BrahimHemdani

And how many of his goals were penalties; a more than decent player though and would rather he would have not been sold.

You need to stop sleeping around.

My expectation is that the Owner and Chairman of Rangers Football Club should have the highest standards of integrity and being regarded as a "wholly unreliable" witness in a court of law doesn't meet my expectation. Call it silly if you like but surely you cringed when you heard that on the news and read it in today's headlines?

I don't know anything about the VB (except that I think I am correct in saying that some or all were members of RST prior to the split in 2008) but what I find astonishing is how anyone accepts all this claptrap from Mr Whyte. If his evidence in a court of law is regarded as "wholly unreliable" what reason is there to believe that what he says out of court is any more reliable?

Broadly speaking you are correct in terms of the cashflow effect of the transaction (less VAT).

I'm sorry but you are not correct, you are confusing cashflow with profit. The "profit" is the sale price less the purchase price excluding fees, VAT and any other expenses involved.

Legally perhaps, but morally in respect of an institution like Rangers?

It's not an insinuation, it's a fact that LBG forced the deal through, as Johnston said in the interview, it was a "corporate" decision; in other words it was taken out of the hands of the local account manager etc.

Regardless of how much of the fee we had paid to Rapid Vienna, if we paid £4M and sold for £5.5M then if you take the fees off both ends of the deal (two agents involved in our sale) and a sell on amount then it is entirely possible that the "profit" was only £270k. Cashflow is quite another matter; that would depend on how much we still had to pay and how much Everton paid us up front.

The BBC treatment of these two stories is disproportionate without a doubt but this man Whyte is causing our great club one embarrassment after another and the sooner he packs his bags the better in my opinion.

Without a doubt and not unreasonably either as Murray asked Johnston to oversee the purchase.

Not with his own money, it would appear.

I can't see the BBC saying they have a document they are relying on for a story if they haven't got it, or at least seen it.

A long stretch, like seven years, for example?

I'm not sure if he could go elsewhere for three times the money but the rest has a ring of truth about it, whether you like agents or not.

Two completely different issues. I agree that the future of the Club depends on the tax case but the details of the purchase and mortgaging the season ticket money are a different matter altogether and I don't agree that questions over £24M are

So you would think that Whyte would be moving heaven and earth to do just that; doesn't seem that way to me. Even now he is saying that the auditors will get the "majority" of the documents they need this week, why not all the documents and why is it taking so long. Do Rangers not have the relevant documents or is Mr Whyte just a tad reluctant to hand them over.

I disagree. What we can well do with IMHO is clarity on how Whyte paid off the debt and if he didn't use the season ticket money for it, where it has gone. All we have had up until now from him is obfuscation and attempts to deflect the questions by attacks on the credibility of those whom are quite rightly posing them.

The overdraft facility was in place to 31/12/2011 I believe. The real issue might have been whether the bank would have renewed it absent any European cash this season. But as I said previously they would have had to weigh withdrawing it and effectively putting the Club into adminstration against the public outcry that would have ensued. So I believe a compromise deal would have been put in place.

If Whyte did nothing illegal and financed the deal with his own money through his own business then he has nothing to fear and should welcome an investigation to clear his name and move on. On the other hand, if he bought the Club with its own mortgaged money (which I assume would be illegal) then he has everything to fear including being deemed not "fit and proper". In that case what he will do is attempt yet again to discredit Johnston and his motives. My guess is that is exactly what he will do. I have said it before and I say it again, whatever Johnston did or didn't do as Chair of the Company, I believe that he did his job as Chair of the Independent Directors thoroughly and I have no reason to question his credibility or his motives. I cannot say the same for Mr Whyte. I am not sure of the definition of "fit and proper" in a football sense but in financial services it means being "honest, competetent and solvent". Hands up, those who think Mr Whyte would pass those three tests?

It's entirely possible, but highly unlikely in my view.

You are right on the money.

I don't undertand why it is even deemed worthy of discussion.

In the Tixway court case, he said he couldn't remember why he was disqualified, then he was asked if it had anything to do with creditors and he said NO. But the BBC got the court transcript of the disqualification case in which the judge said that he had removed money from creditors reach and said it was a serious breach which is why he was disqualified for 7 years. I am sure the whole story was posted on here last night or the night before.

Sent off against Celtic as well.