Spot the difference?

By

Zilch says: February 17, 2015 at 12:12 am ================================== An excellent thought provoking …

Comment on Spot the difference? by The Cat NR1.

Zilch says:
February 17, 2015 at 12:12 am
==================================
An excellent thought provoking post.
I typed out a simliar length post at work this lunchtime about how the English game had eradicated racism from grounds and how any incidents are now reported by the fans themselves to stewards and police rather than them having to hunt the perpetrators. That empowerment did not happen overnight.

I didn’t put the post up, as I was struggling to work out how the Scottish disease could be treated to end up with the same outcome.
It has to be driven by political will from the top, but mandated by society. Top pressure would force the clubs and governing bodies to jump into line rather than pay lip service by withholding grants, resticting ground capacities etc. Criminalisation is not the solution, as banning words will not change the way people think.
Football as a whole saying no to sectarianism and excluding those who won’t behave and treating them as pariahs forces a choice of behaving like a civilised person or not going to football for a fixed period, or for repeat offenders sine die.

I am yet to be convinced that the political will is there to make it happen, although being on the outside looking in, that may not reflect the view of those closer to the situation.

The Cat NR1 Also Commented

Spot the difference?
GoosyGoosy says:
March 7, 2015 at 12:19 am

parttimearab says:
March 6, 2015 at 11:06 pm
The Cat NR1 says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:24 pm

SD would be the ones appointing the administrators
===================================================
Sorry Cat, must be my night to be picky, but ain’t SD loans secured…and secured creditors can’t IIRC appoint administrators..
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Isnt it the other way about? SD have a floating charge and therefore the right to appoint an Administrator/Liquidator if the terms of their loan are not fulfilled? Thats what CW did in 2012
============================================
http://www.londonstockexchange.com/exchange/news/market-news/market-news-detail/12227853.html
The first £5M is secured by a combination of fixed and floating charges.
The second £5M I’m fairly sure would be secured by floating charge, subject to positive due dilligence.

https://www.insolvencydirect.bis.gov.uk/technicalmanual/Ch49-60/Chapter%2056-1/Part%203/Part%203.htm

EDIT
I just noticed that the second £5M will have a five year repayment plan, so that would give TRFC some wriggle room. However, the first £5M has no specified repayment date.


Spot the difference?
TSFM says:
March 6, 2015 at 6:50 pm

The_Pie_Man says:
March 6, 2015 at 6:42 pm
I wonder now that King et al have won the EGM how long the Loan Players from Newcastle will remain at Ibrox.
__________________________________________________________________________

I think that is an interesting question. I remember an old boss telling me that to be successful in negotiations, you had to check your testosterone in at the meeting room door. Given that Ashley has been spectacularly successful in business, my guess is that he will display no petulance, and that the loanees will remain.

But that’s just my guess. How MA reacts on that kind of trivial level will be very interesting.
======================================
Isn’t it in MA’s interests for the Gerdie Five to stay from several perspectives?

He owns NUFC, so by getting them off the NUFC wage bill, he’s saving his company money. They wouldn’t be used at St James’s, so there is no opportunity cost.

If they get game time, it may improve them as players or increase the possibility of offloading the ones NUFC no longer wish to keep.

If they do well on the pitch, it may help increase the feel-good factor at Ibrox, and that increases the SD profits through increased merchandising sales.

If they do nothing but bench warm, it’s TRFC not NUFC paying for it.

In the event of administration, the loans would be terminated immediately as one of the first cost cutting moves, but is there a termination or recall clause in the loan deal that could be excercised in the normal course of business? Have the terms been made public?


Spot the difference?
easyJambo says:
March 6, 2015 at 10:06 pm

The SMSM menu has been updated to restore succulent fayre.

Daily Record Sport @Record_Sport · 9m 9 minutes ago
Rangers chairman Paul Murray: I’d like to thank the Daily Record for its courageous journalism over the past 4 years http://dlyr.ec/PKak08
==========================
That Paul Murray’s got a cracking line in sarcasm.


Recent Comments by The Cat NR1

Les Says It is Time to Ask The Audience?
Hoopy 7 9th May 2020 at 22:36

Good Evening,

It is many months since I have posted.

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

I’ve not posted for ages (much longer than a few months!) and I was trying to work out something to say to reintroduce myself but your post hit the nail on the head and saved me a lot of typing.

Thanks for that Hoopy 7.

Hopefully I’ll be able to join in the as-ever excellent discussions, although I was a bit concerned the other day when an old pain in the proverbial resurfaced and threatened to upset the decorum of the site.
 

The Cat NR1


The Day I was on the Scotland U-23 Bench
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/38428288
It’s nice to see that the BBC is carolling from the SkySports songsheet in the above article.
“OF” mentioned twice and some top level liquidation denial thrown in for good measure.


Peace – Not War
Any chance of this happening in Scotland?
http://www.fsf.org.uk/blog/view/mp-calls-for-government-to-clean-up-game-edm-nov-2016


Peace – Not War
bfbpuzzledDecember 6, 2016 at 20:31
What do the various Rangers have to show for their loans fundamentally hee haw I believe. Nothing has been done to build potential long term income streams via improved facilities or some other projects. It seems that the assets have declined in value and future fixed costs are likely to rise in the form of deferred maintenance. There may be a baldrickian plan and opportunity available for some rich tax pauchler but I do not know what it is -perhaps some advice should be sought.
===================================
I suspect that rather than one of Baldrick’s cunning plans, they will go with the tried and tested Earl Haig’s underpants over the head and pencils up the nostrils. And we all know how that ended up.
It wasn’t the admininistration and liquidation to end all administrations and liquidations though. Deja vu?


Peace – Not War
HomunculusNovember 24, 2016 at 21:2328 Votes 
Using EBTs incorrectly in order to reduce your tax was never a “loophole” it was classic tax avoidance.
Tax avoidance is not and never has been perfectly acceptable as some people would have you believe. That is tax management.
Tax avoidance is using a legitimate scheme, incorrectly, for a purpose which was never intended.
Investing in an ISA is tax management.
Using an EBT to receive contractual payments is tax avoidance.
====================================
That’s heading into tax evasion territory.


About the author