Look Back to Look Forward

By

CORRUPT OFFICIAL APRIL 6, 2016 at 12:45 ============================ Rangers, currently in liquidation have …

Comment on Look Back to Look Forward by Homunculus.

CORRUPT OFFICIAL
APRIL 6, 2016 at 12:45

============================

Rangers, currently in liquidation have debts of (best guess) around £120,000,000. Only a fraction, if any of that will ever be paid.

The Rangers who have existed for around 3-4 years have overspent by around £34,000,000 (so far) in that short time. They currently have debts of around £11,000,000. That’s the PLC, the subsidiary have debts of around £18,000,000 but that is to the parent company so genuinely is an internal matter, it’s really the groups debt which is important.

The overspending and building of debt is only getting worse, they are spending more than they earn and seem unable to do anything about it. As far as I can see this will continue for as long as major shareholders and supporters are willing to provide the board with more money. If they want to strengthen the squad in the summer, and everyone seems to think they will, it will have to come from borrowing, a share/rights issue or selling other assets.

It’s an incredible story, which is only really surpassed by the media’s apparent ability to totally ignore the most important parts of it. Rangers bought the championship, at the second attempt, by overspending what will probably be about £40,000,000 by the end of the season. That is not an achievement, it is madness.

Homunculus Also Commented

Look Back to Look Forward
NAWLITE
APRIL 6, 2016 at 11:51
2 0 Rate This

They refused to answer my follow up asking how the club was separate.

===========================================================

They cannot answer it because it simply isn’t true. The club merely changed the type of entity it was. It’s all there in the history.

Four young chaps had a dream and started a football team. That team became a members club (1872) and in the fullness of time it changed into a private limited company (1899). The private limited company then went public, floated on the stock exchange and became a public limited company (2000). For absolute clarity at the time that PLC failed to obtain a CVA and was placed into (ongoing) liquidation (2012) it did have a holding company. Wavetower (as was) owned something like 85% of the shares in the PLC.

They will not answer the question because they do not like the honest answer. They are more fond of the myth Charles Green created, the separate club / company. The continuity myth is strong because it suits a lot of agendas, it being a lie is just an uncomfortable truth. There was no point at which the PLC owned the Club, it’s just nonsense.


Look Back to Look Forward
JOCKYBHOY
APRIL 3, 2016 at 16:51

To be honest I’m still not quite clear what the “trap” was.

He said that the new legislation would fall foul of ECHR

I asked which article.

He said Article 7 (for starters)

I said I thought Article 7 related to criminality.

Maybe it’s just me but I really don’t see the trap or how I was taken in by it.


Look Back to Look Forward
BOGS DOLLOX
APRIL 3, 2016 at 00:44
4 6 Rate This

Homuncilus – you say you are a lawyer but you immediately pounced on me – trying to devalue my opinion on the possible role of the ECHR. That was a trap – you fell into it.
Tax “schemes”/avoidance are legal at the time because the vendors of them seek leading tax counsels opinion who are willing to opine that they are legit and they will see HMRC in Court to fight the case over legal technicalities/perceived ” loopholes”.

========================================

1. Why would I say I was a lawyer, I am no such thing.

2. I didn’t try to “devalue your opinion on the possible role of the ECHR.” I simply asked what particular article of the ECHR would come into play. You said Article 7. I merely pointed out that Article 7 related to retrospective legislation with regards criminality. Tax avoidance, as far as I am aware is not a criminal act.

3, “Tax “schemes”/avoidance are legal at the time because the vendors of them seek leading tax counsels opinion …”. I think you will find that Parliament and the courts decide what is legal and what isn’t. The people you describe as “leading tax counsel” are highly trained and highly paid lawyers, however they are not legislators. They neither make nor enforce the law. Getting their opinion on something does not make it legal. It just gives you someone you can blame when things go wrong.

Tax avoidance is not legal. A lawyer giving an opinion that a certain scheme is not avoidance it is legitimate tax management does not change that.


Recent Comments by Homunculus

It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
He has a logo already


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
TONY
JANUARY 2, 2018 at 16:03
===========================

Not the humility then.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
TONY
JANUARY 2, 2018 at 15:37
==============================

You guessed, what gave it away.


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
Our hero, and he really is a hero is at it again with his self-effacing prose.

“I cover every issue and more often than not you will read it here first. If I were a Superhero and not a mere blogger I would literally champion the oppressed. However as one who believes  that the pen is mightier than the sword I revert to keystrokes. I have never had a tattoo but if I ever decided to go down this route I would choose the Palestinian flag. However as this might offend one of my my best friends, Max in Tel Aviv, I continue to demure.”

I’m assuming he means demur, however he could well be a shy, modest lady. 

The heroism continues

“When it comes to murderers who remain at large this site will continue to hold the most the most odious mass murderer since Pol Pot, Tony Blair, to account. Given half a chance I would fell him with a single head-butt or induce irreparable damage to his frontal lobes with an upward punch to his nose. Suffice to say I have sufficient training in martial arts to make this blow count. People like Blair are immune to the pen. This lily livered pansy deserves the sword.”

Can you guess who it is yet. 


It Is Better To Offer No Excuse Than A Bad One
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/15715129.New_poll_shows_fans_are_overwhelmingly_in_favour_of_moving_away_from_Hampden/

THE case for retaining Hampden as the home of Scottish football has been dealt a blow after a survey found just 15 per cent of fans were happy to stay put.

…..

The Scottish Football Supporters Association (SFSA) carried out a survey of just under 3,000 of its members and found only a sixth wanted to see major internationals and cup finals staged at Hampden.


About the author