Dave Ferg Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Are there not some rules set by Companies House (or whoever) which states that the Directors cannot just drive the bus over a cliff when there is ample opportunity to put the brakes on miles before? Ah but the bus "went over a cliff" some months back when it went up in smoke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 There is plenty of talk about Sevco going into adminstration again, including those associated with the club.It is well known that they are making a substantial loss every month, and are making some effort to cut the outgoings such as Fat Sally's wagepacket and binning Comical Jim, but it's not enough. So if they go into administration, this will be because they failed to cut back on their considerable wage bill, and therefore is this not a deliberate strategy? Are there not some rules set by Companies House (or whoever) which states that the Directors cannot just drive the bus over a cliff when there is ample opportunity to put the brakes on miles before? Would the Directors be taken to court? Would Companies House allow the business to be bought out of administration again? Presumably there are some rules and regs about how many times a loss making business can keep changing owners.It is illegal for a limited company to continue to trade, without telling folk, in the knowledge that the cliff is right there. But there are many ways to get out of that, and I don't think The The are there yet.But here's an interesting scenario- dunn if I've got this right; please correct me. If The The know they are moving towards admin, they will do it before he season ends. Because the points deduction wil apply to this year, when they could take a 50 point deduction and still win the league. Bu if they admin after the season ends, they take it off next year, and we will sadly be deprived of Nazis in the top league.Therefore, are The The planning for admin late his season?Or do I need to have my tea soon..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstar101 Posted November 5, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 Whichever is the most underhand, devious, cheating way.......that's the way they will do it fazman1977 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slf Posted November 5, 2013 Report Share Posted November 5, 2013 We are defo heading for another major crisis in the game, caused again by that scum of a club are we getting an armageddon part 2 ! braw Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevensan Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Would the Directors be taken to court? Would Companies House allow the business to be bought out of administration again? Presumably there are some rules and regs about how many times a loss making business can keep changing owners. Again? They have never been in Administration. They have never changed owners. TRFC Ltd, formally known as Sevco Scotland ltd, were formed in 2012. They are soley owned by RIFC PLC, also formed in 2012. RIFC were floated in Dec 2012 as a publicly owned company. The original owners of Sevco Scotland ltd were given 1:1 shares in RIFC PLC. Your thinking of RFC PLC, which entered administration on 14 Feb 2012, and formally entered liquidation on 31st october 2012. The two sets of companies are linked only by the brand name 'Rangers' and the assets which were bought by the former from the latter. There is plenty of rules regarding companies going into debt over and over again. its called Phoenix'ing. If RIFC/TRFC had any common directors (whether officially, or controlling from say an offshore holding company) from the last 5 years of RFC PLC trading, then RIFC would be liable for all outstanding debts of RFC PLC (around 120m on last count). That is why Mr King will never be a director and why they are up s*** creek without a paddle should Mr Whyte still have a controlling interest in the new company... By now its almost certain the Spivs (Whyte, Green, Ahmed etc) have their original investment back two or three fold. The only question is how much more can they rape the company for before handing its carcass back to the real rangers men? blueheaven 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plastered Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Interesting stuff from Stevensan as usual. I realise that the overriding companies are seperate, but the underlying business model is the same, ie a football club playing under the name of Rangers at a stadium called Ibrox. Indeed they go to great lengths to point out that it is the same team with the same history. Is there anything to stop a hundred different companies taking it in turn to operate a fundamentally loss making football club called Rangers based at Ibrox, providing with Directors keep changing? The current bunch will not disclose the names of those in power behind the scenes, only those acting as a proxy. Could this be because of common names to both RFC and TRFC, which will link the debts of both? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryangordon86 Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Is there anything to stop a hundred different companies taking it in turn to operate a fundamentally loss making football club called Rangers based at Ibrox, providing with Directors keep changing? -- No Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 Interesting stuff from Stevensan as usual. I realise that the overriding companies are seperate, but the underlying business model is the same, ie a football club playing under the name of Rangers at a stadium called Ibrox. Indeed they go to great lengths to point out that it is the same team with the same history. Is there anything to stop a hundred different companies taking it in turn to operate a fundamentally loss making football club called Rangers based at Ibrox, providing with Directors keep changing? The current bunch will not disclose the names of those in power behind the scenes, only those acting as a proxy. Could this be because of common names to both RFC and TRFC, which will link the debts of both?Well, yes. Eventually even a vampire can't suck blood if there's none left to suck. I think that's basically what we're all hoping for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhq Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 The authorities should be investigating this and going over accounts with a fine tooth comb. If this shower are losing anything like what is being reported then surely they must not be allowed to be promoted. HOODLUM65 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plastered Posted November 6, 2013 Report Share Posted November 6, 2013 There will be some blood to suck if the numpties keep buying season tickets, shirts etc. They still don't realise the money is going towards large houses in France and other goodies. I think there could be a doomed share issue every 12 months, and still get some takers. With regard to points deductions, they would still have enough points for promotion as you point out, but wouldn't they also start with points deducted in Div 1 (or whatever its called) if still in admin when the season starts? Aso, It can't be right that a team can get promoted whilst in admin, but that won't be the opinion of the SFASPFSPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 There will be some blood to suck if the numpties keep buying season tickets, shirts etc. They still don't realise the money is going towards large houses in France and other goodies. I think there could be a doomed share issue every 12 months, and still get some takers. With regard to points deductions, they would still have enough points for promotion as you point out, but wouldn't they also start with points deducted in Div 1 (or whatever its called) if still in admin when the season starts? Aso, It can't be right that a team can get promoted whilst in admin, but that won't be the opinion of the SFASPFSPL.Take your point on the abundance of numpties. But each share issue has to have a prospectus which the LSE have to sign-off I think, and eventually even the AIM will tell them to piss off, or even suspend trading in the existing shares.Yep, if they don't do a quick admin in and out, then there will be more points off next season which, in a much tighter league (surely) could hurt. Actually, as things stand, with only 2 Directors and therefore a non-quorate board, there are already grounds for Admin if they decide to "fail" to appoint new Directors. Didn't one of their own supporters associations say this recentky?Anyway, probably getting ahead of ourselves here, but we can hope... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueheaven Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 Aso, It can't be right that a team can get promoted whilst in admin, but that won't be the opinion of the SFASPFSPL. Agree with that but what can be done to stop it happening? Presumably there are no rules in place to stop a club from being promoted if they're in admin. In effect, the points deduction is meant to achieve that. But as has been mentioned above, it's possible that a club can strategically time when it goes into admin to reduce the impact of losing the points. The massive amount of cheating going on, even now, is truly sickening. This club is winning every week and romping its league, by using players it cannot afford. And the really annoying thing is that it's not even necessary. With that club's stadium, infrastructure and fanbase, it could easily generate enough money, fair and square, to field one of the strongest teams in Scotland, and the goals of annual promotion would still be met. It seems cheating is just too far ingrained into their culture to stop doing it even when they don't need to. Admin and liquidation of the OldCo was a chance for them to make a fresh start, come back clean and still be successful on the pitch - yet they never seem to have been interested in doing that. We need to all make the most of these few great seasons without them, because the Premier League is going to go back to being crap again as soon as they get promoted into it. Indicator and Cagey 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edstar101 Posted November 7, 2013 Author Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 Aye, the papers, radio and tv will be full of talking about the points difference between Celtic & Rangers again and eveyone else will be forgotten once more Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kinnoull Kicker Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 The answer to administration should be quite simple......forget about points deduction it should automatic relegation. Job done. nips and Wendy Saints 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Abernethy Saint Posted November 7, 2013 Report Share Posted November 7, 2013 Some forums are showing a list of The The's major shareholders, which is said to be accurate, confirming that Green, McCoist, Amand and Hughes own 20% of the shares.......for which they paid 1p each. So they apparently bought 20% of the company for around £100,000. The shares are currently worth 48p. So if this is true (and it's been talked about for a long time, without the specific numbers), they are sitting on a paper profit of around £4.8 million between them.Ah but, you say, this shows their loyalty to Sevco, and the genuine healthy prospects for Sevco, because they haven't sold. As is common in these cases, however, they were subject to a "lock-in" period, during which they could not sell. That period ends in a couple of weeks. Watch this space!!!It's got nothing to do with football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOODLUM65 Posted November 11, 2013 Report Share Posted November 11, 2013 Sevco reporting Septic to SPFL for calling off the under 20's derby on Tuesday night without explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ex-montrosesaintee Posted November 11, 2013 Report Share Posted November 11, 2013 Sevco reporting Septic to SPFL for calling off the under 20's derby on Tuesday night without explanation. Their one opportunity for a sectarian bullshit battle cancelled. How dare they. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOODLUM65 Posted November 11, 2013 Report Share Posted November 11, 2013 Their one opportunity for a sectarian bullshit battle cancelled. How dare they. Aye, one side of the divide's hard men are still banged up abroad. ex-montrosesaintee 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cagey Posted November 11, 2013 Report Share Posted November 11, 2013 Police now investigating if Whyte still involved.The saga goes on. Love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOODLUM65 Posted November 11, 2013 Report Share Posted November 11, 2013 The demise of Sevco is likely to occur,, before Police ever get to the bottom of the shenanigans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ex-montrosesaintee Posted November 11, 2013 Report Share Posted November 11, 2013 Like a farmer frantically milking a dead cow, the scum keep trying to get a little more out before it expires. Pretty comical. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ex-montrosesaintee Posted November 15, 2013 Report Share Posted November 15, 2013 Hate the BBC. Why does this article have to mention St Johnstone, but clearly not explain that the accused had nothing to do with the club? Logic would lead a reader to assume the accused is a Saints fan. This is surely bad reporting with intentional ambiguity... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-24949377 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indicator Posted November 15, 2013 Report Share Posted November 15, 2013 Agreed. The way the article is written suggests that the guy is either a Saints supporter, or even a player, as far as people not familiar with our playing staff know. Now why do you think they would do that. Has 'SS' upset one of their 'Sevco' sympathisers maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Wallace Posted November 15, 2013 Report Share Posted November 15, 2013 Hate the BBC. Why does this article have to mention St Johnstone, but clearly not explain that the accused had nothing to do with the club? Logic would lead a reader to assume the accused is a Saints fan. This is surely bad reporting with intentional ambiguity... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-24949377 I didn't read that into it at all. It simply says the tweets were sent after a game against us, and the accused was from somewhere in Glasgow. Read it again and reconsider your outrage. nips 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldermoresensiblepack Posted November 15, 2013 Report Share Posted November 15, 2013 Hate the BBC. Why does this article have to mention St Johnstone, but clearly not explain that the accused had nothing to do with the club? Logic would lead a reader to assume the accused is a Saints fan. This is surely bad reporting with intentional ambiguity... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-24949377 Only if the reader was daft enough to assume that Linthouse is a Saints stronghold in Glasgow. See your point but I didn't read that the way you did and would think that most people wouldn't either. B.B.C. Scotland will always try to throw a wrong one into any report about THE rangers to deflect any blame away from them. Quote Link to comment 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.