sannybear 0 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 I think we will see whyte and green in court. roddy forsyth seems to agree. It looks like that`s the only way we`ll ever get to the truth about this whole sordid mess . What a disgrace ! . 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,627 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 you may think its irrelevant that green entered into a deal to hand rangers back to whyte post admin. I certainly don't. we also only have greens word he did stiff him. though I conceed the info we have so far backs up that claim. So what is it you want? You won't believe any explanation that comes out and there will be nothing worthwhile in black and white. I don't for a minute believe that Green planned to allow Whyte any involvement in the club. Whyte was always going to be stiffed. My major concern is the lies told but there's not much anyone can do about it now. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Author Share Posted April 12, 2013 So what is it you want? You won't believe any explanation that comes out and there will be nothing worthwhile in black and white. I don't for a minute believe that Green planned to allow Whyte any involvement in the club. Whyte was always going to be stiffed. My major concern is the lies told but there's not much anyone can do about it now. how do you imagine he was getting the shares and stuffing him after telling him you are sevco. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewarty 2,025 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 more mudslinging, scaremongering and sensationalism. this time from rangers shareholder and telegraph journalist roddy forsyth. I couldn't see much wrong with Forysth's piece. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,627 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 how do you imagine he was getting the shares and stuffing him after telling him you are sevco. Saying "you are Sevco" means nothing. TBH I haven't read the whole thing so haven't got all the details, but was Whyte actually a registered shareholder of 5088? If not and he doesn't have anything signed then he hasn't any comeback. I know you have mentioned earlier that verbal contracts are enforeable but it's easier said than done. However, it's all "what ifs" . You didn't answer my question. What is it you're wanting here? A detailed explanation that you won't believe and won't change anything anyway? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,745 Posted April 12, 2013 Share Posted April 12, 2013 Sevco 5088 is always in the debate, but as far as I am aware, whether Whyte was a shareholder in Sevco 5088 or whatnot, it became irrelevant once the CVA failed, Sevco Scotland Ltd. was created and took over the assets from the admins? And I severely doubt that Whyte has anything to do with Sevco Scotland. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Author Share Posted April 12, 2013 Saying "you are Sevco" means nothing. TBH I haven't read the whole thing so haven't got all the details, but was Whyte actually a registered shareholder of 5088? If not and he doesn't have anything signed then he hasn't any comeback. I know you have mentioned earlier that verbal contracts are enforeable but it's easier said than done. However, it's all "what ifs" . You didn't answer my question. What is it you're wanting here? A detailed explanation that you won't believe and won't change anything anyway? I don't agree that saying you are sevco means nothing. especially combined with the cash deposits from whyte and early. I've said before I want the whole truth now. I think we can assume we have had all the truth we are getting or we have had the actual truth. if not and anymore lies are exposed I want him gone. immediately. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Author Share Posted April 12, 2013 Sevco 5088 is always in the debate, but as far as I am aware, whether Whyte was a shareholder in Sevco 5088 or whatnot, it became irrelevant once the CVA failed, Sevco Scotland Ltd. was created and took over the assets from the admins? And I severely doubt that Whyte has anything to do with Sevco Scotland. that's fine but if we had got a cva it would have been a huge issue and green was part of that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Author Share Posted April 12, 2013 Sevco 5088 is always in the debate, but as far as I am aware, whether Whyte was a shareholder in Sevco 5088 or whatnot, it became irrelevant once the CVA failed, Sevco Scotland Ltd. was created and took over the assets from the admins? And I severely doubt that Whyte has anything to do with Sevco Scotland. that's fine but if we had got a cva it would have been a huge issue and green was part of that. what we seem to be saying here is because his plan to hand us back to whyte failed we should ignore it. can't say I agree. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 12, 2013 Author Share Posted April 12, 2013 and let's not forget Charles has been caught on tape chasing whyte for the 25k needed to set up sevco. 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.