der Berliner

So essentially, if Rangers can show that the Ticketus deal was a no-goer, Lloyds will keep the money, Ticketus will harrass Whyte (et al) for it and he can simply declare himself bankrupt. That would Ticketus with a 20m odd shortfall and none too happy. Will they want to deal with us again anytime soon (and if so, who does the ticketing)? Even if we blame it on Whyte?

After years of ignorance and apathy ... much debated on here and every other boards, chilledbear, nothing that brings Rangers fans together and let them show their support for the cause should be undermined. Whether it is small or large gestures, simple pledges or people actively doing something, the momentum should be kept and any future owner made aware that we don't want another SDM/Whyte scenario again. The sooner we get the fans together and create a membership scheme or share issue that is not solely driven by a chairman or board to raise money to distribute by themselves, the better. At least in my humble opinion.

I'm baffled at the constant and unrelented negativism. Paul Murray is the front figure of the so-called "Blue Knights", whom we still do not know. So why do people suddenly think he's alone in there with the supporters' groups? Ticketus backs them because ... they - after apparent talks - see them as possible partners and would give them their backing for a stable future. Ticketus could just as easily decide to play hard-balls and want their money back ... and let the lawyers (i.e. not part-timers on fan-boards - no insult intended here) decide who owns them their money. I for one would rather like to talk to and/or have the backing of people who may have a 24m claim to our future. While we are at it, these people represent just one of 5 or 7 interested parties, pending your source.

Why would clearing the Lloyds debt make him a "preferred creditor" when the money he used was not his own and none he could use as a loan et al. My question would be how much are Rangers are worth going by what Whyte paid. Essentially, he paid 1 pound to SDM for the shares, the stadium and Murray Park (et al). That is what makes him the chairman, right? The debt-deal with Lloyds and Ticketus is something that needs to be clarified.

A shrewd Rangers-minded chap would be good, since we not only need someone/-many with money, but also one who starts to defend the club on various levels.

Since it relates to the takeover and is a "rumour" from FF:

Maybe someone used Boss' account on RM and wrote some scaremongering story?

Now if that deal is indeed undone, what exactly does that mean for the club, Lloyds, and Ticketus? It seems the money never reached Rangers so any claims of either party is between them, but not Rangers, right?

Well ... ain't he the secured creditor because he bought the club (and thus the shares and Ibrox and MP) from SDM ... for 1 pound? He cleared the debt with Lloyds fair enough, but that does not make him the secured creditor, does it? And if so, why?

Ahem, "amid the crisis" they took the unusal step of cancelling the PC, but gave "no reason" why they did it? Does that line make sense? Not that I care what ahppens over at the Scumhut, but sometimes you wonder about the logic involved here.

I guess the freaks over at the TCS will working overtime now and seek for another bad rumour.

They are no mp3 files?!

Next time, please make that in mp3 ;-). I've been doing it with the 'No. 23 Recorder' for ages now, e.g. all Rangers games transmitted via Rangers World since about 2007.

BTW, do our players actually have contracts for the SFL? Over here, they sign contracts for the Bundesliga, but not necessarily the Bundesliga 2. Thus, once a club gets relegated, players do not need to fulfill their contracts if a club has not made sure that it is for all tiers of German professional football (we have Bundesliga 1, 2 and 3)..

A thread with this same information was pretty quickly closed over at FF. I for one would be surprised if e.g. Naismith (after his recent speech) would go this route. I wouldn't be surprised if Whittaker would.

Any results thus far then?

Can't actually follow that line of thought. Essentially they spell out all there is to know. That it is not all fine and well is not their fault and they just presents "facts" as they stand. I would assume that is their job and they would be in trouble if they do otherwise. Maybe we should relax somewhat (sic!) and don't see cloak & dagger manouvres all over the place?

I was more interested in the often-cited Leeds United 2007 (?) stuff, people saying that their "history" ended when the newco was created. I did not find anything about either, the newco or the "ending" of Leeds United as a team being run since 18xx. As of their attempts to reach the EPL. We have to keep in mind that the English leagues are far larger and far more competitive than the Scottish ones. A hypothetical Rangers with players being paid 1k+ a week should wipe the floor with these teams (over the season) and go on a string of promotions. You would need fans and a chairman/board with the stamina to sustain these wilderness years, of course. While we are not in Europe, we could try to initiate a Anglo-Scottish Cup, or a some US challenge games to raise money over a season, invite European clubs for friendlies and whatnot. Just as food for thought. All that said, I'm still under the assumption that liquidation in whatever form is not a likely outcome of this crisis.

But these share are not tradeable right now, are they? On a sidenote, what was the prize for these shares? 1 pound?

Essentially ... the players/agents need to agree to pay cuts or a cash injection is needed, else the admins will have to make redundancies to have enough money for us to complete the fixture list. Redundancies in turn would weaken the club's value for buyers, as they would have to invest more later on. On a similar tone, the clubs need to save the money to have time for a good CVA.

Still assume that Whyte was doing this all on purpose, i.e. ridding us of the Lloyds debt, clear the HMRC case (at least to a level sustainable) and then make way for someone else. He was a non-entity beforehand and will remain one afterwards. His only job now is to stand aside and be done with it. Do I like that notion of him conning all? Surely not. But it is the only one that makes some (!) sense.

On a sidenote ... Rangers never ever finished below 6th spot in the league (back in the 1920s I think). As for Airdrie and Airdireonians and Clydebank, I jsut had a look at Leeds United and this Leeds United 2007 thing ... and exactly nothing about them is mentioned on the Leeds United wikipedia site, which should feature it in some capacity. That is the "liquidation" and newco and losing history and all this. So was the mention of them wrong? Were they ever "liquidated", "newco'ed" or somesuch?

I think they will tell it to all interested parties, but not to the public.

I simply assume the admins know what they are doing and why.

Can anyone explain to me this part: If someone buys the business activities and creates a newco behind the club as such, would that still be viewed as liquidation of the Rangers as we knew them - with all the consequences of UEFA penalties and possible sanctions by the Scottish authorities? Or would that only take place if the whole club is being wound up and everything sold off?