Hoosier Ranger
-
Posts
5,473 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Hoosier Ranger
-
-
We might not have to pay it back though
I don't see how that is the case.
-
The board will cover that 2.5m that's been stated time and time again.
Just because Green wasn't there to sign off anything doesn't mean he never had a hand in it from the outside.
I don't doubt this...was just using that to show that the 5M from SD has already been spent and is a legal debt per our financials.
-
I thought that, that he had no option.
This all down to the previous incumbents though accepting this loan to spite us, we never needed it, as i said it's a stitch up from Green, Easdale, Somers etc.
Are you sure about that? Our financials say something different as they say we are running out of money in January and will need 2.5M in additional loans to get through the season. That means the 5M in loans from SD have already been used up.
In addition, Green was not around to sign off on the SD Loan agreement. He was gone well before the loan was accepted.
-
Why has he taken this on ? it was stated he never need this loan, the 5m is still sitting untouched to the best of my knowledge.
Money has been spent. The debt is a legal debt of the corporation.
-
An interesting read tbh and not too far from the sort of conversations I've had with my mates over a few beers but it's all conjecture and may in the end, prove to be total fantasy.
What I'd like to know, from a legal point of view as it were, is this.
I'm thinking that as a director, Green was governed (or at least is supposed to be), by his fiduciary duties towards the company, i.e. that he is to act in the best interests of Rangers at all times.
Are the sports direct contracts signed by Green so unfair towards Rangers that it could be successfully argued that they be set aside, as CG breached his fiduciary duties when he signed them?
While we don't know what's in the contracts, King does but he's been gagged.
My best guess is that both King and Ashley are marking time, waiting to see what happens to Green and the rest in court.
Then, if Green is convicted, can Rangers then use this to have the contracts with Sports Direct voided? Would Ashley then be told to whistle for his £5 Mill? Would the clubs IP then be back in our hands? Is that why King won't pay the £5 Mill, as he knows there is a good chance he won't have to?
Too many questions, thank feck the fitba is back on Saturday.
Unless Sports Direct did something illegal in securing the retail contract, the retail deal cannot be voided just because Green is an unethical POS or was a total buffoon in signing the deal.
-
What i meant was that as stated in a previous post we never needed the loan, it was accepted by the last lot just to be cunts as they knew they were being ousted.
King would never accepted that loan.
But he has legally accepted the loan as Director.
-
It's a set up and a half, that's what it is, it won't be paid back imo.
Not sure I follow you.
The most recent audited financial statements disclose this debt as a legal obligation of the company. These statements were signed off by Dave King as Director. The 5M quid loan is a legal debt owed by the Club to Sports Direct.
-
Exactly, but some numb nuts on here want it paid back.
Given the profits from the Retail JV (per our audited financial statements), Sports Direct will make an additional 500-600K in dividends as a result of the loan not being paid off. That is well over 10% on the original 5M loaned. In addition, our IP is currently in the hands of SD as well as the revenue from next season's shirt sponsorship. Would rather that money stay with the club especially with deep pockets on the Board.
-
Why ? the old board were the ones who accepted the 5m loan, not King and the new regime, why should they pay it ? it's a loan we never needed in the first place the old board took it out in spite knowing they were for the boot out the door.
Its a debt of the corporation...regardless of when and who incurred the debt.
-
More propaganda from paid hands.
I looked over this blog and there seems to be inconsistencies in writing style. I think the use of "hands" is more apt versus one person.
-
If the writer is older than 14 i'd be worried for his future in life.
I don't think you have to worry about that.
-
Just from little ole me am afraid HR.
Excellent stuff TLM....excellent stuff.
-
Was that from the RST or SOS?
-
This is a very important distinction when you consider the reason why some fans are asking for a new inquiry. The uneducated media whores out there are pointing to a particular sentence in Lord Nimmo Smiths verdict as a key point for a new inquiry. LNS stated “Accordingly we proceed on the basis that the EBT arrangements were lawful”
This, they state, is now defunct due to the latest verdict, prior to any appeal, however they, like on most issues that involve a brain, are completely wrong on the basis of above. As outlined, irrespective of the final outcome, EBT arrangements are lawful. They are not illegal. No-one, anywhere int he UK, has been arrested or charged for operating EBT schemes, even when found to be doing so in an incorrect manner. The statement made by LNS still stands and will stand after any final appeal, upheld or not.
Fixed this for you
-
Excellent explanation and summary
-
Here we go, fuck off to the boardroom section if you are going to talk this shite, this is about our performance today.
We need a new look. Teams have already figured out how to play us tactically. We need a few new players and a few minor tweaks
-
Huge war chest available. A few solid signings in January will give the team a different look
-
We've been slipping for weeks, it's a fucking shambles.
Plan B seems to be 'try plan A again'
Tactics need to change. Folks have developed a strategy and it's time to throw a few new tactical wrinkles
-
Kenny miller in first 5 games of the season (3 sub appearances I think and 2 starts) - 5 goals
He's definitely effective even if he was only a 2nd/3rd choice for any of front 3 positions
A year contract extension and then maybe keep him as a coach will do me
I agree...plus he has been pretty healthy as of late and will be a good influence for new signings.
-
What about international breaks? Could argue that players not called up for internationals may be able to take a few days holiday over the break. They might just be given it as days off but I wouldn't see any real issue in letting them take 3 or 4 days holiday instead. Same for injured or suspended players within reason.
Can't use the fact that a player is injured to involuntarily charge them vacation days especially if that injury occurred on the job.
Typically suspensions involve docking pay anyway or at least it give the club the right to do it if they want. Still probably not a valid reason unless they don't show up for a mandatory training or other event.
-
Isn't it normally the end of June contracts expire?
That is my understanding ...albeit...it comes from playing years of FM
-
If you want to equate a contract with an employee; who albeit well paid probably have mortgages, children and other financial commitments the same as most of us, with MA and a disgusting company with a track record for treating their employee's with absolute disdain then carry on...whatever floats your boat as they say.
I hope as a club we have done the right thing and the players aren't due any money.
Who said anything about SD? I said ALL contracts. If you have a track record for not honoring your contracts as a company, then you will pay the price later on with less than desirable terms from vendors, players, and contractors.
-
If that was in their contract then fair enough, seems like they're entitled to holiday pay just as you and I are. If you work all year then hand in your notice, or are paid off then your accrued holidays make up part of your notice period.
Grates a bit I agree but we must adhere to the conditions of players contracts.
You can't selectively pick which contracts you want to adhere to and which ones you don't. Makes you look dodgy.
-
Fraser Aird got a senior call up with Canada. He did not get any minutes last night in Canada's 1-0 win over Honduras.
Latest From Exposing The Rhats.
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
The Board has to raise 5m additional quid to pay off the loan. The club already needs 2.5m and loans from Directors is 4m. That's 11.5m quid needed to pay current debt and fund operations until the end of the season. Huge share issue.