Strachsuit Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yes I've noticed how all the drug kings have had difficulty getting a mortgage from a bank. Their due dilligence must be terribly hard. Not once has anyone asked me about where the money for my deposit has come from when purchasing houses. Maybe you've not bought a house in a while?! I had a large deposit on my house that I purchased in August due to inheritance, I had to show a copy of the will to Nationwide as proof of where the funds came from so it does happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samster Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) Maybe you've not bought a house in a while?! I had a large deposit on my house that I purchased in August due to inheritance, I had to show a copy of the will to Nationwide as proof of where the funds came from so it does happen. Some of the rules regarding mortgages are pretty new though so if you've not bought or sold a house in the last year or so you may not have encountered what you have above. I know mortgage interviews are really, really intrusive now. I heard one company evens asks if you have a gym membership and how many times a year you get your haircut. They're trying to establish the real disposable income people have and not just when you have taken off loans and credit cards like they used to. Edited November 18, 2014 by Samster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samster Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) double post Edited November 18, 2014 by Samster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Don't know if it's been covered in this thread but where did CWs lawyers get the ?24m from? Seems odd that a firm of lawyers would have that kind of money in their bank account. Is this the money that CW was planning to use to buy and fund Rangers until he came up with his Ticketus scam?Liability insurance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) Don't know if it's been covered in this thread but where did CWs lawyers get the ?24m from? Seems odd that a firm of lawyers would have that kind of money in their bank account. Is this the money that CW was planning to use to buy and fund Rangers until he came up with his Ticketus scam? Collyer Bristow are a very big firm of lawyers. Based in London and Geneva and have dozens of lawyers working for them. I'm sure this won't be loose change to them but they'll be able to afford it. This isn't CW's cash, he never had any in the first place! EDIT: As Geoff says above, it is covered by their liability insurance. Edited November 18, 2014 by Strachsuit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 According to PMGB, monthly drip feeding is no longer acceptable to Deloittes and for accounts to be signed off, someone needs to write a very large one off cheque. And soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samster Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 According to PMGB, monthly drip feeding is no longer acceptable to Deloittes and for accounts to be signed off, someone needs to write a very large one off cheque. And soon. Which sounds about right to me. Especially if clubs like Livingston are being asked for bonds to see out the season this drip feed of money to Rangers should also be unacceptable to the football authorities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboz Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 According to PMGB, monthly drip feeding is no longer acceptable to Deloittes and for accounts to be signed off, someone needs to write a very large one off cheque. And soon. Hasn't the AGM been set? Thought the accounts needed signed off before that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mysterion Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Hasn't the AGM been set? Thought the accounts needed signed off before that. Don't think so. The only thing mentioned was a creditors meeting for the liquidated Rangers taking place soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Hasn't the AGM been set? Thought the accounts needed signed off before that. There's been a meeting called for creditors on the 9th Dec. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Hasn't the AGM been set? Thought the accounts needed signed off before that.Not yet as no accounts signed off. AGM needs to be called by end of 1st week December to meet Rangers year end requirements for an AIM listed company. And the accounts also need to be signed off ahead of that. It's getting tight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 There's been a meeting called for creditors on the 9th Dec. image.jpg ... called an annual general meeting in the document ...no ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mighty Thor Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 According to PMGB, monthly drip feeding is no longer acceptable to Deloittes and for accounts to be signed off, someone needs to write a very large one off cheque. And soon. Step forward the man with off the radar wealth (well off the radar in so much as out of the reach of the South African Tax authorities) Mr Dave King! Which sounds about right to me. Especially if clubs like Livingston are being asked for bonds to see out the season this drip feed of money to Rangers should also be unacceptable to the football authorities. Now what do you reckon the chances are of the SFA/SPFL growing a set and asking the Zombies to lodge a bond? Would be top trolling though Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 ... called an annual general meeting in the document ...no ? Annual General Meeting of creditors relating to "Old Rangers". I think Jamboz is thinking its "Newco" AGM. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 ... called an annual general meeting in the document ...no ? Yes, for Oldco, nothing whatsoever to do with the current reincarnation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambovambo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yes, for Oldco, nothing whatsoever to do with the current reincarnation. Duh. Of course. I need to keep up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doctor jambo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Deloittes will be markedly reluctant to sign anything off. they have no cash, debts into the millions and contracts they cannot get out of. I thinkhowever they will only need to de-list? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
givememychoice Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yes I've noticed how all the drug kings have had difficulty getting a mortgage from a bank. Their due dilligence must be terribly hard. Not once has anyone asked me about where the money for my deposit has come from when purchasing houses. I believe the onus is on the solicitor. Thus, if you find a dodgy solicitor they will push things through without doing what is legally required. I very recently bought a new place. My dad is a retired solicitor and he helped with a deposit. Even though my acting solicitor was my dads old junior (and so knew exactly how he had acquired the funds), they had to do the money laundering stuff for him as well. Its not too tricky though as he only needed to show the money in his account (and not how it had got there) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Liability insurance For that to be the case both Collyer Bristow and their insurance broker need to have accepted liability. I'd be surprised if that was the case before any legal arguments in Court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Collyer Bristow are a very big firm of lawyers. Based in London and Geneva and have dozens of lawyers working for them. I'm sure this won't be loose change to them but they'll be able to afford it. This isn't CW's cash, he never had any in the first place! EDIT: As Geoff says above, it is covered by their liability insurance. i think CW had plenty of money, probably still has. Just doesn't like using it if he can use someone else's. Lots like him about the seedier side of the business world. I suspect that CB have been holding this in a client account for him as proof of funds for many deals totalling more than ?24m and BDO have finally called their bluff and forced them to hand it over. I think we will eventually discover that it was CWs cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iaing Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 i think CW had plenty of money, probably still has. Just doesn't like using it if he can use someone else's. Lots like him about the seedier side of the business world. I suspect that CB have been holding this in a client account for him as proof of funds for many deals totalling more than ?24m and BDO have finally called their bluff and forced them to hand it over. I think we will eventually discover that it was CWs cash. Will that absolve CW if he hands over the money that he has lodged with solicitors? Or will he be hauled through the courts and possibly jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Will that absolve CW if he hands over the money that he has lodged with solicitors? Or will he be hauled through the courts and possibly jail.still suffer the latter I would think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 For that to be the case both Collyer Bristow and their insurance broker need to have accepted liability. I'd be surprised if that was the case before any legal arguments in Court. Was this not reported yesterday as being an out of court settlement..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DETTY29 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Will that absolve CW if he hands over the money that he has lodged with solicitors? Or will he be hauled through the courts and possibly jail.Having skim read the Sun in the supermarket (promise) their claim is that SDM was duped because CW said the funds were his and not from Ticketus. CW claim is that he told SDM of the source of funds and the Ticketus deal. According to the Sun that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Was this not reported yesterday as being an out of court settlement..? It certainly was according to the BBC report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 If there is a warrant out for Walter Mitty's arrest then no point trying to hide in Monaco. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewB Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 If there is a warrant out for Walter Mitty's arrest then no point trying to hide in Monaco. No doubt he's currently leaning on Tory backbenchers to block any opt-in to the European Arrest Warrant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hungry hippo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 It's all part of Anti-Money Laundering regulations. You need to be able to demonstrate what is known as the 'Source of Wealth'. Certainly the case in retail financial transaction (e.g. a pension transfer) so i have no reason to believe it's not required in the commercial world. It is required in commercial too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Bids explained http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/9568935/ashley-bid-best-for-rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 PMGB's latest offering http://www.philmacgiollabhain.ie/big-mikes-big-decision/#more-5316 He suggests: The football side of operations is no longer off-limit in terms of cuts Ashley has underestimated (or been lied to) regarding the severity of the cuts required Ashley needs to pump in ?12m guaranteed to get the accounts signed off Failure to get accounts signed off could mean a fine of around ?200-300k RFC currently have enough cash to last to mid-December WiFi services payment now overdue and don't have cash to pay it The WiFi story has been mentioned on here already, is it possible that they (whoever "they" are) could be the ones that serve a winding-up order on RFC? And does anyone have an idea as to what sort of cash they have outstanding to this firm? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Over to you Mike, will you hand over ?12m with the court case now underway[emoji36] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strachsuit Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Over to you Mike, will you hand over ?12m with the court case now underway[emoji36] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I think it's pretty clear that he won't hand over ?12m, seeing as RFC don't have enough assets to secrure against to justify him doing so. That begs the questions; will they be punished and suspended by AIM for not having accounts signed off? (pretty certain) and how will they stumble along through January and beyond? Wallace and McLeod away to stop the ship from sinking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soonbe110 Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Was this not reported yesterday as being an out of court settlement..? Yes but from Collyer Bristow which seems very strange given they were only advisors to CW. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Dan Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Will they generate enough cash? I suspect not and even if they did it would not be COD. They need readies and quick sales are not around these days. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 For that to be the case both Collyer Bristow and their insurance broker need to have accepted liability. I'd be surprised if that was the case before any legal arguments in Court. Its cheaper not going to court if they think they've done wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo-Jimbo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Will they generate enough cash? I suspect not and even if they did it would not be COD. They need readies and quick sales are not around these days. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Very much this. The days are long gone when you got 50% cash up front then the rest in instalments. Besides everybody knows how desperate they are for cash so folk would offer derisory offers in the hope they sell. Wasn't that rumored that somebody made an offer for Wallace like ?800k or something like that but Rangers wanted ?3m, well they might just have to take ?800k just to keep the lights on for another month. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) Bids explained http://www1.skysports.com/watch/video/9568935/ashley-bid-best-for-rangers This reminded me. I understand that Green was blocked from selling any shares for 2 years and this means he can sell his shares around this time next month. I understand that Green is the still biggest share holder with around 7.8%, but could of been diluted, it will be interesting to see if Greens sells and, if so, who buys his shares. Maybe Ashley's current shares and loan puts in prime position to get the rest. ( From 2012 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-valued-at-45m-as-ibrox-club-1498096 . ) Edited November 18, 2014 by I.T.K Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yes but from Collyer Bristow which seems very strange given they were only advisors to CW. Gary Withey of Collyer Bristow was also Company Secretary at Rangers during Whyte's tenure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 This reminded me. I understand that Green was blocked from selling any shares for 2 years and this means he can sell his shares around this time next month. I understand that Green is the still biggest share holder with around 7.8%, but could of been diluted, it will be interesting to see if Greens sells and, if so, who buys his shares. Maybe Ashley's current shares and loan puts in prime position to get the rest. ( From 2012 http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-valued-at-45m-as-ibrox-club-1498096 . ) The lock-in period was only 12 months from the date of the RIFC IPO and that expired in December 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 I really do not like Rangers at all. See equally though, this horrendous trend of sharing Celtic fan photoshop pictures, that are not even slightly funny, is getting really nauseating, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunoatemyhamster Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 With clubs knowing the position they are in financially they might not be in a position to refuse low bids. Beggars can't be choosers & Sevco need cash desperately. This is why i laughed at that Telfer bid from Dundee United. Beautifully timed for acceptance. Love how the boots on the other foot these days. 40k is 40k , Even if it doesn't cover the broadband bill. LOLCO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Future's Maroon Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Right forget about the managment team issue for the moment.Would these four signings be enough to get us through to the summer and into the SPL Graham Shinnie Vladimir Weiss Tom Hateley Stevie May Thoughts? Just seen this on the Bear Pitt - I take it they have a good few million to spend on players then? LMFAO!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 The lock-in period was only 12 months from the date of the RIFC IPO and that expired in December 2013. I'm sure I read it was 2 years.... seems im not ITK! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yep, wonder which club will be he 1st to bid for McLeod?. How long is he contracted up until? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunoatemyhamster Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Yep, wonder which club will be the 1st to bid for McLeod?. Newcastle with a ?12 million bid ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brunoatemyhamster Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) Just seen this on the Bear Pitt - I take it they have a good few million to spend on players then? LMFAO!! They'd have been as well putting Messi , Ronaldo , Aguero, Di Maria and Costa. WTF planet are they on. Infact, Could they even afford the original list on loan ? Dreaming. Edited November 18, 2014 by brunoatemyhamster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 Can't imagine anyone bidding a million or over for LM. Rangers used to be able to add a premium to any Scottish player on their books, compared to clubs outside of the Old Firm, but I suspect those days are gone, at least for players who have only played in the lower divisions of Scotland. Why would anyone splurge on LM? Too big a risk to spend big on, when he's pretty much untested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 I think it's pretty clear that he won't hand over ?12m, seeing as RFC don't have enough assets to secrure against to justify him doing so. Mike Ashley may hand over some money in dribs and drabs - just to keep the lights on - until he has secured rights to all the assets he wants, including ?1brokes and Murray Park. At that point he can turn the financial tap off and just let them die. This would allow all the over priced contracts (with players & with Spivs) to be torn up, and let the likes of King come in to build another new football club (3angers?) carrying little or no debt, but renting ?1brokes and Murray Park from MA. This would give him a nice long term income, with no need to bother about the football side, and possibly still with merchandising done via Sports Direct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) Mike Ashley only drip feeds to keep the poor critter from dying of thirst. This tells us he is not interested in 'Investing' to create a powerful club. Yet This is confusing, as he has interests in the saleable items. Perhaps he and King have indeed come to some arrangement .... Edited November 18, 2014 by Alva-Jambo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alva-Jambo Posted November 18, 2014 Share Posted November 18, 2014 If there is a warrant out for Walter Mitty's arrest then no point trying to hide in Monaco. He should think about Argentina. Lovely people, warm, cheap and no extradition. ( not that I am advising anyone to) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts