bennett Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 What you mean is "two out of three judges ruled in our favour regarding the EBTs being loans in the cases where we hadn't already admitted they weren't." So why did rangers' representatives hold up their hands in the other cases? On a totally unrelated point, have they paid that shredder company their £444 yet? Because it looks like the bargain of the fucking century from where I'm standing! Norman just accept the judges decision and move on, ok for months now you have made an arse of yourself by believing everything that Irish Phil and the RTC Coward blogged but at the end of the day they were wrong. Now move on because no matter how you try to spin it, the result the always be the same. Rangers acted within the law. (This will do as a reply to that Shades guy too) -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 My link There's the link for transference of full SFA membership from oldco to newco,so the original full membership of the SFA from 1874 onwards carrries as before. Same membership,same club,same continuity. Transfer took place before formal liquidation. Edit too add,are you for real? There is absolutely nothing in that article your link provided stating that SFA Membership licence for the club was revoked. The order for liquidation came on the 14th of June after the CVA was rejected by the HMRC. At that point the SFA and SPL memberships were terminated with immediate effect because the club was to be liquidated.This is what is in the associations rulebooks defining a club when liquidation has been ordered on a member club. Rangers PLC or (Rangers FC in the SPL commission) ceased to be a club on that date the 14th of June when liquidation was immanent.It doesn't matter if the liquidation process wasn't in action but the fact that liquidation was going to happen that meant the licences were revoked or terminated with immediate effect. We should leave this till the SPL commission has given it's ruling. I wouldn't give too much to the MSM as they change their stories from day to day when trying to get viewers or mugs to buy the papers.Pre June 2012 Rangers are dead ! After June Rangers the club is separate from the company Rangers the club are definitely DEAD though but the clone lives Also I can't find the fucking rules and regulations on the official SFA website FFS coz it's a maze and won't let anyone see them ! does someone have a link to them ? PLEASE ! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Brusch Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 This is what is in the associations rulebooks defining a club when liquidation has been ordered on a member club. Rangers PLC or (Rangers FC in the SPL commission) ceased to be a club on that date the 14th of June when liquidation was immanent. Do the associations in question struggle to use brackets correctly? And can the not spell "imminently"? If this is the case then anything they say will be met with a vote of no confidence I'd imagine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Norman just accept the judges decision and move on, ok for months now you have made an arse of yourself by believing everything that Irish Phil and the RTC Coward blogged but at the end of the day they were wrong. Now move on because no matter how you try to spin it, the result the always be the same. Rangers acted within the law. (This will do as a reply to that Shades guy too) Sorry that doesn't suffice as a reply to me. You (f**k knows who) have been found to have misused EBT trusts (in some cases) and are liable for tax on those sums. Is the above factual Bennett? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Norman just accept the judges decision and move on(1), ok for months now you have made an arse of yourself by believing everything that Irish Phil and the RTC Coward blogged(2) but at the end of the day they were wrong.(3) Now move on because no matter how you try to spin it, the result the always be the same. Rangers acted within the law.(4) (This will do as a reply to that Shades guy too) 1. I have - the whole decision. I suggest you do the same. It won't stop you making a complete c**t of yourself, but it may moderate the effect. 2. Except, eh, no I haven't, and neither has anyone else on here. 3. They were wrong in many things, equally they were right in many things. 4. Except they didn't, did they? Were they 100% exonerated? No they weren't. Did they hold their hands up to the charges where there was evidence? Yes they did. Did the two judges clear them because they thought they were inoocent? No they didn't. Did they clear them because they "had to"? Yes they did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Do the associations in question struggle to use brackets correctly? And can the not spell "imminently"? If this is the case then anything they say will be met with a vote of no confidence I'd imagine. You really must, when questioning spelling, be able to spell, "they". Otherwise your post is redundant. And you look like a tit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paquis Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Yes I am sure you're both of equal intellect ... At least we have an intellect. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 At least we have an intellect. Aye, a group one, kinda like a hive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WhiteRoseKillie Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Were we not due a big statement/press conference/sales pitch from Charlie Boy today? I thought he was going to lay out the future for the new improved rangers* ahead of the share issue? Or is it so over-subscribed that he doesn't need to push it any more? Where the f**k IS Charlie, anyway? We haven't heard from the little scamp for a while.... * Alright, just new, then.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 And as I mentioned in another thread, Rangers admitted that the majority of the EBTs were taxable and as a result these EBTs were not taken into consideration in the FTTT case, they were only judged on about 20 of them ,it's like going to court for 50 cases of theft and saying yeah well i'll admit that 30 of those were theft but not that other 20 ,then not being found guilty on the 20 and going ...woohoo I won not guilty!! Indeed!!!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lou Brusch Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 You really must, when questioning spelling, be able to spell, "they". Otherwise your post is redundant. And you look like a tit. I'm too quick for my own good, the buttons on iOS are never where they're meant to be I'm not trying to turn this into a grammar nazi thread but if you're wanting to jump to the defence of football's governing bodies some more then you know where I am Oh and by the way, there's a stray comma in there 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 (edited) However, the average of all SPL diddy clubs is UP this season compared with the previous season - despite the absence of Rangers. While Celtic's is down. I wonder why? How can that be? We can excuse Ross thingy and Dundee as they are new. According to ESPN - Hearts, Killie, ICT, Celtic, St Mirren and St Johnstone are all down. Only Abergreen, Dundee Hibs and Hibs are up. SPL average 2012/13 = 9,558. SPL average 2011/12 =13,861. So, who's at it? ESPN? Hmmm? Were you convinced when Doncaster gave his recent SPL 'garden of roses's speech? Edited November 26, 2012 by Bendarroch 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Not really. Most of what you just wrote is generalised nonsense without any facts With regards to the BTC we were found on the whole to be not guilty, if you want to dispute this then please post exactly what we were found guilty of If you want to go off on a tangent then please elaborate I'll pretty much ignore all the tangent and generalised nonsense. My posts couldn't be clearer. Go back and read the reply to Bennett. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Not really. Most of what you just wrote is generalised nonsense without any facts With regards to the BTC we were found on the whole to be not guilty, if you want to dispute this then please post exactly what we were found guilty of If you want to go off on a tangent then please elaborate You were found to have administered some EBT trusts incorrectly. The tax is liable for these. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bendarroch Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 How about: Kilmarnock as a town is on its arse bones, with the last major employer fucking off in search of higher profits elsewhere. Food and rent may take priority for some. The country is on its arse bones, with austerity measures in place to cut debt - not helped by corporate tax evasion. Scottish Football lost a lot of credibility throughout this year by its handling of the rangers scandal. Some fans have had enough of a rigged competition. Killie have not played all their opponents at home yet, so any like-for-like comparison is impossible. Next question, Bendarroch. Here it is - Rangers supporters are somehow immune to the economic pressures that diddies and plastics face? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 Your reply to me was generalised nonsense If you want to have a conversation with Bennet and ignore my points then please go ahead, no skin of my bluenose My posts couldn't be any more straight forward. You can deflect, deny and defy if you wish. It is the very DNA of the Rangers fan after all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shades75 Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 5 As I said the vast majority were found to be loans So you were guilty of the wrongful administration of some EBT's for tax purposes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 This page tells me all I need to know how the BBC really sees things http://www.bbc.co.uk...rangers/results But feel free to make stuff up Aye like you do when you make up stuff and that web page is not supplied by the BBC you roaster Once again if you scroll down to the bottom off the page Tedi ! it says "The BBC is not responsible for content of external links READ MORE" and when you click on the link it shows </h1> <h1>Our approach to external linkingHow links are chosen for BBC Online BBC Online includes links to both internal (BBC) and external (non-BBC) websites. We select links that are editorially relevant to the content they are linking from and are suitable for the likely audience. These links are included for a number of reasons, including: for further relevant information or other key source material for background information for useful practical information for entertainment or enjoyment for further informed comment We do not link to external sites in return for cash, services or any other consideration in kind. We link to sites purely on editorial merit. These will most often be free to access, but users may sometimes be asked to register or subscribe before viewing content. The BBC homepage does not accept submissions or requests. The homepage team selects links and evaluates websites on the basis of editorial relevance. I like the bit where it says "for entertainment or enjoyment" :lol: :lol: SO TEDI ! it's not the BBC's actual words is it ? it's a link to some outside organisation whom the BBC use to make them a website You must be getting real used to being made a complete fud out of by now 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SS-18 ICBM Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 BZ Bear sucks duck eggs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobles Posted November 26, 2012 Share Posted November 26, 2012 By that time the old club will be dead and buried so no money there. We were told it was the company? So rangers are officially dead according to an ex follower. Nice! 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.