the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Hatred no but I had no time for a bunch of rich 'Rangers men' trying to get us as cheap as possible. I was happy for any bid to get accepted and was a bit pissed off at the idea of TBK being entitled to buy us. Miller's plan involved a CVA and merging the companies anyway, but HMRC would have scuppered that like they would have done any CVA (barring one really pushing the boat out like 30 million plus), so I don't see what's the point in arguing against the new company structure when it turns out it was the only option we had. or worrying about miller who made it clear he only wanted us in the SPL. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 or worrying about miller who made it clear he only wanted us in the SPL.If the companies merged I imagine we wouldn't have needed voted in. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 If the companies merged I imagine we wouldn't have needed voted in. the plan was to merge the companies in a couple of years. he wanted permission for the newco to play in the SPL in the meantime. much like the cva we know that's was never going to happen. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 Spot on. FF/RST were instinctively suspicious of each and every bid; Ng, Miller, Kennedy, Green, etc but they gushed in praise of TBK's bid from the outset. Who can forget the thread started on FF by the site owner himself to announce news of, "A brilliant deal struck by Paul Murray" which amounted to TBK handing Ticketus £10m when just a few weeks later it became clear they were owed nothing by the club? Brilliant indeed. From the off, TBK's bid stank to high heaven. An ex-Rangers director, stating simultaneously that he had cut the debt at the club while knowing nothing of the club's finances and so was in no way responsible for EBTs, heading up a consortium consisting of himself, Douglas Park, Ticketus and the RST, with Mark Dingwall acting like a commission-hungry estate agent assuring everyone what a great deal it was? Pardon me for not swooning with excitement at that lineup. At very stage, FF/RST furiously excoriated all bids except TBK's, for whom they barely stopped short of fellating Paul Murray in public, and they expressed utter incredulity when other Rangers fans hesitated to do the same. And you guys seriously wonder why Mr Dingwall's involvement throughout the bid process looked a little suspicious? More fake innocence from FF/RST, I'm afraid. On FF every non-TBK bidder was speculated to be a front for Whyte as well. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 ff is that big that almost everything that's possible to say is said. plenty backed miller. plenty didn't want tbk. indeed I'd say most didn't want tbk. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bossy 0 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 They say that hindsight is 20-20. And so it appears with this discussion. I was sort of watching from the sidelines but, at the time, the BK bid was the only one that we had any information about. The little we knew about the other bidders was generally not very positive. Again, at the time, I thought that, conceptually, the BK bid hung together pretty well. By that, I mean that I understood the structure and felt that, if it went through, it had a realistic chance of putting the club on a solid footing and recapitalising it. Also, at the time, the BKs were offering a significant element of supporter participation so it was not unreasonable that the RST would be supportive as it was a move towards their overall goals. Personally, I was extremely suspicious about Kennedy given his record at Stockport and I got into more than a few arguments on FF as a result (no banning however). When he got into bed with the BKs I began to wonder if I had been wrong about him. Sadly, I think I was right. What we did not know at the time was 1) the BKs had no money of their own and had not lined up any source of financing other than Ticketus 2) Kennedy was only interested in buying us on the cheap (which makes you wonder about his motives). When push came to shove there was no substance behind the BKs. But, again, that is easy to see with hindsight. But, frankly, the other bidders were not any better. With that perfect hindsight vision, it is easy to criticise the RST for backing the BKs but, from their point of view, it was the logical stance. And where was the rest of the support when all this was happening? At least the RST was out there with a perspective. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3909 04 0 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 (edited) They say that hindsight is 20-20. And so it appears with this discussion. I was sort of watching from the sidelines but, at the time, the BK bid was the only one that we had any information about. The little we knew about the other bidders was generally not very positive. Again, at the time, I thought that, conceptually, the BK bid hung together pretty well. By that, I mean that I understood the structure and felt that, if it went through, it had a realistic chance of putting the club on a solid footing and recapitalising it. Also, at the time, the BKs were offering a significant element of supporter participation so it was not unreasonable that the RST would be supportive as it was a move towards their overall goals. Personally, I was extremely suspicious about Kennedy given his record at Stockport and I got into more than a few arguments on FF as a result (no banning however). When he got into bed with the BKs I began to wonder if I had been wrong about him. Sadly, I think I was right. What we did not know at the time was 1) the BKs had no money of their own and had not lined up any source of financing other than Ticketus 2) Kennedy was only interested in buying us on the cheap (which makes you wonder about his motives). When push came to shove there was no substance behind the BKs. But, again, that is easy to see with hindsight. But, frankly, the other bidders were not any better. With that perfect hindsight vision, it is easy to criticise the RST for backing the BKs but, from their point of view, it was the logical stance. And where was the rest of the support when all this was happening? At least the RST was out there with a perspective. What little info we had about other bids was spun as negatively as possible in order to make TBK bid look good. As we've heard, TBK had approached RST to discuss their plans. It seems clear now those plans included supporter representation, which explains why Dingwall & co practically came in their pants every time they mentioned TBK. (Self-interest?? Perish the thought!!) TBKs had pots of money, they just chose not to invest it in buying Rangers. The other bidders were almost all better, which explains why their bids were recommended ahead of the increasingly wretched TBK bids. TBK should have been the preferred bidders but they blew it. Their association with Dingwall & the RST hindered rather than aiding their bid. That's because any party backed unequivocally by MD naturally becomes suspect in the eyes of the wider support. The above may not be palatable but, as Bill Hicks said, "It's the fuckin' truth". Edited December 2, 2012 by 3909 04 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plgsarmy 111 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 They say that hindsight is 20-20. And so it appears with this discussion. I was sort of watching from the sidelines but, at the time, the BK bid was the only one that we had any information about. The little we knew about the other bidders was generally not very positive. Again, at the time, I thought that, conceptually, the BK bid hung together pretty well. By that, I mean that I understood the structure and felt that, if it went through, it had a realistic chance of putting the club on a solid footing and recapitalising it. Also, at the time, the BKs were offering a significant element of supporter participation so it was not unreasonable that the RST would be supportive as it was a move towards their overall goals. Personally, I was extremely suspicious about Kennedy given his record at Stockport and I got into more than a few arguments on FF as a result (no banning however). When he got into bed with the BKs I began to wonder if I had been wrong about him. Sadly, I think I was right. What we did not know at the time was 1) the BKs had no money of their own and had not lined up any source of financing other than Ticketus 2) Kennedy was only interested in buying us on the cheap (which makes you wonder about his motives). When push came to shove there was no substance behind the BKs. But, again, that is easy to see with hindsight. But, frankly, the other bidders were not any better. With that perfect hindsight vision, it is easy to criticise the RST for backing the BKs but, from their point of view, it was the logical stance. And where was the rest of the support when all this was happening? At least the RST was out there with a perspective. What a great post and sort of reflects the way I was feeling at the time. I've always felt that the Club should be in the hands of those who love it most and that it Rangers supporters. It's disappointing to read the post by 3909 04 which displays not only a lack of understanding of what was happening but an absolute hatred of fellow Rangers fans. For the record, I think Paul Murray was let down by others in his consortium and is a totally decent guy. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plgsarmy 111 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 What little info we had about other bids was spun as negatively as possible in order to make TBK bid look good. As we've heard, TBK had approached RST to discuss thier plans. It seems clear now those plans included supporter representation, which explains why Dingwall & co practically came in their pants every time they mentioned TBK. (Self-interest?? Perish the thought!!) TBKs had pots of money, they just chose not to invest it in buying Rangers. The other bidders were almost all better, which explains why their bids were recommended ahead of the increasingly wretched TBK bids. TBK should have been the preferred bidders but they blew it. Their association with Dingwall & the RST hindered rather than aiding their bid. That's because any party backed unequivocally by MD naturally becomes suspect in the eyes of the wider support. The above may not be palatable but, as Bill Hicks said, "It's the fuckin' truth". It's nothing like the truth and if you believe that then you are beyond help. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
3909 04 0 Posted December 2, 2012 Share Posted December 2, 2012 It's nothing like the truth and if you believe that then you are beyond help. I disagree. Unfortunately for you, so did Duff & Phelps, who continually accepted other bids in preference to TBK's. I'm very sorry but it would appear those who mattered accepted my version of events ahead of yours. If I'm beyond help, where exactly does that leave you and the RST? 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.