Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[captain kirk]

Funny how rangers fans were still backing whyte 8months into the job ..even though they now claim otherwise....and even when spiers was calling him a fraud he was laughed at as anti rangers whilst the orcs backed their hero.....

http://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php/topic/160203-vb-and-craig-whyte-interview/?hl=%20craig%20%20whyte

[flyingrodent]

All these cries of "we support a full investigation" while at the same time rushing to lay all the shenanigans at the door of one man tells you exactly what kind of "full investigation" is supported IMO.

After all, it's not like many Teds supported the previous investigations - the legal ones or the journalistic ones - until it became clear that Rangers would get off on a substantial chunk of the charges against them.

Quite the opposite, in fact - they were kangaroo courts, remember? All attempts to damage the club and why, oh why, weren't football fans angry about Vodafone's tax dodgery?

I'll wait and see whether Hector's appeal goes against them, and then we'll find out how deeply committed to transparency they are. My guess is that the principles end where the defeats begin, in justice as well as in sporting terms.

[Ken Fitlike]

Bennet used to be a good poster?

true.

it would be interesting to trawl back and pinpoint the moment where he just gave up debate (realised it was a lost cause) and decided to become a street corner ned sniping snide abuse and generally flicking bogies at passers-by.

Nowadays if you post up some statement like 'The Allies won the second world war' he will have a sarky 'can you provide a link to back that up'

[Ken Fitlike]

Never mind getting rid of players, they were still trying to sign players while in administration FFS!

Mass redundancies would have been completely unacceptable to the rump of the Bears as it would have spoiled the illusion of supremacy in a heartbeat.

and that is the root cause of the whole episode, going back to the mid-nineties at least.

[No8.]

and that is the root cause of the whole episode, going back to the mid-nineties at least.

Aye. The 1890s

[wunfellaff]

Aye. The 1890s

Try two hundred years afore.....

[Jacksgranda]

Whyte was very much in charge (owned about 90% of the shares) and kept things very close to his chest.

And what has this got to do with other directors not doing their jobs?

It has a helluva lot to do with them not being able to do their jobs. That's why folk like Greig resigned.

If they had done their jobs properly they would not have needed to resign.

They weren't allowed to do their jobs properly.

That would be my take on it, too.

Edit: I'm just catching up here, some of my comments may be superceded by subsequent posts, there seems to have been a lot of activity last night.

Edited June 11, 2013 by Jacksgranda

[Bad Day]

Pretentious, moi?

What did you wish to imply then, when pointing out to an Aberdeen fan, the self-evident fact that the club he follows isn't Celtic and never will be?

That aberdeen aren't our rivals no matter how hard they try. It's a sad truth for them.

[No8.]

Try two hundred years afore.....

Bigot

I cant believe i missed that one...too early in the morning

[Jacksgranda]

That aberdeen aren't our rivals no matter how hard they try. It's a sad truth for them.

Devastating rather than sad, IMO

[youngsy]

He didnt waste as much money as Smith when he spent your club to death and now sally is doing the same.

Only one person is responsible for the liquidation of the PLC, Craig Whyte. He illegally withheld PAYE and NI payments, not Smith or anyone else. Try and understand that instead of allowing your undoubted bitterness toward Rangers cloud your judgement.

[weirdcal]

Only one person is responsible for the liquidation of the PLC, Craig Whyte. He illegally withheld PAYE and NI payments, not Smith or anyone else. Try and understand that instead of allowing your undoubted bitterness toward Rangers cloud your judgement.

i think what he was trying to say is it was all connected. CW didnt pay PAYE and NI as he was using the money to keep the company going.

this in turn could be linked to the lack of income due to going out of europe early, coupled with the selling off of season ticket income to service the debt previously run up putting rangers there.

this was the culmination of years of vastly overspending your income, which can be traced back to one statement alone.

'for every fiver celtic spend, we will spend ten'

sir david murray started this, craig Whyte ended it. and as an outsider i would point the finger mainly at murray who screwed the club and left it to a shyster who thought he could (and possibly still can) make a fast buck being the bad guy

[No8.]

Rangers didnt have massive debts before whyte. That is a media myth...Rangers were something like 18 million in debt to the bank which they were paying back while still remaining successful on the park.

[captain kirk]

Rangers didnt have massive debts before whyte. That is a media myth...Rangers were something like 18 million in debt to the bank which they were paying back while still remaining successful on the park.

Thats why no one would touch it eh? Except whyte.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

Rangers didnt have massive debts before whyte. That is a media myth...Rangers were something like 18 million in debt to the bank which they were paying back while still remaining successful on the park.

On the contrary, the £18million 'bank' debt was only a fraction of Ranger's total debts but was the figure banded about the press in order to sugar coat a perilous financial situation. Check the last accounts before Whyte took over, it is all in there.

ETA: http://www.isdx.com/infostore/Company-Accounts/RangersFootball/rangers2010.pdf p.28 Total Liabilities £65million

Edited June 11, 2013 by Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo

[youngsy]

Thats why no one would touch it eh? Except whyte.

The reason why no one would buy it outright was down to the EBT case. At the time of Whyte taking over we had a bank debt of £18 millon which was being well maintained and was coming down year on year. Within a 9 month period Whyte had increased the debt to £56 million, not including operating costs or the EBT case.

[Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo]

The reason why no one would buy it outright was down to the EBT case. At the time of Whyte taking over we had a bank debt of £18 millon which was being well maintained and was coming down year on year. Within a 9 month period Whyte had increased the debt to £56 million, not including operating costs or the EBT ca

This was debunked ages ago. See my previous edit. When Whyte took over BANK debt was £18million. This figure reduced to £0 while Craig Whyte was there, as he securitised Season Tickets instead. The £56 million figure you refer to is directly comparable with the £65million from the accounts I have linked. So therefore it looks as though he reduced debt in the period after he took over.

One thing he definitely did not do was increase debt from £18 million to £56 million. And since I have explained this before in reply to you (I have very few rep points so the post in question was very easy to track down (#111314)) I have to assume it is deliberate misrepresentation of the facts on your part.

[youngsy]

This was debunked ages ago. See my previous edit. When Whyte took over BANK debt was £18million. This figure reduced to £0 while Craig Whyte was there, as he securitised Season Tickets instead. The £56 million figure you refer to is directly comparable with the £65million from the accounts I have linked. So therefore it looks as though he reduced debt in the period after he took over.

One thing he definitely did not do was increase debt from £18 million to £56 million. And since I have explained this before in reply to you (I have very few rep points so the post in question was very easy to track down (#111314)) I have to assume it is deliberate misrepresentation of the facts on your part.

He increased the debt to £56 million with the Ticketus deal and by withholding the P.A.Y.E and N.I. Or are we not counting that £27 milllion to Ticketus and £21 million or so to HMRC? Edit too add, he may have paid the £18 million from the Ticketus deal but that still impinged on the overall debt by another £9 million.

Edited June 11, 2013 by youngsy

[Fotbawmad]

The reason why no one would buy it outright was down to the EBT case. At the time of Whyte taking over we had a bank debt of £18 millon which was being well maintained and was coming down year on year. Within a 9 month period Whyte had increased the debt to £56 million, not including operating costs or the EBT case.

They were numerous people who came to buy the club outright from Minty, but only if he personally took on the tax liabilities if the BTC went against Rangers, which he refused to do. That shows how much of a snake he really was, and how little love for the club he really had actually had.

[youngsy]

They were numerous people who came to buy the club outright from Minty, but only if he personally took on the tax liabilities if the BTC went against Rangers, which he refused to do. That shows how much of a snake he really was, and how little love for the club he really had actually had.

By purchasing the club outright i was adhering to taking on all debt and liability, including the EBT case. I'm well aware that there was interest in taking over the club without the EBT liability and tbh you can't blame anyone for stipulating about the EBT case. We also realise that Murray had no intention of paying any liability, after all he was another who never put any of his money into his original purchase.