Bluedell

Yes, these are the same credit arrangements. They are in place now, but were not for a period of time. That is a fact. Do you with your great knowledge deny it? Have you got evidence that he hasn't defaulted on loan repayments? Where did he get the �£400m from then? Are you suggesting that wlter Smith doesn't know what is happening within the club? That's laughable. The bank can easily state that they are not running the club when they are influencing every major decision that's made. It's naive to think otherwise. You are the one who has stated stuff without evidence. I have the MIH accounts, Walter's statement, the chairman's statement, the appointment of Muir to back me up. You have nothing other than kidding on you have inside knowledge.

MIH have to repay loans of over �£400m in the current year according to their 2008 accounts. Not supposition, but fact. MIH do not have �£400m to repay these loans. Again fact. I'd be interested to know how MIH have therefore not defaulted in loan repayments as you have stated. The bank had withdrawn the credit facility, which was confirmed by Rangers chairman in a recent interview. Fact therefore and not supposition. As Rangers did not have a credit facility the bank CAN say that they will not renew the facility unless they have a representative appointed to the Board. That again is fact, and your comment that a bank cannot impose a director is not looking at it from a realistic viewpoint. I agree that I cannot say for sure that Muir is a bank appointee, but when Walter Smith comes out and says that the bank are running the club then it is more than mere supposition.

I don't believe that the bank don't have a detailed understanding of the situation. It's not that difficult. MIH must have defaulted on loan repayments during the year as it was impossible for them to do otherwise without some major debrt rescheduling which the bank would not have been in a position to do. Murray may have approached the subject of administration because, as a director of the group, he had a responsibility to ensure that it was not trading illegally and therefore had to address the subject of the group defaulting its loans.

The bottom line is that MIH are obviously not OK, which has prompted the bank's actions and has to where we are now.

Thanks for that insight, 26th. You must remember to let us know what you really think of Tom English.

Are we happy that we would be unable to buy anyone during that time? What happens in Dec 2010? Are the bank going to pull the facility completely at that date? What happens if MIH collapses next month? I don't think that we can sit back and be happy that we have banking facilities for the next 13 months.

That's certainly an important and difficult question, one which has been touched upon previously on here. To start with, you need to consider practicality against idealism. Ideally you want to be able to achieve OMOV, but there is a high risk that that it won't raise enough cash as there is no incentive for the big hitters to put a lot of cash in, and presumably we are want a high amount of cash in quickly so from a practical viewpoint it needs to be abandonded. There was a good discussion on this before http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?t=14609. Perhaps some sort of hybrid scheme is needed whereby initially people have power based on the level of their investment, but over time it is transformed into a OMOV scheme, or else there are safeguards put in place to try and limit people's votes up to a set maximum of, say, 5%, although there may be some inherent problems with this. Just some initial thoughts.

It was said that the Trust are looking at 17 different models at the moment. Rather than us reinventing the wheel, would it be an idea to highlight the main areas of differences between the models that are being looked at or what the main areas of connsideration are? That way we can discuss some specifics, rather than talk about abstracts and be miles away from what is being considered.

Are Dundee Utd one of the teams that have agreed to our surcharge? I've lost track. If so, then you make a valid point, and it would take the club to buy into the idea of a boycott and be willing to hand back tickets.

This is from the team that put up even more roadblocks than celtic when we were trying to get things rearranged for th UEFA Cup final. A boycott would get my support.

When Alan Hodgkinson was mentioned, we were regaled with tales of how he had trained Frankie as well as some ex-Hibs goalie.

I'm sure he sent his best wishes and they just weren't read out.

Have my ugly mug plastered all over Gersnet? Aye right. I forgot to say that Terry Hurlock was also there. He was also spotted in the hotel bar at 11am this morning still pissed.

Agreed. He does have a good point, but just can't help himself.

Frankie got some on his phone until it decided to give up the ghost.

Frankie and I were invited to the Andy Goram benefit dinner at the Thistle hotel in Glasgow last night. It was a great night attended by the Goalie himself, Brian Laudrup , Rino, Walter, Durrant, Hately, McCall, Miller and Brand, Hubbard and Simpson. Bill McMurdo was chairman for the night, Jeff Winter the ex-premiership ref did a small turn, and the main speakers were Donald Findlay (whose set I'd heard before at the WRC) and John Gahagan who was totally brilliant. Others who were there include Alan Rough, Alan McGraw, Alastair Forsyth the golfer and Tommy Gemmill. Thanks to Frankie for taking my photo with Laudrup , who has to get a special mention for being willing to sit and sign autographs for around 2 hours. The guy is a legend. Well done to Contacts who organised the evening, and a huge thank you to Chryson Wealth Management for our invitation.

I've no idea why he was banned but he certainly doesn't understand the Rangers accounts well and this has been shown up on several occasions.

I don't have a problem with getting behind something worthwhile, but there's nothing to get behind at the moment. However I'll obviously be looking at what emeges over the forthcoming weeks with interest.

TB, thanks for that informative post. It's obvious that the RST does have an image problem in the support, partly shown by MF's post, and partly shown by the general apathy (at best) by the non-internet fans. Do the RST board show signs of acknowledging and addressing this issue as it's going to difficult to get the punters involved if it is not? edit: I see you have addressed the first part of this, but perhaps not the second. It's OK to say that they are the only group trying it, but if they can't appeal to the masses then there could be problems. We only get one shot at this.

See the Gerspride conference thread.

And yet I didn't hear Peter Rafferty complaining when the Sellic signed Keane. Hypocrite.

UCB, I couldn't make it due to family commitments, but would be interested to hear how the HSV model works in practice, and what your thoughts are to the positives and negatives as to how it would relate to Rangers and our support, given the cultural and other differences involved.

My view is that the mess we are in and the desire to play in England are two separate things (for me anyway). We could be run very well, and I'd still want the move. I agree that it will never happen (or extremely unlikely anyway) but one can dream.

He's played well during the past month, but do you remember all the people calling for Alexander to be in the team prior to that. McGregor has looked shaky on more than a few occasions this season, although thankfully he has regained his best form recently.

To a certain extent, I'd agree with Totti (welcome to the site, btw). Should they have stayed up drinking as they did? Of course not. However Should they have been singled out in the way that they were, when other were almost as cupable? No. Did they deserve to be banned sine die after the hampden incident? Again No. Did the SFA handle the whole situation dreadfully? Too right they did.