Generic Sevco / Rangers meltdown thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

While not wishing to speak for Ballengeich, I think there may have been a degree of sarcasm in his post. He was replying to my comment about staff numbers being slashed from 256 to 255.

---

Indeed. Charlie's claim is that wages have been reduced by £24 million since last season. There's been a net reduction of 15-20 in the playing staff. Has a single MSM outlet expressed the slightest scepticism about these figures?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ballengeich

Has a single MSM outlet expressed the slightest scepticism about these figures?

---

I have to say that with every week which passes, it is this aspect which is becoming more annoying. The only people to point out the contradictions and blatant lies coming from Rangers are the forums and twitter folk. The BBC online and on the radio continue to provide outright support for Rangers, and the newspapers repeat every utterance verbatim with nary a quizzical comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ballengeich

The reduction from £30 to £6 million was in one of Green's statements about the share issue. Surely you don't doubt him? Charles is an honourable man. :greengrin

---

Don't forget, th £6m is just the wage bill. There is still the £24 in trust funds to take account of.

Maybe Green actually meant to say £6m so far this season :greengrin

I thought this was quite good:

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=20932

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

I thought this was quite good:

http://www.twohundredpercent.net/?p=20932

---

Yes, an enjoyable read. You would be hard pressed though to decide who, from their current owner back to the previous two, had told the most lies.

I find it somewhat appropriate that such a vile institution attracts so many crooks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

When will people learn not to read those sorry excuse for newspapers?

---

When will people learn that this is how papers (especially those published in Glasgow) retain a readership?

Naive much?

Lance Armstrong statement:


"Those races were won on the track, I want to know the names of these people..."



Another cup bites the dust!

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.co...reholder-list/


The list of share holders in The Rangers/ Zombie Huns. Got a feeling I know who a couple of the mugs, sorry minor investors. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

http://scotslawthoughts.wordpress.co...reholder-list/


The list of share holders in The Rangers/ Zombie Huns. Got a feeling I know who a couple of the mugs, sorry minor investors. :greengrin

---

Sally, £1m in newcorpse shares. Would like to know if he paid fair value and if not if tax will be applied when newcorpse float like a turd on the AIM. Tax dodging turds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

Sally, £1m in newcorpse shares. Would like to know if he paid fair value and if not if tax will be applied when newcorpse float like a turd on the AIM. Tax dodging turds.

---

It might be £1m or it might not - The list only gives the number of shares, not the value. It's quite common for shares to be issed with a nominal value that is less than £1 - for example Hibs shares are 2p each while the Oldhun's shares were 10p (as are the Yams).

As I said earlier, it may be coincidence, but 22m shares at 25p gives us £5.5m - now where have we seen that number before....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

It might be £1m or it might not - The list only gives the number of shares, not the value. It's quite common for shares to be issed with a nominal value that is less than £1 - for example Hibs shares are 2p each while the Oldhun's shares were 10p (as are the Yams).

As I said earlier, it may be coincidence, but 22m shares at 25p gives us £5.5m - now where have we seen that number before....

---

And Chico has nil shares which means despite his phenoemenol claims regarding Newhun's financial future he has not been prepared to forward one penny of his own money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser1962

And Chico has nil shares which means despite his phenoemenol claims regarding Newhun's financial future he has not been prepared to forward one penny of his own money.

---

He lent the company £5.5m for the asset purchase, which (as Cav suggests) may be paid off by the shares issued thus far.

The last line, though, says that he is due a 10% bonus for a successful float. It doesn't specify "10% of what?".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

He lent the company £5.5m for the asset purchase, which (as Cav suggests) may be paid off by the shares issued thus far.

The last line, though, says that he is due a 10% bonus for a successful float. It doesn't specify "10% of what?".

---

We can assume when he collects this mysterious Sevcorpse percentage he exits stage left with a suitcase of zombie cash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

We can assume when he collects this mysterious Sevcorpse percentage he exits stage left with a suitcase of zombie cash.

---

I think it's more of an "if", given that a successful flotation is by no means a certainty.

Uefa list of registered clubs....................

http://www.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/...r=R/index.html


At least they haven't fallen into the same trap as Scottish Press and say it is the same old Rangers

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Uefa list of registered clubs....................

http://www.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/...r=R/index.html


At least they haven't fallen into the same trap as Scottish Press and say it is the same old Rangers

---

The Rangers "men's" team has been deleted because they aren't in the SPL. There aren't any SFL teams in that link.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

The Rangers "men's" team has been deleted because they aren't in the SPL. There aren't any SFL teams in that link.

---

If and when a Zombie huns team is in the spl, T'Rangers 2012 at best on UEFA list!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

The Rangers "men's" team has been deleted because they aren't in the SPL. There aren't any SFL teams in that link.

---

Why the womens team and the futsal teams then?

:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jgl07

Why the womens team and the futsal teams then?

:confused:

---

They play in the top division of those competitions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

He lent the company £5.5m for the asset purchase, which (as Cav suggests) may be paid off by the shares issued thus far.

The last line, though, says that he is due a 10% bonus for a successful float. It doesn't specify "10% of what?".

---

Are we sure it was "his" money? I always thought he was the frontman for some sort of coalition of the stupid who had put up the cash, hence the shareholdings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser1962

Are we sure it was "his" money? I always thought he was the frontman for some sort of coalition of the stupid who had put up the cash, hence the shareholdings.

---

Fair point. When I say "him", I meant him/one of his companies/him and his mates.

The main point was, though, to say that "he" etc had lent the cash to NewCo, rather than actually bought shares in the company with it.

It's beginning to get on my thruppeny's how long it's taking for the FTT verdict to be released. They said on Sept 12th it would be in October, but they appear to be hanging on to the very end of the month to do it. Why? What possible purpose does it serve dragging it out like this?

....and have the Duffers handed over the leavings to BDO for liquidation yet? The lack of any 'official' clarification is frustrating. I want to see action, and I want to see it NOW

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Uefa list of registered clubs....................

http://www.uefa.com/teamsandplayers/...r=R/index.html


At least they haven't fallen into the same trap as Scottish Press and say it is the same old Rangers

---

Admit it - who clicked on S looking for Sevco FC :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonty

Admit it - who clicked on S looking for Sevco FC :greengrin

---

I looked under 'T' for 'THE' Rangers, but the closest I could find was 'The Glen Bar' :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jonty

Admit it - who clicked on S looking for Sevco FC :greengrin

---

Guilty! :agree:

:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jack Hackett

It's beginning to get on my thruppeny's how long it's taking for the FTT verdict to be released. They said on Sept 12th it would be in October, but they appear to be hanging on to the very end of the month to do it. Why? What possible purpose does it serve dragging it out like this?

....and have the Duffers handed over the leavings to BDO for liquidation yet? The lack of any 'official' clarification is frustrating. I want to see action, and I want to see it NOW

---

Have no fear. Mere days to go. The verdict was with Murray and Hector as of Friday. Maximum two weeks before it's public. Rumour is it's what we all expected . Guilty guilty guilty!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green glory

Have no fear. Mere days to go. The verdict was with Murray and Hector as of Friday. Maximum two weeks before it's public. Rumour is it's what we all expected . Guilty guilty guilty!!!

---

:tsk tsk: Quite, quite wrong to pre-empt the official announcement.

But just in case, I'm adopting this rightaway as an earworm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green glory

Have no fear. Mere days to go. The verdict was with Murray and Hector as of Friday. Maximum two weeks before it's public. Rumour is it's what we all expected . Guilty guilty guilty!!!

---

If I was a betting man, and I'm not, I wouldnae bet on that. but I like the way your thinking:wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by green glory

Have no fear. Mere days to go. The verdict was with Murray and Hector as of Friday. Maximum two weeks before it's public. Rumour is it's what we all expected . Guilty guilty guilty!!!

---

What would be the consequence of that result? Who is responsible for it - the original RFC or Sevco?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

What would be the consequence of that result? Who is responsible for it - the original RFC or Sevco?

---

That's my question too. If the verdict is guilty, what then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steakbake

What would be the consequence of that result? Who is responsible for it - the original RFC or Sevco?

---

The original.

The only real effect a "guilty" verdict would have would be to dilute the dividend to the other creditors.

It is possible that HMRC might then take action against the directors of the Oldco. However, there should be no implications for the new company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

The original.

The only real effect a "guilty" verdict would have would be to dilute the dividend to the other creditors.

It is possible that HMRC might then take action against the directors of the Oldco. However, there should be no implications for the new company.

---

Except for the shame and humiliation because after all, they are the same club as they bought ALL their history. :greengrin

The notion that Scottish clubs did the right thing in banishing the Govan football institution to the bottom league might just sink in to footballing pundits on Sky Sports etc. and to a few more politicians nearer home.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Fair point. When I say "him", I meant him/one of his companies/him and his mates.

The main point was, though, to say that "he" etc had lent the cash to NewCo, rather than actually bought shares in the company with it.

---

I know that this is what we are told happened the bit I am having trouble with his public utterances stating that Newhun "have no debt". Surely it cant be both? Also there now appears to be a list of 19.8m shares that has miraculously appeared despite there having been no notification to CoHo of this, and I understand that there has to be notification within 30 days. He may be a Mr. Super Salesman but like most of his breed, the ends justify the means but I can only imagine the carnage that is left in his wake.

My understanding of the £5.5m, however, is that he borrowed the money as a short term loan on the promise of quick and hugely profitable returns and now, as the lenders are asking for their money back, we are having a public share issue. It may be that the lenders are getting a bit jittery given the attention Green is attracting or, it may be as others have pointed out, they need to get their money back and scatter the company ownership far and wide before BDO begin seriously digging. After all he bought Rangers assetts for £1.5m and (claims) he now has a valuation of those assetts of £80m. Obviously not the same valuers that D+P used, unfortunately.

My point was really that if this was such a sure thing them why did Green choose to borrow the money from investors and not use his own which would have enabled him, personally, to make the killing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

Except for the shame and humiliation because after all, they are the same club as they bought ALL their history. :greengrin

The notion that Scottish clubs did the right thing in banishing the Govan football institution to the bottom league might just sink in to footballing pundits on Sky Sports etc. and to a few more politicians nearer home.

---

If Newco has bought all of Rangers' history then they must surely accept liability for any football penalties due for misconduct by previous owners of the club. I'm interested in just what Green has signed up for when the SFA licence was transferred.

If the SPL investigation into dual contracts decides that results in past years should be amended, then I would expect the owners of the history to be liable for the return of any dishonestly earned prize money. Will Sevco agree to this?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ballengeich

If Newco has bought all of Rangers' history then they must surely accept liability for any football penalties due for misconduct by previous owners of the club. I'm interested in just what Green has signed up for when the SFA licence was transferred.

If the SPL investigation into dual contracts decides that results in past years should be amended, then I would expect the owners of the history to be liable for the return of any dishonestly earned prize money. Will Sevco agree to this?

---

Are these football penalties, though? (devil's advocate smiley..)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Are these football penalties, though? (devil's advocate smiley..)

---

I suspect that's a subject which lawyers will investigate at great length, for appropriate remuneration of course.:cb

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ballengeich

I suspect that's a subject which lawyers will investigate at great length, for appropriate remuneration of course.:cb

---

IMO, it's not really relevant.

Unless the SFA/SPL have come to an agreement with the NewCo that all football debts have to be paid off, AND that amounts due to HMRC are classed as such,.... all of which is unlikely.... the tax debts stay with the old company.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

IMO, it's not really relevant.

Unless the SFA/SPL have come to an agreement with the NewCo that all football debts have to be paid off, AND that amounts due to HMRC are classed as such,.... all of which is unlikely.... the tax debts stay with the old company.

---

I agree with you about the money due to HMRC. What isn't clear to me is the extent to which the SFA licence agreement allows any future penalties to be imposed by the SFA/SPL for past offences. NewCo have agreed to pay some outstanding transfer fees. They accepted a reduced form of the player registration embargo. I've no doubt that title stripping can be done, but what else? I just don't know what the details are and that's where I see a possible future legal battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Part/Time Supporter

The Rangers "men's" team has been deleted because they aren't in the SPL. There aren't any SFL teams in that link.

---

Nah they're still there. Just got the country wrong :wink:

24 October 2012 Last updated at 18:07 Craig Whyte recorded Rangers Ticketus deal talks with David Grier

By Mark Daly BBC Scotland Investigations Correspondent http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...52b76b7f37.jpg Mr Grier has said he was only aware of the Ticketus deal in August 2011
Continue reading the main story Related Stories

• Whyte makes Ticketus deal claims
• Whyte: I found buyer for Rangers
• Murray 'to blame' for Gers' woes

BBC Scotland has uncovered new evidence showing Rangers administrators Duff and Phelps knew Craig Whyte had sold season tickets to buy the club.
It indicates they were intent on denying it because they thought they could get away with it.
In May, the BBC suggested Duff and Phelps partner, David Grier, may have known about the £25m Ticketus deal last April, before Mr Whyte's takeover.
Mr Grier denied any knowledge of the deal until August 2011.
The BBC has obtained a recording of a meeting between Mr Whyte and Mr Grier, which show Duff and Phelps did know.
Mr Whyte bought Rangers from Sir David Murray for £1 and paid an £18m debt to Lloyds Bank by selling three years of season tickets to finance firm Ticketus for £25m.
As well as being involved in Mr Whyte's takeover, Duff and Phelps were appointed as Rangers' administrators after the club plunged into insolvency in February 2012.
In May, a BBC Scotland investigation suggested that Mr Grier may have known that about the controversial Ticketus deal before the Whyte takeover was complete.
Mr Grier, and Duff and Phelps, denied the claims and said he was unaware of this particular Ticketus deal until August 2011.
Last week, in a BBC interview, Mr Whyte said that "everybody who was involved in the deal team at the time knew about" the Ticketus deal.
He added: "They (Duff and Phelps) knew everything, they attended meetings, they were copied into all the emails, they were there on the day of completion. They knew from the start."
That claim prompted Rangers' joint administrator Paul Clark, of Duff and Phelps, to respond: "The allegations against the administrators, who are officers of the court, are false, malicious and without foundation.
"In addition, as administrators, we instigated legal proceedings against Mr Whyte's solicitors (Collyer Bristow) in the High Court in London and those proceedings are centred round the very serious allegation that Mr Whyte was involved in a conspiracy which deprived Rangers of many millions of pounds.
"Our conduct of the Rangers administration has been the subject of intense public scrutiny and we are wholly satisfied it was carried out to the highest professional standards."
BBC Scotland has now received a secret recording that Mr Whyte says he made at a meeting between him and Mr Grier in a private members' club in London on 31 May, after its investigation was broadcast.
The recording, which is to be used in a forthcoming court case involving Duff and Phelps and Mr Whyte's former lawyers Collyer Bristow, has been obtained legitimately by BBC Scotland.
During the exchange, Mr Grier said: "I'll tell you what we're doing with that just so you…
Mr Whyte: "Yeah.
Mr Grier: "We, we went to see counsel yesterday and had a full sort of debrief of all the email correspondence.
Mr Whyte: "Yep.
Mr Grier: "Now, the fact is that we probably did know what was going on with Ticketus. There's no email traffic whatsoever.
Mr Whyte: "That says that you did?"
Mr Grier: "That says that we did.
Mr White: "But we all know that you did and f****** hell.
Mr Grier: "Yeah, yeah. There's no…we were not involved in dealing with Ticketus directly.
Mr Whyte: "Yeah. So you knew the structures of the deal. You were dealing with Lloyds.
Mr Grier: "Absolutely.
Mr Whyte: "And the Ticketus part was Saffreys.
Mr Grier "Yeah. So we've maintained that line quite rigorously."
BBC Scotland has been able to confirm with a voice recognition expert that the recording is of Mr Grier.
Duff and Phelps have yet to respond to the publication of the 31 May conversation.
Regarding previous allegations they said: "Our conduct of the Rangers administration has been the subject of intense public scrutiny and we are wholly satisfied it was carried out to the highest professional standards

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by s.a.m

24 October 2012 Last updated at 18:07 Craig Whyte recorded Rangers Ticketus deal talks with David Grier

By Mark Daly BBC Scotland Investigations Correspondent http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/image...52b76b7f37.jpg Mr Grier has said he was only aware of the Ticketus deal in August 2011
Continue reading the main story Related Stories

• Whyte makes Ticketus deal claims
• Whyte: I found buyer for Rangers
• Murray 'to blame' for Gers' woes

BBC Scotland has uncovered new evidence showing Rangers administrators Duff and Phelps knew Craig Whyte had sold season tickets to buy the club.
It indicates they were intent on denying it because they thought they could get away with it.
In May, the BBC suggested Duff and Phelps partner, David Grier, may have known about the £25m Ticketus deal last April, before Mr Whyte's takeover.
Mr Grier denied any knowledge of the deal until August 2011.
The BBC has obtained a recording of a meeting between Mr Whyte and Mr Grier, which show Duff and Phelps did know.
Mr Whyte bought Rangers from Sir David Murray for £1 and paid an £18m debt to Lloyds Bank by selling three years of season tickets to finance firm Ticketus for £25m.
As well as being involved in Mr Whyte's takeover, Duff and Phelps were appointed as Rangers' administrators after the club plunged into insolvency in February 2012.
In May, a BBC Scotland investigation suggested that Mr Grier may have known that about the controversial Ticketus deal before the Whyte takeover was complete.
Mr Grier, and Duff and Phelps, denied the claims and said he was unaware of this particular Ticketus deal until August 2011.
Last week, in a BBC interview, Mr Whyte said that "everybody who was involved in the deal team at the time knew about" the Ticketus deal.
He added: "They (Duff and Phelps) knew everything, they attended meetings, they were copied into all the emails, they were there on the day of completion. They knew from the start."
That claim prompted Rangers' joint administrator Paul Clark, of Duff and Phelps, to respond: "The allegations against the administrators, who are officers of the court, are false, malicious and without foundation.
"In addition, as administrators, we instigated legal proceedings against Mr Whyte's solicitors (Collyer Bristow) in the High Court in London and those proceedings are centred round the very serious allegation that Mr Whyte was involved in a conspiracy which deprived Rangers of many millions of pounds.
"Our conduct of the Rangers administration has been the subject of intense public scrutiny and we are wholly satisfied it was carried out to the highest professional standards."
BBC Scotland has now received a secret recording that Mr Whyte says he made at a meeting between him and Mr Grier in a private members' club in London on 31 May, after its investigation was broadcast.
The recording, which is to be used in a forthcoming court case involving Duff and Phelps and Mr Whyte's former lawyers Collyer Bristow, has been obtained legitimately by BBC Scotland.
During the exchange, Mr Grier said: "I'll tell you what we're doing with that just so you…
Mr Whyte: "Yeah.
Mr Grier: "We, we went to see counsel yesterday and had a full sort of debrief of all the email correspondence.
Mr Whyte: "Yep.
Mr Grier: "Now, the fact is that we probably did know what was going on with Ticketus. There's no email traffic whatsoever.
Mr Whyte: "That says that you did?"
Mr Grier: "That says that we did.
Mr White: "But we all know that you did and f****** hell.
Mr Grier: "Yeah, yeah. There's no…we were not involved in dealing with Ticketus directly.
Mr Whyte: "Yeah. So you knew the structures of the deal. You were dealing with Lloyds.
Mr Grier: "Absolutely.
Mr Whyte: "And the Ticketus part was Saffreys.
Mr Grier "Yeah. So we've maintained that line quite rigorously."
BBC Scotland has been able to confirm with a voice recognition expert that the recording is of Mr Grier.
Duff and Phelps have yet to respond to the publication of the 31 May conversation.
Regarding previous allegations they said: "Our conduct of the Rangers administration has been the subject of intense public scrutiny and we are wholly satisfied it was carried out to the highest professional standards

---

Ha ha. You've been framed.

D&P now well and truly in the Pooh :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by down-the-slope

D&P now well and truly in the Pooh :greengrin

---

Haha what a guy Craigie Whyte is!
He tapes private conversations with his advisers!
Nice one.

I wonder if he has any more tapes up his sleeve , David Murray, SFA, Chuckie Green ? this could run and run. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Haha what a guy Craigie Whyte is!
He tapes private conversations with his advisers!
Nice one.

---

:agree:
FootballFutbolFitba‏@footbfutblfitba Craig Whyte. As Jim White would have said in his Scotsport days, "what a character."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greenginger

I wonder if he has any more tapes up his sleeve , David Murray, SFA, Chuckie Green ? this could run and run. :greengrin

---

This should unravel the whole Sevco purchase, if I was an oldcorpse creditor I would be instructing my lawyer to sew both Sevco and D&P.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

This should unravel the whole Sevco purchase, if I was an oldcorpse creditor I would be instructing my lawyer to sew both Sevco and D&P.

---

Together?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ****pile

Together?

---

Two for the price of one! :aok: Grier might employ the Tommy Sheridan "out to get me" line. It was a Murdoch/CIA conspiracy to frame him! :greengrin

sew away









might even sue them as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Haha what a guy Craigie Whyte is!
He tapes private conversations with his advisers!
Nice one.

---

We touched on this last week. Every one of them will be stitching each other up now. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Haha what a guy Craigie Whyte is!
He tapes private conversations with his advisers!
Nice one.

---

Legend :not worth Arise Sir Craig, slayer of the hun dragon:greengrin

This shows the utter travesty of Duff and Phelps being appointed administrators.

Recording is on the BBC site here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...medium=twitter

The story that just keeps giving!
Have the hordes started gathering at Greyskull yet?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

This should unravel the whole Sevco purchase, if I was an oldcorpse creditor I would be instructing my lawyer to sew both Sevco and D&P.

---

That would probably need a thread of its own?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

That would probably need a thread of its own?

---

Nah.. this one just keeps bobbin along.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

That would probably need a thread of its own?

---

At first I didn't understand your post, but now I've cottoned on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Nah.. this one just keeps bobbin along.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

At first I didn't understand your post, but now I've cottoned on.

---

I can see Whyte stitching a few of these up. :wink:

Just one big stitch up really

Aaaarg G you got there first :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonnyboy

Just one big stitch up really

---

So close. :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

So close. :greengrin

---

Interlaced even :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonnyboy

Interlaced even :greengrin

---

I can sense a bit of needle in the ibrox camp now John. :wink:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by blackpoolhibs

I can sense a bit of needle in the ibrox camp now John. :wink:

---

Yip. A few erses knitting button holes :agree:

You really couldn't make this up. Mr Whyte is a sly dog!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PatHead

Think this was covered a few thousand pages ago. Can you not read the whole thread!!!!!

Sure Hibs never actually folded we just didn't have a team or the funds to compete for a couple of years before the original "Grandpa " Farmer and his mates helped reconstitute the club, got a team together and helped us return to the leagues.

Jonnyboy might tell you if you ask him nicely.

---

It's all beginning to unravel....

Glasgow press will be struggling to put a cheery slant on this for the great unwashed tomorrow! I'm sure they'll try though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jonnyboy

Yip. A few erses knitting button holes :agree:

---

It's a purler. A few knitted brows around.

D&P are toast and as a result Sevco are clinging to life rafts, but who else has Craigy Bhoy taped? I bet a number of erses are going in and out tonight. No doubt Jabba Traynor will wheel onto Newsnight tonight to give the newcorpse line, or maybe he'll turn like Lazarus! :agree: 'I always knew Craig Whyte was telling the truth!'

:greengrin

Did one of the tabloids not have a front page splash last week on Craigie's "tissue of lies" or summat like that, following his interview??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

D&P are toast and as a result Sevco are clinging to life rafts...

---

Sadly I doubt this revelation will have any impact on Sevco.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

Sadly I doubt this revelation will have any impact on Sevco.

---

Oh I think you are quite wrong there. The way this whole mess is coming unglued makes me wonder if they will even last the season. There must be at the very least half a dozen squeaky bums out there lol. Not a shadow of a doubt in my mind that some people are staring jail time in the face. Can you imagine being involved in the downfall of Rangers and then having to spend time in Shotts or Barlinnie? Lol and lol again......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HoboHarry

Oh I think you are quite wrong there.....

---

I'd love to be proved wrong, but I fear that Sevco are sufficiently distant from this event to avoid fallout. If Whyte releases tapes of discussions with Green from before May, well that would be something else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

I'd love to be proved wrong, but I fear that Sevco are sufficiently distant from this event to avoid fallout. If Whyte releases tapes of discussions with Green from before May, well that would be something else.

---

Aside from D&P's now proven conflict of interest, if Whyte can prove he did have a floating charge it could unwind the whole deal or at the very least mean litigation and uncertainty for a hamstrung Sevco. So let the zombie horde buy the shares. Fools and their money (giro's). :thumbsup:

Wouldn't bet against Whyte having Green tapes and just ensuring he gets his money from a private arrangement by taking someone else down.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

Aside from D&P's now proven conflict of interest, if Whyte can prove he did have a floating charge it could unwind the whole deal or at the very least mean litigation and uncertainty for a hamstrung Sevco. So let the zombie horde buy the shares. Fools and their money (giro's). :thumbsup:

---

Whyte did have a floating charge. That is not in dispute; it was registered at Companies House.

However, for a charge to have any value, there has to be a debt. Whyte was not owed anything by the Oldco. Therefore the charge is worthless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Whyte did have a floating charge. That is not in dispute; it was registered at Companies House.

However, for a charge to have any value, there has to be a debt. Whyte was not owed anything by the Oldco. Therefore the charge is worthless.

---

My understanding was in the event of insolvency the assets would be sold and he as the secure creditor would be paid first. D&P ignored his claim.

I suspect BDO would unwind this dodgy deal on day one if we were dealing with any regular public company with similar shenanigans, but we have to factor in the Orc violence and intimidation, plus the compliant/complicit Glasgow media. We'll see. Popcorn is back on the stove!

Im not legally trained but if this is true and Grier is a partner in Duff and Phelps then surelly they must be found guilty of some form of criminal negligence/charges
And if so then all decisions including selling Rangers to the yorkshireman are null and void?

Administration again:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

My understanding was in the event of insolvency the assets would be sold and he as the secure creditor would be paid first. D&P ignored his claim.

---

CWG's point is that Whyte wasn't a creditor, so he had no claim. He may or may not have held a floating charge or security, but if he's not due any money then the security is worthless. (At least, I think that's what he's saying).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ****pile

Together?

---

:greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

I'd love to be proved wrong, but I fear that Sevco are sufficiently distant from this event to avoid fallout. If Whyte releases tapes of discussions with Green from before May, well that would be something else.

---

I don't see how they can be THAT distant? Green 'buys' the assets from D&P, now pretty much proven to be dodgy---something everyone kinda knew ----at a knock down price. Green is up to his forehead in this too. Didn't he attempt to buy property from Murray a while back?
They are all a bunch of crooks. They have now fallen out. Could be fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

My understanding was in the event of insolvency the assets would be sold and he as the secure creditor would be paid first. D&P ignored his claim.

I suspect BDO would unwind this dodgy deal on day one if we were dealing with any regular public company with similar shenanigans, but we have to factor in the Orc violence and intimidation, plus the compliant/complicit Glasgow media. We'll see. Popcorn is back on the stove!

---

They ignored the claim because he wasn't due anything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

They ignored the claim because he wasn't due anything.

---

Not sure you can be sure of that though when this is the same discredited mob who denied knowledge of the Ticketus deal and are sewing Whyte's solicitors on oldcorpse's behalf. Whyte did state he was secured on the Ticketus deal. D&P just wanted to run up a big fee and get their own bag of loot. Whyte seems to think he has money due anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

Not sure you can be sure of that though when this is the same discredited mob who denied knowledge of the Ticketus deal and are sewing Whyte's solicitors on oldcorpse's behalf. Whyte did state he was secured on the Ticketus deal. D&P just wanted to run up a big fee and get their own bag of loot. Whyte seems to think he has money due anyway.

---

Go back to about page 5 on this thread :greengrin

Whyte's original position was that he had used his/his company's money to pay off Lloyds TSB. Accordingly RFC owed him that cash, and he took out a charge to secure the debt. So far, so good.

However, as we later discovered, he had actually used the Ticketus money (which was due to RFC) to fund the purchase. I can't remember the numbers, but the money he took from Ticketus was more than the money RFC owed the bank.

Net effect... RFC owed Whyte nothing, indeed he owed them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

Go back to about page 5 on this thread :greengrin

Whyte's original position was that he had used his/his company's money to pay off Lloyds TSB. Accordingly RFC owed him that cash, and he took out a charge to secure the debt. So far, so good.

However, as we later discovered, he had actually used the Ticketus money (which was due to RFC) to fund the purchase. I can't remember the numbers, but the money he took from Ticketus was more than the money RFC owed the bank.

Net effect... RFC owed Whyte nothing, indeed he owed them.

---

yeah, I know that, but if the Ticketus money was secured to Whyte personally and not oldcorpse as he claimed it was ... We have the the Collyer Bristow case that's outcome will reveal more I assume.

We also have to go back to the time when Chuckie went north to meet Craigie to get him to sell his shares in Hunco for £1, and Chuckie gave him £2.

What was the real deal behind that ? Craigie must have been told that he was in for a cut later on. I'll bet he taped that converstaion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

yeah, I know that, but if the Ticketus money was secured to Whyte personally and not oldcorpse as he claimed it was ... We have the the Collyer Bristow case that's outcome will reveal more I assume.

---

The Ticketus money wasn't secured, it was the money that Whyte paid off the bank with that was. And that security was lodged with Companies House.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

The Ticketus money wasn't secured, it was the money that Whyte paid off the bank with that was. And that security was lodged with Companies House.

---

He gave them personal gaurantees.




Anyway, Channel 4 (Alex Thomson) are running a segment on hun intimidation on their news tomorrow.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

He gave them personal gaurantees.




Anyway, Channel 4 (Alex Thomson) are running a segment on hun intimidation on their news tomorrow.

---

CW gave Ticketus a personal guarantee, but that's not relevant to his security over RFC.

Mibbae you legal peeps can enlighten me. I was always under the impression that recording somebody without their consent was illegal, or at least 'inadmissable' in court.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sadtom

Mibbae you legal peeps can enlighten me. I was always under the impression that recording somebody without their consent was illegal, or at least 'inadmissable' in court.

---

No chance there. Nobody would be allowed a wire tap or undercover surveillance in that case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sadtom

Mibbae you legal peeps can enlighten me. I was always under the impression that recording somebody without their consent was illegal, or at least 'inadmissable' in court.

---

I was wondering about that myself....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

No chance there. Nobody would be allowed a wire tap or undercover surveillance in that case.

---

Don't the cops need to apply for legal permission to do so?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

Not sure you can be sure of that though when this is the same discredited mob who denied knowledge of the Ticketus deal and are sewing Whyte's solicitors on oldcorpse's behalf. Whyte did state he was secured on the Ticketus deal. D&P just wanted to run up a big fee and get their own bag of loot. Whyte seems to think he has money due anyway.

---

Are you implying that there was a stich up somewhere? :na na:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod

CW gave Ticketus a personal guarantee, but that's not relevant to his security over RFC.

---

I suppose it's possible that Rangers (RIH) provided an indemnity over CW's personal liability in relation to the Ticketus money and that makes him think he has a claim under the security. Given his role in the whole affair I doubt it would be enforceable, but he may think it is.

BTW, I thought the security was a floating charge. If so that means it was over all the assets of the company, not just Ibrox and Murray Park.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sadtom

Mibbae you legal peeps can enlighten me. I was always under the impression that recording somebody without their consent was illegal, or at least 'inadmissable' in court.

---

It is inadmissible in court - i.e. it can't be used as evidence, but I don't think it's actually illegal - journalists have recorded and broadcast many undercover recordings and not been charged with anything. Remember Bruce Grobelaar talking about match fixing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

I suppose it's possible that Rangers (RIH) provided an indemnity over CW's personal liability in relation to the Ticketus money and that makes him think he has a claim under the security. Given his role in the whole affair I doubt it would be enforceable, but he may think it is.

BTW, I thought the security was a floating charge. If so that means it was over all the assets of the company, not just Ibrox and Murray Park.

---

Presumably, though, his claim was adjudicated by D&P and rejected.

And I think it was a floating charge too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Caversham Green

It is inadmissible in court - i.e. it can't be used as evidence, but I don't think it's actually illegal - journalists have recorded and broadcast many undercover recordings and not been charged with anything. Remember Bruce Grobelaar talking about match fixing?

---

Legal or not, once the cat is out of the bag, I would have thought it can still negatively affect the person concerned in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FalkirkHibby

He gave them personal gaurantees.

Anyway, Channel 4 (Alex Thomson) are running a segment on hun intimidation on their news tomorrow.

---

Good! Because our mob certainly dont have the guts or desire to do it, do they? They are too busy intalling cameras and microphones in all the 3rd division grounds and loving them up. What an embarrassment they are....

Thanks for the heads up. I will catch the piece via the Channel 4 News app.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Green Goblin

Legal or not, once the cat is out of the bag, I would have thought it can still negatively affect the person concerned in the future.

---

Indeed. That's why barristers will often say something inadmissible in court and the judge directs the jury to disregard that remark - do they? Do they f***.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sadtom

Don't the cops need to apply for legal permission to do so?

---

The Sheridan tape was hardly inadmissable was it. It got him charged with perjury.