The Rangers soap opera goes on and on.

[Mikey1874]

1 minute ago, sadj said:

So going by that hes got his way and doesnt need to ringfence money ina. UK Escrow 

 

The message from today seems to be

 

"Just get on and make the offer Mr King"

 

with or without dramatic language 

[Don Dan]

Still seems vague to my not so learned brain. Does King now have to lodge the funds in an accessible UK escrow. How long has King got, what does “as quickly as possible “ mean in law?  Penniless must set alarm bells ringing behind the wrought iron gates, no war chest! Being declared “penniless” by your lawyers must alarm the markets King operates in especially in the UK ( if he does) 

Edited July 20, 2018 by Dannie Boy

[Footballfirst]

2 minutes ago, sadj said:

So going by that hes got his way and doesnt need to ringfence money ina. UK Escrow 

 

Not really.

 

Lord Bannatyne suggested to King's QC that he should have a word with his client and get things sorted out, preferably without the need to go to a proof hearing.

[sadj]

2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

 

Not really.

 

Lord Bannatyne suggested to King's QC that he should have a word with his client and get things sorted out, preferably without the need to go to a proof hearing.

Ah right ok so basically look hes in contempt but if we go that route its going to be trouble for you get him told please to just comply and get it moving so we can avoid that?

Edited July 20, 2018 by sadj

[Scnorthedinburgh]

The Lord has given king a chance to comply and avoid court by both parties councils talking and agreeing how the original court order will be met.

If king doesn t grab that chance it's in court in august and that judge will enforce the order.

No wiggle room, the no end in sight part basically covers it all, comply and it's over.

[Footballfirst]

2 minutes ago, sadj said:

Ah right ok so basically looks hes in contempt but if we go that route its going to be trouble for you get him told please to just comply and get it moving so we can avoid that?

 

A two day proof hearing to be held in front of another commercial judge, possibly on 14th August unless the two parties can agree on how an offer will be progressed before then. Lord Bannatyne was keen to see the matter concluded.

 

Lord Bannatyne said that he wasn’t going to be available until April next year, so the proof (as requested by TOP and agreed by Lord Davidson) would have to be heard by another judge.

 

He basically told Lord Davidson to have a word with his client and get things sorted out. Lord Davidson nodded in agreement with the look of someone saying “I know, I know”.

 

It might be a good thing for King that Lord Bannatyne will not rule on the matter as he seemed to be exasperated by the failure of King to submit a code compliant offer.

 

A “proof” in Scots legal parlance is effectively a trial for civil matters, where both sides are able to put their cases to a judge, who will rule on the matter.  That should be the end of it, barring another appeal to the Inner House.

 

I believe that “trials” are only for criminal or jury matters.

[Don Dan]

In one sense King is caught between a rock and a hard place. He has to make an offer for the other shares and that will cost the penniless liar money. He cant authorise a new share release until he does which is no doubt holding new funds back from the club. Meaning another loan required in the very near future.

 

King will drag this out in the hope of a successful run in Europe. I’m sure he’s given  loans to the club which he’ll recall to fund this offer. 

Edited July 20, 2018 by Dannie Boy

[sadj]

Just now, Footballfirst said:

 

A two day proof hearing to be held in front of another commercial judge, possibly on 14th August unless the two parties can agree on how an offer will be progressed before then. Lord Bannatyne was keen to see the matter concluded.

 

Lord Bannatyne said that he wasn’t going to be available until April next year, so the proof (as requested by TOP and agreed by Lord Davidson) would have to be heard by another judge.

 

He basically told Lord Davidson to have a word with his client and get things sorted out. Lord Davidson nodded in agreement with the look of someone saying “I know, I know”.

 

It might be a good thing for King that Lord Bannatyne will not rule on the matter as he seemed to be exasperated by the failure of King to submit a code compliant offer.

 

A “proof” in Scots legal parlance is effectively a trial for civil matters, where both sides are able to put their cases to a judge, who will rule on the matter.  That should be the end of it, barring another appeal to the Inner House.

 

I believe that “trials” are only for criminal or jury matters.

Is the contempt not a criminal thing? Or is that a different matter

[sadj]

@Footballfirst is there a possibility he is squirming on the offer to try and get others to pay it as if he uses his own money SARS will be all over it asking where the money came from?

[Footballfirst]

2 minutes ago, sadj said:

Is the contempt not a criminal thing? Or is that a different matter

 

There are different laws relating to civil contempt and criminal contempt. 

 

1 minute ago, sadj said:

@Footballfirst is there a possibility he is squirming on the offer to try and get others to pay it as if he uses his own money SARS will be all over it asking where the money came from?

 

Of course he is squirming on the offer because he just doesn't want to do it as there is no value to him doing so.  I don't think he has an option to getting someone else to pay for it, although all that the Court and TOP were interested in was that he makes a code compliant offer, rather than where he sources the funds or which trust is used.

[Scnorthedinburgh]

4 minutes ago, sadj said:

@Footballfirst is there a possibility he is squirming on the offer to try and get others to pay it as if he uses his own money SARS will be all over it asking where the money came from?

He is squirming as he doesn't want to do it with anyone's money.

TOP won't care where the money comes from as long as the offer is made and underwritten by King.

King knows some investers will cash in so it will cost him.

He just wanted enough to be able to push through votes, not to be actually left holding the baby.

Plus any future share offer would water down the value of these shares he is being forced to put an offer for.

Reducing the ways he can raise funds for the club, unless he is willing to hurt himself.

[Glamorgan Jambo]

Just quickly checked the share price of King's company (micromega) and notice that it's halved this year. About half of the fall is down to the special dividend that was said to be the source of the £11 million to be used for this offer. No idea what caused the other half. Maybe all is not quite as well with his businesses as he'd like fans to think. 

[sac]

When’s the next round of the Europa league, because “as soon as possible” & “no end in sight” just buys them more time.

 

just makes it look like the law is complicit allowing this to drag on. Whose in charge here ffs?

[buzzbomb1958]

King is an ideal fit for the new club both don't give a toss for the rules other honest people and institutions have to adhere to ,they think they are above the law, the sooner these zombies have their heads chopped off the better,I only hope and pray that when the time comes they stay dead

[jambovambo]

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/sfa-face-six-figure-legal-bill-to-fine-rangers-5k-reports-1-4771633

[reaths17]

31 minutes ago, jambovambo said:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/sfa-face-six-figure-legal-bill-to-fine-rangers-5k-reports-1-4771633

they brushes must be worn too the wood if their actually thinking about it

[brunoatemyhamster]

1 hour ago, jambovambo said:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/sfa-face-six-figure-legal-bill-to-fine-rangers-5k-reports-1-4771633

Get it payed! Maybe cut back on the 6% rises this year. That will cover it. 

[12XU]

On 08/07/2018 at 20:27, redjambo said:

 

Cheers for posting this.

Rangers Thug - ex Liverpool player - back in court today and fined  - but don’t worry - SG reckons he will be a fans favourite 

[NANOJAMBO]

31 minutes ago, 12XU said:

Rangers Thug - ex Liverpool player - back in court today and fined  - but don’t worry - SG reckons he will be a fans favourite 

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/jon-flanagan-court-breach-order-14934922

[IveSeenTheLight]

5 hours ago, jambovambo said:

https://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/teams/rangers/sfa-face-six-figure-legal-bill-to-fine-rangers-5k-reports-1-4771633

 

Bloody hell, that link should come with a warning it has a video lauding the DeidCo achievements, including the players they signed using EBT’s as a lure.

[1971fozzy]

3 hours ago, 12XU said:

Rangers Thug - ex Liverpool player - back in court today and fined  - but don’t worry - SG reckons he will be a fans favourite 

 

SG has been in court himself let’s not forget  he is a perfect fit for newco

[25bhr]

Once upon a time in a far away land there were 2 football teams.   One team made an honest mistake by fielding an ineligible player. The other team's major shareholder broke the law. He was then in contempt of court. He continually evaded his financial obligations laid down by high authority.  Now the powers that be in this far off land took highly punitive action against this team and its owner.  But they viewed the first teams misdemeanour as a simple oversight and took no action against them. This far away land is a place of enlightenment. It is not called Scotland

[jambovambo]

http://thenational.scot/news/16368845.court-orders-rangers-chairman-dave-king-to-make-11m-share-offer/

 

This article says “orders” ...

 

Others have said “urges”. 

 

I prefer this one. 

[Don Dan]

31 minutes ago, jambovambo said:

http://thenational.scot/news/16368845.court-orders-rangers-chairman-dave-king-to-make-11m-share-offer/

 

This article says “orders” ...

 

Others have said “urges”. 

 

I prefer this one. 

 

It would interesting to read to courts transcript of the actual wording.

[kirkierobroy]

On 7/21/2018 at 14:12, jambovambo said:

http://thenational.scot/news/16368845.court-orders-rangers-chairman-dave-king-to-make-11m-share-offer/

 

This article says “orders” ...

 

Others have said “urges”. 

 

I prefer this one. 

 

Does The National not worry about the structural integrity of its windaes?

[John Findlay]

On Saturday, July 21, 2018 at 14:45, Dannie Boy said:

 

It would interesting to read to courts transcript of the actual wording.

I don't think the National care. Afterall they are political wise as far from Sevco and their support you can get. Credit to them for reporting in a non sycophantic manner.

[lost in space]

17 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

I don't think the National care. Afterall they are political wise as far from Sevco and their support you can get. Credit to them for reporting in a non sycophantic manner.

Nobody reads it. Has a tiny circulation/print. 

[John Findlay]

3 minutes ago, lost in space said:

Nobody reads it. Has a tiny circulation/print. 

Maybe not hardcopy but, I bet it gets far more reading it online.

[Spellczech]

On 21/07/2018 at 14:12, jambovambo said:

http://thenational.scot/news/16368845.court-orders-rangers-chairman-dave-king-to-make-11m-share-offer/

 

This article says “orders” ...

 

Others have said “urges”. 

 

I prefer this one. 

I'm most interested in the last 2 paragraphs. Surely King has no interest whatsoever in other shareholders accepting his offer? He already controls the board. So what is the "chaos" that would result from shareholders rejecting his offer of 20p?

[Jodami]

2 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

I'm most interested in the last 2 paragraphs. Surely King has no interest whatsoever in other shareholders accepting his offer? He already controls the board. So what is the "chaos" that would result from shareholders rejecting his offer of 20p?

It's not particularly well worded but I think the suggestion is it would be chaotic if he doesn't pony up the money for the offer - no share issue, TOP sanctions etc. He won't obviously so then it will be interesting to see what the authorities do next. 

[eyesandears]

1 hour ago, lost in space said:

Nobody reads it. Has a tiny circulation/print. 

I think it'll be dead before Rangers. 

[colinmaroon]

2 hours ago, lost in space said:

Nobody reads it. Has a tiny circulation/print. 

 

 

Ah, so you're tapping all online traffic and able to come to that judgement on actual data or, are you just waving it in the wind?

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

If King doesn't pony up, the TOP could/would have recourse to instruct the rest of the concert party to make the offer, instead of King. So the end result might be that King goes to jail and all, or one, of the rest have to make the offer. That, I'd suggest would constitute chaos.

[ri Alban]

10 hours ago, eyesandears said:

I think it'll be dead before Rangers. 

Rangers are already dead. 

[tntjambo]

8 hours ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

If King doesn't pony up, the TOP could/would have recourse to instruct the rest of the concert party to make the offer, instead of King. So the end result might be that King goes to jail and all, or one, of the rest have to make the offer. That, I'd suggest would constitute chaos.

 

If TGASLWas going to pony up he would have long ago he is not ponying up because he has no money to do so it is as simple as that he will keep kicking the can down the road till either someone else ponys up on his behalf or the TOP give up the ghost.

[John Findlay]

7 minutes ago, tntjambo said:

 

If TGASLWas going to pony up he would have long ago he is not ponying up because he has no money to do so it is as simple as that he will keep kicking the can down the road till either someone else ponys up on his behalf or the TOP give up the ghost.

TOP will not give up the ghost. They are not the SFA or SPFL 

King doesn't have the money. He never has. His problem has been getting someone else to pony up.

He's finally finding out he can count all his friends on one finger or less.

This is the beginning of the end for King.

Whether the same can be said of Sevco remains to be seen.

[lost in space]

12 hours ago, colinmaroon said:

 

 

Ah, so you're tapping all online traffic and able to come to that judgement on actual data or, are you just waving it in the wind?

No, of course I don't have info on on-line traffic (Wiki does show a hard copy of 7770 per day and digital of 1975).  There are reductions on all hard copy newspapers - with many dropping half of their hard copy sales.  The Independent has lost about 75% of it hard copy sales though in the last few years.  

The Daily Record has a circulation of approx. 138000.

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

30 minutes ago, tntjambo said:

 

If TGASLWas going to pony up he would have long ago he is not ponying up because he has no money to do so it is as simple as that he will keep kicking the can down the road till either someone else ponys up on his behalf or the TOP give up the ghost.

I think King does have the money (enough to cover his liability, but not necessarily many millions above it), but having money, and spending it, are two entirely different things, and once it is spent, you don't have as much as you did before, especially when the money you spend is dropped into a big, bottomless hole. King just doesn't want to spend the money, plus he has a problem if he does try to comply as, if he can't get the money legitimately out of SA, he would be in the full gaze of the SA authorities should he use money he shouldn't have, such as investments outside of SA he should have repatriated to SA under the terms of his get out of jail free arrangement.

 

King might never do time for not complying with the TOP order, he might never lose out, personally, because of it (other than, perhaps, being unable to return to the land of his birth), but contrary to what he says, and what most believe, it might actually do a lot of harm to TRFC if the 3bears find themselves having to do the complying for him. They won't have the luxury of living outside of UK legal jurisdiction, and other than declaring themselves bankrupt, would have no escape from having to make the offer, which, once King is out of the picture, could see a rise in the level of acceptance as belief in the survival of the club diminishes.

 

So, the directors who appear to have already maxed out on making directors loans, would now face having to spend £5m plus for shares they clearly don't want and will see as a further irrecoverable personal loss. With TRFC historically surviving on directors loans, recently having to borrow secured loans from unsympathetic lenders, and now their main pledger of future funding right out of the picture, that would undoubtedly constitute the chaos at Ibrox the article suggests.

[eyesandears]

12 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Rangers are already dead. 

You are of course correct my friend. My mistake. The National is likely to die before Sevco 

[jambovambo]

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/law-firm-is-told-to-explain-rangers-settlement-secrecy-ldfw0xnt2

 

Collyer Bristow told by judge to explain secrecy of settlement between them and Rangers FC Group. 

 

Interesting. 

 

Its in the Herald too but can’t find a link. 

[Neon]

34 minutes ago, jambovambo said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/law-firm-is-told-to-explain-rangers-settlement-secrecy-ldfw0xnt2

 

Collyer Bristow told by judge to explain secrecy of settlement between them and Rangers FC Group. 

 

Interesting. 

 

Its in the Herald too but can’t find a link. 

Depressing how long this has been dragged out, time consuming and a complete waste of money - wonder what the tax payer is footing for all these court appearances.

[Footballfirst]

1 hour ago, jambovambo said:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/law-firm-is-told-to-explain-rangers-settlement-secrecy-ldfw0xnt2

 

Collyer Bristow told by judge to explain secrecy of settlement between them and Rangers FC Group. 

 

Interesting. 

 

Its in the Herald too but can’t find a link. 

 

I actually attended yesterday's hearing in the hope that things had moved on a bit - they hadn't.  The case relates to Henderson & Jones seeking cash from the Oldco in respect of a floating charge held by Wavetower/Liberty Capital. H&J are a company that specialises in buying and following up on legal claims held by insolvent companies.  My understanding is that CW still has the right to one third of any proceeds obtained.

 

The hearing was just a follow-up to one in June in which Lord Bannatyne ordered that the £24m settlement agreement between BDO and Collyer Bristow be provided in a sealed envelope to H&J pending any claims of confidentiality through privilege.

 

BDO waived their rights to privilege, but Collyer Bristow sought to retain them in a letter from their solicitors Clyde & Co. so the envelope remains unopened. H&J were seeking that Lord Bannatyne should rule that the envelope could be opened and allow them to see the terms of the settlement agreement, i.e. why the £24m was paid.

 

Some debate on privilege followed as Roddy Dunlop QC for BDO was obliged to argue Collyer Bristow’s case despite him representing BDO who held a different position.

 

Lord Bannatyne eventually ruled that Collyer Bristow’s solicitors should be directed to attend the next hearing, now scheduled for 16 August.

 

What is the importance of the terms of the settlement agreement?

 

It's not totally clear, but Douglas Fairlie QC argued on behalf of H&J that BDO held contradictory positions on the Lloyds Assignation and Ticketus agreements. On the one hand it was suggested that it was how those those agreements came about that prompted the £24m settlement, while on the other BDO held a contrary view in denying H&J’s floating charge claim because those same agreements were viewed as being tainted and fraudulent. 

 

It only becomes important when H&J claim that they should have had first dibs on the £24m through Wavetower/Liberty Capital’s floating charge; i.e. if BDO argued that the Assignation and Ticketus agreement were all above board in obtaining the £24m, then it follows that the floating charge should also be kosher. If however, the £24m was handed over for other reasons, then it would weaken H&J’s claim.

 

The next episode in the saga will follow in three weeks time.

 

There is another hearing at the CoS on Friday in BDO's action against the administrators (D&P) for incompetence.  That case probably has some way to go before we might get to the meatier bits.

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, neonjambo said:

Depressing how long this has been dragged out, time consuming and a complete waste of money - wonder what the tax payer is footing for all these court appearances.

 

I would imagine the parties concerned are covering the court costs (well the losers anyway). Not sure the tax payer will be coughing up.

[Hearts Machine]

On 7/20/2018 at 21:03, NANOJAMBO said:

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/liverpool-news/jon-flanagan-court-breach-order-14934922

 

"Former Liverpool FC defender Jon Flanagan today admitted skipping a rehabilitation session imposed after he kicked his girlfriend in the street."

 

Animal. Even Stan collywobble ain`t that low. He kicked Ulkrika in the face and legs..........terrible enough.  But a boot straight in the lady`s street?  That musta hurt.

I don`t have a "Street" to kick, but if I did, I`ll bet it would be bloody sore.

 

Edited July 25, 2018 by Hearts Machine

[7628mm]

Someone mentioned in another thread about Rangers wearing a Hummel strip last night that had no advertising on the shirt. Could be a UEFA "anti gambling" advertising ban thing but I am currently none the wiser. 

The strip is not one of the 3 that Hummel adverts have for Rangers for 2018/19. Could be something or could be nothing.

Basically looking for some info if anyone has any.

[John Findlay]

5 minutes ago, 7628mm said:

Someone mentioned in another thread about Rangers wearing a Hummel strip last night that had no advertising on the shirt. Could be a UEFA "anti gambling" advertising ban thing but I am currently none the wiser. 

The strip is not one of the 3 that Hummel adverts have for Rangers for 2018/19. Could be something or could be nothing.

Basically looking for some info if anyone has any.

If Hibs had Marathon Bet on their's last night. Then it won't be a Uefa rule.

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

If Hibs had Marathon Bet on their's last night. Then it won't be a Uefa rule.

 

Hibs did have Marathon Bet on shirts

 

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hibs/how-the-hibs-players-rated-against-asteras-tripolis-1-4774675

[Spellczech]

14 minutes ago, 7628mm said:

Someone mentioned in another thread about Rangers wearing a Hummel strip last night that had no advertising on the shirt. Could be a UEFA "anti gambling" advertising ban thing but I am currently none the wiser. 

The strip is not one of the 3 that Hummel adverts have for Rangers for 2018/19. Could be something or could be nothing.

Basically looking for some info if anyone has any.

Probably Sports Direct have said "Our shop staff are not applying any more transfers until our position is settled"

[Jambo-Jimbo]

 

According to the daily ranger.

 

"Rangers are set for a surprise strip selection ahead of their clash with Osijek.

Steven Gerrard 's side are in Croatia as they look to gain a first leg advantage in the Europa League second qualifying round tie.

 

The Ibrox faithful were wowed as three designs were unveiled by new kit producer Hummel earlier this month - but none of those will be used at the Stadion Gradski vrt tonight.

Instead, as per the club's official Instagram story, Rangers look to be donning a red kit which was used in a closed-door friendly against TNS.

Gerrard's men have also used the red top in training throughout pre-season.

The strip does not feature a sponsor on the front, with Rangers usually backed by online casino company 32Red."

 

Sorry for having to post a link to this rag, but I have to. (Doesn't mean anybody else has to click on it, as the above is the full story)

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-set-surprise-strip-selection-12986581

 

Story doesn't give any reasons why they are using a training kit.

Edited July 27, 2018 by Jambo-Jimbo

[Escobar PHM]

6 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

According to the daily ranger.

 

"Rangers are set for a surprise strip selection ahead of their clash with Osijek.

Steven Gerrard 's side are in Croatia as they look to gain a first leg advantage in the Europa League second qualifying round tie.

 

The Ibrox faithful were wowed as three designs were unveiled by new kit producer Hummel earlier this month - but none of those will be used at the Stadion Gradski vrt tonight.

Instead, as per the club's official Instagram story, Rangers look to be donning a red kit which was used in a closed-door friendly against TNS.

Gerrard's men have also used the red top in training throughout pre-season.

The strip does not feature a sponsor on the front, with Rangers usually backed by online casino company 32Red."

 

Sorry for having to post a link to this rag, but I have to. (Doesn't mean anybody else has to click on it, as the above is the full story)

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-set-surprise-strip-selection-12986581

 

Story doesn't give any reasons why they are using a training kit.

Do they not have to register strip designs with the SPFL/SFA and UEFA ? Or is that another rule they're excluded from ?