VB statement re Whyte

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,543]

The Car Park is still owned by the club. The catering is a 50/50 as to what was better commercially. The JJB deal was most definetly a better commercial deal in comparison to what we made on shops.

But not withstanding that, its incredible that you feel so passionately about being lied to by the old regime, yet you cant see the Gigantic forest for the 5 million trees standing in front of you when it comes to Whyte.

Your support of him and trying to find good in everything that he has done is completely nauseating.

and anyway who's supporting him. I've admitted he's lied and he is turning out to be a crook. But it won't be the first time a chairman of our club has used someone else's money to fund his pleasures

once administration is over we will be in control of our own destiny debt wise. Isn't that a good thing?

[caseyjones 3,009]

if the outrage shown in the arsenal shares thread is real then some people have serious anger issues

Him flogging the Arsenal shares is seen to be far worse than lies over the whereabouts of millions of pounds.

That, I believe, is why we are The Rangers.

[WVB 2,560]

if the outrage shown in the arsenal shares thread is real then some people have serious anger issues

To be fair, peoples emotions are running very high, and mountains can quite easily be made out of molehills in situations like these. People are angry, worried, afraid, nervous.........you name it. Having been through the death of a club in 1994 (Caledonian FC) and seeing the outrage, and heartache (not to mention at least two suicides), I'm in the position where I can look at this a wee bit more circumspectively than some.

In the grand scheme of things, the lies, the Arsenal shares, the whole fucking shitfest, wont matter a fuck once its all over and we are back standing on the taigs necks, with the club on a solid foundation, the way it should be.

[Guardian 4,281]

VB Statement On Recent EventsWritten by Admin Friday, 17 February 2012 16:25Vanguard Bears would like it to be known that their stance on Rangers has not changed. After our last meeting with Craig Whyte we ended our statement with these words:-

"The Administrators of Vanguard Bears remain supportive of Rangers owner Craig Whyte until unfounded allegations are proven otherwise".

One look at the list of so called "financial experts" the media have called upon this week (Graham Spiers, Paul McBride QC, Charlie Nicholas, Kevin McCarra and Tom Devine to name a few) tells us it would be folly of any Rangers fans to believe everything that is reported in the media.

Yes we have concerns over certain issues but without knowing the facts we believe it prudent to await the findings of the administrators before commenting further.

At this time we urge ALL Rangers supporters and ALL Rangers groups and forums to get behind the team and Ally McCoist on Saturday and indeed at all times to prove just how strong the Rangers family is at this very trying time.

Have the VB gone into administration too FFS ?

See that bastard Craifg Whyte

[Adoniram 1,919]

What people need to determine (Administrators primarily) is did he lie for personal gains or for the benefit of Rangers FC.

[Chef 436]

I have went from undecided to really undecided, I also know not to listen to everything I hear or certainly read. I feel he has been hung out to dry and has made things even more difficult by his own doing, he should not lie to the fans but I need to know his reasons for doing so which will all come out in the end.

I noticed if you are undecided you are a whyte fanboy wich I don't agree with but you soon realise waiting for actuall facts on some things ain't allowed in this game.

It don't look great for whyte that's for sure.

[WVB 2,560]

What people need to determine (Administrators primarily) is did he lie for personal gains or for the benefit of Rangers FC.

And if it turns out he lied for the benefit of Rangers FC, they then need to decide if they can live with those lies (I know I can).

In a fight for survival, anything goes.

[caseyjones 3,009]

What people need to determine (Administrators primarily) is did he lie for personal gains or for the benefit of Rangers FC.

If monetary value is the only thing that he is being judged on, then it doesn't matter a fuck what his motives were.

[Bluedell 14]

What people need to determine (Administrators primarily) is did he lie for personal gains or for the benefit of Rangers FC.

Given he has saved himself £18m by using our season ticket money, it's fairly obvious he has personally gained.

[Anchorman 85]

Seems like a real sit on the fence and self preservation job if you ask me. for these reasons:

(1) "We sat face to face with him in a meeting just days before he shafted us. We reported back on a succeful meeting. We were taken for mugs and if we say so now we lose all credibility".

(2) "We've got this guy's ear and trust and it gives us credibility that when can get a face to face with the owner. What happens if he comes back and we've slated him? We will lose that relationship".

(3) "What if he doen't come back and we want a similar relationship with a new owner, and we've openly supported Whyte and opposed P.Murray for eaxmple?"

Solution - "Don't lose face over the meeting we had when we couldn't see he was screwing us big style. Say "innocent until proven guilty". Keep all options open".

Well you know what? If we had sat back to "just wait to see where he eventually takes us because he is not guilty of anything yet" we would have ended up in an unthinkable state (if we are not there already). I'm afraid Mr Whyte is one of these characters that thinks everyone but him fell out of the 'Daft Tree' and hit all of the branches on the way down. HE LIED NON STOP AT YOUR MEETING e.g. Tickitus etc. WHAT MORE DOES IT TAKE?

IMHO

[Chef 436]

Given he has saved himself £18m by using our season ticket money, it's fairly obvious he has personally gained.

Where is it? What will it/can it be used for? Who will benefit from it?

[WVB 2,560]

Given he has saved himself £18m by using our season ticket money, it's fairly obvious he has personally gained.

Before anything has become clear, THAT is somehow obvious?

[Bluedell 14]

Before anything has become clear, THAT is somehow obvious?

Yes it is.

[Smile 26,606]

Seems like a real sit on the fence and self preservation job if you ask me. for these reasons:

(1) "We sat face to face with him in a meeting just days before he shafted us. We reported back on a succeful meeting. We were taken for mugs and if we say so now we lose all credibility".

(2) "We've got this guy's ear and trust and it gives us credibility that when can get a face to face with the owner. What happens if he comes back and we've slated him? We will lose that relationship".

(3) "What if he doen't come back and we want a similar relationship with a new owner, and we've openly supported Whyte and opposed P.Murray for eaxmple?"

Solution - "Don't lose face over the meeting we had when we couldn't see he was screwing us big style. Say "innocent until proven guilty". Keep all options open".

Well you know what? If we had sat back to "just wait to see where he eventually takes us because he is not guilty of anything yet" we would have ended up in an unthinkable state (if we are not there already). I'm afraid Mr Whyte is one of these characters that thinks everyone but him fell out of the 'Daft Tree' and hit all of the branches on the way down. HE LIED NON STOP AT YOUR MEETING e.g. Tickitus etc. WHAT MORE DOES IT TAKE?

IMHO

Seems very Bitter.

Whats wrong with someone wanting all the facts.

[StudsLonniegan 9]

Seems like a real sit on the fence and self preservation job if you ask me. for these reasons:

(1) "We sat face to face with him in a meeting just days before he shafted us. We reported back on a succeful meeting. We were taken for mugs and if we say so now we lose all credibility".

(2) "We've got this guy's ear and trust and it gives us credibility that when can get a face to face with the owner. What happens if he comes back and we've slated him? We will lose that relationship".

(3) "What if he doen't come back and we want a similar relationship with a new owner, and we've openly supported Whyte and opposed P.Murray for eaxmple?"

Solution - "Don't lose face over the meeting we had when we couldn't see he was screwing us big style. Say "innocent until proven guilty". Keep all options open".

Well you know what? If we had sat back to "just wait to see where he eventually takes us because he is not guilty of anything yet" we would have ended up in an unthinkable state (if we are not there already). I'm afraid Mr Whyte is one of these characters that thinks everyone but him fell out of the 'Daft Tree' and hit all of the branches on the way down. HE LIED NON STOP AT YOUR MEETING e.g. Tickitus etc. WHAT MORE DOES IT TAKE?

IMHO

What is he guilty of ? telling lies ? lawyers tell lies for a living, business men tell lies as a matter of course, unless of course your world is populated solely by Jock Ewing and Perry Mason.

[Bluedell 14]

Where is it? What will it/can it be used for? Who will benefit from it?

Where is what? Whyte's £18m? Does he have it? It certainly wasn't used to pay off the bank loan.

[Mikhailichenko 90]

What is he guilty of ? telling lies ? lawyers tell lies for a living, business men tell lies as a matter of course, unless of course your world is populated solely by Jock Ewing and Perry Mason.

F*ck me there's a blast from the past

[StudsLonniegan 9]

The below is either true or it isn't and very easy to ascertain.

PROOF OF FUNDS:

As far back as November 2010, at the start of the takeover plans and long before there was any discussion about approaching Ticketus, Sir David Murray and Lloyds Banking Group were provided with – and were satisfied with – proof of funds amounting to £33 million. It was several months later, when negotiations were still on-going that the proposed Ticketus deal – '100 per cent the best deal for Rangers'– was mooted.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,543]

Where is what? Whyte's £18m? Does he have it? It certainly wasn't used to pay off the bank loan.

but if he never had it in the first place and doesn't have now. How did he financially gain from it then?

[Chef 436]

Where is what? Whyte's £18m? Does he have it? It certainly wasn't used to pay off the bank loan.

Lots of questions so little answers, perfect ingredients for an opinion based on facts.

It don't look good but I'll assume you know more than tom dick and harry

[Adoniram 1,919]

The below is either true or it isn't and very easy to ascertain.

PROOF OF FUNDS:

As far back as November 2010, at the start of the takeover plans and long before there was any discussion about approaching Ticketus, Sir David Murray and Lloyds Banking Group were provided with – and were satisfied with – proof of funds amounting to £33 million. It was several months later, when negotiations were still on-going that the proposed Ticketus deal – '100 per cent the best deal for Rangers'– was mooted.

Has David Murray refuted that statement?

[StudsLonniegan 9]

Has David Murray refuted that statement?

No one has the bank included, which to be fair you wouldn't expect them to, it could point to them approving a deal with a guy who only had £1.

[MosesMcNeil 1,664]

what i don't get is that everyone is accusing whyte of lying. Fair enough he has.

Erm...

[StudsLonniegan 9]

It is good that punters are able to question the taig medias inference that Whyte is skint, will they prove it, will they prove the bank was negligent in checking out Whytes "proof of funding" will they prove a conspiracy to present Whyte as something that he isn't and never was, will they prove that murray was complicit, or will they just fail to prove anything and go on the ramblings of part and a major part of the original problem, aj.

[gunslinger 270]

Yes and Paul Murray's 2 "bids" have shown why they didn't want anyone else to buy us, they thought we would slip into admin and they could pick up the pieces.

hopefully they can.