Meh. Everyone knows you need a good goldfish-based analogy to make a sensible new club/new company argument.
Yet your own clubs official documents say differently. No wonder you lot are confused. http://www.scribd.com/doc/148828922/Rangers-FC-Memorandum-and-Articles-of-Association ~Page 8
There is no confusion over in the blue corner, Chubby. SPL - "Same Club" SFA - "Same Club" SFL - "Same Club" SPFL - "Same Club" UEFA - "Same Club" ECA - "Same Club" LNS - "Same Club" Desmort Dermond - "Same Club" GIRFUY
If Rangers FC are still the same club, then: Why do the old shares in the club no longer hold value? Why did TRFC have to receive the transfer of RFC SFA membership? Why did the assets of the CLUB have to be sold? Why did RFC players refuse contract transfers to TRFC? If this was the same club then no transfer would be needed. Why are TRFC unable to take part in European competitions? Unless sanctioned for breaking rules, European competitions are open to all member clubs trading for more than 3 years. Why are debts which the CLUB incurred no longer collectable for the many creditors of RFC? Why did Duff & Phelps state that in the event of liquidation, the players registrations would revert back to the SFA. Why would that need to happen? Why couldn’t they remain registered with the CLUB? Answers or deflectors? Timmy is OBSESSED/CARES MORE ABOUT RANGERS/BEALING/HOOFBASHING HIS KEYBOARD/ETC ETC. just getting it in there so you lot dont have to.