Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!

[AberdeenBud]

Rangers Myths #672

Why did nobody warn us?

Remember when the BBC tried to warn you about the MBB?

Rangers fans hold demonstration outside BBC in Glasgow

STV 5 November 2011 15:00 GMT

Protest: The demonstration took place on Saturday afternoon.© STV

Around 200 of Rangers fans gathered outside the BBC in Glasgow on Saturday to demonstrate against what they claim is biased reporting of the club.

The protest, organised by the Vanguard Bears supporters' group, saw fans gather outside the corporation's head quarters at Pacific Quay and hand in a signed letter of complaint over alleged unfair coverage, including a documentary aired last month about owner Craig Whyte.

[AberdeenBud]

At the same time as Our Hero was receiving his rapturous applause this was published on the award winning rangerstaxcase blog;

The ever deceptive Craig Whyte

25/05/2011 578 COMMENTS

“Deceptive”: adjective Giving an appearance or impression different from the true one; misleading.

Whyte has released a statement on the official Rangers website dismissing the calls for “vigilance” from outgoing directors as just sour grapes from men replaced for resisting change. His statement includes the following:

“I believe most Rangers supporters understand that, as a result of the takeover, the Club’s debt to the Lloyds Banking Group has been cleared and I have repeatedly stated to the Board my intentions to invest in the team.”

This statement is nothing short of a clear attempt to mislead Rangers supporters. It is a craftily worded statement (Hay McKerron must be exhausted) that amounts to an attempt to deceive his paying customers. Craig Whyte does not say that Rangers FC’s debt has been reduced. He did not say this because he cannot say this. He cannot say this because it is not true. As this blog has stated several times, the debt that Rangers owed Lloyds banking Group was purchased by Whyte’s Wavetower company (as it was then named) in a transaction that did not involve Rangers. The purchase of MIH’s shares in Rangers FC by Whyte’s firm for a single pound was a separate transaction. So Rangers do not owe Lloyds this money any more, but they owe the same amount to someone else: Whyte’s company.

Prove me wrong, Mr. Whyte. Make a fool of me. Discredit this blog by revealing the structure of Rangers’ debt today. It is a plc and it does have 26,000 other shareholders who have a right to know the amount of indebtedness of the company they co-own with you.

The truth is that Rangers’ debt is about £28m (including negative working capital). The takeover did not change Rangers debt, but Whyte is trying to imply otherwise. Whyte is shaping up to make Sir David Murray look like a model of transparency and straight-talking.

Rangers supporters and journalists should note what Whyte did not mention. Whyte ignored the “circular” that he is alleged to have promised to the Independent Board Committee (a sub-committee of the old Rangers board that reviewed the takeover proposal). Alastair Johnston says that this was originally promised to be released on 16 May, but is now scheduled for 6 June. This “circular” is supposed to reveal the how Whyte plans to fund Rangers going forward (the £25m investment promised). Perhaps Whyte is just practicing ‘dignified silence’ on this subject? Perhaps this is simply a subject that he does not want to discuss publicly in advance of a result in the tax case?

[Bendarroch]

Which would've been my guess re chucky, yet the amount of buns that want him back is staggering .

I guess even if you fleece folk, as long as you give the right soundbites, a percentage will always want more.

Not me - I wanted Green gone long ago and I'm delighted he's gone now. I think he's an arse.

I have no idea if he's away permanently.

[Bendarroch]

we'll all get a good laugh at the excuses used to discount anyone and everyone who explains this to you.

Perhaps we should have listened more closely to the the IRA writer, the bungler and the runaway when they told us (again and again and again) that we owed HMRC £14bn, the SPL would deffo strip our titles and all the other stuff they have been bang on the money about.

The willingness of various diddies and plastics to pin hope (any fucking hope) on their streams of pish is something 'we'll all get a good laugh at'.

[wunfellaff]

It has lot a lot do with the competency and decency of a man whose blogs are used repeatedly on this thread to make points.

Ofcourse certain people on here won't face up to the other side of McConville which doesn't their purposes.

£9000 eh? A lot of money for a pensioner...

5 points....

1/ you can't "lose" what you never had.....

2/ it wasn't hers, it was her father in laws.....

3/ she was 80, she should've saved for the last 65 years...

4/ name "baxter".....hence outrage over fellow bun.

5/ damned sure more pensioners lost individually more when the assets were sold on the sly to give the illusion of continuance. Fancy squaring them up with a sale of assets ?

[flyingrodent]

Perhaps we should have listened more closely to the the IRA writer, the bungler and the runaway when they told us (again and again and again) that we owed HMRC £14bn, the SPL would deffo strip our titles and all the other stuff they have been bang on the money about.

The willingness of various diddies and plastics to pin hope (any fucking hope) on their streams of pish is something 'we'll all get a good laugh at'.

Maybes aye, maybes naw - they're bloggers, not infallible oracles of truth. You can place more faith in the Record's output, and that's saying something, and anyone who thought differently was proven wrong.

On the other hand, maybe you should have listened more closely to "the IRA writer, the bungler and the runaway", as well as much of the mainstream press, when they told you "again and again" that Sir Dave was a liar; that Craig Whyte was a crook; that Charles Green was a conman; that your club was mere months away from extinction; that you'd been running an extremely dodgy player remuneration scheme; that HMRC were intent on pushing all the way in their case against you, and on God knows how many other issues.

But it's irrelevant anyway, now. You were told and you didn't listen, and you're still inventing new and ever more feeble excuses not to listen every day. That's why the fate of your club is in the lap of the Gods or, more accurately, in the hands of a bunch of extremely dodgy businessmen with chequered pasts.

Hell mend you, mind. It's your club - if you want to blabber on about Phil Whose Surname Enrages Rangers Fans while your new club tanks, that's your concern. It wouldn't be mine, but I'm not you.

[Dindeleux]

Without reading the last 50 or so pages..................who is Paul McConville.

[youngsy]

I presume you will talk about David Murray in the same way. After all he was this paragon of virtue who would only hand Rangers over to someone who could be trusted with the club. When push came to shove he would have taken money from anyone as long as Lloyds were paid off and he could scarper. The Murray regime clearly created the opportunity for the real shysters like Whyte and Green to jump in.

The cloud under which all this happened of course was the big Tax case and the uncertainty about the EBTs. Time might tell us these were unfounded threats, but the fact that he allowed these to be problems lies totally at his door. Obviously HMRC did not trust him one bit. Partly as he had 'previous' with them.

So rather than harangue McConvillie who is merely a bit player in all of this, why not abuse those who are the really guilty ones?

Starting with David Murray and his board at the time.

I've given David Murray plenty of abuse in the past regarding the situation the club was heading under his tenure and not just in the last couple of years either so try again on that. Whyte? I'll be honest initially i was hopeful about him but soon realised how much of a scumbag he was, quite similar to McConville actually,you know ripping people off for money,full of promises that never reach fruition, that type of person. So in that respect i'll give McConville all the criticism i personally feel he deserves, just as i will for Murray,Whyte and Green. So as i stated imo McConville has no credibility to try and criticise anyone, perhaps he should have a long look at himself instead.

[youngsy]

Without reading the last 50 or so pages..................who is Paul McConville.

A discredited lawyer who many lap up every word he puts out. http://www.ssdt.org.uk/findings/finding_item.asp?LTfindingID=544

Edited May 8, 2013 by youngsy

[Burma]

Has McConville even bothered to apologise to Helen and the others or is he too busy blogging about a football team?

Yes he has. Now answer the question you weird obsessed little orc.

Or perhaps its because the answer doesnt fit in with your agenda or your compulsive pathological lies.

Bennet the orc who never posts about his club.

[flyingrodent]

I've given David Murray plenty of abuse in the past regarding the situation the club was heading under his tenure and not just in the last couple of years either so try again on that. Whyte? I'll be honest initially i was hopeful about him but soon realised how much of a scumbag he was, quite similar to McConville actually,you know ripping people off for money,full of promises that never reach fruition, that type of person. So in that respect i'll give McConville all the criticism i personally feel he deserves, just as i will for Murray,Whyte and Green. So as i stated imo McConville has no credibility to try and criticise anyone, perhaps he should have a long look at himself instead.

Nothing could better illustrate why Rangers are in their current position, when one of the most reasonable of their supporters posting on this site can make direct comparisons between the men who destroyed the club, and some c**t who nobody knows who writes some stuff on the internet.

It's like a bunch of Transylvanians sitting around saying well, that Count Dracula is pretty awful, what with all the murder and villainy and mayhem... quite similar to that evil, disgusting, immoral piece of human filth who plays banjo down at the Fruitbat Tavern on a Tuesday night.

You'd think Murray would get it in the neck much, much worse than some joker with a website - he doesn't.

And that, in microcosm, is why Rangers folded.

Edited May 8, 2013 by flyingrodent

[hellbhoy]

Paul McConville = discredited lawyer who posts about Rangers and other things.

Whyte & Green = two devious b@stards with dodgy pasts who have took the piss out of Rangers fans and their club.

Which of these two statements should the Rangers fans be more concerned about ?,a fucking no brainer there IMO.

Yes some have used McConvilles blogging on here as some sort of relevance to the state Rangers are in,I have read some of his posts and it's not all bullshit but some of his ramblings surpass even my understanding.It's pretty darn fucking stupid for Rangers fans to shoot down any of McConvilles blogging if they say they haven't read any of his blogs in the first place.It would appear Rangers fans first thoughts about McConville is "discredited lawyer" whilst dismissing the blatantly obvious in the first place ! Whyte & Green are far worse than McConville as far as their club is concerned.Liars can often tell the truth if it suits their agenda to push forward a lie right behind it.

If I was a Rangers fan I'd be more concerned that shysters are killing my club from the inside whilst keeping an open opinion from others even if they appear to be somewhat untrustworthy because they do not support the club I support.I'd suggest you read some of his blogs first and try not to read through blue tinted glasses while you do it and then ask yourself is some of what he is posting the truth ?.

[~~~]

http://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php/topic/160203-vb-and-craig-whyte-interview/

Edit : minutes from meeting with Craig Whyte

Q&A with the Chairman is reported as follows by VGB.

VB – Reports of Rangers going in to Administration continue to dominate the media in Scotland, including a rumour from a credible source to VB that the club will voluntarily enter Administration on Monday 7th November. Is there any truth in this rumour?

CW – Not at all. Our phones were red hot last Friday (28th October) with the same rumour, which led to us having to contact media organisations to inform them it was business as usual for us

VB – Do you have a value in mind that you could settle at with HMRC that could allow the club to pay off any amount due, should Rangers lose the “main” case against the organisation, and avoid the scenario of Administration or Insolvency?

CW – Yes, although that value is sensitive

VB – Would that value be paid directly without offsetting against future season ticket revenue?

CW – Yes

VB – Are you confident of winning the case?

CW – Yes

VB – Do you genuinely see Administration as an option, or is it part of a game with HMRC?

CW – Sadly, it is an option, and not a game in the slightest, although we see it (Administration) as worst case scenario. A Plan “D” if you will.
Administration is not, and never has been a Pre determined Strategy to deal with any possible loss of the “main” tax case.
Rangers are talking to HMRC on a daily basis

VB – What is the legal/contractual position of “Murray Park”? Can is be put to the fans to rename, perhaps as a symbol of a new era?

CW – There is no obligation to keep the name of “Murray Park”.

VB- We've have no representation on either the SFA professional board or the SPL board since Martin Bain has left? With Peter Lawwell, Eric Riley & Stephen Thompson among those now in senior positions there seems little influence for Rangers within the management circles of Scottish Football

CW – The SPL is democratic, and Ali Russell will take over from Eric Riley at the SPL next year. The SFA has obviously been through some restructuring which we will monitor throughout the coming months.

VB – The previous management at Rangers attempted a Share issue, which was undersubscribed, largely due to a lack of trust between the support and the custodian. Is this an avenue that you have considered?

CW – It’s not something we have considered to any great degree. Do you think the support would invest?
VB – If given confidence that the money would be used wisely, yes

We then moved on to more general Media issues


3. The Media

VB - We have already covered the BBC Demo, and the Documentary, and note your action against The Record and Herald during this season has resulted in quick apologies, what is your position on Graham Spiers (the discredited journalist) (the discredited journalist)

CW – I decided when I took over the club, that while I would address media imbalance, I would start with a clean slate, and expect the same in return. After seeing Mr Spiers’ involvement in the BBC Documentary, we were considering whether to withdraw all press privileges, but decided against it, as we were of the view that his influence and readership is not significant enough to trouble us. That said, when we took that decision we only considered “The Times’” reach in Scotland, not their reach in England and beyond. [Following discussion with JH] It is too late to reverse that decision. If Mr Spiers appears on our radar again for the wrong reasons, we will take a more holistic view. In football terms he’s on a retrospective yellow card

VB – Are you aware of any journalists that he considers as having a sympathetic ear to the club?

CW – To a certain degree yes, but some are constrained, and outnumbered within their outlets to put the required balance back in to reporting. Some also have their work edited. (CW named two journalists, who VB were non committal on our view of them)


4. The Support

VB - One of the reasons our plans for a BBC Demo were delayed, were the reports coming in from fellow fans about their treatment at the hands of Stewards at Ibrox, where we felt that our fellow supporters were being unfairly targeted by G4S at Ibrox, and treated like cattle on their travels. We temporarily put our energy in to offering advice and support to those affected.

The SNP and “Anti Sectarian Bill” – How can the club help the support, when our behaviour in recent years with regards to “Sectarianism” has been exemplary?


CW – Will will continue to lobby strongly, and ask that our supporters not be singled out without good reason. G4S have been spoken to since the incidents you refer to, but are still constrained by a lack of clarity from the authorities

VB – It is our understanding that there is a specific letter from UEFA with respect to “The Billy Boys”, but that it has never been distributed.

[CW looks to JH] JH – Yes, there is a letter specifically outlining “The Billy Boys”, and it was shown to members of the RST, Assembly and Supporters Association. It does exist and is not a myth.

VB – We are concerned at the double standards on the term “******”, and how the goalposts have moved on a word historically an exclusive term referring to “Irish Republicans” of all religions, to have a dual meaning interpreted by certain factions as they see fir.

CW/JH – Case law and legal advice tells us that those of influence in Justice deem that the term can be deemed Sectarian in certain circumstances, but that there is a lack of clarity over what these circumstances are. The time to argue this was before case law. That time has passed.

VB – We are also concerned over the double standard in usage of the sectarian word “***”, which also has case law to support it being sectarian, but there is a distinct lack of action on those using the term

CW – We were unaware of this case law and will look in to it

VB – In recent years it has been noticeable that there is a significant political presence at Celtic Park both within the boardroom, and in stands, why does it not appear to be the same at Ibrox? Are we looking at engaging with Political figures

CW – Believe it or not, there are a handful of MPs and political figures not shy to show their allegiance. They may not be household names, and the cameras as Ibrox generally being on the same side of the pitch as the main stand perhaps doesn’t show them regularly. In any event, I don’t think they are here to be on telly.

VB – Regards our BBC Demo, do you back it?

CW – I can fully understand the frustrations that have driven you to organise it

As we were about to wrap up proceedings we asked one final question.

VB – We understand that there was an incident in the Tunnel at Ibrox before you bought the club, where an opposition manager is rumoured to have racially abused Vladimir Weiss and El Hadj Diouf. Did this happen, and if so, why weren’t the press told? Do the club have evidence?

CW – I wasn’t here, so can’t comment. We don’t want anyone to lose their job do we?
JH – No Comment

VB – Thanks for your time Mr Whyte

CW/JH – Our pleasure
Reply With Quote

-------------------------------------------

'We don't want anyone to lose their job'.... No we certainly don't...Lennon Must stay

Lennon did stay No. 8

Edited May 8, 2013 by Enrico Annoni

[youngsy]

Nothing could better illustrate why Rangers are in their current position, when one of the most reasonable of their supporters posting on this site can make direct comparisons between the men who destroyed the club, and some c**t who nobody knows who writes some stuff on the internet.

It's like a bunch of Transylvanians sitting around saying well, that Count Dracula is pretty awful, what with all the murder and villainy and mayhem... quite similar to that evil, disgusting, immoral piece of human filth who plays banjo down at the Fruitbat Tavern on a Tuesday night.

You'd think Murray would get it in the neck much, much worse than some joker with a website - he doesn't.

And that, in microcosm, is why Rangers folded.

I think you're missing a bit of what i'm saying here. This man McConville,in my view,has no room to criticise anyone as regards non-payment of money after his own behaviour representing those families. This is why i personally don't recognise him as a credible person in any criticism.

As for David Murray,to say that he does not get more criticism than McConville or any of these bloggers tells me a lot of how out of touch you are with many Rangers fans, not just those on this forum. Murray has had massive criticism many times over the years regarding his spending and the road he took the club down from many Rangers fans.

Speak to many Rangers fans about him (i'm not speaking of the knuckledraggers here) and you'll find that the majority are very much against him and are very critical of his part on the events at the club during the mid 2000s.

[wunfellaff]

And not a word against Walter youngsy ?.....

[Bendarroch]

Phil Whose Surname Enrages Rangers Fans

Wasn't the response that Phil Whose Surnames Enrages Plastics?

I'm sure we just had this cycle over the last few days. I know we did.

I wonder who you are trying to convince with the idea that we really, really should listen to these bawbags. You apparently couldn't give a f**k - despite the reams of posting evidence to the contrary.

I understand your fascination for all things Rangers. I've had it for as long as I can remember.

[thelegendthatis]

I think you're missing a bit of what i'm saying here. This man McConville,in my view,has no room to criticise anyone as regards non-payment of money after his own behaviour representing those families. This is why i personally don't recognise him as a credible person in any criticism.

As for David Murray,to say that he does not get more criticism than McConville or any of these bloggers tells me a lot of how out of touch you are with many Rangers fans, not just those on this forum. Murray has had massive criticism many times over the years regarding his spending and the road he took the club down from many Rangers fans.

Speak to many Rangers fans about him (i'm not speaking of the knuckledraggers here) and you'll find that the majority are very much against him and are very critical of his part on the events at the club during the mid 2000s.

I am sure I have missed Murray apologising to Rangers supporters, shareholders or the Scottish public at large. Do tell me if I wasn't paying attention when it happened.

He hasn't gone away. Not yet disappeared to his vineyard and estate in New Zealand.

However he did raise his head to complain about leaks from HMRC about the Rangers shenanigans.

He complained about the leaks that apparently took place. He didn't complain or attempt to correct the content of the said leaks.

Hypocrite. Up there with Keith O'Brien as a con man and liar. Using the law to bully lesser people into shutting up.

[~~~]

I understand your fascination for all things Rangers. I've had it for as long as I can remember.

Shame your fascination didn't involve lifting a finger to help Rangers when the club was on it's knees before dying

[youngsy]

And not a word against Walter youngsy ?.....

In what respect? If you mean as a manager who was given vast amount of funds to spend on his team why would we be critical of him at that particular time. After all tell me what manager would have rejected such sums for transfer targets,as well as that what support would be critical of a manager that was delivering trophy after trophy? The whole problem lay with Murray in subsidising such layout of money that was pushing the club further into debt. Add to that,there was no proof of any description that Smith benefitted from use of an EBT. So in what respect should Smith be criticised.

[wunfellaff]

In what respect? If you mean as a manager who was given vast amount of funds to spend on his team why would we be critical of him at that particular time. After all tell me what manager would have rejected such sums for transfer targets,as well as that what support would be critical of a manager that was delivering trophy after trophy? The whole problem lay with Murray in subsidising such layout of money that was pushing the club further into debt. Add to that,there was no proof of any description that Smith benefitted from use of an EBT. So in what respect should Smith be criticised.

As a Rangers Man with all things Rangers at heart.

Not going there again due to hissy fits but he is a self serving rat fuccer. Own skin he saves.....numero imo he looks to. Coont of a "dignified" man.