Rangers Banter Archive April 10 2012

10 Apr 2012 23:11:19
Rangers owed only a few years ago the sum of £80m to the bank. Within a few short years this was reduced to £18m while still putting a competitive team out and winning several leagues and cups

The figure of £140m is pie in the sky based on things that may not happen and monies not due to be paid immediately. The key is the big tax case and if it goes for us we may actually be in a better position than 4 years ago.

Who's to say the true figure of debt isn't £60m or so and we wiped that out in 3/4 years

BFH

50m of debt moved to MIH who underwrote share issue - murray just moved the debt around - what state would rangers be in if all the debt generated by the club had been kept there

Agree, even if it takes ten years, but afraid that will not happen, somebody will buy for as cheap as possible and pay some p in the £. At last somebody that believes we should do the right thing.

10 Apr 2012 20:52:15
bill ng does not do "WOK KING" away.... jsm
watp

10 Apr 2012 19:51:39
A lot of Rangers fans need to waken up, we WILL be liquidated, we owe £140+m, a buyer would need to arrange to pay this & pay potential transfer fees & wages for �ext season, it's never going to happen, it's all over for Rangers Football Club.

I agree with the liquidation part, i believe that is the end game for D & P and at least 2 of the bidders.

This is absolute tosh. The reason they are in admin is so they can try an arrange a CVA which will allow them to exit administration. If the creditors agree to say 10p in the £, the the debt is £14m, not £140m. However there is no certainty that creditors will accept CVA. If that is the case we will then be liquidated and creditors will receive whatever can be raised by selling assets. So somebody will buy Ibrox and MP and depending on who it is, can either be new owners, or a third party who leases them back to newco, who will pay a rent. Whatever happens we will not be landed with £140m. Whilst that is obviously better some of us do feel we should pay these debts, even if it takes forever.

If rangers owe 140 million quid they should pay every single penny back.In this current climate dont forget that families are been kicked out of their homes for owing a few thousand pounds,why should this club be allowed to pay its creditors a pittance?Rangers will be tainted for years to come when they refuse to pay back what is owed.

10 Apr 2012 18:53:47
Bill Ng states... "If we take over Rangers, Rangers will not be history, Rangers will make history. Heritage of Rangers will stay,"
WATP

Don't believe a word of it, who really knows him and what he's up to?

Brilliant! Here comes whyte number two.Have any lessons been learned?Far east consortiums are not what's needed

Last time I seen him he was jumping out the boot of a car naked in The Hangover.......DH

10 Apr 2012 17:30:37
Can someone please explain how Craig Whyte has personal guarantees to the tune of £30million?

I guess he isn't talking about Ticketus, as they wouldn't waste time with consortium's (TBK's) if they could sue him directly for breach of contract (albeit yes I admit without seeing the contract I do not know if there is any cross default clauses (or lack of) that may stop them from recourse), especially if they can get back all their money, rather than the 37p per £1 mooted last week.

So presuming it is not Ticketus, and not HMRC, and as D & P have said, he hasn't put money into the club, so he is not a secured creditor, how on earth is he on the line for £30million?!?

Ive been thinking the same, he also states he has £30mill ready to invest. The same £30mill he'll recieve after liguidation? It all seems very underhanded. The courts should make him accept his £1 back and send him away. CheltBlue

10 Apr 2012 15:58:08
Is it just me or does the latest news regarding Mr Ellis stink to high heaven?Are we really expected to believe these two friends, who no doubt know where each others secrets are buried,are turning on each other?For a long time i have thought Whyte was a puppet for some very shrewd operators,i now hazard a guess Ellis is that man.My opinion is this is another scare tactic that will push buyers further away.The thought of more legal battles,appeals and legal bills is just what Rangers dont need right now.The longer admin drags on only one party gains;Duff & Phelps,long time partners of .......Craig Whyte. Players wage cuts are due to be paid up next month,i would hope the Fighting Fund is not used for this as lots of small business owners are owed monies and they should be paid. If the FF is not to be used then where is it coming from? Rangers, in it's present form, is all but over,Mr Whyte has seen to that

Just a small point regarding where the money will be coming from. Just think if our super manager had managed to keep us at least in our 2 national cup competitions then a run to both finals wouls have generated at least 2 million.

As it happens his poor team selections and tactics put paid to that!!

Agreed.Ally must be held to account over the course of a season.I think he would jump into bed with any potential bidders to keep a job.Dont forget there has been some terrible results even before administration.His buying policy,albeit in the lower reaches, left a lot to be desired,and playing players out of position is a weakness he seems unable to overcome.

He didnt get backed in the transfer market, hes done more than expected of a manager since admin and hes proved to me he has Rangers at heart. With 10pts deduction and no backing the 18pts isnt as bad as it seems. The guy will learn from mistakes made (every manager makes f''k ups) and needs time. I know its going to be a long road ahead and Im more confident with Ally there than not. IMO. CheltBlue

@Cheltblue; Why? His record is not anything to write home about,he constantly backed whyte and is now jumping all over the american bidders.He has also played a blinder in the pr stakes,making himself unsackable with his soundbites.Ally knows how the media works and has used this to his advantage.

To @ 3, he maybe never got backed to the extent we would like but put out of europe by malmo bottlewashers and maribor amateurs, then falkirk in cup come on man wisen up he aint good enough!!

Yes it a disgrace we went out to the teams that we did but better managers have went out to worse teams, there isnt many other people i would rather have in charge of us with everything that is going on, the football just now is just not that important the main thing is the clubs survival after that has been dealt with then we can start worrying about the management

c/bridge bluenose

@4 most managers would of run a mile at the thought of admin. Getting behind the "team" includes backing owners unfortunatly. I dont blame him wanting to meet his prospective new employer and isnt he the most senior member of staff? Im not defending his mistakes but I can think of far better Rangers teams to not perform in euro qualifiers with more experienced managers at the helm. CheltBlue

10 Apr 2012 15:47:29
bill ng all thje way for me.. BK and american are full of sh....jsm

Bill NG looks to be another Mr tight, he won't deliver, I think rangers are finished as we know, newco rangers isn't the same, rugby for me.

Bill is the new 1 to come out and say this and that now he is the best thing since slice bread have we not been here b4 and if we do get a cva any player rangers want will have 2 pay full amount upfront whitch is not going 2 happen anyway for a cva 2 work the company must return a profit every 4 weeks thats the rules of a cva how r rankers going 2 do that liqud is the only way

10 Apr 2012 14:16:50
this thing with elis is not good news we could be tied up in court cases for months everyone is just in this to rip us fans off murray has left rangers in a real mess

Or its a secondary issue so CW is sued personally. Meaning if or when he sells Ellis will still be in the hunt for 24.9% of the procedes or the shares? CheltBlue

10 Apr 2012 13:41:48
If we owe 55M then the only way to go is with the BK's and ticketus if they are willing to wipe of 17M and defer any other payments for two years. Remember that there is also 7.5M owed to the fans who have debentures, if thay keep the debentures thats another 7.5 plus ticketus 17m wiped out. Settle with the other creditors, win the BTC, raise the season ticket money for working capital. FFS somebody make it happen.


JG

You will still owe around 20m even if you get a result in the tax case.Do you really swallow this nonsense that ticketus will write off this amount? postpone payment maybie,write off? no chance

To the original poster - and while theyre at it why not have them find a cure for all known diseases, reconcile the Israelis and the Palestinians and find the Higgs Boson particle. Simples.

10 Apr 2012 12:15:21
heres a question,

as the btc isnt decided yet, then that amount cant be taken into consideration as part of a cva,

so for example if we go with the TBK deal, and ticketus debt is also removed, we would have to agree a cva based on about £30 millions worth of confirmed debt,

my question is would all the unsecured creditors like HMRC who have cases yet to be settle, be the force to take whatever percentage to the pound that is agreed now, when there case is decided??

As i understand it the btc is now about additional penaties that may be due pushing the aount up from 50 mil to 70 mil.

Also as long as 75% of creditors accept the cva they all have to accept, but itcan be appealled by credtors if circumstances change, ie Rangers get some money or crediturs feel there is more money to get from asset sale ie players

But lets get real here all rangers players are up for sale so if any of them was worth a few mil they would be sold and they will be sold how else will rangers get through the summer!

The amount of money being spoken about clearly isn't enough to maintain a squad like the current one. So long as the squad is better than Hearts' and Motherwell's, Rangers will do OK.

10 Apr 2012 11:39:20
"Bill Ng says he can't wait to talk about potential new signings with manager Ally McCoist should the Singapore businessman's consortium's takeover bid succeed."

I'm sure everyone remembers He Who Shall Not Be Named throwing out plenty of signing chat at the start of this season. It's clearly a ploy to try and get the fans to back / show support for his bid but he needs to realise that no Rangers fan can have signings at the forefront of their mind when we are on the precipice of liquidation.

I, for one, would much rather see him talking about bringing the club out of administration... To throw out a Monopoly analogy, you cannae Pass Go until your out of Jail!

10 Apr 2012 10:23:10
About Bill Ng (The Herald)

"The 52-year-old claims to have become a Rangers fan after watching television coverage of the team winning the European Cup-winners' Cup in 1972. It might be a ploy to convince supporters of his merits, but his wealth is not in question, with Wealth-X, the group that compiles information on the world's richest individuals, estimating his personal fortune to be worth almost £40m."

Remark - £40m is not much money in this context. Do they mean £40bn or is he really placing a chunk of his wealth in Rangers?

Think even the Motherwell born Billionaire had more than that

Hes part of a consortium so it could well be right

Anyone really believe he's been supporting Rangers for 40 years?

10 Apr 2012 09:52:55
Whats Andrew Ellis all about? He is
like a vulture scavenging over our
club. He brought Whyte to Rangers
and now says he is sorry. Not good
enough for me. How much has this
guy put into the club? The only
people being duped are the fans.

Maybe he feels hes doing the right thing? With his 24.9% and the other share holders do they have enough control to oust CW in a takeover? Or at least remove him from decision making? More twists and turns with clever media reporting makeing it difficult to gauge whos actually got the upper hand other than HMRC. Of course he might just want 24.9% of watever CW gets... CheltBlue

It might be a good thing if he can prove whyte said it as it could void his shares..
but it is getting more confusing by the day.
craigandbabybear

When Ellis tried to buy the club himself a couple of years ago a business guy in a paper wrote that he would be a disaster for us. I'm not an expert on the money side but I am not gullible either. I would hazard a guess that him and Whyte are still in contact and are probably working together to make sure they both get as much money out of the club as possible. Guys like that don't end decade old friendships over business deals. Be very wary of this guy.

10 Apr 2012 07:53:32
david murray is to blame he comes out and states oh a never knew craig white would do this to the club, well mr murray u my friend are to blame so get off ur fat bahooki and pay atleast half the debt craig white never helped but 110% david murray is a fud

10 Apr 2012 01:04:37
Doing some research about leeds and the hmrc and i think it will equally apply to rangers, but its not all good news.

From what i can gather the hmrc agreed to the cva rather than liquidate as thet dont want to punish the ordinary football fan, but they still want their money so its the new owners decision whether to pay up or if the debt too great liquidate. Heres the bad bit leeds debt was 6 million and that was about 12 years ago!. Whats our chances?

Don't know if this is any use to your post but I'm sure I heard that a law came in last week (6th April) that a company who owe tax just can't go into liquidation without hmrc approval or something like that ? Ie thr company owe taxes of 3m go down the tubes & the tax man doesn't get a look in.

Another thing if rangers come through this I don't think they will be a big force again will end up like a Aberdeen etc

When does this BTC finish ?

Lenny

What are you talking about? The Revenue just want as much money as they can get. The book value of assets isn't it either. Ibrox and murray park wouldn't be worth very much if sold separately. If someone bids more for the assets collectively than the meagre total you'd get selling individually it's best all round. This is why people aren't bidding fortunes. It was always going to be £20- 30m to get control. The only problem is if we shyte digs his heels in. He wouldn't have a leg to stand on legally obviously (hasn't put anything in, will have broken conditions of sale and purchase agreement on "buying" Rangers- settling "small tax case" etc. Buying a companies shares borrowing against its own assets..... A list as long as your arm- this would deter any normal person but no oor Craigx

@lenny i think it will be tough if we get through this i agree but i also think we will get back to the same strenth if we are run properly , i would love us to start using young players just cant really see it happening because the owners will want instant sucess because u get more cash back.u wouldnt bid 20 mil plus for aberdeen etc we are still a big club just we need some people that arent dodgy as f@ck trying to screw us over...
btc u havin a laugh it was supposed to be over by now, i think it is just they are keeping it tight until they agree a cva..
craigandreallyconfusedbabybear

10 Apr 2012 00:26:49
Can anyone tell me how so many people already know the result of the EBT case and why everyone guessing the outcome have found rangers guilty?

BFH

Because they are !

Because they are guessing you mean?

Rangers have lost the BTC. They are waiting for the result of their appeal. They lost the case months ago.

@3 aye if you say so thats why HMRC have sent out begging letters to all the other 5000 companies involved asking if they would like to settle out of court for a nominal fee ? (because they want every penny their owed and dont do deals on tax as timmy crisisloan expert keeps telling us)

09 Apr 2012 23:49:51
In 1993 Rangers came within one goal of a place in the first final of the Champions League, losing out to Marseilles after a controversial series of events in which Marseille were accused of cheating, Walter Smith stated "It still sticks in the back of my mind," when questioned recently over the events of the winter of 1992 and spring of the following year. I think that the other SPL managers think the same of Smith and Rangers and this is the reason why the gang of 10 are outraged as they also feel cheated and feel the need for change?

TrueBlue

The 10+2 arrangement was tolerated so long as the 2 could be relied upon to uphold the standards required for effectively being the public face and money earners for the SPL. But that's not the case now. The 10 don't want the 2 to block change any more.

(OK, any 2 can block change but it's nearly always going to be old firm vs the rest)