forlanssister 3,066 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Nothing's impossible but we do need to take a step back from the conspiracy theories sometimes. There is no great conspiracy merely a perfect storm of thieving bastards wanting their share of what's ours. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 I agree with that as an aim objectively speaking. However I find it hard to achieve after the actions of say: MIM, Lloyds, BBC, D&P, SFA, SPL BBC, Channel 4..... I fear that the last few years have scarred me for life Oh and Harper Collins yet another another "reputable firm". RangersMedia were absolutely sure there was a conflict of interest there when they were dealing with us and and are now absolutely sure that there is no possibility of there being any conflict of interest within Deloitte. Then again they support Deloitte just because Mark Dingwall does not. Their entire "thought" processes seemed determined by a hatred of FF....when, as we all know, they should be being shaped by a hatred of septic. Surely our thought process should be shaped by a Love of Rangers and not a hatred of Celtic ? Are we really becoming THEM ? Saddens me to think so. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 lots of accountants out there who didn't hel green buy us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Remind me - who was in charge of LBG's Scottish business division when SDM 'sold' to Whyte ?Did they allow their footballing allegiances(and maybe religious & political too) to blackmail SDM into selling knowing full well what was likely to happen when Whyte got control ? certainly would have seemed to have helped their chosen club as things transpired did it not? Never trust these organisations because of their name.They're only as honest, transparent & trustworthy as who they choose to employ. Some good some not. We've found that out have we not? We can use these conspiracy theories all day long, and that is the beauty of them, they are very difficult to prove, or indeed disprove. We owed them 18 million or whatever it was, and someone came in that would give them their 18 million back (by nefarious, criminal means admittedly - but we dont know if LBG were in on that, not for sure or charges would have been pressed, surely - or is the police force and judicial system in on it too). If you looked at it objectively and with no bias in EITHER direction, it is just as easy (and plausible) to say that LBG were in the hole for 18 million to a company that had, potentially, a 100 million + debt - and we ALL Know, and KNEW, that there was absolutely NO WAY we would have been able to service that debt had it crystallised. Add in the fact that we are talking about an industry which is rarely profitable as it is, and certainly not cash rich usually unless using bank lines of credit - and it becomes very easy to suggest that all that LBG were doing was operating in the best interests of their shareholders, which is their fiduciary duty to do. The fact that the Scottish business was run by two Tims could be deemed to be almost irrelevant - because IF you can believe they operated objectively and in the best interests of LBG and its shareholders (which they were given they got all their debt back and walked away from a company that may have been in a position to pay them nothing 6 months into the future) then it matters not who was in charge. There could very well have been shady goings on - but on the face of it they could justify putting pressure on SDM to sell (he didnt exactly need much pressure applied as he was looking to sell for years prior anyway) to get back their cash from the sale proceeds. Whether they were in on Whyte's actions on funding is another story, but we dont know if LBG and the two Tims were playing any part in it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Surely our thought process should be shaped by a Love of Rangers and not a hatred of Celtic ? Are we really becoming THEM ? Saddens me to think so. I meant to put a wink-smiley at the end of that, sorry. As I said on another thread last week though - there have been times since O'kneel and TLB came to Scotland when I have felt this way. Wrong though I know it to be. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
barca72 440 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 I don't know who to believe anymore. I mean when you have two companies, Law Financial Ltd and RIFC laying claim to the same company, Sevco 5088, as a subsidiary you end up going around in circles trying to make sense of it. I don't know about you but I'm at the stage where I feel we won't really know anything until the whole mess is dealt with in court. The worst nightmare is that Whyte could win and end up owning Ibrox and Auchenhowie. It does not matter how you look at the situation, the whole thing seems to centre around the ownership of Sevco 5088. However, the one thought that makes everything else go away is the Police Scotland criminal investigation into Whyte. If the Ticketus decision stands then everything Whyte did from that point forward is criminal. He created a contract with SDM in which he produced funds to pay off the bank and as a result was able to conclude the contract for the shares for one pound. So, if it is deemed that the funds were gained illegally then all causal links from that point forward will be quashed. I much prefer to think of Whyte gaining free room and board in the Bar-L than gaining the keys to Ibrox and Auchenhowie. I can live with these assumptions until the truth is known. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Is it a million miles away from normal thinking that David Murray may still be the head in all of this. I have that niggling feeling since the beginning. We all know Murray would not want to be part of Rangers going into administration so what would be better than him to hire a patsy. Was Murray really that stupid to let Whyte buy Rangers for a pound. I really have my doubts on that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Is it a million miles away from normal thinking that David Murray may still be the head in all of this. I have that niggling feeling since the beginning. We all know Murray would not want to be part of Rangers going into administration so what would be better than him to hire a patsy. Was Murray really that stupid to let Whyte buy Rangers for a pound. I really have my doubts on that. Not at all pete. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 Is it a million miles away from normal thinking that David Murray may still be the head in all of this. I have that niggling feeling since the beginning. We all know Murray would not want to be part of Rangers going into administration so what would be better than him to hire a patsy. Was Murray really that stupid to let Whyte buy Rangers for a pound. I really have my doubts on that. donald muir forced him to sell on lloyds behalf. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted April 22, 2013 Share Posted April 22, 2013 donald muir forced him to sell on lloyds behalf. Murray could easily have planned the buyer though. 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.