the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 hes missed a rather important step then as i pointed out to him on ff 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,267 Posted April 12, 2013 Author Share Posted April 12, 2013 hes missed a rather important step then as i pointed out to him on ff Yes, but unless I am mistaken here, that was pre-CVA and became irrelevant after the CVA failed? As can be seen from post-CVA and final statements from the admins. Sevco 5088 had nothing to do with Rangers after the CVA failed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 Yes, but unless I am mistaken here, that was pre-CVA and became irrelevant after the CVA failed? As can be seen from post-CVA and final statements from the admins. Sevco 5088 had nothing to do with Rangers after the CVA failed. yes but its not something you can ignore or wipe from history. what if we had got a cva? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 Yes, but unless I am mistaken here, that was pre-CVA and became irrelevant after the CVA failed? As can be seen from post-CVA and final statements from the admins. Sevco 5088 had nothing to do with Rangers after the CVA failed. Nothing but an exclusive and binding agreement to purchase the assets for £5.5m according to Duff & Phelps. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 so it wasn't just the cva deal that delivered the assets to sevco 5088 but the asset sale as well? in terms of the agreement i mean. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 so it wasn't just the cva deal that delivered the assets to sevco 5088 but the asset sale as well? in terms of the agreement i mean. Indeed it was. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gribz 743 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Holy shit what a mess. The OP makes things a bit clearer as to how Green was trying to shaft Whyte but thats it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 I think this is definitely going to see a few people appearing before a judge in the not so distant future. My fear is they are not going to get to the brains of the operation. I used to share that particular opinion but now I have more faith in plod. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,267 Posted April 13, 2013 Author Share Posted April 13, 2013 yes but its not something you can ignore or wipe from history. what if we had got a cva? Green would probably have told him that Whyte was not allowed to hold any position in the Scottish game due to SFA rules and that's that? Just as food for thought? In any case, "what if" is always interesting, but of no concern today. "What if" Green already knew that HMRC was not agreeing to the CVA when he dealt with Whyte? (Wasn't it Green who said that he'll get Rangers before it was actually certain?) "What if" he had his own informer at HMRC? ... What I am intimating above is that people right now tend to look at it all from the worst possible angle. While it is sure not to be discounted, it should not become standard either. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 13, 2013 Share Posted April 13, 2013 Green would probably have told him that Whyte was not allowed to hold any position in the Scottish game due to SFA rules and that's that? Just as food for thought? In any case, "what if" is always interesting, but of no concern today. "What if" Green already knew that HMRC was not agreeing to the CVA when he dealt with Whyte? (Wasn't it Green who said that he'll get Rangers before it was actually certain?) "What if" he had his own informer at HMRC? ... What I am intimating above is that people right now tend to look at it all from the worst possible angle. While it is sure not to be discounted, it should not become standard either. and whyte would have said if i dont own sevco your not getting my shares. whyte was and is allowed to own us. he just cant run us. 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.