Gaz FFC Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 http://newsmanc.co.uk/2012/02/15/news-council-plan-sponsored-city-trash-for-glasgow-rangers/ LOL Can't get smilies on my phone (boo) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SodjesSixteenIncher Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Hilarious but unsurprising news. The only twist that could make this funnier would be if Lloyds hadn't received all of their money. Think I would involuntarily empty my tank if that happened. RangersMedia still banging on about minty. MissingThePointChosenFewRSC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 (edited) Hilarious but unsurprising news. The only twist that could make this funnier would be if Lloyds hadn't received all of their money. Think I would involuntarily empty my tank if that happened. I'm hoping David Murray has to accept 10% of his £1 asking price. I could die happy there and then. Edited February 21, 2012 by Gaz FFC 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
THE KING Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Can anyone confirm if he's even paid that £1 for the club yet? Yes he got an advance from the bank after he sold them them a share in profits from the ibrox salad bar 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SandyCromarty Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 In many respects its only confirming what everyone already suspected. Ultimately the money paid-off the bank debt, which we keep being told had to be shifted. The fact it did so through the circuitus route of Whyte is only relevant if he's creamed-off the £6.4M extra, though it may have gone into running costs alongside (we assume) the £9M in unpaid taxes, which is possible as wasn't ~£6M "added" last year when they couldn't meet the first repayment? Rangers might as easily have 'mortgaged' their own STs themselves to pay their own debt themselves. It seems incredibly unlikely Ticketus are idiots, though. They must've: [1] known what Whyte was doing when they lent him it pre-takeover [2] surely have some form of security to prevent them losing the lot Questions are: [1] where's the remaining 'cash' [2] what's Whyte's big plan here [3] what's Ticketus's "safety-net" This is only front page, there's still the £59 million debt to the revenue that was in place before he took over the club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgf Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 This is only front page, there's still the £59 million debt to the revenue that was in place before he took over the club. No there wasn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 In Japan there has been a huge financial scandal over Olympus. the company admitted that the company's accounting practice was "inappropriate" and that money had been used to cover losses on investments dating to the 1990s Similarities? Interesting to know one of the execs was found hanging from a tree yesterday with a note saying 'i'm sorry''. I just cant see Craigy boy having the same sense of guilt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killieshire Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 In Japan there has been a huge financial scandal over Olympus. Similarities? Interesting to know one of the execs was found hanging from a tree yesterday with a note saying 'i'm sorry''. I just cant see Craigy boy having the same sense of guilt. I believe he has a pre-contract agreement with Ticketus that if this ever happened that it would be Broxi Bear who got strung up with a sign saying 'I'm not sorry at all as I love money, Craigy', with a great big smiley face drawn on it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 21, 2012 Author Share Posted February 21, 2012 Isn't today the day we see the first concrete action from the administrators, as they announce redundancies? Prediction - Staff members shafted, but on the playing side, of their 67 strong squad, kids and fringe players will be massively culled, while the £20k + per week diddies who breeze into Murray Park in their Land Rover Sports are left well out of it. In fact, if the administrators, in conjunction with Fat Sally, actually announce that as much as ONE 'genuine first teamer' is being let go - I'll keel over in shock. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Isn't today the day we see the first concrete action from the administrators, as they announce redundancies? Prediction - Staff members shafted, but on the playing side, of their 67 strong squad, kids and fringe players will be massively culled, while the £20k + per week diddies who breeze into Murray Park in their Land Rover Sports are left well out of it. In fact, if the administrators, in conjunction with Fat Sally, actually announce that as much as ONE 'genuine first teamer' is being let go - I'll keel over in shock. Why would they release first teamers? They will hold on to them until the transfer window and sell them...the way they are playing though they might not get very much right enough. The only 1 i see who it would make sense to release is Papac as he is going in the summer and we have adequate cover for that position 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Isn't today the day we see the first concrete action from the administrators, as they announce redundancies? Prediction - Staff members shafted, but on the playing side, of their 67 strong squad, kids and fringe players will be massively culled, while the £20k + per week diddies who breeze into Murray Park in their Land Rover Sports are left well out of it. In fact, if the administrators, in conjunction with Fat Sally, actually announce that as much as ONE 'genuine first teamer' is being let go - I'll keel over in shock. How many Rangers players are on twenty grand a week? They offered Cousin 7500 a week, and then reduced it to 5000. Of course the ordinary staff are the ones going to suffer, but they are the ones who aren't protected by contracts and agents. As Rangers can't sell anyone, there may be very few changes to the first team, although perhaps those with higher win bonuses may play less - not that's much of an issue on current form. Come the summer though, everyone's for sale. Steven Whittaker to Trabsonspor for 400k may be inevitable now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 21, 2012 Author Share Posted February 21, 2012 (edited) Why would they release first teamers? They will hold on to them until the transfer window and sell them...the way they are playing though they might not get very much right enough. The only 1 i see who it would make sense to release is Papac as he is going in the summer and we have adequate cover for that position Why would they release first teamers? The league is gone, they're out of both cups, and if Fat Sally is making the decisions, I thought this might be the time for him to use administration to cut loose a couple of 20k+ per week diddies, as surely the root of Rangers problems is that they are rooked, skint, somewhat short of shekels... Obviously the likes of McGregor and Whittaker have serious value in the summer - but what about some of Rangers genuine first teamers who are on the wrong side of thirty now? Why on earth would a club who, at the very best, will need to re-build for the future, hold onto these guys with nothing left to play for? If Rangers have genuinely promising kids at Murray Park - they'll need them soon. Makes more sense to cut some of the deadwood and look to the future? When I refer to '20k + per week guys' I really should just say 'higher earners' - so apologies for that. Edited February 21, 2012 by pozbaird 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flood Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 I am sure that Mr Whyte indicated that the club was losing £10m a year. I have no reason to dispute this as he seems an honourable and honest man.... Surely then, the administrators then have to cut costs by about £200k a week. The players must be cut as there wont be many admin staff on more than say £300-400 a week? They wont take much out of the losses. Unless its all a sham administration.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 The Daily Mail must have its story wrong. I'm sure that when the Ticketus deal became public Craig Whyte said that the cash would be used to develop the team and that none of it had been used for the purposes of debt reduction. Surely a writ will be issued in the next few days and the Mail can join the BBC in the dock.They'd be off the visitor list at Ibrox if Whyte were still around the place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Thanks to folk for answering my earlier question about Ticketus being done, which should show that I don't really understand these things. So is the following a possible sequence of events that could have happened or is there no chance? Whyte goes to Ticketus for the £24million. Ticketus agree and give it to Wavetower/Rangers Group Ltd - backing up Alastair Johnston's claim the money went into some other account On buying Rangers FC Ltd (or whatever) Whyte payes Lloyds £18million to from Rangers Group Ltd to clear the debt Rangers FC Ltd now owe Rangers Group Ltd £18million. The remaining £6million is resting in Group Ltd's account Father Ted style or is used for running costs, taking Rangers FC Ltd's loan up to £24million Whyte/Rangers Group Ltd is secured creditor and Ticketus aren't affected because their beef is with Group Ltd not FC Ltd. As I said, possible or not? And if not, where have I gone wrong? Seems I wasn't that far wrong after all! I've now decided Whyte is a genius. He's managed to get Rangers owing him at least £18million despite the fact it wasn't really his money in the first place! He seems to me like folk who pretend to be lottery winners and garages and the like are only too happy to let them have cars because they think the cash is coming. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingscot Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Why would they release first teamers? They will hold on to them until the transfer window and sell them...the way they are playing though they might not get very much right enough. The only 1 i see who it would make sense to release is Papac as he is going in the summer and we have adequate cover for that position I'd agree if anyone is up for being released by administrators it will players like Papac- high earners that are out of contract in June so they have no sell on value. What is the point of keeping them on in business terms. Lafferty too I'd guess. I think they may well cut a lot of youth coaches and youth squads. Rangers will have more than a few teams and they'll sacrifice some for others. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L. Brilliant Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Any truth in the rumour that Rangers are due Burnley £500k if Lafferty plays 100 games (he's on 98)? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 Why would they release first teamers? They will hold on to them until the transfer window and sell them...the way they are playing though they might not get very much right enough. The only 1 i see who it would make sense to release is Papac as he is going in the summer and we have adequate cover for that position er, because you have no money? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 How many Rangers players are on twenty grand a week? They offered Cousin 7500 a week, and then reduced it to 5000. Of course the ordinary staff are the ones going to suffer, but they are the ones who aren't protected by contracts and agents. As Rangers can't sell anyone, there may be very few changes to the first team, although perhaps those with higher win bonuses may play less - not that's much of an issue on current form. Come the summer though, everyone's for sale. Steven Whittaker to Trabsonspor for 400k may be inevitable now. I very much doubt any are on 20k / week. When they tried to re-sign Miller last season before his ill-fated move to Turkey, the offer on the table was 18k / week. Think that's the maximum Rangers could afford (last) season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 First teamers with no resale value should certainly be getting released. 0 Quote Link to comment 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.