BrahimHemdani 1 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 That's what I was thinking BH, but he also spoke about us being £18 million due to the bank and he needed to get to a permant debt of £16, after paying off £1 million a year, which says to me that we were not quite at the stage of total debt freedom. The question still is, would we have been better off staying with Murrays mob, orgoing with Whyte's. That's probably something we'll never know. The £18M was what was outstanding on the Term Loan, payable at £1M a year, so what he is saying is that in another two years it would have been at comfort level for the LBG. The real issue was that the overdraft facility was renewable at the end of the year and in another interview he said that the bank put the squeeze on him to sell or they wouldn't renew the facility. At that point I don't believe we needed it but no money from Europe would have changed all that. LBG are Whyte's bankers as well, remember. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 The question still is, would we have been better off staying with Murrays mob, orgoing with Whyte's. That's probably something we'll never know. Well I know it isn't a popular view but I would rather be on SDM + LBG than Whyte + Wavetower. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Well I know it isn't a popular view but I would rather be on SDM + LBG than Whyte + Wavetower. It's a bit like comparing Lloyds of London to a small fry who aspires to be like the Airdrie Savings Bank. Then again, if there's a major run on banks in the event of another global financial crisis, some companies will be better off by not being tied to large banks, but that might not happen for a fair number of years? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Well I know it isn't a popular view but I would rather be on SDM + LBG than Whyte + Wavetower. I am afraid your view is picking up momentum by the minute and is shared by more people than you think. Conman is lingering somewhere in the back of my mind although i wouldn't point that finger just yet. He does say one sensible thing though that Scottish, no all, football clubs should live within their means. Chelsea already 81 million in the red even after Abrom. had cleared their very much larger debt is just madness. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 (edited) Well I know it isn't a popular view but I would rather be on SDM + LBG than Whyte + Wavetower. Really you would've kept Sir Flim Flam that just beggers belief imo. Would rather see us cease to exist than have that bawbag back in control, just remember everything that's wrong with the club is on him no one else and that includes Whyte. Is Whyte perfect probably not but he's like the Virgin Mary compared to that prick Murray. Edited February 1, 2012 by GovanAllan 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Someone who we can trust and would tell us the truth, that rules both sides out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Seems to be that so far, all Whyte is guilty of is not being a benevolent and generous owner - or being squeaky clean which I think is something you'll never find in the successful, entrepreneurial world. If he manages the club in a fiscally prudent way, what is wrong with that? Ironically, Murray ended up being reasonably generous and benevolent, but he mismanaged the club in the first place and left us in a poor position despite him losing millions. I think what we're looking for, just doesn't exist. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Seems to be that so far, all Whyte is guilty of is not being a benevolent and generous owner - or being squeaky clean which I think is something you'll never find in the successful, entrepreneurial world. If he manages the club in a fiscally prudent way, what is wrong with that? I don't call using future years' season ticket money as being fiscally prudent. It's just bad business. He says that the club has a £10m shortfall. Well he promised to stick in £5m working capital, £5m for transfers, and more on top. We have also received millions from Ticketus. Where has all this cash gone and why do we need to sell Jelavic? If we have such a shortfall, where was the money going to come from for his £2.8m bid for Goodwillie? Did he really expect us to believe that we were ever going to sign an EPL club captain for under £1m? What is he trying to hide by changing the year end of Rangers FC Group Ltd? Why did he try and mislead fans yesterday with his claims that his use of Ticketus was commonplace? Other than Leeds and Newcastle, what clubs have mortgaged future years' season ticket money? What I'm looking for is a truthful owner who can be upfront with the fans, and not lie or mislead from the word go. Surely that must exist? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 I don't call using future years' season ticket money as being fiscally prudent. It's just bad business. He says that the club has a £10m shortfall. Well he promised to stick in £5m working capital, £5m for transfers, and more on top. We have also received millions from Ticketus. Where has all this cash gone and why do we need to sell Jelavic? If we have such a shortfall, where was the money going to come from for his £2.8m bid for Goodwillie? Did he really expect us to believe that we were ever going to sign an EPL club captain for under £1m? What is he trying to hide by changing the year end of Rangers FC Group Ltd? Why did he try and mislead fans yesterday with his claims that his use of Ticketus was commonplace? Other than Leeds and Newcastle, what clubs have mortgaged future years' season ticket money? What I'm looking for is a truthful owner who can be upfront with the fans, and not lie or mislead from the word go. Surely that must exist? Just a question BD but has anyone said the 24mill has gone anywhere all that's been said is he has the money if we need it for day to day running of the club. I can't remember it being said its spent. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,148 Posted February 1, 2012 Share Posted February 1, 2012 Just a question BD but has anyone said the 24mill has gone anywhere all that's been said is he has the money if we need it for day to day running of the club. I can't remember it being said its spent. If it hasn't been spent why couldn't we pay the £9.5million tranche Ticketus wanted? Obviously I'm making the mistake of taking Keith Jackson's accusations at face value but £24.4million (plus £6million for Jelavic) is a lot of money. 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.