Media sources, They have 8 people in on between 400-800 an hour. But none can give any assurances if they loose the big tax case. Potentially it could be 75 million to buy rangers, which would take 10+ years before you started to see a return on it.
THREE 'conditional' offers of which one is a very dodgy American consortium and the other is from a bloke who says doesn't even want to buy the club. The BK bid didn't even include any figures. All it said was "funding is in place, with working capital to let it compete at highest level".
Conditional based on the Big Tax case being resolved no doubt, otherwise why not just make an offer. If the FTTT is lost then all offers will be removed rather promptly.
I have a source close to Duff & Felchs who has confirmed that the balloo knights bid consisted of one A4 sized sheet of paper with " the big hoose must stay open " written in blue crayon.
Rebels inane ranting This argument was "pursued" because I disagreed with your view that losing the tax dispute automatically meant Rangers had flouted tax regulation and were therefore cheats. Patently not true. Shown to be bollocks. I haven't softened or changed my view at any time. You, however have changed your view and concede that losing a tax dispute does not automatically mean wrong doing. You have nothing left but ranting "they cheated" because you know 10000% they broke tax law. You know **** all. Rant away RabidBhoy. Rant away.
Show it to be bollocks then. There has to be a reason you haven't revealed your brilliant argument to show that Rangers being found to have pursued an illegal tax strategy is not cheating? Your opinion isn't worth a ****. The tribunal will establish if Rangers acted illegally or not. Do you understand that? Don't You have embarrassed yourself enough as it is. Don't make me shame you. My opinion has not changed one single iota. Some dick head who once had a set to with Hector knows his **** I assume you have changed my argument because you are unable to beat the one I actually made? Rant? Rabid? How sad.
Rebel reduced to rabid ranting The posts are all here on this thread. I stated my view many times. It has never changed. Yours has. You are now agreeing with me (after me continually stating to wait for the tribunal result) that it is up to the result of the tribunal to decide if Rangers acted illegally or not. I pointed this out to you repeatedly. I never had a strategy. I repeatedly stated that losing the tribunal did not automatically mean Rangers had cheated. A view you now seem to agree with. I also said that if the tribunal can show that tax legisaltion was broken/flouted then they did cheat and that I hoped and expected criminal charges to follow because breaking tax legislation is fraud. You never had an argument. You stated several times that Rangers losing the tribunal was proof of cheating. You now seem to see that is not the case. All you had was "you knew" Rangers cheated. What happened to your 10000% certainty Rangers cheated? You had **** all, you've realised it, and now all you have left is rabid ranting and name calling. Telegram for *****... "Whit a ****in loser you are."
You can blame some of the other GC'ers. They ****ed off from GC and were capering about on the OF boards. I followed and then Rangers went into admin and I got stuck here.
So I have changed my mind now? Rangers losing this tribunal demonstrates they have cheated. Given that this statement is demonstrably correct, given that you have failed to present any counter argument whatsoever, i see absolutely no reason to revisit that position. As for name calling...evidently your grasp of irony is about as good as your grasp of tax tribunals. Shall I wait for you to change your mind again, or is this your final position?
Nice to see you've calmed down a bit, Rebel My position has been the same all along. Never changed it. It's all in this thread. However, I'll restate it again... Losing the tribunal means cheating IF they lost because it can be shown they broke tax legislation; otherwise no regulations were broke and it merely means they lost the dispute for whatever reason (the tribunal result will tell us). Disputes can be, and are, lost to HMRC even when no wrong/illegal doing has occurred (for example - IR35 - where HMRC decided the rules could be interpreted differently by them against limited companies who happened to be IT contractors - whereas every other limited company using the same rules were fine - that's just one example of how HMRC operates.). Do you really believe everyone who ever lost a dispute with HMRC was guilty of wrong doing? Of breaking the rules/legislation/regulations? That is a remarkably naive view, and very far from the truth. It's not as black and white as you percieve it or wish it to be. Your 10000% certainty when you know nothing of the facts is patently ridiculous. Which is why all along I have repeatedly said wait for the result of the tribunal.
