With a raft of legal issues related to holding an Annual General Meeting late and the need to have audited financial statements released prior to an AGMit is important for Rangers and its directors that they do not add to their already complex compliance problems.
As this club was founded decades before an incorporated company was formed, and as many clubs or groups exist without incorporation why when the company that operated rangers previous went into liquidation did the club cease to exist.
Yes everyone accepts the new company is a new legal entity, but this article is NOT about a legal entity, nobody even bothered to put when the company was formed showing its relevancethis is about the club.
Currently under the trading name The Rangers Football Club, which is close to this title of the article too. It's important to understand that the appointment of liquidators will not mean the end of football at Ibrox - only the end of the company that ran the club - Malcolm Cohen, Liquidator.
At the point of being squished, that entity is comprehensively squished in its entirety. Hmrc business plan 2011-12 rangers does not revert to caterpillar status or turn into anything else. Another butterfly can come along with the same pattern on its wings, it can flutter about in the same vicinity, we can even call it a similar name: Clavdia chauchat talk We're trying to establish here if a club being as one with a company, and a company merely running a club, are both reasonable points of view supported with evidence as above from insolvency experts, or if there is a definitive answer one way or another than can decide the debate, as a matter of fact and not opinion.
A CVA would restrict the scope of such action. Moreover the liquidation route does not prejudice the proposed sale of the club. This sale can take place either through a CVA or a liquidation.
So the sale is not being undermined, it simply takes a different hmrc business plan 2011-12 rangers. Liquidation will enable a sale of the football assets to be made to a new company, thereby ensuring that football will continue at Ibrox.
It also means that the new company will be free from claims or litigation in a way which would not be achievable with a CVA. Rangers can make a fresh start. The more i read about all this, especially with the great points made by Ricky, the more stunned i am that this article has been allowed to state something so grossly bias and inaccurate for so long.
This whole article needs rewording back to before someone inaccurately claimed the club no longer existed. It says if a CVA is not agreed "then there will be a sale of the Club's business and assets", a sale of business and assets is not a sale of the Club.
Selling the Club would be totally and utterly pointless as it is going to enter Liquidation and you'd be wasting whatever amount of money you were going to pay for it.
Football Clubs NEED to be Legal Entities Corporations nowadays as it would be illegal if they were paying staff and recieving payments from sponsors etc and were not, that is why all Clubs became Incorporated, mostly in the lat 's as Football became a business in its own right.
Yes a club needs to have a legal entity to operate in the football league today, and that is why the club is now under the control of a new company. As HMRC statement above clearly implies and encourages. That is exactly what is happening - football will continue at Ibrox, but since the club was not sold to Green'c consortium, it is still being liquidated.
The club that does continue at Ibrox will be a new club, even if it plays in the same colours before the same fans in the same stadium.
If my father dies and I decide to move into his house, wear his clothes and sleep in his bed, it doesn't make me my father. However convincingly I look like him, he will still have dies and I am merely his replacement.
Regards Fishiehelper2 talk Whatever argument or analogy I use, you insist that the club can exist even when its legal personality has been liquidated.
You will not accept any proof that I could bring forward that shows that the club and the company are the one, single, self-same entity, and any evidence you may be able to find that would suggest to support your view I would probably dismiss as not from reliable sources eg - I wouldn't accept any claim on this matter from Charles Green who has a clear business interest in promoting the idea that 'he bought Rangers'.
I think we are at a total impass and despite hours of dialogue, we are making no headway towards consensus. Unless fresh points are made, I will simply respond briefly in future to restate by disagreement.
One thing is certain, there is no consensus for the grossly offensive and controversial wording in the article. Thanks BritishWatcher talk That is very strong stuff. I can imagine people find it controversial to say that Rabgers FC is coming to an end - about as controversial to suggest that is can survive being liquidated!
By the way, I read the comments Ricky made but he is not dealing with the key point: Rangers FC is in the second category. Against this, fans of other clubs may be offended if the articles were to be changed to suggest that Rangers FC is not being liquidated.
My own view is that we should be seeking to build accurate articles without taking into consideration whether readers may be offended by what they read - we should never intend to give offensive, but if readers take offence What they may be offended about is the article claiming Rangers Football club which existed BEFORE that company was incorporated somehow no longer exists.
They would be offended because its wrong!The other factor of course is presentational because should HMRC consider a time to pay deal it is tantamount to HMRC providing Rangers with a subsidy to enable wages that can attract the necessary attendance to make the business case stand up.
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. Clark also suggested that HMRC may agree to a Creditors Voluntary Arrangement.
HMRC have given no such assurance. Whyte owns the club and is the only person who can sell his shares. Dec 30, · Concern About Rangers As A Going-Concern? 30/12/ 2, Comments Yesterday, one of our regular contributors, Adam, provided news that Rangers may have finally persuaded an auditor to sign-off on their accounts.
Business Plan Business Plan You can find all of HMRC’s archived reports and plans on their web archive and current reports and plans on urbanagricultureinitiative.com Rangers have previously only admitted that there is an on-going dispute with HMRC. The club have not formally admitted that the scale of the tax assessments are unpayable.
This blog provided the world with confirmation of the scale of the problem with our identification of where the Bain Papers could be found online [subsequently redacted on legal advice].