

Is appears to me, that the UoFs don't realise that it is the company that owns the assets, the club is (as all Sevconians opine) some un-dead, ethereal spirit that hovers around the company, but is most definitely NOT the company when it comes to matters of profit/loss/assets and LIABILITIES. To claim that the club owns the assets would be to suggest that it had some form of corporate structure and legal personality (such as say an incorporated company). Surely no-one would ever suggest such a thing! I hope the erm.......... Union of Fans is sending itself an admonishing letter, and I hope to see a redaction soon! Yours aDONisSheep

Just to clarify, administration would be deemed as an insolvency event. Yours aDONisSheep

Hi Bennett That is one way to go about it, but I'm not sure that the fans or King have a strong enough hand to play the 'confrontation' game. If you're asking for my opinion (which you probably aren't), from a financial perspective (as far as I've understood it), the subsidiary has the brand, the properties and the onerous running costs. Confrontation may lead to an even quicker 'clearing of the decks' (i.e. the holding company either shifts or secures the remaining assets against the current loan), leaving the club/subsidiary with nothing but the 'brand' and a pile of loss making/onerous contracts. Of course, this could be just my speculation, but it's certainly what I'd be thinking of doing if it were my cash and I was in it for the money. I think 'sabre rattling' is a dangerous game to play just now. Yours aDONis

Whilst I agree with what you are saying. If backed into a corner, then the outcome is more likely to be acrimonious. The Spivs have separated the 'football club' aka the subsidiary from the 'non-trading' parent company already. If they move the assets, then they can sell the subsidiary knowing that whoever buys it, has little or no option other than to pay a rental for the stadium. It's a dangerous game, is all I'm saying. Yours aDONis