Jump to content

 

 

Octopus (Ticketus) Issue statement re Rangers


Recommended Posts

It's not good IMO.

 

It's the same as saying I've bought my season ticket for next year. I wouldn't expect to lose that ticket as I'm not a creditor - I've already paid in advance for the service.

 

They knew what they were doing then. I'd guess that who ever buys us would have to effectively buy them back off them or come to some sort of deal to pay them back

Link to post
Share on other sites

so they've bought assets that don't exist yet? and what if the club decides not to issue season tickets for those seats and simply issues tickets on a game by game basis?

 

Was thinking the same.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was thinking the same.....

 

I guess Rangers could have a membership scheme where you don;t buy an actual season but have the right to buy the same seat every match but must pay game by game or 4 games at a time????

Link to post
Share on other sites

it's interesting, if you book and pay for a holiday and the tour company goes bust, then you've lost your money and have to claim compensation from ABTA. If you pay for a three piece suite and the company goes bust before it is delivered then you lose your money and count as an ordinary creditor. So possibly the same might apply to ticketus and the season tickets. One things for sure, the Lawyers are going to have a field day!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here are the original MG05's that were subsequently stricken from the records, what replaced them if in fact anything does has not yet been ascertained.

 

Check the wording and you will see that it is not just "Season Ticket" income they are entitled to under this charge.

 

15f0jmo.jpg

 

1zl65j5.jpg

 

xlb1pf.jpg

 

5lnx4m.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't look good. However, according to the administrators we haven't seen this money - is that correct?

After a day of slightly lifted spirits, this and the SFA announcement have me concerned again.

Never mind, we don't do walking away, and we don't do losing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks to me as if it IS on just the ST's when you look at the definition and "follow the trail" of the definitions.

 

We beg to differ but that's neither here nor there, the important part is that the MGO5 was later stricken from the record.

 

I think but not 100% sure because it was a big f*&k up. Is the charge actually covering the Season Tickets or is it every other asset except the Season Tickets ?

 

Also when it was stricken it was not replaced by another filing in Scotland, but since RFC Group Ltd is an English company and if they provided the security (which incidentally backs one of Craig Whyte's claims) it may not have been picked on as there is no MG05's for English companies IIRC (and stand to be corrected).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.