der Berliner 3,815 Posted February 21, 2012 Share Posted February 21, 2012 If it is true that the 24 mill will be used to pay the tax bill then where do we get the running costs from for the next 3 years. Seems like a borrow borrow borrow scenario to me and not a healthy way to get the club back on it's feet. A few notes ... - 24m to cover some 3.5m per month (or somewhat but not much less in months to come) will end up with no money in 7 months. There is more cash flow than that, but even so, it would not help that long either. - if the money was used to clear the Lloyds debt, it essentially becomes another "debt/loan" to either Whyte/Ticketus. The latter will get their money back from ticket sales anyway, only that Rangers need to get money from another source to pay the bills. Ticketus will thus most likely not want the money back instantly. That said, Ticketus said that they don't do loans or the like and that such practise is pretty common in the world of football, what the club does with their money is not relevant to them. They have the relative security to get their money back straight from the ticket offices. - if anything, it may weaken Whyte's position as preferred creditor ... but it might be one of his plans anyways, getting rid of Lloyds and placing a pistol on HMRC's breast with regard of their handling of the HMRC case. He sure gets the bloody nose here, but if he is removed from the scene (as creditor) for is sneaky behaviour, it should be more easier for any potential buyer to get the club and speak to HMRC on a more peaceful tone. Not that I have any clue whatsoever. And we have to keep in mind that all of this is so far just papertalk. 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.