Your assertion that because a different company now owns “Crystal Palace” means that the club is a different club is not quite correct.
Crystal Palace was incorporated as in 1905 and remained within this legal structure until 1984 when a new company was set up called “Crystal Palace FC (1984) Limited” and set ups as a subsidiary of “The Crystal Palace Football and Athletic Club Limited”.
“Crystal Palace FC (1984) Limited” took over the operation of the business and assets of the football club but remained as part of the group structure of “The Crystal Palace Football and Athletic Club Limited”. It changed its name to “Crystal Palace FC (1984) Limited” in May 1986 before being placed into administration in March 1999.
“Crystal Palace FC 2000 Limited” was set up in 2000 by Simon Jordan to purchase the club from administration and like you say it only purchased the assets and business of the club, not the company itself and so like the current situation with Rangers/Sevco, is not the same company and so could be treated as a new club.
The difference with the Rangers/Sevco situation and the situation with Crystal Palace (and other teams in England) is that “Crystal Palace FC 2000 Limited” was able to purchase the single share in the league previously owned by “The Crystal Palace Football and Athletic Club Limited” and latterly “Crystal Palace FC (1986) Limited”. This was permitted by the Football League and so the football authorities in England consider this to be the same club, even if operated by a different company.
Where your argument falls down in trying to link this case to Rangers/Sevco is that while Sevco was allowed to purchase the assets and business of Rangers Football Club Plc, it was not permitted to purchase the SPL share. Had Sevco been permitted to purchase the SPL share, we could argue that it was the same club as before but now, that argument is flawed.
Posted by TyroneBhoy