der Berliner

As I said before, I would assume that they keep the debt, but essentially never want it back, i.e. waiving it. Or it could well be that for some reason or another, we pay back a given sum (100k per annum) into their accounts.

So has ManU's and ManC's and that of every other football club in the world. The point is, will someone want the debt back?

Londonstockexchange.com

BBC Rangers takeover documents are signed ... yet ...

Rumour on FF has it that Craig Conway was at Murray Park with his agent yesterday to become our first signing for next season. (Just relating this story, no idea whether true or not ... wouldn't mind him coming, since he can deliver a cross, is a freebie and wouldn't command high wages. Could bring Russell, Swanson, Dillon (or was it Dixon?) and Goodwillie along ... )

Jelavic ... you know, I wonder how teams think they can offer us peanuts for our stars when we can read articles like this one too: Jela has only just arrived and I doubt that this 17-year-old is as good as him nor has a 10-year contract at Anderlecht to warrant such a fee. If the EPl comes calling and wants to deal with us, they should do so with mega-bugs or stay away. Anyways, this Jela rumour is just that, a rumour. And it comes at a very important time in the title race. Much like the Bougherra stuff.

Nope. As I understood Murray (the Paul version) he wanted do a share issue for these 25m, thus, unless I am mistaken, creating more Rangers shares for the market? He's got someone to underwrite them, someone who would instantly hold that amount of shares and become a major shareholder too. Why wouldn't that be possible under Whyte would be my question? Essentially, he could equally swap allegiances from Ellis to Murray, King or you-name-him too, looking for a better option/-s to raise money. Just a few points that sprang to mind.

I for one assume that hardly anyone knows anything of substance. What's in the press need not to be correct either, usually, we hear "representatives" or "close-tos" talk, but not David Murray, Whyte or the like. In essence, we will have to wait and see. As for debts moving ... yes, but the thing is that as long as we are tied to Murray, MIH and Lloyds, the latter will squeeze us dry. Every club has debts, but most are long term with fixed pay-back rates. And they still work "wonderfully well" when it comes to finance the football team as such. If Paul Murray or King or whatever mysterious backer wants to help the club, they should stop their little wardances and get together with Whyte. But as long as there are big egos involved, well ...

More a case that neither is entirely wrong. It is usually best to wait 24 hours before commenting on rumours and hearsay (no insult intended, BTW).

It's be what 4 to 5 hours on since this thread started and there is no indication whatsoever that any news outlet caught wind of it? (Source: NewsNow)

How's that? Isn't he supposed to talk to the directors too? As I said before, if these people have the best interest of Rangers in mind, wouldn't they work together to get us away from MIH and Lloyds? Too easy a notion perhaps.

Dunno. David Murray was happy with Whyte's offer. Lloyds was happy with the offer, the board was said to be happy too. Ally was being handed 5 to 10m was last we heard. Most part of the SDM and Lloyds money was in the bank, we were told. The rest was to be put there. Now, "30 seconds before midnight" we are suddenly told the board runs amok? They fear the sack? Now wait, while it sure is prestigious to be a Rangers board member / director, it does not exactly earn these people millions of pounds. And to most it does not matter either. They see the future of the club endangered? Heck, what have THEY done these last few years then? For all their wardancing now, they sure haven't helped the cause of Rangers FC while being directors. If Whyte was a clever chap, he'd simply adopt the share issue stuff to to finance the club ... once he takes over. Why must it be so complicated?

We've been in terrific form of late and if we can keep it, there's every chance that it could go down to the wire ... with them playing Motherwell again, even though at home. IMHO we've only had very few let-downs - given the size and strength of our squad - this season, the main talking points will remain with McGregor chasing out of his goal and Bougherra needlessly flooring his opponent during the Nerby at Ibrox. Slips like the home defeat to Hibs and the Tangerines happen. We've given it our best shot, Jela's injury and Miller's departure dented our aspirations somewhat, but even if we won't retain the title, the players will not get any flak from this Bear. Of course, as has been said, the fat lady has not yet sung and we'll see what happens in the Highlands the day after tomorrow. Butcher will sure have his troops fired up.

Dunno, but unless I am mistaken, no-one can QPR catch now? One game to go and first place secured? Or do they have some legal battle running?

The banks gambled on money, the bubble burst, the markets plumped, MIH fell into a nigh bottomless pit and we went along. Simples, actually. Had the credit crunch not happened, no-one would really have cared about our debt. We run dry when MIH and Murray run on empty.

Ach well, you get them here, you get them there, you get them everywhere. That is the way it is. Hence I prefer to argue and debate with the reasonable people on each of the boards, something that gets the support as a whole forward.

You wonder what goes on in these warped minds. He says "I hate you" and it's "a hate-filled rant". Ach well, all about headlines and selling figures. Anyways, he should not have done it, but it does show up the scum for what they are.

Murray wanted to leave the club in the hands of someone who take it forward. Not some weak-legged Ellis bid of last season, but a strong one. Won't hold this against him. And, BTW, as much as people lambast him for the debt et al ... had the banks not gambled on billions in the US, no-one would have a second look at 20odd million debt these days. Anyone chasing the banks about this though?

Can't see much reason in comments by posters on various Rangers boards when they slag the club off for selling Miller in January. In any transfer that goes on, there are more than one party involved. We did not chase Miller to Turkey, he simply did not sign on the dotted line, asking for too much money, had no stamina to wait for the take-over to happen NOR willingness to help his club out at least till the end of the season - like Boyd did. He and his agent sure got bumper deals here and he followed the call of money. 300k more within half a year will sure sound good in someone's ears, Kenny's account will have been healthy enough though back in December. I do assume that the management asked him to stay and only after he indicated that he did not want to, they waved good-bye. The club earned not much in selling him, yet, we got Healy and Diouf to ease the loss. Neither are renowned 20+ goal strikers, of course. Kenny served Kenny and fair enough. He could have been a man and go for one final year with silverware - in Turkey he will not win any this season, BTW. So could Miller's farewell cost us the title? In a way. It adds to the the injury dealt by Ian Black to Jelavic (three months without his goalthreat), the two woeful decisions by two of our stalwarts during the Nerby, Weiss injury now, Bartley injury, and the like. I have no doubts whatsoever that had Miller stayed we would have won more games than we did, for his goal threat, despite him not being at the top of his game, was second to none. His predatory instincts especially against Timothy were sublime. But that is all history now.

Well, scotzine's AndyM's comments about us waving the 40k Union Jacks to get "Her Madg" on our side in our case against HMRC are equally ridiculous. Tried but failed to reason with him/them. The problem is that people like him have taken over the headlines and no matter how much truth is in their news, some of the bad stuff and lies will stick with us no matter what. Hence, as some people have said, we should go on the offensive here and hire a qualified QC who stops these lies and bad-mouthing in its tracks. Obviously, you'd want to see the reaction if Sir David is indeed fined for this. The reaction down south, that is. On a sidenote, maybe Rangers should invite the Countess of Strathearn for our last home game, where she could offer Sir David her thanks for being as daring ...

Thaks for the reply. Ibrox being revamped by Murray companies ... fair enough. Then again, me as an objective onlooker would ask: someone would have done it anyways? The question would be: had they done it at a higher cost than Murray's companies?

Coming to think of it, buying us now ahead of King (while the latter still entangles himself from the RSA tax stuff) could be somesuch sneaky indeed. Should King still want us in 2 years time.

Well, I would ask those who say Whyte wants to buy us (or any other footie team for that matter) because he can make money with us: how? I've seen various statements by our supporters that Murray made millions out of us, but never got a decent reply as to: how? Anyone buying a football club (in Scotland) will only run up debts, no matter what. Unless he gets lucky ... like Timothy ... and sells players to Russia or England for inflated fees.

Maybe that's the 25% Ellis has to deliver?

Maybe, just maybe, he's just a Bear who wants to get us out of the Murray-mire ... ere selling us off with a touch of profit to e.g. King, once this even bigger Bear gets his house in order?