Jump to content

 

 

barca72

 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,356

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by barca72

  1. barca72

    Redundancies

    barca72 replied to BEARGER's topic in Rangers Chat

    How would you know that for sure? Has someone told you this is so?
  2. barca72
    I was thinking more along the lines of registering and recording discontent of the actions of the board in the event that the board is ever brought to task for what could conceivably be called 'failing in their fiduciary duty to the company', hence the reference to the vote. In lieu of the court actions proceeding against the other four plus Whyte at the moment, I was looking for a legal instrument that could be used against the board in future, and presently registered as minority shareholder concern and alarm.
  3. barca72
    Is there a mechanism whereby the shareholders, other than the institutional shareholders, can meaningfully display their displeasure with the board's actions here? Other than calling for a vote to replace them.
  4. barca72

    Redundancies

    barca72 replied to BEARGER's topic in Rangers Chat

    Some things are just ironic, eh, BH?
  5. barca72
    Where is Andrew Ellis in all of this? Didn't he once threaten to sue Whyte for a 25% stake in the company he claimed Whyte owed him for setting up the deal?
  6. barca72
    Who knows Rab , http://desmondcheyne.wordpress.com/2014/08/25/benefits-of-the-proceeds-of-crime-act-2002/ Benefits of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 ... The Act permits enforcement authorities to seek out and obtain profits earned via crime by those who have committed such crimes. Those assets are retained right at the beginning of confiscation proceedings, in order to deter criminal activities while the action is pending. Sometimes, a criminal conviction simply is not possible, which would then prevent the ability to obtain an order for confiscation. In those instances, instead of proceeding under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, a civil action can be initiated in an attempt to show that the assets were most likely obtained due to conduct that was unlawful, with the standard being the balance of probabilities. When cash is in question, a constable or HMRC officer might be able to utilise cash seizure powers when there is a reason to believe the cash was obtained or used in furtherance of conduct which is unlawful. However unlikely it seems, that reads to me that if Whyte is found guilty, the money he paid to LBG could be seized since the money paid to them was money that was obtained by conduct that was unlawful. Should the money Whyte paid to LBG be seized, LBG would then need to sue Whyte for their money just as Ticketus has done. http://www.articlesbase.com/criminal-articles/proceeds-of-crime-the-law-explained-2164595.html CONFISCATION PROCEEDINGS under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 can be complex and rather draconian. There are four Assumptions as follows: 1. Any property transferred to the Defendant within the six year period that preceded the start of the proceedings for this offence(s) was obtained by him as a result of his general criminal conduct and at the earliest time he appears to have held it. ... The sting in the tail is that if the sum ordered is not paid, there are fixed periods of imprisonment to be ordered in the case of default. This is often a very painful process.
  7. barca72
    Agreed. The SFA are covering their bases in case those fools, who appear at the C1888c games, sing their IRA songs. If it was my child I would be offended at them applauding my son's death. If they can't give him a minute's silence in respect, then don't acknowledge his death at all.
  8. barca72
    Just like the Mepps H210 spinner gets the biggest Muskies, so too does the good guy get the ooooffffttt. LoL.
  9. barca72
    That sounds encouraging.
  10. barca72
    Assuming that these interlinked cases came to a favourable conclusion and fraud and criminality was proven, is there any way that the original shareholders - the victims of unlawful activity - would be allowed to become the owners of the company again? Or has too much water passed under the bridge and they would only be allowed some kind of monetary judgement, which they might never see?
  11. barca72
    It's all archived. Fill your boots. https://footballtaxhavens.wordpress.com/author/footballtaxhavens/
  12. barca72
    My problem with this dismissal is transparency. With BH fired, and FS giving testimony to the fact he was not one of the complainants, this leaves us with two out of the remaining ten who could be seen as the complainants. But who are they and if we don't know that, how can we trust any of them? I decided to ask my representative on the board directly, and I would urge a member of each category to do the same. Here is my exchange with my representative ... Hi XXXXXXX, Of course - I have no problem with that at all. All the best, Gary Gillan Overseas Rep Rangers Fans Board On November 13, 2014, XX wrote: Hi Gary, Thank you for your prompt reply. In the interests of transparency, can I have your permission to publish this reply on a couple of the fans’ forums? Thank you & oblige XXXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX True Blues. Sent from Windows Mail From: garygillan@rangersfansboard.co.uk Sent: ‎Thursday‎, ‎November‎ ‎13‎, ‎2014 ‎3‎:‎21‎ ‎PM To: XX Hi XXXXXXX, Thanks for getting in touch and for being so forthright in your questions. I was not one of the complainants. Apparently there were two from inside RFB and one from the general public. On the contrary, Alan and I got on very well and were in regular dialogue throughout his tenure on the RFB. I'm surprised that he was removed, but it is Rangers' call and I have my job to do to make sure the RFB is as much of a success as it can possibly be, which I will continue to do. Follow Follow! Gary Gillan Overseas Rep Rangers Fans Board On November 13, 2014, XX wrote: Dear Gary, I have just finished reading of the dismissal of Alan Harris from the RFB. Since the man was not allowed to know who the complainants were, I should like to ask you if you were one of them. If you were, what were your reasons for requesting his dismissal? Thank you & oblige, XXXXXXX XXXXXXX, XXXXXXX True Blues. Sent from Windows Mail
  13. barca72
    Are you sure these decisions are being made by Sinclair? Maybe he wanted to give some of them contracts but these were denied further up the foodchain.
  14. barca72
    I am sorry to hear of your dismissal BH. We don't need to know who complained, it could have been anyone on the RFB, apart from FS, and the member of the public could have been a Rangers' board member. Either way it stinks. From the grilling you took on this forum at least, I thought all you revealed was your intent going forward rather than any content of the meeting which could had discomfited any colleague on the RFB. If, and this is how it looks to me, they don't want to answer the hard questions and are uncomfortable with transparently publishing the minutes, then they have just shot themselves in the foot. We have had enough of intrigue and deceit. The best thing they can do now would be to shut down the RFB, who will believe them now? Maybe your dismissal was a blessing in disguise !!
  15. barca72
    Que sera, sera !!!
  16. barca72
    Is this a postage problem, I'd be happy to pay the difference?
  17. barca72
    C'mon SC, you have proven your mental acuity on several occasions. Both teams are standing in the easy position with their hands behind their backs and heads bowed in respect. Why would this man grab his 'boaby' in public and hold it there for over a minute? Other than to make a public statement of insult, can you figure some other reason? As McLean said ' It is just a part of who we are, ingrained into us from birth. ' If I was inclined to say anything to these men and their culture it might run along the lines of Rabbie, 'O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!'
  18. barca72
    I've had a look at this post a few times and I still can't make up my mind if the question is genuine. Let's assume it is. Let's compare Stokes' actions with another ROI player - James McClean. We know that McClean refused to wear the poppy and he gave us a written letter ( composed by who knows ? ). He, however, received a congratulatory tweet from the esteemed Deputy First Minister of the Assembly in Ulster, and convicted IRA terrorist, Martin McGuiness. His reason given is - 'It is just a part of who we are, ingrained into us from birth.' See the article for context here - http://www.u.tv/News/McClean-a-credit-McGuinness/bb5e39ba-b81c-4c9a-94e2-b4d8fcc76252 Stokes on the other hand preferred to be more graphic in his message. No doubt he will expect a similar congratulatory tweet from his friends in the Real IRA. It is interesting to note that their Taoiseach Enda Kenny attended a commemoration at Enniskillen, attempting to build on warming relations between Republican Ireland and the U.K. No doubt in both of the footballers' cases they were extending to the British and their culture a big huge 'F*$K You'. Message received and understood from both of these forlorn souls.
  19. barca72
    He still won two promotions in a row, running away from the packs; even if they were plumbers and pizza delivery drivers.
  20. barca72
    MacDonald - Sittler - Thompson, that was their best chance since '67. They will continue with glorious defeats forever. With their money that is strange, eh?
  21. barca72
    I think in all probability we are celebrating the service and sacrifice of all Armed Forces personnel who have given so much in all conflicts during the 100 year period of 1914-2014. The conflict of 1914-1918 being the first World War, allows all nations everywhere to have a unified expression of thanks to those who gave so much. Here is a website that gives a good explanation of the 'The Memorial Garden - 'Flanders Fields 1914-2014' Memorial Garden' ... http://www.memorial2014.com/en/memorial_garden p.s. When are the Oilers ever going to get it right?
  22. barca72
    In that vein then, maybe we could have someone else from this forum and BH'S colleague on the RFB - namely ForlansSister - be good enough to give us the report and explain the minutes from the next meeting. This would surely share the workload for both reps, given that there is no secretary in place yet for the RFB. Would you be prepared to take on this time and effort FS?
  23. barca72
    Well played, BH. You have shown infinite patience under this barrage of acerbic posts. I know you expected a certain amount of pressure but this appears to be OTT. No doubt the patience and acuity you have shown will come in handy when dealing with Ashley's board. Thanks for volunteering !
  24. barca72
    Have you got a link to that story?
  25. barca72
    http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/academy-news/item/8014-loan-watch Wednesday, 05 November 2014 14:30 Loan Watch Written by Alice Hedworth Loan Watch KYLE McAusland continued his goal scoring for Brechin City - here is this week's Loan Watch. Kyle McAusland – Brechin City McAusland made it two goals in two games as he helped Brechin City progress to the next round of the Scottish Cup against Stenhousemuir - the 21-year old has netted three times in his past four games for his loan side. His goal came in the 52nd minute as the ball found its way to him on the edge of the box and he lifted his shot over the goalkeeper. McAusland had been pushed up into a midfield rather than his customary right back position for the cup tie. Tom Walsh – Stenhousemuir That cup win came against Tom Walsh’s current team and he played all 90 minutes of his team’s 2-1 loss. Robbie Crawford – Greenock Morton Ally McCoist gave Crawford permission to play in Greenock Morton’s Scottish Cup game against Airdire – it will mean he cannot play for Rangers this season in the same tournament. The 21-year old came on as a substitute in the 77th minute of the 0-0 draw. Luca Gasparotto – Airdrieonians Gasparotto played the whole 90 minutes in the opposing team to Robbie Crawford. And the young Canadian had a chance to win the game in the final minute, but sent his header over the crossbar. Barrie McKay – Raith Rovers McKay was an unused substitute in Raith’s 2-0 Cup victory over Linlithgow Rovers. Daniel Stoney – Stranraer Stranraer played Peterhead twice in the week, once in the league and then again in the Scottish Cup. Stoney was a 74th minute substitute in the league fixture and scored the fifth and final goal of their 5-0 win – breaking away from the Peterhead defence before slotting the ball home. Stoney was limited to an 84th minute appearance off the bench in the Cup game, as Stranraer won 1-0. Craig Halkett – Clyde Halkett came back into the Scottish Cup squad after missing the last few weeks with an injury. He appeared as a substitute at the start of the second half, as Barry Ferguson’s side were beaten 2-0 by Spartans – A Lowland League side.
×
×
  • 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.