Bluedell 5,373 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 No guarantee that they would back a CVA they may well decide "f*&k it we'd as we'll liquidating the decision would be a purely business one. Which option maximises their return? CVA or liquidation? If it's CVA then there's no way they'd go for liquidation. They are obliged to go for maximising the return for their investors. If it's liquidation then HMRC will want to go down that route anyway so what Ticketus wanted becomes largely irrelevant. The whole "we'd be as well liquidating" argument comes across as a scare tactic, and is disappointing. There are other reasons and these are not clear despite the assurances of openness from the BKs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,066 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 the decision would be a purely business one. Which option maximises their return? CVA or liquidation? If it's CVA then there's no way they'd go for liquidation. They are obliged to go for maximising the return for their investors. It's pretty obvious that Ticketus must think that the BK's obtaining a CVA (without Ticketus being in the pot) offers them the best return for their investors. It doesn't automatically follow that they view a CVA per se as offering them the best return. They may well prefer the liquidation route with Miller as opposed to a CVA with Ng (only Ticketus will know for sure). If it's liquidation then HMRC will want to go down that route anyway so what Ticketus wanted becomes largely irrelevant. The whole "we'd be as well liquidating" argument comes across as a scare tactic, and is disappointing. There are other reasons and these are not clear despite the assurances of openness from the BKs. Non of the would be buyers have made public enough information for any of us to make a definitive decision period, getting someone to push your bid via twitter doesn't come across as being either a trait to inspire confidence nor a sign of openness, and the SE Asian equivalent of sitting by a radio in the African jungle listening for Celtic results is taking the piss to be honest. Personally I remain to be categorically convinced beyond doubt of any of the prospective buyers ability, plenty questions need to be asked of the BK's but at least we know who (some of them anyway) they are, whatever anybody's personal axe to grind is I don't think there's any dubiety surrounding their Rangers credentials. Mr Ng looks to have (or at least his family) plenty of cash, at least he knows what a football looks like, has experience of running a football club (whether successfully or not can be debated). Little to has been heard from Miller but his desire for "a creative solution" lets the cat out of the bag a bit, certainly no altruistic notions behind his interest. Duff &Phelps have been pushing their favoured non-liquidation liquidation since practicall day one, I fear that is where we're heading. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted April 8, 2012 Share Posted April 8, 2012 Duff &Phelps have been pushing their favoured non-liquidation liquidation since practicall day one, I fear that is where we're heading. Agreed period. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 isn't it a pro to take ticketus out of the cva because the have mote than 25% and can block it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 isn't it a pro to take ticketus out of the cva because the have mote than 25% and can block it. I don't think anyone knows what percentage they'd have at the moment. £18m of their ticket cash was used by Whyte to pay off the club's LBG debt, but that's a debt which Whyte had agreed to pay. The whole thing absolutely stinks. I think the result of the EBT case is key to the structure of a CVA. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 our efforts on the field for this season are all but finished (other than the small matter of playing Celtic at Parkhead in a few weeks)! Maybe I'm being a bit of a pedant here Frankie, but I think ALL of the remaining games until we've definitely secured 2nd place are hugely important because it means a BIG difference to the club's finances if we were to lose 2nd place. Thankfully we're in a great position with Motherwell dropping points in Edinburgh yesterday, so I'm not worried, but we've got seriously tough games coming up that we need to win as things stand. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,373 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 isn't it a pro to take ticketus out of the cva because the have mote than 25% and can block it. No, because I don't believe that they would block it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 None of them inspire me to be truthful. Foreign owners scare me, but that might just be me, and TBK don't seem to have much money behind them, which I find surprising after all this time. My main worry is the Admins, they could choose any of the bids and publish a good case for their choice, but we only have their word that the winner will be the best for the future of Rangers. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenzie1 0 Posted April 9, 2012 Share Posted April 9, 2012 A well thought out precis. However; I would take issue with your pen-picture of the Americal, Miller. You did not mention as one of the 'cons' that he was an ex-bankrupt? I also agree with the assertion that Ticketus would lose a court case due to their lack of diligence in lending Whyte 24m (or whatever) without any evidence of collateral. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,200 Posted April 9, 2012 Author Share Posted April 9, 2012 A well thought out precis. However; I would take issue with your pen-picture of the Americal, Miller. You did not mention as one of the 'cons' that he was an ex-bankrupt? I also agree with the assertion that Ticketus would lose a court case due to their lack of diligence in lending Whyte 24m (or whatever) without any evidence of collateral. Thanks mate. I didn't know Miller had been bankrupt so apologies for missing that. As for Ticketus, they're undoubtedly in a weak position which makes any reliance on them worthy of debate. 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.