rbr 1,247 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Yes, they will do, but it was worthwhile doing, even though we didn't win. Did anyone win , or did this just muddy the water's even more with Ticketus having no secured rights to these tickets 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Reminds me of my wife Well, you're wife will know you better than anybody.:devil: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Ticketus now know that they could end up as an ordinary creditor and may have to take their chances with everybody else in the CVA pot. It remains to be seen what the terms of any deal with Ticketus and the Blue Knights actually are, I expect (or perhaps just hope) that whilst any agreement may see them better off than through a CVA they cannot expect as full a return as their contract allows for. An interesting game of poker beckons. I don't think I can back any deal re Ticketus and Blue Knights if Ticketus don't take a hit of some sort. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Are Ticketus not planing to effectively become bankers in this deal? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danny 0 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Ok, I'm confused. Rather than saying we've lost, the judge has been reported as refusing to rule. That's quite a different thing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,354 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Did anyone win , or did this just muddy the water's even more with Ticketus having no secured rights to these tickets I can't see any reson why Ticketus would be secured. there was no security ever put in place so why should one appear now. I fail to see how they could argue that but perhaps I don't have all the facts, but the fact that we "won" that is fairly meaningless. I'd suggest that Tickeketus won the important argument. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlueMazza 0 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Ok, I'm confused. Rather than saying we've lost, the judge has been reported as refusing to rule. That's quite a different thing. Exactly why I wasn't too bothered about it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Here's a though.... Whyte (The Pillar of Honesty that he is), had previously stated the the Ticketus deal was secured against one of his companies.....therefore, all we need to do is - NOTHING!!!! If we don't pay up, then Ticketus will go after the guarantee will they not???? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 Are Ticketus not planing to effectively become bankers in this deal? That's my take on it, they are obviously backing BK and if they take over then will get paid back slowly (but still paid back). It's in their interest for us still to have a team challenging for the title and play in Europe again in the future as more season tickets will be sold so they will get more money back. It is getting a bit confusing for me though, doesn't take much these days 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted March 23, 2012 Share Posted March 23, 2012 This has just been tweeted by Evening Times journalist. Matthew Lindsay @MattLindsayET Reply RetweetedRetweet Delete FavoritedFavorite · Close Open Details Just spoke to one of Scotland's top insolvency practitioners. A Rangers fan, he feels it is "inconceivable" the club will avoid liquidation. 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.