I can't see Rangers liquidating anyway, so it's all moot for me.
Ja606 bears aside(for the most part), it is refreshing to see a guy like Mitre actually discussing liquidation rather than heads in the sand bear types.
I talked to him the other day about this and although I thought it looked hopeful at best, he did put forward some good arguments.
I stated his biggest problem would be Whyte's involvement.
I also suggested that HMRC would go after a new entity with the same history.
As I have no speakers in work, could you give me a run down of what Krasner has said?
Shame how the guy also quoted that rangers have to settle all football debts in full.
Football creditor rule does not apply in Scotland. Calls his expertise into a bit of doubt dont you think?
Mitre,
If you don't want the name of your club forever, ahem, tainted, then I would suggest that you do have to pay all of your football debts.
To be fair, the guy states that liquidation is different from administration. And that if they are liquidated then they lose their history.
He does not say that if the club are bought prior to the club being declared liquidated that their history is lost.
He confirms Leeds kept their history even though they are a NewCo.
Good to see your hard work bearing fruit,mitre. Keep it up
Tim,
If we agree a CVA for a pence in the £ ammount, it would be illegal to pay the football debts in full.
It would be giving preferential treatment to creditors.
'zilla
There's quite a lot.
The Insolvency Expert says that liquidation is where there is no buyer and the club completely collapses and you have to form a NEW Rangers that starts from the very beginning"
This flies in the face of mitre's argument and puts it to bed.
Ahm talking about dignity, mitre.
Paying a p in the pound, then going out and spending money on footballers.
Eeeeeugh yuck.
Cheers DC.
To be honest, the board is getting flooded by idiots from na606, who I have been ripping it out of for a few days.
I like the tims on here more than I like the bears on na606 so that says it all!
Mr freeze,
We have 4 bids in!
I think the club will find a buyer alright, even if it is only for £1!
You only have three bids in.
Do you actually know what's happening at your club?
Thats what you deserve when you leave ja606.
Traitor.
Sorry, I mean not606.
What one are you anyway? Let me guess rebelbhoy? or are you the one that signs of all posts with 'up the ra?'.
Aye, helping to solve the problems of the supports aint you.
The tims on here are all decent, if a bit stuborn, im sure they dont want you wasting the place.
Lol, pie.
Tell me about it!
Im not even allowed on the Rangers Board on not606. The moderator didnt let me in because I didnt include the terms (t@1g or f-onion) in my post!
Made me either a tim or a tim excuser! lol
Mr Freeze2012, interesting stuff.
I do believe that liquidation looks like the only way forward for them....I guess we'll find out soon enough.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
MITRE JIST NAW................NAE MERR,
YER RIGHT, RANGERS ARE INNOCENT,
YOU HAVE PROVED IT TO MY SATISFACTION
Well I do know that the football creditor rule does not apply in scotland, and he does not.
Calls into question his knowledge of our situation do you not agree?
Well I do know that the football creditor rule does not apply in scotland, and he does not.
Calls into question his knowledge of our situation do you not agree?
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH FFS
Mitre thinks he knows more about the administration/liquidation process than an Insolvency Expert who was involved in the Leeds Utd administration
Let's ignore what the Insolvency Expert has to say and believe Mitre instead
By the way, this is the same Mitre who a few months ago was telling everyone on here that Celtic were DEFINITELY a new club as they were forced to become one in 1994.
Leo,
You know im right on that one though!
If a guy is held up as the fountain of knowledge on the case, you would think he would get the basics correct!
Oh and for the record.
The guy did not say that we could not be bought before liquidation.
He also said that Rangers have a higher wage bill than Celtic!!!!!
WTF
Mitre, the guy obviously is an expert in his field....And missing the football creditor rule is not a big issue.
It only becomes so if HMRC agree to a cva. Something tells me with the line up of clubs they're ready to sue after the Rangers case that they'll go out to prove a point and a cva will be rejected.....Just my opinion.
Sign in if you want to comment
mitre_mouldmaster (The Rangers One)
Page 1 of 15
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 9/4/12
I can't see Rangers liquidating anyway, so it's all moot for me.
posted on 9/4/12
Ja606 bears aside(for the most part), it is refreshing to see a guy like Mitre actually discussing liquidation rather than heads in the sand bear types.
I talked to him the other day about this and although I thought it looked hopeful at best, he did put forward some good arguments.
I stated his biggest problem would be Whyte's involvement.
I also suggested that HMRC would go after a new entity with the same history.
As I have no speakers in work, could you give me a run down of what Krasner has said?
posted on 9/4/12
Shame how the guy also quoted that rangers have to settle all football debts in full.
Football creditor rule does not apply in Scotland. Calls his expertise into a bit of doubt dont you think?
posted on 9/4/12
Mitre,
If you don't want the name of your club forever, ahem, tainted, then I would suggest that you do have to pay all of your football debts.
posted on 9/4/12
To be fair, the guy states that liquidation is different from administration. And that if they are liquidated then they lose their history.
He does not say that if the club are bought prior to the club being declared liquidated that their history is lost.
He confirms Leeds kept their history even though they are a NewCo.
posted on 9/4/12
Good to see your hard work bearing fruit,mitre. Keep it up
posted on 9/4/12
Tim,
If we agree a CVA for a pence in the £ ammount, it would be illegal to pay the football debts in full.
It would be giving preferential treatment to creditors.
posted on 9/4/12
'zilla
There's quite a lot.
The Insolvency Expert says that liquidation is where there is no buyer and the club completely collapses and you have to form a NEW Rangers that starts from the very beginning"
This flies in the face of mitre's argument and puts it to bed.
posted on 9/4/12
Ahm talking about dignity, mitre.
Paying a p in the pound, then going out and spending money on footballers.
Eeeeeugh yuck.
posted on 9/4/12
Cheers DC.
To be honest, the board is getting flooded by idiots from na606, who I have been ripping it out of for a few days.
I like the tims on here more than I like the bears on na606 so that says it all!
posted on 9/4/12
What's na606?
posted on 9/4/12
Mr freeze,
We have 4 bids in!
I think the club will find a buyer alright, even if it is only for £1!
posted on 9/4/12
You only have three bids in.
Do you actually know what's happening at your club?
posted on 9/4/12
Thats what you deserve when you leave ja606.
Traitor.
posted on 9/4/12
Sorry, I mean not606.
What one are you anyway? Let me guess rebelbhoy? or are you the one that signs of all posts with 'up the ra?'.
Aye, helping to solve the problems of the supports aint you.
The tims on here are all decent, if a bit stuborn, im sure they dont want you wasting the place.
posted on 9/4/12
Lol, pie.
Tell me about it!
Im not even allowed on the Rangers Board on not606. The moderator didnt let me in because I didnt include the terms (t@1g or f-onion) in my post!
Made me either a tim or a tim excuser! lol
posted on 9/4/12
Mr Freeze2012, interesting stuff.
I do believe that liquidation looks like the only way forward for them....I guess we'll find out soon enough.
posted on 9/4/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 9/4/12
MITRE JIST NAW................NAE MERR,
YER RIGHT, RANGERS ARE INNOCENT,
YOU HAVE PROVED IT TO MY SATISFACTION
posted on 9/4/12
Well I do know that the football creditor rule does not apply in scotland, and he does not.
Calls into question his knowledge of our situation do you not agree?
posted on 9/4/12
Well I do know that the football creditor rule does not apply in scotland, and he does not.
Calls into question his knowledge of our situation do you not agree?
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH FFS
posted on 9/4/12
Mitre thinks he knows more about the administration/liquidation process than an Insolvency Expert who was involved in the Leeds Utd administration
Let's ignore what the Insolvency Expert has to say and believe Mitre instead
By the way, this is the same Mitre who a few months ago was telling everyone on here that Celtic were DEFINITELY a new club as they were forced to become one in 1994.
posted on 9/4/12
Leo,
You know im right on that one though!
If a guy is held up as the fountain of knowledge on the case, you would think he would get the basics correct!
posted on 9/4/12
Oh and for the record.
The guy did not say that we could not be bought before liquidation.
He also said that Rangers have a higher wage bill than Celtic!!!!!
WTF
posted on 9/4/12
Mitre, the guy obviously is an expert in his field....And missing the football creditor rule is not a big issue.
It only becomes so if HMRC agree to a cva. Something tells me with the line up of clubs they're ready to sue after the Rangers case that they'll go out to prove a point and a cva will be rejected.....Just my opinion.
Page 1 of 15
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10