Three Shakes … and a Twist

By

Jack + jabber + co – PR `big push` has …

Comment on Three Shakes … and a Twist by twopanda.

Jack + jabber + co – PR `big push` has started – funny how they`ve been sitting on all this for 18months 😉 + More CG `noise, but; staying `in context`;
`
• In 13th Day since FTT `Landed` on 18th October – must be v very close to FTT Public release

twopanda Also Commented

Three Shakes … and a Twist
RTC reflecting on MSM Street of Shame over on twitter
– priceless the nonsense from the DR past and now – ridiculous MSM nonsense on parade.

Can’t help it RTC!! – Borrowed this – Billionaire `exclusive` article by the pilgrim jabber . 😉
http://twitter.com/rangerstaxcase/status/263243350247886849/photo/1


Three Shakes … and a Twist
Good golly gosh – seems the DR is in Historical `Revisionist` Mode – removing links all over the shop including – K Jacksons CW `Billionaire` has vanished into cyberspace oblivion – and him an award winning MSM reporter too! – oh dear dear my my. Wonder if today`s `exclusives` destined for same fate?

http://es.twitter.com/ETimsNet/status/177515536597528576

Still – The National Library of Scotland does keep a collection of Newspapers for `Record` just in case future scholars have a mind to research the workings of PR influence in the Scottish MSM.


Three Shakes … and a Twist
So LH hearing with D+P this Wednesday, we`re told, ostensibly scheduled to ratify the admins resolutions [fees] end the administration and appoint BDO. But a small matter of COI to resolve – we`re told. So presence of DG + CW + HMRC may be required? Or perhaps a later LH sitting?

On the Timeline, our understanding has changed given the 31 May tape disclosures of DG trying to get a CW statement to allay HMRC COI concerns. So in the fortnight up to the `sale` in mid June did HMRC seek representation with LH leading to him requesting a COI report a week after the `sale`? If that’s so, the major creditor HMRC had concerns over D+P two weeks before the `sale`. Did this come from the BBC documentary or was something else at play? HMRCs concerns seem [from the second tape] to centre around D+P and any connection to TU `Noise` in May. But in March LH ruled on TU. The implication is that `TU` were `active` in some form two weeks before the `sale` which is logical given over 20m at stake and CW guarantees had not materialised post the administration. Using `TU` shorthand, – but we need to define `TU` as the `investors` behind TU and not the umbrella company – they could all act independently post the administration.

`TU` has been rejected as a unsecured creditor for voting rights? Why? `TU` must believe they have a security whilst D+P consider any security invalid – or that `TU` didn`t have a direct contract with RFC and the 20.3m didn`t go through RFC books? – Why? We don`t know as the 2011 accounts are unaudited. But if the 20.3m went “mistakenly” from CB to LBG, `TU` could just ask LBG very nicely if they could have it back please? In public though TU will only say they`ll go after CW – which makes no sense. What does fit is that `TU` could have submitted `allegations` and that comes back again to who[m] was developing the deal[s] with TU and the investors behind it.

If DG of MCR/D+P was negotiating with the bank what difference would it make if DG knew about the original TU set-up or not? Well, it doesn’t make any sense to negotiate with a bank if you don’t know what you’re principally negotiating with – so why negate it and why go to effort to avoid an email trail? So if DG was negotiating with the bank he should know perhaps more? A wee refresher on DG and his close acquaintance for years – a Mr D Muir of LBG once a member of the RFC board; a good article from the time:
http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/donald-muir-the-banks-inside-man-at-ibrox-has-questions-to-answer.16995762

So it’s getting more implausible to believe LBG didn’t know details about TU – so what? But HMRC do tax collecting – that`s their singular raison d`etre. Administrators can repeat can – no law saying they have to – investigate deals 3 years before any administration. D+P have elected not to go beyond the CW/CB `boundary` – in public anyway. HMRC may not be satisfied with that. LBG/MIH ducked the 75m [they thought 50m at the time] BTC and other RFC debts – but did that action using `TU` additionally cause the PAYE/NIC WTC fallout under CW? Certainly valid questions for HMRC to put to the admins.

But events turned quickly after LH COI Report requirement on Friday – by the Monday the position had morphed to a criminal investigation by the CO/PF. Therefore what could HMRC do with their COI concerns – they would all have to wait patiently. 4 months had passed, nothing developing on the criminal investigation – and HMRC decided enough was enough with this administration and pressed for the appointment of BDO. With their guys in they could redraw the boundaries of investigation and push on. They impel D+P for the petition in October.

So what can LH do? Well suspect in the first instance LH may – now – need more time to coral the parties to get to the bottom of this and that questioning may need co-ordination with the CO/PF? – But to stick to brass tack admin practicalities – and money seems to run things [the bit that hurts]

There needs to be enough left in the `pot` to cover BDO costs for an investigative liquidation – that we’re told – could last years. HMRC want this done. Plus on-going legal costs. There doesn’t seem to be much left in the `pot` after D+P get their claimed fees. I guess Liquidator costs area on a par to administrators. If say, and as a guess, liquidation was to last 3 years what might that cost including legal fees? D+P plus their legals was about 5m – for the bulk of it say 6 months. That’s 30m over 3 years. Poor benchmark so let’s cut that by 80% down to 6m to give some benefit to the doubt. I don’t think there’s enough in the pot even for that. The secured creditors would likely end up with less than zilch. Therefore in principle, if HMRC want their liquidators investigation and the secured creditors want some money there should be incentives to claw back some cash. The first questions might be why is so little left after administration and why has administration carried on 4 months after the `sale`.

Now if the COI is the gig and `me` not convinced by this 25m CB action. Yes – I think some of the `sale` details could be up for review and justification, which may happen sooner rather than later if/when DGs little taped foibles leads to a COI. Where that could `lead` I have no idea – so think this is now a step by step phase drawing out. This should get interesting.


Recent Comments by twopanda

A Sanity Clause for Xmas?
Looks like Rangers Oblivion is now assured. With luck CFC will disappear too, but it will take a couple of couple years, hopefully less, but good riddance to the endless mindless aggravations. Everyone will move positively on with their lives without this antiquated OF societal stain of negating / dividing communities.

Our Grandkids shouldn`t be burdened with all the past nonsense – make it happen Folks – Please!
tp&mtp


A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
`Rangers refuse to answer new questions about retail revenues`
MILLIONS been and being ripped from working folk
That`s how it is
tp


A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
MA buys or controls Brands – it’s his business
He allegedly wanted and maybe gains the IP – or he doesn’t
Important perhaps to keep things going or, a new start up
In whoevers hands I don`t know – but a pretty penny will be asked by whoever has IP “ownership”
We`ll see
tp


A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
Extraordinary scenes and subliminal DR by line headlines today IMO reprehensible
Anyone believing one individual was responsible for everything is misguided IMO
Frayed nerves after a 3 year nightmare is human and understandable
But consider
The Law will take its time
It has to, it simply just has to, get to the bottom of this scandal (s!)

Anything else will leave long term scars

I believe the Law will sort this out properly in time as nothing else will suffice

If all Bears (+ Bearettes!! 😉 – Blimey) can keep the heid in the face of SMSM PR drivel
This could work long term in Bears favour
Needs a bit of patience and forbearance after last 3 years & I`ll admit this a big ask of anyone
It has to be done tho
It`ll work as patience rewarded
tp


A spectre is haunting Scottish Football
Financial mumbo jumbo – & expensive!! mumbo jumbo – opaque nonsense to deceive folk
Overkill by parasites to confuse normal people

Looks like more buying time
Would be beneficial (IMO) if ALL the Authorities cleared up ALL this nonsense once and for all
Better for everyone
tp


About the author