[Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!]

As it happens we almost had the highest average attendances in the league that season (just a shade less than Celtic's, who won the league while we were fifth) and in the previous two seasons we did have the highest average attendances (when we finished fourth and fifth).

Quite so, with average attendances of under 22,000 and under 21,000 (the two seasons before that were under 18,000 and under 17,000)

Those kinds of numbers could once again be coming to a stadium near you

if Rangers are not in the SPL, then these are exactly the kind of figures that we will be getting… And so will Celtic :-)

it is no coincidence that the dominance of Old Firm went to new levels when both clubs seated their stadia and therefore the only way to guarantee your ticket for the Bigot Derby was to buy a season ticket. Take that away, and attendances (and therefore finances) for both will plummet.

They will obviously still have a lot more cash than anyone else, but it will not be anything like the Gap that it has been for the last 25 years.

[Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!]

Didn't Strong and co become creditors along with everyone else when released? Forced to accept 2p in the pound?

I'm pretty sure that's correct.

And not inconsistent with the position that the company is 'responsible' - really ironic choice of word when you consider what happened then and what is happening now.

[Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!]

Issue is that if you make redundant anyone while in administation you are still liable for the redundancy costs, or the payout on the rest of the contract if it is a fixed term like a Player (so only saving on just keeping for the rest of the season would be a bit of NI and Tax as you can make a lump sum payment ex of Tax as a payoff.......However if you are in Liquidation that Company does NOT have the Liability for the redundancy...The Government does!!

Are you sure?

I thought the main reason Well went in to administration was to do exactly that?

[Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!]

Why didn't Celtic make a statement about almost every journalist who has said the same thing as Salmond. Seems that Celtic are a bit paranoid and are falling over themselves to say 'we don't need Rangers, let them die for all we care'.

In fact most journalists have simply said 'Celtic would be worse off without Rangers' - many in direct response to Lawwell's comments on Monday.

Do Celtic really believe that? Do they hate the idea of Rangers winning the title ever again, that they would rather they ceased to exist rather than have a credible opponent to drive competition in the league?

If Rangers did die, Celtic would get bored sh1tless winning the league every February. Interest in their club would drop and they would end up staying just a bit better than Hearts, Motherwell, Dunde Utd etc. Assuming they couldn't get a move to England (which would be much more likely without Rangers, than it would with them) they'd end up playing in front of 20,000 or 30,000 fans, or less, within a decade.

Celtic have far more to lose than any other club if Rangers went tits up. In fact, it would actully be funny to watch.

If Rangers aren't in the SPL next year, that's the kind of crowds Celtic will get immediately.

[Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!]

If Craig Whyte is a secured creditor, surely that is only up to and including what the club actually owes him.

I was under the impression he'd not actually put that much of his own money in?