BlueAvenger 10,516 Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 He's not the same Donald Findlay.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,287 Posted November 1, 2014 Share Posted November 1, 2014 don't care what he or anyone else thinks.fact is we're still the same club that was created in 1872. it's just not the same company.it would be a different story if the club wasn't transferred to the newco, then the oldco got liquidated while still owning the club, then another company comes along and creates a team called Rangers FC. that rangers wouldn't be the same club and wouldn't have the history. that never happened but it seems to be what some people want to believe happened.The club was formed in 1872 the plc was begun in 1899 the plc is gone the club lives on Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shuggy 1,308 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Donald Findlay is sounding confused:"Rangers coming is a big occasion for the club and the town of course. The last time they played Cowdenbeath in a league game was April 1971.""new entity" last played Cowdenbeath in 1971. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
liquid111 51 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Same club.Different corporate shell.End of story. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,287 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 don't care what he or anyone else thinks.fact is we're still the same club that was created in 1872. it's just not the same company.it would be a different story if the club wasn't transferred to the newco, then the oldco got liquidated while still owning the club, then another company comes along and creates a team called Rangers FC. that rangers wouldn't be the same club and wouldn't have the history. that never happened but it seems to be what some people want to believe happened.I'm not sure how many people really believe that I think most are just trying to wind us up Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
themoodybloo 77 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Not that I agree with Findlay about being a new club, but there are a few home truths which, as long as they remain unacknowledged, represent a weakness to be exploited by our enemies.For starters - We fucked up in a huge way allowing the holding company to go bust.Think you will find Whyte fucked us up....we had a manageable reducing debt... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Fantana 28,894 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 absolute bollocks from him.If coca cola buy Barr and start selling Irn Bru, Irn Bru remains the same thing.The product can change hands and companies as much as it likes, everything else remains the same. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Hume 13,494 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 At the time DF was stitched up for being part of a private "Sash Bash", I don't think there were many Rangers fans who weren't on his side, as it was an "insider" who did the foul deed to him.I therefore feel that he is being a bit scarce with his memory function, and now must suffer from selective memory syndrome. As said above the man is still a top solicitor, and knows well the words and context he has used to describe our club's position, and he should well remember the outstanding support he received from our fans when he was near to ending it all.My main question is, why has he come out now, and given an interview about this often discussed, and unequivocally proven in our favour, matter? He had very little to say during the whole admin process then, so why now? He is wrong on so many levels, and for someone of his stature to come out with this immature take on the matter only shows that it definitely is not Old Holborn he is smoking, but something he must have been paid in kind for, from one of his nefarious clients.Just goes to show that even one once trusted to look after our traditions, cannot really be trusted, even to give a true account of our situation, so much for loyalty then, thanks a lot Donald...... you really are a trumpet. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bears r us 31,000 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 At the time DF was stitched up for being part of a private "Sash Bash", I don't think there were many Rangers fans who weren't on his side, as it was an "insider" who did the foul deed to him.I therefore feel that he is being a bit scarce with his memory function, and now must suffer from selective memory syndrome. As said above the man is still a top solicitor, and knows well the words and context he has used to describe our club's position, and he should well remember the outstanding support he received from our fans when he was near to ending it all.My main question is, why has he come out now, and given an interview about this often discussed, and unequivocally proven in our favour, matter? He had very little to say during the whole admin process then, so why now? He is wrong on so many levels, and for someone of his stature to come out with this immature take on the matter only shows that it definitely is not Old Holborn he is smoking, but something he must have been paid in kind for, from one of his nefarious clients.Just goes to show that even one once trusted to look after our traditions, cannot really be trusted, even to give a true account of our situation, so much for loyalty then, thanks a lot Donald...... you really are a trumpet. You have hit the nail square on with that post B H. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Bear 72 363 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Its impossible for a club and a company to equate to the same thing as by definition they are completely different. A club is an organisation that is defined by its function in this case its a Football Club. A company is simply a legal entity which can take different forms.In professional football most clubs are operated by a company. That's the corporate shell in which the club is run.The MLS operates as a franchise. It has a single company as the operator. That doesn't mean they are a single club.There is no logic in the new club argument. The MLS is one of many examples in world football that 'fly in the face' of this argument.Soccer economists, football governing bodies, Scottish courts, media organisations and government organisations have all confirmed what we already know - that Rangers FC are the same club that was formed in 1872. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bobby Hume 13,494 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Its impossible for a club and a company to equate to the same thing as by definition they are completely different. A club is an organisation that is defined by its function in this case its a Football Club A company is simply a legal entity.In professional football most clubs are operated by a company. That's the corporate shell in which the club is run.The MLS operates as a franchise. It has a single company as the operator. That doesn't mean they are a single club.There is no logic in the new club argument. The MLS is one of many examples in world football that 'fly in the face' of this argument. Soccer economists, football governing bodies, Scottish courts, media organisations and government organisations have all confirmed what we already know - that Rangers FC are the same club that was formed in 1872.Its impossible for a club and a company to equate to the same thing as by definition they are completely different. A club is an organisation that is defined by its function in this case its a Football Club A company is simply a legal entity.In professional football most clubs are operated by a company. That's the corporate shell in which the club is run.The MLS operates as a franchise. It has a single company as the operator. That doesn't mean they are a single club.There is no logic in the new club argument. The MLS is one of many examples in world football that 'fly in the face' of this argument. Soccer economists, football governing bodies, Scottish courts, media organisations and government organisations have all confirmed what we already know - that Rangers FC are the same club that was formed in 1872.So true LB72, that is why it is so grating, when even people who held high office and inside knowledge to all our inner workings, and had the privilege of being where we normal mortals can only wish for in another life, comes out and runs off at the mouth to the Rangers hating press. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shuggy 1,308 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Donald will be telling us next that Rangers did not exist before the limited company was formed in 1899. So how could the limited company claim all those trophies won between 1872 and 1899?!!Because the club existed before the plc! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I am not generally one for backing him up, but what he was talking about was not about the legal entity, rather the heart and soul of the club with our ownership structure. Agree or disagree with that obviously. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibroxblue 122 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 Findlay was talking about how he feels about the club and that included things like a lot of his old pals not being there.His emotions aren't anything to worry about. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loyal Bear 72 363 Posted November 3, 2014 Share Posted November 3, 2014 I am not generally one for backing him up, but what he was talking about was not about the legal entity, rather the heart and soul of the club with our ownership structure. Agree or disagree with that obviously.To be honest I haven't read the article, I merely seen the headline. If that is the case it certainly wouldn't be the first time that someone's words on our current situation have been taken out of context to make it sound like he means something else. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mo55 65 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Is donnie just no an auld lushJust saying like. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christchurch Rangers 1,229 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 saw that article about what findlay said a few days backthought about posting it hear then thought nar who gives a fuck what that wee weasel thinks anyhowhe can go fuck right off Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ianferguson 2,619 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Whatever way you look at it Findlay has let the fans down by allowing his personal thoughts to be twisted by the haters who wish to question our identity and history.Bottom line is that Findlay talks about the heart and soul of the club and rambles on about marble staircases and radiators but the Fans are the heart and soul of the club and that will never change Then Now Forever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iain1712 336 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I am not generally one for backing him up, but what he was talking about was not about the legal entity, rather the heart and soul of the club with our ownership structure. Agree or disagree with that obviously.And there was me thinking that I was the only one to see that. His words have been twisted by a tarrier loving journalist, McGowan ffs do a bit of research bears this clown is a rancid taig. Good post L B Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 54,318 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Ally says he shared a wee drink with him after the game last night and the topic never came up.Is Ally not bothered by this, or worse, telling a wee porkie???? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,287 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Findlay was talking about how he feels about the club and that included things like a lot of his old pals not being there.His emotions aren't anything to worry about.Donald Findlay should know better Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
coop troop 106 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Donald Findlay should know betterAin't nobody on this rock going to convince me he didn't know full well and exactly how that would be twisted. You walked Findaly, keep Fucking walking. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
californiadreamin52 339 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 http://www.viddy.com...3e-31c3567a71c7"I said no such thing" Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Ally says he shared a wee drink with him after the game last night and the topic never came up.Is Ally not bothered by this, or worse, telling a wee porkie????1) Ally did address it to the media 2) there is nothing to be bothered by, Findlay was not talking about us as a legal entity, it is pretty clear he was talking about the ownership of the club and the way we are acting which he feels makes us seem like a different club. That is nothing to do with administration, liquidation, holding companies or legality. Quote Link to post 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.