The official "Takeover Completed" thread

[Guardian 4,281]

The other side of the coin is that you have used blind faith as a reason to back any Whyte takeover, now you're using Murray and bankers as character witnesses, ffs.

Is there another choice ?

Carry on as we are, lose more players, no Champions League cash, no signings ?

More cutbacks, emptier benches and fans deserting in droves.

I don't see anyone that has any more credibility offering a better solution.

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

You honestly believe that? Fuck me ive read some shite on here that takes the biscuit! You genuinely think he doesnt have a crefit card or debit card! You probably think he has a wee Rangers bank to keep his money in

I know that's it's very uncommon for anyone not to have a credit card in this day n age but I do believe that ,and maybe he has a wee Rangers bank to keep his money in and that's why it's currently taking him seven months and counting to total all they coins up ,

(P Murray has come out and said on SSN that the whyte bid is weighted in favour of the bank rather than the club, )

[RFC55 108,934]

I know that's it's very uncommon for anyone not to have a credit card in this day n age but I do believe that ,and maybe he has a wee Rangers bank to keep his money in and that's why it's currently taking him seven months and counting to total all they coins up ,

(P Murray has come out and said on SSN that the whyte bid is weighted in favour of the bank rather than the club, )

You are more deluded than anyone i have ever read on a message board. Are you trying to tell me this guy does not have any sort of money what so ever? Which is what your doing btw.

Spangles has said he has money but not of the amount to buy Rangers. You are flat out saying that he has fuck all. He waltzed into a restaruant and didnt have a dime

[spangles 7]

Is there another choice ?

Carry on as we are, lose more players, no Champions League cash, no signings ?

More cutbacks, emptier benches and fans deserting in droves.

I don't see anyone that has any more credibility offering a better solution.

Because I can spot a chancer at a thousand paces, and did murray suss ellis before or after he "proved" funding, I must have missed where the bank made any comment about whyte and cash, you of course will have it to hand, or there again you probably don't

[scottyboyblue 61]

The sad state of affairs is that even after Paul Murrays statement we as a support are still in the dark, now after me moaning about nobody telling us anything, i'm not slating P Murray for giving his side of the story. But that it is all it is, the same as Craig White was getting his side of the story out through his sources last week. I have followed this club for 40 years, and like most people on here, knew somebody who knew somebody at the club, but my "sources" like me know nothing. I really don't know what is the best way for the club, on one hand i know absolutely nothing about White, but on the other hand, i don't understand for the life of me, why after sitting on the board for the last 4 years and watching us decline at an alarming rate, how all of a sudden Murray has an idea where to get £25 million. All i do know is that we will be better of without SDM and the bank, and that if the two parties fighting for control love the club like we all do on here, then surely they can find a way between them to move this fantastic Scottish institution forward into a long term secure future, come on guys get the finger out

[bluepeter 5,627]

I know that's it's very uncommon for anyone not to have a credit card in this day n age but I do believe that ,and maybe he has a wee Rangers bank to keep his money in and that's why it's currently taking him seven months and counting to total all they coins up ,

(P Murray has come out and said on SSN that the whyte bid is weighted in favour of the bank rather than the club, )

What does that even mean? I thought the deal was paying the bank back in full. They're on record as saying there is no termination payment. How can it be weighted in their favour over Rangers?

Also, Whyte has managed to prove funding availability to the Rangers board, Murray and Lloyds, but couldn't fool Abdul at the local Indian Restaurant? Come on to fuck.

This thread is abysmal - rumour, counter-rumour, agendas, nobody who actually has a fucking clue when (if?) Whyte will buy Rangers, childish petty arguments. I'm out.

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

You are more deluded than anyone i have ever read on a message board. Are you trying to tell me this guy does not have any sort of money what so ever? Which is what your doing btw.

Spangles has said he has money but not of the amount to buy Rangers. You are flat out saying that he has fuck all. He waltzed into a restaruant and didnt have a dime

On this occasion I'm going to agree with what I heard until whyte tells us all he has his own wealth ,( allegedly the chinese bill was a few grand , )

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

my view is that yes there are doubts abourt Whyte, but there are no doubts that Murray must go before the transfer market opens.

better that we have some investment and have to get shot of whyte in 5 years time than nothing for the next 5.

[RFC55 108,934]

On this occasion I'm going to agree with what I heard until whyte tells us all he has his own wealth ,( allegedly the chinese bill was a few grand , )

come on mate please read over your posts as to how daft this sounds?

If you seriously think that would bypass our media who will be choking to find something like that about him your mad.

[indieboy1980 3]

We need investment now and can't afford to wait any longer! Let's just hope who ever gets us has the desire to win things and watch good football

[dtmuir 3]

better that we have some investment and have to get shot of whyte in 5 years time than nothing for the next 5.

This is the main problem i think. The board cannot agree to a deal if they feel the same way. There is no way we should be looking for a new owner who will only be a stop gap.

If we are only looking for a stop gap then i would, imo, back murray's bid as the debt will be transfered to a different bank within 12 months which means that we should be able to arrange a much better repayment plan. It would mean that the club is in a stable situation and, according to murray, any tax liability would be with MIH/Llyods.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,545]

Because I can spot a chancer at a thousand paces,

dear fucking lord. I've heard enough now

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

This is the main problem i think. The board cannot agree to a deal if they feel the same way. There is no way we should be looking for a new owner who will only be a stop gap.

If we are only looking for a stop gap then i would, imo, back murray's bid as the debt will be transfered to a different bank within 12 months which means that we should be able to arrange a much better repayment plan. It would mean that the club is in a stable situation and, according to murray, any tax liability would be with MIH/Llyods.

but this is the thing, we don't know that whyte is a stop gap.

i do know if we do not get investment and have to sell more of our best we will be lucky to come 3rd next season and there will be revolt amongst fans.

[J-Maestro 11,104]

How can the offer be more beneficial to the bank?

With the debt gone we have what has single handedly stripped our club to the bare bones off ours backs and can start fresh. Building the club with the money we have rather than one big cash injection and nothing after it.

Murray goes on about 25m for players, and what happens in January when the banks decides they want some more money? He certainly didn't stop them before selling players so why would he be able to now.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

How about,

Whyte is still there long after Murray sussed out Ellis.

Both Murray and lloyds are satisfied he has the cash. The only people who don't are those who want to bid themselves.

Seems to me you just want to pish on any Rangers stories and create doubt. I don't know why you would want to do that.

So think of it this way. You are owed £18 million. The business that owes you this is in currently fighting a law-suit that could see them owe say another £25 million. Would you be?

a) Happy if there was someone daft enough to give you all your money the now.

b) Happy to risk being in a dog fight for money if the law-suit goes all wrong?

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

come on mate please read over your posts as to how daft this sounds?

If you seriously think that would bypass our media who will be choking to find something like that about him your mad.

Mate I totally agree with you , this sound's absolutely mad especially as I heard it from another Bear with no axe to grind with whyte

[TheLawMan 6,240]

What does that even mean? I thought the deal was paying the bank back in full. They're on record as saying there is no termination payment. How can it be weighted in their favour over Rangers?

Also, Whyte has managed to prove funding availability to the Rangers board, Murray and Lloyds, but couldn't fool Abdul at the local Indian Restaurant? Come on to fuck.

This thread is abysmal - rumour, counter-rumour, agendas, nobody who actually has a fucking clue when (if?) Whyte will buy Rangers, childish petty arguments. I'm out.

It favours the bank because they can say, just as you have said "I'm out"

They get their money and run. As part owners of MIH, the pending tax case result is off their shoulders as well. Of course it favours the banks.

[Right_To_Censor 1,951]

its not the two ronnies, its the two murrays. just what we need

[TheLawMan 6,240]

NEWSFLASH

If Paul Murray is correct in saying that Craig Whyte is willing to buy the club and take on any debt that is a result of this pending tax case, then this guy is an absolute LOONBALL and should be nowhere near our club.

[RFC55 108,934]

NEWSFLASH

If Paul Murray is correct in saying that Craig Whyte is willing to buy the club and take on any debt that is a result of this pending tax case, then this guy is an absolute LOONBALL and should be nowhere near our club.

BBC news 24? SKY? SSN?

[TheLawMan 6,240]

BBC news 24? SKY? SSN?

RANGERS MEDIA - The Bears' Den

[RFC55 108,934]

RANGERS MEDIA - The Bears' Den

You put NEWSFLASH Rangersmedia do not do NEWSFLASHES

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

Day-Late Retard headline:

London-Based Spiv In Chinese Carry-Oot Stramash

London-based spiv and all round little man about town, Crape Cripes, was arrested then released last night after a Glasgow Chinese delivery man was 'bumped' for an alleged £3,000 carry-oot bill.

Police were called to a hotel in the city centre where Mr Cripes and his associate, London-based wheelbarrow manufacturer, Andy Trellis, were staying. Witnesses claimed that the Chinese delivery man, a Mr Wan Hung-Lo, was trying to kick in the door of the hotel room Mr Cripes and Mr Trellis were staying in and that he was shouting, "You give me ma' money you cuppa' o' cheap plicks!"

The alleged 'bump' happened when Mr Cripes said to the delivery man, "Oops, I've forgotten my wallet" he then took the food and slammed the door in Mr Hung-Lo's face. Mr Hung-Lo then heard them giggling and laughing behind the door and so he took the action he did to try and gain access.

By the time the Police arrived, Mr Cripes and Mr Trellis had devoured almost £3,000 worth of Chinese caviar, lobster and fillet steak, washed down by several bottles of Chinese wine.

A police spokesman said, "A Chinese delivery man is helping us with our enquiries. We are looking to charge him with criminal damage and breach of the peace. As for the outstanding amount owed, I'm sorry...that's got hee-haw to do with us. That's a Civil matter."

Mr Cripes and Mr Trellis were seen the following evening dancing the night away at Bennett's Bar.

(advertisement)

[TheLawMan 6,240]

You put NEWSFLASH Rangersmedia do not do NEWSFLASHES

Are you kidding me on here ?

[TheMotor 2,208]

So, in summary (admittedly a long-winded one) we appear to have three different camps in this thread:

Camp 1: Pro-Whyte

Key arguments in favour:

1 - Get Lloyds largely out of Ranger's decision making process by clearing all but 4 million of the debt owed.

2 - Get rid of SDM and current board who have overseen slide to current position. Almost any change must be good.

3 - New manager can start planning for season ahead with, alledgedly, increased budget for playing staff and potential for investment in new players of 5 - 10 million, plus any income from sales.

4 - New ownership and new board = new thinking and new growth opportunities.

Evidence to support Whyte bid being the right one:

1 - Media reports that Whyte is worth Billions/hundreds of millions/tens of millions/well, he owns a castle........... Actually, there is almost nothing in the public domain to support any of this. Nobody outside of the deal has a clue what his true resources are.

2 - From what little is leaking out about the deal, it appears that SDM/Lloyds/AJ and the supervisory committee believe that Whyte has adequately proved that he has the funds to purchase the shareholding of SDM and clear the majority of the debt. The closest we have to any sort of confirmation, though, is AJ's statement to the Plus Exchange in which his main gripe is over the lack of a binding commitment in the paperwork at that time in regards to the ongoing funding of the playing squad; he acknowledges that the proposed deal pays off SDM and Lloyds. So Whyte appears to have at least 25 million plus, that some people have seen evidence of.

3 - Media reports that Whyte will invest up to 25 million over 5 years, including 10 million in the first year, in refurbishing the squad. Again there is only circumstantial evidence of this. Both sides seem to be leaking that this is in the deal but not locked down yet, which appears to be a key sticking point and one that the anti-Whyte camp are jumping on (possibly quite rightly).

Main concerns: Why do we know so little about him? What are his real resources? Why does he want to own Rangers and what are his long-term plans?

Camp 2 - Not Sure

Quite possibly a very large part of the fanbase. Fed up with all the negativity around the club and an owner who has long ago lost all interest. Hate to see players being lost due to budgetary reasons (rather than because they are just pish) and disappointed with the lack of quality we are able to bring into the team. Would love to see new owners and new investment but just not sure about Whyte.

The lack of detail about who are new owner is, and what his motives are, is a concern however. Are we getting Murray years 1 - 10, or Murray since? Even worse, are we going to do a Portsmouth?

But who else is out there? P Murray and King? Hmmmmmmm...........

Camp 3 - Anti-Whyte

Key arguments against:

1 - Whyte hasn't got any money. He doesn't even really have the 25 million odd that SDM/Lloyds/AJ appear to think he has. Pre-plumbing toilet apparatus humour used for illustration purposes.

2 - Whyte has previously been declared bankrupt.

3 - Whyte is a conman and thief. Veiled allusions to stealing diggers and a castle roof.

4 - Whyte is an asset-stripper and there is no evidence of any business successes.

5 - Ellis is involved. Ellis is a property developer and therefore evil. Ellis tried buying a club before Rangers and was chased out of town. Eliis also lacks the relevant toilet equipment.

Evidence to support Whyte bid being the wrong one:

1 - Links to other forums where someone has copied tabloid articles showing that Whyte has had court action initiated against him by HMRC and other creditors in the 1990s. Nowhere in these articles, however, to those tabloids state the outcome of those actions. You would expect that if the judgments had gone against Whyte, that would be the headline news, not the initiation of the actions. Especially since the news articles were written years after the disputes.

2 - In one of the same tabloid articles, the issue of Whyte's insolvency is raised in connection to (again) the commencement, not the outcome, of proceedings against him by creditors. The only direct quote is from Whyte himself, saying he has never been declared bankrupt, which is not contradicted.

3 - Of Whyte's "Grand Theft Digger" operations, we have only ever so witty veiled references from forum posters but no evidence. No details of prosecutions, no court reports, no media reports even.

4 - Of Whyte's previous business successes, there truly is very little evidence, if any. This is, to my mind, the strongest argument in the anti-Whyte camp's armoury. Due to the lack of information about his business dealings in the public domain, the only thing we have to go on is the fact that the players on the other side of the deal all seem to be taking him seriously. But this issue should concern all Bears. However, the term "asset-stripper" seems to get used by people who have little understanding of what it means: Rangers really do not have a great many assets worth stripping that could not be much more easily obtained elsewhere for much less work.

5 - Ellis is a strange one and another strong point for the anti-Whyte camp, but possibly not for the reasons they think. I would just question what expertise he brings to the deal for his 25% cut of SDM's shares? He has no great property development track record. Lots of small deals, apparently, but nothing outstanding. He also has a poor record in his attempts to run Northampton Town and QPR, being run out of town pretty quickly in each case. However, it is useful to remember that SDM was also chased by the mighty Ayr United and proved a diabolical failure in his attempts to build a sporting empire out of his MIM franchise teams in basketball and ice-hockey. Also, when it comes to property development, we could not possibly get worse that SDM, unless Whyte plans to sell Ibrox: SDM couldn't develop a roll of film.

I could be way off but I reckon many Bears will have at least one foot in the "Not Sure" camp and are probably moving the other foot towards the "Pro-Whyte" camp as things advance (albeit bloody slowly).

The "Anti-Whyte" camp certainly raise some questions that should be asked but, on this board at least, failing to produce anything solid at all to back their position, and attacking posters with other viewpoints as stupid, just makes them appear petulant and childish, rather than genuinely concerned for Rangers or for debate