Jim1955

Will HMRC agree to some creditors getting more favourable treatment?

A decent player for a number of years, my best wishes go with him.

Just pleased to see some movement, finally.

If i have understood all the various claims about monies owed by and monies due to Rangers regarding football transactions then we have more debtors than creditors. I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong. I appreciate that the SPL may be talking about claims between member clubs but football is bigger than the SPL. We are owed more than we owe when it comes to football debts. That said, it's another sign that, maybe, the SPL are starting to recognise the whirlwind that they have sown.

Apparently a 19 year old youth has been arrested and appearing at Glasgow Sherriff Court today.

I'm confused ( no surprise there ) can someone explain in simple, clear terms just exactly what the difference is between a "newco" and what celtic did when they changed their corporate name from cfac ltd to celtic plc.

Their not the sharpest of tools in the box.

 

I blame the schools.

Was obliged to have a wee chuckle there.

The top two are OK but the bottom one is offensive.[/Q

 

It certainly is offensive, they have spelt football with one L.

This has happened a couple of times recentlyand I'm disappointed, though not really surprised, at the lack of response from Nil by Mouth.

The fixtures post split is yet another area that has to be looked at.

Translated means, please don't boycott us because we are already in the shitter.

Tough.........

Reap the whirlwind, idiot. You were one of those that started it, be under no illusions we will finish it.

I know that but I'm just quoting the Rangers Tax Case blog, wonder if they'll use the same interpretation when it comes to the shit on their own doorstep.

I should have known that. Is there something similar on the horizon for the yahoos?

Fs you might want to edit your post, tax avoidance is not illegal but tax evasion is. That said a good post.

I would be more than happy to call their bluff, because that's all it is.

Has Ally been told? He was keen to find out!

For speculation's sake, I'd say anything from £2-10million...

I won't disagree. I dont think the destruction of the club matters to him but the value of the club's property does.

Just how much is this character holding out for? Best guesses anyone?

For what it's worth I think Ally was hinting at a M.A.D. scenario. Mutually assured destruction. He was robustly telling the SFA to back off or we wouldn't be the only club put out of business.

So this is why it was opposed.

This could get very interesting.

The SFA has an Achilles heel and it offers a better target and more chance of success than any protest march. Their weakness is their reliance on 2 main corporate sponsors: Carling and William Hill. In the first instance we should refuse to enter next season's Scottish cup citing supporters disgust at the attitude of the SFA to Scotland's best supported team. Every supporter should email both Hill's and Carling and explain in civil terms that they regard both firm's to have tarnished their reputation by their sponsorship of the SFA and that as a result they will no longer be using either company's products or services. I can just as easily donate my money to Ladbrokes and while I don't drink lager, I'm pretty sure I can find other beers or spirits, produced by the same group, that I must regretfully stop buying and transfer my affections elsewhere. No risk of any civil disorder and I reckon the shower of ne'er do wells at the SFA are more likely to listen to the moneymen.

What it says in the title according to STV on twitter.

Can anyone say for definite if Rangers put a sell on clause in the deal with Everton? He's had a good start and it's quite possible that some bigger Epl sides might be looking at him.

Miller's bid has at least one virtue, it seems to have injected, a much needed, note of urgency into the equation. Hopefully pencils are being sharpened this weekend.