Jump to content

Souness thinks we NEED a strong Rangers...


Recommended Posts

On 25/10/2017 at 6:38 PM, Scooby_Doo said:

Bell end. 

http://m.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/41754794

He can piss off and take his £30000 brown envelope with him. 

I think this is the beginning of the circling of the wagons. Rangers don't have a pot to piss in (again), so the public needs reminded in advance how much we NEED them. 

There's definitely something in that. Whenever the calls of support are being made bad news is never far behind. 

Personally I've enjoyed enormously the fact that the Huns haven't won a proper trophy, or even come close, for years. Long may it continue and even then they still won't have paid the proper price for what they did to Scottish football. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Lambert the latest rent-a-quote to chip in with some nonsense on Sevco:

 

Lambert said: “I think it was the worst decision to demote Rangers three leagues.

"It wasn’t good for the Scottish game, the Scottish league and certainly not for the national team.

“Celtic and Rangers, in years gone by, provided a lot of players for the national team and it’s mainly Celtic now. That’s the bigger picture and people hadn’t really thought it through. Nobody thought, ‘Well how is this going to affect Scotland, the league itself, Glasgow as a city?’

“I think it was the wrong decision to put them down three leagues.”

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, it wasn't that it was the wrong decision at all. 

The problem was that anyone thought there was a decision to be made. They didn't think there was one when Airdrie went bust, nor Gretna. 

There is every chance they'll have another decision to make soon enough if the stories about invoice financing are true. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, it was the correct decision, regardless of what you perceived to be the consequences for Celtic, the SPL or Scottish football in general.

They couldn't be allowed to just get rid of all that debt and simply continue as before.

And as a new club they were actually fortunate to be allowed to jump the queue and be granted entry into the league.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Prahakillie said:

"Celtic and Rangers, in years gone by, provided a lot of players for the national team and it’s mainly Celtic now. "

 

Does it matter where they come from?

Another great myth, it would be better for the good of the Scottish game.

 

I'd argue that celtic provide more players now than the old filth did combined during the 90s/00s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are internet stories and rumours to be fair. They are supposedly approaching companies who specialise in invoice financing, whereby you borrow money against future income. So for example, they might borrow money against projected share of the TV pot. However, the interest rates are punitive, and it's generally used by companies in financial distress. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Prahakillie said:

Nobody thought, ‘Well how is this going to affect Scotland, the league itself, Glasgow as a city?’

He seems to have forgotten about Michael Johnston.

Although, to be fair, Johnston was thinking more about the effect on his and Killie's finances than the Scotland football team...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Prahakillie said:

Lambert said: “I think it was the worst decision to demote Rangers three leagues.

Rangers were not "demoted". Rangers Football Club ceased to exist due to bankruptcy and liquidation. Its in year one of "Economics and Accounting", you could look it up Paul.

A company of dodgy shysters and money lenders was formed under the label Sevco which bought up the fire sale assets at knockdown prices and applied for admission to the Scottish Football League. Following the usual standard exchange of bungs etc. their application was fast tracked and the rest is history.     

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A word of warning guys - look out for a squinty-eyed guy at the match tomorrow who asks you for money. Do not approach him, as you may end up owning the Rangers.

Rangers chairman Dave King has been ordered to make an £11m offer to the club's remaining shareholders.

A Court of Session judge ruled that King needs to offer investors 20p per share for the share capital not already controlled by him and three partners. The ruling comes as a consequence of an action brought by the Panel on Takeovers and Mergers. The financial watchdog claimed that King did not comply with the terms of the 2006 Companies Act.

Legislation dictates that entrepreneurs who hold a 30% stake in businesses are compelled to make an offer to investors to buy remaining shares.

It was argued that King acted in concert with businessmen George Letham, George Taylor and Douglas Park to acquire more than 30% of voting rights in Rangers in late 2014.

During the case, lawyers acting for King said the chairman could not afford to buy back shares at 20p per voting right.

King led a boardroom takeover at Ibrox in early 2015 but insisted he did not work "in concert" with Letham, Taylor and Park.

His legal team argued that it was a trust - New Oasis Asset Limited (NOAL)- and not himself, who had acquired 15% of Rangers shares. In Friday's written judgement, judge Lord Bannatyne said he was convinced King had control over his family trusts and therefore had the money to make the offer.

Advocate James McNeill QC, acting for the Takeover Panel, had earlier outlined evidence of the group working together, including an email from Letham to King, raising the possibility that the purchase of shares from Laxey and Artemis would take them over 30%.

In the email, Letham wrote: "Dave just a reminder that after we buy Lacey today, we will hold 19.7 per cent. We really only want to buy Artemis 10 per cent if it (sic) the intention to stay under 30 per cent otherwise we will have to make a mandatory offer." McNeill told the court that this showed King was aware that he would have to make an offer for the remaining shares. He also said financial investigators had established that King was in charge of the NOAL shares during 2015.

Lord Bannatyne added: "As Mr McNeill pointed out, on two occasions the Trusts have been willing to provide money for the purchase of Rangers shares when he wished them to do so. Now suddenly when the respondent does not wish to comply with the terms of rule nine, the Trusts no longer are willing to provide any money. This tends, as Mr McNeill, submitted to show actual de facto control over the trusts by the respondent rather than the opposite."

The court heard that, in October, the share price was worth 27p. Shareholders do not have to accept the 20p share offer.

BBC Scotland Sport (still banned from Ibrox)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...