Jump to content

 

 

forlanssister

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    12,284

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

 Content Type 

Everything posted by forlanssister

  1. forlanssister
    It will be one of their signatures on the bill of sale not any of ours.
  2. forlanssister
    Or hold a fire sale of assets, well at least the ones you didn't grant security over half way through last season when season ticket sales were 36k.
  3. forlanssister
    You're really clutching at straws now, their budget has been blown to f*&k by the non renewal of season tickets that's crystal clear. The 36k figure is the one given by the board when bigging themselves up, the mid season ones will have been 2k at most. I doubt Deloittes will provide them such leeway to make such bold assumptions in the next going concern statement. If my business's main revenue source fell by such a percentage me and by bank managers would be bricking it as would most others.
  4. forlanssister
    From the same six month accounts. Whatever way you want to dress it up sub 30k is disastrous when you've budgeted for a "modest" increase on 36k.
  5. forlanssister
    They budgeted for an increase in season ticket sales.
  6. forlanssister
    1) They got greedy, pure and simple. 2) They got greedy, pure and simple.
  7. forlanssister
    Do they not realise that every time they come out and state that Ibrox is not for sale, leaseback whatever that more and more people become convinced that Murray Park/Auchenhowie is a goner?
  8. forlanssister
    Having spent six and a half years pursuing a litigation claim I am aware how they work and play out. The administrators pursued a claim for £25m not £100m that is an indisputable fact, BDO maintained that claim at £25m. Given the similarity of the amount claimed and the reputed settlement it would appear Collyer Bristow's insurers knew they were on a hiding to nothing. Personally my guess was it would be settled on the steps of the court for £10-15m. There may well have been a settlement regardless and for all we know it may well have been a lot less had Paul Murray not attempted a re-capitalisation. However it is clear from the reports in The Lawyer that the conspiracy to deny RFC plc the re-capitalisation was where the administrators, liquidators and there respective legal teams thought they would receive most joy.
  9. forlanssister
    Ticketus are ordinary creditors same as debenture holders, the guy that runs the paper shop, the guy that printed the programmes etc, etc, no more, no less. Lord Hodge awarded them f*&k all. The reason they are going after Whyte as already pointed out to you is that he gave a personal guarantee that's totally irrelevant with regards to anything Lord Hodge did or said.
  10. forlanssister
    They thought they were secured creditors but Lord Hodge effectively said they were merely ordinary creditors, whatever way you want to dress it up they're creditors of RFC plc.
  11. forlanssister
    Then the claim would have been for your mythical £100m + rather than the actual £25m claim in the litigation. Funny why the lawyers for RFC plc felt the need to even mention Paul Murray in court if he was so irrelevant. In any event I've yet to see irrefutable proof that the claim has actually been settled.
  12. forlanssister
    From the administrators report. No sign of of being in excess of £100m eh?
  13. forlanssister
    No it wasn't the claim for the £3.6m was because the administrators claimed the money belonged to RFC plc.
  14. forlanssister
    The original claim was merely for the monies laying in the Collyer Bristow client account circa £3.6m.
  15. forlanssister
    The claim against Collyer Bristow was for the £25m investment the club was denied by opting for the Whyte £1 "purchase" as opposed to the £25m re-capitalisation from a Paul Murray fronted consortium. There's a misconception that Paul Murray tried to buy the club in 2011 he didn't it was a re-capitalisation which is something very different.
  16. forlanssister
    Indeed but yet so few actually realise this.
  17. forlanssister
    Hopefully someone who has never even heard of Largs let alone been there!
  18. forlanssister
    They were a debt owed by oldco to the bond holders no if's or but's will change that. Lord Hodge stated that the Ticketus debt did not rank above ordinary creditors effectively making them ordinary creditors at the time, Lord Glennie had nothing to do with the administration his ruling was in regards to the SFA's transfer ban.
  19. forlanssister
    £7m worth of debentures for a start.
  20. forlanssister
    He's fit, technically decent and two footed a half decent coach should be able to make a player out of him.
  21. forlanssister
    Thought he looked half decent went he went to right back the other night certainly no worse than any of the others who take turns to play there. Probably the only genuine two footed player we have too.
  22. forlanssister
    You think a business turning over circa £19m should fork out the fat end of £1m for a CEO with no previous experience and came from the dole queue? We were turning over £60m + when Bain was CEO.
  23. forlanssister
    Well Easdale, Somers and Crighton were there when Wallace was handed his onerous contract. Easdale, Somers, Crighton and Wallace were there when Laxey were handed their (since superceded) onerous contract.
  24. forlanssister
    Really? Our esteemed CEO, present Chairman, present Directors and Deloittes our auditors were unaware but somehow Malcolm Murray had to know?
  25. forlanssister
    Whist I have no great objection in principle to using asset based finance, my own business for example could not function without doing so and it is a perfectively normal and useful tool of business. However in saying that there is the caveat of trust and there isn't a single member of the present board that I would trust to ensure any such deal is properly constructed and for the benefit of the club as opposed to certain office bearers and shareholders. We are unable to move forward as long as we are run and controlled by those who see the club as nothing more than a vehicle for personal enrichment or in the Easdales case an attempt to buy credibility.
×
×
  • 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.