Darthter

No vast monetery investment.... Reducing the wage budget by 2/3rds.... Seeking future investors..... Future share issues..... Main backers withdrawing at a later date (most likely by selling shares @ a profit) Identify the bid? Smith??? Brown??? Green??? Take yer pick.

But the "debts" would be getting paid for by a different company - you could view it as donations to certain clubs!!!

There is no legal obligation for us to settle the football debt. If we are "forced" by agreement into settling it, it may be worthwhile negotiating with those clubs that owe Rangers, to see if there is an agreement that can be reached. However, they are legally creditors to the oldco, so there may be no agreement CAN be reached.

Was never a fan of Barry Ferguson - Thought he had more talent that the actually did have.

All valid points, but IMHO its about compromise. By getting us to clear debt associated with the oldco, NO-ONE can then dispute the clubs history. I also think its fair to settle the footballing debt - these are debts that technically, the CLUB has incurred!!!

and a mountain out of a mole hill....

Spooky....just replied with similar in the other thread....

That ties in nicely with my thread on the company name!!! The company name & club name are too similar for those in the lower IQ bracket to differentiate between, therefore the media are trying to keep it simple (possibly) - Also, keep it vague, and you can sling more dirt!!!

The devil will be in the detail..... Fans/media will be presented with a summary of the deal - I would hope that the exact technicalities of the "legal challenge" stuff will be documented in detail before any agreement is reached. If it means a quick solution to the problem of "What League???" then I'm all for it!!!

in a few months (hopefully....) no one will care what the controlling company is called - it'll be about the team on the pitch!!! Opting for something like Rangers Holdings as Der Berliner suggest would maybe be a better option.

I would go along with that....its clearly different from the Football club!!!

but WHY the need to change it at all - is there a legal reason??? Keeping the name completely different means there is no confusion - Sevco Scotland owns Rangers Football club. IF Sevco go bust or sell etc, it would clearly be the company, not the club.

I doubt that the condition would apply to all legal challenges ever. I think it will be to do with specific, outstanding issues ie. the Bringin the game into disrepute/transfer embargo thing. It'll be a deal on the table - we'll let you into the SFA/Div1, if you pay football debts from oldco, and accept x, y, z as punishment for the disrepute thing - deal or no deal?? I think the transfer embargo my well just disappear - its certainly not been mentioned ANYWHERE recently.

Could it simply be a communication breakdown??? RFC/Sevco supplied the list of DD's to Fastpay before the folk cancelled the DD's. These cancellations may not have been passed to or processed Fastpay (in time, or at all). It is possible that the folk who had cancelled had spotted the DD's before Fastpay had a chance to push through updates etc. It may possibly be another mountain out of a mole hill.

Been thinking a wee bit about the company name - currently Sevco Scotland. According to reports, the plan is to change it to The Rangers FC PLC (or similar) as soon as possible. Why the need to change??? Over the past weeks/months there has been mass confusion between The Football club & the governing company. By keeping the company name completely different ie. Sevco Scotland, this would then give a clear differential between the two entities.

In this situation I don't see it as much of a problem. I see the proposal as a "take it, or leave it" offer. Rangers pay the previous football debts, and the fines handed down to them, no arguments & no appeals. Providing there are no further sanctions added, I would accept. At least we would know where we're playing next season, and in a division where we would likely keep all our decent players (of the ones left...) Before accepting though, Rangers should be getting written confirmation that there will be no further punishments or sanctions applied.

I understood that part to refer to the financial stuff - football debts & fines. The legal challenge I read as the newco not challenging the debt/fines of the oldco.

I would hope that once the future has been determined ie. what league we'll be playing in, that CG will provide some kind of blueprint. I feel there are too many variables in an already fluid situation. If he was to reveal plans just now, then had to change them, there would be an element of the support that would brand him a liar. Also, if he reveals detailed plans for Div3, I feel that SPL/Div1 clubs would simply say "looks like your prepared....cheerio!!". One hurdle has apparently been crossed - the return of players for pre-season training. We now have a decent idea of who's gonna be playing next season. Now we need to get the league sorted out, then hopefully clarification on transfers etc.

I would give them a couple of options.... 1) come back on a reduced contract & carry on as normal. 2) come back on the same contract, immediately on transfer list & never kick a ball for the club again 3) sod off & never come back

Goian also given extra leave due to international duty.....

Got it via txt...

Possible line up for next season: Allan McGonner Tata Papac Free Wallace Dorin gone Adios Bocanegra Steven Whitcontract Release McCabe Gone Aluko Leave Davis Stevie Naicontract Solong Kerkar

I would think sorting out all the shit, rebuilding the club & paying them on time will be reward enough!!!

Unlike the rest who are doing a William Wallace, and going for freedom!!!

Isn't that exactly what Green did, and got lambasted by the fans!!!!