Donald Muir, the bank's inside man at Ibrox, has questions to answer

[forlanssister 3,132]

The last two paragraphs are illuminating.

 

 

PICTURE the Rangers scandal as a giant battleground where everyone has been hit and bloodied to some degree.

 

In the biggest mess of all is public enemy No.1 Craig Whyte, who strode triumphantly into Ibrox last year and now wouldn't be safe to walk the Glasgow streets.

 

Sir David Murray has become increasing toxic for leading the club to the edge of the abyss. Rangers company secretary Gary Withey is accused of obstructing attempts to release bank money which came from season-ticket sales. Lawyers Collyer Bristow have been alleged to have been unhelpful. Duff and Phelps, the administrators, have been accused of dithering and being Whyte's lackeys. Ticketus were happy to profiteer from speculating on supporters' loyalty and they're panicking about not being able to get their £24m back. HMRC have not been paid by Whyte and are at least £15m down, a sum which could multiply by four. Players have lost up to threequarters of their wages. A handful of staff have lost their jobs. Ally McCoist is stressed to the hilt. Fans have been sick with worry. The SFA has been told their "fit and proper person" rules are powderpuff. Paul Murray, sacked from the board last year, now faces the pressure to deliver which comes with building up the fans' hopes.

 

It has been like a financial cagefight and no party has escaped at least collateral damage. Well, perhaps one. There is one unmarked party in the story of Rangers' disgrace, a key participant in the story, but now almost forgotten and free from the mudslinging. Who was it that Walter Smith said was "running the club" in the final months before Whyte's disastrous takeover? Who was it who sanctioned Whyte before leaving the scene with all of its money paid up in full? Lloyds Banking Group must look at everyone still immersed in this carnage and, laughing up its sleeve, think 'what a bunch of mugs'.

 

When Donald Muir joined the Rangers board in the autumn of 2009 he was variously described as a "turnaround specialist" and a "company doctor". Lloyds put a gun to the club's head and insisted that he went on the board. Former chairman Alastair Johnston said the bank made it clear that it was a condition of Rangers' credit facility that Muir had to be a director. Muir was the guy who oversaw an aggressive clawback of Lloyds' debt at Rangers. He ran the show. When it was said that club staff couldn't buy a paper clip without running it past him first, the joke had a ring of truth. Because of Lloyds, Smith went two years without being able to buy a player. Because of Lloyds, he spent a while working without a contract as Rangers couldn't afford to commit to one. It was "terribly compromising" to have Muir sitting in on meetings when the board wanted to discuss financial strategy, said Johnston.

 

When Muir joined the board Rangers' debt stood at £33m. When he left â?? on the day Lloyds got out and Whyte took over â?? the liabilities were pegged at just £18m and falling. From the shambles of Rangers' finances, Lloyds pulled off the miracle of getting back every penny they were owed. When Sir David Murray talked about selling Rangers only to someone with the club's best interests at heart â?? gee, that worked out well â?? Lloyds' view on where the club ended up was not so explicitly expressed. No wonder: now it appears they didn't really care so long as they got their money back and were long gone before the big tax case verdict landed.

 

Well, that's business. If Rangers say they don't do walking away, then banks don't do emotion. They weren't under any obligation to look after Rangers beyond holding up Whyte's proof of funds document from Collyer Bristow and saying, "Look, he's got the cash â?? we're off". But what about Muir?

 

Muir and David Grier go way back. They've known each other for years. This time last year, Muir was on the Rangers board and Grier was the turnaround specialist advising Whyte on his takeover. Now Grier is a partner in Duff and Phelps, the administrators Whyte succeeded in appointing. So did Muir and Grier know that Whyte intended to fund the buy-out by flogging future season tickets rather than using his own money? How come Whyte felt he had the authority to go to Ticketus and get a £24m advance on the season tickets on April 7 last year, 28 days before the takeover went through? Ticketus had done previous deals with Rangers, remember. When Whyte offered to flog them Ibrox season tickets, it's unthinkable that they would do anything other than pick up the phone to someone at the club and check his authenticity and credentials to sell. If Lloyds were "running the club", and Muir was its man on the board, did he give that approval?

 

Muir described himself as a Rangers supporter and a guy who cared about the club. He was Alex McLeish's mate. Well, he may have worked wonders for Lloyds, but how big was his role in placing Rangers in Whyte's hands? Can he look himself in the mirror today and feel he served "his" club? Muir's not likely to be seen at Ibrox any time soon, but in December he had a VIP seat at the Old Firm game. He sat beside Whyte.

 

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/opinion/donald-muir-the-banks-inside-man-at-ibrox-has-questions-to-answer.16995762?

[Zappa 0]

The last two paragraphs are illuminating.

 

Very interesting indeed.

 

Some of us here have tried to bring the subject of Muir's involvement into the whole takeover discussion on various occassions, even recently.

[Frankie 8,869]

There's no doubt everyone involved has questions to answer in why we are where we are.

 

I do find the positive BK spin in today's Herald interesting. I wonder if Muir is involved with another bid or if this is just to apply more pressure to Whyte?

[capstans 0]

There are still people who believe the only duty the bank had was to take the money and run.

[Guest stfu]

I have always said that like any other criminal investigation look at who benefited from the takeover and who did not.

Those who did benefit:

1/ Muir. Was surely on some sort of bonus from Lloyds/HBOS as a consultant he managed to get the bank back 100% of their money.(huge conflict of interest)

2/ Murray. Managed to pass all liability for the BTC to a new owner and to RFC.

3/ Lloyds/HBOS as above got back 100% of the monies owed.

4/ Whyte. Unknown exactly how much he has made from this but can safely be assumed that he was not in this for nothing.

 

Those who did not benefit:

1/ Rangers Football club. Left with even more liabilities than before with the burden of the BTC.

2/ The shareholders (including Dave King). Selling to Whyte for £1 effectively made all shares in Rangers worthless and again left higher future liabilities.

 

Remember Donald Muir was on the board at Rangers so had a duty of care first and foremost to the shareholders.

 

What I do not understand is why when there are so many failings from 1 to 4 have there not been any arrests yet.

These people should be made to answer in court for what they have done.

[Bluedell 6,042]

When Whyte offered to flog them Ibrox season tickets, it's unthinkable that they would do anything other than pick up the phone to someone at the club and check his authenticity and credentials to sell.

 

1. If Ticketus were contacting Rangers, would it really be Muir that they would have spoken to? Would Muir really be the main contact of Ticketus in the club? Is it not far more likely that they would have spoken to Bain or McIntyre, if they were to speak to anyone?

 

2. When Whyte approached Ticketus with what was a confidential business deal, are Ticketus really going to break that confidence and give out the details to someone else?

 

3. If you were Muir and you did know that Whyte had financed the deal with Ticketus cash and had no intention of putting in any of his own cash, would you really want to be seen in directors boxes with whyte subsequently, or would you try and stay as far away from him as possible?

 

I'm no fan of Muir but there needs to be better evidence than this before you can start tying him in with Whyte.

[Guest Dutchy]

Very interesting indeed.

 

Some of us here have tried to bring the subject of Muir's involvement into the whole takeover discussion on various occassions, even recently.

 

I remember saying that the bank were killing us and there were people on here saying that they are entitlled to their money back, which they were getting, just not as fast as they wanted it. By demanding immediate repayment, it would appear that all they were interested in was getting their miney back as soon as possible, and helping to destroy our club in the process.

 

But then again, that's business, or so they say.