spanner

John McLelland Oct 2002. It’s loans we took for Murray Park and loans associated with other assets we have, so they are repayable over time depending on the loan itself. The interest on the debt is about the equivalent of paying the annual wages of a top class player, which I think puts it in context. Is Murray Park still mortgaged, if so who holds the mortgage.

Are there any outstanding debts that are secured to any other body, other than the banks.

Why are there so many disparate groups now, when I was a kid it was one body, how different bodies with different agendas can ever hope for consensus is the stuff of dreams or nightmares. Maybe it would be better to have one consolidated body, before any grandiose plans are made or mooted.

OK UCB, no harm done, my belief in SDM extends only to his undoubted ability to wrong foot everyone, he does appear to be the ultimate Ringmaster. You could well be right and I could be very wrong, somewhere in the middle is no answer, I respect your views as honestly held and appreciate your replies, even if we differ I think we all would like to see everyone come out of this happy, would be a nice Christmas present.

The reported words of the chairman. The survival of the club is not in doubt. There is no question about the club going into administration. Nobody involved in the discussions I have had over the last three months wants to play poker with the future of Rangers Football Club with Rangers being the stakes. One of the things we have done in the last three months is extended our relationship, our credit facility, with the bank. They have been quite collaborative with respect of moving forward. We have had clean audit opinion as a going concern so we can move forward. Hearts link. http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/spl/Hearts39-debt-reaches-37m-after.3902790.jp I am led to believe that MIH was granted an extension to the publishing date of the accounts, to allow them to restructure the debt, who knows it might even be true. Whatever else is being put about RFC is a viable going concern, of that the chairman has no doubt.

Why urgently, you are making a drama out of paper talk, are you implying that Rangers are in immediate danger of financial meltdown, Martin Bains statement in the accounts says very differently. It appears a lot of glory hunters are looking for their 15 minutes of fame out of this media driven and invented drama, Rangers FC are in no danger despite the doom merchants. The bottom line is very simple either MIH and Rangers by assocciation are trading legally or they are not, either solvent or insolvent, solvent being the obvious answer, investment is always welcome in any business but we wont go bust tomorrow or next year if we don't get it. The club as always will go in the direction plotted by SDM, somethings never change despite the window dressing.

Why are posters putting it about that Rangers are in immediate mortal danger, when they are anything but. Hearts debt by comparison is �£38+ million and they are hardly in the same financial league as us. I do not see anyone preparing obituaries for them. As stated bludell, you have substantiated nothing.

They say a hollow drum beats loudest and you certainly beat very loudly, I see you still fail to post up your facts, why would that be, I think we know, as for the rest of your beating, it sounds very much like you are beating the retreat, time to put up don't you think.

I would, but as you have not been able to furnish anything to back your claims up, there is nothing to file, only your suppositions. ETA. sorry forgot to add this. The �£15m revolving credit facility is in place for a period in excess of one year to 31 December 2010. The term loan, repayable over 20 years, stands at �£ 20m following the scheduled repayments during the year. The current projections and forecasts indicate that the Company should be able to operate within the level of its current facilities. The �£15m swap arrangement entered into with the Bank of Scotland in March 2008 remains in place at a fixed rate of 4.67% until at least March 2011.

As I said publish your facts, I am not claiming to be any guru, you claim to have the relevant paper work so post it, otherwise we can file it under supposition.

Thanks Frankie your reply is appreciated, my brothers mates in a certain hall in Muir street Larkhall had a good laugh about the timmy jibes, I think it may have been Al's posting existence of previous loan notes from Murray Sports that may have been to much for some, anyway thanks again Frankie.

MIH as any other company can and do renegotiate loan terms or extend them, at least that is what I am told. You appear to be under the impression that the bank has withdrawn Rangers credir facility, is or are these the same banking arrangements that are in place until Dec 2010 and due for review in Dec of this year. I was under the impression that WS was a football manager, what WS thinks or who he thinks is running the club is of no importance in the financial aspect, do you really imagine the bank is going to lie bare faced to the public by saying they are not running the club, they said they are not that is good enough for me and as I am led to believe the code of practice. You keep stating things as fact without any evidence, if you have any evidence that anyone has defaulted on bank repayments let us see them. SDM appears to be playing a blinder her, looks to be panning out as I and others imagine he would expect.

Bluedell, your take on matters as are all of ours, are in the main supposition. What I do know is that no one has defaulted on anything yet. Again as has been explained to me, Donald Muir is an invitee to the Rangers board at the behest of SDM, the bank cannot impose directors on companies that are solvent and trading within their remit. To impose anything would be the job of an appointed official administrator. To all intents and purposes it appears that SDM has got one of the best company doctors around free of charge, also a bogeyman for the fans to concentrate on, as this time around it would not be SDM who is advising or making the necessary financial cuts, it would be seen as the bank protecting its interests, as previously said SDM is no ones fool.

The bank as far as I know are a long way from having a detailed understanding, MIH's property arm have assets or they may turn out to be millstones, depends from what I have been told how the leases or purchases are framed for tax breaks, development grants, EU monies all sorts of financial things way above my head. What I do know is that no one at the banks or anywhere else is underestimating SDM, love him or loath him he is no ones fool and a lot sharper than most. The white knight is most probably sitting in Charlotte square. Just a thought, what if it was SDM who broached the subject of administration.

The way it has been explained to me it is more media mischief than any great problem at this moment. If Rangers continue to service the debt there is no problem, the problems could arise if MIH's accounts reveal something that makes the bank take action against them and indirectly Rangers, if MIH are OK and can service their debts, the end result would have been much ado about nothing. I think SDM will have an interest in Rangers for a long time yet.

Why is anything urgent, it has been stated our banking arrangements stand until Dec. 2010.

Thanks guys, I don't know enough about money things to argue about the finer points, all I can say without giving anything away is that he works for Lloyds TSB Asset Finance Division at quite high level, I on the other hand am just one of the millions of unemployed.

The hypocrisy of some sites is breathtaking, my brother who posted as boydscores has been banned by Rangersmedia, apparently he understands the Rangers accounts only to well, he should for reasons that will become obvious at a date in the future. If you don't agree with the party line it appears that over at Rangersmedia, appears the little general plays the timm card and you are gone, how about that frankie.

First post so bear with me, I was told by a mate who was at the meeting that there was a small turnout of about 150-170, is this a barometer for the future and the apathy it appears that exists about our present situation.