Jump to content

 

 

Recommended Posts

amms - no, I didn't have any problems with it either. King was convicted on 41 counts, he had the choice of two years jail per count or pay a huge fine instead. As he could easily afford the huge fine, he paid that rather than serving the rest of his days in prison. it is also true that a judge described him in the very words we would describe Green or Whyte - strangers to the truth/glib liars.

 

The difference is simple - King is a Rangers fan so we want him; the others weren't, so, obviously, were only using their devious wiles ("business expertise") to line their own pockets.

 

 

I write this as one who wants King far more than the current board or any previous owners back to pre-Mint days btw

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the SFA try to block Dave King joining the Rangers board of directors (presumably based on his tax case in S.A) will there be calls for an investigation into Dermot Desmond's background?

 

Nope. Or why the Glasgow City council (made up to a large degree of Celtic-minded people and season ticket holders) agreed to sell land to the club for 1 pound. Not to mention the way Penn State was dealt with in the US of A. In that respect, you have to give the Yahoos and their cohorts credit for their tenacity ...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope. Or why the Glasgow City council (made up to a large degree of Celtic-minded people and season ticket holders) agreed to sell land to the club for 1 pound. Not to mention the way Penn State was dealt with in the US of A. In that respect, you have to give the Yahoos and their cohorts credit for their tenacity ...

 

It's far worse than described, the then Glasgow District Council Planning Committee agreed to sell three streets, Janefield Street, Kinloch Street, and Dalriada Street, to their green'n'grey hooped heroes for ONE PENNY.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's far worse than described, the then Glasgow District Council Planning Committee agreed to sell three streets, Janefield Street, Kinloch Street, and Dalriada Street, to their green'n'grey hooped heroes for ONE PENNY.

 

In June 1993, the existing stadium at, Celtic park had a certified capacity of 56,000, of which only 12,000 were seated. At that time the board of Celtic had almost decided to relocate to a new purpose built stadium at Camsbuslang. The solution to keeping Celtic in Glasgow was to build over Janefield Street, the public highway and cantilever the rear of the upper tier of seats back out over the cemetery by some 10 meters.

 

The council houses in Janefield, Kerrydale and Dalriada Streets were demolished and the residents re-housed because the new Stadium blocked out their light and interfered with their TV receptions. Council tax payers footed the bill for this as the land was sold to Celtic Plc for a penny.

 

The cost to the council in terms of resettlement grants to the 300 or so families living in the houses, the demolition of said houses and ground clearance was conservatively estimated at £1.25 million.

 

The Legal and Estates Committee comprising thirteen councillors met to approve the sale of ground (the three streets) to Celtic. There were 11 Labour Party councillors, one SNP, and one Tory. Both the Tory and SNP councillors demanded that their fellow councillors in the Committee state their allegiances, shareholding, season ticket status, etc..... The meeting was suspended and the decision on the sale was passed to a full council meeting (all 102 Glasgow District councillors).

 

All but 11 of those 102 councillors were Labour Party councillors. Those 11 put forward the same motion for disclosure of share holding and season ticket status before the vote was to be taken. The then leader of GDC, Pat Lafferty made the ruling that these details did not have to be revealed. The vote was taken and the full council decided overwhelmingly to sell Kinloch Street, Dalriada Street, and Janefield Street to Celtic for a penny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously this merits discussion but I honestly feel things have been sensationalised to fill up column space. Could be wrong but I don't see King being blocked.

 

Negative opinion: SFA insert a clause whereby King cannot invest for x amount of years. Ridiculous but we are dealing with the SFA.

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.