BrahimHemdani

I can't see a company going to the expense of a court case where they may or may not be awarded costs just for the publicity. If the debts were paid, there would be no court case.

Rangers bought the Albion Car park back from Murray's Premier Property Group for £1 in 2004. There were conditions re the possible building of the casino that never went ahead.

No GA, I haven't, but most sensible people can sort out their disputes before they get to court. On the other hand I have sued people in court half a dozen or so times and in my experience they were just people who didn't want to pay their debts, in other words they weren't really genuine disputes. That certainly seemed to be the case with the pensions and tax advice bills that Mr Whyte agreed to pay once Rangers had been taken to court.. My point is that he shouldn't have let it get that far unless there was a genuine issue that couldn't be resolved by discussion and in those two cases at least there didn't appear to be a genuine issue.

That is more or less my understanding. I am advised that he borrowed the money that he put into Wavetower to do the deal in the first place.

Fans should have trusted the Independent Directors Group and made their feelings known at the time.

No I certainly do not. I argue the toss if I think there is an issue and I have a legitimate case. But when the dispute (if any) is settled and I am due to pay an agreed amount, I pay. I have never been sued in court for a debt that I knew I had to pay as has happened more than once already under Mr Whyte's reign at Ibrox.

Interesting that you should choose my birthday for your wedding, congratulations!

I will certainly not argue against your experience. Personally, I'm not sure about the Turkish players' attitude to football, my only experience is being in Bursa and whilst the fans were very friendly I didn't see any particular evidence that they were more passionate about football than Spaniards or Italians for example. Think Novo and Amaruso, for example, both of whom became very passionate about our Club. On the playing front, in terms of Greeks; contrast ther passion of Kyrgiakos with the apparent disinterest of Samaras!

If we lose the tax case and the Club goes into administration, Whyte will own the property. If we win the tax case and he goes on to develop the property he should be able to sell his shares in the Club at a handsome profit in 5-10 years time, which was Ellis' plan.

The issue is not about his disqualification per se, it's the fact that he said he couldn't remember why he had been disqualified. If he had taken your position he or his lawyer could have argued that it wasn't relevant. As far as I can see The Record have simply reported the facts of what was said in court as have STV http://news.stv.tv/scotland/west-central/294269-sheriff-will-decide-if-rangers-owner-craig-whyte-has-to-pay-roofing-firm-90000/. Everyone is entitled to draw their own conclusions. The impression I have is of someone who engages the services of professional advisers or purchases goods or services (pensions advice, tax advice) and then tries to find any excuse not to pay for them.

When Willie Johnston decided to turn it on, he was in today's parlance "unplayable".

How many times?

There is some comment about this in the Rangers magazine interview with Ali Russell. The discussions on the Hinshelwood Development Proposal in 2006-07 involved the Club, GCC, GHA and the owner of the site at the corner roundabout. A major issue was the Albion Car Park which is required to provide the 900 spaces necessary in connection with the Club Deck. Now that the Hinshelwood flats have been demolished the way may be open to the Club (or should I say Mr Whyte) developing the land that they own around the stadium.

I'm equally excited by him but don't quite understand why a part Turkish player would be more likely to give 100% than a player of any other nationality? I would suspect that he will start on the bench next week and come on for Wallace at some stage. Question is, will Ally start him ahead of Wallace and in these circumstances would Papac retain his place (my preference) or would Wallace go to LB? If I was Gregg Wylde, I'd be thinking about going on loan somewhere.

I just don't like the way this man does his business.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2012/01/20/rangers-owner-craig-whyte-accused-over-unreliable-evidence-in-court-battle-with-roofing-firm-86908-23708472/

Much as I would have preferred Bocanegra, it's probably a correct decision. Bocanegra has only been with the Club 6 months.

Correct (message too short apparently!)

I view this as extremely BAD NEWS. I don't know anything about Mr Betts but I do know quite a lot about Mr Ellis. As I have said several times on here, at the time of his abortive takeover bid, I was the Secretary of RST. On 15 March 2010 his then agent in Guernsey, David Gilmour of Marlborough Trust Company told me in answer to a direct question, that Mr Ellis had no interest in Rangers as such. DG brought the idea to AE. He DG sees it as a “terrific opportunity”. Of course it is possible that Mr Ellis is now more intersted in Rangers and less interested in the "opportunity" but his football experience at QPR and Northampton Town hardly fills one with great confidence.

More like the other way about, which is why I'm told that Bain has already turned down £500k to settle.

Isn't this the knub of the issue? My understanding is that Johnston granted Bain the contract extension without the knowledge or approval of the Board but that would be the Rangers FC Board's problem not Bain's. Is anyone here seriously suggesting that if they had been suspended and had not been charged under normal company disciplinary procedures and effectively faced constructive dismissal from a two year contract, they wouldn't fight for as much as they could get?

No harm whatsoever in having or expressing a strong opinion but when you start accusing someone of criminal activity, without having any evidence to back up your claims, that's a bit OTT in my opinion.

I think he was frustrated because apart from Mols, no one else was on the same wavelength. I well remember when Lovenkands was on the wing and RdB pointed to send a ball towards the corner flag, sent the pass and then found Lovenkrands still standing where he was. He was also hampered by injury. I only wish we had seen him 5 years earlier.

That would ne "NO" then I take it. In what way did he "neglect his fiduciary duties"? As part of the Independent Directors Group, he was protecting the rights of 26,000 small shareholders including me and events are gradually proving them correct in their opinion.

Seems a bit silly to talk up a player if you are genuinely interested in buying him.