gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 So you cannot back up your claim, nothing new there.the real question is did d muir act in rangers best interest in forcing our sake to whyte or his own lots more to come on this. I doubt anyone's going to jail but I live in hope. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheikh Salim 215 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 That is why he won't do a live interview. The Shareholders Circular was more of the same, full of legal-speak and semantics.Tbh in hindsight I now think the ciricular was all smoke and mirrors, that, the agm etc wouldnt matter if his sole purpose was administration. I am firmly in the anti Whyte camp now, however I would love to be proved wrong. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brubear 2,927 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 This makes me a happy fanboy!If by fanboy you imply I am a Whyte fan you couldn't be further from the truth Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonbryce 63 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 No, see that would be a straight forward loan, whereas ticketus have confirmed they don't loan money they buy assets. Which would mean they bought assets from Whyte before he had any.Can't be legal. Surely. He sold something he didn't have.There isn't any practical difference, unless the company goes bankrupt, in one case, the bank gets title deeds to a property, in the other case, Ticketus gets a box of season tickets.The negotiations would take place on the basis that Craig Whyte would sell them a load of season tickets if he manages to buy Rangers. Actually signing off the sale would be pretty much the first thing he did after buying the company and being appointed director.This sort of thing is actually quite normal when financing the purchase of a business. If for example you wanted to buy a bus company, you might finance the purchase of it by selling the buses to a leasing company. What is not quite so normal is that lenders usually insist on the new owner putting in some of their own money so that it isn't a one way "heads I win, tails you lose" bet for them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudsLonniegan 9 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 The circular is and was crystal clear, only many didn't read it, procure being the all important word.© The Rangers FC Group has stated its intention to invest, or procure an investment of, £20million by 2016 for investment in the playing squad. If, as part of any player acquisition, theClub agrees to make a transfer payment in a future year before 2016, The Rangers FC Groupwill be obliged to invest cash to cover such transfer payment, up to £5 million per year; suchamounts coming out of the £20 million investment that The Rangers FC Group has stated itsintention to invest;(d) The Rangers FC Group has undertaken to provide or procure the provision of up to£5,000,000 of additional working capital facilities to the Club;There are no irrevocable commitments or letters of intent which The Rangers FC Group or any personacting in concert with The Rangers FC Group has procured in relation to the relevant securities of theClub. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheikh Salim 215 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 You obviously don't have a point, you prefer the pish printed by the taig ridden meeja as your bible. I also note you couldn't bring yourself to answer the question. Sorry I assumed you were asking a rhetorical question. I like how you deflected my points. If you truly believe that all the media, all the rags, etc etc are printing made up stories just to slag off Whyte then you are either very naive or very stupid. Or possibly Ali Russell. Goodnight : ) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
StudsLonniegan 9 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Sorry I assumed you were asking a rhetorical question. I like how you deflected my points. If you truly believe that all the media, all the rags, etc etc are printing made up stories just to slag off Whyte then you are either very naive or very stupid. Or possibly Ali Russell. Goodnight : )No, you are just very easily led. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 The circular is and was crystal clear, only many didn't read it, procure being the all important word.© The Rangers FC Group has stated its intention to invest, or procure an investment of, £20million by 2016 for investment in the playing squad. If, as part of any player acquisition, theClub agrees to make a transfer payment in a future year before 2016, The Rangers FC Groupwill be obliged to invest cash to cover such transfer payment, up to £5 million per year; suchamounts coming out of the £20 million investment that The Rangers FC Group has stated itsintention to invest;(d) The Rangers FC Group has undertaken to provide or procure the provision of up to£5,000,000 of additional working capital facilities to the Club;There are no irrevocable commitments or letters of intent which The Rangers FC Group or any personacting in concert with The Rangers FC Group has procured in relation to the relevant securities of theClub.as snake would say "yoink" Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 so is studs Craig whyte or Donald muir? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 so is studs Craig whyte or Donald muir?Spangles. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinnymate1690 627 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 spangles appears to have been right Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 spangles was spot on. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 spangles was spot on.Spangles was also a stirrer who set one side against the other. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Jela 20,403 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 so is studs Craig whyte or Donald muir?SWSL. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clemdog 39,389 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 What's the update? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 SWSL.definately not. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Spangles was also a stirrer who set one side against the other.like our new friend. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCDBigBear 10,830 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 4 years = 160,000 season tickets = 24 million = 150 quid per ticket,seems a bit low does it notI believe it was 25% of the expected annual ST sales. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nvager 498 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Lets all be patient and see the administrators confirm the Daily Mail's story.It should be true or CW will sue them for libel.I will be amazed if it is not true.No doubt all CW's fans on here will still say it is part of a master plan. Let's all be fair and withhold judgement on CW until we hear more from the Administrators in a few days.I will stick my head out and say he may be a charlatan/crook/snake oil salesman - oops sorry - let's wait a few days! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JCDBigBear 10,830 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 If this Daily Mail story is true then God knows where we go from here. Whyte must have lied to Murray. Murray and the Board didn't do their homework. Whyte has lied to us all. The shambles we are in just gets worse. The administrators should tie Whyte to a chair and beat the truth out of him. What I can't understand is why the Admin guys didn't ask Whyte question number 1: Where is the £24m? I wouldn't have let him out the room until I knew where it was. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redsox1 1,361 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 If this Daily Mail story is true then God knows where we go from here. Whyte must have lied to Murray. Murray and the Board didn't do their homework. Whyte has lied to us all. The shambles we are in just gets worse. The administrators should tie Whyte to a chair and beat the truth out of him. What I can't understand is why the Admin guys didn't ask Whyte question number 1: Where is the £24m? I wouldn't have let him out the room until I knew where it was.and if its not true ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCutch 4,340 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Ok,The way I see this is as follows :If Whyte approached ticketus with a view to selling £24m worth of something he did not own on the strength of possibly buying Rangers, then before they have even shifted the cash out of their bank account into a holding fund, surely they must have picked up the phone and spoke to SDM to ask if this was even remotely true?And if they did speak to him, and he just wanted out before the big tax case made it to the hearing, then maybe he was party to this, and is what AJ has been calling for to be investigated?If the above is proven to be true, then SDM and Whyte should have their baws tied together and hung from the flagpole over the Govan Stand. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Lets all be patient and see the administrators confirm the Daily Mail's story.It should be true or CW will sue them for libel.I will be amazed if it is not true.No doubt all CW's fans on here will still say it is part of a master plan. Let's all be fair and withhold judgement on CW until we hear more from the Administrators in a few days.I will stick my head out and say he may be a charlatan/crook/snake oil salesman - oops sorry - let's wait a few days! no way back for him now for me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GMac 1,405 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Lets all be patient and see the administrators confirm the Daily Mail's story.It should be true or CW will sue them for libel.I will be amazed if it is not true.No doubt all CW's fans on here will still say it is part of a master plan. Let's all be fair and withhold judgement on CW until we hear more from the Administrators in a few days.I will stick my head out and say he may be a charlatan/crook/snake oil salesman - oops sorry - let's wait a few days! The Mail usually get it right. Right wing, protestant and unionist, they won't want to piss us off. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
'o'rangerblue 89 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 So, and this sticks in my craw, has AJ been right all along? 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.