gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 fine, we owe them a percentage of season ticket sales in the coming seasons, so far we havent had a new season for them to get their moneyits like saying that rapid are creditors because we will owe them money in the summertrade creditors is probably the term. one of the accountants will know. what I do know is that all season book holders are creditors and these guys have 100 odd k of them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 fine, we owe them a percentage of season ticket sales in the coming seasons, so far we havent had a new season for them to get their moneyits like saying that rapid are creditors because we will owe them money in the summerrapid are too Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shotasboots 12 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 As seems to be the norm, our support mouth their opinions before knowing the facts.Our support is full of "the big I am's" as well for some reason. we'll never have a supporters rum club due to those people. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colonel Mustard 380 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 seems clear to me that if the administrators were telling prospective buyers that ticketus weren't an issue that this wouldn't be happening. I think we can forget the idea ticketus aren't owed by rangers.Ticketus said they don't lend money, they buy tickets.Craig Whyte didn't actually have access to any tickets when Ticketus paid him money.Craig Whyte says he was entitled to use £18m of the Ticketus money to pay Lloyds (which he promised to do with his own money), because he personally made guarantees to Ticketus (which presumably made the money his).There would appear to at least be quite a bit of ambiguity about how much involvement Rangers had in this deal. It appears to have been a Whyte/Ticketus arrangement made before he could speak for Rangers. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Ticketus said they don't lend money, they buy tickets.Craig Whyte didn't actually have access to any tickets when Ticketus paid him money.Craig Whyte says he was entitled to use £18m of the Ticketus money to pay Lloyds (which he promised to do with his own money), because he personally made guarantees to Ticketus (which presumably made the money his).There would appear to at least be quite a bit of ambiguity about how much involvement Rangers had in this deal. It appears to have been a Whyte/Ticketus arrangement made before he could speak for Rangers.enough for years in court while we remain in admin yes. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jig 14 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 No, no interest in them whatsoever. No money, no investment, fans in-fighting, back in debt to a bank and the return of David Murrays personal chef as CEO. No thanks! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 No, no interest in them whatsoever. No money, no investment, fans in-fighting, back in debt to a bank and the return of David Murrays personal chef as CEO. No thanks!hi flecky. chef indeed. oh and bains not coming back under p Murray. I did miss you flecky I was wrong <3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
legalbeagle 3,734 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I a very concerned that it seems to be a relatively unknown quantity, fronted by a substantial ego (not necessarily a bad thing) with no huge personal wealth. Our concern is both saving the club, and then having the funds in place to actually put as back to where we want to be.The Blue Knights seem to be using our debt to ticketus to fund their bid,followed by fans investment to rebuild, but what are THEY actually offering.I am also fully prepared to be open when the plans are made clearer, but it does some a little convoluted at the moment. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smile 26,600 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 No, no interest in them whatsoever. No money, no investment, fans in-fighting, back in debt to a bank and the return of David Murrays personal chef as CEO. No thanks!Agree with this whether your swsl/flecky or not.We need a fresh start from top to bottom. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jig 14 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Agree with this whether your swsl/flecky or not.We need a fresh start from top to bottom.I am neither and indeed we do Smile. Fresh start all round needed. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jig 14 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 hi flecky. chef indeed. oh and bains not coming back under p Murray. I did miss you flecky I was wrong <3Hopefully Paul Murray is not coming back either. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaiserJon 12,392 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Who exactly are the Blue Knights? We know of Paul Murray - the 'front man' - the RST and the RSA's, and we now know that Ticketus has (rather mysteriously) appeared as a member of the consortium. But who else is a member? Who are the 'money men' and, more importantly perhaps, what are they worth?.I, for one, am not putting any money into any bid or campaign until I am entirely satisfied that the money is in COMPETENT hands WITHIN A VIABLE PLAN.I've heard nothing from the Blue Knights that persaudes me that they are the consortium I should back. However, I'm eager to hear from them and - as I've repeatedly said - I'll keep my powder dry until they reveal their detailed plans and their financial resources.The introduction of Ticketus does not inspire confidence!I would also like all the other six bids to be looked at as well and full plans to be laid out before we are steamrollered into this BK bid. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 505 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Impossible to be for or against the bid until we know more. Would be good to have the opportunity to ask questions of them and any other interested party. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 why not we owe them 27 million over 3 years. clearly someone told p Murray and saverangers that they are.At this moment in time we owe them precisely nothing. They are not creditors and are not seeking creditor status. If, and I know it's a big if, Whyte has indeed secured the deal against his own funds or that of companies he owns outwith Rangers, then it is Whyte alone who will have to cough up, if and when a new owner takes over and tells Ticketus they are not getting the tickets. And yes, it will probably involve us in some very lengthy and expensive court cases, but if we are indeed in the right on this, our bills should be met at the end of the process by the loser. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluepeter9 5,167 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I am going to use the VB defence this time. Don't know enough to comment one way or another! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pye1965 26 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 If Ticketus came in could they increase the ST price? Do Duff and Phelps have to accept the highest bid,or the best bid for the good of the club? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 If Ticketus came in could they increase the ST price? Do Duff and Phelps have to accept the highest bid,or the best bid for the good of the club?I believe we set the ticket price, but maybe someone with more knowledge of the Clubs inner workings can say different.The admins have to accept the best bid for the creditors. This does not mean they have to accept the highest bid, only the bid which will be most able to settle said debts going forward. The CVA, if we get it, will be a significant financial millstone for any new owner so they will need to prove to the admins that the funds, or a proper financial plan to gain those funds, is/are in place.This is not my opinion as I'm pretty much confused by it all, but the opinion of a trusted acquaintance who works for a company involved in administration work. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Impossible to be for or against the bid until we know more. Would be good to have the opportunity to ask questions of them and any other interested party.a voice of reason as ever frankie. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 At this moment in time we owe them precisely nothing. They are not creditors and are not seeking creditor status. If, and I know it's a big if, Whyte has indeed secured the deal against his own funds or that of companies he owns outwith Rangers, then it is Whyte alone who will have to cough up, if and when a new owner takes over and tells Ticketus they are not getting the tickets. And yes, it will probably involve us in some very lengthy and expensive court cases, but if we are indeed in the right on this, our bills should be met at the end of the process by the loser.they own season books and as such are creditors. they aren't seeking secured creditor status. because secured creditors dont vote on a cva. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosesMcNeil 1,664 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Whoever buys the club will, presumably, come to the support with a share issue to raise funds.Will handing said cash to Ticketus as an 'investment partner' prove to be for the betterment of our beloved club? I cannot accept their interest is in anyway philanthropic.Lot's of questions needing definitive answers - I'd much rather we have nothing to do with them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pye1965 26 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 I believe we set the ticket price, but maybe someone with more knowledge of the Clubs inner workings can say different.The admins have to accept the best bid for the creditors. This does not mean they have to accept the highest bid, only the bid which will be most able to settle said debts going forward. The CVA, if we get it, will be a significant financial millstone for any new owner so they will need to prove to the admins that the funds, or a proper financial plan to gain those funds, is/are in place.This is not my opinion as I'm pretty much confused by it all, but the opinion of a trusted acquaintance who works for a company involved in administration work. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Whoever buys the club will, presumably, come to the support with a share issue to raise funds.Will handing said cash to Ticketus as an 'investment partner' prove to be for the betterment of our beloved club? I cannot accept their interest is in anyway philanthropic.Lot's of questions needing definitive answers - I'd much rather we have nothing to do with them.the question is will any new owner have any choice about giving ticketus cash. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreckedroy 33 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 they own season books and as such are creditors. they aren't seeking secured creditor status. because secured creditors dont vote on a cva.Surprisingly, I will take the admins word before yours. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MosesMcNeil 1,664 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 the question is will any new owner have any choice about giving ticketus cash.If we must repay them, then a seemingly obvious solution to that issue would be to sell shares to supporters in the club for that portion relating to repayment of Ticketus.£24.4m of the club then held by supporters. Ticketus out of our club forever. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunslinger 270 Posted March 10, 2012 Share Posted March 10, 2012 Surprisingly, I will take the admins word before yours. can you show me where admins said the weren't creditors and weren't seeking to be creditors? 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.