Takeover talk - Rangers confirm Whyte talks

[markybear 136]

Murray won't be in charge forever, at some point in time the ownership has to change hands..... This time round has a decent chance by the sounds of it.

I know ppl have doubts for one reason or another but Murray physically can't be in charge forever, one day it will change and it could be soon.

[gordo7 147]

Murray won't be in charge forever, at some point in time the ownership has to change hands..... This time round has a decent chance by the sounds of it.

I know ppl have doubts for one reason or another but Murray physically can't be in charge forever, one day it will change and it could be soon.

I am hopefull that this is the case. At least he's a Rangers man, and you would think that he will have the best interest of the club at heart. However, in saying that, i'm not going to get my hopes up till I hear something concrete.

[Ace 3,556]

Rangers set for £25m transfer warchest from prospective new owner Craig Whyte if takeover deal goes through

Nov 19 2010 James Traynor

CRAIG Whyte plans to pump at least £25million into Rangers for new players over the first five years of his ownership if his bid to buy the club succeeds.

The 39-year-old Scots business tycoon is in talks with Rangers owner David Murray and although Whyte declared yesterday negotiations are at an "early stage" the Ibrox club could be in new hands before January.

And if Whyte pushes through his £32m bid for control after his due diligence period has been completed he plans to hand Rangers' manager a minimum of £5m at the start of each season. But there could be more millions available for players and wages depending on whether or not Rangers are generating cash from European competition.

These figures might not set pulses racing among Rangers fans but they would be a dramatic improvement on the stark financial realities facing the club right now as manager Walter Smith copes with a threadbare squad.

Whyte's input would allow the new manager - Smith is standing down at the end of this season - to increase the squad as well as meet the demands of players who are moving out of contract.

There have been rumours that Whyte is a front for someone else but the Motherwell-born entrepreneur is very much his own man. It is understood he is prepared to put in 75 per cent of the £32.5m required to gain control of Rangers, with Andrew Ellis, who failed on his own to buy the club earlier this year, weighing in with the remainder.

However, while Whyte will use his own money it is not clear if Ellis has backers for his quarter of the asking price. But it's known that none of the current Rangers directors is involved.

In fact, they were as bemused as every other Rangers fan when they heard of Whyte's interest. Dave King, the South-African based Scot who has also tried and failed to buy out Murray, was on the phone to Glasgow and Edinburgh yesterday after reading Record Sport's story on Whyte.

We can reveal £27m of the bid will wipe out Rangers' debt and get Lloyds Bank off the club's back. The remainder of the cash, £5.5m, will pay off shareholders with Murray receiving £4.6m.

Whyte is aware of possible tax liabilities Rangers will have to pay if HM Revenue and Customs press ahead with a case against clubs who have allegedly used offshore trust payments for players .

It is thought Rangers could be faced with a bill for millions if the Revenue win their case but even so, Whyte appears comfortable with the position.

After yesterday's story, Whyte's people made a statement to the Stock Exchange saying: "Mr Whyte confirms he is considering making an offer for Rangers Football Club and is in talks with Murray International Holdings but that these are at an early stage and there can be no certainty an offer will ultimately be made. Mr Whyte has not yet approached the board of RFC."

Rangers said: "The board confirms it has been advised by Murray International Holdings Ltd that it is in early discussions with Craig Whyte regarding the acquisition of MIH's majority shareholding in Rangers Football Club plc."

http://www.<No links to this website>/football/spl/2010/11/19/rangers-set-for-25m-transfer-warchest-from-prospective-new-owner-craig-whyte-if-takeover-deal-goes-through-86908-22724378/

[Ace 3,556]

Rangers director Dave King highly sceptical of Craig Whyte's proposed Ibrox takeover

Nov 19 2010 By Gary Ralston

DAVE KING last night expressed serious misgivings over Craig Whyte's proposed deal for Rangers.

The South African tycoon had never heard of the wealthy businessman from Motherwell before his phone starting buzzing yesterday with enquiries from Scotland.

The Rangers director reckons leaks to the media of Whyte's interest in the club could have scuppered the chances of a takeover taking place.

And he again raised doubts, which he first aired in Record Sport in June, about the ability of Andrew Ellis to be part of a credible consortium aiming to buy out majority shareholder Sir David Murray.

King, speaking from his home in Johannesburg, is also highly sceptical about figures being touted of a minimal £5million per season to fund transfers for the first team squad.

He said: "If I was this chap and had his money - there 's a difference between £1billion of assets under your control and owning it as wealth - I'd be uncomfortable that the story has hit the press.

"It would be a down side to even continuing with the transaction.

"This is still at a very premature stage and it's unfortunate for the process that it has got out to the marketplace earlier than anyone would have liked.

"I'd never heard of Craig Whyte before I took a few calls and was passed some articles by Rangers from the Scottish press.

"I've also had a brief chat with Martin Bain and seen statements made to the stock exchange. If I was Whyte I'd be unhappy as it makes it harder to do a deal.

"I wouldn't be happy at the expectations that are now flying around in terms of transfer funds that will be made available to the manager for players.

"I'm not surprised Ellis is being linked with the deal, although links can be tenuous. It would surprise me if he was a party to anything meaningful.

"As for a deal being done, this is the golfing equivalent of looking for a hole in one on a 650-yard par five dog leg - with a water hazard 400 yards down the fairway. He's also standing with a seven iron in his hand."

King will be integral to any talks after he invested £20million in Rangers in 2000.

That shareholding is still tangled up in a legal battle with South African tax authorities but King insists it would have no impact on his ability to increase his stake in Rangers in the future.

He added: "No one has been in touch about this proposed new deal.

"However, that isn't disappointing. It's not expected at this stage."

King revealed he is maintaining his brief on the club but believes the conditions are still not right to make a greater commitment.

He said: "It's not a question of me being in a position to do so, it's a question of other parties being accommodating - that includes banks."

http://www.<No links to this website>/football/spl/2010/11/19/rangers-director-dave-king-highly-sceptical-of-craig-whyte-s-proposed-ibrox-takeover-86908-22724385/

[Ace 3,556]

2 new stories to spark more debate ... gotta love the press

[biotechnology 2]

I personally dont think this will go ahead, Mr Whyte has some very iffy "links" to many failed businesses,(I know thats his business line-Im not talking about that-has left hundreds in Glasgow without pay when he shut firms & bailed to Monaco.

I really would love this to be true, but I feel once the press get their "initial story" & sensation-then its time to attract the mud & after just some searching on him, his firms & contacts, business addresses, Whois(website owners)-there are many things which I feel will make DM not sell.

The only way he will sell to this guy is desperation.IMHO

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

I wouldn't trust Traynor to tell me the time of day. He's a fat, obnoxious arrogant prick.

I caught some of his musings on BBC Radio Shitland last night when he and that other obnoxious little fuckwit, Chick Dung, were discussing this bid.

According to Dung, this is a non-goer...........according to "Mr £25m war chest" it's only 50/50.

Both are cunts. Both are trying to sound "informed".

Don't buy into the hype - wait and see where this one lands.

[RFC55 108,962]

[RFC55 108,962]

The RST has alot to do to win back the trust of your average bear. So for me for them to word the statement in the way they did would suggest to me this is a bit further down the line. So unless they are "at" it again then i doubt why they would put their already damaged rep on the line again. But then again....

[Frankie 505]

The RST has alot to do to win back the trust of your average bear. So for me for them to word the statement in the way they did would suggest to me this is a bit further down the line. So unless they are "at" it again then i doubt why they would put their already damaged rep on the line again. But then again....

The Trust definitely appear to have jumped the gun on this for some reason.

They need to be asking searching questions about any prospective party not prematurely welcoming them to the club.

[RFC55 108,962]

The Trust definitely appear to have jumped the gun on this for some reason.

They need to be asking searching questions about any prospective party not prematurely welcoming them to the club.

Thats my point Frankie, and this is not a go at the trust, but if this goes tits up they take another huge hit in terms of their reputation.

We all want to know if this is in the best interests of RFC and that the "motives" of any potential new buyer are made clear. But fuck me the way they had worded their statement was like it was a done deal.

I also dont get who would have leaked it to them. They slated Ellis last time round, but this time the deal is good?

[caseyjones 3,009]

The Trust definitely appear to have jumped the gun on this for some reason.

They need to be asking searching questions about any prospective party not prematurely welcoming them to the club.

Desperation, Frankie.

[Frankie 505]

Thats my point Frankie, and this is not a go at the trust, but if this goes tits up they take another huge hit in terms of their reputation.

We all want to know if this is in the best interests of RFC and that the "motives" of any potential new buyer are made clear. But fuck me the way they had worded their statement was like it was a done deal.

I also dont get who would have leaked it to them. They slated Ellis last time round, but this time the deal is good?

I'd fancy a journalist would have leaked it to them but I'm only guessing myself.

It's not a huge deal for the Trust to be premature but I'd have thought they'd reduce their own exposure by accompanying any exclusive news with the kind of constructive analysis I'd expect from such a group. As it stands that appears to be missing - other than what looks like erroneous information about Whyte's business background.

[Frankie 505]

Desperation, Frankie.

Perhaps but I don't think they need to be any more desperate than anyone else.

Nothing wrong with welcoming proposals (I did so cautiously myself) but if they want to improve their reputation, then they need to accompany welcomes or the like with sound analysis.

[PaulRFC1 115]

With Ellis I always had a feeling it wasnt right because he had no actual cash to run a club like Rangers and he just didnt seem right.

For some reason I am thinking this guy is the real deal, he has a supposed 700m personal wealth and something about his businesses being worth 1billion and is a Rangers fan.

I just have a feeling this deal WILL happen.

[Frankie 505]

With Ellis I always had a feeling it wasnt right because he had no actual cash to run a club like Rangers and he just didnt seem right.

For some reason I am thinking this guy is the real deal, he has a supposed 700m personal wealth and something about his businesses being worth 1billion and is a Rangers fan.

I just have a feeling this deal WILL happen.

While it appears that this guy operates on a difference financial level to Ellis, in many ways his business background is similar.

Too many questions remain at this stage for us to be overly optimistic IMO.

[caseyjones 3,009]

Perhaps but I don't think they need to be any more desperate than anyone else.

Nothing wrong with welcoming proposals (I did so cautiously myself) but if they want to improve their reputation, then they need to accompany welcomes or the like with sound analysis.

I would say that most Bears would have given the rumours a cautious welcome, but would have refrained from putting out a knee-jerk statement about looking forward to working with the mysterious buyers, and very few of them have media spokesmen to advise them! If they can't have any influence under a new regime the last of their reputation will be gone, and they know it.

[DarcheVinny 1,003]

anything with the name Ellis for me is a non starter until the mint hands over the keys live on SSN.

For me Ellis is only bothered about the surrounding land around Ibrox that i beleive we have control over (someone correct me if im wrong).

Which means, I don't really want him anywhere near our club, as his intentions are not right, whether he is 'backed' by Whyte or some random arab as papers suggested last time.

[ralston 0]

Everything points to Murray as the leak, as to whom he leaked to first is another matter, but it certainly wasn't the Chairman, Bain or the board, any journalist worth the name would have been asking questions of the board and in particular Johnston and Bain, unless instructed not to. So take your pick, whatever it has Murray all over it, he may be up to something, I doubt that something is selling the club, to many vague areas and concerned parties making no comment or having no knowledge.

When this goes finally tits up, a lot of embarrassed people will in a daze once again, better to learn from past mistakes than to keep repeating them. There is also the link between Whyte and Lloyds through Pritchard Stockbrokers, who at last accounts had debt sitting with Lloyds, all very strange, would be helpful to have a statement from our chairman, now that would make for interesting reading.

[Frankie 505]

anything with the name Ellis for me is a non starter until the mint hands over the keys live on SSN.

For me Ellis is only bothered about the surrounding land around Ibrox that i beleive we have control over (someone correct me if im wrong).

Which means, I don't really want him anywhere near our club, as his intentions are not right, whether he is 'backed' by Whyte or some random arab as papers suggested last time.

We don't have control over the immediate landbank - that is still owned mostly by GCC and some housing companies.

However, outline planning permission is available for some of these areas (particularly the car park which we do own) and I doubt GCC would be too hard to deal with for other parts.

As such, I can only assume this is Ellis' angle for a profit on his investment.

[ralston 0]

What have we learned since the story became public, only as far as I can see that Whyte does not own Braehead, does not have a box at Ibrox and is allegedly a rabid Motherwell fan/or Rangers loyal. Other less than fawning tributes to Whyte concerning his business past appear to be taboo, supposedly lawyers on watch.

The story appears to be dying a death on most boards, with interest waning, perhaps most have a feeling of Deja Vu.

[RFC55 108,962]

We don't have control over the immediate landbank - that is still owned mostly by GCC and some housing companies.

However, outline planning permission is available for some of these areas (particularly the car park which we do own) and I doubt GCC would be too hard to deal with for other parts.

As such, I can only assume this is Ellis' angle for a profit on his investment.

Frankie on the land issue mate. If ANY new owner came in and re developed the land for his own ££££££ yet Rangers continue to grow and make profits, is that really a bad thing?

[Frankie 505]

Frankie on the land issue mate. If ANY new owner came in and re developed the land for his own ££££££ yet Rangers continue to grow and make profits, is that really a bad thing?

Well, considering we don't own the land at the moment, then no.

Obviously I'd prefer we shared in any development/profit but, as always, we can't judge any such plans until we see them.

For example, let's accept that Ellis - after investing into the club - gobbled up all of the landbank from GCC; e.g. the astroturf facility, the car park and the area where the flats have been demolished. Say he then built a new facility - much like the Amsterdam Arena where the football pitch is only one small part of a larger new SECC if you like.

Remember, Rangers probably wouldn't own this but rent the facility from whoever owned it - be it Ellis initially then someone else if he sold it.

Now, that may bring in much needed development and facilities as well as short-medium term income but it would also bring in longer term uncertainty.

To be clear, I don't have a problem with any buyer making money from Rangers - that should be a good barometer of success for us. However, the club should also be their primary concern; not their wallet.

[RFC55 108,962]

Well, considering we don't own the land at the moment, then no.

Obviously I'd prefer we shared in any development/profit but, as always, we can't judge any such plans until we see them.

For example, let's accept that Ellis - after investing into the club - gobbled up all of the landbank from GCC; e.g. the astroturf facility, the car park and the area where the flats have been demolished. Say he then built a new facility - much like the Amsterdam Arena where the football pitch is only one small part of a larger new SECC if you like.

Remember, Rangers probably wouldn't own this but rent the facility from whoever owned it - be it Ellis initially then someone else if he sold it.

Now, that may bring in much needed development and facilities as well as short-medium term income but it would also bring in longer term uncertainty.

To be clear, I don't have a problem with any buyer making money from Rangers - that should be a good barometer of success for us. However, the club should also be their primary concern; not their wallet.

I agree mate Rangers should be the priority

[Johnson 27]

Everything points to Murray as the leak, as to whom he leaked to first is another matter, but it certainly wasn't the Chairman, Bain or the board, any journalist worth the name would have been asking questions of the board and in particular Johnston and Bain, unless instructed not to. So take your pick, whatever it has Murray all over it, he may be up to something, I doubt that something is selling the club, to many vague areas and concerned parties making no comment or having no knowledge.

When this goes finally tits up, a lot of embarrassed people will in a daze once again, better to learn from past mistakes than to keep repeating them. There is also the link between Whyte and Lloyds through Pritchard Stockbrokers, who at last accounts had debt sitting with Lloyds, all very strange, would be helpful to have a statement from our chairman, now that would make for interesting reading.

Murray was the leak.

He phoned his pals in the media, who then phoned the RST to tell them this was kosher, deffo gonna happen.

Interestingly, Andy McInnes in the Express (who is well connected to Murray) says the news "may spark a bidding war".

And then we get quotes from King elsewhere.

I just get the feeling people are playing games here, and it's Bears like us that are being left in the dark.