der Berliner

Said thread on FF was based on a tweet of the Herald, who has by now said that it won't be before tomorrow. On a sidenote, I don't think they know anymore than we do, just looking for a few hundred more clicks.

Well then, that's one of the sports reporters who I would not like to put all too much trust in either. And yes, I know him for some time ... (and he does indeed cater to ideas to forlan's liking)

I see you revert to attacking fellow posters not following your conspiracy and doom-mongering path. I do not blame the media, I say that I do not trust them - especially if their daytime job so far included sports reports. We do get some decent enough business stuff along the way, but if you read carefully, most of them say that since they haven't got all the details handy, they hardly can give you definite answers. I guess we all have learned after the Whyte fiasco, but that does not say that we have to distrust anyone down to the core by default either. What I do note is that some tend to put a negative spin on nigh anything the admins do ... and if you e.g. belittle my opinion about the media, I'd reposte that with your essentially negative approach to anything D&P, no matter what. No really, you tell me that I was sort of foolish to believe e.g. Whyte statements after the takeover or statements on the club's website, but want me to trust the words of Dave King? The chap who apparently has more tax people chasing his scalp than Whyte could count to (and yes, I assume that it is not solely malcontent on the RSA tax people's side)? The chap who stood idly by and watched SDM lead us all down the path to oblivion, the chap who did nothing during the Lloyds' years, or, indeed during the takeover? You know something? I actually do not want an answer from you to that. D&P will do what they have to anyways, whether you or me like it or not. I for one will not run about in 2 years time waving a flag proclaiming "I told you so!", no matter what the state of play will be then.

Well, somehow I managed to detach myself from most of the hysteria about our situation. Which is propably a bit easier outside of Scotland than it is where most of you are. But honestly, nigh anything that happens does so without reach of anyone of us - the SFA debacle aside, perhaps. The whole administration scenario is being played outwith most of our comprehension, yet many amongst the media and on the boards think otherwise and stir more emotion and trouble up the longer it goes on. When, in all honesty, I have no more reason to believe them than I would my next door neighbour. No disrespect here, just a fact. The whole Whyte affair taught us that paper and even official Rangers website talk can provide a false dawn. Thus, for the time being, I just sit and watch what unfolds and give every new info some 12 to 24 hours ere really starting to looking at it in earnest. Sure, we can tell the admins what we think about liquidation or newcos and whatnot. We can prepare for the various scenarios too. But progress for the club will only happen once a new owner is actually there. Hence, I enjoy every game coming up as a little cup final and a chance to see the greatest team this side of Saturn's rings again.

It would help if the bidders actually start talking to Whyte and try to agree on some sort of settlement, no? Whatever we feel about this man, Whyte looks to be in a certain position of "power" here, unless a judge rules otherwise.

Mulder & Sculder have not called back as yet, so we'll have to wait a touch longer with regard to D&P's conspiracies et al. But I grant you that D&P made some statements they will sure regret now. (Then again, what do we know about the actual state of play here?)

Only if they apply the rules that are in existance and have been used so far for administration periods. And that excludes the transfer embargo, of course. BTW, Motherwell only had one 10 point deduction and were in admin for longer than a year, unless I am mistaken.

Could we actually call on UEFA's code of integrity and fair play? I mean, while they want to implant a law and guidelines for clubs living within their means, they apparently look on as Spanish and Italian clubs constantly fail to pay VAT, social insurances, tax et al, accumulating billions of Euro in debt ... yet all are still playing on, mainly because no-one amongst the relevant authorities seem to care? On another note, if the Miller model is agreed to, and the SPL agrees that the club actually retains the history et al, are we actually a new club under UEFA guidelines? Same goes for any other "newco" model where the SPL/SFA agree to the club keeping the history (whether or not it is fined). Unless I am mistaken, the UEFA rule actually primarily applies to clubs that have NOT been members or in existence for that long and mainly opposes e.g. Russian oil billionaires creating a club out of nothing and pumping in millions to compete with the likes of Barca in no-time.

I actually put this bit of info forward to someone who is in contact with "our" prime investigator, i.e. David Leggat. With regard to dropping into the SFL ... who is to say that the club on the field of play will recover and whether they don't think up a few sanctions still? Obviously, if we keep the core of our current squad we may get promotion by x-mas from Dvision 3 and 2, while on the other hand finance the Scottish lower clubs and thus enhancing Scottish football at base level. Maybe that is something that won't go amiss amongst the SFL clubs ... and hence they'll sure vote for our inclusion. Still, it remains to be seen whether the SPL as we know it will be a league worth playing in by the time we might be back. Of course, there's always a chance for European football in spite of all this, if e.g. we win the Scottish Cup in 2013. Will the support and the money-men have the stamina to wait another four or five years for a possible money spinning CL campaign? Will they think up a number of money spinning friendlies or challenge cups?

An interesting article here, yet, what it fails to note is that the SPL and SFA are willing not to use existing "law" as it was done so far (Dundee, Motherwell) - or take a look of what the English FA did with e.g. Leeds United, but utilize a loose, self-imposed and -written "law" texts (which are rather guidelines than actual laws, IMHO) and make the best out of it for some clubs, but not fairness and sanity. There is not exactly a failure within these guidelines, but the use of them by the current powers.

Yep. In any case, the board of the SPL who made up this attempt on legislation and want to see it installed by May 14th - just to hit us again while we are toiling - needs to be remembered ... and their respective clubs being targetted with an away fan embargo next season. I doubt that they'll get the 11 votes for the 2nd part of the ruling (75% monetary cuts), and whether they get the 8 votes for the other half remains to be seen. There are some sane people in the SPL club's boardrooms still. (What goes around, comes around ... sooner or later.)

Of course, no-one in their right mind really wishes physical harm to Whyte, but if this all goes to the wall and he proves to be the main culprit for this to happen, does he really thinks he can hide anywhere on the planet? As of this HMRC thing, it really beggars belief that they have not been able or willing to come to a decsion for 5 months here. From the looks of it, they purposfully keep the verdict on hold to see what happens during the take-over and with the CVA / liquidation stuff, so they might pounce on a new owner when he's ready. In that respect, one is tempted to show them the and take the Miller route.

Yes. I'll call Mulder and Scully tomorrow morning.

Perhaps you stop this bampottery and accept that the diginity I refer to with regards to behaviour of your average Rangers supporter is something else than the "dignity" shown by our former club's owners, directors, and CEOs untowards Celtic's and the authorities behaviour. If you do think that bad-mouthing our manager and the club's players is the sort of level a Rangers supporter should be on ...

Had these banners been in the Rangers end, the headlines would scream at us now.

So what? Is Whitey a court-employed administrator? Or just one of your average lawyers that you'll find in abundance out there? How many students of Oxford, Cambridge, Princeton or Harvard have made utter fools of themselves later on? How many bankers have ruined banks that were in existence for decades or centuries? @ capstans .... it looks that you do not know the meaning of dignity, or don't want to. It does indeed show to what sort of level some of us have been dragged down to.

I take it these are rhethorical questions, not least since the answer is in my post already. And while I am at it, the admins have a job to do and I for one doubt that they risk their careers as well-paid lawyers and essentially court employees for the likes of Whyte and Co..

Should have read "solely". Having read the statement again, he does favour his two-company route, given the Ticketus / HMRC stuff. Then again, we have no clue about the HMRC bill, while the admins may still rip the Ticketus deal apart.

Seriously, I never followed a administration at other clubs, so I actually can't tell. What we do know is that we aren't in admin that long and our administration is being blighted by various institutions haring after us, as well as being lead into admin by people leaving a legally and administrative minefield behind. This bainer chap might be Kennedy's spokesman, but his mythical / mystical stuff, keeping the Bears on edge week in and week out, sure does not help at all - no matter what his intentions are.

No-one. And Miller does not primarily look at the newco route. But we've spoken about that at length.

(I've not read the BBC stuff.) Ally's probably fearing that if no solution is reached, the club is staring into an abyss. At the same time though, he said that he has actually spoken to Miller and the latter also spoke to him, wanting this to be dealt with so that Ally can plan for next season. Obviously, inbetween the SFA came up with their transfer embargo, which will hurt if not successfully being dealt with. Still, as Danny intimated here and somewhere else, Miller does not equal cessation or winding-up of Rangers. We hardly know what sort of ideas Miller has, nor how his discussions with the SPL/SFA went. So it is far too simple to sing to the tune of the doom-mongers in the mhedia and now amongst the Bluenoses too. The Blue Knights can throw up one horror scenario after another as much as they like, the time for bluffing and playing poker is soon coming to an end here and then, it will not them who will be suffering, it will be us and our club. So either they get their act together and waive a few million now, or just step aside.

Rooney could throw in two months of his wages to keep us going for a couple of months ...

Methinks the admins were in talks with Kennedy for the whole of Saturday and it has been said (bainer over at FF) that today will see more changes to the TBK bid. IMHO, BK should just do it, put 6m on top of the old bid in straight cash and off they go. That said, I'll take no sides here. Far too much assumptions on the Miller bid, with hardly anyone actually knowing how his dual-company stuff is or will be working. Way to much scare-mongering involved from day one, not least by those who have no clue (nor detailed info) about it - i.e. the sports press folk.

You know for sure that Bill Miller was involved in any deal concerning Wednesday?

Did the admins said themselves that they will only consider an unconditional bid? Or was that in fact a media spin? I would expect that some conditions need to be met ere a deal can go through, yet, the severity of these conditions might be the bone of contention. As of the numbers mentioned ... who gave this confidental info to the media? Is it just more assumption or hearsay?