Do you want the Blue Knights .

[bluepeter 5,627]

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.

Interesting article by Fury on that subject: http://www.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=654:ticketus-may-not-be-such-a-bad-thing-after-all&catid=103:board&Itemid=531

[Ped faeIbroxStreet 5]

I have to say I shuddered when I heard the quote from Paul Murray saying he would expect a place on the board if TBK where the successful bidders. He should be saying nothing accept the survival of the club matters.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Interesting article by Fury on that subject: http://www.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=654:ticketus-may-not-be-such-a-bad-thing-after-all&catid=103:board&Itemid=531

Cheers for posting that mate!

It's actually the best article I've seen on the Ticketus-TBK involvement from any media outlet. For a start, it's logical, it's factual and it explores all relevant possibilities rationally and only speculates on the unknowns that are key, which it does in a sensible, balanced manner.

Well done to the author, Chris Graham. He's provided something which nobody else has and covers all the key points I raised. For that, I think he has explored the subject fully.

It merits being posted again and it's most pertinent in this thread:

Ticketus may not be such a bad thing after all...

Details Published on Friday, 16 March 2012 06:05 Written by Chris Graham

WILLIE VASS ©

When Paul Murray announced that his Blue Knights consortium had struck a deal with Ticketus to be part of their bid for the club, there was a collective gasp followed by much wailing and gnashing of teeth from the Rangers support. Were Ticketus not the guys who helped Whyte in his underhand acquisition of the club? Were they not part of the problem? Well, as with much of this saga, things may not be as clear cut as that. There has been plenty written and said about why their involvement is bad but let's try to look at why Ticketus may not only be a necessary but also a desirable part of the future of Rangers.

Firstly, in terms of Ticketus' involvement with Whyte it is difficult to get an idea of the exact picture. Nobody is yet sure if the agreement with Whyte to provide him with £24.4 million in return for the advance purchase of tickets for matches at Ibrox will stand up to legal scrutiny. As always with matters which end up in court there may be merit in both sides of the argument. Ticketus will believe they advanced the money in good faith and that their deal was conditional on Whyte's purchase of the club being successful. The administrators, who go to court today in order to start to clarify the position, feel that Craig Whyte had no legal right to sell the tickets and therefore the deal should be set aside and Ticketus should seek recourse from Whyte and not Rangers.

No matter the outcome of the case however, it is likely that Ticketus will be a part of Rangers future at least in the short term. They are unlikely to accept any ruling removing their right to the tickets they feel they purchased in good faith and an appeal would be likely. Furthermore, there is a strong argument that Rangers will require the cash facilities that Ticketus can provide. It is an often missed fact in all this that Ticketus were not brought into the club by Craig Whyte. Rangers have used Ticketus for years to advance money against season ticket sales to improve cash flow at the points of the season where revenue is low. Paul Murray is familiar with Ticketus and clearly is of the opinion that they have been as much a victim of this as Rangers. Should we as a club seek sympathy for ourselves having been duped by Whyte but then disregard others who may have suffered the same fate?

Aside from moral judgements on whether Ticketus have a case there are also practical issues for any new owner to consider. Paul Murray will not wish to begin his tenure at the club locked in a legal battle for £24.4 million. There is enough negative publicity around at the moment without adding to it unnecessarily. Furthermore, Rangers have no current overdraft or credit facilities with a bank. There will be times in almost every season where we require such facilities and Ticketus have the cash reserves to provide them. Now the obvious retort to this is that Ticketus have already provided Whyte with the money, which he has promptly spent, so all they will be doing is taking out of the club. Well that may not be the case.

The current deal with Ticketus seems to involve them being given a set amount of tickets per season. Obviously these tickets will be worth more than £24.4 million over three seasons as they will have wished to make a profit. Let's say they would be due back around £30 million of ticket sales. If we look at Rangers 2010 accounts the amount taken in for gate receipts and hospitality was around £26 million. It's difficult to be sure exactly how much of this was season ticket revenue but let's say for the sake of argument that it was around £18 million. It's clear that having to repay £10 million a year of this season ticket revenue to Ticketus would severely hamstring the club. It would drastically reduce our already tight income and would certainly force more wage cuts.

Things however have changed. Ticketus stand to have to accept potentially as little as 10p in the pound as part of a CVA. Worse still, if the club are liquidated they would stand to get as little as 1p in the pound. Clearly it is in their interests to see Rangers remain a viable business as recouping their money is conditional on a club existing which has tickets to sell.

Now Paul Murray has not yet made clear the detail of Ticketus' proposed involvement but let's see how it could work. I would imagine the first discussion will have been that Ticketus just want their money back. It is hugely unrealistic of them to expect to recoup the profit element of the deal so that should immediately bring the amount of ticket worth due to them down to the £24 million mark. The next step for Murray should have been to change the term of that ticket distribution from three years to as many as ten. Ticketus are not in a strong position here - they will be happy to just get their money back. This would mean as little as £2 million a year in ticket sales being due to them - a much more manageable amount. It is also possible an even longer term has been negotiated.

Crucially, this solution also allows us to continue to have a facility with Ticketus. While the club is seeking banking facilities it will be possible to use Ticketus to plug gaps in cash flow in much the same way as has been done in past seasons. This has a double benefit. It sweetens the deal for Ticketus because they will make some profit out of these additional arrangements and it helps the club until alternative facilities can be agreed.

Paul Murray may not be successful in his bid for Rangers but if he is I can fully understand his wish to involve Ticketus. As I have stated before it is essential that Murray makes it clear that he has been able to secure these type of concessions from them to make their involvement not only palatable but also desirable. Muray strikes me as a bright guy and I do believe he has Rangers best interests at heart. If he is transparent and explains himself then I think he will secure the backing of Rangers fans and hopefully we can rest somewhat easier in the knowledge that the club will be in the hands of someone who, although not mega-rich, will run it properly and with due care and attention