mozam76

This is the case in England I'm sure, but not here. I'd imagine Thompson at Dundee Utd, and I daresay Hearts as well, could have something to say if they don't get the money due them but Dunfermline do. The more that happens (or doesn't, as the case is here), the more I think that this is an administration in name only.

From Raman on twitter - Fraser Wishart: 'players voted to accept significant salary deferrals..administrators indicated... highly unlikely they'd accept proposal'

This is it I suppose - when do they start running at a loss? Are they ok paying 20 players and 5 staff, but as soon as there are more than that, they're running at a loss? Or is it much much worse? If things are as bad as are being made out, it would appear that they're running at a loss as soon as they switch the fucking lights on in the morning and put the kettle on!

Saw that interview with Popcorn Mooth earlier, he was very p***kly when asked if he had any feelings toward the club, bad or otherwise. Just noticed on the BBC's Chris McLaughlins twitter - "Various options discussed betwene players and administrators at Rangers. 11 players go and 50% wage cut deferred until end of season" "Running costs until end of season £10m. Shortfall is around £4.5m. McCoist fighting hard to save jobs". Also saying " 8 players go with 50% cut across the board now or NO redundancies and 75% wage cut. Situation fluid and a mixture likely."

Also, if anyone wants to listen to Keith Jackson on Talksport this morning, here you go. Keys & Gray & Jackson

Whilst the devastating news sinks in that any announcement is now likely to be made tomorrow (double edged sword right enough, as one of the tweets saying this was from the delectable Debi Edward), I wonder if anybody has read this blog piece from the BBC's Matt Slater? He wrote a few fantastic pieces on Portsmouth during their first admin, and he's raised a few very good points on Rangers predicament. It's also, unusually, generated a few decent comments instead of the usual arrant nonsense from the blue hoardes. Matt Slater blog

Been thinking about all the other famous "March's". There's been The Wedding March, Middlemarch, March of the Valkyries, even March of the Swivelheads. I'm sure there are more. Well Duff & Phelps could just be about to make this March, March 2012, be the best of the fucking lot. Starting tomorrow. Do it lads. You know it makes sense.

Loving the "tags" at the bottom of that review - amongst my favourites are "bigot", "racism", "skint" and "moonbeam". :lol: Just as a wee side note - I said TAGS..........................................!

You may very well have done - on Sportsound last night Chick Young took a break from playing with himself over the Brian Kennedy story, to say that he had spoken to Rangers players, who said that of the 22 players who'd had "a meeting", SEVEN of them voted AGAINST deferring their wages. He did raise a valid point in that Rangers have players away on International duty, guys such as McGregor and Edu - if players are going to be punted tomorrow (Thurs), it may be once all players are there, so nothing today (Wed). Something else I've been wondering, and it may be posted elsewhere on this most glorious of threads - how much, roughly, are administrators fees? That's them been in two weeks now, working god knows what hours, and there will be more than two of them there I'd imagine; surely their bill is going to be a whopper?

Traynor is another one who hasn't really got a clue what he's talking about. If he was being honest, he'd just come out and say "look, I have no idea what's going on, so will just admit here and now that anything could happen". But no, he makes crazy statements. On one of his performances on Newsnight during the first week of admin, he said "Rangers, if they get a CVA, will pay about 20-25% in the pound" - and he said it with a fair degree of authority. If he's being honest, he's about as qualified to talk about Rangers financial affairs as I am - and couple that with the fact that he writes for the Record, then I wouldn't believe him if he said it was raining outside.

Aye. Erm............ well! Aye! In my defence, when she ordered it online I did think it was a bit dodgy, but she went ahead onyway. Hmmmm. *cough* Tonight's been a bit of an eye opener in a couple of ways. I've got a 7 year old boy (Ronan) from a previous relationship, who stays with my wife and I half the week. Tonight is the first time since he was small that we've had a baby staying over - and he has been absolutely terrific. He helped bath her earlier on, and was more than happy to help get her nighttime bottle ready etc. He's a really good helpful wee guy normally anyway, helps us keep the house tidy etc, but to see him do it with another wee one in the house - tugged at our heart strings a wee bit! He says he would love a wee brother, I'm not sure how much longer me and the wife will be able to hold out!

We've got my wee niece staying over tonight - she's 15 months and her mum had said to my missus "she'll sit quite happy watching anything on the telly, but she goes DAFT when Curious George is on - she shouts and shakes her head, so we turn it off". An hour after she's been dropped off, Curious George came on - and she sat utterly transfixed through the whole show, and when it finished she turned and looked at us as if to say "why has it finished? " Regards merchandise SD - my wife had the same problem at Christmas, one of our other nieces is daft for Rihanna, and she couldn't find anything for her - she ended up using a tshirt printing website who basically take any image you like and print it on a tshirt - needless to say, this wee cheap white Tsirt that cost sweeties with a photo of Rihanna on it is the wee scones favourite item of clothing! Would genuinely wear it all day is she could.

Billy Dodds in particular has been spouting absolute drivel since last Monday. His match summarising in general are usually murder, but since last Mondays Shit/Fan interface he's had to give his views on off field matters more often, and he's been totally found out as a blue nosed wee twat. Last Friday I think it was, on Sportsound, it sounded like he was ready to blow a gasket and offer Tam Cowan outside - Dodds said that the Rangers support would be galvanised, and that on Saturday they would be out in support of the team and they'd get terrific backing in their hour of need etc, - Cowan said "where were they last weekend then? Was that no' an hour of need, against Dundee Utd in the cup?". Dodds was giving it "why bring that up, What's the point in bringing that up? That's just ridiculous etc". Wee rat.

And for that we should be truly thankful.........! He's a bit of a golf fiend too by the looks of it. I'm @mozam76 for anyone who's interested.

Did SP not come out pretty early last week (Tuesday PM? Can't quite remember) demanding assurances they would be paid for the Killie game? It struck me then that they would be demanding cash ASAP after the game, if not up front. In fact, the way they made that demand public so soon after admin being announced, it made me think that they've maybe had problems getting their money over the last few months.

David Grier. Paul Clark (the bald fella today), said to Keith Jackson that there was nothing unusual in that at all.

Don't get me wrong, at no point today did I think they were going to come out and say "x amount of players will have to be punted", and sound like the Labour guy who left the note saying "Sorry, the money's gone" - but those two guys, Clark in particular, sounded as if Whyte had been prepping them on this from the outset. How in the name of the wee man, can they POSSIBLY come out and say that liquidation seems wholly unlikely, when they haven't even sorted out where the PAYE money went, who actually got the Ticketus money, where the money from Jelavic has went..........................................

So they "believe" the Ticketus debt is £24m, they "believe" that half of the Jelavic money is somewhere in the club, they don't really know who owns Murray Park or Ibrox, but they are "wholly confident" that Rangers will survive and that liquidation will not be an outcome? f**k me, they'd have been better with Del Boy and Rodney up there,

This guy Clark is as slippery as Craig Whyte, IMO. I doubt I'll get much more from this.

Reading a wee bit about what Celtic have seemingly said (regarding not needing Rangers), and the financial figures they've posted. Given what is going on there, by all accounts being financially prudent with their projections etc, and when you compare that to the absolute clusterfuck of affairs at Ibrox - then how can anyone come out and say that Celtic are wrong? I know all the nonsense about reduced TV deal, reduced crowds etc etc - but I'll tell you what, if that was to happen, I'd rather have the Celtic boards way of dealing with it (or indeed Motherwell, or St Johnstone) than whats been happening at Ibrox.

Delayed by 15 minutes, and it's only one hack per media organisation apparently.

Sky Sports news reporting that Craig Whyte has assured players they will be paid this month, and that he hopes they will be out of admin by the end of next month. I daresay he and the administrators are having dialogue etc, so this may sound like pedantry, but should those kind of statements not be made now by the administrator? I was under the impression that it's now the administrator was running the club, no-one else?

Dodgy mates or no dodgy mates, are they actually allowed to do be seen to be doing that? If they act in the interests of Craig Whyte first and foremost, would that not be because of his status as a secured creditor, rather than him being bedfellows with them? How does "secured creditor" staus get assumed? I only ask because it seems as though Ticketus will be due >>>£20m, HMRC are due >>> £9m - is the Ticketus debt alone not higher than what Craig Whyte is due?

I don't know if this has been cleared up earlier in the thread or not, so forgive me - but I've read a few posts today about football creditors being paid in full, that they get priority. Is a football creditor basically, a football club or a player? I've been reading that Burnley are due money on the Lafferty transfer if he plays 100 games (he's on 98 apparently), and the well documented cases of Dundee Utd and Dunfermline being due money for recently televised games. So should they be alright? I was also wondering - surely to f**k £9m wouldn't be their actually standard tax bill for 9 months?

It was, aye - TdF winners since WW2. They didn't really have much of a clue, they guessed Lance Armstrong and Miguel Indurain - couldn't remember Contadors name.