forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 The whole BBC thing confuses me. He was accused of 'criminality' on the basis that he was a director on boards when he had been disqualified. He slammed the BBC for their muckraking exercise, withdrew co-operation with the club and released strong statements condemning them for being 'institutionally biased against Rangers'. Quietly, 2 or 3 months later, he admits their accusation of his disqualification was actually completely true. What he seems to deny is being a director during that time, despite the BBC having documents which put his name on various companies' boards during said period. The evidence against him isn't exactly weak, and he admits to part of it despite initially setting up a bit of a panic room regarding them. So what's to say in 2 or 3 months he won't quietly admit to 'small aspects' of the Record's accusations too? The BBC didn't have documents as such as you allude to what they had was a transcript of a court case where a witness stated that he was acting as a director of a company called Re-Tex whilst he was banned from doing so. bmck's post pretty much covers why Whyte won't sue, he simply cannot leave himself open to being questioned by some of the country's leading QC's whilst on oath. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 bmck's post pretty much covers why Whyte won't sue, he simply cannot leave himself open to being questioned by some of the country's leading QC's whilst on oath. He could just answer awkward questions whilst under oath by saying he can't accurately remember x, y or z.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 He could just answer awkward questions whilst under oath by saying he can't accurately remember x, y or z.... But I'm sure the QC's will assist his recollection of the facts.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Listening to Alistar Johnston on BBC Radio Scotland, and he's sounding not too bad with regards to how our relationship with the banki was much improved. Of course, no matter what he says, it could have still been a few years before we got to the scenario he's talking about, and the tax case would have still to be dealt with. Businessmen, they're meant to save the country as well. Fat chance the fat cats can manage that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Whyte doesn't actually deny using the monies from Ticketus to pay off Lloyds in that statement. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Listening to Alistar Johnston on BBC Radio Scotland, and he's sounding not too bad with regards to how our relationship with the banki was much improved. Of course, no matter what he says, it could have still been a few years before we got to the scenario he's talking about, and the tax case would have still to be dealt with. I found Mr Johnston's comments entirely convincing, especially in relation to LBG, and the questions he posed are the ones that all Rangers fans should be asking. The statement is very carefully crafted e.g. "I can categorically assure supporters that when I launched a takeover bid for the Club it was funded entirely from one of my companies and that was demonstrated clearly to the satisfaction of the previous owner, Lloyds Banking Group and professional advisers." No doubt this is true but he deosn't say where his company got the money. I am in no doubt that "his company" borrowed the money somewhere and it wouldn't surprise me in the least to find that in effect that was future season ticket sales. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 That's what I was thinking BH, but he also spoke about us being £18 million due to the bank and he needed to get to a permant debt of £16, after paying off £1 million a year, which says to me that we were not quite at the stage of total debt freedom. It remains the fact that the tax case will have a great bearing on how we progress, or not, in the near future. I'll be devasted if we were to go to the wall and re-emerge as some other company/club. The question still is, would we have been better off staying with Murrays mob, orgoing with Whyte's. That's probably something we'll never know. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 There's a theory being voiced that Whyte is trying to back Murray into a corner where he (Murray) will have to accept the tax liability and that Murray is orchestrating a media campaign against Whyte in return. Hence the BBC interview of AJ and Walter - and the Daily Record spread that was more or less commissioned by Murray. It seems Whyte may not have been nearly as idle or as passive as people think. Of course, I couldn't possibly confirm any of this and wouldn't even try to. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 There's a theory being voiced that Whyte is trying to back Murray into a corner where he (Murray) will have to accept the tax liability and that Murray is orchestrating a media campaign against Whyte in return. Hence the BBC interview of AJ and Walter - and the Daily Record spread that was more or less commissioned by Murray. It seems Whyte may not have been nearly as idle or as passive as people think. Of course, I couldn't possibly confirm any of this and wouldn't even try to. ...and for lesson #2 on how to start a rumour.....???? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 ...and for lesson #2 on how to start a rumour.....???? The possible scenario that maineflyer is outlining is something that's been getting mentioned on and off for a good while now (months). I don't buy it. I trust Whyte far less than I trusted Murray which means I don't trust Whyte at all. Whyte bought Rangers Football Club knowing it was essentially a loss-making entity and knowing he didn't have the cash or means to support it. I don't believe for one minute that Whyte's intentions are above board because there's no evidence of him having serious money and no evidence of him being this uber-smart "business turnaround specialist" that so many fans blindly bought into. Guys like Paphitis and all the other genuine turnaround specialists who really ARE smart businessmen don't buy football clubs unless they're a fan with millions of spare change to invest in their passion, but Whyte said on camera that he sees Rangers as a business opportunity. The big question for me is did Whyte see a business opportunity that benefits himself AND the club or just himself? He claims to be a massive fan, so you'd imagine that he'd want any moving and shaking to be beneficial to both, eh? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.