Do you want the Blue Knights .

[jimatcaledonia 32]

Didn't they "buy" them off somebody who didn't own them ?

The law on that is pretty clear. There would be no valid title.

Record Sport has been alerted to a Companies House document in the names of Whtye and his newly-appointed right-hand man in the boardroom, Phil Betts. This has raised concerns among prominent supporters at Ibrox.

The paperwork was lodged on May 26, just days after a night of the long knives that saw chief executive Martin Bain suspended and former chairman Alistair Johnston booted off the board.

And there are growing fears Rangers could be run along similar lines to the business models which forced English giants Leeds and Newcastle to the brink of financial ruin.

Analysts say the document - called an MG50 - could signal Whyte's intent to mortgage off the next four years' worth of season-ticket money as a security against some form of loan.

It was this kind of high-risk scheme which was blamed for the crisis that saw Leeds plummet into the third tier of English football and almost forced them out of business.

In 2007 Newcastle had to be rescued by Mike Ashley's £100million bail-out after over-extending themselves with a similar strategy.

Now Rangers season-ticket holders will want to know where their hard-earned cash is going and if Whyte plans to use it to finance his initial takeover, which saw him agree to wipe out £18m debt with Lloyds Bank.

Whyte has also pledged to hand McCoist an initial fighting fund of at least £5m, inject up to a further £5m as working capital and find almost £2m to refurbish parts of the stadium.

But one Rangers supporter with a background of financial expertise told us last night: "We have to be told if Mr Whyte is using our season ticket money to fund all of his promises.

"If that is indeed his intention then the long-term financial health of our football club could be exposed to serious risk.

"There are very glaring questions here which need to be answered."

The issue is about the timing of the agreement between Whyte and Ticketus and also the initial terms of the sale between Whyte and Rangers.

[gunslinger 270]

all signed after he owned us.

[rupert thebear 7]

I believe yes and with Ticketus, read somewhere (Leggo Land maybe) that Ticketus would act as a sort of banker. Which makes sense business model wise.

Really depends how quick a case could be resolved.

[mrd 0]

I think I've actually met, through a contact, Scott Murdoch and the same guy had dealt with Alastair Johnston (and David Murray in the past). I've been trying to find a photo of Scott to see if I'm right but I can't believe there's many Rangers fans that are also self made property millionaires who work a lot in New York.

I understand it would be preferable if the owner was a mulch-billionaire who could bankroll us for 20 years but assuming there isn't someone like that interested this is a much better solution for us as fans than an English investor/speculator who thinks he can make money here.

The likes of Johnston and Murdoch are incredibly intelligent and have made their money elsewhere, they're just in this for the good of Rangers as a club so they can be counted to act in the support's interest. Besides that Murdoch didn't seem like someone who tolerates a poor standard of work, if he's involved I imagine there won't be a Martin Bain style guy at the top who nobody is really sure is qualified or good at his job. If he is invested the club will be well run from a business point of view - much more in the style of Lawell you'd imagine. I wouldn't like to be the one to tell Murdoch I've made a loss this year and he needs to put money in to cover it.

It depends what you want to happen I guess, if you quite liked the erratic pattern of the last 15 years or you're desperate to roll the dice to try and get regularly into the Champions League you might hope for someone who's going to throw money in. Me, I'd like them to get the basics right; breaking even, bringing through players, the squad on fair long term contracts, a club that competes with Celtic at an SFA/board room level and supporter representation on the board.

[jimatcaledonia 32]

all signed after he owned us.

Lawyers for Duff & Phelps believe they can demonstrate that the ownership of the tickets should be declared null and void, thus freeing up huge income streams for prospective new owners, like Paul Murray

If Craig Whyte entered into an agreement that was subsequently ratified then we owe Ticketus.

If Craig Whyte broke his contract with Rangers and that was declared null and void, then Ticketus would come under scrutiny about their involvement.

If Ticketus made possible a contract that was declared null and void, then any subsequent ratification that benefited their participation would be investigated.

Hence, their new found compassion and determination to join with the Blue Knights.

[gunslinger 270]

Lawyers for Duff & Phelps believe they can demonstrate that the ownership of the tickets should be declared null and void, thus freeing up huge income streams for prospective new owners, like Paul Murray

If Craig Whyte entered into an agreement that was subsequently ratified then we owe Ticketus.

If Craig Whyte broke his contract with Rangers and that was declared null and void, then Ticketus would come under scrutiny about their involvement.

If Ticketus made possible a contract that was declared null and void, then any subsequent ratification that benefited their participation would be investigated.

Hence, their new found compassion and determination to join with the Blue Knights.

ifs buts and maybes

[JTP 221]

I think I've actually met, through a contact, Scott Murdoch and the same guy had dealt with Alastair Johnston (and David Murray in the past). I've been trying to find a photo of Scott to see if I'm right but I can't believe there's many Rangers fans that are also self made property millionaires who work a lot in New York.

I understand it would be preferable if the owner was a mulch-billionaire who could bankroll us for 20 years but assuming there isn't someone like that interested this is a much better solution for us as fans than an English investor/speculator who thinks he can make money here.

The likes of Johnston and Murdoch are incredibly intelligent and have made their money elsewhere, they're just in this for the good of Rangers as a club so they can be counted to act in the support's interest. Besides that Murdoch didn't seem like someone who tolerates a poor standard of work, if he's involved I imagine there won't be a Martin Bain style guy at the top who nobody is really sure is qualified or good at his job. If he is invested the club will be well run from a business point of view - much more in the style of Lawell you'd imagine. I wouldn't like to be the one to tell Murdoch I've made a loss this year and he needs to put money in to cover it.

It depends what you want to happen I guess, if you quite liked the erratic pattern of the last 15 years or you're desperate to roll the dice to try and get regularly into the Champions League you might hope for someone who's going to throw money in. Me, I'd like them to get the basics right; breaking even, bringing through players, the squad on fair long term contracts, a club that competes with Celtic at an SFA/board room level and supporter representation on the board.

Hi Scott,

What is your long term plan as a part of the blue knights then?

[jimatcaledonia 32]

ifs buts and maybes

Enough ifs, buts and maybes for Ticketus to try and renegotiate the ‘contract’.

Bearing in mind Ticketus planned to cripple us for 3 years at least in the best case and own our assets even if we went in to liquidation.

Neither scenario was of any concern to them, now why the sudden interest?

That’s the question needing answered.

[mrd 0]

Hi Scott,

What is your long term plan as a part of the blue knights then?

I wish mate, if its the guy I met he seemed to be living quite the life at the time. Workaholic mind you, gave you the impression he worked morning to night.

[gunslinger 270]

Enough ifs, buts and maybes for Ticketus to try and renegotiate the ‘contract’.

Bearing in mind Ticketus planned to cripple us for 3 years at least in the best case and own our assets even if we went in to liquidation.

Neither scenario was of any concern to them, now why the sudden interest?

That’s the question needing answered.

it does.

it will be great if they don't get a penny.

it just looks unlikely.

[54RTLR 2]

Origionally, I was all for hopping on board with the Blue Knights but seriously reconsidered and now I would just like a billionaire to take over Rangers.

Sorry, but consortiums have too many egos and enemies so to speak.

I would like fan representation, but not ownership.

[gunslinger 270]

if the choice is the blue knights or a billionaire I will also go billionaire.

[Turnberry18 3,204]

if the choice is the blue knights or a billionaire I will also go billionaire.

If the billionaire was a billionaire that would be even better.

[BCLoyal9 53]

Too many people involved.

Not enough money being shown.

Company in the background looking to make money back from the Club.

People who were involved in our downfall in the first place...

I voted "Without Ticketus" but scratch that. I want a more compact , cohesive and above all wealthier takeover entity to come in. Hopefully after the administrators have unstitched us from the Ticketus deal in court , and told them and their lost £24 million to suck cocks in Hell.

Then if all goes well it's a cva with the taxman and we're looking bang tidy

[Turnberry18 3,204]

How can anyone vote on this when we don't know who they are?: the fact Paul Murray is spearheading it is neither here nor there; who are they?: and by that I don't mean the ones who we know about, I am talking about who all of them are, and what their plans are.

[gunslinger 270]

the real question is why wouldn't you want them. the alternatives are some unknown a guy wo says he will step aside if the blue knights are in place and oblivion.

[Zappa 358]

if the choice is the blue knights or a billionaire I will also go billionaire.

If the choice is the Blue Knights or someone not using Ticketus to fund their takeover, I'll go with the bidder not using Ticketus.

[Thermopylae 15,287]

I think if the whyte fiasco teaches us one thing it is that it's good to have a choice

[gunslinger 270]

If the choice is the Blue Knights or someone not using Ticketus to fund their takeover, I'll go with the bidder not using Ticketus.

but are they?

[gunslinger 270]

I think if the whyte fiasco teaches us one thing it is that it's good to have a choice

not really. I urged us to chose p Murray when whyte took over. that went well.

[islandblue 366]

Ticketus is a no no for me

[Malteser 2]

I have serious doubts about Brian Kennedy he's not even listed as a director for Sale Sharks he is meant to own, and his history is just as murky as Whytes. Have a look http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03333690

At least with the Blue Knights there are familiar faces, who are to some extent recognised Rangers fans, ticketus deal won't go away either way because its a binding agreement or something.

[bluesteel 218]

I have serious doubts about Brian Kennedy he's not even listed as a director for Sale Sharks he is meant to own, and his history is just as murky as Whytes. Have a look http://companycheck.co.uk/company/03333690

At least with the Blue Knights there are familiar faces, who are to some extent recognised Rangers fans, ticketus deal won't go away either way because its a binding agreement or something.

In the absence of info,tbks seem to be our best bet

[nvager 498]

I would rather some people with DEEP pockets and a whole new managerial set up. A clean out from top to bottom ruled by serious money and good business ethics.

Whether that is possible I do not know.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

We've got to be wise about this one and know the facts.

That's why I'm refraining from voting.

TBK won't have Ticketus in tow for now reason. There must be some advantage.

Therefore, we need to know the details of the deal. Apparently they're not wanting a share of the company, but a return from their outlay.

Perhaps they're willing to forego their profit or even contribute to the bid just to get all or even some return on the money they've put out. Maybe it's just a rescheduling of the debt.

This court case will decide, perhaps only temporarily, the role aWnd influence of Ticketus. The claim is that they bought tickets. Who from? Whyte didn't have them. Where are they? Have they already got them?

Does the debt lie with Whyte? Can he claim against us?

Darrell King says the Administrators are trying to get the debt to be part of the CVA. Why would the Administrators want to increase the debt, if it lies with Whyte?

Is £24.4m more than 75% of the overall debt? If so, King says, they can scupper the CVA. If it's legally clarified as part of the CVA, do Ticketus have any recourse, or are they left with the yay or nay on the CVA.

If it's part of the CVA, they get their share. If the block a CVA they would get nothing. Why does King think they would opt for a zero return.

It's about what's best for us and we need the facts to do that.

We can't rule options in or out when ignorant of the facts.