RANGERRAB

I don't see the SFA having any issue whatsoever with PM. Does that theory suggest that none of the old guard can return, even if they were outspoken regarding Whyte at the time? Remember that would include Dave King.

They would have no valid reason for stopping PM.

I think it is in the SFA rules that they can block an appointment if the person has been involved with a club within something like five years of an insolvencyevent. Cant honestly see that happening though regards PM. The SFA have a lot more questions to answer than PM regards Whyte

I agree with the point that Paul Murray may be seen as divisive, although I don't have an issue with him. His area of expertise is corporate finance and therefore would be an asset in respect of raising finance going forward.

 

I'd also agree that forensic accounting or day to day financial control wouldn't necessarily be his strong point and would expect a FD to be appointed to work alongside him.

Whilst I have past criticisms of PM in the SDM era his return would go down like a lead balloon with the SFA.

I'd imagine PM knows too much for their liking during Whyte's time at Rangers. Ive always been suspicious about Regan's role throughout and if he was being advised by someone.

Lets hope PM sees this as an opportunity to settle a few old scores, proving the EGM is successful

Putting to one side that there is a battle for control raging at the minute, have any of the outside parties been given the type of access required to be able to reveal that sort of detail?

What sort of access ? Financially I'd say it fairly obvious where we are.

Anyone who watches the current team on the park(and what we have in the dug out) surely knows that serious funds are required.

All I'm asking is do all parties have that sort of money?

He may win the war, but he will lose the peace. Rangers supporters will not accept failure on the park, if we're getting hammered by Celtic on a regular basis and are struggling to beat Aberdeen etc, then the support will simply drift away, merchandising sales will slump and all he'll be left with is some property in a run down part of Glasgow, We're not Newcastle, they at least have the consolation of playing in the EPL against a good quality of opposition...we don't have that.

I've yet to hear anything from MA, T3B, DK or whoever tell us how they intend to fund a vastly improved Rangers team on the park.

Too many of us have forgotten that

Do T3B's have much money ? I mean real, serious money behind them ? Are either of these 3 really wealthy enough to find and invest in our club to what we require ? Park seems the wealthierst by far. Not a loaded question - just putting it out there, as it appears they have money - but to what level ??

You have raised a very valid point. FWIW I do not believe they could provide the level of finance Sarver or Ashley could provide(if they were willing to that is).

Let's not kid ourselves serious finance is needed to improve what we're currently watching on the park. No one will turn up to watch a poor Rangers side just because there's 'Rangers men' on the board but haven't got the finance to improve the side

not ideally but what choice did they have to force change and try to stop it.

 

in truth worthington have progressed their claim far enough to cripple us at present we cant raise finance in any meaningful way because of their claim. their best bet is no doubt to continue that as long as possible and hope for a settlement.

progressed their claim ? to what stage ? have I missed something?

they are probably just waiting on the easdales handing them over as agreed.

Do you think Park,Letham,Taylor & King would have bought their recent shareholding if this were true?

So if Worthington or whoever have a legal claim on newco assets what's stopping them?

In 2012 as part of the agreement for the SFA licence & membership transfer to newco (i.e. the club continued under new corporate structure) we had to forfeit SPL prize monies.

Why would the Bank care who Rangers were sold to..their only interest was to get some money back. It wasn't their problem.

Really? Don't you think they'd some sort of responsbility in all of this to ensure RANGERS were sold to a reputable owner?

And do the bank not still have in their possession the £18m Whyte gave them which will likely be deemed the proceeds of fraud at a trial later this year? does it seem ok for a bank to behave in that manner?

I don't for a moment think that Fullerton had anything to do with it and don't think that Leggat's ramblings should be taken seriously.

 

Murray was looking to sell but had already turned down some very small bids, including one from one of the 3 bears. The bid primarily was designed to get LBG their cash back and remove the BTC risk from the LBG-controlled Murray Group. The bank were clearly calling the shots following the 2010 MIH reorganisation and had placed Muir on the board of several MIH companies including Rangers.

 

I believe that Murray did not have the option of refusing to sell to Whyte as the bank had control, although Murray may well have sold to him anyway if it was up to him.

And the bank were quite happy for Rangers to be sold to someone like Whyte ? Did they know his business history ? Plenty of people, not just PM & AJ, certainly knew about him.

Not only that but when Whyte got Rangers they withdrew all Rangers bank credit. Very strange

Much of that I would agree with.

 

But how was he forced into selling something that he had been trying to sell for a couple of years anyway ? He was looking to sell regardless. I personally don't buy the notion that Fullerton forced a sale to Whyte just to shaft us - which is, as we all know, what RangerRab is really trying to get at.

And Donald Muir was certainly well rewarded for this sale was he not?

SDM always said he'd only sell to the right person(s). And he was well warned about Whyte was he not by the likes of PM ? So why did he sell? The answer is very apparent IMO

Let's hope at Whyte & his chums fraud trial SDM has to go into the witness box & reveal everything. That would be most interesting.

I can't say for sure but he certainly chose to either way.

Did he have a choice? I don't think he did

Can you expand on that?

Never under-estimate the determination & hatred of those who are against us

I think you need to look at the nature of the statement Rab - saying "we didnt find any evidence of leaks from within HMRC" doesnt mean emphatically that they didnt come from there just that the enquiry failed to find any evidence to prove this. As Ibrox Boy correctly points out - Im quite sure any evidence of such would have vanished long ago.

Seems very strange to me if police seems to have given up on this does it not?

Note to The Herald: No RFC fan wishes to be 'duped' by David Murray pretending to care about our club 4 years after he almost killed it.

don't you think he was forced to sell to Whyte?

Its concluded Rab - they stated they could find no evidence the leaks came from HMRC.

 

Which begs the question of how LNS arrived at his conclusion.

Well if the leaks didnt come from HMRC where did they come from then?

Haven't the police a duty to find this out? Laws were broken here were they not?

I wonder if BBC Scotland and Mark Daly would be interested in producing a documentary entitled, 'the men who sold the stolen tax documents'?

What's the score with the police investigation into how Daly got these documents? Where did he get them from? Were no laws broken? I would have most certainly thought so

Somebody or some persons gave over the private tax details of Rangers employees without their knowledge or consent. Is nothing getting done about this any longer?

never got played in his preferred CB position either

I don't recall anyone coming up with anything that you could hang your hat on at the start which suggested Green was definitely bad.

He did say at the beginning he'd be here for a year. I don't think though anyone could have predicted the way things would have worked out with Green

I don't recall anyone coming up with anything that you could hang your hat on at the start which suggested Green was definitely bad.

Some are would have you believe they are/were clairvoyant

Green was always in 3. Sarver would be in 2 if I thought that his bids were anything more than a tactic to increase pressure on those who would be in group 1.

 

That system is one that we should all adopt, and when a name is mentioned, everyone gets to give them a rating.

Great idea. Much better than football eh?

Who cares if the team is dross & the caretaker manager is clueless & doesn't want to be there

Bill miller was whyte

LOL. You're not serious are you?

It's neither here nor there what people say on here about him.

 

I personally would have happily started going back to Ibrox if he got in a manager and we started playing watchable football again.

 

The people that count (shareholders and board) didn't entertain his offer and that's all it boils down to.

The lamentable product on the park needs addressed ASAP.Without sufficient funding like Sarver had to offer that will be difficult