Ergatrude
-
Posts
1,403 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ergatrude
-
-
I remember when I was first considering giving up my TV license, they said that even if I had a video recorder in the house, I needed a TV lecense. I've got access to a video/TV comby and many old style vidoes, so, by rights, I should be able to watch these vids as the video would not be able to record digital programs.
Actually, I'd better read that link you're posted first, doh!
I was told when I cancelled my TV license that I would require one even for owning a mobile phone as it could receive a TV signal, whether I watched it or not.
The links that Sairdy posted seem to show otherwise. I pay for sky anyway, so I'm fooked either way.
0 -
-
I thought that you required a tv license if you had any equipment capable of receiving live TV, regardless of whether you watch it or not.
0 -
This is the survey related to this subject of a new Rangers company that one of CQN Paul's cohorts and faithful followers started up - http://www.zoomerang.com/Survey/WEB22DJKZJRULU
This is either fake or really slow. I filled it out as a Clyde fan & chose "yes" to the question about Rangers being put back into the SPL. I then saw the chart and low and behold Clyde still has 0% yes votes.
0 -
Did the BBC write this? Haha. It starts of as "suppose" Rangers formed a new company blah blah blah & by the end it's talking as if it's already happened & that we are threatening the league. Fuckwits.
0 -
GovanAllan makes a fair point. We all know who started all this - and how they loved it when it was open season on us. The backlash on this Bill has only started in earnest when they realised that they were going to be targeted too - which they are, and will be. The days of the IRAoke are drawing to a close.
What they want now is a return to the grey area they had before. Shout the loudest, be offended the most. Write to UEFA, FARE etc etc and call the sectarian card, while remembering to play the "it's purely political" one.
Nope. Pandora time. The box is about to open, never to be shut.
Lots have said it. Reap what ye sow. Or in other words, those who live by the sword, die by the sword.
I don't disagree at all, but at the same time I want to be able to go to Ibrox & not have to walk on eggshells in fear of being ejected. So the sooner everything is resolved the better.
0 -
Comedy on BBC2 just now.. :-p
0 -
How about we all cancel our TV license, then we turn every single TV in our houses on to BBC channels. So not only are we not paying them, they are working for us anyway?
0 -
So this guy thinks it's free speech for a Republican sympathiser to come to Scotland and shout "up the ra" ? so by extension i could travel to his home and shout "FTP" and "kill all Catholics" and he would be happy about me doing it?
No, he doesn't think it is alright, the point is about point scoring & fairness in sentencing.
0 -
Actually as soon as I typed that I remembered that the guy who attacked Lemon was charged for religiously aggravated assault, but they couldnt prove it was motivated by religion. Which is why it was all dropped. If they had charged him with assault I'm sure he would have been punished.
Sorry Bluedell.
0 -
Did he spend 4 months in prison before it was dropped? I thought the Times had reported at one point that he was on bail until the trial. Well, even still, 8 months for trash talk compared to 4 months for attempted assault (no matter how much I dislike the person) isn't fair.
0 -
-
Whilst I agree with the principle of freedom of speech, I would also agree that some people should at least consider other people before they abuse the privilege.
At the same time I also agree with the article's main point. In my opinion the point is that what Stephen Birrell said is wrong, no one would deny that, but that the punishment which he received in comparison to other offences is unfair. How can a man receive a prison term for something he said & another man escape unpunished for an assault caught on camera in front of 30,000+ people?
This sort of justice doesn't send out any clear messages or act as any warning, what it actually does is increase both sides efforts to criminalise the other by points scoring.
I also agree with Bluedell that it's taken a while for a Celtic minded person to come forward & say this after they all seemed to be whistling another tune. At the same time though,does it matter? As long as the outcome is that the legislation is clear & fair then, in my opinion, it doesn't matter how long it takes everyone to get on the same page.
In conclusion, I like agree'ing with things :cheers:
0 -
Well said.
0 -
Hateley or Numan.
0 -
It's fine mate. The problem for us all is, that with the lack of information that we do get, even generally reliable sources are coming away with stuff that is speculation. Apparently adding words like 'perhaps' gives people a free reign to say what they like. Reminds me of a documentary I once saw that kept using the words 'allegedly' at the beginning of every sentence.
0 -
Nah, I can see his point. Reading my original post even I would assume I was talking matter of factly, which I wasn't supposed to be. I would have a bash at trying to sort my original post out, but after 13 hours at work & a few beers topped off with the fact I'm posting from my GF's rubbish laptop I'd rather not!
0 -
Jeez, I think maybe CW should consider hiring you as his lawyer.
My entire post was always going to be speculation & opinion based on what I had read. No-one trully knows what is happening at Rangers at the moment as we are only given tiny snippets of information to take as we understand which is what I, like many others, have attempted. From your replies a few things have been taken out of context from how I meant them & since your reply seems not only mocking, but slightly angry I'm not even going to try to fix it. I'm not good at this, I just had an opinion and felt like sharing it. I am sorry.
0 -
Where is the proof that This money is being added to the debt owed to Whyte ? The catering kiosk refurbishment is being paid by the caterers, not RFC.
It is highy unlikely that things such as players wages are being added to the debt owed to CW unless you believe that the club doesn't have the cash-flow to support it's working capital.
Besides, care to tell me what advantage there is in being the largest creditor ? There is no advantage unless you are a secured creditor, which CW's company may be. But by running up a debt to himself I see no real advantage in the event of an administration.
By running up bt to himself and not the club it gives e club a healthier look to it - that has no benefit in an administration, all it means is the assets are higher.... And the preferred creditor gets first bite.
Running up debts to be the largest creditot serves no purpose at all as far as I can see.
Tell me ergatrude, what benefit is there?
There isn't really any proof, it's just taken from stuff he & his representatives have said all along at different stages, including before the takeover was complete.
Firstly, when I say the catering stuff etc, it is the contract that is paid by his company.
The 'debt' to his company isn't really a debt, it's a guarantee. As he has said before, if we win the tax case, it will be written off. He has also said before that Rangers spends more than it makes & this will need to be brought in line, the overspend will be what is added to the holding company.
The benefits are that once the company enters administration & CW becomes the biggest creditor then he will have priority over HMRC. We would still owe them their money & they would have to be paid, but CW would be the priority. I think it is merely an effort to buy us some time or to ensure he doesn't end up personally bust in the worst case scenario.
Also, as for the secured creditor thing, pure speculation, maybe that is what Ellis & co are involved for?
0 -
The biggest creditor will be Craig Whyte. The way it has been structured is that Glasgow Rangers owe the company Wavetower, or whatever it is called, something in the region of £50m. £18m Lloyds debt, £25m transfer revenue (released by 2016 but still owed to his company), running costs so far (remember the big cleaning & catering deal), players wages, the stadium upgrades & everything else. These costs are being paid & added to the companies tab so that in the event of administration Craig Whyte will be the largest creditor regardless of what happens. He is extremely smart for an 'alleged' criminal failure.
0 -
Mulgrew scored. Celtic 2 - Dons 1
0 -
1-1 Ryan Jack.
0 -
-
Received a txt or 3 tonight saying Marvin Andrews has signed for Rob Roy. Is this a wind-up?
0
Welcome Thread
in Rangers Chat
Posted
Welcome