gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 A typo part 3 was written by the ibc i think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 ok in jan we had 5.5 million cash at bank. some of which was set aside for the tax bill. 2.8 bar to be precise. so surely that frees things up a bit on top of the 5 million. we were also waiting on a big cheque from uefa. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogbg 20 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 part 3 was written by the ibc i think.No - that was part 2. I had initially thought that's what they meant as well. Part 3 is the details of the agreement. Hopefully just a typo, as BlueDell suggested, otherwise there's no point in even reading the agreement details! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 No - that was part 2. I had initially thought that's what they meant as well. Part 3 is the details of the agreement. Hopefully just a typo, as BlueDell suggested, otherwise there's no point in even reading the agreement details!i am sure it should be part 2 then and is indeed a typo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 ok in jan we had 5.5 million cash at bank. some of which was set aside for the tax bill. 2.8 bar to be precise. so surely that frees things up a bit on top of the 5 million. we were also waiting on a big cheque from uefa.At no time has 'topping up' been mentioned. Infact the £25m for transfers has been emphasised two or three times now. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Why does Whyte and company get preference over the tax people in the case of insolvency? That is my only question. As a condition of the acquisition? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
H72 265 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I don't have a fucking clue what any of this means. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bilko89 507 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I don't have a fucking clue what any of this means.No got a scooby loyal btw when is this tax case hearing and when do we hear the outcome? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 At no time has 'topping up' been mentioned. Infact the £25m for transfers has been emphasised two or three times now.i am talking about spending rangers own cash. the 25 million is extra capital which has to be invested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Why does Whyte and company get preference over the tax people in the case of insolvency? That is my only question. As a condition of the acquisition?its secured. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
25yearsofgreatkeepers 1 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 rangerstaxcase.com/2011/06/06/rangers-circular-released/copy and paste this link! I don't know what to make of this????? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jelavic18 695 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 I dunno what to make of this, seems a bit misleading from original press releases! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOAT 30,449 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Too many runners-up on this forum the night. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieD 20,047 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Posting anything from that site should be an instant ban offence. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogzy 31,195 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 im surprised it took so long for someone to make a thread on this. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxou 66 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davekerrthebear 124 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 oi you 2 earl haigs, jelavic18 and 25 years fuck off eh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loan Ranger 48 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-13675873 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
davekerrthebear 124 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 whyte has been advised that rangers f.c. wont be held accountable for the tax bill and as AJ stated the same some time back. it seems that someone who's advice carries weight has been chatting to both, so im not worried. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-13675873this is the tit that had us 29 million in debt in april. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 part 3 was written by the ibc i think.No, it was part II that was written by the bitter and twisted. You were doing so well too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 No, it was part II that was written by the bitter and twisted. You were doing so well too. so were you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 1,941 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-13675873On the whole, it's not a bad article but some of it is wrong. For instance:"It then says it intends to invest - "or procure an investment of" - £20m by 2016 for spending on the player squad.It's not clear if this includes the starting £5m commitment."It's perfectly clear that the £20m doesn't include the £5m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 On the whole, it's not a bad article but some of it is wrong. For instance:"It then says it intends to invest - "or procure an investment of" - £20m by 2016 for spending on the player squad.It's not clear if this includes the starting £5m commitment."It's perfectly clear that the £20m doesn't include the £5m.even i noticed this. is this not the guy leggat had a go at the other day for his anti rangers agenda. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trueblue68 2,497 Posted June 6, 2011 Share Posted June 6, 2011 Radio five saying we could go into insolvency if the tax case goes against us etc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts