Richard Wilson - Herald - 16th May

[SteveC 150]

Is Blue Pitch the Easdales?

 

I think Artemis is Easdales and Blue Pitch someone else, I think Blue Pitch connects to/with/is "the gentleman" that Brian Kennedy knows but won't reveal the name of. (Which alone is highly worrying)

[SteveC 150]

Isn't this open information for all, if people would look at the right places?

 

The question would obviously be: "Who owns Rangers?" People cast wary glances towards Easdale et al, talk about "new owners" and whatnot. But even if they get a greater share than anyone, some 12% or whatnot, are they the owners? The biggest shareholder is not exactly the owner, is he? He may get a director's place, but there it stops? Just asking. As far as I see it, someone has to buy up 50+% of the shares to become "the owner" of the club and the next question would be: is that currently possible?

 

 

yes, but we do not who all these names are. We've never known who owned us. The all singing all dancing I'm in for a quick killing professional Yorkshireman was only ever a front. Even he never lied about that (well, until the spotlight went to his head) . We don't know who Blue Pitch, Atremis etc actually are, we don't know who owns what, we don't know about Ticketus's real involvement.

 

Just about the only thing we know is that nothing we've been told ever turns out to be true - the "no person will own more than 10%" is just as likely to be yet another Green lie. It's the kind of thing Whyte would tell him to say. You could even make it true, - "get two brothers to split 19.9999% between them. Chuck me old mucker - you ain't even lying. cackle cackle"..."add Imran's and me other pals like Zeus and Ticketus's hidden stakes and BOOM 515 and a lot more........."

[der Berliner 3,290]

As Frankie says, this is merely timing. RFC Plc WILL be liquidated - hence why BDO are in doing the liquidation process just now. Why we continue to get all hot and bothered about something which no longer affects the CURRENT entity that manages the club is beyond me, especially over an entity that WILL be liquidated.

 

We have far bigger issues than worrying about whether the previous company is given the proper terminology in terms of status.

 

The point is "facts". I know that the oldco will go down the drain one day, but right now it has not. It is open and public knowledge. Why - with all the minute detail and effort given on other stuff - this is continually erroneous. Much like the "have been relegated" stuff. Why would I give him by default any greater credit with other news? (BTW, I know that he's one of the saner and impartial ones ... just saying.)

[the gunslinger 3,366]

I think Artemis is Easdales and Blue Pitch someone else, I think Blue Pitch connects to/with/is "the gentleman" that Brian Kennedy knows but won't reveal the name of. (Which alone is highly worrying)

 

the gentleman was either at Zeus or blue pitch or both I always thought.

 

though I aslo think it was whyte.

[RANGERRAB 3,306]

i don't see a big issue with saying the oldco is liquidated. it's only a matter of time.

 

Not necessarily. Might never happens. Newco might buy oldco so as no one else gets the company & its name

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Not necessarily. Might never happens. Newco might buy oldco so as no one else gets the company & its name

 

no it won't as it would cost around 50 million to do so.

[RANGERRAB 3,306]

no it won't as it would cost around 50 million to do so.

 

No it would not cost 50million or anywhere near it. Old co is a worthless, empty corporate shell with no assets.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

No it would not cost 50million or anywhere near it. Old co is a worthless, empty corporate shell with no assets.

 

and debts of at least 50 million.

[craig 5,199]

No it would not cost 50million or anywhere near it. Old co is a worthless, empty corporate shell with no assets.

 

gunslinger is right. There may be no assets but anyone willing to purchase oldco would be picking up the liabilities. Oldco will be dead.