beermonkey Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 No they didn't, the entire undertaking would be the old company et all. Sevco only purchased the assets of the company, the use of trading names is controlled by statute - The Business Names Act 1985. This Act imposes certain legal requirements on companies using trading names. The most obvious point is the trading name cannot be the same as or similar to another company or business name in a way that might be confusing. In the case of Rangers transferring the name from the oldco to the newco and treating them as different companies could fall foul of the passing off regulations. It is down to someone to complain though. Time for some more diddy power then ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cairn Terrier Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 So can clubs only chart their history from when they traded as a PLC? Did you have some kind of severe head trauma (ie kicked by a horse) in the past? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 In 1900 due to financial and other problems, Dumbarton FC ceased to be and their membership of the Scottish League lapsed. In 1908 a completely new Dumbarton FC was formed and applied successfully for membership of the Scottish League. The new club had no business connection with the old one. However they played at the same ground, used the same crest and colours and assumed the honours (including two league championships and a Scottish Cup win) and history of the old club. People appear to have just kind of accepted that. Aye, and other examples include the "hibernation" of Hibs, and also apparently Dundee wound-up in 1898 and reforming as a new limited company during the season (see some posts in Infowire)... I would argue that people at large generally accept these things, and if the authorities and media do, so will "officialdom" and respected publications etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 who ? Doesnt't know who Dr Heidi Poon is. Typical uninformed Jambo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 who ? She is one of members of the tribunal deciding the Big Tax Case. She is supposed to be a director of an Edinburgh law firm, Morton Fraser, but she is no longer listed on their website. Maybe she became unavailable halfway through and they had to start again. http://blogs.channel4.com/alex-thomsons-view/delayed-rangers-tax-tribunal/2359 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Doesnt't know who Dr Heidi Poon is. Typical uninformed Jambo. I Doped Rhino 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Doesnt't know who Dr Heidi Poon is. Typical uninformed Jambo. Tch! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Aye, and other examples include the "hibernation" of Hibs, and also apparently Dundee wound-up in 1898 and reforming as a new limited company during the season (see some posts in Infowire)... I would argue that people at large generally accept these things, and if the authorities and media do, so will "officialdom" and respected publications etc. Maybe, but I will not accept this! That sounds familiar......................... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Actually it is. It's part of something called "goodwill" and has been specifically valued on many company takeovers. Just catching up from yesterday, so I don't know if anyone has commented on this but it needs corrected. Goodwill is a non-tangible asset of a company that is created when the assets of a company are purchased for above book value. In the case of Sevco, they paid less than book value for the assets and therefore have no goodwill on the books. So going by your definition, if the newco have the history and the EBT punishment is the removal of some of these titles, does that mean that Sevco will have to take an impairment charge to their goodwill??? Short response is your speaking pish. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) He also gave Whyte another quid for the hell of it. That means Whyte made a 200% profit . That still cracks me up, the blunder and that The Times and The Guardian quoted him as saying 100%. Oh the irony!! Perhaps thats why you shouldn't read anything but red tops. To calculate a percentage profit, you take the profit and divide it by the cost price and multiply by 100. So Profit = 1 / Cost = 1 * 100 = 100% profit. Whyte doubled his money but did not make 200% profit Edited July 24, 2012 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Leggo on form today: http://leggoland2.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/kennedy-shows-just-what-liar-charles.html Charles Green bad. Brian Kennedy good. No reason for why though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Stramash Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) In 1900 due to financial and other problems, Dumbarton FC ceased to be and their membership of the Scottish League lapsed. In 1908 a completely new Dumbarton FC was formed and applied successfully for membership of the Scottish League. The new club had no business connection with the old one. However they played at the same ground, used the same crest and colours and assumed the honours (including two league championships and a Scottish Cup win) and history of the old club. People appear to have just kind of accepted that. Can't see the HMRC, the SFA, the club's creditors, those investigating the possible illegal use of EBTs, and the slightly secretive Green team just getting off with the authorities saying, 'Oh well, as you were, but don't let it happen again.' Though I suppose whatever new club the majority of supporters get behind will be perceived as a continuation of the Gers, by the fans at least. In one sense, fans probably see themselves as the club, since players, managers, and even business entities come and go. Edited July 24, 2012 by Danish Pastry 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Oh the irony!! Perhaps thats why you shouldn't read anything but red tops. To calculate a percentage profit, you take the profit and divide it by the cost price and multiply by 100. So Profit = 1 / Cost = 1 * 100 = 100% profit. Whyte doubled his money but did not make 200% profit IP fully understands that. He simply worded his post badly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Just catching up from yesterday, so I don't know if anyone has commented on this but it needs corrected. Goodwill is a non-tangible asset of a company that is created when the assets of a company are purchased for above book value. In the case of Sevco, they paid less than book value for the assets and therefore have no goodwill on the books. So going by your definition, if the newco have the history and the EBT punishment is the removal of some of these titles, does that mean that Sevco will have to take an impairment charge to their goodwill??? Short response is your speaking pish. I like the cut of your jib, sir. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Leggo on form today: http://leggoland2.bl...ar-charles.html Charles Green bad. Brian Kennedy good. No reason for why though. Green's wee message bhoy from the Beeb, together looking like the proven liar and the mug who had fallen for the liar’s snale oil salesman’s spiel.<br class="Apple-interchange-newline"> WTF is Snale oil??? what a fuckwit 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Regardless of any legal status, the labels of any owning companies or their trading names, this, public and footballing perception, is the most important factor. I expect that in 20 years, Scottish society will consist of two groups of people: 99% of the population who will accept and view Rangers and Sevco as the one and same thing, or have no idea anyone thinks differently. 1% of the population who will take pleasure in in pointing venomously at young children in their replica shirts while shouting "Rangers are DEAD! You support SEVCO! You've never won anything!" Not holding out much hope then if you think in 20 years time you won't have won anything ETA: Too slow!! Edited July 24, 2012 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 This has got to have been the most boring, nerdy w*nkfest couple of days in the history of this thread. If a team wearing blue, playing home games in Ibrox, with the same fans, continues playing football, they will be known as Rangers. Their history won't somehow disappear in a collective mind melt. Even if some trophies and titles get taken away, all that will do is prove there is still a club called Rangers to take them from. Reciting arcane bits of company law and accountancy practice (usually out of context) won't change that. Shame, but there we go.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 Leggo on form today: http://leggoland2.bl...ar-charles.html Charles Green bad. Brian Kennedy good. No reason for why though. Charles Green's a proven liar apparently. Leggo's kind of subtle on that point. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 (edited) Leggo on form today: http://leggoland2.bl...ar-charles.html Charles Green bad. Brian Kennedy good. No reason for why though. Amongst many other things, Leggo does not understand the meaning of "controlling interest" or at least pretends not to, in order to mislead the orc hordes. eta Also very short piece from Leggy today. Feeling a bit "tired" perhaps? Edited July 24, 2012 by cyderspaceman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenHibee Posted July 24, 2012 Share Posted July 24, 2012 This has got to have been the most boring, nerdy w*nkfest couple of days in the history of this thread. If a team wearing blue, playing home games in Ibrox, with the same fans, continues playing football, they will be known as Rangers. Their history won't somehow disappear in a collective mind melt. Even if some trophies and titles get taken away, all that will do is prove there is still a club called Rangers to take them from. Reciting arcane bits of company law and accountancy practice (usually out of context) won't change that. Shame, but there we go.. Wrong! Rangers FC will cease to exist. Unless all us non-rangers fans get collective Alzheimers, we will never, ever fail to remind them of this year, the year they fell. Phoenix Rangers will exist, play in blue, sing their lovely songs within Ibrox stadium, but they will never be the same. Every single rangers fan, deep down, for the rest of their lives, will sting with pain knowing this is the case. They will respond to this by drumming up support and noise as much as possible about how they are the ggow rangers...and we need to put them back in their place. Can't wait for their promotion in 8 years time. 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.