13-11-2015, 18:37
Its a direct quote
here the context
"Mr Brown then moves on to “the vexed question of the mythical concept of the club.” Lord Doherty states that the “articles of association show Rangers started as a club.”
Brown responded that this changed when Rangers incorporated in 1899. Brown continued: “Sevco Scotland did not buy the club they bought the business and assets of the club. There is a difference between the company and the business assets, but not between a club and a company. A club is an undertaking of it’s owners. As it has neither capacity of personality, no-one can be CEO of a club. The idea that someone can be CEO of an undertaking is just nonsense.”
Brown continued: “I realize that Rangers being the same club is a matter of life and death to some, but it wouldn’t be a proper legal case without the elephant in the room getting mentioned. The team are paid by Sevco, play at a ground owned by Sevco, trained by a manager who is employed by Sevco, fans buy tickets from Sevco. Rangers was a basket of assets that could be sold, but these were not indivisible. The players went one way and the ground another, where is the “club” then?” "
twisting words no
back to evidence which because you don't accept you just ignore
The CLUB was not sold simple
sorry if that's a matter of life and death to you
the pain you feel is just because you wont accept the truth
here the context
"Mr Brown then moves on to “the vexed question of the mythical concept of the club.” Lord Doherty states that the “articles of association show Rangers started as a club.”
Brown responded that this changed when Rangers incorporated in 1899. Brown continued: “Sevco Scotland did not buy the club they bought the business and assets of the club. There is a difference between the company and the business assets, but not between a club and a company. A club is an undertaking of it’s owners. As it has neither capacity of personality, no-one can be CEO of a club. The idea that someone can be CEO of an undertaking is just nonsense.”
Brown continued: “I realize that Rangers being the same club is a matter of life and death to some, but it wouldn’t be a proper legal case without the elephant in the room getting mentioned. The team are paid by Sevco, play at a ground owned by Sevco, trained by a manager who is employed by Sevco, fans buy tickets from Sevco. Rangers was a basket of assets that could be sold, but these were not indivisible. The players went one way and the ground another, where is the “club” then?” "
twisting words no
back to evidence which because you don't accept you just ignore
The CLUB was not sold simple
sorry if that's a matter of life and death to you
the pain you feel is just because you wont accept the truth