Jump to content

 

 

BrahimHemdani

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    11,099

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by BrahimHemdani

  1. BrahimHemdani
    You can send a complaint here info@visitscotland.com Suggested text: Dear Sirs, Why is Ibrox Stadium, Glasgow listed as a museum when all the other football stadia are listed as such, including Hampden Park which houses the Scottish Football Museum. Done.
  2. BrahimHemdani
    It IS there but it's listed as a museum http://www.visitscotland.com/info/see-do/ibrox-stadium-p559321 rather than a football stadium.
  3. BrahimHemdani
    Can I be your agent?
  4. BrahimHemdani
    The 2,000th view of this thread!
  5. BrahimHemdani
    The guys who are filming the Blue Bear Rises https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ph0UAvTrTaU&noredirect=1 would like to come along at around 3.00pm for about half an hour tops to get our impressions of the season past and our hopes for the future; Cristobal at the restauarnt is fine with this (obviously a wee bit of publicity for him). I have made it clear that this is subject to agreement from all those attending and that it must be restricted time wise to allow for less inhibited discussion after a few beers. :cheers: As has been said by those who have been filmed so far these guys are 100% genuine and there is no hidden agenda. Hopefully, you'll all want to be film stars and perhaps we might be joined by a few more Hollywood hopefuls.
  6. BrahimHemdani
    A good case for Judge Judy perhaps then.
  7. BrahimHemdani
    I agree with you on that, it is a very bold assumption indeed. One really has to wonder about the nature of these enquiries; have they asked the UoF about their true intentions, for example, did they toss a coin or cut cards perhaps or go to see a tarot card reader? And the auditors have made it abundantly clear that the going concern basis relies on these assumptions. It is 100% clear that given the threat of "season ticket holders divert(ing) payment away from the Club" the directors had two choices: 1) accept that the Club was not a going concern and all that implies; OR 2) make assumptions that would satisfy the auditors a rock and a hard place come to mind. Having agreed with you here, I think I'll quit for now and save my strength for the match review tomorrow.
  8. BrahimHemdani
    Maybe's aye maybe's no; but it's more than a chink in Mr Houston's armour, it's a ruddy great big hole.
  9. BrahimHemdani
    There will be a compromise but it will not include granting any form of legal security over the Club's principal assets. Both sides will come out saying they have achieved their goals.
  10. BrahimHemdani
    If Mr Houston had merely criticised the regime or allowed the regime to be criticised on his web site then provided the comments were true he would not be in any danger of being sued; it's the way he and the posters on his site have included personal attacks that is causing the issue; this site was warned for using simliar language was it not?
  11. BrahimHemdani
    And these are just some of the possible scenarios. The Board won't grant security over Ibrox and Murray Park because it ties their collective hands behind their collective backs. It is interesting to note that the drip-feed idea has now been consigned to the scrap heap and rightly so. If the Chairman's statement and the auditor's comments do not spell out the dangers clearly enough, then it is hard to imagine what would. If the company becomes unable to discharge its liabilities when they fall due then the prospect of a new insolvency event looms large. High stakes indeed.
  12. BrahimHemdani
    Surely that's the point; Mr Easdale hasn't threatened to sue Mr Houston for criticising his performance as a director, that would be ridiculous; he has threatened to sue because in his opinion and that of his lawyer, the comments objected to on the SoS web site were libellous and constitute actionable defamation because they are injurious to his business reputation and hence his business. Furthermore he then published a repition of said comments, which was ill-advised at best. Whether you think the comments were defamatory or not, they were a personal attack on Mr Easdale not on his performance as a director and even if they were, that would not be a proper use of the money that was collected for the benefit of the club. If the original aim of the fund had included a statement along the lines of The 'Rangers Fans Fighting Fund' will allow supporters to make cash donations towards the club's running costs and the Fund may also may be used to defend prominent fans from actions for defamation raised by Directors of the Club would it have achieved the same level of contributions or indeed any contributions? Wouldn't it rightly have been said at the time that a fund to help save the club is one thing and it's needed now; a fund to defend a fan from a defamation action is quite another and may hopefully not be needed at all.
  13. BrahimHemdani
    How would the Board "force" a season ticket boycott or force fans to do or not do anything, sorry I don't get that.
  14. BrahimHemdani
    Fair enough. Let me put it another way. I don't agree that the comments about material uncertainty and the possibility that the club is not a going concern are "putting a gun to the heads of the season ticket holders"; they are the subjective opinion of the auditors given public comments about the possibility of such action.
  15. BrahimHemdani
    What is being said here is that the possibility of a ST boycott ITSELF creates material uncertainty of the kind that means that the possibility that the club is not a going concern is something that has to be considered. These are subjective accounting and auditing considerations that could have led to adjustments to the accounts. This sentence is critical It is obvious that this has been subject to debate and it is possible that that debate led to a delay in the accounts being published.
  16. BrahimHemdani
    I doubt they would see it that way. They have highlighted the auditors concerns and reading between the lines the going concern basis has clearly been a close run thing.
  17. BrahimHemdani
    A question I've asked on the other thread. The website is temporarily unavailable If the Trustees say that it is constitutional to hold such a meeting and that members/contributors can determine that the monies be used for a purpose that was not part of the stated aims of the Fund (IF that is indeed the case) then they should publish the constitution and highlight any sections that they are relying on.
  18. BrahimHemdani
    The RFFF web site is "temporarily unavailable" and apparently the financial records were removed at some point but I found its aims here: http://m.realradio-scotland.co.uk/my-real/news/rangers-fc-in-turmoil/fans-fighting-fund-launched/0c54c Rangers legends Walter Smith, Ally McCoist and Sandy Jardine have launched the 'Rangers Fans Fighting Fund'. They're asking supporters worldwide to back the club they love by making donations to generate revenue throughout the administration process and beyond. The 'Rangers Fans Fighting Fund' will allow supporters to make cash donations towards the club's running costs. A media release from Rangers said: "This Fund compliments the Club's own initiatives to sell out the remaining games of the season at Ibrox. "Money raised through the 'Fighting Fund' will go to the Club's running costs and supporters can contribute right now to the secured Rangers Assembly bank account." Whatever one's views of Mr Houston or the threat of litigation against him, contributing to his legal fees does not appear to be consistent with those aims and I don't see how a vote of members could change that since contributions were made presumably on the basis of the aims. Does the RFFF have a constitution and if so would such a meeting be constitutional? I would suggest that if folks want to support Mr Houston financially a separate fund is established for that specific purpose.
  19. BrahimHemdani
    With power comes responsibility; that responsibility must be taken very seriously in the light of the material uncertainty which the action referred to creates.
  20. BrahimHemdani
    Whatever one thinks of Mr Summers these comments are highly significant; In implementing a professional basis for managing the Club, it remains a significant concern that external comment and ill-informed opinion continues to create uncertainty with regard to future income and cash flows. In particular, recent public comments suggesting season ticket holders divert payment away from the Club has caused a level of uncertainty over the timing and quantum of season ticket cash flowing into the Club, which as with many other football clubs, is Rangers' primary source of income. If this were to happen then there would be a negative impact on short-term cash balances and it is possible that the Club may need to seek alternative additional short term financing. This clearly would not be in the best interests of Rangers and would likely have a significant impact on our ability to progress the development of the Club in the planned manner. This possibility results in the existence of a material uncertainty which may cast doubt about Rangers' ability to continue as a going concern and therefore that the Company may be unable to realise its assets and discharge its liabilities in the normal course of business. Nevertheless, after making the appropriate enquiries and considering the uncertainties referred to above, the directors have concluded that there is a reasonable expectation that the Company has adequate resources to continue in operational existence for the foreseeable future. Accordingly, the directors continue to adopt the going concern basis in preparing the Interim results. Since the founding of the Club in 1872, supporters have, year after year, provided the working capital of the Club through ticket sales. Also providing capital were private individuals who subscribed for shares throughout the life of the Club. This model broke down when Rangers entered administration. The Club could only continue to survive and play football with the help of Rangers supporters and those who subscribed for shares at the IPO in December 2012. Many of those shareholders are fans and lifelong supporters. However, the bulk of the funds came from institutional investors. Both groups are stakeholders in the Company and must work together to help rebuild Rangers and ensure it has a successful, stable and sustainable future.
  21. BrahimHemdani
    The money I take it you're referring to BD, no probs.
  22. BrahimHemdani
    Thanks to a number of guys who have now "followed" and/or retweeted the VILLA FOR SALE 35 minutes from Alicante airport tweet. Hard to keep up with this!
  23. BrahimHemdani
    Extremely generous of you BD; please send to the bank account details provided by PM. :cheers: Frankie, you have to be good for at least double that
  24. BrahimHemdani
    Fair point probably a misuse of the word; but of course I meant "Alert" as in "advise" the change of time not "alert" as in danger warning!
  25. BrahimHemdani
    That's all agreed then; I'll alert the restaurant.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.