TheLawMan 6,240 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Right so we reckon that these are the concerns he has went to this insilvency mob with these concerns.Right another couple of questions if you or any non taig newbies can answer.How would Craig Whyte managed to have deposited money into a bank account as proof of funds to SDM and Lloyds?Why if the old board really had the money could they not have instigated a buy out of SDM since they knew that the club were for sale?These are only possible answers to your questions and im not saying its the case.1) It would have been possible that he had a note from Ticketus confirming the loan upon completion and he then used that to get the money from elsewhere for a short window to convince SDM. 2) Im not sure they ever had the money but they claimed that they were only doing it on the condition SDM took the liability for the Tax Claim which was never going to happen. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Preparing the ground for his return?......................along with SDM?no chance. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFC55 109,290 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 These are only possible answers to your questions and im not saying its the case.1) It would have been possible that he had a note from Ticketus confirming the loan upon completion and he then used that to get the money from elsewhere for a short window to convince SDM. 2) Im not sure they ever had the money but they claimed that they were only doing it on the condition SDM took the liability for the Tax Claim which was never going to happen.Bare with me mate im not great on these so if you can answer please do.Surely Lloyds and SDM would have wanted proof of actual money rather than on the strength of borrowing? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazzalivesforever 1,987 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 At least with this, one way or another we'll hopefully find out the truth. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Well he claimed in his interview with Tom English he did. Im sure SDM and Lloyds would easily have rubbished thatunless they knew and didn't care. say because it got them of the hook for a really big bill. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
A.T.G 10,773 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 These are only possible answers to your questions and im not saying its the case.1) It would have been possible that he had a note from Ticketus confirming the loan upon completion and he then used that to get the money from elsewhere for a short window to convince SDM. 2) Im not sure they ever had the money but they claimed that they were only doing it on the condition SDM took the liability for the Tax Claim which was never going to happen.Yet Murray had the intention of selling Rangers to someone who would benefit RangersThat job was impossible thanks to him, he really has fucked us over Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFC55 109,290 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 unless they knew and didn't care. say because it got them of the hook for a really big bill.Well mate i would hope SDM had stayed true to his word.GS on a kind of related point. Do you think it is possible CW is tying to mould us into a company that is trying to run properly rather than over spend like we have been doing, but as he has went for the jugular of the club this is why these questions are arising? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 13,319 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 unless they knew and didn't care. say because it got them of the hook for a really big bill.Ive considered this in the past ....but really how would CW predict that would be their attitude ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clemdog 39,389 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 What's going on here?Just came in from my mates. Summary would be great? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
HG5 11,154 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I can't see how they can get power if we win. far more likely the know or are speculating we lost.Why not just creep along and buy what's left of the club from the wreckage in that case?Whether their intentions are good, bad or brilliant, they're earning themselves some bad rep among the fans on here with this, along with that already accrued with the '£25m down the back of the sofa' stunt. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Bare with me mate im not great on these so if you can answer please do.Surely Lloyds and SDM would have wanted proof of actual money rather than on the strength of borrowing?Yeah. So "HYPOTHETICALLY" Whyte goes to Ticketus and says he needs £24m and he would give them a share of 4 years season tickets as collateral. Ticketus say YES but we will only do it once you own the club and heres a letter confirming that.Whyte then goes to MR OTHER INVESTOR and says "Can you borrowm me £18 million for 2 weeks and i will pay you back £18.5m" Oh and heres the letter confirming i can pay you back on MAy the 8th.MR OTHER INVESTOR gives him the money and he lodges that in his own back then shows it to David Murray who by this point really doesnt give a shit what money he has as all he wants is to GET THE FUKK OOT.All hypothetical of course, but also very plausible. AJ is a prick, but Im with him if it results in an independent look at things, hopefully ending in transparency. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hemdale1873 167 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Maybe im a mongo but were does Whyte say in that we will go to Admin Questions were then posed about the Big Tax Case. If the case goes in the Club’s favour, the Chairman stated that HMRC would appeal and that would mean a further lengthy period of the same uncertainty and would discourage investors, sponsors, etc. If we lose the tax case, we can appeal but there would then arise the issue of managing any accruing debt. He couldn’t speculate on the outcome but made it clear this is a vital period in the Club’s history He said we lose the tax case we are in trouble, he said he win the tax case and we are in trouble. Some people need to read between the lines here. The man wants admin and that has been his plan since day one/Jesus we had to borrow £20m just to keep our head above water this season, how long do you think we can keep that up. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AMMS 27 Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 Willie McKay is a horrible man from the little I know of him however he's pretty shrewd and usually knows which side his bread is buttered on. Which makes his comments tonight about Rangers, and Whyte in particular, quite telling. Football agents tend not to have a go at club owners unless they've nothing to fear in reprisal. I wonder just how the pressure Whyte must be currently feeling is affecting him. He's under a spotlight he's never experienced before and is facing considerably more of it in the future. I wonder if he's thinking of an exit strategy. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_ger 1,454 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Credit facility ?Isnt that what Whyte is supposed to be ?No that is what SDM was at the start. When Rangers was his play thing. Rangers as a sustainable business should be able to get credit and pay it back at a reasonable rate. Of course this is going to be negatively impacted on by all the doom and gloom and accusation flying around from ex employees. I am not saying that CW is running the club in the right way but all these public accusation are not good for business. In the same way the financial crisis with the banks main problem was that all confidence was lost. AJ is helping facilitate a loss in confidence in Rangers FC as a viable business.Why could this request for an investigation not been done in the background without the press knowing. It all fucking stinks of something rather rotten to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Well mate i would hope SDM had stayed true to his word.GS on a kind of related point. Do you think it is possible CW is tying to mould us into a company that is trying to run properly rather than over spend like we have been doing, but as he has went for the jugular of the club this is why these questions are arising?Firing executives via the press, non-payment of bills, failing to produce audited accounts by the deadline, failure to call an AGM, removal from PLUS, failing to disclose previous director ban........Aye, run properly. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Well mate i would hope SDM had stayed true to his word.GS on a kind of related point. Do you think it is possible CW is tying to mould us into a company that is trying to run properly rather than over spend like we have been doing, but as he has went for the jugular of the club this is why these questions are arising?Borrowing £30m of future income creating a £8m a year repayment is not a sign of running a club or business properly Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_ger 1,454 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 What's going on here?Just came in from my mates. Summary would be great?http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/16975105 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFC55 109,290 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Yeah. So "HYPOTHETICALLY" Whyte goes to Ticketus and says he needs £24m and he would give them a share of 4 years season tickets as collateral. Ticketus say YES but we will only do it once you own the club and heres a letter confirming that.Whyte then goes to MR OTHER INVESTOR and says "Can you borrowm me £18 million for 2 weeks and i will pay you back £18.5m" Oh and heres the letter confirming i can pay you back on MAy the 8th.MR OTHER INVESTOR gives him the money and he lodges that in his own back then shows it to David Murray who by this point really doesnt give a shit what money he has as all he wants is to GET THE FUKK OOT.All hypothetical of course, but also very plausible. AJ is a prick, but Im with him if it results in an independent look at things, hopefully ending in transparency. Now even i understand that Although would the general practice not be to show actual funds? Ie his banking statements/transactions? I dont know btw just asking.I am not against it mate, but the timing of all this shite is murder. Every new story is like a severe boot in the bollox Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFC55 109,290 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Borrowing £30m of future income creating a £8m a year repayment is not a sign of running a club or business properly Thats why i asked "is it possible" do keep up Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Well mate i would hope SDM had stayed true to his word.GS on a kind of related point. Do you think it is possible CW is tying to mould us into a company that is trying to run properly rather than over spend like we have been doing, but as he has went for the jugular of the club this is why these questions are arising?its possible. what I think is he bought us fully intending to fold us and reform the club. he might have changed his mind though. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RFC55 109,290 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Firing executives via the press, non-payment of bills, failing to produce audited accounts by the deadline, failure to call an AGM, removal from PLUS, failing to disclose previous director ban........Aye, run properly."do you think it is POSSIBLE" For you and TWM Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 What's going on here?Just came in from my mates. Summary would be great?The thread title tells you everything. The rest is just us talking the usual bollocks. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudsLonniegan 9 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 I really don't mind who they investigate as long as johnston is first in the que to be investigated, fukin judas. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Ive considered this in the past ....but really how would CW predict that would be their attitude ?because the man that found him told him. Mr muir. indeed he probably came up with the plan. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 13,319 Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 The thread title tells you everything. The rest is just us talking the usual bollocks. So can I ask - if they do investigate us and something untoward is found with the process of takeover...Where does that leave us ?No paddle and creek comments please !! 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.