10 years since old rangers admin

[Dons_1988]

2 hours ago, AJF said:

No, I feel no shame in supporting Rangers.

Remarkable. 

[gudge1903]

Scumbags to a man. Every last one of them. Even the reasonable ones usually let their mask slip if you play them right. I think it stems or at least helped by a compliant and corrupt media who will make excuses for their cheating, their bigotry, sectarianism and even for the old clubs death. 

 

[Stellaboz]

SHARE PLAN

Sevco need cash

SHARE PLAN

Sevco need cash

[stressball]

16 hours ago, AJF said:

Our situation now is vastly different to 10 years ago. Any 'debt' we have, is to our shareholders who are currently happy investing and having loans converted to shares. We don't have much external debt at all (which was not the case 10 years ago).

As you say, there will come a time when those investors will withdraw their ongoing funding, and at that point, we will revert to a model where we rely on CL football or to sell assets (players) to cover any shortfall. You could probably argue with the recent sale of Patterson we have already started that shift.

'Getting to just do the same thing' is not the same thing at all.

You could argue you haven’t as the Patterson money seems to be gone, presumably on Ramsey as suggested by yet another share issue.

[stressball]

And on the subject it FFP, I’m fairly certain here’s a caveat that states only £xM is allowed to be injected by the board.

Although that’s probably why Rangers refused to appoint the necessary individuals to trade freely on the stock market, to ensure no one but then have a true idea of what’s going on.

[AJF]

1 hour ago, stressball said:

You could argue you haven’t as the Patterson money seems to be gone, presumably on Ramsey as suggested by yet another share issue.

The most recent issue of shares could easily be a conversion of loans into equity. I'd go as far as saying that is the most likely scenario given we had confirmed we'd already met our future funding requirement for the season before we received the money for Gerrard and Patterson.

[stressball]

33 minutes ago, AJF said:

The most recent issue of shares could easily be a conversion of loans into equity. I'd go as far as saying that is the most likely scenario given we had confirmed we'd already met our future funding requirement for the season before we received the money for Gerrard and Patterson.

Your accountants have confirmed lots of things over the past few years that have turned out to be a lot of shite though.

If I was a Rangers fan I’d be worried by the lack of true transparency, it hurts the reach of the club to true outside investors.

But then, trading properly on the stock market would require more insight into what’s going on so it’s probably easier to keep the unsustainable model going willy nilly until you strike a pot of cash or lose it all.

[AJF]

6 minutes ago, stressball said:

Your accountants have confirmed lots of things over the past few years that have turned out to be a lot of shite though.

If I was a Rangers fan I’d be worried by the lack of true transparency, it hurts the reach of the club to true outside investors.

But then, trading properly on the stock market would require more insight into what’s going on so it’s probably easier to keep the unsustainable model going willy nilly until you strike a pot of cash or lose it all.

I'm sure if they wanted to hide something like that, they'd just say "we don't need additional funding" rather than state in the last set of accounts that we require £7m additional funding this season?

Rangers fans are always told "it's all there in your accounts for everyone to see", yet you seem desperate to paint a bleak picture that you are willing to overlook what's actually shown in the accounts, despite there being an independent auditor's report included which was often a large stick Celtic fans would use to beat us with when there was an absence of one. Odd that.

[AJF]

1 minute ago, IDoNotKnowThisOne said:

Not as odd as having no shame in supporting the c***s 

 

Take your face for a royal blue dump pls 

[Dundee Hibernian]

I know quite a few Rangers fans that are not of the type seen baying at away games or in pubs shouting at the telly. Other than football, decent sorts ( @AJF seems the type as an example). But not one (no not one) is chastened by the situation David Murray et al brought to the club, and the whole of the game up here, even when I point out the many thousands of pounds I spent following a bent league where one club was cheating the others.

They're always careful speaking about the situation, and never try to emphasise that they are the same club which was caught out and suffered the obvious consequence of excessive financial deception, but I've not met one who expresses a shred of remorse.

[AJF]

1 minute ago, Dundee Hibernian said:

I know quite a few Rangers fans that are not of the type seen baying at away games or in pubs shouting at the telly. Other than football, decent sorts ( @AJF seems the type as an example). But not one (no not one) is chastened by the situation David Murray et al brought to the club, and the whole of the game up here, even when I point out the many thousands of pounds I spent following a bent league where one club was cheating the others.

They're always careful speaking about the situation, and never try to emphasise that they are the same club which was caught out and suffered the obvious consequence of excessive financial deception, but I've not met one who expresses a shred of remorse.

That's the thing, if I had been asked different questions, my response would've been different.

Do I support Tax Avoidance? Absolutely not (my employer would have an issue with me if I did). Am I happy Rangers were found to have participated in Tax Avoidance schemes? Again, no.

But these decisions were made by certain individuals who I now harbour resentment for due to the suffering it caused me as a fan. That in no way makes me feel any shame to be a Rangers fan, though.

[Squonk]

The current club playing out of Ibrox has learned absolutely nothing from the self-inflicted death of its defunct predecessor and it openly admits to operating a policy that, at least in part, gambles its existence on far-from-guaranteed Champions League riches.

When I say club, I of course mean the expendable and replaceable operating company, not the immortal, metaphysical essence that is the actual football club, which, as we know, has no legal personality, mainly because it is a fabricated concoction of the purest fantasy; a figment of the fertile imagination of the hordes; a ludicrously contrived piece of fiction which was necessary to fuel the survival myth and keep the blue pounds rolling in. 

Edited February 24, 2022 by Squonk

[Dundee Hibernian]

3 minutes ago, AJF said:

But these decisions were made by certain individuals who I now harbour resentment for due to the suffering it caused me as a fan. That in no way makes me feel any shame to be a Rangers fan, though.

That's fair, but don't you feel mortified by the large numbers baying at away games or in pubs shouting at the telly?

These are guys who arrogantly ignore the cheating which took place, a stance which, if applied to other clubs, would bring embarrasment and humiliation to their supporters.

[hearthammer]

@AJF, you have always seemed to me, and from what i've read, by consensus, one of the more reasonable and affable supporters of l'equipe nouveau. I personally would add @KnightswoodVanBear to that extremely short list.

However, when the core facts are presented regarding the cheating, financial malfeasance and hubris regarding the old club, the default setting of "same club", "150 years" and "going for 56" automatically kicks in for each and every one of you.  This situation was facilitated by a spineless SFA/SPFL (Doncaster & Regan) and more than compliant media who conveniently airbrushed over the facts to ensure their sources of income were not materially affected by the industrial scale avoidance/evasion (the side letters swung the "scheme" into the latter).

The company currently being liquidated by BDO is "Rangers Football Club" in the same way that "Gretna Football Club" is.  There was no "holding company" pre-2012 and, like Gretna, a new "phoenix" company was started to allow football to continue being played out of Ibrox (Gretna 2008 was the new company established by them) .  The main difference was that all efforts were made to ensure the name "rangers" continued to be in Scottish football, whereas Gretna were treated, as per the rules, in the correct manner as befalls a football team entering Administration/Liquidation.  You, and every other fan that i know, or who contributes here, cannot bring themselves to be the first person to acknowledge the truth of the situation.

Using current football parlance, what would your views and beliefs be if the demise had happened "at the other end", ie, if it was celtic who had transgressed/cheated and shat all over the rule book ??  Would you still be as happy and complicit in their fans living the lie ??

You're a reasonable guy, but i'm not so sure you'd be willing to address any of these points head on and honestly, in case you were seen as the "traitor".  You would, however, earn the full respect of everyone here if you were able to tell it like it is.

 

Thank you.    

[stressball]

I still don’t understand how racking up debt to board members who then convert the debt to shares is “sustainable.”

 

 

[Highlandmagar]

59 minutes ago, AJF said:

That's the thing, if I had been asked different questions, my response would've been different.

Do I support Tax Avoidance? Absolutely not (my employer would have an issue with me if I did). Am I happy Rangers were found to have participated in Tax Avoidance schemes? Again, no.

But these decisions were made by certain individuals who I now harbour resentment for due to the suffering it caused me as a fan. That in no way makes me feel any shame to be a Rangers fan, though.

You feel ashamed that your club built its power in Scotland on bigotry and sectarianism. And it's supporters still breath on. And your club pays lip service to it.

[AJF]

18 minutes ago, Dundee Hibernian said:

That's fair, but don't you feel mortified by the large numbers baying at away games or in pubs shouting at the telly?

These are guys who arrogantly ignore the cheating which took place, a stance which, if applied to other clubs, would bring embarrasment and humiliation to their supporters.

 

9 minutes ago, hearthammer said:

@AJF, you have always seemed to me, and from what i've read, by consensus, one of the more reasonable and affable supporters of l'equipe nouveau. I personally would add @KnightswoodVanBear to that extremely short list.

However, when the core facts are presented regarding the cheating, financial malfeasance and hubris regarding the old club, the default setting of "same club", "150 years" and "going for 56" automatically kicks in for each and every one of you.  This situation was facilitated by a spineless SFA/SPFL (Doncaster & Regan) and more than compliant media who conveniently airbrushed over the facts to ensure their sources of income were not materially affected by the industrial scale avoidance/evasion (the side letters swung the "scheme" into the latter).

The company currently being liquidated by BDO is "Rangers Football Club" in the same way that "Gretna Football Club" is.  There was no "holding company" pre-2012 and, like Gretna, a new "phoenix" company was started to allow football to continue being played out of Ibrox (Gretna 2008 was the new company established by them) .  The main difference was that all efforts were made to ensure the name "rangers" continued to be in Scottish football, whereas Gretna were treated, as per the rules, in the correct manner as befalls a football team entering Administration/Liquidation.  You, and every other fan that i know, or who contributes here, cannot bring themselves to be the first person to acknowledge the truth of the situation.

Using current football parlance, what would your views and beliefs be if the demise had happened "at the other end", ie, if it was celtic who had transgressed/cheated and shat all over the rule book ??  Would you still be as happy and complicit in their fans living the lie ??

You're a reasonable guy, but i'm not so sure you'd be willing to address any of these points head on and honestly, in case you were seen as the "traitor".  You would, however, earn the full respect of everyone here if you were able to tell it like it is.

 

Thank you.    

I'll give you my view on it, but I know already it's not something that will resonate with or appease other fans or do anything to quell any criticism, for that matter. But, I'll give my opinion anyway.

I'm not a denier of liquidation, nor am I ignorant to the circumstances that led to it. Rangers willingly took part in a Tax Avoidance scheme exploiting a loophole in tax legislation and they were later informed that said loophole was never intended to allow that tax advantage and that HMRC believed it would ultimately be taxable. Yet, they persisted with it and over a decade later it was, not surprisingly, found to be taxable (despite an initial victory for Rangers at tribunal).

As you mentioned Celtic, the biggest mistake (not the only one) Rangers made was to operate an Employer led EBT scheme, meaning any future liability would land with the club, rather than sign players up to contractor loan schemes as individuals, which is what Celtic players did. Ultimately this allowed Celtic plausible deniability and as a result, the tax liability is now beginning to land with the players they paid via these contractor loan schemes.

I can't claim that if the roles were reversed I'd view things any differently from how you do now in regards to Rangers.

So, I'm not saying liquidation never happened and I'm not saying others fans are wrong to believe we are a different club or don't have a right to be angry. But (here's where people will disagree), I sit in the same seat in the same stadium as I did prior to 2012. I support a team that wears the same badge, plays in the same colours and I go to football matches with the same people that I attended with prior to 2012. So, in my view, I support the same club.

 

[AJF]

2 minutes ago, stressball said:

I still don’t understand how racking up debt to board members who then convert the debt to shares is “sustainable.”

 

 

Nobody has said it is sustainable. I actually said it wasn't sustainable and Rangers have also said as much.

[stressball]

Just now, AJF said:

Nobody has said it is sustainable. I actually said it wasn't sustainable and Rangers have also said as much.

It missed half of the rest of my post for some reason, but I also mentioned the independent auditor raised a business concern over the accounts if I recall correctly.

[AJF]

2 minutes ago, stressball said:

It missed half of the rest of my post for some reason, but I also mentioned the independent auditor raised a business concern over the accounts if I recall correctly.

They did. It notes that this concern is brought about due to the fact that in order to continue operations for the next 12 months, the group is dependent on raising additional finance to cover projected cash shortfalls. This was the additional £7m required, which has already been confirmed as being secured.