ascender

This is getting worse than the bs stories we have to endure every transfer window.

I've seen a few people asking why certain threads had been removed and there's been some really strange ones posted about Ticketus, the administrators, the Blue Knights deal etc. Not sure what's going on to be honest.

Has there been any communication from the different fans groups as to why they're backing Murray's consortium? I've not seen anything from RST and am still a member, so would be good to hear why they've chosen to back this horse so to speak.

So the summary is that before Whyte took over, there were lots of unanswered questions as to the financial situation of the club and there was the big tax case cloud hovering above us. Since Whyte took over, there's even more unanswered questions as to the financial situation of the club and there is still the big tax case cloud hovering above us, but on top of that there's unpaid taxes and a possible debt to Ticketus of a further 24M + a cut of future revenue. Anyone bidding for the club has all of the above to sort through plus the latest rumours of problems with player contracts and registrations to get to the bottom of. All this talk of multiple people interested in the club can only be a good thing, but I still think there's a couple of massive potential blockers there, the result of the big tax case still being the main one. Would be good to have a sticky topic on the main page which only mods could update with facts that have been confirmed as I lost track some time ago.

I don't understand why they'd get involved with Ticketus given the administrators are still trying to work out exactly what Whyte's deal with them means to Rangers in terms of liability. From the Ticketus perspective it makes perfect sense as they are covering their bases, but it seems a bold or desperate move by Paul Murray.

Thanks for posting, things definitely seem to be looking a bit brighter today.

I think the only reason We could legitimately apply would be if the whole league system up her collapsed and we were left with nowhere "competitive" to play.

So what is the point of the fit and proper test? If the SFA think a prospective owner isn't fit and/or proper, what exactly can they do about it? Block the sale of a club? If not, then this is all a moot point really. Regardless of the actual legislation, it makes them look fecking incompetent if nothing else.

Maybe it's a foolhardy, romantic notion which in reality wouldn't work out but I think on the face of it there are some real merits to it.

Is this the one into Whyte's takeover and the whole fit/proper thing that they completely failed to do at the right time? Or the one in to the allegations concerning wrongly-registered players and two contracts for some?

Just getting things back to the subject of football, I'm wondering where this season's performances on the pitch mean for Ally's future? I'll preface this by saying we obviously have to take the off-field situation in to account, but is there a danger that we let this overshadow the fact that we've been dumped out of Europe twice by teams with far less resources than us and blow a lead in the title which could have left us still in the chase for the sole even after the 10 point deduction? There's been some fairly abject performances along the way and while McCoist's leadership skills off the park during this time of crisis are to be commended, has he shown enough to be given another chance?

Personally I think the idea of starting out in the bottom division could be quite an exciting prospect and also give Scottish football a bit of a boost. As per original post, this is not based on cold hard facts, but I find it all very appealing. It could also give new owners the time to get a sustainable model in place without being under pressure to win the spl first time out. I suspect the idea would be popular with fans which might mean the money will still be there to build a team with a blend of our own youth players and some experienced ones, so we live within our means while also expanding out scouting network over the next few years. The possible lack of tv money would be the biggest practical drawback, but that might not be as big an issue as some think depending what deals could be done. Would also let the other spl clubs have their few seasons of being able to genuinely challenge for the title and obviously show us just how much they don't need us.

I knew we should have had some sort of bullshit statement bingo game going today as I think we'd now have a full house. Clearly if Whyte says there's no reason for liquidation then it's a dead cert.

Take Bain as a perfect example of this. While none of us are really sure what his remit was, he came in and apparently oversaw the initial down-sizing of the wage budget in record time. He was very visibly involved in celebrating silverware with the players & management and claimed to have the best interests of the club at heart. There was also a noticeable change in tack when dealing with the media when he was given more responsibility over that side of things. So was he a Rangers man who did some good things for the club and was only paid a fair wage for someone in that sort of position, or was he out for personal gain, pure and simple?

Part of the problem in reviewing the conduct of people like Bain, Muir, Johnston etc is that there's still loads of unanswered questions and many inconsistencies around exactly what was going on at Rangers over the last few years. We thought the truth would come out post-takeover once things had calmed down, but instead we're in the middle of an even bigger shit storm and the same people have pitched up again to stick their oar in. Even when Walter was in charge he wasn't averse to making statements to the media which had clearly been influenced by one or more of the behind-the-scenes players. Remember the constant stories about us being doomed and how Lloyds were killing the club? Yet after Whyte took over we've started to hear how the debt was under control, still winning trophies etc from the very same people who were warning us about financial meltdown for the last couple of years. There has clearly been gross financial mismanagement of the club from about the time when Advocaat was put in charge and the spending went nuts. Apart from that, I've not much idea about any of the other rumours or accusations until I hear some actual evidence as it looks like the same personal agendas and vendettas which have been played out for the last 5 years continue to do so.

And the more I read about certain clubs wanting to see us penalised season after season if the worst happened and we were liquidated just makes me hope that any new owner is seriously considering looking at the viability of just starting from the bottom division.

This isn't a "head in the sand" answer, but I find it amazing in a small parochial country like Scotland, in the small world of Scottish football and in the even smaller goldfish bowl of Glasgow, that something like this would have been kept quiet for so long with all those who must have been aware of it. Between this, the rumours of wrongly registered players and the side-letters for the EBTs, surely something more concrete than that single draft letter that the Sun ran with must exist? Given all the players who were allegedly involved, along with agents and middle-men, many of whom I'm sure didn't leave Ibrox on good terms, I'd have thought journalists and anyone linked with Celtic who got an inkling of any of this would have been all over it. The Rangers Tax Case site is being praised for running with stories that some of the media apparently knew about but weren't willing to print, I'm assuming because of the lack of actual evidence that may mean they were leaving themselves open to litigation? Even when last week's Hugh Adam interview was released, it didn't actually contain any hard facts or evidence, but was being heralded as some sort of smoking gun because it backed-up the rumours. The rumour about wrongly registered players again seems strange because of how many people looking after their own interests and being paid to look after their clients respective interests would surely spot such fundamental errors in a process they'll all have been involved in multiple times. I'm ready to be proven wrong on some or all of the allegations and then for us as a club to face the music, but many seem to be getting carried away while forgetting there's not actually been anything proven as of yet. The outcome of the big tax case hasn't even been announced, yet we've seen rampant scaremongering around the possible liability being taken as fact. A fact which has seen the amount of tax + interest raise from 12M to 25M to 49M to 75M and beyond. Its just ridiculous.

Much of what's been reported by various sources over the last couple of weeks as unfortunately turned out to be accurate so I'm guessing this is too. All we need is for Whyte to deny it and we've got our confirmation.

Am I the only one who'll be looking out for Larry David on Sky Sports tonight?

Why on earth would he do this???

Utterly bizarre.

What was strange was comments along the lines that when they were looking into the takeover, they had asked some questions of Whyte's team and were just ignored. Was that publicised at the time?

I suspect what the club needs is fresh thinking and a change of ideas in the way its run both on and off the park. I'd hope that new owners or investors would insist on looking at everything from coaching, scouting, youth policy etc. Finishing second is always seen as failure, but if the playing squad is decimated due to administration, this is the one chance we'll have to rebuild properly and put foundations down for years to come which could see us being completely self-sustainable and maybe even playing better football which would see us prosper in Europe without breaking the bank.

And how about the last three titles where we've been a club on our knees and Celtic still couldn't beat us? Does he want those taken away as well?

The way its going, he could be proved to be a very credible businessman depending on what you're looking for him to do - i.e. if he has structured this whole thing to protect the business, get it debt free and then have funds available to put back in. For some people credible doesn't have to equal moral. Although there is also the thing that he may not need to do much more business if money isn't a real problem for him either through his past businesses or what happens as a direct result of the Rangers stuff. All just pure speculation, but I don't think there's any way someone like him could be as stupid and naive in the running of a club if they've also managed to fool SDM and his team of lawyers and accountants when it came to proving he knew what he was doing in the first place.