Wings Over Scotland Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Any tickets sold by Brechin City are, of course, a function of Brechin City's trading, not Sevco's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wings Over Scotland Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Surely that line isn't spurious though. Could they be called out for using it? Probably, technically, but who would have an interest in doing so? Plus, any action would be overtaken by events almost immediately. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thelegendthatis Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) Phoenix companies are not illegal, in fact they are encouraged and provided for in company law. The only, or the main, illegal aspect of a phoenix company occurs when the directors of the previous company 'phoenix' a new company with the main or sole aim of avoiding tax liability. Newco IS a phoenix company in some ways. i.e they are trading at the same address, carrying on the same business., with many of the same employees. However they are not acting illegally doing that. Havent a clue about images, logos, naming and branding. Shouldn't imagine it makes a whole lot of difference to anyone who matters(HMRC for example). I believe they may have to make some minor alterations but they will still be, quite clearly branded as Rangers FC and you'll hardly notice any difference in their logo or branding, and thats perfectly legal if approved by companies house. HMRC certainly do not forbid phoenix companies. Its not their place or in their power to do so. They would only be concerned if the phoenix company was to have a commonality amongst the directorship, given that there is an massive unpaid tax liability involved. Something else needs to be said here. Despite the wishes of the broad base of Scottish football fans, even if BDO were to walk into Ibrox tomorrow, liquidate the Oldco AND the Newco, re-possess the stadium, the car park and Murray Park and sell it to Tescos, the entity that is Rangers will not disappear for ever. No business with 100,000 potential customers a month willing to pay an average of £50 each a month, will disappear completely. Having spent a couple of weeks away from P&B I am amazed how this thread has degenerated. And the post above typifies it. Are we in school holidays or something? Maybe time for Rangers for Dummies to be published? There obviously is a market. It is as if now that Rangers are moving into liquidation, and the team under whatever name is going to struggle in front of comparatively large crowds in Division 3, that many of the more significant posters from the past seemed to have given up. Meanwhile the cowboys circle the business exploitation opportunity, with double glazing salesman Brain Kennedy joining the greed queue today (again). Ticketus, Whyte, the guilty ex Rangers directors all still need to be dealt with, as they still await their chance from the sidelines. Court cases and court threats by the bucket load still to be sorted. We have the SFA, holding onto its Rangers supporting key members of staff with Campbell Ogilvie sitting out the storm. A flawed and useless SPL trying to invent a role for themselves under their totally flawed business model. Rangers may be in the wounded animal stage, but now is the time for them to be put down for good, with Green's assistance. And we talk here about what name can be used. So much still to do. We seem to be trying hard to become irrelevant. Edited July 23, 2012 by thelegendthatis 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Or maybe who was responsible for making the tickets was pished the night before and is a clerical error !.OR ! BC worker "What am I gonna print on the tickets boss,sevco 5088 or sevco Scotland ?" BC director "Thuck it ! you better put the Rangers on it or they will destroy the stadium in response that we didn't call them the Rangers,you know what a shower of fuckers they are" BC worker "OK boss cheating tax dodging b@stards it is" You're probably not that far from the truth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Earlier today I thought I'd have a look at some fixtures of all the divisions and I see that the SPL still have 'Club 12' fixtures listed on their site, with the SFL having Dundee, Airdrie and Stranraer in the First, Second and Third respectively. I take it this just through laziness, or is there something they are waiting on? It can't be the Rangers SFA membership as those clubs will be moving up regardless. It gave me a little panic for a moment that they still hoped to wrangle something dodgy, but it's far far too late in the summer for that. I was under the impression Scotland wasn't getting a summer this year. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarreZ Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Sitting in the pub last night, minding my own business. When in comes this very attractive girl, wearing not only a Sevco top but a scarf also. She then proceeds to give me the glad eye for half an hour, before bringing me a pint of lager and chatting me up for another half hour........Finally she said to me 'fancy taking me home?'..... I said 'sorry hen, but you're not in my league' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pull My Strings Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Speaking as a director of a limited company myself, kindly stick your staggeringly arrogant condescension up your hole. That presumably explains the fact that you clearly have a little knowledge (which is a dangerous amount). My partnership isn't incorporated. Does that make me more or less of an expert than you. I don't get it because it isn't the case. They bought some assets and used them in a new business. Charles Green paid £2.75m for the contracts of some players, most of whom have since fucked off because it turns out he didn't own their contracts at all. Most of whom fucked off because they exercised their right to f**k off rather than transfer under TUPE. I'd hope that you'd understand the concept of TUPE (kit requires an understanding of a business undertaking) but I don't really care. You've digressed enough. They WILL be. Not yet they're not. What have they "marketed" other than a spurious line on a website? You can't even buy a season ticket yet, six days from the start of the season. Why not? Because they don't have a business yet, since their only function is to play football and they don't yet have a licence to do so. I can't prove a negative. You constantly assert that Sevco is trading as Rangers right now, yet are unable to provide a shred of evidence in support of that assertion, because there isn't one. There probably will be soon, but as we speak there isn't. You can bluster around that fact all you like, but it won't change. Okay, so your argument is that sevco are not a business. You've mentioned numerous problems but haven't been able to specify a single one other than the frankly bizarre assertion that a company which employs dozens of staff, who transferred over from their previous eployer because the law explicitly recognises the associated business undertaking is not a business. Incidentally, I haven't asked you to prove anything, I merely asked you to explain your argument with sources, since you stated earlier that you had cited sources. You've explained your argument, it's nonsense, and you have no sources. I've wasted enough time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only A Game ! Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Ok I'm trying to get my head around this. So if I set up a company called 'Woolworths' using the same logo etc selling the same stuff that makes it a phoenix company if I was a director of the previous Woolworths. But if I was never a director of Woolworths it would not be a phoenix company. If that is the case the law sucks major style and it's given me an idea If you are a former director of Woolworths and you have unpaid tax liabilities that you have no intention of paying your company would be a Phoenix company acting illegally. If you are not a former director of Woolworths but have bought the assets and the intellectual property, you are still a Phoenix company, but your not doing anything wrong, even if the former entity known as Woolworths owes millions in unpaid taxes. You'd probably have to change the name for clarity between the two companies but you could do it perfectly legally. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted July 23, 2012 Author Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) I admit to not fully understanding the legalities of Charlie Green's Sevco being able to pop out the other side of this affair as 'Rangers' - but here's my take on it as a reasonably intelligent guy, just not one who can get his head around the legal mumbo-jumbo and inter-forumster bickering to actually make sense of it all.... Rangers got into a lot of debt, for reasons we are all well aware of. It caught up with them, and like so many other football clubs before them, they entered administration. However, unlike so many of those clubs before them, they couldn't get a CVA agreed, and were liquidated. Charlie Green racked up and paid money to own the exact same entity that Whyte, and before him, Murray had owned. He faces a lot of problems which we also are all well aware of - getting an SFA licence, meeting the running costs of what is a huge stadium and training complex, meeting staff wages, he has a youthful inexperienced squad, he has to start at the bottom of our league system, and on top of that, his manager is a buffoon. Anyhow.... if he can get over all of these obstacles, including his manager's ineptitude, I see no reason why he cannot carry on as 'Rangers'... just as we knew them before, but probably minus 5 league titles and 4 Scottish Cups, oh, and minus 40,000 fans at every home game... but it'll still be Rangers. The only way I can see him not managing to carry on as 'Rangers' is if the whole set of obstacles is simply too much, and it implodes in a big puff of smoke that rises up into the Govan sky and spells out the words 'Third Lanark' before wafting off on the breeze. Even then, Brian fcuking Kennedy and his smurfs will emerge to pick up the shattered pieces, and they'll attempt to carry on as 'Rangers'.... In short, I see no way that there simply won't be a continuation of Rangers at some level. If Charlie boy crashes and burns on the launch pad and fails to lift-off, it still won't spell the end. Have I got any of this even half right? Edited July 23, 2012 by pozbaird 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwiznaeme Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 You guys are absolutely mental. BDO and HMRC do not give a single fuck about sevco trading as Rangers. Less of the insults you sanctimonious cockhead. Time will tell who is right and who is wrong in regards to what BDO and HMRC give a f**k about. In your last few hundred posts on this thread you have attempted to persuade everyone that you are an expert in the affairs of everything concerning "Rangers", attempting to persuade everyone that "Rangers" are still alive. Dundee Utd fan you may or may not be but one thing is certain ... "Rangers" were your big team before they suicided themselves. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wings Over Scotland Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 I've wasted enough time. Something we can all agree on there. If you ever come up with any evidence of Sevco trading as Rangers in any way whatsoever, do feel free to get back to us. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cutty Old Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Companies House issue trading names now? Seriously? Seems to me that you are very knowledgeable PMS. Instead of sarcasm and condescending remarks, why don't you inform those who want to discuss the issue and are ignorant of the real facts. If you're not prepared to do that, I for one would understand completely and if that is the case, why bother debating with mere mortals at all ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pull My Strings Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Dundee Utd fan you may or may not be but one thing is certain ... "Rangers" were your big team before they suicided themselves. Jesus wept. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Sitting in the pub last night, minding my own business. When in comes this very attractive girl, wearing not only a Sevco top but a scarf also. She then proceeds to give me the glad eye for half an hour, before bringing me a pint of lager and chatting me up for another half hour........Finally she said to me 'fancy taking me home?'..... I said 'sorry hen, but you're not in my league' I considered giving you a red dot for that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) Something we can all agree on there. If you ever come up with any evidence of Sevco trading as Rangers in any way whatsoever, do feel free to get back to us. When the Season tickets renewals went out, weren't they collected initially by oldcorpse on behalf of Sevco? Thats not just trading, that was taking the piss. Edited July 23, 2012 by wunfellaff 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Having spent a couple of weeks away from P&B I am amazed how this thread has degenerated. And the post above typifies it. Are we in school holidays or something? Maybe time for Rangers for Dummies to be published? There obviously is a market. It is as if now that Rangers are moving into liquidation, and the team under whatever name is going to struggle in front of comparatively large crowds in Division 3, that many of the more significant posters from the past seemed to have given up. Continuity has been stressed by both Green and McCoist. The name is important. If they get to go with a blue kit, Rangers FC playing at Ibrox then in terms of company law, what's to stop any football club racking up as much debt as it likes and doing a Newco. Meanwhile the cowboys circle the business exploitation opportunity, with double glazing salesman Brain Kennedy joining the greed queue today (again). Kennedy previously stressed he would be the last man standing, does he know something we don't? Ticketus, Whyte, the guilty ex Rangers directors all still need to be dealt with, as they await their chance. Court cases and court threats by the bucket load still to be sorted. They'll be dealt with out of the limelight after the season starts for Newco We have the SFA, holding onto its Rangers supporting key members of staff with Campbell Ogilvie sitting out the storm.A flawed and useless SPL trying to invent a role for themselves under their totally flawed business model. Rangers may be in the wounded animal stage, but now is the time for them to be put down for good, with Green's assistance. And we talk here about what name can be used. So much still to do. We seem to be trying hard to become irrelevant. The thread has followed all the key issues as they've risen, there's more to come and we'll see it through. Been peaks and troughs before on the thread. Right now the company name is important. As is the five way discussions to get the SFA licence transferred from oldco to Newco. Identity and Continuity are what the Rangers support expect. If they get the name and the history, is that fair or not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 (edited) Probably, technically, but who would have an interest in doing so? Plus, any action would be overtaken by events almost immediately. It just seems strange that Sevco would lay itself open to a challenge over the name rights when by biding their time they would most likely be granted them. One thing they need to do is to keep their nose as clean as possible Edited July 23, 2012 by The Old Northerner 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlasgowCeltic.org Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Charlie Green racked up and paid money to own the exact same entity that Whyte, and before him, Murray had owned Nope, they owned 'The Rangers Football Club plc', which is the club which won a few titles, rioted in Manchester, Barcelona etc. If they wanted to own that same club, they would have had to have bought the shares from Craig Whyte. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GlasgowCeltic.org Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Identity and Continuity are what the Rangers support expect. If they get the name and the history, is that fair or not? History is not an asset which is transferable. It's not even an asset of any kind. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pull My Strings Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Seems to me that you are very knowledgeable PMS. Instead of sarcasm and condescending remarks, why don't you inform those who want to discuss the issue and are ignorant of the real facts. If you're not prepared to do that, I for one would understand completely and if that is the case, why bother debating with mere mortals at all ? Sorry, bud. I have tried but these things tend to degenerate into nonsense. That post above was made in the midst of dealing with a particularly unsatisfactory digression. My apologies to all who I have offended. I do have a very unattractive tendency to condescension and sarcasm when I'm irritated. It's a fair cop. 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.