BrahimHemdani

I think I am right in saying you need 10% of shareholders to call an EGM, which is why SDM can do it and others might find it a tad difficult. However, the directors or a majority of them, may be able to do it, which would give the "independents" a forum if they wanted it, which I doubt. Company Law experts please step forward. May depend on Rangers articles which I have at home, if I ever leave the office tonight

When he realised his bid was failing, CW tried to get in on PM's share offer. But I agree with your last comment!

I accept that Danny but my point is that the one who gets convicted still has to do time and will get a longer sentence next time for a repeat offence, regardless of whether or not the other two are apprehended never mind convicted. If you rob a bank and get caught, there's not much point in saying that other people are doing it to and not getting caught, you wouldn't have been caught if you hadn't done it, regardless of what anyone else does. I know this won't be a popular view!

der Berliner;253880 "[1] They fear the sack? Now wait, while it sure is prestigious to be a Rangers board member / director, it does not exactly earn these people millions of pounds. [2] If Whyte was a clever chap, he'd simply adopt the share issue stuff to to finance the club ... once he takes over." [1] In the case of Bain, it IS a million pounds (a year), so he does have a vested interest; McIntyre must be on a decent salary too; but for the rest it's only a few thousand in director's fees. [2] My understanding is that Whyte has talked to Paul Murray, a sure sign of the weakness of his (CW's) bid.

A very poor statement in my view (written perhaps by my successor as Secretary of RST?) and if it accurately reflects what was said then I agree wholeheartedly with #5: the statement should have clearly stated what is and what is not permitted. The attempt to deflect blame on to supporters of other clubs takes up as much if not more space than condemnation of the "minority of (our) supporters " who sing sectarian or otherwise illegal songs. People in glass houses comes to mind. When will those who think this way realise that like any other wrongdoers there is no point in saying why aren't you catching the other criminals it's Rangers fans who are in the dock and need to reform their behaviour, what other people do is nothing to do with it.

I was wondering if you meant BS (as in bull****) or from BH as in me? Anyway I posted the details of the Monday 19th D-day and it was proven correct as SDM, Whyte and LBG were set to go on that date but stopped by the "independents". I posted this information today as soon as I got it from my source and if I say any more about the source it will dry up and he would get lynched amongst other things. Believe me or don't but at that point I had not read anything in the press, I don't buy the Record or the Times. The papers will likely have the story tomorrow but remember you heard it here first.

We're not, that's the point.

Yes, but we don't know what the terms are elsewhere. The worry would be that "elsewhere" would want to sell Murray Park or other assets, to get its money back.

What was missing from that quote was "A deal would also see Rangers' debt to LBG wiped out ........"

[1] Correct, sorry about that. The offshore company presumably has money or is backed by people with money (though it is possible it may have to borrow some, more likely it would be equity based finance); the offshore company lends the money to Rangers secured on Murray Park (which has been revalued a number of times recently); the terms of the loan may or may not be better than the existing terms with LBG (though I don't see how they could be better); Rangers use that money to pay off most but not all of the LBG debt. It is not as if Whyte is "giving" Rangers any money all that is happening is that Rangers trade one lender for another, a pointless exercise in my view, since so long as they don't breach their current banking covenants there is not much LBG can do about it. [2] I am not sure what Whyte himself has said but it does seem that the support have been misled, by whom or for what purpose I am not sure.

Yes, but think of the negative publicity: SDM brings in Johnston to find buyer, Johnston sets up independent committee to vet offer, offer rejected, Murray sacks the Board, I don't think so. How could he say that that it would be in the best interests of Rangers to sack the board who rejected the offer because it was not in the best interests of Rangers.

We wouldn't be debt free, far from it, we'd just owe the money and quite possibly more money to someone else or some other bank.

Apparently Whyte is on his way to Glasgow and may not be aware of what has happened (although it seems the decision was taken at the weekend); he should get a shock when he lands. The vasty bulk of the money would have come from loans to an offshore company, so as I have said all along, Rangers would have been no better off, the debt would just have shifted from LBG to person or persons unknown. IF Whyte pulls out, which I expect, LBG will have no alternative other than to negotiate with Paul Murray. It is likely that he will offfer them something up front and the balance over say 5 years rather than 18 years outststanding on the term loan. This would be attractive as a share offer since it could be argued that most of the money raised will go to the team rather than SDM or LBG.

Daily Record this morning.

My source close to LBG tells me that Rangers Board have now formally rejected Whyte's offer with working capital plan. Whyte has now to decide whether to make a "hostile" bid which presumably would involve an EGM in an attempt to remove the Board (or at least the Independents).

My source very close close to LBG tells me a somewhat different story to that portrayed in the article by Ron Moore? He says that progress is at pedestrian pace and that Whyte is still being very slow to produce documents particularly around working capital which is the key to getting agreement. He says that Tuesday looks ambitious in terms of getting all the paperwork done.

It's a conspiracy

I have been reluctant to post again on this topic, because although my sources were impeccable and the information (about Monday 19th) was solid the deal was blown out the water (at least temporarily) by the Independent Committee. At the same time I did say that I was "sceptical, very sceptical". So for what it is worth I have information from one of the same sources that Ellis will be in Glasgow on Tuesday and thinks the deal will be done then. I will try to verify from my source close to LBG tomorrow. By the way is 5,200+ views a record :grin:

Brian Laudrup was voted joint 5th best player in the world (with Peter Schmeichel) in the FIFA poll after Euro92, OK he floppped in Italy but let me know the next time we sign someone within 2 years of him being voted 5th best player in the world. As a pure football player I rate him in the top three I have seen in Rangers' colours: Baxter, Gascoigne and Laudrup; but none in my opinion had the football brain of Ronald de Boer. Jelavic looks like a good player in the Prso and Hately mold and can improve but he's not in the same league as those mentioned above.

Perfectly understandable.

Yes, I was aware of that but just threw in 1873 to see what reaction I got

Personally I remain sceptical, very sceptical even but the sources are both only one removed from the parties to the deal and are both very confident so maybe just maybe........................

NO, don't even know who that is. (Well, I suppose that if I don't know who NB is I can't say with 100% accuracy that it isn't but the source is not in Northumberland and is not a Rangers fan.)

1690 or was it 1873

Now confirmed by a source very close to Ellis, who reckons, in spite of numerous false dawns, that the deal is definite for Monday.