forlanssister 3,050 Posted September 2, 2011 Author Share Posted September 2, 2011 Asking how you know they are real was just the first thing that came to mind, but as BD says they must be real because they can easily be verified. I don't think you've been banned from RM btw because one of the mod/admin team over there has been sticking up for you and asking people to stop the tim accusations. Well when I try to get on I get this message [#1000B] You are not allowed to visit this forum. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 FF has no report on this whatsoever, which is somewhat dubious. Anyways ... what does the document actually say? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted September 2, 2011 Author Share Posted September 2, 2011 FF has no report on this whatsoever, which is somewhat dubious. Anyways ... what does the document actually say? If you read the thread you will see that it was removed from FF, however I have been told by admin that they will look into the reason why and get back to me. It states we have given up all future income due from Azure under the terms of the catering contract for a one off sum from a leasing company, something that will potentially still have ramifications after Whytes tenure passes. The timing of it barely a week after the Malmo debacle would suggest that the picture Whyte and his spimeisters have been painting isn't as pleasing as they would have us believe. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 2, 2011 Share Posted September 2, 2011 It states we have given up all future income due from Azure under the terms of the catering contract for a one off sum from a leasing company, something that will potentially still have ramifications after Whytes tenure passes. Is it not just that the catering contract has been used as collateral to secure a loan? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted September 2, 2011 Author Share Posted September 2, 2011 Is it not just that the catering contract has been used as collateral to secure a loan? The question is why has it been necessary to do this so early into Whytes tenure. I agree the details are vague (probably deliberately so) but if iirc the catering contract was recently extended by 9 years if this lease is of a similar length. Doubt even Whytes most ardent fans think he'll be here for 9 years, so someone else will have deal with a reduced revenue stream. It appears his �£52 million hasn't spread itself very far Here's the site I got the scans from, same one with the Lennoxtown mortgage details. http://www.scribd.com/eric_clelland You can inform the lynch party I'll happily respond if allowed to do so. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 The question is why has it been necessary to do this so early into Whytes tenure. I agree the details are vague (probably deliberately so) but if iirc the catering contract was recently extended by 9 years if this lease is of a similar length. Doubt even Whytes most ardent fans think he'll be here for 9 years, so someone else will have deal with a reduced revenue stream. There isn't going to be a reduced revenue stream if what looks like a loan secured on the catering deal is paid back. Ok, so you can maybe deduct the loan amount from the revenue stream, but that's it. It's not the end of the world or the demise of the club by a long shot. What's much more concerning is the HMRC tax bill situation and how it's being dealt with. Then there's the fact that a month before Craig Whyte actually bought the club we had a poster on here say he had been told by the stadium manager that the catering comapany were going to be paying for the kiosk and concourse refurbisment and after the takeover Whyte then basically insinuated that the he or the club were paying for these refurbishments. There's some things that just don't add up and I'm not talking about the transfer market dealings. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted September 3, 2011 Author Share Posted September 3, 2011 I think the fact that our credit rating isn't exactly AAA rated added to the fact that no conventional bank will touch us would indicate that we have probably paid a high price to raise a few quick bucks, granted we don't know the terms but I doubt if Close Leasing are either charitable or foolish and will have priced relevant to the blatant risk involved. I digress with you regarding the revenue stream but concur that it's not the end of the world or the demise of the club but still think it's another nail in the coffin, just some more short term gain which will result in long term pain. I agree the current HMRC case ( the wee one?...) is nothing short of shambolic as Fridays developments admirably demonstrated. Part of the problem with Whyte is all the shit he allowed to be spun prior to and immediately after the take over is beginning to unravel at an alarming rate. I recall well the post on here re Azure and the kiosk refurbishment long before Whytes arrival, his claiming of the credit for it does seem bizarre or perhaps a tadge desperate. There certainly are a a lot of things that aren't adding up at the moment and Whyte doesn't seem in a hurry to clarify things in the least. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
djbroxybear 0 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 I believe the first instalment from CC was used to doo up the Stadium he said he spent 3m a think also how come the big Screens are still not working he said they would be working again? Did Whyte not say to the Shareholders Statement that the tax bill would be paid? Now i dont know the inns or outs but why hasn't Whyte paid the bill then dispute the penalty afterwards? We have spent just over 1m on transfers fees for players NOT 5m YES he has said 5m to invest in the playing squad us the fans didn't think it was including wages etc. Whyte has taken a few quid into Ibrox from the fans backing but has he PUT ANY OF HIS OWN MONEY IN ? We could be going back to the Slippery Dave days, Whyte the Club has to come out and make a statement. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 While we all start debating this and why Whyte does that, has anyone any idea how other clubs handle this stuff? Maybe it is common practise, but we just haven't done it before. Right now, it is like people telling me that drinking Coke is bad because it has 12 pieces of sugar in one glass. What they do not tell me is that apple juice has 10 pieces of sugar per glass too ... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted September 3, 2011 Share Posted September 3, 2011 While we all start debating this and why Whyte does that, has anyone any idea how other clubs handle this stuff? Maybe it is common practise, but we just haven't done it before. Teams have done it with season ticket income before. Leeds spring to mind. Usually a sign of financial problems. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.