The media are playing games, ..stv come up with an "exclusive: which they manipulate and milk, so baw brained Chick on the bbc has to try and trump it......tis why I rarely read anything that the scottish media has to say...

off to my kip, dont you lot be up all night

Dos I agree.

CVA was never an option.

Whyte was however a necessity that at on point was needed. Now the question is what was agreed.

While I admit there are clearly timing issues between what is being shown and the legal transaction - and the effort to discredit Charles as a wholesome person it seems - I can say that there is more to come out....asset ownership is very much debatable...

Later Lauders

Speak tomorrow lads

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

laudo, stone taken oot the day...........AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH

The media are playing games, ..stv come up with an "exclusive: which they manipulate and milk, so baw brained Chick on the bbc has to try and trump it......tis why I rarely read anything that the scottish media has to say...
---------------------
you would think charles has upset some within scottish football?

bigger story tonight is that the spl have still refused to let the sfl see vital financial information prior to vote..

what have they to hide?

where is the tv deal? where are the sponsership deals? are they contingant upon securing Rangers tv rights?

will the spl be bankrupt if the "re-organisation" doesnt go ahead?

far more important to scottish football than what happened to Rangers 12 mths ago with no bearing on where the club is now.

asset ownership is very much debatable
--------------
no it isnt.

laudo, stone taken oot the day...........AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH

Joss ???

the surgeon wiz nicknamed vlad

Leo.

I take it you had a Procedure ?

If so I hope it went well.




2 fellas went down the other day for trying to take out Joss Stone.

Did you get wan taken oot ???

<the surgeon wiz nicknamed vlad>


Whaur did he impale ye laddie ?

vlad might have been the cant who impaled me with an endoscope...

with ten students looking on.

still cannnie pee straight

right up the flute mighty....................ouch

Jeez oh.

Can we no talk about the War in Ireland or summat less queasy ?

ffs promise the mrs a messy facial and end splashing ma ain pillow

Offski now - got an early start.

Wishing ye well Leo.

aye hope yer better leo

gnite mighty

cheers dos

Hope yir boaby's fvckin sore.

its fackin agony

Didn't see the program and I do believe there's a bit of a witchunt against green going on in the media, but, my understanding is the same as tafkas.

The assets were sold to sev co 5088 then transferred to sev co Scotland a few days later. This would probably leave green n co on dodgy grounds?!?

I have backed green and said all along I would until something properly negative came out, which it now is starting to IMO.

Just when you think how desperate Whyte was to get dnp, then green just appearing from nowhere with Whytes shares.

Whether Whyte n green are still working together , or green bumped Whyte , there is defo something a wee bit fishy IMO.

If it turns out green has bumped Whyte , I won't be too bothered. But the legalities of it all may be a problem

Here is an extract from the D&P interim report dated 10 July 2012:

"4.1 The Club continued to trade under the control of the Joint Administrators up to the date of the sale of the business and assets of the Company to Se vco on 14 June 2012."

"Se vco" is defined in the report as: "Se vco Scotland Limited of Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow G51 2XD (Company number SC425159)"

In the D&P final report dated 27 September 2012, they stated:

"7.1 A detailed outline of the marketing process undertaken by the Joint Administrators which preceded the sale of the business, history and certain assets of the Club to Newco on 14 June 2012, was provided in the previous report to creditors dated 10 July 2012."

"Newco" is defined in this report as "The Rangers Football Club Limited (Formerly Se vco Scotland Limited) of Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow G51 2XD (Company number SC425159)"

Going by this the sellers ie the administrators never at any time sold the business to se v co 5088.

Duke looks that way from what's been posted there, but I do seem to remember at the time the sale went thru it was transferred from one sev co to the other?!? Hope I'm wrong but as I've posted, a few things are really not starting to add up for me.