buster. 4,808 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 If Celtic had been subjected to what we have gone through with HMRC, what sort of statement would it have made? WW3 would have been declared and the issue would have been a hot topic at both Holyrood and Westminster. They fight and fight hard. We roll over. The board of RIFC won't consider it their fight. They are there to act in the interests of the shareholders who in the great majority want to make money out of the cash cow (the support) of a wholly owned subsidiary (TRFC). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,416 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 The board of RIFC won't consider it their fight. They are there to act in the interests of the shareholders who in the great majority want to make money out of the cash cow (the support) of a wholly owned subsidiary (TRFC). It is,IMO,their fight as it is our fight, also if there was any chance of compensation they will fight. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 It is,IMO,their fight as it is our fight, also if there was any chance of compensation they will fight. How would they benefit from any 'compensation'? Do you really think some of the Blue Pitch and Margaritas of this world want increased focus upon what has went before ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 It's their fight because their predecessors and the newco agreed to the terms put forward by these authorities. It's also their fight because it's OUR fight. While again I agree with you, I find it hard to see where they would stand in some of the fights for compensation or whatever. They can't show loss for some of the stuff that happened to the Oldco or that the Newco is deserving of anything - and in fact the board of the Newco rather than having loss have actually gained from a lot of what happened, much of it scandalously so. In simple terms I can imagine them complaining to say HMRC and being told, "What's it got to do with you?" The problem with the separating of club and company to preserve our history is that it also muddies the waters for this kind of stuff. The new company has no concrete grounds for complaint against HMRC, while the club and fans do. I still agree with your point that the terms of the 5 way agreement should be vigorously appealed against as they were forced upon us under duress and this would now look incredibly onerous in a court of law without the ill judged, perceived justification of tax evasion and competitive advantage. I believe we are owed transfer money, prize money and a far larger slice of the TV money. The illegal transfer ban now also looks totally inappropriate but playing devils advocate, it hasn't made a great impact in our promotion back to the top, and it gave the board and excuse to save money without flack from the fans. Perhaps it could be argued that we had to sign in haste which meant we overpaid some players and are due compensation there. I think our biggest problem in any demands is the non-payment of tax by Whyte and the actual administration and newco scenario did happen. I think the SFA can wash their hands of liability there and just say they applied their very fluid rules correctly in their eyes. Thinking more, I think there is a case to be made against members of the SPL for the vote on our share, as this was not done fairly - especially with the pressure applied by Celtic based on what is now known as a fabrication. But like the EBTs "discretionary" loophole, they can argue its legitimacy by using subjectivity of intention. So the only fight I can see that the board have a good standpoint for winning, is the 5 way agreement and punishments thereof. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) People need to get a handle on what's happened to us or we will never learn. Sdm is the cunt that sold us to Whyte knowing he would put us in admin. Because he didn't care and it protected his business. Whyte is the cunt who bought us with season book money intending to put us into admin and get rich off the stolen cash and rejuvenated debt free company. This lot are the cunts that made sure we got liquidated so they could make the money not whyte. D&p and Muir are accomplices to the cunts. Edited July 11, 2014 by the gunslinger 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,247 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 People need to get a handle on what's happened to us or we will never learn. People not agreeing with your point of view have sure enough got a handle on what has happened. There's simply more than one one opinion and yours need not to be the only correct and valid one. That ... is a lesson people should learn first and foremost when starting a/any debate. Sdm is the cunt that sold us to Whyte knowing he would put us in admin. Because he didn't care and it protected his business. Whyte is the cunt who bought us with season book money intending to put us into admin and get rich off the stolen cash and rejuvenated debt free company. This lot are the cunts that made sure we got liquidated so they could make the money not whyte. D&p and Muirhead are accomplices to the cunts. I only know a couple of "Muirheads", one is a rather good looking captain of the Scottish women Curling team, the other a notorious Yahoo running "Celtzine". Who is it you are talking about? Apparently, after Frankie's words in the other thread re "more direct speech", today looks to be the day for utilizing gutter speech ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Gutter speech for gutter snakes 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheWee BlueDevil 0 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 So you are incapable of arguing against the points I raised. At least we have established that.If I was you i would not challenge anyone's argumentative skills. Peralta or Peralta. Tell me again SBS which one is it that plays for us? Oh I forgot, apparently they can just pick any South American country and jump ship at will. I'll go for the Venezuelan/Bolivian/ Paraguayan/ Ecuadorian Peralta - you know the one you like so much. Or is it the Mexican/Columbian/Venusian/Martian other one you like so much?? Honduran? - No way. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 If I was you i would not challenge anyone's argumentative skills. Peralta or Peralta. Tell me again SBS which one is it that plays for us? Oh I forgot, apparently they can just pick any South American country and jump ship at will. I'll go for the Venezuelan/Bolivian/ Paraguayan/ Ecuadorian Peralta - you know the one you like so much. Or is it the Mexican/Columbian/Venusian/Martian other one you like so much?? Honduran? - No way. Wait, are you referring to the blatant wind up post I made where I commented that the Peralta that scored for Mexico might get us a few million? Go to bed mate . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bluebell 0 Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 The people who have their grubby mitts on our once great club couldn't give to shytes about this scenaris, in fact it was the reason they got their hands on it in first place 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.