the gunslinger

the real problem is it would be the old firm every year in the final. the superbowl woukdnt be up to much if it was the same two teams. perhaps if rangers and celtc were in the same half and it was a one off final.

yes the profit was in cl years. but even without we would have been breaking even more or less. as I say whyte bought a healthy company and there's no reason for us not to be a healthy club right now. other than whytes determined efforts to drive us to where we are now.

I've never known a forum to have an opinion. but individuals can be hypocritical on any forum. I expect some who backed whyte because he stepped up won't back Brown if he does. you for example are critical of p Murray but Paul put up cash and tried. sure it wasn't enough but that's the fault of those who didn't put up cash not those who did.

not really no.

it is. a similar hypocracy to the people who insisted green should be allowed to hide his investors. I'm interested to see what Brown comes up with.

they probably trust bomber. its certainly a step up from blind faith in Muir, lloyds, whyte and now green.

expensive commercial encyclopedia like to give the impression wiki is inaccurate. its an urban legend. its as accurate as any encyclopedia.

net debt though was only 14. 1 year ago. this whole sorry episode is entirely avoidable.

55 million was the debt figure excluding ebt case IIRC.

I see claims on ff that McGregor will rejoin if Brown is successful.

America is a much bigger place with more teams.

14 million in debt. championship winning squad and income exceeding costs by over 10 million. we are exactly where whyte put us.

Di Stefano always works for himself.

better investigation. whyte is subject of a criminal investigation. ill take that and the epl over better investigation. hmrc also said it was so they could chase whyte for cash.

Craig whyte bought a healthy rangers. he immediately cut our income, increased our costs and started piling up debt. I find it hard to see how we aren't exactly where Mr whyte invisaged right now.

how could he hope to own a healthy rangers if he didn't pay a penny's tax. or indeed any other bill he wasn't taken to court over. or with 9 million a year in repayments to ticketus. ?

he didn't get his 2 quid from green. that was only paid if we got a cva.

I've always said he wanted us liquidated and as such it was where we were headed. nothing I have seen suggests otherwise. as for why I don't know yet.

we don't know yet.

looks to me like whyte wanted liquidation. he did afterall make a cva impossible.

Your Options & Guides Read our guides What your options are Director's duties Director's toolkit offer Raising finance Warning signs Based in Scotland? About Us Who we are What we do Where we are Help for corporate advisors Help for lawyers Testimonials Case Studies Contact Us Search our site Need help?call 0800 9700539 01289 309431 0131 242 0081 020 7877 0050 Out of hours: 07833 240747 Or Click Here For Live Help Full Name * Email Address * Phone Number (optional) Share on facebook Share on twitter Share on email Share on print More Sharing Services We have heard that HMRC will not support a CVA?" This is not true! Just because the HMRC rejected the CVA proposal put forward by Oddbins not that long ago does not mean that they have had any change in policy. They will approve a CVA if it is a properly structured, a well thought through plan and the company has been compliant with tax rules in the past. In their recent guidelines published at http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/helpsheets/vas-factsheet.pdf they set our their policy. The HMRC agency that decided on these proposals is called the Combined Voluntary Arrangement Service (VAS). Currently it votes in favour of c70% of all proposals. However, we have a >90% approval record. Once a CVA is proposed the enforcement agency of the HMRC is no longer involved and have no say over whether a proposal is accepted or rejected. In essence the job of the enforcement agency is to collect 100% of the tax owed. If this is simply not possible then responsibility passes to the VAS. The HMRC are keen to support VIABLE businesses as they see it as a way of reducing lost tax. However, it should be noted that if you do propose a CVA then you should try and pay as much tax as you can prior to the creditors meeting. It is common sense really as if you are asking for their support then you need to be seen to be doing the utmost in persuading them your business is viable and that you will pay any tax owed in the future. We will of course advise on this aspect as and when we draw up a CVA proposal. If you think you have a viable business then give us a call and we can chat through your options 01289 309431

seems highly unlikely. hmrc also accept cvas all the time.

I hope he pulls this off.

its true. we knew it was the case. but you can't forcibly sell a player like a slave. at least that's what they will argue.

and cost more.