rbr 1,247 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 The coppers-in-the-pound creditors may have something to say about that. They can say what they want , football debt must be repaid in full 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 They can say what they want , football debt must be repaid in full According to who? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crimson Dynamo 128 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 This has probably been answered already but. At one of the original press conferences by the admins it was stated that another company called Rangers owned all the assets ie Ibrox and Murray Park and was solvent. What has happened to that company? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 According to who? Frazer Wishart recently and also in the case of Portsmouth first admin around they had to sell players to get money to pay for players bought , its also on the UEFA statute somewhere 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Frazer Wishart recently and also in the case of Portsmouth first admin around they had to sell players to get money to pay for players bought , its also on the UEFA statute somewhere The football creditors rule doesn't apply in Scotland. Yet.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 0 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 Frazer Wishart recently and also in the case of Portsmouth first admin around they had to sell players to get money to pay for players bought , its also on the UEFA statute somewhere Thanks, mate. There's a football creditors rule in England, but it doesn't apply in Scotland. UEFA can/will impose sanctions for non-payment to other clubs. I didn't hear what Wishart had to say on the subject, but would be interested to read it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,292 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 On a sidenote, you'd hope that UEFA and Co. see sense here. IMHO, Whyte gambled with the future of the club and apparently failed (for numerous reasons, not solely his own). Still, to drag the club and the support into this and the aftermath would be aking to the Nick Leeson affair and Barings bank. While questions should be asked about Whyte's behaviour in general, who could have prevented him from doing this and who actually failed all along the way as well ... namely HMRC and the SFA? If they want to charge Rangers FC and its support for sins of essentially one man, wouldn't it be consequently right to charge themselves too? As strange as it may seem. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 I wasnt talking about the football creditors rule 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,186 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 HMRC don't approve CVA unless creditors are treated equally. It's on their charter. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,292 Posted May 4, 2012 Share Posted May 4, 2012 So is it upon us again to save the club's blushes and pay the football debts from e.g. the Fighting Fund ... and calling in some of the pledges made by the support? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.