VB statement re Whyte

[TheLawMan 6,240]

In that case you were arguing against yourself. Nowhere did I say LBG were acting in a way no other bank would.

What was said:

LBG were running the club when we had circa £10M additional income from European football. Quite clearly, had LBG still been in charge, cuts would've been made after McCoist bombed out of Europe to the giants of Malmo and Maribor and our earnings would've been down circa £10M.

LBG cannot be blamed for wanting their money back ASAP. With the big tax case hanging over the club, potentially they could've struggled to get a fraction back if that case went against us. Banks, like most other businesses, do not like uncertainty. You are living in cloud cuckoo land if you think they were happy just to have the overdraft/long term loan paid back on a slowly slowly basis.

Hence, as Walter Smith said "LBG are running the club", the tight squeeze applied by them beyond a slowly, slowly payment plan.

Yeah but you have to realise that the picture on 1st July 2009 was wholly different from the picture on 1st May 2011.

On 1/7/09 we owed them £27m and we owed trade creditors a further £10m with no cash in the bank

On 1/5/11 we owed them £18m and we owed trade creditors a further £2m with cash in the bank

Please tell me you can see why that would make a difference to the way our club would be run.

[MrSifter 181]

Yeah but you have to realise that the picture on 1st July 2009 was wholly different from the picture on 1st May 2011.

On 1/7/09 we owed them £27m and we owed trade creditors a further £10m with no cash in the bank

On 1/5/11 we owed them £18m and we owed trade creditors a further £2m with cash in the bank

Please tell me you can see why that would make a difference to the way our club would be run.

Clearly the debt was reduced massively. From your figures, in the two year period LBG were running the club we'd paid back £9M to LBG and £8M to trade creditors. A total of £17M paid back in two years.

That's a fairly steep payback time frame and realistically this pattern was going to continue with LBG running the club and the impending tax tribunal. I'd imagine they'd be squeezing every last drop out the playing squad after McCoist's £10M failure in Europe.

You initially objected to my assertion that LBG were suffocating the club. I take it you now want to withdraw that objection.

[Gaffbear 4,096]

I find it astonishing that he thought he could get away with this and the fact so many bought into it.

We had experienced business men telling all not to trust him and he was a liar,thief and charlaton and we only saw a saviour..How wrong were we.

Jail him and put him in a cell wi Bears

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Clearly the debt was reduced massively. From your figures, in the two year period LBG were running the club we'd paid back £9M to LBG and £8M to trade creditors. A total of £17M paid back in two years.

That's a fairly steep payback time frame and realistically this pattern was going to continue with LBG running the club and the impending tax tribunal. I'd imagine they'd be squeezing every last drop out the playing squad after McCoist's £10M failure in Europe.

You initially objected to my assertion that LBG were suffocating the club. I take it you now want to withdraw that objection.

I dont no. Our previous mismanagement of finances were suffocating our club. You cant blame a bank for spending beyond your means.

Its like saying its the bank faults for getting into so much into debt that you cant afford your mortgage.

The bank were only doing what they should be doing. And the situation had changed which is the most important point

[Adoniram 1,919]

I dont no. Our previous mismanagement of finances were suffocating our club. You cant blame a bank for spending beyond your means.

Its like saying its the bank faults for getting into so much into debt that you cant afford your mortgage.

The bank were only doing what they should be doing. And the situation had changed which is the most important point

Is that not how the banking crisis started and how Murray was allowed to spend, spend, spend all that money we didn't have in the first place?

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Is that not how the banking crisis started and how Murray was allowed to spend, spend, spend all that money we didn't have in the first place?

He had the security. BACK THEN. Bottom line though, it was Murray who went to the bank, not the other way around.

[MrSifter 181]

I dont no. Our previous mismanagement of finances were suffocating our club. You cant blame a bank for spending beyond your means.

Its like saying its the bank faults for getting into so much into debt that you cant afford your mortgage.

The bank were only doing what they should be doing. And the situation had changed which is the most important point

Well you're moving the goalposts again.

No-one is blaming the bank. You cannot seem to grasp that the big tax case was the issue driving the bank's attitude. It's quite clear they were desperate to get out as much as they could before the result. As such they were suffocating the club by forcing payback at a faster and faster rate.

It makes your earlier points laughable:

Of course they wanted their money back, but that wasnt the point being made. They had no right to get their £18m back. If we were operating in our own cash whilst paying the capital and interest at the agreed rate, then Lloyds could have done diddly squat about the £18m as it was a Long Term Fixed Loan.

A Long Term loan is subject to regulations and like mortgages, cannot be recalled on a whim, unless you break the agreed covenant set out at the beginning of the loan.

Lloyds could not make a demand for instant repayment on an agreed 22 year loan, unless there was a default. FACT

At no time since 1st July 2009 have we breached our £15m overdraft limit with Lloyds. FACT

[OneDavidCooper 2,505]

Pompous

[StudsLonniegan 9]

Contradiction doesn't even describe these two articles by the same roddy forsyth on the same day.

http://www.google.co...fqE-jb1I3b-Q_GA

http://www.telegraph...Cup-replay.html

[StudsLonniegan 9]

He had the security. BACK THEN. Bottom line though, it was Murray who went to the bank, not the other way around.

Bottom line is murray had a very cosy relationship with certain individuals at first BOS and then HBOS, which LBG ended and instituted real banking parameters. The former two indulged his every whim believing he and they lived in a different world, LBG disabused all of that notion.

[Bothwellbear 1,392]

sooooooooooooo 13 pages now.... VB still not spilling the beans

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

sooooooooooooo 13 pages now.... VB still not spilling the beans

Why does anyone want them to.... ?

Hopefuly a lesson learnt for them, no idea why they even mentioned it in the first place.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Well you're moving the goalposts again.

No-one is blaming the bank. You cannot seem to grasp that the big tax case was the issue driving the bank's attitude. It's quite clear they were desperate to get out as much as they could before the resu

lt. As such they were suffocating the club by forcing payback at a faster and faster rate.

It makes your earlier points laughable:

You are clearly confused. I confirmed the banks reason for pushing Murray. In fact that reason alone backs up my facts. They knew they couldn't recall the £18 million so they forced murrays hand to make sure they got weighed in.

You seem like a sensible chap so please read over everything again.

[Jocky Broon 207]

Not a time for anyone to be gloating.Whyte has duped all and sundry and is clearly a professional con man.We all make mistakes and VB are still a very big part of the Rangers family.Lets cut them some slack.

[caseyjones 3,009]

Why does anyone want them to.... ?

Hopefuly a lesson learnt for them, no idea why they even mentioned it in the first place.

Oh, I think we've all got a good idea why.

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

Oh, I think we've all got a good idea why.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,540]

if we only reduced overall debt by 17mill between 1/7/09 and June 11. Where did the rest of the money go? In that time frame we got near 40 million extra revenue from Europe. Surely we weren't needing an extra 23 million to cover the clubs expenses for they two seasons

[Adoniram 1,919]

Oh, I think we've all got a good idea why.

Go on then tell us why?

Could it be because we are still waiting on the report from the administrator

Or are you privvy to information you would like to share with the rest of us?

[GeneralCartmanLee 313]

Go on then tell us why?

Could it be because we are still waiting on the report from the administrator

Or are you privvy to information you would like to share with the rest of us?

I think he was refering to the "secrets" I said to you at the time you would have been better not even mentioning that as it didn't come across well....as you have seen since....

[caseyjones 3,009]

Go on then tell us why?

Could it be because we are still waiting on the report from the administrator

Or are you privvy to information you would like to share with the rest of us?

I was under the impression we were talking about the original 'We know a lot more' remark when the original statement was announced detailing the topics discussed at the meeting. Were we not?

As for you waiting for the administrator, fine, it's not as if you can do much else when faced with the glaring differences between what was reported, and what has subsequently surfaced. I don't see that as any reason for muck to be slung at you.

[MrSifter 181]

You are clearly confused. I confirmed the banks reason for pushing Murray. In fact that reason alone backs up my facts. They knew they couldn't recall the £18 million so they forced murrays hand to make sure they got weighed in.

You seem like a sensible chap so please read over everything again.

And round it goes. The only one confused is you. I said LBG were suffocating the club, you said anyone holding that view needed a "kick up the arse."

A Long Term loan is subject to regulations and like mortgages, cannot be recalled on a whim, unless you break the agreed covenant set out at the beginning of the loan.

Lloyds could not make a demand for instant repayment on an agreed 22 year loan, unless there was a default. FACT

At no time since 1st July 2009 have we breached our £15m overdraft limit with Lloyds. FACT

We never breached the £15M overdraft limit since 2009 by your own admission and according to you the long term loan cannot be recalled on a whim. Obviously we're still waiting on you to confirm you've seen the exact terms and conditions of Rangers' loan / overdraft facility.

You cannot square the circle that LBG were indeed extracting more money in a quicker timeframe than expected in said loan/overdraft and therefore they were suffocating the Club.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

Go on then tell us why?

Could it be because we are still waiting on the report from the administrator

Or are you privvy to information you would like to share with the rest of us?

.... VB in dignified silence shocker (A tactic they roundly objected the club using wrt to BBC, DR, Phil Wankingloblin, Bain, SFA, etc. etc. )

[gunslinger 270]

if we only reduced overall debt by 17mill between 1/7/09 and June 11. Where did the rest of the money go? In that time frame we got near 40 million extra revenue from Europe. Surely we weren't needing an extra 23 million to cover the clubs expenses for they two seasons

we paid 9 million in transfer fees as well. over that actually.

[gunslinger 270]

.... VB in dignified silence shocker (A tactic they roundly objected the club using wrt to BBC, DR, Phil Wankingloblin, Bain, SFA, etc. etc. )

next thing you know adoniram will be at ibrox.

the times they are a changing.

[StudsLonniegan 9]

we paid 9 million in transfer fees as well. over that actually.

We got £9 milliom as well.