forlanssister

No it wouldn't.

Proves my earlier point...

Interesting remarks re floating charge.

Merchant Capital seem to be drip feeding the bad news to their investors how long till they tell them the excrement has well and truly collided with the rotating cooling device ?

Should they now be charged with "Bringing the game into disrepute" for their failure to do so ?

That's what I read into it but I doubt everybody will assume that. I assume the player willing to play for free is Lee McCulloch and the one willing to retire is Sasa Papac. But then again I was well warned yesterday not to 'assume' anything in this entire sorry saga...

As informative as this is the result will be innocent players having their character assassinated, perhaps names should have accompanied the story.

Jerome is Whyte and his buddies the Earley's recipients of the £250k bung re Banstead. It looks like they liquidated Jerome and raped its' pension fund, nice people eh?

It's 40.18% owned by Craig Whyte who is also the company secretary and Phil Betts is a director.

From an undoubtedly dubious source who alas unfortunately have a half decent track record on this whole sorry saga...

Whyte is not "number one" creditor that honour is held by Close Leasing by virtue of the fixed charge they insisted upon when Whyte mortgaged off the catering income.

Good question, wonder if there is a similar precedent somewhere?

I'm hearing "certain agent" singular (in one ear and plural in the other!!) representing two players.

I'm pretty sure any buyer would want finality on the issues of the floating charge, Ticketus and HMRC ( I mean who'd buy a business with an unquantified tax liability....). By the sound of the administrators they're definition of "liquidation" seems to differ from the common held view, I'm sure one of those accountant type chaps will explain and expand far better than I could. I have a feeling we're just sitting on the sidelines watching a game being played and to the victor the spoils, I just hope the deck's hasn't been stacked.

http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?39396-Phil-Betts-and-the-catering-deal. (details of the charges in that link) Yes the validity of Whyte's can be challenged whether that challenge would be successful or not would be a matter for the courts.

They couldn't prove what Whyte did till HMRC showed them the documents re Ticketus reclaiming the VAT, hence Alastair Johnston's "Financial Assistance" complaint.

Whyte holds the floating charge on the RFC assets and Close Leasing hold a fixed charge, would those not have to be satisfied before assets can be sold?

Even if we win that case we will receive less than £3, Duff & Phelps charge a success fee of 10% + expenses for recovered monies and Taylor Wessing won't be acting pro bono.

I f*&king hope they have an agenda no point them being there without one.

Doubt there will be a sale until the floating charge,Ticketus and HMRC issues are resolved. Administrators posturing and trying to show the players who's boss.

Who did Whyte give his statement to, Tommy the Fenian Taliban taxi driver ?

Hope you pay the tv licence .....

Nothing set in stone as yet.