Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
rangersxfc

Ng's Sinaporeans deal with Ticketus - Blue Knights stepping aside

Recommended Posts


and they were indeed owed 27 million as proven by the published creditor pool.

the idea we owe them nothing has no basis in reality.

ffs the only 2 bidders that don't plan liquidation are doing a deal with them. no

one does a deal to pay money that's not owed.

I was under the impression the creditor's report showed a list of creditors at the date the club went into administration - 14th February. After the court case about the Ticketus deal there was no judgement given which left it in the hands of the administrators to make a decision on their status. Was there not something mentioned by the administrator that the negotiation of a CVA would not include Ticketus as a preferred creditor? Is this not the basis for Ticketus trying to recoup some of their money by doing a deal with TBK in exchange for short term working capital? I may be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was under the impression the creditor's report showed a list of creditors at the date the club went into administration - 14th February. After the court case about the Ticketus deal there was no judgement given which left it in the hands of the administrators to make a decision on their status. Was there not something mentioned by the administrator that the negotiation of a CVA would not include Ticketus as a preferred creditor? Is this not the basis for them trying to recoup some of their money by doing a deal with TBK in exchange for short term working capital? I may be wrong.

that's nothing like my understanding but I've been wrong before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the lack of information and confusing statements were to be repeated in a share issue, then .....

indeed but we should have clarity by then.

which would just leave the sniping and misinformation from the usual suspects on here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

tbk are funding the purchase and underwriting the share issue. unless your getting into the realms of saying they are lying and I have zero interest in that line of attack.

if we had time which we don't perhaps ticketus could indeed be removed for nada. but as things stand they are very clearly a creditor for 27 million ish. that's not up for debate.

I may be wrong because of all the many reports but are TBK not borrowing more from Ticketus to fund the purchase and even wanted them to pay the £500k? That is obviously a way of funding the purchase, as you say, but it is the reason many here doubt TBK deal and makes the need for the share issue to be a complete success.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I may be wrong because of all the many reports but are TBK not borrowing more from Ticketus to fund the purchase and even wanted them to pay the £500k? That is obviously a way of funding the purchase, as you say, but it is the reason many here doubt TBK deal and makes the need for the share issue to be a complete success.

no not to fund the purchase. but yes they did ask ticketus to pay the 500k worth a go I guess.

the share issue will be underwritten it can't fail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

indeed but we should have clarity by then.

Hope so, otherwise we'd only be looking at "individual nostalgic investment" rather than serious institutional money etc. 10,000 of us (if that) at 1,000 a pop (if that) wouldn't cut it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no not to fund the purchase. but yes they did ask ticketus to pay the 500k worth a go I guess.

the share issue will be underwritten it can't fail.

If these knights(hate that term) can't come up with 500k well this £30m share issue has to be a concern if the knights are to underwrite a share issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

RST jumps my baws over non-constructive arguments, but drags David Hillier into a legitimate discussion about the potential effects of the overdraft facility vs. Ng's reported 14m in 5 years for no reason... rolleyes.gif

Anybody who wants to follow this spin fest can here: https://twitter.com/#!/ShaneANicholson

Don't care if you follow me on twitter or not, but this load of shit is worth a read.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not a lot.

tbk still have a deal in place with ticketus.

bill ng doesn't yet.

d & p say they hope to find a mug to give them 500k by the end of the week.

Cheers GS 00000042.gif

So are TBK maintaining their stepping back actions? And I thought the TBK's statement said they were ready to pay the £500k?

Like you said somewhere else still a long way to go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darryl King is saying Rangers have 3 days to officially name a preferred bidder. Or the Club is in severe danger of liquidation.

Possible reason why TBK stepped back, cause they knew they couldn't complete a deal in this time scale.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no not to fund the purchase. but yes they did ask ticketus to pay the 500k worth a go I guess.

the share issue will be underwritten it can't fail.

I keep seeing this like it means something. It is perhaps typical of anything to do with TBK that they are somewhat economical with the truth.

The share issue will fail. Of that there is no doubt.

That brings us to the underwriting. You say TBK will underwrite it. How will they do that as they are struggling as it is. Why not buy the club outright to start with ?

In reality they will borrow that and we will pay for it.

I haven't seen anything to the contrary and will assume that to be the case until I do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Darryl King is saying Rangers have 3 days to officially name a preferred bidder. Or the Club is in severe danger of liquidation.

Possible reason why TBK stepped back, cause they knew they couldn't complete a deal in this time scale.

Craig Whyte will end up in jail if we go to the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Craig Whyte will end up in jail if we go to the wall.

Might be the safest place for him ... being buggered the Daddy will do nothing to fix his eyes, mind you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep seeing this like it means something. It is perhaps typical of anything to do with TBK that they are somewhat economical with the truth.

The share issue will fail. Of that there is no doubt.

That brings us to the underwriting. You say TBK will underwrite it. How will they do that as they are struggling as it is. Why not buy the club outright to start with ?

In reality they will borrow that and we will pay for it.

I haven't seen anything to the contrary and will assume that to be the case until I do.

see now your saying the blue knights are lying.

pointless talking to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on raw numbers (and just to show I'm seeking clarification on answers with some modicum of impartiality) of 10m over 9yrs for TBK vs. 14m over 5yrs for Ng re: Ticketus, as is assumed based on figures being reported:

David Hillier @DavidHillier

@ShaneANicholson TBK deal would be better for RFC. Under figures you supply, Ng deal is 20% better for Ticketus. Assumption: r=9%.

Of course doesn't account for implications of overdraft facility since TBK has divulged no info other than they're sought it, not how they intend to use it or rates attached to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on raw numbers (and just to show I'm seeking clarification on answers with some modicum of impartiality) of 10m over 9yrs for TBK vs. 14m over 5yrs for Ng re: Ticketus, as is assumed based on figures being reported:

David Hillier @DavidHillier

@ShaneANicholson TBK deal would be better for RFC. Under figures you supply, Ng deal is 20% better for Ticketus. Assumption: r=9%.

Of course doesn't account for implications of overdraft facility since TBK has divulged no info other than they're sought it, not how they intend to use it or rates attached to it.

nor has ng asserted how he will address a million pound a month shortfall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Based on raw numbers (and just to show I'm seeking clarification on answers with some modicum of impartiality) of 10m over 9yrs for TBK vs. 14m over 5yrs for Ng re: Ticketus, as is assumed based on figures being reported:

David Hillier @DavidHillier

@ShaneANicholson TBK deal would be better for RFC. Under figures you supply, Ng deal is 20% better for Ticketus. Assumption: r=9%.

Of course doesn't account for implications of overdraft facility since TBK has divulged no info other than they're sought it, not how they intend to use it or rates attached to it.

How is £14m 20% better than £10m? I make that 40%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...