UCF2008

Just like he said recently after Green left, he'd been given a budget for next season that he was happy with. He now has doubts if that will remain the case. Green boasted of a £10m transfer kitty and I think Ally's only saying he needs it to get his hands on as much transfer funds as he can. We all know there's no way he's getting £10m to spend.

I don't think he needs ten million to get out of Div2. I doubt he does either in all honesty. At the same time I don't think it's unreasonable for him to hope for a few million to invest in rebuilding the squad. Especially if that job's to be completed by the time we get back to the SPL. It's not his decision though and just like managers in all walks of life he'll spend the budget he's given. From the soundbytes he's been giving us since Green & Ahmad departed it seems as though he at least suspects his budget has been cut significantly for next season.

Completely unrealistic and I struggle to believe this came from within the club. Wherever it came from I think it demonstrates a clear agenda against the current coaching staff and absolutely fails to acknowledge our current situation. If you put any club in the world in the bottom tier against part time opposition, attendances will dwindle. Some of our attendances this season have been remarkable given the level of opposition and have rightly been reported as such around the globe simply because the expected drop didn't happen...yet. The fact remains that the novelty factor and determination of our support to back the team through thick and thin will only stretch so far. Ibrox won't be empty any time soon, but the numbers will fall and there's nothing a change of coaching staff and football philosophy can do about that.

Was that not in the terms agreed with D&P which would have been void if their contracts reverted? Or was this a written guarantee Green claimed he made?

Something I've been wondering. Had the players contracts rerverted back to their original terms before being TUPE'd?

It's a tough call. I think all of them might struggle to deliver what we would expect of them. At least the good aspects of their game from their previous spells that is. I think their experience would be invaluable in bringing through the youngsters, but the more of them we bring back the less game time the youngsters will see. It depends on wages. If both are willing to play for buttons then I'd like to see Boyd and Novo back in September.

It's not good news. At least not to the extent that many were hoping some squeeky clean moneybags was going to ride in to our rescue. Aside from the alleged crminal links though it's not as bad as some are making out. They don't have the finances to throw silly money at the club to take it forward, but they don't have the finances for a takevover either. They also appear to have previous history of investing in Scottish football for reasons other than financial gain. Again, they don't have the means to do so much in the way of our favor but at least they might not just be in it for the dividends.

I was just trying to add some balance to avoid noising up our Green brigade. It was nigh on impossible to come up with a single excuse for him until that one dawned on me

I'm trying to work out why Green would sell to Easdale. Was his the first acceptable bid? Was he letting his ego get in the way of selling to someone he previously fought off like Kennedy or McColl? Did he want to stake a claim to having brought his purchaser on board? Or to give him the benefit of the doubt, is he just keeping true to his word that no one would own more than 10-15% of the club? The Easdales don't have the means to purchase a majority stake afterall.

I'd say we (and by that I mean you as well) would have hoped for him to do what was best for Rangers

It's a scary thought. I've no idea what the implications would be. I don't think anyone can say otherwise with any certainty. We don't even know for sure what Whyte's end game in all of this is. What puzzles me is how calamitous the statements and actions of the club have been over the past month. It's almost as if we're trying to hand the club back to Whyte.

If it's proven Sevco 5088 doesn't belong to Rangers then we won't be.

It's company startup costs though. We're the company and these costs (or most of them) will be reflected in our accounts. Green's just the guy who claimed he was running the show.

No but you might have agency fees to cover unless you sold it in the classifieds.

The company owns it's own defunct takeover vehicle. Why shouldn't we owe costs for the organisation of investment in it?

The company from Singapore who were involved in brokering some initial investment in the Green consortium. Green claimed they were trying to extort money from the club and refused to pay when the bill they produced was significantly higher than expected

It's not that I don't necessarily believe Murray was well enough connected, but to be the criminal mastermind behind all of this you'd have thought that he could have avoided the whole tax case in the first place. Then there's the fact that Rangers represented a relatively insignifcant portion of his debt with far greater exposure to the peering public eye. Do I think Lloyds needed to twist his arm to sell Rangers to Whyte for a pound? Maybe a little when he started to get an idea what they might be up to. He definitely wasn't duped as far I'm concerned.

Since Rangers are now claiming ownership of Sevco 5088 Ltd, does this not now confirm direct involvement of the club in any legal dispute? So where we were last week looking at Green Vs Whyte, we're now instead looking at Rangers Vs Worthington Group?

Read the statement from Worthington Group again. It makes it pretty clear they believe that Sevco 5088 is part of the package. It's top of their list of LFL assets. I expect they'll be fighting Whytes corner without Whyte needing to prove anything beforehand.

You're absolutely correct in terms of any Worthington Group legal action. It's not going to be Worthington Group Vs Rangers. It would most likely be Worthington Group Vs Green & Ahmad. The problem is those two alone account for a 12.5% shareholding in Rangers. Then if you take into account how the ownership of Sevco5088 in the event Worthington's claim is successful, you'd be looking at other members of the original takeover consortium and how their shareholding may be affected by the proceedings, then it's potentially a disaster for Rangers. You're also right that just because they say they've been advised of a prima facie case to answer, doesn't mean anythnig has been decided. Whyte has an appaling courtroom record in all of this and on his own I don't think he'd stand much of a chance. I also don't think the Earley brothers would bring much to table on that front. Other parties involved in Worthington Group might however make a difference in this case.

Maybe because Worthington Group announced it to the Stock Exchange?. http://www.investegate.co.uk/worthington-group/rns/diversification/201304170811385415C/

I was thinking the same thing myself. Also why should we put 110% trust in MM? Because he's a Rangers man? Because the rumour mill tells us he and Green couldn't stand one another? Who appointed MM as chairman? Was it Green, Ahmad or someone else? I honestly can't remember and can't say I would trust even that much coming out of the horses mouth if I was to go and look it up. The only one out of the lot of them that I could say I personally trust 110% to try and do what's best for Rangers is Walter and even then it's all resting on good intentions and his understanding of the club's traditions. Neither of which have f**k all to do with how the club runs as a business. It really is a sorry state of affairs.

David Gill would fit that bill. Conveniently, he'll be available in June as well. ...for a not so small fortune no doubt.

He hasn't been anywhere nearly influential enough in fighting our corner, mainly due to his EBT shackles, but I think we need to retain as much of a pro Rangers view over at Hampden as possible. It's already overrun by those of the other persuasion. The last thing we need to be doing is strengthening their position. Also since he's been so easily gagged by Regan and co, I don't personally think he's the right man to take us forward as a club.

Possibly. A month's notice would take him up to that point wouldn't it?