Rangers Rumours Archive May 15 2012

 

Use our rumours form to send us rangers transfer rumours.


15 May 2012 21:38:31
Bears, are we once again getting the proverbial taken from us again?. Green says he will run the club as a profitable business and we will never find ourselves in this mess again. Then today the papers are full of us spending millions on new signings should we win embargo appeal. Are we getting mugged here again and taking it all in. I for one is sick of it, we want straight forward talking and no fancy grandstanding.

Believable63 Unbelievable17

Are we never gonny trust anybody again then because of one bad apple?

Agree0 Disagree0

Liquadation is going to happen,hmrc listening to these noises bout us spending millions wont go down well in our case for a cva,or is this mr greens plan

Agree0 Disagree0

The only people getting mugged are us tax payers.

How arrogant is it to talk of planning a CVA for creditors with a piddling 8.5m, then spending millions on buying players.

I despair of what has become of football.

Agree0 Disagree0

Have we spent any money yet on New players? No. Fact. Do we believe the Scottish press? Not me anyhow. Nothing of importance to write about today. No consortium details to report so need to fill back pages with something to keep the gullible ones on edge. Don't believe most of what you read.

Agree0 Disagree0

"Are we never gonny trust anybody again then because of one bad apple?"
Are you for real mate When did 2 (Murray and Whyte) become 1.Our place is an absolute Embarresment to every Rangers supporter 'cause of these TWO and maybe more! And another thing supposing the Green mega consortium goes through, then they get hacked off and want out. What's it gonna be like dealing with 20 people to round the shares back up?
Can u blame any of us being sceptical?

Agree0 Disagree0

Its OK being sensible now, but where were all the skiptics when it matterd: now the only thing left is alittle hope.

Agree0 Disagree0

The only remarked about buying players IF transfer emabargo was overturned and AFTER debts paid !

Agree0 Disagree0

.... and flying to Hong kong? for tourny arnt we skint:???

Agree0 Disagree0

Flying to HK. Business class min of 5500 k per seat return. X how many in the squad and support staff / hangers on. Then hotel etc. the creditors who are struggling to keep their business are just going to love that. Christ sake Bears show a bit of humility, these are normal folk with families to support and some will be have been no doubt fans who were barely breaking even but wanted to support their club and have the kudos of being a supplier to you. I thought us scots were renowned for fairness? Disgusted. {Ed001's Note - the organisers of the tournament will pay for travel and accommodation. Is it that difficult to stop and think?}

Agree0 Disagree0

Wake up guys, Green ISN'T here to benefit Rangers, in-fact, not one bid (including the blue knights) was for the benefit of the club, every single person who has showed interest in buying Rangers has seen the opportunity of getting something on the cheap, none more so than Paul Murray & Brian Kennedy, those two clowns wanted to (try) and save Rangers with fans money with minimum costs to themselves, a blind man could see that!! if anyone on here thinks Green in the man I would urge you to go check out his track record, honestly guys, if Rangers fans don't start getting their fingers out, they could end up being remembered as the most gullible fans in the history of football, blue knights, black knights, green & whyte, STOP BELIEVING THE SPIN........

Agree0 Disagree0

Only person being mugged is you OP..believing the paper bunch of lazy hacks...also get a grip when your first burd chucked you did you stop trusting all women ? So give him a chance...

Agree0 Disagree0

Daily record reports 25 million pounds of player value (to the creditors) will now walk over the summer for a paltry 8 million....

Yet if a newco formed - even that 8 million is lost....

leaving creditors down 25 million from players alone,

Seems news is fed to daily record to warn creditors - it can only get worse so accept 2p in the - or else

poor creditors, 25 million in tax has gone, now 25 million in player value is going, only need to here that ibrox is only worth 30 million or than whyte owns it... and the 100 million steal is on.

creditors may get nothing - but all rangers rans value will have gone as well.

Agree0 Disagree0

Paper talk -why are you all so gullible? their trying to make up stories and exaggerate truths to put the boot in to Rangers -they don't want us to survive! SG

Agree0 Disagree0

There was no crying about the poor creditors when Bill Miller announced it would take " multi-millions" to restructure Rangers from a loss making business into a profit making business.

The consortium are saying the same thing but putting a positive spin on it, at the end of the day Rangers is worth very little in its current state and it will take a lot of investment to sort it out.

Ordinary creditors would get nothing without this investment, because the company in liquidation is worth nothing to them.

Anorak

Agree0 Disagree0

The ordinary creditor would get nothing from a liquidated Rangers, the only reason they are getting something is because of the very investment that is being condemned. This investment is essential to turn a loss making model into a profit making model, without it, Rangers are not a commercially viable concern. If Rangers are not a commercially viable concern then the assets are nigh on worthless, it is ludicrous to suggest this investment could be used to pay off the clubs debts, the amounts involved dwarf its actual worth.

Rangers with muti-millions invested is worth 18 millon, without investment its worth next to nothing, its a loss making business with worthless assets except to a comercially viable football club called Rangers.

I simply do not understand those who scream ” liquidation liquidation ” and ” creditors creditors “, when it is a fact the creditors would get less out of liquidation. It is obvious who benefits the most from a liquidated Rangers and hiding behind the creditors doesnt disguise this fact.

So lets be transparent and name names, some Celtic fans want Rangers liquidated not because it benefits the creditors, not to save the SPL, not out of sporting or financial integrity, but out of self interest.

Celtic would clean up unopposed for a decade.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

Well done ed 001. If course rangers will be paid a fee and expenses. Obvious. Not sure if it is sensible rangers fans commenting or fans of other clubs trying to punish rangers to eternity. Better get used to being punished forever more. For financial misdemeanors. Hardly murder is it? !

Agree0 Disagree0

FFS calm down it's paper talk, let's just wait and see what happens, I know this is a rumours site but seriously let's wait and see what happens today,although I wouldn't be surprised if it was delayed again.BLUNTRU72 LLRFC

Agree0 Disagree0

If/when rankers are liquidated then the creditors will make more from that than the pox 8.5million on offer and if your mob is sent to div3 then you will be the Big losses too along. with the smaller spl clubs as you will have no tv money either. so do the DIGNIFIED thing Mr Green and pay your debt and taxes like every other hard working person in the country. but then rangers are not being very dignified at the moment are they as every single person who has to pay tax has been. also why is it that very buyer of rankers is going down the cva route when the should be paying the debt and if this "consortium" is so wealthy why don't they just pay the debt

hail hail

Marco1888

Agree0 Disagree0

Less off the lip 001, my MBA thinking man enough for you ! regardless of who pays for what it should be a no go {Ed001's Note - MBA just proves you have an education, not intelligence. You clearly have little of that, this tournament is a way for Rangers to make money, on that basis only a fool would say they shouldn't go.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Anorak you say -The ordinary creditor would get nothing from a liquidated Rangers but

A. The way these work with the inevitable firesale they might well get the same dosh from a liquidation.

&

B. The ordinary creditor unfortunately won't really get much of a say & it's likely HMRC will insist on liquidation.

What do HMRC get? They get the FEAR FACTOR. Don't insult us with substandard offers, we're not a soft touch & you WILL BE LIQUIDATED IF YOU TRY IT ON.

BB

Agree0 Disagree0

Marco 1888 talking gibberish again either they take share of 8.5 or receive absolutely nothing simples secured creditors get the lot how hard is that to understand how many REAL financial experts have to tell them its a take it or leave it

Agree0 Disagree0

Maybe I'm missing something,,"Take the 2p in the pound or you get nothing" So if club is Liquidated does this not mean the assets of the club Park training complex players etc etc are SOLD off and the money raised is then dished out to a list of creditors!!

Agree0 Disagree0

Marco. it ain't greens debt. he and his consortium are trying we think to buy o loss making company and turn it around. Not walk in and pay off someone else's debt. That will never happen so get over it.

Agree0 Disagree0

As non Bear, I have to take issue with a comment that Green publicly stated.

He said that every year Rangers would experience champions league football. Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we drop to one CL place after this season.

Therefore, by that comment, Rangers will win the league for the rest of history.

9 in a row was bad enough, but forever.

Gee, that's an appealing thought to those who are not old firm.....

Makes the decision to start in division 3 all the easier to agree with.

Agree0 Disagree0

"Take 2p in the pound or get nothing"

No. No. No.
Liquidation means the assets are sold and divvied up amongst creditors. The result - some unknown pence per pound.

CVA means creditors agreeing to say 2p in the pound using new money pumped into the club (8.5m in this case) and the assets remain the property of shareholders (CG in this case) and with zero debts.

Therefore creditors have to be convinced that 8.5m is at least as much as they would get than if the club were liquidated.

Simple as :-)

Agree0 Disagree0

If I said at least 74 people had read this post and made an opinion on it, would you believe me?

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes. yes. yes
Marco- simply put the CVA is the only and best option for the creditors to get any kind of return. Let me explain why the creditors would get very little if anything via the sale of assets as a result of the liquidation scenario.
Firstly, if rangers were liquidated the player’s contracts would be considered null and void meaning every member of the playing staff would be free to walk away without a transfer fee having to be paid, therefore the creditors would not receive a single penny from the sale of players. The next two most valuable assets at the club currently owns are Ibrox and Murray Park……I don’t know about you but I can’t think of many organisations (football clubs included) who would be interested or have a need to buy a 55000 seater stadium in Glasgow not to mention a state of the art training complex, can you? Who do you possibly think would want to buy these so called assets which in your views would turn fund the creditors pot?
FYI- the land that ibrox sits on including the car park, is valued at 1.1m whilst the land that Murray Park sits on is valued at 740k therefore even if the adminstrators could sell the land that both ibrox and mp to a developer the creditors could only see a maximum of 2.2m…….im sure you will agree this is substantially less than the 8.5m+ that the CVA option will offer?
Ps even if a developer did buy the land at ibrox then they have a problem, the main stand at ibrox is a listed building and cannot be knocked down!
In summary the creditors will see very little if anything from the liquidation of rangers, it is in their interests for rangers to survive.

Simple as :-)
Ghound

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 21:31:47
Livingston threaten to sue if rangers don't receive same punishment! Source STV

I think this is going to really cause a stir!

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/livingston/99924-livingston-threaten-legal-action-against-scottish-fa-over-rangers-situation/

Believable49 Unbelievable7

Livingston have written to the Scottish Football Association warning they may take legal action if the governing body fails to act upon Rangers' financial woes appropriately.

The First Division club have outlined they would pursue up to 1.2m in lost revenue for their relegation to the Third Division in 2009 if the SPL side are not dealt with in a similar manner.

The decision to demote Livingston, who were in administration but in the hands of prospective buyers, was made by the Scottish Football League prior to the start of the 2009/10 season.

A failed appeal to the SFL was followed up by a submission to the Scottish FA, who ruled the punishment was fair and reasonable.

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston went into administration in the Scottish top league and were punished by being sent to Div3.
Rangers are in the exact same situation and the SPL and SFA are bending over backwards to keep them in SPL.
It's a dirty mafia up here in Scotland and it should be cleaned out.

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston were RELEGATED meaning they were under the control of the SFL, NOT the SPL, both have their OWN rules as they are DIFFERENT organisations!

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston went into administration for the second time thats why they were put into div 3

Agree0 Disagree0

They never got a transfer ban! We have lost 10 points andbeen fined understandably,however how can we rebuild the club when we can't sign a team oh and the fact we lose tv revenue if the other SPL clubs agree -how many times do we get punished ? SG

Agree0 Disagree0

Were livi not relegated cos at the time they went from the spl to div one and hit finacial problems and at the time it was the council who owned their stadium and livi never paid up on it,so it was the council who moved them into administration,that itailian owner refused to accept an offer from the administrator for the club think it was like 250k and was gonna sink the club then thats when the sfa stepped in to save them and punished them to div 3. so saying gers are in the same situation is wrong, get ur facts right first

Agree0 Disagree0

Go for it Livingston....The whole of Scottish Football is behind you...except for Rangers fans off course....
We should ensure that the law is laid down against those who have broken the rules at Hectors House.

Agree0 Disagree0

Where Livingstone not in division one when they where relegated what about what happened to Dundee they never got relegated having gone into admin twice yet they never tried takin the sfa to court

Agree0 Disagree0

Motherwell got no sanctions against them, so wheres your conspiracy theory now. big eck

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers need to go to div 3 if liquidated! It would be unfair and wrong to do otherwise. You can't have 1 rule for 1 and different rule for another. Rangers can work their way back up through the divisions with the fan base they have, it would only take a few seasons. Old firm matches will return as normal and at least Rangers can move on. If they stay in SPL then they will have to put up with everyone under the sun thinking and saying negative things about how they cheated the rules to stay ect. Rangers won't be able to hold their heads high. At lease if they go to div 3 then they can hold their heads high and say they took what's coming and done their time. Livingstone have every right to go to court if the rules are bent to keep Rangers in the SPL. If Rangers are not liquidated then that sorts some issues at least.

Agree0 Disagree0

Behave! Livingston were relegated by the SFL! the ESS PEE ELL dont have the power to relegate any team, purely because of self preservation.

Agree0 Disagree0

All bias aside, Livingston are entirely correct. The rules need to be applied fairly, and that is all that any non-Bear is asking or demanding. There is a precedent, and that needs to be followed.

Agree0 Disagree0

How many times to be punished???
How many years was the cheating going on??
How much profit was made during this time??
How many clubs suffered through this??

Just a few questions that should be looked at.
All this before Mr Whyte decided to take PAYE and not actually pay it.
Legal...Moral....Dignity........CORRUPT!

Justice must be seen to be served or what message does this send?

Agree0 Disagree0

They are not suing Rangers... It's the SFA!!

Agree0 Disagree0

The rules have changed since Livi were put into adminstration......TWICE.

Agree0 Disagree0

Who cares about Livingstone? two bit nobodies WATP!

Agree0 Disagree0

Quite clearly NO profit was made............

Agree0 Disagree0

Lot of people missing the point and talking about administration. Livingston are suing if a NEWCO Rangers gets back into the SPL, i.e, currentco Rangers are liquidated.

Livingston were not relegated for being in Admin, they were relegated for going into Liquidation.

As far as the rules go, when it comes to newco Rangers, they are 100% in the right to question the SFA and SPL.

And remember, the SPL is a different organisation, but the SFA have final control over all footballing matters in Scotland. No-one in the SPL can register players unless the SFA say so and its teh SFA who put forward our European representatives. It is their right, if the SPL go against them, not to select ANYONE from the SPL to play in Europe, naming clubs from the First Division if they wish.

In short, the SPL may be a different organisation, but they still have to play by the rules of the governing body, the SFA

Agree0 Disagree0

How much profit was made......

I loads ya fool thats why were INSOLVENT....

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston were NOT liquidated, the SFL relegated them from First to Third for entering Administration during the close season and the SFA upheld their appeal

Agree0 Disagree0

Well this is the SFL not the SPL, but really the same rules should apply, as much as is possible in their respective leagues. Livingston of course are hoping for leniency for Rangers because that will increase their payout if they are successful.

Another thing for football chiefs to worry about!

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston can't sue Rangers... they can only sue the SFA,

Agree0 Disagree0

How much profit was made......

I loads ya fool thats why were INSOLVENT....


You are insolvent because every penny was ploughed back into the team at the expense of the taxman and everyone else. Are you trying to suggest that RFC did not benefit from cheating the taxman?

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston were NOT liquidated, the SFL relegated them from First to Third for entering Administration during the close season and the SFA upheld their appeal

Soory, you're wrong. I think youll find if you do your research, Livingston were relegated to div 3 for starting liquidation proceedings and their being a fear (from tge SFA) they could not fulfil their fixtures.

As I said, they were punished for going into liquidation (different from actually being liquidated) and NOT for going into Admin.

This is Livingstons case, they dont care about Rangers being in admin, only if they newco straight back to the SPL.

A quick google will confirm all of the above.

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 18:51:18
Livingston threatening legal action against SFA for £1.2m if preferential treatment given to RFC.

Believable29 Unbelievable16

Then won't Livingston equally find themselves in trouble with higher authorities isn't it uefa that take a dim view of any club taking legal action against their own football association ?

Agree0 Disagree0

Livi were dealt with by the sfl rangers, if and only if they form a newco will be dealt with by the spl two different assoc two different sets of rules nothing to do with sfa

Agree0 Disagree0

The Newco outcome will be the SPL decision, not the SFA, Livvy weren't in the SPL when they went into Liquidation or should I say Meadowbank. Anyway where does this End, Fed up now with all the speculation on top of speculation. The bottom line is Most people in Scottish football want us severely punished. Lets GTF to England we have the Men in charge that could make it happen at some sort of level.

Agree0 Disagree0

Is there a source to this story becuase i cant find one - anyway as everyone has said sfl dealt with livingston so there case is void.

lets hear every other club who has went into administrations case.

every case is heard on an individual basis - the fact is rangers and celtic bring a lot more than livingston than dundee and everyone else

ryanrfc

Agree0 Disagree0

IF the ebts goes against rangers then cant every team they have played in murrays era threaten to sue them..... just a thought...........LIZZIE WHERS MA BROLLY

Agree0 Disagree0

Doesn't matter if you are in Engerland, the debt and HMRC will follow. ASAIK the English law for admin/liquidation are tougher.

Agree0 Disagree0

Somewhat ironic that you have a dig at 'Meadowbank' when your own club are planning to to create a whole new team, but retain the history of the old one!

Agree0 Disagree0

You will play in England very shortly, of that there is no doubt.

Should have two away matches against Berwick Rangers next season when you are demoted to Division Three!

Agree0 Disagree0

All football in Scotland is under the auspices of the SFA. Livingstons case is that Rangers have been told the only thing more serious than the offences they committed was match fixing. logically then their offence was less serious, it would be illogical for Rangers to be treated more leniently. It will end when Livi either progress their suit or drop it

Agree0 Disagree0

You can't go to England. Rangers deserve to be severely punished for decades of cheating. I don't want Rangers to die but they must accept punishment in good grace and not try to dictate terms

Agree0 Disagree0

Nowhere to run, nowhere to hide mate. England couldn't accept you even if they wanted to. Not that they ever would. You will have to stay here face the punishment for the rules you have broken. Why not take whatever they can throw at you with some dignity and then maybe your team can hold there head high and say they done the time for the crimes so to speak. Probably sounds outlandish to you lot eh

Agree0 Disagree0

Not that simple, if rangers could just go to england they'd have done it years ago. England don't want us.

Agree0 Disagree0

And so they should, vested interests! Livingston had a squad to play in the first division and a couple of weeks before the season started they were thrown into division 3.

Airdrie United chairman Jim Ballantyne insists Livingston only have themselves to blame after the Scottish Football League relegated them to the Irn-Bru Third Division.

The future of the West Lothian club is back in doubt after the SFL opted to punish them yesterday for breaching the league's insolvency rules.

Jim Ballantyne, SFA Committee member, turning up at Linfield v Rangers

And Murray


Rangers Chairman David Murray dealt a decisive blow for Airdrieonians in 2002 when he demanded money owed to him by the club and was unsympathetic towards their cause.

Murray was quoted as saying: “I apologise to Airdrie’s supporters but something had to be done about this debt. Business is business and Carnegie Sports also have wages to pay,” bluntly refusing to help the debt-stricken club
only in Scotland

transparency and fair play, no wonder its not wanted.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why oh why do you have this old chestnut of England again. I am fifty years old and this has been talked about for forty of them, and guess what we are no nearer that happening than we were forty years ago. The fact that the owners used to be with a club in England does not mean they want or need us.
It is time to realise that we p,ay in Glasgow and Glasgow is in Scotland, that's where we will always be.
SPL don't want it, EPL don't want it, UEFA really will not allow it, so the chances are bugger all. Please stop this England talk. Why don't we join the primers liga, as much chance as england

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston appeal was heard by the SFA!

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes it was the sfl that relegated them but it was the sfa who heard the appeal and agreed with the punishment

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston were twice in administration , so they can not expect the same treatment !

Agree0 Disagree0

What is it with this England tosh? Is it just a poor way to try and punish all other Scottish clubs and their fans? We are rangers of Glasgow? If were allowed to jump into another league what stops Porto or benfica joining la liga? Or grasshoppers or Salzburg joining bundesliga? you haven't really thought this thru have you? Itll never happen.

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes the sfa did agree with the punishment, but they did not set the punishment, that is out with their duristiction. The decision is taken by the league authority, for Rangers it is the SPL, and for livingston it was the SFL. So good luck to them losing their court battle

Agree0 Disagree0

Livingston don't have a case. Simple as that.

Plus, I didn't see them take action at the time of their demotion i.e Motherwell not being demoted for being in administration.

It's purely because it is Rangers. We wouldn't be hearing about all these attempted rule changes if it were any other club outside the OF.

It's pathetic!!!!

TTG

Agree0 Disagree0

The rest of Scottish football wouldn't be punished if Rangers went to England. This myth of Rangers propping everyone else up is about to be shown up for what it is - a myth.

Before the Souness era, when Rangers were rubbish (and where were all the Loyal Bears then, eh?) Scottish football was in a much healthier state.

Scottish Football does NOT need a strong Rangers. Only Rangers need a strong Rangers.

Oh, and please do go ahead and boycott away games. We could do without the hordes of "fans" invading other parts of Scotland every other week.

Agree0 Disagree0

Hull calling! (worked south border on and off last 15 years) Down here RFC are as wanted as a turd on your shoe, getting tired of defending the sh*te coming out of some so called bears mouths, i will write this in big letters so the thick ones can read it and get it into their thick heads. ENGLANG WILL NEVER ALLOW THE OLD FIRM EITHER OR BOTH TEAMS INTO ANY LEAGUE ,rant over blood presure dropping.

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 17:57:31
Not wanting to sound negative,because i'm actually quite glad and relieved that someone has put in a bid to save our club. But can't help thinking like a lot of bears,that we need to know who these guys are,for obvious reasons. I accept the arguement being made for Confidentiality.At the same time i'm intrigued by CG's statement that some of them want to wait until the CVA is in progress before being named. Would this mean that if CVA is agreed some will drop out? Is there more money for them if it's newco?
There's also the possibility that having so many investors(20) that this may take a while to investigate them all,is this a plan?
However having said all that we've got no option but to cross our fingers and hope for the best...Haven't We?
Optimistic Bear

Believable27 Unbelievable6

Do u not think if the green consortium are talking about how much they are going to invest in the playing squad should they not be looking to pay off the debt first and not try for a cva if they have so much money as green says in the days sun , just saying

Agree0 Disagree0

I would have assumed the reason they'd want to remain anonymous is that if they are revealed as being significantly wealthy then the creditors may feel they can demand a higher settlement...

Alternatively it could be that they've previously been involved in companies that have came through cva's, for example HMRC would be less likely to agree to terms if one of the investors had previously agreed a cva with HMRC etc etc...

Agree0 Disagree0

We need to wait an see an when its done an dusted we will find out just need to keep the FAITH


TB

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with 1st post, and i hear everyone already talking of future signing targets, get a grip the days of stupid spending is finished even after 1 year sanctions. why was walter given 40m to spend when he came back knowing there was financial problems typical murray playing monopoly with other folks money

Agree0 Disagree0

Just as a matter of curiosity guys apparenty cw has a charge over the ground etc. I assume he doesnt hold a charge over the players? Surely the selling of the squad would equate to more than is on offer by way of greens cva? Just wondering- havent heard anyone mention the players.

Agree0 Disagree0

Have been hearing rangers lawyer thinks he'll get the transfer embargo overturned meaning the warchest can be come a reality.

I can see Ally bringing Grant Holt to Ibrox this time around, the return of Kenny Miller and possibly after a disappointing stint at Anfield the return of Charlie Adam.

Also think some big name international players from the likes of Singapore might be on their way during the summer to help with the promotion of Rangers as a global brand & believe Ally could be watching Euro 2012 with a view to making a few bids for some of the stars of that tournament.

Suddenly the futures bright again!

Agree0 Disagree0

I'd assume the reason the investors dont want named is because if the deal falls through they would be advised by the police like (THE ALLYGATE INCIDENT)to step up their personal security.....TTTS

Agree0 Disagree0

This might just be what every Celtic fan dreads--- A Green 20 man international consortium with megabucks, paying the
creditors just enough to keep them happy with a CVA, staying in the SPL and then regenerating the Gers into a global brand eventully telling the SFA & SPL Cheerio Cherio Cherio... & joining an inevitible Euro Superleague.

All this achievable with the kind of warchest even David Murray could only dream of

For every fiver Celtic spend, we'll spend a tenner, nah make that twenty!

Happy days may be here again for us bears after all!!

Stay optomistic bears!

Agree0 Disagree0

Charlie Adam!!! Please not - he's over-rated not to mention over-weighted....

I've just started celebrating the fact that Lafferty will be off so why spoil my celebrations?? :)

Agree0 Disagree0

I cant believe what im reading 135m in debt and your talking about spending millions on players will everyone get real mid table team for 5 years at least if lucky.

Agree0 Disagree0

HMRC cant and wont give Rangers a CVA , the case has already been decided , but both parties agreed to keep it under wraps till after the end of the season , i dont know the amount Rangers are liable for , but apparently it is not good news , if HMRC were to give Rangers a CVA they would in effect be telling every club , business and tax payer , occhh its all right , you dont need to pay all your tax , just give us 5p in the , not an option i'm afraid , no matter what all you Rangers fans believe and think , you are no different to any other business where tax is concerned , they will i understand let Rangers pay the full amount over a period of time , 2m out of 50/70m is not acceptable , they would rather liquidate Rangers , get money from a sale of assets while sending out a message to others who try to avoid paying tax , so dont get too cocky just yet .

Agree0 Disagree0

Am I right in thinking if Rfc are liquidated players walk free from contract. So there value is nil? They only have a value if Rfc agree a cva?

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers fans are living in the twilight zone if they think Green and the scarlet pimpernels are here to save them. If the duel contracts are proven the tax case will look like chicken feed compared to what will follow..

ps. Livingston's rumblings are the beginning of the end.

Agree0 Disagree0

this morning quoting 8m for the senior players, at the reduced fees.

That's how many players out of how big a squad? How many other players could go for 50K - 100K a shot? Let's say a conservative extra 2m for the job-lot.

Add to that the money potentially raised from other Rangers assets.

Then look again at the 8.5m offer from the mythical consortium.

Even given this very simple calculation ... does anyone really think a CVA will or can be agreed?

Agree0 Disagree0

At 85%, with 20 investors it is under 5% each and as such below the SFA limits and as such they cannot force an investigation into each one personally.

Agree0 Disagree0

8m for senior players.

Yes, doesn't stack up compared to 8.5m from CG. What does 8.5m buy? Ibrox, Murray Park and how many players' contracts? Certainly not 8m worth. If D&P are doing their job right thee players have to be sold before the CVA.

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 14:31:32
anyone doing the 1872 walk for the RFFF On sunday

Believable13 Unbelievable39

Aw no another walk......... LIZZIE WHERES MA BROLLY !!!!!!

Agree0 Disagree0

And ma hat ;-)

bil72

Agree0 Disagree0

Naw im no

Agree0 Disagree0

Lets walk proud and that we are showing support for our great club Glasgow Rangers . Lets be dignified with our singing and be respectful of others. We will make people eat there words about us but we should also be humble in our victory. And we will get back to being a great force that we once were.
" Strive to be humble in victory and gracious in defeat" .

Agree0 Disagree0

I am washing my anorak.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why bother now that Mr Green and his 20 man have taken over.

You're only subsidising millionaires tbh.

Agree0 Disagree0

RFFF all fine and very good - I've put a bit in myself - but it might be good if they told US what they are doing with the money??

bil72

Agree0 Disagree0

Bil72
They probably have a wee EBT scheme going.

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 13:56:58
SFA (Regan) has finally and publicly asked Green today to disclose the members of the consortium. More worrying is that he also confirms that the SFA still have no fit and proper test. Frightening!

Believable44 Unbelievable4

With Regan asking for all the names of the group buying rangers be made public.,

will this also be getting asked of all other members of the spl, will all invested members of every team have to be made available to the general public,

or will this only be done to rangers and then any other team that is sold to new owners??

Agree0 Disagree0

Am a Rangers fan for over 40 years and I want to know these 20 names - if they even all exist.

Any Ger who defends Green's lack of transparency yet applauds Ally's demands for SFA transparency will look a fool and won't do the club any good.

In fact, if we don't ask Craig Whyte Mark 2 serious questions then as a club we will probably deserve to die.

He's taking us for mugs fellow bears.

BB

Agree0 Disagree0

You are right, for an honest bsuiness everyone should be named, investors and shareholders.

Also all previous shareholders and directors who participated and received monies froma corrupt compnay and an illegal EBT scheme.

Why doesn't Ally demand thier names, oh maybe hes one of them !

Agree0 Disagree0

`Rangers are the only ones that can investigate the buyers. if it happens again and the sfa see that the buyers arent fit enough to buy club then rangers get fined by the sfa, so its all up to rangers to do the checks

Agree0 Disagree0

With your track record It's hardly surprising the SFA/SPL want to know exactly who they are dealing with! so that they can investigate (due diligence) to ensure they are fit & proper (as per the rules)! oh silly me I forgot you don't do compliance or rules for that matter, I'll bet you there are a few surprises lurking within this group

Agree0 Disagree0

Why shoould Green give the names, they are investors and can be silent partners, therefore they may ahve an agreement in place to say we will provide funds but want to stay out of the public domain, there is nothing illegal in that funding process, as long as Green is fronting it and he proves to be fit and proper, then what is the issue?

Agree0 Disagree0

"Why shoould Green give the names, they are investors and can be silent partners, therefore they may ahve an agreement in place to say we will provide funds but want to stay out of the public domain, there is nothing illegal in that funding process, as long as Green is fronting it and he proves to be fit and proper, then what is the issue?"

So if they turn out to be Columbian drug lords or the mafia that's ok? Get real, no reason for 20 (yes 20) individuals to stay hidden. What if they don't exist and it's actually CW behind it all, would you not want proof. If I was a creditor expecting to take a bath I bloomin well would! If I was an RFC employee I'd want to be sure this crap isn't going to happen again.

Agree0 Disagree0

Y such an issue now? the sfa are taking this stance now but maybe just maybe if they had been so bothered b4 Mr Whyte would hav got nowhere near scottish football and rangers. kinda adds fuel to the fire for the ppl who think there is now an agenda against rangers. wot the last few months has shown is the utter hatred from some in scottish football towards rangers but hey ppl hav long memories ah only hope others at any point in the future dont hav any problems :)

Agree0 Disagree0

But Green said he was a front man who would then leave. Which leaves the band of directors - they are more than investors, they have legal obligations. Which is why anyone can go to Companies House and see who a director is - it's called transparency.
So how do we know each is fit-and-proper?

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree the SFA have to show an interest after their catastrophic failings with CW, but ultimately it only concerns them if any of those consortium are to take up positions as directors.

Otherwise it is nothing to do with them. They can always impose retrospective sanctions, if not currently in their constitution they can make up the new rules to suit.

Agree0 Disagree0

The problem with that my friend the sfa/spl honest rangers fans etc DO NOT WANT to travel down the road again aka CW
DO you not understand that

Agree0 Disagree0

To have 20 new investors at rangers is great for the scottish game and spl onwards and upwards we are back

Agree0 Disagree0

As the original poster in am glad to see the the spl/sfa are asking for the names and facts about the new owners,

means that they have actually learnt from the mistakes of the past with the CW issue, this can only be a good thing as hopefully it means they wont be repeated at any club.

what i want to know is will all the other 11 clubs have to also disclose all there investers aswell, or will this only happen when a club is sold in the future,

as surely if rangers have to disclose all the investers where they on the board or not then so should the other 11,

Agree0 Disagree0

Wot bile, " We have long memories, i only hope others down the line don't have any problems" u still don't get it do you. (how to make friends and influence people, page 1, chapter 1,) YOU ARE A TUBE .

Agree0 Disagree0

The rest of the club's major investors are listed at companies house or via stock exchange, so no big secrets there. Don't get this "well if we have to tell you who our investors are, then you need to show me your's" attitude comes from. Don't get defensive because we want to know the quality and reliability of the people who will be in control of our club. Not interested in who owns what in the east end or Edinburgh.

Agree0 Disagree0

Currently they are ONLY investors - its nobody's business until they become (unlikely) members of the board.
Are we sure Murray (won't call him sir) divulged every name who invested in the club?

bil72 (couldn't keep away!)

Agree0 Disagree0

Can no one take a positive stance here 21 investors for a scottish club must be a good thing for the scottish game only in this country can potential backers be scared off the more money that gets invested in the spl in scotland the better this includes other clubs too not just rangers

Agree0 Disagree0

"The problem with that my friend the sfa/spl honest rangers fans etc DO NOT WANT to travel down the road again aka CW"
--

As far as SFA and SPL are concerned tough, as for the Rangers fans they are in the hands of the administrators, as far as I can see anyone would have done.

SFA and SPL can't stop someone buying a football club, that is up to the person selling the club to perform due diligence. The only jurisdiction they have is that the office bearers are fit and proper persons.

Agree0 Disagree0

Don't think owners of a club need to be named as fit & proper persons but directors do so when Rangers finally get round to naming a board to run the club then these are the people who will be checked for fit & proper purposes

Agree0 Disagree0

Who are these 20 investors, a cannae wait tae look them right in the eye... sorry eyes a ment in yi no i meen it ......ally

Agree0 Disagree0

To last couple of posters - so you don't care who controls the club? "Only investors" are the people who will pull the strings, they will appoint the directors, they will decide who to hire or sack. They will control the purse strings, so ultimately they control who will get paid or not paid by the club. Therefore, it is critical that the investors are trustworthy, respectable and fit to be in control of a club such as RFC. Is it that difficult to comprehend?

Agree0 Disagree0

They need to know incase of tax evasion no sorry money laundering, and im quite sure they do have all the names of investers of all league members

Agree0 Disagree0

To the poster above talking about ebts,,,,ebts are not technically illegal and are not deemed as tax evasion but tax avoidance,,,,,are you all thick ,,if he names the people and theyre deemed to be big players then we have no chance of a cva as they will want a bigger pot

Agree0 Disagree0

Green will name all the investors:

Mr Gold, Mr White, Mr Blue, Mr Pink etc etc.

Agree0 Disagree0

The obvious question would be, if Mr Green had such a watertight solution/bid for our problems backed by 20 investors why would he not ply his trade in the land of megabucks engerland!

Agree0 Disagree0

To the poster above ebt are illegal in some cases as we know, if you go to buy a house you need to prove where your deposit has come from it is law

Agree0 Disagree0

If these people in this group are as wealthy as some state and they are named, the creditors will want more money. This is the reason these people do not want named until a CVA has been agreed. So I am happy for them to remain a secret until then, why should they go pulblic and have to pay more to get a CVA agreed, and hence have less to invest in the Club afterwards?
Ritchie712

Agree0 Disagree0

To th guy that said -Y such an issue now? the sfa are taking this stance now but maybe just maybe if they had been so bothered b4 Mr Whyte would hav got nowhere near scottish football and rangers.

So you're saying Whyte should have been investigated but Green's consortium shouldn't?

That's great logic mate.

Bet you marched to BBC Scotland to protest against Mark Daly's documentary lol

Agree0 Disagree0

It is not an invesigation against the spl and to try and tar other tax paying,debt paying clubs with rfsee to try and implicate others only to try and reduce facing punishment is beyond comprehension...Your club is toxic and always has been so leave honest clubs out of your pantomime or do you fear more exposé.

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers have a 50% chance of getting into the CL every year with only one team qualifying. They are playing against teams that would not survive in the championship.

There is a 10 mllion reward for the group stages with a Europa run as a consolation prize.

England is a big pond with a lot of big fish.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

This moving to england always comes up, they dont want any scottish teams, why should they? as for this spl needs us nonsense, (in the 80s the top 2 teams was aberdeen & dundee utd and st mirren even finished 3rd) the bottom 6 in league only play the old firm once at home.

Agree0 Disagree0

"To last couple of posters - so you don't care who controls the club?"
--

What I'm saying is we have no choice.

I welcome the SFA trying to find out, but ultimately they have no jurisdiction over who owns the club.

Agree0 Disagree0

This moving to england always comes up, they dont want any scottish teams, why should they? as for this spl needs us nonsense, (in the 80s the top 2 teams was aberdeen & dundee utd and st mirren even finished 3rd) the bottom 6 in league only play the old firm once at home.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
30 years ago!! you kind of kill your own point there, and you dont always play the bottom 6 only once at theirs, depends on the fixtures, man you are dumb, yeah we'll never move to England but if your going to post try to make it relevant and also make sense

Agree0 Disagree0

I can see why the SFA are doing this, having been caught out by CW last year. It's a reasonable request.

If you were a bank and someone wanted open a business account then they would have to disclose the investors in that business. Football is, today, a financial matter.

Agree0 Disagree0

PS welcome back bill72!

Agree0 Disagree0

30 years ago! you kind of kill your own point there, and you dont always play the bottom 6 only once at theirs, depends on the fixtures, man you are dumb, yeah we'll never move to England but if your going to post try to make it relevant and also make sense

well it was 20 years ago david murray killed scottish game with over spending

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 12:05:29
So Green and associates are really telling the world how much money they have and are willing to spend, BUT want creditors to agree to a CVA worth a few pence in the pound while life goes on a if nothing had happened. If I were a creditor, I would see this as a massive slap in the face and liquidate the club even if only to make me feel better.How insensitive can you get. If these people have as much as they say, then why not settle the bills. Before anyone says that businessmen will not spend more than they have to, just remember, that the creditors are business men too.

Believable46 Unbelievable16

But your not a creditor and have no say....mark

Agree0 Disagree0

That makes it all ok then mark , ever heard of common decency ?

Agree0 Disagree0

CVA is never gonna happen anyway. Everyone knows this - HMRC refused 10M from rangers 2 yrs ago - they will not take anything other than 24M .....end of.

...Liquidation only route.

Agree0 Disagree0

And you're obviously a Rangers fan, who will have no say either when the CVA is rejected and your club gets liquidated.

Agree0 Disagree0

These men in the shadows, furtive, secretive, unknown, appear to have the same bad attitude that permeates Rangers....they'll do well but the club won't.

Agree0 Disagree0

Once again the papers cud be makin things up! Why on earth wud u say u are goin too invest millions in the club n give creditors penny's! Or there sayin this so creditors reject cva any green says oh wel we tried newco it is!

Agree0 Disagree0

Even if it is liquidation what does it really mean, history is always going to be there is the hearts and minds

Agree0 Disagree0

Creditors will lose most of their money either way. The question is - will they be better off under a proposed CVA or through liquidation? Clearly Green will look for a low p/ CVA and valuing the assets is probably very hard anyway.

Agree0 Disagree0

Dear oh dear. Not even sorted with creditors, taxman, EBT's BTC etc. and now we are discussing multi million pounds war chests. C'mon, lets get real here. Nice thoughts but looooong way to go yet

Agree0 Disagree0

Valuation of a stadium is very hard to do as its a sporting arena it will only be valued at what somone is willing to pay. Also correct me if i am wrong but in the facade on the main stand not classed as a listed building so you can't knock it down

Agree0 Disagree0

Wee Vlad will be jumping up and down for his Lee Wallace transfer money as well soon.

Agree0 Disagree0

Guys - it's called 'business', hard for some to understand I know, but these guys didn't make it good in whatever business their involved in by handing over blank cheques FFS!
This is the normal process of administration - no more , no less
ACCEPT IT & move on

bil72

Agree0 Disagree0

It wasn't Green and Co that ran up the bills! Why should they come in and spend all their money correcting somebody elses mistakes to the fullest! They want a chance to make a profit long term so as businessmen are seeking a legal route in order to procure the assets of a company in financial dire straits! Let's put it in simple terms...you buy a house and suddenly you are being chased for the previous owners debts...do you pay in full or sort it out to your benefit? I know I wouldn't be spending my cash to sort out somebody else's bills!

Agree0 Disagree0

AEG buying staduim in various cities across europe for concerts etc, now that hard in glasgow with SECC and venues, but if you dont want to loose all that profit from events, ibrox holds 50,000 and has done concerts..

so there is valuation there. Lady Gaga in SECC or Ibrox....

if rangers go to div 3 - they wont need ibrox and may be unable to afford to play there (how will they pay the rent?)... dont say tickets - ticketus has that money for 3 years.

Agree0 Disagree0

That may be the case about buying someone elses house but if i did i would be changing the name on the front door and not calling myself by their name. Do the honest thing and pay your dues.
67Coatbridge

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree,if they have that much money to invest then pay the bills in full as why should the people suffer,its not there fault but its only right to clear all the smaller bills etc

Agree0 Disagree0

Pay someone else's debts? Yeah right. We aren't the first club to stiff someone outta cash and we won't be the last. It isn't anything to be proud of but if we think about it honestly I bet we all know someone we call family or a friend who has been bankrupt had their home repossessed or not paid their tax . It happens. Were all very sorry. Move on. I've been stitched up in the past and can think of 3 I know right away to have been declared bankrupt.

Agree0 Disagree0

I am seriously tired of some Celtic fans hiding behind sporting and business integrity, they want a league without their biggest rival, they don't want competition, they want to win everything and stroll into Europe unopposed every year. They don't give a monkeys if it hurts the SPL or Scottish football in general, its all about winning.

A CVA is the best deal fo the creditors, get over it and deal with it.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

Obviously the journalists just rearrange the following phrases for all the rangers ownership stories:
War chest
Multi millionaire
Saviour
Wealth off the radar
Straight talking
Watched as a boy

Really desperate amateur stuff and very sad to watch the simple and gullible jump on this.

Agree0 Disagree0

@Anorak: it's not just Celtic fans.

Agree0 Disagree0

Just listened to clyde 1 superscoreboard. Heard a caller call the hacks on the programme a credit ti Scottish investigative journalism ! Unberievable. they are a disgrace . Allthe are are apologists for rangers . " give Green a chance " they bleat " lets see where he is going with this " Lessons learned from the Whyte farce ? NONE

Agree0 Disagree0

Anorak you're true blue colours are shining through.

Its not just Celtic fans who want Rangers gone. CVA may be the best deal for the creditors or maybe NewCo but it doesnt mean what Rangers have done isnt despicable.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why do people say that ibrox only worth money as stadium ...highbury anyone? ... murray park is that worthless too ? the fact that rfc fans think it fine to pay small sums in a cva while holding assets is immoral maybe legal but immoral. dont do walking away agreed but does do walking away with small business men and womans cash ? dignity sure. i dont see uefa taking small sums for member clubs.

Agree0 Disagree0

They are not someone else's debts they are our debts, Whoever owns the club is the club.

Like it or not these are Rangers debts a change of ownership doesn't change this.

As a life long fan I am ashamed of my club and of the so called fans who seem to delight in us stiffing people for the money we owe them.

This is our history now the club who doesn't pay its bills!

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 10:04:58
Do we know the names of any of Green's Consortium? STV Grant on Twitter saying Wayne Rooneys agent and some one called Mike McDonald? ANy ideas bears?

Believable11 Unbelievable12

Mike mcdonald was on the sheff utd board with green when green got punted as chief exec at sheff utd at the time.

Agree0 Disagree0

Reports in the Daily Express article about a war chest names another agent.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ignore the press. Speculation in the last few days has been very wide off the mark. Walter Smith was mentioned then Graeme Souness. Then yesterday it was Freddy Shepherd. All have denied being involved so let's assume any other name is nonsense too.

Agree0 Disagree0

I think gordan ramsey, on his twitter whhen someone asked about buying rangers he said, im cooking up someething....

Agree0 Disagree0

Duff&Duffer will know

Or am I just being silly;-)

bil72

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 09:45:20
CHARLES GREENS consortium will hand Ally McCoist a multi-million pound war chest this summer if the Scottish Football Association can be persuaded to drop their transfer embargo.
Express Sport spoke to one of Greens backers, former Sheffield United owner Mike McDonald, and he admitted that their group have serious wealth that has been put together from the medical worlds of Kuwait, Abu Dhabi and Singapore alongside major investment from European and UK property developers.

Top football agent Paul Stretford will also have a major involvement in the football operation, helping the club to buy and sell players.

McDonald admitted that once Greens consortium complete their takeover and sort out the debts they are willing to plough significant amounts into the team to help McCoists team to become big players in Scotland and the Champions League.

In the Mail andxpress today!

Believable23 Unbelievable65

You'd have to suspect that puffery like this is not going to help persuade creditors to accept a CVA. "You lot can have a few quid each, and once that's out of the way we'll start loughing millions in!".

Was nothing learned from the stories originally peddled by Mr Whyte? This lot sound scarily similar.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why don't they put significant money in now to pay off debts? Instead of steering us to NewCo and liquidation? That's not 'saving' us! Any bidder could liquidate and restart.

Agree0 Disagree0

Working down in Hull, if we don't take our medicine for our past wrong doings, i can't honestly say if i could continue to follow RFC. this whole thing has made us look stupid and to expect preferential treatment just because of "who we are" is making me squirm. Down here ex pat footie talk in the bars is "Rangers are trying to bully their way out" of this mess, not great for a club who once hoped to play down here. Chance now ZERO

Agree0 Disagree0

Any 'wealth off the radar'? I think we may have heard this before. More lazy journalism, surely rangers fans aren't still buying this s**t?

Agree0 Disagree0

Not two war chests?

Agree0 Disagree0

Oh dear ,wake up guys,these people are asset strippers in it for a profit and by sort out the debt do they mean pay what Rangers owe because anything less is shamefull, as if they say there is a multi million pound warchest available it should go to paying the creditors. As for champions league that is at least 3 years away and if the SFA SPL grow a pair you will be in the 3rd div with no history(cant see there being need for million pound players down there)At least it was encouraging to hear Hibs go on about integrity being more important than anything else

Dannybhoy

Agree0 Disagree0

So he is willing to produce a "multi million pound war chest" while shafting the creditors with a CVA. Im sure the creditors will be happy with that.

Agree0 Disagree0

Disgusting, shaft the creditors, then splash the cash like the old days. Should be expelled from the SPL for this legalized theft

Agree0 Disagree0

Shameful. Shaft the tax payer and small creditors and then rub their face in it by pouring millions into buying players a few weeks later. SFA and UEFA should throw the book at them. I wasn't for suspending the licence, but I am now. Disgraceful.

Agree0 Disagree0

This will be the same 20million that mr whyte promised

Agree0 Disagree0

This is not true. Not in press or on their websites.

Agree0 Disagree0

Could have been the same statement Whyte made one year ago.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why isn't this money in there now? Or is it in there but Green will have selective memory with his pin number till the day after the CVA passes? Then after you shaft companies big and small to the tune of pennies in the pound, you will unleash a sizeable transfer budget once the CVA goes through, paying players thousands a week while screwing the Scottish Ambulance Service for a sizeable chunk of their 8,438 due. If this club had ANY integrity at all there shouldn't be a hint of a transfer budget for next season regardless of the potential embargo. Glasgow Rangers - they don't do paying their way.

Agree0 Disagree0

Well, if I was a creditor, I would be completely cheesed off by this. The amount of any CVA (if agreed) will be based on what the club can afford. How will it look if the new owners say they can only afford to pay for example 10p in the pound and then pump millions into the club to buy new players, which under normal circumstances, they cant afford.
Other clubs in the SPL who are in debt are cutting back on player budgets. It is time Rangers wised up to the situation they are in and lived within a reasonable budget

Agree0 Disagree0

A ridiculous story to try and influence the integrity of the SFA case tomorrow. An attempt to blackmail the SFA to overturn the transfer ban.

Agree0 Disagree0

Big players in Scotland hardly requires multi-millions, as for big players in CL....GET REAL.

They are trying to spin the plain fact that Rangers wll be run just like Celtic.

ANORAK.

Agree0 Disagree0

Green was quoted ''For every Fiver they spend we will..............''

Pay what you owe before you make these promises

Agree0 Disagree0

I would rather they used the money to pay all there debts to the 276 companies that they owe money to?!?
Just a thought!

Agree0 Disagree0

So what is being said here, if true, is: We have lots of money available for the club if we can get the SFA to drop those pesky sanctions. OK  but the bigger issue here is :Creditors!! for your CVA we only have 8.9 million, sorry guys. However we have loads of money for players! 
How do you think the creditors will actually view that..... Mmmmmm 

Agree0 Disagree0

Point 1- you do realise that multi-million means greater than 1

point 2- lots of people posting on here that the consortium dont want to be named in order to hide their true wealth thus compromising any CVA...surely stating once debt is cleared we will be buying expensive players and and using "multi million " war chest.... does that not alert any CVA of their true wealth also..not very wise ..Johnny G

Agree0 Disagree0

Remember guys this is the press headline we are talking about ive seen more truth posted on these pages lol

Lochaber Bear

Agree0 Disagree0

Nice wind up post. Got them all spewing. Cant see vast investments honestly. by living within means itll be 1 mill players tops When we're allowed.

Agree0 Disagree0

OMG, is this deja vu or something!! Are you lot not sick of getting carried away by rumour after rumour. These people were willing to let Miller take the club for 11million, that is not a good sign. Now your talking about "major players" and "war chests". You'll be lucky if they don't rape and pillage you by the end of this.

Seems a bit weird to me that a club that insisted on full disclosure for the SFA panel (risking their safety) are happy to be taken over by a consortium of 20 unnammed individuals. Maybe they're protecting themselves from the psycho fringe.

Just remember that you can't blame the SFA. Hard to check up on somebody who's not been named.

Agree0 Disagree0

Looks like the days of the Gazzas and Laudrups at Ibrox could be back shortly.


Seriously guys, Green is making us look like a laughing stock.

There will be no CVA, no warchest and even if there was the whole thing would stink anyway as it would mean many ordinary creditors being shafted.

Charles Green = Craig Whyte Mark 2.

BB

Agree0 Disagree0

I am a rangers fan big time but these guys taking over can anyone tell me why they should sort out mess of other individuals yes we should try to pay our debts but not with the money coming in for a new management team at least the creditors will get some money back but if you bought a business that was failing would you put all your money to pay off others debts i dont think so just let them get on with cva pay some money back then get our beloved glasgow rangers back to where we belong. The 3rd division is not an option as all clubs would lose to much money and scottish football not matter what anyone says would suffer and if we get 10 point deduction we still make champions league and are the green scared to keep us in premier as we win it with a ten point deficite then show how good you lot really are

Agree0 Disagree0

What a negative bunch id love to see rangers splash the cash and bring the old days back think of the sucsess we could have but no u all just want to sit there and be negative

Agree0 Disagree0

We already tried pumping millions Into the team to give Europe a crack, look where that got us!

Agree0 Disagree0

As a Celtic fan it is good to see the honest Rangers fans saying we must pay our debts first, not go spending money on players. I think if Mr Green had made that statement the SFA will look more favourably on that and would be willing to help, and the Rangers fans could have held there heads a bit higher as they would be seen as doing the right thing.

Agree0 Disagree0

I'm thinking along the same lines as the firsy guy to reply to this. Most successful businessmen tend to be quiet about their wealth and prospective deals. This guy seems to be too keen to brag about his intentions and his prospective "war-chest". I think he's putting on a front, cos he ain't got no back. I'm also hearing stories that he's still tarting araound for backers, asking for as little as 100k to buy in, ok, that's big cheese for most of us, but worrying like he's trying to run a raffle to drum up cash. BEWARE!!

Agree0 Disagree0

Post is complete and utter nonsense. Get a grip no big money will be spent on players. players will leave to get wage bill down. Honestly wake the F**K up. Season ticket holder here and i dont want the club to ever go back to the spend,spend,spend days. Thats what got us in this mess. Green has stated club will live within its means & wiil never have debt in his time in charge = no wages over 7-10 grand.

Agree0 Disagree0

That's the whole point of administration, to screw the creditors.

Why on earth would businessmen pay more for something than they have to?

To please obsessed Celtic fans? I think not.

Agree0 Disagree0

While this is all very fanciful lets concern ourselves with trying to survive first and foremost and then look at putting solid structures in place to ensure that we are never again open to the crookedness of the last 20 yrs.

Seriously when I read nonsense like this I would like to swing for someone - have we learnt nothing?

Big G.

Agree0 Disagree0

Post is complete and utter nonsense. Get a grip no big money will be spent on players. players will leave to get wage bill down. Honestly wake the F**K up. Season ticket holder here and i dont want the club to ever go back to the spend,spend,spend days. Thats what got us in this mess. Green has stated club will live within its means & wiil never have debt in his time in charge = no wages over 7-10 grand

Agree with this totally, seems some people still want to bury their heads in the sand. Rangers will not be spending big money ever again. Was once a big club in Scotland, has always been a small club worldwide get real. Also NEWCO is not Rangers its a new club, no guarantees to have the same following or aceptance into any league. Note Hibs chairmen comments sporting integrity over money, could just be some teams may fell they will be better chance of staying in the SPL if Rangers are not, self preservation.

Agree0 Disagree0

Whyte is behind this. I can smell him. These unofficial announcements are goading creditors into ignoring cva and liquidating assets. Whyte is the only secured creditor.

Agree0 Disagree0

Honestly your embarrassing yourself! if the consortium was so wealthy surely 20 of them could have come up with more than 8million. so gullible its laughable. for every fiver celtic put down, we will make up 10! sooner yer disgrace of a club dies the better. am sure the creditors would be interested in selling all your assets if u said they were getting nothing.

Agree0 Disagree0

"am sure the creditors would be interested in selling all your assets if u said they were getting nothing."
--

There is only 1 secured creditor you imbecile.

Agree0 Disagree0

"As a Celtic fan it is good to see the honest Rangers fans saying we must pay our debts first"
--

If an exit is achieved via a CVA, they will have paid their debts.

Agree0 Disagree0

Must we back to our arrogant ways. Lets be more dignified and act with integrity before we go and shout our mouths off. Please a bit of humble pie people .

Agree0 Disagree0

If an exit is achieved via a CVA, they will have paid their debts.
--

They will have paid 5-10% of their debts and the rest will be written off.

Agree0 Disagree0

You really are a complete fool, have you learned nothing about Whyte;s broken promises and yet here you are ready to be shafted by another fly by night chancer who is going to liquidate as he knows a CVA isnt possible. But no here we go again with another 20m to spend on players. Yawn its like groundhog day. Rangers till July

Agree0 Disagree0

I'm sure HMRC are listening to Greens untold wealth and investment in the team well pay the Millions Rangers owe them as well as others ..... Or is he just talking s**te the same way Whyte did

Frustrated bear

Agree0 Disagree0

NO way transfer embargo will be lifted it is UEFA will have there say as Rangers would be getting away unpunished

Agree0 Disagree0

UEFA has imposed a one year ban for going into administration, they have had their pound of flesh. The transfer embargo will be lifted and Rangers will have to pay cash up front.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

Green says he will offer 7p CVA but then pay back money to creditors over 10 years by selling virtually all staff. We will have a team of 17 year olds for next year and beyond and struggle to stay in SPL. We need the worlds best scouting system.

Agree0 Disagree0

15 May 2012 00:44:10
Is Ticketus stating today 'no future involvement' a veiled message of intent to liquidate?
Ticketus will be conned by rangers for £27m and get the same pennies in liquidation as CVA hence they need to liquidate to send a message to future clubs who are thinking about writing off debt via CVA.

Believable49 Unbelievable35

'no future involvement' for Ticketus, means that they are chasing Whyte through the courts and are no longer a Rangers creditor.

Agree0 Disagree0

No in law the fact everyone at rfsee knew exactly what was happening they are as guilty and liable as CW! Stop reading daily rags

Agree0 Disagree0

Until the Ticketus deal is breached they can't go chasing after anyone.
Two interesting scenarios -
a) IF a CVA is agreed, the Ticketus deal would remain in place UNLESS the new owners (CW shares transfer are on condition a CVA is agreed) breach it.
b) If liquidation CW holds Ibrox and Murray Park through his floating charge.
Then he either sells to the highest bidder (enough to cover Ticketus plus a little more), or rents both of them back to the newco using those funds to pay Ticketus.
Or even hands them over to Ticketus to satisy the debt.
Remember the creditors vote almost 3 weeks ago?
Still no mention of the result from D&P, ergo they didn't get everything they wanted.
Specifically the right to sell of assets as they saw fit.
Still a lot more twists and turns to come yet!

Agree0 Disagree0

Where have you been they are after whyte for the money.

Agree0 Disagree0

They cant be a creditor at RFC and a creditor to Craig Whyte at the same time for the same monies, if Craig Whyte made "personal guarantees" to them they surely only he can be pursued?

Agree0 Disagree0

I fear that HRMC will not accept a CVA to send out a clear message to football clubs that they will not accept pennies in the pound.

It is liquidation for us - dont be fooled by anything else.

Big G.

Agree0 Disagree0

Agreed with first post......govan_front87

Agree0 Disagree0

That's not what Tickets said. They said they are going to participate in the CVA as well as chasing CW for the guarantee he made on their investment (as widely predicted on this forum).

Wondering how CW will wriggle out of that one.

Agree0 Disagree0

White conned them not Rangers,this was done before he even owned the club!

Agree0 Disagree0

No future involvement means in the purchase or management of the club. They still have contract for 4 years tickets, if that is ripped up then they become creditors for 27m. Any shortfall after CVA or Liquidation, Whyte has to make good.
Food, shirts other contracts out there will continue for years on CVA.
Better to Liquidate if new owner and regain control of these things.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ticketus are still one of the main creditors and the language they are using now is normal for a creditor heading to court to start the liquidation process. " No Future Involvement " only means that the court will take up their fight instead of them having any contact with Duff and Phelps. They will receive far more of their money back through liquidation than a CVA. They will only chase Craig Whyte for any shortfall which he will be accountable for.

Agree0 Disagree0

Sorry to disappoint you Declan but liquidation is now not an issue Ticketus know it HMRC either take the penny's in the pound or they write it off

Agree0 Disagree0

Until the deal is breached what legal reason do they have to pursue him?
D&P certainly haven't ended/breached the deal, so how can Ticketus sue anyone - at the moment.
If I lend you a tenner at the start of the month to be repaid in 4 weekly installments, I can't take you to court until you miss a payment.
Unless you know better this hasn't happened yet, and D&P haven't decided to try and tear up the deal, or have they?

Agree0 Disagree0

Ticketus weren't conned by rangers they were conned by weasel whyte.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ticketus only hope is cva, simple as that, they will not get 27m from gers, lol, keep dreaming,

Agree0 Disagree0

Still not sure where this "share transfer dependent on CVA is coming from". It's the other way around. The shares are bought and paid for. CVA wouldnt have been possible without them.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ticketus money was used to pay of rangers bank debt and keep your toxic club running for months, im afraid to yell you, a court will see this as rangers debt, , forget your cva,

Agree0 Disagree0

"Still not sure..."

Read between the lines:

[Green] told the Daily Record: "I met Mr Whyte for the final time last week when he signed the legal documentation exclusively with my group to pledge his shares and his debenture to this bid on the basis that the CVA would proceed."

So if the CVA doesn't proceed? Shares revert to CW I would guess. However CG has a contract with D&P that if the CVA were to fail then he will form a newco to buy the assets instead.

Agree0 Disagree0

Craig Whyte owes Ticketus money or more his own companys owe ticketus money NOT Rangers.NorrieBoy.

Agree0 Disagree0

Still not sure where this "share transfer dependent on CVA is coming from". It's the other way around. The shares are bought and paid for. CVA wouldnt have been possible without them.


Another case of not reading what was said, as another poster has indicated shares only transfer in the event of a CVA. The legal documantation to this effect has been signed, not the actual transfer. In the event of liquidation, more bidders can enter the bidding process, Green is only guaranteed control if he gets a CVA, if not all bidders fight for the assets, so although there is a potentual to get assests for less than CVA, same potetual applys that the cost of assests can be greater. D&P in the event of liquidation must open the books to all parties and bidding war starts. I am assuming

Agree0 Disagree0

D&P invited all bids, this includes liquidation bids, liquidation bids were received in the form of a newco. Greens offer is dual purpose, CVA or newco, either way its nothing to do with Ticketus.

HMRC may reject CVA but not object to Newco bid but I find it unlikely, they will accept a CVA.

Anorak.

Agree0 Disagree0

Do you think for a minute whyte would have sold his shares without covering the ticketus deal why would he? green probably has agreed with whyte to keep ticketus involved and who owns the stadium, murray park etc? there seems to be lots of open ends, not totally convinced of anything yet.

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent