The Gasman Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Minus the appeal, when will the verdict be? Was supposed to be last week wasnt it? No it wasn't. Verdict is not expected till March/April. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandt Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 No it wasn't. Verdict is not expected till March/April. Sound man, cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandt Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Wee question i'm sure someone can answer. Was thinking earlier today. Our debt in proportion to the size our club to the debt to a club the size of Rangers must be worse surely? How close to being in a similar situation that Rangers could find themselves in soon are we? Or are we simply in a better situation because Vlad has our debt in his own bank? Sorry for my lack of financial understanding, not my high point. Cold war history on the other hand Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 It's not a black and white or all or nothing decision. The FTT may rule that certain transactions were taxable and that others may not be. Ah right ok, that makes sense I suppose. I've not really being paying too much attention to the details, but yes that sounds about right for similar things. Glad you and others are paying attention and taking an interest, it saves the rest of us from doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Wee question i'm sure someone can answer. Was thinking earlier today. Our debt in proportion to the size our club to the debt to a club the size of Rangers must be worse surely? How close to being in a similar situation that Rangers could find themselves in soon are we? Or are we simply in a better situation because Vlad has our debt in his own bank? Sorry for my lack of financial understanding, not my high point. Cold war history on the other hand The only way HMFC would be in a similar situation to Rangers is if we owed a debt to an external creditor like Rangers could do to the taxman. There have been rumours on the same blog that HMFC have been involved in some dubious dealings with the taxman but these seem to have gone very quiet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandt Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 The only way HMFC would be in a similar situation to Rangers is if we owed a debt to an external creditor like Rangers could do to the taxman. There have been rumours on the same blog that HMFC have been involved in some dubious dealings with the taxman but these seem to have gone very quiet. Was in my mind all the time but wanted to make sure. Regarding the HMFC and taxman part. If there was something dubious going on i assure you it would be very known. I dont think the taxman cares about keeping things low profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Wee question i'm sure someone can answer. Was thinking earlier today. Our debt in proportion to the size our club to the debt to a club the size of Rangers must be worse surely? How close to being in a similar situation that Rangers could find themselves in soon are we? Or are we simply in a better situation because Vlad has our debt in his own bank? Sorry for my lack of financial understanding, not my high point. Cold war history on the other hand Hearts debt is probably around 3.5 times our turnover. Rangers debt excluding the tax case was about 0.5 of a year's turnover before Craig Whyte arrived. It has probably more than doubled since then. Hearts and Rangers are in similar positions with the bulk of the debt owned to the owner, only Vlad has / had some wealth, while CW is a billionaire / multi millionaire / shyster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 How close to being in a similar situation that Rangers could find themselves in soon are we? Or are we simply in a better situation because Vlad has our debt in his own bank? We don't (as far as I know!) owe the HMRC millions of pounds due to potentially dodgy tax arrangements. Our debt is made up to a large extent from paying more in salaries to players than we make as a football club/business. The vast majority of it is owed to UBIG, Vlads main business, who also own Hearts, rather than any bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAYEL Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 Wee question i'm sure someone can answer. Was thinking earlier today. Our debt in proportion to the size our club to the debt to a club the size of Rangers must be worse surely? How close to being in a similar situation that Rangers could find themselves in soon are we? Or are we simply in a better situation because Vlad has our debt in his own bank? Sorry for my lack of financial understanding, not my high point. Cold war history on the other hand Vlad owes our debt to Vlad not HMRC . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 I think we need to wait for the Hearts accounts to be published to see in the tax investigation that was ongoing for the previous 3 years has continued into a 4th. I fear that it will. HMRC only go public when they take action on a company, e.g. petitioning for administration or a winding up order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAYEL Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 The only way HMFC would be in a similar situation to Rangers is if we owed a debt to an external creditor like Rangers could do to the taxman. There have been rumours on the same blog that HMFC have been involved in some dubious dealings with the taxman but these seem to have gone very quiet. The rumour on the blog was nonsense. Someone was trying to say because Ogilvie was at Hearts ande rangers that we must be doing the same thing. 2 + 2 = 6 Bollox We had a tax bill and we have paid it. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VALDOS Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 But surely if HMRC win the tribunal, by saying they are due ?49million, then the tribunal panel are hardly going to say, yes you (RFC) are guilty of tax evasion to the sum of ?34million and should have payed that plus fines and interest of ?15million, but we'll let you off with all that and only demand you pay ?20million.(or whatever) If found guilty, they will have to pay the full amount they are being chased for. If that was the case they would be in a tiny minority, rarely is it as cut and dry as that. As others have said, the EBT's will have been analysed on an individual basis. The likely outcome in most tribunals is normally somewhere in the middle, if not short of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 The rumour on the blog was nonsense. Someone was trying to say because Ogilvie was at Hearts ande rangers that we must be doing the same thing. 2 + 2 = 6 Bollox We had a tax bill and we have paid it. . We have had and have paid several tax bills to HMRC however we are under continuining investigation b HMRC that means we are being audited and anybody who has had that misfortune will know that they can go back through years of receipts with a fine tooth comb looking for any transgressions or underpayments. Basically they are all over our ass as they also are with other clubs. I wouldn't rule out more payments being demanded from them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 If that was the case they would be in a tiny minority, rarely is it as cut and dry as that. As others have said, the EBT's will have been analysed on an individual basis. The likely outcome in most tribunals is normally somewhere in the middle, if not short of it. Rangers were sold for a quid!!! that strongly suggests they are in line to lose and lose heavily - once thwy lose that bill becomes payable and due almost immediately. Rangers can appeal any penalties and/or points of law but that doesn't stop the tax bill being due and payable. If they won any appeal they might get money back but initially it's a live debt to be paid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAYEL Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 We have had and have paid several tax bills to HMRC however we are under continuining investigation b HMRC that means we are being audited and anybody who has had that misfortune will know that they can go back through years of receipts with a fine tooth comb looking for any transgressions or underpayments. Basically they are all over our ass as they also are with other clubs. I wouldn't rule out more payments being demanded from them? Of course they can but that doesnt mean we haven't paid our taxes. The rumour on the blog was only summised because Ogilvie worked at both clubs , nothing more. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted February 3, 2012 Share Posted February 3, 2012 We have had and have paid several tax bills to HMRC however we are under continuining investigation b HMRC that means we are being audited and anybody who has had that misfortune will know that they can go back through years of receipts with a fine tooth comb looking for any transgressions or underpayments. Basically they are all over our ass as they also are with other clubs. I wouldn't rule out more payments being demanded from them? Do you know that for a fact or are you just basing it on the 18 month old qualification to our last published accounts? (I mean except to the extent that everyone who makes a tax return is "under continuing investigation" by HMRC). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted February 4, 2012 Share Posted February 4, 2012 So, possible 10 point deduction and, of course, if guilty of the "good faith" statute, according to expert Chic Young, plus another 8 points = at least 18 points! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Latest Craig Whyte interview by Tom English. Make of it what you wish. http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport-columnists/aidan-smith/interview_craig_whyte_chairman_of_rangers_fc_1_2098205#.Ty3SrVPpSII.twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guess The Crowd Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The only way HMFC would be in a similar situation to Rangers is if we owed a debt to an external creditor like Rangers could do to the taxman. There have been rumours on the same blog that HMFC have been involved in some dubious dealings with the taxman but these seem to have gone very quiet. I understand a certain agent of our acquaintance looked into such practices but was talked out of it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Aidan smith : jelavic is better than Brian Ruiz -- err no.... They are going down the shitter IMO... Pity we are not closer their points deduction could have made 2nd a realistic objective if we were on the boil easing our own financial woes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vegas-voss Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Latest Craig Whyte interview by Tom English. Make of it what you wish. http://www.scotsman.com/scotland-on-sunday/sport-columnists/aidan-smith/interview_craig_whyte_chairman_of_rangers_fc_1_2098205#.Ty3SrVPpSII.twitter So he's lying again in that article he said that the plan was to get as much money for Jelavic as they could but just two days ago he said Rangers didn't want to sell him and it was Jelavic that demanded a move.The guy just says anything to cover his own back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Stewart Regan got himself in a bit of bother in a Twitter debate with Celtic fans last night, which may have some repercussions. He started off with an innocent comment about his rear wheel drive car handling like a Jelly in snow. A Celtic fan responded making a reference to "Jelly and Ice Cream when Rangers die" being sung by the Celtic fans at ICT yesterday. A selection of tweets that followed were: StewartReganStewart M. Regan @CelticNewsAtTen @themikeybhoy67 Do you really think that?s in the best interest of Scottish football? #shortsighted StewartReganStewart M. Regan @GrahamDWilson Celtic and rangers have a joint sponsorship deal, the TV deal relies on Old firm derbies. Do Celtic not need Rangers? @krys1888KK @StewartRegan Gretna, Airdrieonians and Clydebank have all been lost with many others still struggling with debt. What about them? @StewartReganStewart M. Regan @krys1888 whilst they were important clubs in their local communities they did not have the same commercial pull with broadcasters. MD1888MD @StewartRegan @krys1888 Stewart please think about what you are saying. Rules are not applied based on size/influence of offender surely? StewartReganStewart M. Regan @paddimir absolutely not. If they breach the rules then they will face the appropriate sanction. But still allegations at present. StewartReganStewart M. Regan @themikeybhoy67 debate is healthy, but you need to consider all of the implications. I think the above again shows that the SFA, like the SPL, are only interested in the revenue that they can generate off the back of the OF. While it is welcome that Regan is willing to engage with fans in this way, I think he has shot himself in the foot with this particular exchange. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Francis Albert Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 . I think the above again shows that the SFA, like the SPL, are only interested in the revenue that they can generate off the back of the OF. While it is welcome that Regan is willing to engage with fans in this way, I think he has shot himself in the foot with this particular exchange. And once again demonstrating a huge blind spot in not recognising that the dominance of the OF is what is wrong with the Scottish game. If only Scottish football consisted entirely of clubs with primarily local interest the game would be far healthier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Stewart Regan got himself in a bit of bother in a Twitter debate with Celtic fans last night, which may have some repercussions. He started off with an innocent comment about his rear wheel drive car handling like a Jelly in snow. A Celtic fan responded making a reference to "Jelly and Ice Cream when Rangers die" being sung by the Celtic fans at ICT yesterday. A selection of tweets that followed were: StewartReganStewart M. Regan @CelticNewsAtTen @themikeybhoy67 Do you really think that?s in the best interest of Scottish football? #shortsighted StewartReganStewart M. Regan @GrahamDWilson Celtic and rangers have a joint sponsorship deal, the TV deal relies on Old firm derbies. Do Celtic not need Rangers? @krys1888KK @StewartRegan Gretna, Airdrieonians and Clydebank have all been lost with many others still struggling with debt. What about them? @StewartReganStewart M. Regan @krys1888 whilst they were important clubs in their local communities they did not have the same commercial pull with broadcasters. MD1888MD @StewartRegan @krys1888 Stewart please think about what you are saying. Rules are not applied based on size/influence of offender surely? StewartReganStewart M. Regan @paddimir absolutely not. If they breach the rules then they will face the appropriate sanction. But still allegations at present. StewartReganStewart M. Regan @themikeybhoy67 debate is healthy, but you need to consider all of the implications. I think the above again shows that the SFA, like the SPL, are only interested in the revenue that they can generate off the back of the OF. While it is welcome that Regan is willing to engage with fans in this way, I think he has shot himself in the foot with this particular exchange. Shows two things : A) what a clown Regan really is engaging in a conversation of this sort (if the tweet was actully his. & A complete lack of objectivity and impartiallity on his part given the comments (again if the tweet was actually his). Frankly none of the comments would really surprises me knowing what we know of the internal workings of the those who run the game here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buba Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 StewartReganStewart M. Regan @GrahamDWilson Celtic and rangers have a joint sponsorship deal, the TV deal relies on Old firm derbies. Do Celtic not need Rangers? This was interesting.. Is he talking about the current new sky deal?? And if so what happens if rangers do go bust... Surely sky cant cancel it?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 And if so what happens if rangers do go bust... Surely sky cant cancel it?? According to what was reported at the time of the new deal, Sky are "guaranteed" four old firm games a season. If the SPL can't deliver that, they may well find that Sky can walk away from the deal. Now a cynic might think that was done just to up the pressure on the SFA / SPL / Clubs, to treat Rangers (or a NewCo) leniently, but only if you're a cynic.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingantti1874 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Well I for one am shocked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Gasman Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Well I for one am shocked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tasavallan Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 According to what was reported at the time of the new deal, Sky are "guaranteed" four old firm games a season. If the SPL can't deliver that, they may well find that Sky can walk away from the deal. So, the OF 'guaranteed' top six finishes, or will the split be removed if either drop into bottom six. I am loving all of this Shenanigans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VALDOS Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 StewartReganStewart M. Regan @GrahamDWilson Celtic and rangers have a joint sponsorship deal, the TV deal relies on Old firm derbies. Do Celtic not need Rangers? This was interesting.. Is he talking about the current new sky deal?? And if so what happens if rangers do go bust... Surely sky cant cancel it?? If it is written into the contract then they can cancel it if they like. Doncaster had to back down to Sky in order to secure the TV deal, Sky's concern was that League reconstruction would result in less (2) Old firm encounters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Regan probably shouldn't have said what he did, but can anyone argue with it? Good interview from English though, asks the questions in a pretty blunt manner most journos would be afraid to use. It's clear to anyone with half a brain that Whyte is lying out his arse and it's wee lies and half-truths all over the shop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 If it is written into the contract then they can cancel it if they like. Doncaster had to back down to Sky in order to secure the TV deal, Sky's concern was that League reconstruction would result in less (2) Old firm encounters. Indeed, which is why the 'softening' process is beginning now. Whyte is already hinting at 'plans' if they lose. There is no doubt the Scottish football establishment will pull every string available to help Rangers/Rangers Newco. If they do though they will kill Scottish football. Rather than seeing this situation as an opportunity to revamp Scottish football, they will ruin the game in the process. It is why I am hoping they are complicit in the tax case if Rangers lose, assuming these 'side notes' to the contracts exist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Regan probably shouldn't have said what he did, but can anyone argue with it? Indeed they can. Would his FA counterpart say the same if it was Manchester United in Rangers situation? Good interview from English though, asks the questions in a pretty blunt manner most journos would be afraid to use. It's clear to anyone with half a brain that Whyte is lying out his arse and it's wee lies and half-truths all over the shop. I thought it was decent but only because Whyte confirms him as a lying barsteward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Indeed they can. Would his FA counterpart say the same if it was Manchester United in Rangers situation? Definitely not but reading what he's actually said, do you think he's inaccurate with any of it? I dinnae. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Definitely not but reading what he's actually said, do you think he's inaccurate with any of it? I dinnae. I don't argue that the TV deal is driven by the gruesomes. I do argue that he is wrong about looking at the 'bigger picture'. I want the stickies to suffer all sorts of misery and that is the biggest opportunity Scottish football will ever face to revamp its game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I don't argue that the TV deal is driven by the gruesomes. I do argue that he is wrong about looking at the 'bigger picture'. I want the stickies to suffer all sorts of misery and that is the biggest opportunity Scottish football will ever face to revamp its game. Think the SFA are putting all their eggs in one basket. (well two baskets) They seem to focus on old firm games to the detriment of the other teams. if we were to move to an 18 team league set up we would lose just two old firm games, but gain a highland derby, a fife derby, and if Ayr got their act together maybe a Ayrshire derby. If the TV made a big thing of these games then i think over time they would get better and bring in the cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsuperslim1874 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Think the SFA are putting all their eggs in one basket. (well two baskets) They seem to focus on old firm games to the detriment of the other teams. if we were to move to an 18 team league set up we would lose just two old firm games, but gain a highland derby, a fife derby, and if Ayr got their act together maybe a Ayrshire derby. If the TV made a big thing of these games then i think over time they would get better and bring in the cash. Agreed. I have mentioned this before - so many more derbies available that mean so much to so many other people. The dundee derby used to be decent as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hackney Hearts Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 but gain a highland derby, a fife derby, and if Ayr got their act together maybe a Ayrshire derby. ...and the derby-est derby of them all - the Dundee derby. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Agreed. I have mentioned this before - so many more derbies available that mean so much to so many other people. The dundee derby used to be decent as well. ...and the derby-est derby of them all - the Dundee derby. Of course... Dundee derby always a good game. How could I forget. We all need are rivals to spur us on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I'm not usually a fan of Bill Leckie but this article is about the most sensible I've seen from a "red top" journalist about Rangers for a long, long time. Hits the nail on the head. http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/columnists/billleckiesports/4109713/Forget-the-finger-pointing-they-have-ALL-made-a-total-mess-of-it.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2NaFish Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I'm not usually a fan of Bill Leckie but this article is about the most sensible I've seen from a "red top" journalist about Rangers for a long, long time. Hits the nail on the head. http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/columnists/billleckiesports/4109713/Forget-the-finger-pointing-they-have-ALL-made-a-total-mess-of-it.html It's a decent enough article, but wtf is this bit all about? And the wettest of them all? Sploosh forward Ali Russell, their grandly-titled chief operating officer. He arrived at Ibrox after a stint in charge of Scottish swimming. Which at least gave him plenty experience of being this far out of his depth. Because boy, is he floundering. The babbling embodiment of everything that's wrong with a club engulfed in a tidal wave of crisis. Look at the way he's handled the Jelavic business. The only way he could look any more ineffectual right now would be if he started drawing a wee love-heart over the 'i' at the end of his name. And by the way, what's THAT about? Is he testing the tolerance levels of the fans by converting to Islam one bit at a time? Is he Broxi's long-lost brother? Or did he idolise Saddam's right-hand man, Chemical Ali? :Vlad-Stupid: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floyd Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I'm not usually a fan of Bill Leckie but this article is about the most sensible I've seen from a "red top" journalist about Rangers for a long, long time. Hits the nail on the head. http://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/scotsol/homepage/sport/columnists/billleckiesports/4109713/Forget-the-finger-pointing-they-have-ALL-made-a-total-mess-of-it.html Excellent article that hits the nail squarely on the head in terms of this whole debacle. His description of Craig Whyte is also bang on the money. He likes to hide in the background most of the time but if there is something to celebrate or crow about he is front on the queue, like unveiling the league flag or invading Davie Weir's departure from Ibrox. There will be a lot of angry bears this morning that's for sure, but still no cracked crest,,,,,,,,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 "But as the boos rang round a half-empty stadium, you had to ask whether even the world's richest Bluenoses might think about putting their money somewhere it would be a bit more secure. Like a furnace." HAHAHHAHAHAHHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I think this could be a critical week for RFC. Now they have gone out the cup, they have no sources of extra income. Most clubs struggle with cashflow in the last three months of the season and there will definitely be a net outflow of cash at RFC. That doesn't fit in with CW's M.O. He is supposed to have a meeting today with Grant Thornton, their auditors, to establish what will happen with the accounts. If that meeting goes badly it wouldn't surprise me if he pulled the plug within a few days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.T.K Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I'm not usually a fan of Bill Leckie but this article is about the most sensible I've seen from a "red top" journalist about Rangers for a long, long time. Hits the nail on the head. http://www.thescotti...mess-of-it.html I like a good Rangers bashing story.... but I don't think it was much more then that. To me the story was just some known facts tarted up. We know Murray got Rangers into a bad state, we know Whyte is a chancer and has made a big gamble with Rangers. Dont think the story told me anything new. Meh, typical Scottish journalism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I like a good Rangers bashing story.... but I don't think it was much more then that. To me the story was just some known facts tarted up. We know Murray got Rangers into a bad state, we know Whyte is a chancer and has made a big gamble with Rangers. Dont think the story told me anything new. Meh, typical Scottish journalism. Don't agree - six months ago you would never ever have got a story written in this sort of way in either of the "redtops". There's been a wee bit of a sea change - brought about by the heads being removed from the sand and seeing that Rangers are heading for disaster. What we're getting now is the start of the "blame game". At least Leckie has the balls to point the finger at SDM - which is more than may of them will (probably becuase they've been in his back pocket for years and he knows a fair mount about them). When things do finally go tits up for them - watch for the blood letting that takes place. Personally, I can't wait for this to happen - it will be wonderful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaii Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 The laptop loyal - yet even though this is a fellow journalist saying it goes on I'm sure some on here will still say there is no press agenda in Scotland And every time, the ink was barely dry before he picked up the phone to one of his media puppies to spin the line that everything was hunky dory. Well, it never was. For Rangers, it might never be again. And Murray has to take his share of the rap. The internet's been buzzing all week with gags about knighthoods being stripped for the crime of bringing historic institutions to their knees ? but in all seriousness, the comparison between Sir David and Fred Goodwin IS one worth making. Spending money that didn't exist, speculating on over-priced purchases with no residual value, culling low-paid staff when profits dried up, staying tight to the right people in high places while keeping pet journalists on a short leash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I don't think Leckie's article was particularly good in terms of content. He's had a go a just about everyone associated with RFC. However, as previous posters have pointed out, that wouldn't have happened in the pre Whyte days. What is happening now among the red tops just now is that the red tops are positioning themselves to support whoever ends up running a newco RFC, e.g. the Daily Record appears to be aligning itself with Paul Murray. If RFC does go down the newco route then it might be interesting if more than one consortium seeks to present itself as the real deal. That could result in a major split among the tabloid press. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamboinglasgow Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 I don't think Leckie's article was particularly good in terms of content. He's had a go a just about everyone associated with RFC. However, as previous posters have pointed out, that wouldn't have happened in the pre Whyte days. What is happening now among the red tops just now is that the red tops are positioning themselves to support whoever ends up running a newco RFC, e.g. the Daily Record appears to be aligning itself with Paul Murray. If RFC does go down the newco route then it might be interesting if more than one consortium seeks to present itself as the real deal. That could result in a major split among the tabloid press. The longer things go on under Whyte the more you realise how skillful a manipulator Murray was as an owner. His control of the press is/was pretty impressive, the fact even now where it is clear that it was Murray's fault that Rangers got into the position they are now (Whyte has just made it worse) he is still held up as blameless by quite a few in the media. But his ability to manipulate the fans is another great skill he had. Had Murray been in charge last week, Rangers would have signed a player to counter Jelavic leaving. However, that is not to suggest the player would be great or even a success, but he knew that you could calm the fans by signing. Look just after Kaunas dumped Rangers out of the Champions League, he goes on a spending spree (which helped put Rangers in this financial position) it helps stem the anger from the fans, then there is the "we deserve better campaign" where one of Rangers fans chief concern is how Murray Park is not producing the talent they were told would come out, this comes to a head when the fans announce they will have a protest at a game, when the game comes suddenly John Fleck is in the starting XI, Murray gets his friends in the media to bang on about how he is the greatest thing to come out of Ibrox and even push for a call up, Murray manages to completely halt the Rangers fans anger (though at a cost of a youngster who becomes over hyped and sadly starts to believe that hype, gets into an argument with McCoist and since has been a bit part player.) What happens if there is a newco? Who will own what or can their be rival attempts at setting up a newco? Would Rangers still own Ibrox? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted February 6, 2012 Share Posted February 6, 2012 What happens if there is a newco? Who will own what or can their be rival attempts at setting up a newco? Would Rangers still own Ibrox? It will depend on how the assets are disposed of. Obviously whoever owns Ibrox would probably be in pole position, but there is nothing to stop anyone coming along with independent funding with a proposal to groundshare at Hampden. The new owner of Ibrox may only be looking for a return on his investment through a lease arrangement and may be open to a a bidding war between rival factions. The assumption being that a newco RFC is admitted direct to the SPL, otherwise the initial financial case might not add up. If they have to apply to join the SFL Div 3, then I can see rival bids from the likes of Spartans also being submitted. Another imponderable is the possibility that a potential owner decides to buy an existing SPL club and move it lock stock and barrel to Ibrox. St Mirren better beware! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.