MoodyBlue 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Call me a big girls blouse - but i literally feel ill with all of this shite 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Yes, that's the case. It will be up to other parties to argue differently. Like I've said since this announcement, I'd fancy the leaking of this document is to expedite the ownership process. They first have to determine whether the granting of security is illegal. Given that the Albion and Edmiston House are already being used for previous loans, to this layman, there doesn't appear to be any difference other than sentiment. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Call me a big girls blouse - but i literally feel ill with all of this shite I'm in enough bother with making personal comments, so I'll pass. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MoodyBlue 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 I'm in enough bother with making personal comments, so I'll pass. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 If I was the board, and I was charged with failure of duty, I would point at Ashley's club in England which, albeit in a sleekit fashion, operates in a break even fashion. 'We only want the same for Rangers', they could say. As much as this makes me as ill as Moody, I can't see any legal recourse that would stand up in court. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,562 Posted January 15, 2015 Author Share Posted January 15, 2015 They first have to determine whether the granting of security is illegal. Given that the Albion and Edmiston House are already being used for previous loans, to this layman, there doesn't appear to be any difference other than sentiment. Yes, which is why the court may grant the interdict and delegate the decision to the company shareholders. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,724 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Yes, which is why the court may grant the interdict and delegate the decision to the company shareholders. I will take your word on that, Frankie. As I say, I have no knowledge on the processes involved. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueSolace 0 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 Call me a big girls blouse - but i literally feel ill with all of this shite Ive got a team of ulcers in my stomach... to think this could happen in front of our eyes... City financiers and businessman ruthless and corrupt to the core....do not give a damn about the club or our stadium. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted January 15, 2015 Share Posted January 15, 2015 We must en masse oppose this with every fiber of our being. At best the ****s will pilfer and fritter the 10 million leaving us 13 million in debt and at worst we will lose ibrox for ever. Loans are clearly needed and whoever supplies them will no doubt want security but we must have people in charge we can trust. This is why it was vital people did not renew in the summer. We need to be able to withdraw funding totally when it is required. 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.