Bluedell

We may find pre-match comments being made by QCs who don't have anything to do with the club itself.

Very much so, which is a shame.

Totally irrelevant but

It obviously avoids dealing with the issue seriously and risk alienating a vocal section of the country. Seen as being the easiest way of avoiding addressing the apartheid education system.

We weren't told that we were going to win the tax cae. Of course everyone puts forward the front that they are confident that they are going to win the case. You wouldn't expect them to do anything else or else it would have a negative impact on the result. The worst case scenario of the tax case was always going to result in administration, under any regime.pre-pack would probably be the best for the club under these circumstances. Why am I not surprised that you would take the negative from the circular?

That's also unclear. However there's nothing to stop himn doing it, and it'd make sense for Whyte not to commit to it here. What he's stating here is what the agreement is. Anything above that is irrelevant for the circular.

Good luck with it. Hope it's a successful night.

Yes, you are adding it. That may be the intention but it's unclear, and perhaps Whyte doesn't want to commit himself, as who knows the level of success or otherwise we are going to have over the next 5 years.

And I doubt they will be of any interest.

I'm pleasantly surprised by the circular. We aren't debt free as has been mistakenly reported, but there is a commitment that the debt transferred to TRFCG will be waived if all goes well with the tax case. There will be funds made available - up to �£5m working capital, �£5m transfer fund, a further �£20m for transfers in future years, �£2.8m to meet a tax liability and �£1.7m for the stadium. However it is unclear as to whether this "investment" will be repayable to TRFCG at some point in the future. I guess we would assume that it is repayable, given that the document is silent on it.

I've reread the form and am now unclear about what exactly has been released. The wording is ambiguous. However the bottom line is that something has been released which means that there is less of a floating charge than there was before.

The timetable was that the circular would be posted by 6th, so expect it to arrive over the next few days, as I'd guess it'll be posted out second class. However hopefully something will be issued on the Plus markets site later today.

It's not like McGillivan to get something wrong. The bank has had a floating charge for a number of years, as detailed in the accounts "The Bank of Scotland plc has a floating charge and guarantees from each Group company on account of each other in respect of the loans and the overdraft." Most of this has now been released, given that most of the debt with Lloyds has now been cleared as would be expected. A portion of the floating charge (season ticket money) remains, presumably to cover working capital requirements if we still bank with them and/or to cover the lease that exists.

That should happen as a matter of course. I'm always disappouinted when I hear the likes of Spiers saying he has talked to anyone at the club, or Radio Clyde featuring an hour's feature on Walter.

Why note that Whyte was born in Motherwell? Makes me think that the article originated in Scotland and therefore probably Murray, so i'd take it with a pinch of salt. Chances are that the Russians walked away.

It can be argued that banning them makes martyrs of them. Perhaps we take a different approach. Don't allow them on the team plane for European games, don't answer their questions at press conferences and allocate them a different section at Ibrox for watching the games. Rather than being at the front of the main stand, we will allocate them some seats at the back of the Club Deck, where they don't get their HT pie and bovril. Journalists have egos and this would hit them harder than being banned. They will be humiliated rather than claiming hero status, which they could if they were banned.

Do the TBOers look upon the switch to move further away from the away support as a negative?

I wonder if that's the most important part of the article?

And he's ginger.

So who would be making that call, mate?

Naismith for me. :sn:

There you go, Frankie. And you thought that you got it from someone else.

Interesting to see Jim Sherry worked for Lynette Leisure....

As I've said before, my mate remembers him going to games around 1999/2000. There's no doubt he's a bear. As for his worth, it's my guess that he's worth nowhere near the �£700m mark, but that doesn't mean he can't be good for the club.