forlanssister

You simply have absolutely no idea how these things play out. Prove that the Blue Knight's have no money as you so consistently claim, the floor is yours'. You keep accusing people of peddling "spin and lies" and offer up absolutely no proof to back it up so either put up or shut up. Just because what Tannochsidebear posted yesterday has not panned out 100% (yet!) the way he was led to believe does not ergo equate that he has posted "spin and lies", take a look at his posting history and you'll see that he's not posting out of malice or to feed an ego he's simply passing on information that he possesses that he believes a wider audience should be aware of.

Cynical moi ? Perish the very thought! I'm cautiously optimistic but not overly so as it's far from a straight forward operation.

You may well end up repeating yourself several times!

I didn't ! Although I'm of the opinion that the debentures would be honoured on the existing terms there has been no announcement or even a "leak" to indicate this is so, if I had included it in the scenario then the usual suspect would have been screaming "Source!!! Source!!!!" and that's becoming rather tiresome. It has the effect however of making the deal even more palatable to those whose acceptance is needed. It doesn't matter how many times you explain it that £10m (example! ) can in fact be greater than £11.2m some people will never believe you!

If you take out the "football creditors" of £3.5m (cancelled by football debtors anyway iirc) and the Ticketus £27m then it's £10m (your example) to clear £25m, much more palatable I assume (it ust be noted both scenarios exclude the FTT result). FWIW I think the fat lady is still just clearing her throat, but what the f*&k do I know?....

I don't know him personally only by his postings, if you pay attention to what people post it soon becomes apparent if they're on the level or not. (not a nudge towards you more a generalisation to the idiots who think people will betray confidences just to amuse them)

Himself is good enough for me, people shouldn't get so hung up with this "source" nonsense all the time.

Indeed, I eagerly await to see how either the "absolutely irrelevant" and the "won't be an impediment" is finally dealt with.

For all the wailing, gnashing, grunting and moaning it'll boil down to the most basic of factors nothing to do with the merits and counter merits of CVA v newco etc. etc. if the administrators are doing their job which is to look after the creditors interests then it simply comes down to whose bid offers the most pennies in the £ for the creditors, my understanding of they way the bids are (or perhaps will be) structured is that while Millers appears to have the highest headline figure the BK's has by far the highest per £ value to the creditors.

Perhaps their IFA told them there was too much risk in unconditionally parting with £0.5m at that stage?

You seriously need to "man up!" a bit. If you want to see abuse then take a look over the last year on RM and see the shit that was dumped upon the handful of us who refused to accept that Whyte was the second coming incarnate, bannings were handed out to those who were exposing Whytes' raping and pillaging. This is probably the least polarised of any of the main Rangers forums. (for the avoidance of doubt I am not now nor never have been a member of the RST)

The latest effort.

Paul Clark was speaking with a forked tongue. It's not a coincidence that the Blue Knights,Brian Kennedy and Bill Ng have all expressed in public serious doubts about the actions of Duff & Phelps (Clark, Whitehouse and Grier because Griers' been conducting things behind the scenes despite what we've been told). Duff and Phelps will not consider any bid that is not "unconditional", unsurprisingly the three (ex)bidders (BK's,BK,BN) want to gain control of Whytes' shareholding, despite the bluster of Clark that Whyte "won't be an impediment" he either will not or cannot deliver them. So while refusing to consider bids from BK's,BK and BN because they are not unconditional he states that he will accept Millers bid to liquidate on Monday, yet according Bill Millers own statement his bid is conditional! Paul Clark is a shameless liar, the questions are, why is he lying and who is he lying for?

Except that wasn't an attempt at "gratuitous alienation".

Yes it's a non-liquidation liquidation despite what Miller says it's not a CVA.

Of course it is, dress it up any way you like.

LOL...wondered when you'd return to form.

Bill miller statement in full

He who pays the piper pays the tune, and they've had a shitload of cash out of RFC plc since their association with Whyte.

The administrators have the power to issue new shares that would delete Whytes' shareholding to the point it becomes "irrelevant", they have made no attempt to do this or to take other actions to achieve the negation of Whyte. We are now entering the final stages of the business plan that David Grier constructed for Craig Whyte.

The only way you can (or more accurately would) bid unconditionally at this point is if you intend to liquidate.

It's genuine enough though....

Looks like they need the services of a "turnaround specialist" and/or a "venture capitalist".......

Does he have a nice sideline in a the rather Tony Sopranoesque "Waste Management" business ?

http://piratenews.org/BFI_WM_WILLIAM%20MILLER_MULLINS_SAWS_AGENTS.HTML http://www.oocities.org/parking_ticket_appeal/contentspublicrecords.html