BEARGER 1,853 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...1-5m-loan.html Rangers last night appeared to contradict the wording of that document, insisting the repayments would come from a wider pool of money. A club spokesman said: "The loans, if drawn, will be repaid from the operating cash flow of the business at the relevant time. Operating cash flow comprises many sources including commercial partnership income, retail dividends and match ticket income." Spivs out. Just noticed previous thread. Still lying spivs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,884 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 We have one bank account. All income goes into it including season ticket cash, commercial and retail income and match ticket income. The repayment of the loans will come from that. How anyone can identify where each specific pound used to repay the loans is beyond me. I fail to understand the outrage here and elsewhere about the source of the repayments. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,278 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 We have one bank account. All income goes into it including season ticket cash, commercial and retail income and match ticket income. The repayment of the loans will come from that. How anyone can identify where each specific pound used to repay the loans is beyond me. I fail to understand the outrage here and elsewhere about the source of the repayments. totally agree , where did people think the money was coming from , at the end of the day its all the clubs money , the disgraceful thing is the terms of the loan 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 I'm more outraged that it hasn't been cancelled yet 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 We have one bank account. All income goes into it including season ticket cash, commercial and retail income and match ticket income. The repayment of the loans will come from that. How anyone can identify where each specific pound used to repay the loans is beyond me. I fail to understand the outrage here and elsewhere about the source of the repayments. BD, I agree. I have a feeling that the outrage from some is tied to the traumatic memories of Whyte and Ticketus. Where this spin is coming from is more interesting. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real PapaBear 0 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 I'm more outraged that it hasn't been cancelled yet Not only that but you have to imagine that these characters are now sailing close to the edge of legality. As far as I am aware, a company director has the legal duty to act in the best interests of the company at all times. That's not an optional extra or a conditional add-on, mind you. It's a legal requirement under the law of the land. So, if they are knowingly taking a short term loan at less favourable rates than is otherwise commercially available, simply to reward themselves, then they are acting in their own interests and not in the interests of the company. That, to me, would be a clear breach of the law. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,853 Posted March 8, 2014 Author Share Posted March 8, 2014 The Ranking Agreement basically establishes that both have claims over both the car park and Edmiston House. Have a look at the page hand-numbered 19 (its 3 pages down) in the Ranking Agreement - this mentions that the money to Sandy Easdale and Laxey will be repaid in the first instance from season ticket money. Peculiarly, the announcement to the Stock Exchange said the loan would be repaid by 1st September 2014 - http://www.londonstockexchange.com/e...entId=11872699 - but the Ranking Agreement says 1st September 2015. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,853 Posted March 8, 2014 Author Share Posted March 8, 2014 I think people are missing point of this loan story. Board spokesman appears to be contradicting an official document. Why is that? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,853 Posted March 8, 2014 Author Share Posted March 8, 2014 And if they are paid out in May that equals approx 60% interest rate per annum. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 4,034 Posted March 8, 2014 Share Posted March 8, 2014 I still assume that the loan was hurridly done to ward off any claims by Ahmad. It would be the only reasonable explanation apart from immediate cash flow problems (which certain factions will favour). We'll have to wait and see whether Letham, Laxey and the company can come to an agreement here. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.