nelsonRFC82 305 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I actually said it was questionable whether the investment in the squad totalled £5m but that there certainly has been investment in the squad, however I pointed out that the pledge was to invest £5m per season, this season is not over yet so he cannot possibly, as yet, have failed to deliver on that.I don't know what Whyte has personally invested, although any investment is not a gift. It would actually increase the debt the club owes to him/The Rangers Group.In terms of the pledges (again the specific legal wording of these has to be considered not just the implication!), I do believe he will have followed through on these as failure to do so ends up in the debt owed by the club to The Rangers Group being written off. It is not in his (or our?) interests for that to happen prior to the tax case. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
messiah10 58 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 i am very grateful to him for initally saving us but i think in long run he could fuck us up big time Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 i am very grateful to him for initally saving us but i think in long run he could fuck us up big timeWhy you harping on about Murray Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I actually said it was questionable whether the investment in the squad totalled £5m but that there certainly has been investment in the squad, however I pointed out that the pledge was to invest £5m per season, this season is not over yet so he cannot possibly, as yet, have failed to deliver on that.I don't know what Whyte has personally invested, although any investment is not a gift. It would actually increase the debt the club owes to him/The Rangers Group.In terms of the pledges (again the specific legal wording of these has to be considered not just the implication!), I do believe he will have followed through on these as failure to do so ends up in the debt owed by the club to The Rangers Group being written off. It is not in his (or our?) interests for that to happen prior to the tax case.Strange. I've just looked back and it wasn't your post I meant to quote on sorry mate. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Takes a wee while to sign up for this place In the same segment there was a throw away comment that another of the companies he invested in upon his return turned a £5M profit last year.Why was the examination of companies split to concentrate on the company that failed, why not the the company that succeeded or a 50/50 split?Points of concern yes, but it was a hatchet job, pure and simple. Lets see what Whyte does at Rangers not what he done before he got here - Branson's done ok after spending time inside for dodgy dealings has he not?************************First Post, same username as I have on FF.Not for long . After they find out you are posting on here Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallas Cowboy 3 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Not for long . After they find out you are posting on here My only view on the divide between the "two sides" I posted when a couple of the Admins from here posted in a thread on the trust, what I said then you can read by searching for the thread on FF. My memory's not the greatest so I can't give you a word for word but basically it was embarrassment at the fact that in this time in our history, of all times, the support was dividing into factions/cliques.Follow Follow won't stop me being a member here or vice versa.I only posted my username as I assumed it would make life easier for the guys who'll be determining whether or not the new guy (who signed up last night - of all nights) is a Timposter. Ps FF server was down and I was guesting over here when I saw this thread and felt the need to post. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 My only view on the divide between the "two sides" I posted when a couple of the Admins from here posted in a thread on the trust, what I said then you can read by searching for the thread on FF. My memory's not the greatest so I can't give you a word for word but basically it was embarrassment at the fact that in this time in our history, of all times, the support was dividing into factions/cliques.Follow Follow won't stop me being a member here or vice versa.I only posted my username as I assumed it would make life easier for the guys who'll be determining whether or not the new guy (who signed up last night - of all nights) is a Timposter. Ps FF server was down and I was guesting over here when I saw this thread and felt the need to post.their jealous of ff on here mate.you will get used to it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 their jealous of ff on here mate.you will get used to it.Jealous of the RST and Jealous of FF.ffs Do you write for chewing the fat or something. If no, you should. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garnock Blue 317 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Wouldn't it be in his best interests for the club to succeed and be financially successful though?Reputation means something in business, he has a chance with Rangers to publically be seen as a success as a businessman, surely that would be better than him than to be seen as a grim reaper of business.this As a businessman, I would think he is not the type of guy who would want to be seen as a failure at Rangers FC....Keep the faith! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 My only view on the divide between the "two sides" I posted when a couple of the Admins from here posted in a thread on the trust, what I said then you can read by searching for the thread on FF. My memory's not the greatest so I can't give you a word for word but basically it was embarrassment at the fact that in this time in our history, of all times, the support was dividing into factions/cliques.Follow Follow won't stop me being a member here or vice versa.I only posted my username as I assumed it would make life easier for the guys who'll be determining whether or not the new guy (who signed up last night - of all nights) is a Timposter. Ps FF server was down and I was guesting over here when I saw this thread and felt the need to post. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 their jealous of ff on here mate.you will get used to it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
psychobudgie 55 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 All I saw from the documentary was that Whyte was that he was in the 90's a bit on the edge with regards to his business practices and got caught and barred for 7 years as a result from working as a Director in the UK. He then buggered off to Monaco and continued to work as a VC from a abroad until his ban was lifted and he came back and that was it. Nothing at all that isn't already in the public domain. Everything else was speculation and accusation from the BBC.He's a bit dodgy but which really successful businessman isn't? What multi-millionaire hasn't avoided tax or used accountants to make money vanish and reappear. I'm actually with Whyte on this. It was nothing more than a hatchet job by BBC Scotland. Hell, Spiers pops up in the first 3 minutes which pretty much speaks volumes for the level of journalism on display. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddrock 107 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I've only read two posts into this thread, and they're both ridiculous. I take it you're talking about the "Rangers men" who contributed to that muck-raking documentary which was clear in its aim to harm Rangers last night? They should never be allowed anywhere near Ibrox again (not that I think they'd ever be back anyway). I genuinely am amazed at "Rangers' number 1 fan"'s behaviour with regard to Whyte, from start to finish.OP - Whyte has invested more than £5m in the playing squad, as he said he would, so the whole premise of this thread is wrong.Well your wrong . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 OP - Whyte has invested more than £5m in the playing squad, as he said he wouldWhat evidence of this do you have BP ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluepeter 5,627 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Well your wrong .How can I argue with logic like that? What evidence of this do you have BP ?"There have been many steps forward since then but that was the biggest. Had we retained that debt with Lloyds we would not have been able to renew contracts and we would have had to sell players and now we are not forced to do that."We have had the transfer window and we spent more than £5million on new players and new contracts and I think we have a great team on the pitch; a team that's capable of winning the league and that's the most important thing."We could have spent a lot more than that but unfortunately didn't get some of the players we went after."http://www.rangers.co.uk/articles/20110913/i-stepped-up-and-paid_2254024_2449130 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 How can I argue with logic like that? http://www.rangers.co.uk/articles/20110913/i-stepped-up-and-paid_2254024_2449130Yeah that indicates Rangers have spent it.Not Craig Whyte. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluepeter 5,627 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Yeah that indicates Rangers have spent it.Not Craig Whyte.Did Rangers spend it from the vast pool of money they have lying about? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 Did Rangers spend it from the vast pool of money they have lying about? We were cash positive from last season. We took in £16m of season ticket money in May and June.He could and should have put in £5m in May as working capital.We got something close to a million for Charlie Adam.Its possible its coming from all of that but just as i cannot say for definite he HAS NOT invested it, no-one can say 100% he HAS. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluepeter 5,627 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 We were cash positive from last season. We took in £16m of season ticket money in May and June.He could and should have put in £5m in May as working capital.We got something close to a million for Charlie Adam.Its possible its coming from all of that but just as i cannot say for definite he HAS NOT invested it, no-one can say 100% he HAS. I'm pretty sure you've said several times that he hasn't invested it. Feel free to correct me.I'd say it's pretty obvious that, had Whyte not bought Rangers, we would not have made the signings or increased the contracts that we have. You can pick over the bones and minutae of what he said (or you thought he said) but we have players here who would not have been here had Whyte not taken over. Do you think we'd have turned down £6.5m for Jelavic if Whyte hadn't been here? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 I'm pretty sure you've said several times that he hasn't invested it. Feel free to correct me.I'd say it's pretty obvious that, had Whyte not bought Rangers, we would not have made the signings or increased the contracts that we have. You can pick over the bones and minutae of what he said (or you thought he said) but we have players here who would not have been here had Whyte not taken over. Do you think we'd have turned down £6.5m for Jelavic if Whyte hadn't been here?We might not have got offered it if he wasnt here but not withstanding that, Jelavic is of course the £4 million signing sanctioned in August of last season when Whyte wasnt here Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluepeter 5,627 Posted October 21, 2011 Share Posted October 21, 2011 We might not have got offered it if he wasnt here but not withstanding that, Jelavic is of course the £4 million signing sanctioned in August of last season when Whyte wasnt here Which doesn't change what I posted in any way. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.