HibeeJibee Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Because the difference between the Gretna situation and Rangers situation in reality don't even begin to compare. I'm not suggesting Gretna and Rangers are identical situations. They are, however, similar - in terms of the consequences for the SPL and other clubs through them failing early. Aside from expunging results and therefore moving goalposts, other clubs will miss-out on income from hosting Rangers, or going a home game short. Some may only get 17 home games, breaking their ST obligations. If the advancement of money they are going to be due in May, less whatever other clubs have in outstanding debts, gets them to the split or to May 13th... that'd be reasonable, IMO. (Also - Gretna were due to repay £££ as SPL gave them more than just 12th's prizemoney). Edited February 28, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin M Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 And Falkirk FC - Scottish Cup Winners 2009... And we'll take a wee League Cup 2010, thank you 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I'm at work on the old dog and bone, does anyone know when the administrators are doing their big brother evictions? I have the joy of working with a Rangers "fan" he doesn't seem to be able to grasp how serious the risk is to Rangers, bless. I told him yesterday that his beloved team had been fined £50k for refusing to tell the stock exchange that Whyte had been banned for 7 years previously from being a director, he repeated this to me this morning as he read his paper, he may be losing it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 You really couldn't make any of this up. It seems to me that Ticketus either made a truly insane decision in giving Whyte this money even prior to his purchase of the club, or that, as I've previously suspected, there was a lot more to this deal with Whyte being a patsy. Based on this story, assuming the adminstrators aren't simply making a desperate and probably futile throw of the dice attempt to claw back some funds, then the former scenario applies. This is very difficult to get your head round, and actually now looks as though it is Ticketus that was the patsy, and either Whyte or the puppet-master had this outcome in mind all along. FFS, talk about murky.... Ticketus will have Credit Default Insurance to mitigate any loss, but the interesting thing would be if Whyte was telling the truth when he said he was personally liable for the debt. Has he been living it up in Castle Grant and Monaco without a pot to piss in, at the same time as bankrupting Rangers? That would be funny as fcuk! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Craig Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 And we'll take a wee League Cup 2010, thank you We'll have the 2005 League Cup then thank you very much. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drooper Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) Ticketus will have Credit Default Insurance to mitigate any loss My reading of the Retard story might suggest that this wouldn't be paid out as the very integrity of the deal is being brought into question (in much the same way that my car insurance wouldn't be paying out for an accident if I had omitted to put it through an MOT). Edited February 28, 2012 by Drooper 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 My reading of the Retard story might suggest that this wouldn't be paid out as the very integrity of the deal is being brought into question (in much the same way that my car insurance wouldn't be paying out for an accident if I had omitted to put it through an MOT). It did seem weird that they would hand over the £24 million a month before he even had the keys to Ibrox. Either he's a hugely convincing conman or there's some brown envelopes stuffed with cash been passed around. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 It did seem weird that they would hand over the £24 million a month before he even had the keys to Ibrox. Either he's a hugely convincing conman or there's some brown envelopes stuffed with cash been passed around. I assumed the exchange would've been in someway 'conditional', i.e. if he didn't takeover Rangers, he had to return it (and had it secured against one of his companies in the interim). Perhaps not!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted February 28, 2012 Author Share Posted February 28, 2012 Jim Traynor is involved, and the story appears to be full of 'it is our understanding', 'it might be the case', and 'if proof can be found'... Fuxxake. To sum up what we actually know as fact in the first fortnight of this... 1. Rangers went into administraton. 2. Duff & Phelps appointed administrators. 3. Whyte admits Lloyds got their 18mil out of the Ticketus deal money. 4. Matt McKay sold to a Korean club. 5. Russell and Smith leave Ibrox. 6. Cousin deal officially off. I don't think I've missed any post-administraton related event of undisputable fact. Again, fuxxake... Not a lot, if we take tittle-tattle and gossip out of it. Fingers crossed that if Rangers die, that bawbag Traynor goes with them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Will the other clubs be big and brave enough to turn this situation to their benefit? Here is a once in a life-time opportunity to renegotiate some of the deals around SPL cash allocations and voting rights. Rangers will survive this in oneform or naother, but maybe with some help required. The others should use that as a negotiating position to extract changes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Oh and by the way, we'll have the 1949 Scottish Cup too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meatwad Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 If Rangers are going to begin these "legal proceedings" how the f**k can they afford the legal fees. The mind boggles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 If Rangers are going to begin these "legal proceedings" how the f**k can they afford the legal fees. The mind boggles. Legal Aid 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Will the other clubs be big and brave enough to turn this situation to their benefit? Here is a once in a life-time opportunity to renegotiate some of the deals around SPL cash allocations and voting rights. Rangers will survive this in oneform or naother, but maybe with some help required. The others should use that as a negotiating position to extract changes. It could be a great opportunity to smooth out the cash allocation, which is pretty fair overall until you get to the gulf between 2nd + 3rd. It won't make much difference, in terms of weaking Celtic (notably) and strengthening the rest, but it's more the principle. Be careful what you wish for with voting rights, though. It it was say 8-4, we'd probably have a 10-team SPL starting next season. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimH Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Ticketus might be getting shafted How can they attempt to get money out of an account that they do not have access to (i.e. it's not an account that has anything to do with Rangers FC) to get funds that are there because of a deal they say was flawed and therefore does not stand up. If the deal shouldn't have gone ahead, then the money is not theirs! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Be careful what you wish for with voting rights, though. It it was say 8-4, we'd probably have a 10-team SPL starting next season. Good point, and it was the non OF chairmen who forced through the Setanta deal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 How can they attempt to get money out of an account that they do not have access to (i.e. it's not an account that has anything to do with Rangers FC) to get funds that are there because of a deal they say was flawed and therefore does not stand up. If the deal shouldn't have gone ahead, then the money is not theirs! Exactly, they can't have it both ways. I think Duff and Phelps are trying anything to make sure there's money to pay their fees.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozam76 Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 (edited) 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. Edited February 28, 2012 by Did someone say I scream? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensburgh Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 Oh and by the way, we'll have the 1949 Scottish Cup too. Do all these claims mean we get to celebrate the 20th anniversary of our 2nd Scottish Cup win in 1992? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambomo Posted February 28, 2012 Share Posted February 28, 2012 I wish they would just hurry up and go now! 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.