Jump to content

Welcome to RangersMedia!

Sign In or Register to gain full access to our forums. By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.


All companies who said no to CVA


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 Support_The_Troops

Support_The_Troops

    Ian Durrant

  • True Blue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:30 PM

List of companies that said no to a cva don't know if posted all ready sorry if it has been. http://www.rangers.c...5~177463,00.pdf
advertisement



#2 McWeedy

McWeedy

    Arthur Numan

  • True Blue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:42 PM

Why is the value for HMRC so great, it seems to reflect the big tax case but as this hadn't been heard in court why is it represented?

#3 WilliamMunny

WilliamMunny

    Richard Gough

  • True Blue
  • 1,820 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:44 PM

View PostMcWeedy, on 20 June 2012 - 04:42 PM, said:

Why is the value for HMRC so great, it seems to reflect the big tax case but as this hadn't been heard in court why is it represented?

That's what I was thinking

#4 Alnic3856

Alnic3856

    Andy Goram

  • Banned
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:44 PM

Had to be factored in, incase we lost the case, if not it would have been a seperate claim afterr CVA had been agreed.

#5 TheLightsOfHome

TheLightsOfHome

    Michael Mols

  • Loyal Bluenose
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 95 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:44 PM

Who the fuck did we owe Palermo money for?

#6 Alnic3856

Alnic3856

    Andy Goram

  • Banned
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:44 PM

Goian

#7 SirAlistairofMcCoist

SirAlistairofMcCoist

    Ian Durrant

  • True Blue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 597 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greenock

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:46 PM

Can someone copy and paste it please (tu)

Link not working on my phone.

#8 jimbeamjunior

jimbeamjunior

    General Jimbeamjunior

  • HSV Rangers
  • 27,843 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:49 PM

thought we stuffed the tarriers for 40k???????

#9 McWeedy

McWeedy

    Arthur Numan

  • True Blue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 430 posts

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:50 PM

View PostAlnic3856, on 20 June 2012 - 04:44 PM, said:

Had to be factored in, incase we lost the case, if not it would have been a seperate claim afterr CVA had been agreed.
If that's the case one of the bond holder creditors should have launched a 200 million claim against us and passed the CVA before dropping the suit!

#10 Ricky_

Ricky_

    Terry Butcher

  • Banned
  • 4,387 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:50 PM

there is something seriously wrong with the system of disputed tax.

how long did the FTTT go unresolved?

fucking shambles that a bunch of judges can sit on their arses for as long as they liek while businesses & peoples livelihoods are left in limbo.

#11 The Beast

The Beast

    Richard Gough

  • True Blue
  • 2,168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Second star to the right and straight on till morning

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:51 PM

Why St Etienne ?

Where's Hearts ?

#12 scott12003

scott12003

    Stuart McCall

  • Loyal Bluenose
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 238 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United Kingdom

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:52 PM

why is there a ticketus and a ticketus 2 company ???
why have they set up 2 separate companies for that deal?
did they suspect something wasn't right ?
that seems a bit fishy to me!

#13 jimbeamjunior

jimbeamjunior

    General Jimbeamjunior

  • HSV Rangers
  • 27,843 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:53 PM

View PostThe Beast, on 20 June 2012 - 04:51 PM, said:

Why St Etienne ?

Where's Hearts ?

hearts were paid in full from our prize money were they not

rapid rejected becomin a creditor didnt they not

and perhaps st etienne werent paid in full for the transfer the first time

#14 Alnic3856

Alnic3856

    Andy Goram

  • Banned
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:54 PM

View PostMcWeedy, on 20 June 2012 - 04:50 PM, said:

If that's the case one of the bond holder creditors should have launched a 200 million claim against us and passed the CVA before dropping the suit!
What?

That is exactly the case the CVA was calculated on worst case scenario, it is not even open for discussion, the Tax case money was factored into the deal as a potential future liability otherwise a successful CVA without it could have seen us facing another claim a couple months later for countless more millions.

#15 FlippinEck

FlippinEck

    Rangers Football Club Season Ticket Holder

  • True Blue
  • 34,447 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Edinburgh, Scotland

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:57 PM

We dont owe Hearts til July I thought?

Saying that I dont think the fee we owe would move over to the NewCo so you would have thought it would have been listed?

#16 T_Cradle85

T_Cradle85

    Jorg Albertz

  • Loyal Bluenose
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 154 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland

Posted 20 June 2012 - 04:58 PM

View PostSupport_The_Troops, on 20 June 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

List of clubs that said no to a cv don't know if posted all ready sorry if it has been. http://www.rangers.c...5~177463,00.pdf

Clubs?
Think you may be confusing the vote for a CVA with the vote for our newco to be given entry to the SPL.

Nice link though, for the list of creditors that voted against the CVA. Biggest one being the obvious HMRC one that we all knew had been the main cause behind it.

Edited by T_Cradle85, 20 June 2012 - 05:00 PM.


#17 beerbelly

beerbelly

    Stuart McCall

  • True Blue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 270 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Uk

Posted 20 June 2012 - 05:01 PM

one thing for sure looking at the list

Although voting against was academic given the taxman refusal i do hope the newco take note of who not to order any future catering equipment from ... step forward Cairns & Scott Caterhire Limited i hope the no vote for a measly 752 was worth it.

others who voted no i can see some sympathy with as it fair substantial amounts that could cripple some small companies but voting no for 752 a joke.

#18 Support_The_Troops

Support_The_Troops

    Ian Durrant

  • True Blue
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 593 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Glasgow

Posted 20 June 2012 - 05:04 PM

View PostT_Cradle85, on 20 June 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:

Clubs?
Think you may be confusing the vote for a CVA with the vote for our newco to be given entry to the SPL.

Nice link though, for the list of creditors that voted against the CVA. Biggest one being the obvious HMRC one that we all knew had been the main cause behind it.
Sorry heads up my arse ment companies

#19 ayrshireger

ayrshireger

    Andy Goram

  • True Blue
  • 1,382 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ayrshire

Posted 20 June 2012 - 05:06 PM

View Postjimbeamjunior, on 20 June 2012 - 04:53 PM, said:

hearts were paid in full from our prize money were they not

rapid rejected becomin a creditor didnt they not

and perhaps st etienne werent paid in full for the transfer the first time

Yeah I think they were, along with any other Scottish team we owed money to.

Rapid, rejected, plus never sent a representative, so I don't think they would appear on that document as I think thats just who arrived for the meeting.


And we still owed money for Bocanegra.

#20 Alnic3856

Alnic3856

    Andy Goram

  • Banned
  • 1,583 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

Posted 20 June 2012 - 05:08 PM

View Postbeerbelly, on 20 June 2012 - 05:01 PM, said:

one thing for sure looking at the list

Although voting against was academic given the taxman refusal i do hope the newco take note of who not to order any future catering equipment from ... step forward Cairns & Scott Caterhire Limited i hope the no vote for a measly 752 was worth it.

others who voted no i can see some sympathy with as it fair substantial amounts that could cripple some small companies but voting no for 752 a joke.
Companies were entitled to vote however they liked, maybe they have a preset voting stance for instances such as this, many companies do or maybe 752 is a lot to them, in the grand scheme of things it matters not a single fuck because even if everyone else had voted yes HMRC scuppered the deal and would have regardless. But to get mad at a company voting against accepting anything less thn what is rightfully theirs is stupid and is the kind of attitude which has cost us the sympathy vote from a lot of neutral supporters.