Darthter

@Calscot If I'm reading your post correctly, you are suggesting that for a club to be successful, it needs be run outwith its means??? This is how Man City, Chelsea etc are run, and yes they have been successful. But what about the likes of Portsmouth??? They have tried to follow the successful teams in spending big, and they're paying for it now. What would happen if Chelsea or Man City's owners left?? What would happen to Hearts if Mad Vlad simply walked away??? Basic rule of ANY business - Make more than you spend!!! Why can't that result in a successful football team??? Financially, Motherwell are one club that appear to be running soundly. I believe they posted a profit of £540k for year 2010/2011, and they have been very successful this season in the league. I don't see why a football club should be ANY different from other businesses!!!

If a football club is being bank rolled by a wealthy owner, and running at a loss - IMHO that equates to an owners plaything!!! Where would Chelsea be without Abramavich??? Man City with out their Arab owners???? Exactly WHY can't a football club be run as a corporate entity??? The whole game revolves around money these days!!! It is more about revenue streams than anything else. How many tickets can we sell.....how much merchandise can we sell.....What else can we do to get more cash from out customers (Not fans). As for the SFA not being a court of Law - strictly speaking they are. The justice courts uphold the law of the land, the sfa uphold the laws/rules of Scottish Football. The reason that so many clubs are in potential financial ruin is because they are not being run on sound business practices!!!

I don't agree with the declining to enter the cups....we SHOULD enter them & do our damnedest to win them!!!! With the FULL support from the fans - show the other clubs/SPL/SFA exactly what size of monster they are dealing with!!! That which doesn't kill us, only makes us stronger!!!

I've stated that very angle in several threads before!!!! We have a decent squad - certainly capable of being competitive in the SPL. Add to that a hunger to compete from the younger players breaking through - I think it could be positive. In the past it's been difficult for young talent to break into the 1st team on a regular basis - we preferred to buy in talent. We don't have that luxury for the next 12 months though!!!

I'm not overly concerned about winning anything next season (didn't win anything this season....). What is important is that the team is competitive, and gives others a run for their money!!!!

I think it is time to put the reality hat on.... As Crawford01 has stated, the club/company/whyte have not behaved themselves over the past 12 months, and the fine/embargo is the punishment for what has gone on. AS a fan, I don't agree with the punishment, but when does the convicted party EVER agree with their punishment??? According to quotes, we are still able to extend contracts & renew expiring contracts, so that is where attentions should be turned. Get the likes of Aluko, Kerkar, Little etc resigned and unsure that the squad remains as strong as possible for next season. Personally, I feel that the transfer embargo may actually work in the clubs favour. Due to not being able to sign players, the new owners can focus on firstly getting the financials sorted out, then turn attentions to the scouting network in preparation for next season - we have a full 12 months in which to scour the globe for reasonably priced talent!!!. We already have a team of strong potability. Ness, McCabe, Hutton & Perry have all shown that they can handle the SPL. Darren Cole has also shown his ability in the past as well. I think the spotlight will really be on John Fleck this season. There has been a lot of expectation place on him over the past few years, and many forget that he is still a young guy - 20/21?? This is his opportunity to really shine!!! We also probably have Ortiz coming back from Spain, who may well relish a free running role up & down the right wing.... Also, with the sanctions being upheld, the opposition can no longer claim about the club going unpunished for financial misdemeanors!!!

Hopefully their job!!!

It's been rather quiet over the past few days....not twists, no turns, no (major/confirmed) scandal. As Rangers fans, we're not used to this after the past 12 months..... I am hoping that the silence is a good thing, and that Mr Green & his team are beavering away sorting out the CVA, and finalising his future plans etc. If this continue, we MAY have to start discussing football matters again....:surprised:

What happens if Regan doesn't like some/all of the backers....what can he do??? NOTHING!!!! Until Mr Green, or any of his consortium assume a position within the club ie. director etc, the SFA/SPL are powerless to do anything. This has been shown time & time again with Mad Vlad @ Hearts!!!! By all means, Regan & Mr Green should have a chat, whereby Mr Green can outline (in broad terms) his plans for the club, but nothing else should or needs to be divulged!!!

I think it will all depend on the state that Green's bid has reached. By 1st June, The CVA proposal should be out with creditors, with the meeting following on the 6th (allegedly). If the takeover is still progressing positively, I believe the vast majority of the players will stay. If its looking a bit shaky, only the true Blue-noses will stay. If its collapsed, I think most will cash in.

did the ban not apply to registering player over 18yrs old???? We can sign/pay for whom ever we want, but can't register & play them!!!!

That's being generous...

There was another wee section in todays DR (Page 7). This time it does mention that it was 'tic fans!!!

The SFA have no right or jurisdiction to demand who the consortium members are!!! I agree that the names should not come out until a CVA is agreed. At the moment, the important thing is that the funds are available for the CVA, not who supplied it (providing its legal etc). Green has repeatedly said that the full list of consortium members will be released in due course. Hopefully by meeting with the SFA/SPL, Mr Green can give them enough information to satisfy them, without giving names etc.

A valid point....but I would put money on the fact (as GovanAllan says), that folk on here know a helluva lot more about football than they do about the Administration process!!! I would suggest that most folk on here have been involved with a football team at some stage of their life - either playing or running one....how many have gone through an administration process of the complexity of the Rangers one????

As you say, I think the fans are more aware of the financial state, and are aware that tough decisions need to be made. However, that doesn't mean that they will accept those decisions if/when they happen.

A couple of questions for everyone..... How many folk on here are Administration specialists??? How many of you all do this kind of thing for a living???? Unless you are doing this kind of thing on a daily basis, how can ANYONE pass comment, with any authority on how the process in going??? i'm not saying I trust D&P, but at the same time, I have no reason to doubt what they are doing. The whole club is a financial mess, and the admin process was always going to take a while - unless you believe the pillar of truth that is Craig Whyte!!!!

My take on what Green did @ Sheffield, is more that he made decisions that the fans didn't like, but ultimately benefited the club - I don't know the full story on what when on, so I may be wrong!!!! Making decisions that the fans don't like, and making bad decisions are 2 completely different things!!!

The BTC has absolutely nothing to do with Whyte not paying PAYE or NI - The club currently owes £0 for the BTC!!! The reason why whyte didn't pay the PAYE/NI, is because he underestimated the running costs & had no money of his own to invest. There was NO CASH FLOW at the club. Withholding the PAYE/NI contributions is a common way for businesses to allow themselves some extra cash flow in the short term. It is not illegal if the deductions are declared. As for HMRC agreeing to a CVA....who knows. As Green has said, they are better to accept something as opposed to possibly nothing.

Suppose it would depend on them simply being investors, or whether they are going to hold positions on the board.

He is certainly saying the right things....The big difference between Green & White (strating to sound like a game of Cleudo..), I believe is that Green ain't promising the world (yet...). He is coming across as being realistic.

There have been a couple of comments over the past 36 hours that have me a wee bit confused....Who actually owns the club??? Mr Green has been mentioned as "the new Owner". He himself stated that money & contracts have changed hands with Craig Whyte. At the press conference, Paul Whitehouse stated that this wasn't a preferred bidder situation - legal contracts have been signed, then went on to mention a period of exclusivity. There is no notification on Plus net about changing of Rangers share ownership, and Whyte is still down as Chairman. So....is CW still the owner @ the moment, or is Charles Green the owner????

A Celtic fan dies on match day and goes to heaven in his Green and white shirt. He knocks on the old pearly gates and out walks St. Peter. "Hello mate" says St. Peter, "I'm sorry, no Celtic fans in heaven." "What ?" exclaims the man, astonished. "You heard, no Celtic fans." "But, but, but, I've been a good man", replies the Celtic supporter. "Oh really", says St. Peter. "What have you done, then ?" "Well" said the supporter, "Three weeks before I died, I gave 10 pounds to the starving children in Africa". "Oh" says St.Peter. "anything else?" "Well, 2 weeks before I died I also gave 10 pounds to the homeless." "Hmmm. Anything else?" "Yeah. A week before I died I gave 10 pounds to the Albanian orphans." "Okay", said St. Peter, "You wait here a minute while I have a word with the governor." Ten minutes pass before St. Peter returns. He looks the bloke in the eye and says, "I've had a word with God and he agrees with me. Here's your thirty quid back, now f*** off".

AHWNN......he's a couple of points for you to ponder!!! My views of Kennedy & Murray were changed somewhat after seeing their press conference - I thought they presented themselves very well, and came across passionately. However, you simply can't get away from the facts. They are putting in £5.5m immediately....this will probably equate to between £2.5 & £3.5m for the creditors pot - to cover debts of £55m (approx 6p to the £)!!!! This is then topped up by conditional extras over the coming years. At that rate, HMRC would be due something like £840k (from initial £14m debt) - would you accept that??? Add to that, that BK's bid also included money due to the club anyway (£3.9m) - this cash is due to the club regardless of who the owner is!!!! They are making a point that they will be covering running costs until the CVA is agreed - surely that will happen with any new/proposed owner???? Simply put, TBK's motives are right - they clearly want what's best for the club, but they want it @ a knock down price!!! If they had simply put more cash into the creditors pot straight away, they would have had the keys to Ibrox by now, but they chose to go down the "deep pockets, short arms" route!!!

Maybe the Green Brigade will have to change their name!!!!