ascender

Its also been rumoured from the start that TBK are short of actual cold hard cash which is clearly going to put them at a disadvantage. Like Bigy says, surely all interested parties know what sort of money its going to take to buy the club regardless of whatever other noise is going around about sanctions by the footballing authorities.

I'm with Gribz on this one, in the same way that I think its unfair to plan action to disrupt the Scottish Cup Final. Besides, with the SFA, our reasons for the boycott are clear, the target is clear and our support seems united behind that common goal. If we dilute the message or the target I think we're at risk of the whole thing petering out to nothing again after whats been an incredible start to it.

Very uneasy about the ticketus involvement. I really don't see how we as a club owe them anything as it appears they were conned by Whyte pure and simple.

Exactly, it covers the two main points, the first one being that the club is being punished for the actions of one man and also that the Sfa/spl seem to be making things up as they go along.

There's some good ideas here but they're all worthless unless we had a properly co-ordinated campaign with the buy-in of the majority of season ticket holders, all fan groups and travel clubs. I've been hearing for years that the spl would be much more competitive without us and clubs don't need our money, so it's the perfect chance to try this theory out. I'm sure with a reduced wage bill and decent home crowds the numbers could be made to stack up and it would also give a chance to build strong foundations which could then be built on after a speedy return to the spl.

I thought all of these are unrelated to administration though? This is all because of the way Whyte has run the club since he took it over rather than a direct result of us going in to administration and like Frankie says, the rules are worded such that there's massive room for interpretation.

I genuinely have no idea what the hell is going on and I'm trying to keep up.... Mainstream media reporting isn't helping as all the different issue just morph in to one. The only reason we're in administration is because of the way that Whyte ran the club after he bought it. How can he not have legal responsibilities to answer to here given he deliberately withheld tax, thereby putting us into administration? The actions of a single man have ultimately brought the club to its knees. Where was the due diligence from David Murray and how have the Sfa escaped from attention given their fit and proper test was a sham? The previous board members also have a case to answer here because before Whyte came along, they couldn't seem to decide if the club was doing ok financially (paying bills, reducing debt slowly but surely etc.) or financially doomed, a message they even got Walter Smith to get behind at times, knowing the fans would listen to him. We've been taken for chumps and worryingly, some of these characters are still around and interested in taking the club forward. Without total disclosure about the off-field affairs and figures of the club over the last few years, I don't trust anyone to be honest and I find it surprising to see so much backing for bidders at times, even moreso when you factor the ticketus fiasco in to things. Why are we even dealing with ticketus? They were duped by Whyte as much as anyone, so given how this panned out, why are some parties keen to do a deal with them? I hate to say it, but is liquidation the only real option here? Are we not just delaying the inevitable, because it's such a tangled mess, are we maybe going to be better off going the newco route so we can start with a clean slate? It may not be the "proper" thing to do, but unless those individuals responsible for getting us in to the mess stand up and do something to make amends, we're going to be saddled with the end product of their dereliction of duties for years to come. If we're not going to be competitive, why not use the next few years to build from the bottom and live within our means and also see how the spl does without the club and the fans money?

So what was the justification for the signing ban? Missed all this last night so have just logged on and so far I can't see any reasoning for this punishment. The financial penalties I can understand and fining Whyte, but where did the ban come from???

So looks like there's no preferred bidder yet and even conflicting info about the state of the Miller and Blue Knights bids as admin have said they've still not received an actionable bid.

I don't understand the logic behind deserting a newco. A newco is just that, a new company behind the scenes. We'll still be playing in blue at Ibrox and the trophy room will still be full. Assuming there's no skeletons in the closet and no trophies are removed, the club will still be Glasgow Rangers. That emotional link and bond will still be there, so why would people suddenly desert us because the Sfa or spl won't recognise historic achievements? Those trophies will still have been won by our great club and it's players.

But if Whyte doesn't get money for his shares, it makes you wonder what he stood to gain from any of this? If he was a patsy, it would have been on the promise of money for his shares and/or his assistance in rushing a deal through with new owners. If he was genuine and trying to make a fist of it, why did he make such basic errors in running the company and show such misjudgement in cash flow given how much time he spent on due diligence? The whole thing stinks.

Any word about what sort of conditions are being specified by the bidders which are causing a problem? Is it possible to put an unconditional offer in when things like the big tax case is hanging over us? Still have no idea how any of this works in practice given the amount of unknowns and the fact that any hmrc decision is going to be subject to appeal(s). Doesn't feel like we're much further forward at all to be honest.

It all makes you wonder if some of our "enemies" who've suggested this will end in liquidation, no matter what, have been right all along?

And who are the administrators ultimately accountable to?

What happens if Whyte is not willing to sell his shares or there's no one willing to pay his asking price? What are the options? Or was this whole thing just one long charade to make liquidation appear to be the only option and to soften the blow with fans by giving false hope?

Hang on a minute..... Taking the EBT case out of the equation and the other amounts which are showing as being owed to football clubs (some of which may or may not be overdue), how the fuck has Craig Whyte been able to run up actual debts of 40M plus since he took over????

Fuck me. Seriously. That's all I can muster right now looking at some of these figures.

You say they're in it for the long game Frankie, but do you know why they're considering it in the first place? I guess motives are to make money, but what's piqued their interest in the club?

I've seen various comments from him, I think the longest piece was just before he lodged his bid where he explained why he was interested in buying us and there's been quotes from him here and there since putting his bid in. Always seemed to be talking a lot of sense.

Well there you go, that's things speeded up for him. I have to say I quite like how he's come across in the interviews he's given so it's a shame that his bid wasn't deemed to be the best. He's clearly had experience of running sports clubs who have had financial difficulties and I still think there's something to be said for having one man ultimately in charge. Assuming its the right man obviously.

Guy comes across very well in that short piece, certainly more genuine than Whyte or Murray. He has experience of owning a sports club and there is something in the argument to say that there are benefits to having one person ultimately in charge at a club although we've also seen the negatives of this.

The only letter that's been made public is the one that the Sun published a few weeks back. The thing about this story and the one about player registrations is that elements of them require numerous people to turn a blind eye to them (for whatever reason) from our club officials, the sfa, players and their agents. Can that really have been going on for so long if we were doing things wrongly or if there was a risk that individuals could end up being financially penalised? As I've said before, given a Rangers player can't fart without the press picking up on it I'm surprised there's not been more evidence uncovered.

Where did this rumour start btw? Was it the rangers tax case blog or somewhere else?

Yip, the state of Scottish football is all down to Rangers. The problem with much of the commentary on the issue is that many of the most vocal don't like Rangers. That inevitably means that articles like the above are selective with their facts and at some point tip over the edge of reason. The amount of gloating on display is to be expected, but it's the ill informed gloating which is difficult to take. Because you have in effect some fans of all other clubs in Scotland wading in, the picture portrayed of our club and it's fans is very one sided and that's very apparent when you read articles on media sites which invite comment. The thing is, no matter what happens over the next while, those same fans will find something else to complain about. The one thing I really want from any new owner is someone who will finally stand up for our club and it's fans.

Even though it's sdm it's reassuring to hear this as the dual contract thing seems to have been a rumour which originated on the web and has since grown arms and legs to the point where it's being taken as fact particularly by non-Gers sites.