Of Assets and Liabilities

Of Assets and Liabilities
We’ve added a Donate button to the sidebar for three separate amounts. The reason for this is that anything less than £2 would attract up too much PayPal charges for the donation to be worthwhile.
Seems a bit odd, but we’re doing this as a trial for reasons outlined in the poll page. We’ve been persuaded by the arguments for donation. This way, sensibilities won’t be offended by the presence of ads and no-one is compelled to contribute. We will give an account of donations in a month with news on how effective this move has been.

BTW, someone disliked us enough to spam the poll in an effort not to do anything 🙁

Details on the poll page.

Of Assets and Liabilities
Statue of Lobey, Rank Badyin and El Fideldo in Woodlands Road
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Lobey_Dosser_1.jpg

Some pics
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lobey+dosser&hl=en&rls=com.microsoft:en-gb:IE-Address&prmd=imvns&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=1WOWUO_pKYLM0QWL3YHIDg&ved=0CCoQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=633

Of Assets and Liabilities
john clarke says:

Friday, November 2, 2012 at 13:55(Edit)

I think this link will confirm my general description of the QC for Collyer Bristow.

http://www.advocates.org.uk/stables/advocates/00001890.html
__________________________________________________________________

John

Never trust someone whose name is a complete sentence 🙂

… except Rangers tax case!

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
bogsdollox says:

March 7, 2014 at 1:08 pm

Alan Price says:
March 7, 2014 at 12:54 pm

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Rangers were not the lender. The Sub-Trusts, into which Rangers made a contribution via an EBT, are the “lender”. Rangers gave the money away and there can be no suggestion of repayment to them.
__________________________________________________________________

Yes, but had the loans been repaid by the lendees, Rangers would have been able to apply for one themselves had they set up a sub-trust in their favour. Therefore the money would have been available to the club in times of hardship.

Or perhaps I am missing something here?

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Auldheid
Res 12 is as you say important, but I am convinced that Celtic have no desire whatsoever to pursue its aims.
We could have a discussion about the possible reasons, but ultimately if DD is disinclined to seek a proper answer to these questions, then the SFA will dodge the bullet.
Thus my question to Campbellsmoney: do individual (or groups of) shareholders have locus to seek legal redress here?
Going at it in that fashion may even force Celtic and other clubs for that matter to come on board.

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Campbellsmoney

Is there anyone outside of the clubs who may have locus to challenge LNS? Is there any basis for a challenge?

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————
I don’t know is the answer, but I doubt it. You see its not a question of law really. Its not a proper court – its a made up thing by a private body.
_________________________________________________________________

I meant a challenge in law. For example, is there a framework whereby a shareholder(s) of a club(s) could challenge the outcome?

It does seem rather odd that, if a most people here believe, RFC achieved honours dishonestly and in doing so denied other clubs prize-money and opportunity that those clubs are reluctant to seek redress.

My guess I that the must have something to lose by bringing that up – but what?

Is there a mechanism through which the SFA/SPL could be sued by individual shareholders for loss of earnings caused by a lack of proper regulation by the governing bodies.

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Campbellsmoney

Is there anyone outside of the clubs who may have locus to challenge LNS? Is there any basis for a challenge?

Scottish Football: An Honest Game, Honestly Governed?
Kicker Conspiracy

Double click or tap on the TU and it will change your vote 🙂