Cadman

Are the player contracts lodged with the parent company or the football club. The way i understand it the company and the club are 2 separate entities under the same umbrella (Sevco) - if the players contracts reside within the football club then they are not being transferred but are being carried forward (the 'original' company, the oldco, is in liquidation but the 'original' football club continues with an unbroken line), am i right or on a completely different planet?

i'm sure there's a bench seat somewhere in the Championship with Whittaker's name on it because, after a couple of games with miss-placed passes and running into the opposition players and losing the ball, it's where he's going to be spending most of his season. Naismiths a stick on for another long term injury - we'll see if his new club is so willing to stand by him like Rangers did - good riddance to them both.

I reckon it's their agent filling their heads with crap. They've probably been told that the transfer fee any club would have paid for them would get used to pay their wages + a bit more on top (he probably has them both in the £3 million bracket). If they think the are good enough to get a top half EPL team their deluded - championship will be their limit or an EPL team fighting relegation, but they won't win anything at whatever team they end up at. With Naismiths injuries he'll be seen as a risky signing and will be sold after a season for a profit - Whittiker will be a bench warmer, if they think some club is going to start them ahead of a player that they have paid good money (who they have to justify paying that money for) ..... like i said their deluded. Agents have got a lot to answer for in the modern game.

i voted No - but the truth of the matter is that i really don't know. There are too many variables from 'how much will i earn' to 'how successful would i become if i played in the lower divisions' and everything in between. I think a lot of the younger player will be influenced by external sources (agents, parents etc) and the older and more experienced players won't want to labeled as 'only good enough for the lower leagues of Scotland' and the earning potential that goes with that. In a nut shell i would say it's down to future guarantees, and even with Walter in the boardroom, that's not something that Rangers could give at this moment in time.

the thing that bothers me most about this deal is why is Bomber getting involved with this cnut - anyone involved with the bheasts from the east is undoubtedly got a secret agenda for taking on Rangers. Hopefully Green doesn't give them the time of day or he gets a wee phonecall from Walter to set him straight on any possible implications.

they should have bought Stockport County from Brian Kennedy

that's a very good way of putting it

If Rangers are still going through liquidation (i'm not sure if they are until BDO have finished doing their stuff) then am i right in saying NO bank will give them a business account anyway, hence the reason for not having one. If the ST money was going anywhere OTHER than a Rangers account (to SEVCO, Zeus etc) can you imagine the uproar from fans who don't back Green, and people like Leggo would have a field day preaching doom and gloom about them trying to do a runner with the cash. Green has stated he will set up (or has set up) an Escrow account to hold any monies in the short term - including any ST money. Green might have a bit of a reputation when it comes to sacking a manager or selling a player (at the behest of the Sheffield United board) but i somehow think he's a long way from being another Craig Whyte and Zeus are also, from what i can gather, a reputable company. This is just my opinion though and is based on reactions, from certain quarters, seen thus far.

Ian Hart was willing to allow Green to use monies that he had previously earmarked for Rangers Youth Development Fund - for me that was an investment from Hart to Green and as such Hart became a member of the consortium. If McColl, and his consortium, hadn't come on the scene then Hart would have been quite happy to leave his money in the hands of Green - also taking the plaudits when things become successful - but McColl and the old TBK did come along and Hart jumped ship (possibly thinking Greens ship was sunk) only to find out he'd left the Queen Mary to board the Titanic. I don't know if i'd want someone like that onboard anyway - someone who would stab me in the back when an old friend comes calling.

McColl and Co. want the club so does your statement also apply to them?

A wee excerpt from Walters statement : "The supporters should be under no illusion that it will be extremely hard but with their support (does he mean ST sales, share issue and has Greens consortium not been slated for possibly doing the same thing) we can overcome financial hardship that lies ahead by lending their support to what we feel is the correct way forward - for Rangers people who know the club inside and out to control its destiny (This bit gets me - Walter knows the club but won't be there, McColl and Park know nothing of the inner workings of the club, so who does he mean?)

if some of those who go on this 'march' are less than peaceful and end up getting arrested, would they expect any fines accrued to be paid by the RFFF seeing as they seem to think their acting on behalf of all Rangers fans (and organisations)?. Edit : when i say less than peaceful i mean for things like Breach of the peace, public drinking disorder etc NOT acts of violence.

Hart said: “A number of years ago I invested in the youth development department. “At the time when Charles Green was the preferred bidder and was going for the CVA, I allowed that money to be used but I am not part of his consortium. “That money was on the basis that he was going for a CVA for the simple reason of trying to save the club. “But I’ve been behind Douglas Park in the previous bid with the Blue Knights. “I spoke with Douglas today and I’m happy to be involved in putting more investment into the bid by him.” going by the above quote it sounds like Hart was happy to allow Green to 'invest' his money into his consortium and renaged when he got wind of Walters consortium and shifted his 'investment' to them - it also makes me wonder for how long beforehand was this consortium in place and why they didn't make their intentions known then.

well Walter did mention in his statement that the board would consist of men 'who know Rangers inside and out' which would suggest it's people who have had previous hands-on experience with the club - so you may well be right.

not to the initial bid (as far as i'm aware) - he didn't when he was part of TBK so i don't think it's going to be any different now.

Surely they have to prove that his comments SOLELY encouraged the 'investigation' by fans into who the guys were. They can't prove that if he HAD NOT made that comment things would have panned out differently. Friggin ridiculous behaviour by the SFA

Neither is McColl - he's funding the bid but that's as far as he's going.

1. When Millers bid was accepted why did they not step forward? 2. Can you prove this to be the case?

the old saying 'you need to make money to spend money' comes to mind.

awaiting the usual RANGERS MEN comment Edit : oops too late.

100% agree - we should be united not divided.

Walter (and McColl for that matter) is taking no part in running the club when / if a successful buyout is completed, so you can get behind Walter all you like but while your there let us know who else is behind him (the ones who will actually be running the club).

For those that are talking about Charles Green taking money from the club - season ticket money or otherwise - should note that he has stated he is taking no cash from the club whatsoever, what he IS taking are shares and the valuation of these are dependent on how successful the club becomes. The better condition Green leaves the club (on and off the pitch) the more he stands to make on the shares so it's not in his best interests to screw the club.

Another thing people seem to forget about Green is he's not taking any money out of the club when he leaves - he taking shares. Share prices rise and fall dependent on how successful the company is that they are for. So it goes without saying that it is in Greens best interests to make The Rangers Football Club as successful as possible (on both the footballing and the business fronts).

He didn't say he hadn't spoken to King - he said he hadn't spoken to King about Ally. Answer me something, what makes you think that Green would speak to a guy like King (who's been badmouthing him for weeks) and discuss his business paln with him?