simplythebest 0 Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 Ticketus was external debt for one. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,132 Posted November 20, 2012 Share Posted November 20, 2012 I am afraid I am not into searching back on all his statements and I did ask it as a question. I will accept I could be wrong, but I am sure we are paying a loan back over a number of years. i am just not 100% sure that the loan was for the purchase. I was present at the meeting in the Ibrox Suite (as were other posters from here) one of the many occasions he's made the "debt free" claim, no mention at all of "external debt". At no time has Green or any of his investors intimated that the £5.5m for the asset purchase was a loan. The details of a loan for the CVA monies was declared in the CVA proposal, no mention of a loan in regards to the straight asset purchase was made. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I was present at the meeting in the Ibrox Suite (as were other posters from here) one of the many occasions he's made the "debt free" claim, no mention at all of "external debt". At no time has Green or any of his investors intimated that the £5.5m for the asset purchase was a loan. The details of a loan for the CVA monies was declared in the CVA proposal, no mention of a loan in regards to the straight asset purchase was made. Is it not possible as small a number as one investor may be treating it as a loan? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,511 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 This is the story I think and you were right about the 8.5 mill for CVA. I just took it and still believe the 5.5 mill is also a loan.The fact he says that if the CVA does not go through he is 3mill better off and not 5.5 worse off says it for me i think. I could be wrong as I say. The former Sheffield United chief executive also insisted that the consortium did not require season ticket money to fund its takeover and said that revenues from that source would be put into a holding account until the club emerged from administration or reformed as a newco. "On Thursday all the names will be out there and either it has gone through a CVA or a newco,â? the former Sheffield United chief executive told Telegraph Sport last night. â??Some of the people don't want to play ball if it's newco, some are happy either way. "The season ticket renewal letters went out last night. It says quite clearly on the renewal letters that monies received will be placed in an escrow account and that was clearly because the administrator can't have access to it because he's going. â??He's either going because a CVA has been agreed or because it's newco route. Let's assume CVA goes ahead. Any money that comes in between the approval and the cooling off period (28 days from Thursday) is all ring-fenced. That's why this myth that we are using season-ticket holdersâ?? money to buy the club is spurious. "If I was a Rangers fan, I would be suspicious. I definitely understand why people are nervous and distrusting and I think that's healthy. I don't think people should just jump like lemmings off a cliff. I think football fans are more intelligent than they are categorised. They are aware that for the CVA to go through on Thursday, for that to happen the receiver will already havebeen paid so we would have no chance of using that money. "The other claim is that the money is going in as loan and therefore we are going to take the money back out afterwards. The reason it is a loan is because I never wanted the 26,000 existing shareholders diluted and destroyed. â??If I put all those monies in as equity on the first day, they would have been down to nothing. We've spoken to the panel on a regular basis and through our advisors we are coming up with a structure that ensures the existing shareholders are not prejudiced. â??If I had put the money in any other method we would have triggered what's called a Rule Nine bid and apart from the time delays that would create, the shares would have lost all of their value and I don't think that's right or fair. â??I have spent hours with my advisers and paid them big fees to protect the minority - and I am now the bad guy, this crooked guy who is putting a loan in to take 4000% interest on it. Fans see this 'loan' and think it is something sinister. It is exactly the opposite of sinister. It was done specifically to protect their interests. "There's no season ticket money required to do the deal. The deal is completed on Thursday when we will not have received one penny from season tickets and if the CVA doesn't get approved I am £3m better off. â??By the end of the cooling off period we will have then raised another £30m, that's two years season-ticket sales. Fans will be allowed to participate and if fans don't want to participate then all those that are lining up will take the shares. â??No one will be able to say that Charles Green didn't allow us to buy shares, because anybody can buy shares. By the end of July, we will have £30m-plus in the bank from the share issue. â??Rangers have never had that much cash in the bank never because it was either siphoned off to Ticketus or siphoned off to deal with other financial inter-group companies. "Without us this club would have closed. When I get these comments that the Blue Knights consortium was going to do this or that I say â??Get your cheques out and buy it!â?? â??I have said to everyone everyday, â??I am here to do a job and I want to raise as much money for Rangers as I can.â?? I don't care where that money comes from as long as it is legally obtained. â??If fans don't want us there, buy the shares and kick us out. I will have a contract. If you don't like me, sack me. That could never happen before but that's why I have done it this way so that's exactly what can happen. The club will be listed on the stock market and if the fans want to take over the club, take it over - take it over.â? In another shot at Dave King, the Rangers director who accused him of â??a complete lack of transparencyâ?? and who had advised creditors to vote against a CVA, Green said: â??How could a Rangers fan even think of that? â??Up until now everyone has told me to worry that Craig Whyte will change his mind and not give his shares to me. Just to set the record straight, whether King has got a claim against Whyte I don't know - I wouldn't suggest I have been chaperoning them for the last two years and was there when one said something to the other - but what I do know, as far as my limited knowledge of the law is concerned, is that as far as a CVA is concerned even if all the shareholders vote against it, if the creditors all vote for it, they overrule the shareholders. â??So you actually don't need the shares. The creditors would force it through.â? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,132 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Is it not possible as small a number as one investor may be treating it as a loan? Then according to your logic Charlie lied. "Rangers is debt-free and a huge club with enormous support and a 140-year track record of success on the domestic and international arenas. "We're at the late stage over a kit deal with adidas or Puma and the moment we were knocked out of the SPL we took control of our image rights. And we have no debt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Then according to your logic Charlie lied. Or there were no loans at that time. Investment can come about any time. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Moon 1,547 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I thought the loan was from investors, hence not external debt, was for working capital after the purchase and prior to the sale of season tickets which was delayed to the last minute due to the machinations of the SPL. I have seen Green use the phrase "external debt" on a few occasions. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Bolton owe their owner about 140 million I couldn't care less. but if the Bolton owner bought the club with fans money I bet he's hated. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 I couldn't care less. but if the Bolton owner bought the club with fans money I bet he's hated. Explain where the fan's money comes into this. The cash is from their own pockets. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Ticketus was external debt for one. internal or external and no mater the amount, interest rate or repayment terms it would still be a bunch of shysters buying the club with our cash and getting rich off the fans. I really hope this isn't true. green & co will make plenty of the uplift in share price and good luck to them on that. this though would be ripping the piss. 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.