dave.j Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Is he influencing things at Rangers? Did a stock market announcement confirm that one of the directors was appointed by him? I don't know if he is influencing things or not and do not know what relevance a stock market announcement has. What I do know ism that the hearing isn't for another week(?) So how is he guilty of breaking the rules? There's no decision been made. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 You don't know? really? lol You don't know what relevance a stock market announcement which confirms he has appointed a director at Ibrox means? really? lol Of course he is, he is not allow to influence things at Rangers, yet he appoints a member of the board...guilty, but then you know that and are just playing some daft wee Dave game. Just acknowledge he hasn't been found guilty yet, and I'll stop playing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Dave game it is then...as you were. Good lad, so after accepting your error.... Why do you think the three bears are making an offer they know can't be accepted due to the 35 day exception? Do you think it's to save face with the gullible fans who don't know the offer can't be accepted? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I have not made any error, I think you would have to be pretty mental to suggest Mike is not influencing matters at Rangers. Who said it cannot be accepted? is that 35 day rule up for legal challenge? Erm........No 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Ibrox. A national treasure 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Is payroll day not soon? If so this 35 day rule effectively rules and out any other source of funding for 2 pay days. This looks like a masterstroke by Ashley. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Apache Don Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Lawyer are we? Nope but Companies House isn't on my bookmarks bar for absolutely no reason 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 From the Bears’ Den tonight. The self awareness gene seems not to have developed… “Our shitebag support is embarrassing. Robbie Neilson has had his digs at us, poking fun that we’re not title contenders, etc. When did we go from being feared, to fearing everyone else? Hearts are small, pathetic wee club coming to Ibrox, if they’re not worried about the game, then they should be. Let’s remind them that they are cheats, a club run on the back of money stolen from customers of a Lithunian bank who lost everything, so their gangster owner could spend way over the odds on shite players just to keep them in the division. At least when we went insolvent it was for a phantom debt that HMRC cooked up from thin air.” 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podlie Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Nope but Companies House isn't on my bookmarks bar for absolutely no reason Thought it more a requirement of the Land Registration etc (Scotland) Act 2012, than company house. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 ` After all this time ... Tedi now finally wants to get to the truth ... utterly brilliant. And Charlotte fake emails as well..you couldnt make it up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I like the 3 bears trick, it's an old one that king used before. Basically making an offer they know can never be accepted by the company. Previously king did it requesting security over Ibrox(?) knowing full well the company couldn't accept it as there was a claim in place from Whyte over the ownership of the stadium. Now the three bears want security over Murray Park, knowing the board can't offer it as there's a 35 day lock down in place. It makes for great pantomime and the press love a rangers minded money man to write about, but really their offer has as much clout as me making one. I assume the board had to agree to this claim against Ibrox, otherwise your or I could do the same. If so, what were the board thinking of? Do they get any of the £10M loan before the claim period is up? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 I assume the board had to agree to this claim against Ibrox, otherwise your or I could do the same. If so, what were the board thinking of? Do they get any of the £10M loan before the claim period is up? According to sources the permission from the board was provided via Llambias and Leach (2 required signatories) The Board subsequently made a statement suggesting that no deal had been agreed with anyone - but interestingly failed to contradict the actions of Llambias and Leach. The latter statement is being seized upon both by the 3 Bears and Rangers Supporters Trust as grounds for a legal challenge against the board for misleading the Stock Exchange. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 (edited) It's worth pointing out that TRIFC haven't formally notified the Stock Exchange of any credit arrangement with MASH. The last official update was to say The Company notes the recent speculation in the press. The Directors confirm that they are currently considering various proposals to secure the financial future of the club, however no decision has been made at this time. I'd have thought they'd need to do that pretty much as soon as they start drawing down against it. ETA: Thanks for the update, Auld Heid. Edited January 16, 2015 by The DA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 If the 3 bears challenge it's legality, how long would it take for such a process? Longer than the 35 days? It could be the 3 bears challenging it that sends them into admin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 BT Sport will be delighted tonight 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The DA Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 If the 3 bears challenge it's legality, how long would it take for such a process? Longer than the 35 days? It could be the 3 bears challenging it that sends them into admin. I'd have thought the sooner the better from their point of view, before MASH's £10M is used up. If they can push into admin today, they'd only have £3.5M of loans to pay back - assuming they haven't splurged the new £10M on a new mower for Ally. There is of course still the small matter of reaching the end of the season but... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/6929-club-statement "For the avoidance of doubt and so that all Rangers fans are again reassured, the Board has stated that it has no intention of granting security over Ibrox to anybody. We have already shown in our actions - and not words - that our stadium is sacrosanct." Lies http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/7322-board-statement "The Board is happy to reaffirm its position, which has never been a matter of debate, by confirming once again that it will not enter into any form of sale, securitisation or leaseback of Ibrox Stadium. "This has been and still remains the Board's clear and consistent position on this subject as it continues to protect and enhance the assets of the club "The Board of Rangers Football Club is committed to protecting the assets of the Club for the benefit of all Rangers fans, and to adhering to the highest standards of corporate governance." I will never set foot inside Ibrox stadium if this goes ahead, it will be the end for me. Just catching up, 40 pages to go, so if this has been mentioned you are welcome for the bump. If not, why? Liar Tedi, another 5 star season ticket boycottesque empty threat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Ibrox. A national treasure ImageUploadedByPie & Bovril1421372947.490362.jpg Played on by The National Disgrace F.C. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 f**k the catching up, got up to the post where Ashley is lending £10M. How long before Rangers default? Ashley will just clean up. Glorious! Or secure all the assets and let the three bears and King acquire the club saddled with debt! Either way Ashley owns the Rangers' fans spare cash for the foreseeable future. Fucking glorious. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted January 16, 2015 Share Posted January 16, 2015 Ibrox. A national treasure ImageUploadedByPie & Bovril1421372947.490362.jpg Move to Hampden for a year? That would destroy No8's a team playing in blue at Ibrox rhetoric. Besides did they no say that they'd be playing on the streets soon enough? 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.