Walter Bishop Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Heard a rumour tonight that Mr Murray is cacking himself at takeover of HBOS by Lloyds as he is up to his eyeballs and Lloyds have no intention of turning blind ete as HBOS hae been doing!!! Hence the desperation to sell some of their "star" players. Anyone else heard anything similar??? Would love it if this happened to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbump Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Peebles, flux capacitor etc etc;);) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I said many months ago when HBOS were first reported to be in trouble this could mean serious problems for Rangers in particular but many other clubs as well. More so Rangers because as you say HBOS have been more than helpfull to them and have allowed them to accumulate vast debts, mainly through fear. KNowing if they were to start recalling debts it could cause many thousands of Rangers fans to close accounts with them. Now however new owners wont need to worry about that problem, and will need to start balancing the books. In this financial climate that means to start recalling large debtors, and it isn't just Rangers FC but also Murray International as well. Serious times ahead for all. Ill also add, how glad we could be that we no longer owe all those millions to HBOS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DB-14 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 No chance they'll go into administration, and I really wouldn't want any SPL club to go into administration as we aren't exactly in a great financial position so one club goes down then there's always a wee chance we could be next. This is a non-starter though. FTH. :108years: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groot Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Think a big difference between us and Rangers is where the debt is held, the owners of the club in effect also own the debt, our worry would be if Vlad decided to jump ship Rangers aren't as fortunate as with their debt the banks needs will be more important than Rangers needs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I don't think there is even the slightest chance Rangers will go into Administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 one thing is for sure, despite the facade of transparency and honesty, rangers and SDM are every bit as secretive about their affairs as the big bad vlad is. there would appear to be concerns and issues being played out behind the scenes which SDM is extremely keen to keep a lid on, and it's well documented and in the public domain that he's very adept at imposing his own censorship on certain quarters of the media. and in turn, some sections of the media are willing participants in this. rangers are desperate to sell off players. not to fund the purchase of new players, there is an obvious urgency to raise funds for other reasons. cash flow problems? debts being called in? interesting times ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Having read some of the OPs "BBC understands" moments, i will not bother placing even a 1p bet on it. More chance of Kaka coming to Hearts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I don't think there is even the slightest chance Rangers will go into Administration. Would love it to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Gunn Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 here is what someone sent me.... Back in April (18th to 20th) there was a discussion (Next Seasons CL Seeding) about the level of Rangers debt that everyone (including the Press in Scotland) seems to think is ?68m. This is the figure that appears in the Rangers accounts as at 30 June 2003 BUT may not be the true figure! David Murray who owns the major shareholding in Rangers has set up a fairy complicated pyramid of companies which makes it more difficult to understand the true financial position but the facts are:– 1. 65% of Rangers FC plc (RFC) is owned by RFC Investments Ltd (RFCI). 2. 100% of RFCI is owned by Murray Sports Ltd (MSL). 3. MSL is owned by David Murray (DM). 4. DM also owns Murray International Holdings Ltd(MIH) Because the turnover of MSL is identical to RFC we can take it that MSL does not include any other trading companies apart from those which make up RFC. Thus we need to look at the MSL accounts to see the true financial position. Key facts from MSL Group Accounts as at 30 June 2003 (all figures in ?millions): 1. Turnover for year 49.035 (up from 44.61) 2. Loss for year 29.61 (down from 45.74 3. Accumulated Losses 88.49 4. Shareholders Deficit 29.2 5. Net Debt 128.58 (up from 112.8) The Shareholders Deficit figure has been arrived at despite: 1. Inclusion of Goodwill 17.41 (A departure from the Companies Act 1985) 2. Property Revaluations 62.30 (This is a cumulative figure) Accumulated Trading Losses are thus in excess of ?150m (88.49 + 62.3) There is also a contingent liability not included in the above figures: 1. Deferred Interest 18.04 The deferred interest is very interesting – RFCI used to be part of Murray Group Holdings Ltd (MGH) but was demerged from that group and ownership of RFCI was transferred on 29 January 1999 to MSL. As part of that transaction MSL issued loan notes of ?60m to MGH. MGH is a wholly owned subsidiary of MIH. Anyone looking at the accounts of MIH would not see the ownership of MGH and through that the “ownership” of the loan notes because the MIH accounts only list trading subsidiaries and MGH is not deemed to be a trading company. Thus MIH no longer owns RFC but instead MIH is owed ?60m by MSL, which is payable if the shares, assets or business of RFCI or (more importantly) RFC is sold. In other words MIH has “converted” its 65% shareholding in RFC into a ?60m asset although MIH has now restated the value of that asset to ?52.96m. It is often reported in the Press that with David Murray’s “vast empire of companies” RFC do not need to worry about the accumulated losses or net debt because David Murray’s group can always put more money into Rangers FC. It is not clear what funds have been “put in.” RFC losses have been supported by (1) property revaluations (2) sophisticated financial accounting (3) the ability to borrow. RFC and in particular the ultimate owner of RFC (MSL) owe large sums which, if called upon to do so, could only be repaid by selling the property assets (mainly the stadium) assuming a buyer could be found and the Rangers support didn’t mind no longer having the stadium! Key facts from MIH Group Accounts as at 31 January 2003 (all figures in ?millions): 1. Turnover for year 266.49 (up from 221.47 2. Loss for year 8.96 (3.93 profit) 3. Accumulated Profit 23.03 4. Shareholders Funds 79.39 5. Net Debt 190.24 (up from 181.79 In arriving at the above figures 3 significant items are included by MIH: 1. Investment in RFCI 5.08 2. Goodwill and Intangibles 4.61 3. Loan Notes from MHL 52.96 If these were excluded the shareholders funds would be reduced to ?16.74m There is a contingent liability not included in the above figures: Pension Scheme Shortfall 6.40 There is a further contingent liability of ?139.89m in respect of guarantees to the bank in respect of borrowings by various subsidiaries. To see the latest figures we will need to wait until 30 November 2004 for the 30 January 2004 Accounts. So what is the net debt of Rangers? ?68m per RFC accounts or ?129m per MSL accounts or ?190 per MIH accounts or ?319m (that is ?129m for MSL group and ?190m for MIH group) being the cumulative net debt of David Murray’s companies? Interestingly the total creditors figure for MSL + MIH is ?417.231m. An analysis of the total creditors figure shows the level of bank borrowings: Bank Loans 136.983 Bank Overdraft 100.448 Total 237.431 Of the ?237m the overdraft (?100m) is payable on demand and ?80m of the bank loans are payable within 5 years with ?57m falling due after 5 years. Sorry this is so long and I realise a lot of this will only make sense to accountants but it is important that the true facts are available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Would love it to happen. As would I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Would love it to happen. While not wanting it to happen to any club they are on my list. Celtic St Mirren Dundee Rangers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groot Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 GBT, I'm not an accountant but it seems to me a lot of that info is from 2003/2004, it doesn't really tell us about their current predicament, have they not had a rights issue that SDM underwrote since then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Well run ostensibly profitable companies are having their overdrafts or a percentage chunk of them called in. This is putting some of them into administration It could happen to any football team. Bizarrely there is a chance that being with a more mainstream high street bank leaves you more exposed, so having some tinpot Eastern European bank as your bank may actually be a benefit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 Having read some of the OPs "BBC understands" moments, i will not bother placing even a 1p bet on it. More chance of Kaka coming to Hearts. ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 ???? Not at all. Im sure the mods can check your "i hear" posts. One great one was Jones fell out with Mixu and thats why he is out the squad exclusive. the fact he was with his baby in hospital being the real reason. http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/showthread.php?t=34785&highlight=jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArmiyaRomanova Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I don't think Rangers will be allowed to go into administration - but I would suspect that strong words will be had (if they haven't been had already) and that Ipox belts will be tightened for some years to come. This will hopefully be of benefit to us - we're supposedly not keen to sell players to the OF so are unlikely to lose out in that respect. And a 'cheaper' Rangers squad might be overtaken in the league. Here's hoping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Impossible for Rangers to end up in administration IMO. Look at their debts; then look at their assets. Non-starter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Impossible for Rangers to end up in administration IMO. Look at their debts; then look at their assets. Non-starter. If big financial institutions can go t**s up then it wouldn't be impossible for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Impossible for Rangers to end up in administration IMO. Look at their debts; then look at their assets. Non-starter. Non-starter? If those assets are illiquid and are the subject of write-downs in any case, then the historic accounts become irrelevant. Administration could (but probably won't) happen to any club if they fail to meet a demand for payment. If their bankers are demanding they reduce their overdraft and they fail to do so, then admin could happen. And remember, it almost happened to Septic before Fergus Magoo stepped in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jammy T Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I think people are missing the point. Business overdrafts are being called in or halfed all the time at the moment WITHOUT any missed payments or any particular credit risk. If Banks think they can force some cash into their coffers they are doing it Nobody notice the bank stocks today? The money that has gone in so far is having sod all impact - money needs to be hoarded and engathered for the next massive round of losses. They are being dirty bassa's about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I think people are missing the point. Business overdrafts are being called in or halfed all the time at the moment WITHOUT any missed payments or any particular credit risk. If Banks think they can force some cash into their coffers they are doing it Nobody notice the bank stocks today? The money that has gone in so far is having sod all impact - money needs to be hoarded and engathered for the next massive round of losses. They are being dirty bassa's about it Correct, although banks will in almost all cases give notice of an overdraft reduction when the overdraft is in the millions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted January 14, 2009 Author Share Posted January 14, 2009 Not at all. Im sure the mods can check your "i hear" posts. One great one was Jones fell out with Mixu and thats why he is out the squad exclusive. the fact he was with his baby in hospital being the real reason. http://www.hmfckickback.co.uk/showthread.php?t=34785&highlight=jones Whats the problems with passing on information you receive? I never say anything is for definite only what i have been told or heard. I unlike you dont seek attenion, and i certainly dont stalk fellow posters by pulling up old posts and keep records of them. As for the mods "checking" my posts? WTF? This is a football forum for discussion,rumours,whispers etc etc. If you cant handle threads that are anti-rangers,protestant,chelsea,British or bigoted then dont read them. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shaun.lawson Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Non-starter? If those assets are illiquid and are the subject of write-downs in any case, then the historic accounts become irrelevant. Administration could (but probably won't) happen to any club if they fail to meet a demand for payment. If their bankers are demanding they reduce their overdraft and they fail to do so, then admin could happen. And remember, it almost happened to Septic before Fergus Magoo stepped in. Correct - but what were Celtic's assets while Parkhead was falling to bits and the team had been failing for years? Not what Rangers' are now, certainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoff Kilpatrick Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Correct - but what were Celtic's assets while Parkhead was falling to bits and the team had been failing for years? Not what Rangers' are now, certainly. Quite so but then the obvious comparison is what happened to Leeds after Ridsdale's profligacy (which is also a nice metaphor for the UK economy under Gordon Brown's stewardship). Elland Road has never been more valuable but it didn't stop them borrowing against their assets to the point of lunacy. That said, I think the whole Rangers in administration thing is a classic internet wildfire rumour started by Septic fans because things have really tightened up at Ibronx but it is clear that they need cash quickly for whatever reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groot Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Out of interest, who owns Murray Park? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted January 15, 2009 Author Share Posted January 15, 2009 Out of interest, who owns Murray Park? One of Murray`s companys, MSM ?(murray sports management) i think? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 GBT, I'm not an accountant but it seems to me a lot of that info is from 2003/2004, it doesn't really tell us about their current predicament, have they not had a rights issue that SDM underwrote since then? I think the main point we need to look thats been missed in that long comment is this part at the end Particularly the bit in bold Bank Loans 136.983 Bank Overdraft 100.448 Total 237.431 Of the ?237m the overdraft (?100m) is payable on demand and ?80m of the bank loans are payable within 5 years with ?57m falling due after 5 years. That piece was written around 2003/04. That would now tie in with the apparent need for Murray to raise as much money as possible if there is a ?57m debt needing to be repaid in the very near future, some time this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Maroonblood Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Whats the problems with passing on information you receive? I never say anything is for definite only what i have been told or heard. I unlike you dont seek attenion, and i certainly dont stalk fellow posters by pulling up old posts and keep records of them. As for the mods "checking" my posts? WTF? This is a football forum for discussion,rumours,whispers etc etc. If you cant handle threads that are anti-rangers,protestant,chelsea,British or bigoted then dont read them. Thanks. Well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nucky Thompson Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Those administration rumours are laughable, just like we've been going into administration for over a year now:mw_rolleyes: The power of the Internet and bitter rival fans imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Quite so but then the obvious comparison is what happened to Leeds after Ridsdale's profligacy (which is also a nice metaphor for the UK economy under Gordon Brown's stewardship). Elland Road has never been more valuable but it didn't stop them borrowing against their assets to the point of lunacy. That said, I think the whole Rangers in administration thing is a classic internet wildfire rumour started by Septic fans because things have really tightened up at Ibronx but it is clear that they need cash quickly for whatever reason. Rumour it maybe Geoff, but stories about this have been swilling around Glasgow for a couple of weeks - and i know a few Rangers supporters who are extremely worried that they are going to have to empty at least half of the team in order to pay for SDM Murrays finacial mistakes with the club. What's really interesting is apart from one or two titbits - the press and the redtops in particular have been muted on this. But there again i suppose he that pays the piper calls the tune! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mac_fae_Gillie Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 would hate to see any club go into administration but would love to see Rangers forced to sell every player worth anything and end up with a bottom 6 capable team,would make for an interesting season next year. Would be very interesting to see how Rangers homegate drops as well.. OK so celtic would romp the league but so what,1 horse race or 2 horse race don't matter... May even lead to VR investing cash on the right players to sieze the chance. FINGERS cross... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PresidentRomanov Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Is this the Jambomonics version of hibs.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest JamboRobbo Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Pickybum in sticking up for Rangers FC shocker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I think the main point we need to look thats been missed in that long comment is this part at the end Particularly the bit in bold That piece was written around 2003/04. That would now tie in with the apparent need for Murray to raise as much money as possible if there is a ?57m debt needing to be repaid in the very near future, some time this year. The after 5 years does not mean now it means from now on. It could be over the next 4/5 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deevers Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 The after 5 years does not mean now it means from now on. It could be over the next 4/5 years It would mean at least some part of it if not all of it is due for repayment. In any case having to repay this sort of money, even if it is over a few years is going to place a considerable strain on Rangers financial resources. That can only be a good thing for the rest of the SPL. Cue the whinging an whining about wanting to slope off to the EPL to start up again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Deevers I agree Anything that reduces the OF financial advantage is good for the rest of the SPL us especially. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Don Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 The after 5 years does not mean now it means from now on. It could be over the next 4/5 years The way it reads to me is 80million was due over a 5 years period and another 57million due after that 5 years which would bring us up to 2009 this year that a final payment of 57million is due. There is obviously a reason Murray needs money and is selling Players, that could be one possible reason. Im not saying Rangers are heading for administration I don't think it would ever be allowed to happen, having said that Celtic were within hours of the shutters going up. but I would say there are serious money problems and a lot of Rangers fans believe that to be the case as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bean counter Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 The way it reads to me is 80million was due over a 5 years period and another 57million due after that 5 years which would bring us up to 2009 this year that a final payment of 57million is due. There is obviously a reason Murray needs money and is selling Players, that could be one possible reason. Im not saying Rangers are heading for administration I don't think it would ever be allowed to happen, having said that Celtic were within hours of the shutters going up. but I would say there are serious money problems and a lot of Rangers fans believe that to be the case as well. I believe that they have money problems and with SDM openly trying to find a buyer for the Club his reluctance to pump in more money is understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WalterEgo Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Correct - but what were Celtic's assets while Parkhead was falling to bits and the team had been failing for years? Not what Rangers' are now, certainly. Whilst I very much doubt that Rangers will go under the situation then and now is very different. Previously companies went under for reasons of solvency. Now otherwise profitable companies are getting into difficulty due to lack of working capital (look a little closer to home:rolleyes:). If the banks turn off the tap then a company would have to liquidate assets in order to keep going. That's when it starts getting messy. Right now companies need to be cashed up to be able to breathe easily - anyone reliant on bank funding shouldn't be sleeping too well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gillsjambo29 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Administration or not it's a bad state of affairs whenL: 1. You accept a less than overwhelming bid for your top scorer over the last few seasons 2. Practically invite bids for your captain and supposed talisman 3. Announce ahead of the Jan window that you need to offload eight players. I can?t see Rangers going to the wall but which ever way you look at it their in some pretty deep doo da and Murray is in no position to bail them out. It?s potentially great news for the rest of the top 6 clubs because it?s an ever declining spiral. You sell a number of your better players and qualification for the Champions league becomes ever more difficult. Coefficient then drops making it harder still. It would lead to an interesting battle for 2nd place while it still carried the champion?s league spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hagar the Horrible Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 SDM has wanted out of Ibrox for quite some time, but so far has not found a suitable buyer, now i doubt he can find any buyer suitable or otherwise. He launched a ?50m share issue to which was not taken up by the so called loyal Rangers fans. SDM had to buy these shares himself in turn he ended up owning more of Rangers than diluting his hold. Coincedence shortly after he sold a subsidary (1/3rd of MIM) for ?125m one would assume to pay for this share holding. Now with the banks the way they are and SDM has all his dosh tied up in assets and as the bottom has fallen out of the non-precious metals market. Cash flow is a real problem. He looks like he has to sell big this window to alleiviate the problem, however if he does not then they may have to sell several players in the summer. This however could be SDM asset stripping Rangers making them debt free so as to make the club a more sellable option. Rangers as a club have enough players and clout to sell their players for far more than they are worth, just now. but it will be interesting to see what happens when the window shuts and nobody has been off-loaded. I cant see them going into administration as a club due to these assets. HOWEVER if MIM go breasts skywards then RFC will go with them unless SDM sells first. The same applies to Aberdeen who are as a club showing a good finacial standing but the Milne group could drag them down. In either case a small investment in playing staff this summer could put us in a strong position for second place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Whats the problems with passing on information you receive? I never say anything is for definite only what i have been told or heard. I unlike you dont seek attenion, and i certainly dont stalk fellow posters by pulling up old posts and keep records of them. As for the mods "checking" my posts? WTF? This is a football forum for discussion,rumours,whispers etc etc. If you cant handle threads that are anti-rangers,protestant,chelsea,British or bigoted then dont read them. Thanks. As far as i recall none of your i hear posts have been accurate, so you either make it up or your "sources" feed you crap. Stalking you? hardly pointing out to other posters what i recall about your posting history is not stalking. Ive already posted id be happy if rangers went bust so whats the ****e at the end of your post? trying to paint me as a bigot? If you are, be a man and post that or do us all a favour and stop posting lies. For the record, im not anti rangers, nor pro rangers, i am protestant, an arsenal fan and British, and who mentioned bigoted? oh right you, can you tell me what posts i am allowed to read? If you post crap and i believe it to be crap, ill say so. Just to clarify, i think your op is crap and another look at me, i know people thread. Just like your others, this will fall on its face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 This was hardly a positive up-beat article nor the usual tub-thumping from Sir Dracula Murray http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/rangers/2009/01/15/i-m-making-tough-decisions-now-to-benefit-rangers-in-long-term-says-sir-david-murray-86908-21042297/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brownkg Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Poor man even the jounos don't want to speak to him and hear the truth:eek: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted January 15, 2009 Author Share Posted January 15, 2009 As far as i recall none of your i hear posts have been accurate, so you either make it up or your "sources" feed you crap. Stalking you? hardly pointing out to other posters what i recall about your posting history is not stalking. Ive already posted id be happy if rangers went bust so whats the ****e at the end of your post? trying to paint me as a bigot? If you are, be a man and post that or do us all a favour and stop posting lies. For the record, im not anti rangers, nor pro rangers, i am protestant, an arsenal fan and British, and who mentioned bigoted? oh right you, can you tell me what posts i am allowed to read? If you post crap and i believe it to be crap, ill say so. Just to clarify, i think your op is crap and another look at me, i know people thread. Just like your others, this will fall on its face. Nearly 24 hours and you come up with that!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted January 15, 2009 Author Share Posted January 15, 2009 As far as i recall none of your i hear posts have been accurate, so you either make it up or your "sources" feed you crap. Stalking you? hardly pointing out to other posters what i recall about your posting history is not stalking. Ive already posted id be happy if rangers went bust so whats the ****e at the end of your post? trying to paint me as a bigot? If you are, be a man and post that or do us all a favour and stop posting lies. For the record, im not anti rangers, nor pro rangers, i am protestant, an arsenal fan and British, and who mentioned bigoted? oh right you, can you tell me what posts i am allowed to read? If you post crap and i believe it to be crap, ill say so. Just to clarify, i think your op is crap and another look at me, i know people thread. Just like your others, this will fall on its face. You are the biggest freekin attention seeker on here!!! Looking back at my threads i have posted twice regarding Velicka and Jones, The Jones one turned out to be partly pash and who knows regards to Velicka. I posted a few weeeks ago that we have made enquiries about Arfield this is spot on and i 100% trust my source. Any others?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest S.U.S.S. Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 You are the biggest freekin attention seeker on here!!! Looking back at my threads i have posted twice regarding Velicka and Jones, The Jones one turned out to be partly pash and who knows regards to Velicka. I posted a few weeeks ago that we have made enquiries about Arfield this is spot on and i 100% trust my source. Any others?? Sure i am sweetheart, sure i am. Remembering its a family board means im unable to post my thoughts on you but i will ask, looking at your threads, does that make you the biggest fool or biggest liar then? because as far as i can see your "sources" feed you crap and you rush on here to tell us all or you make it all up trying to look like mr football insider. Others? not sure, simply posted what i recalled from you. Keep posting what your "sources" give you, post enough rumours and one is bound to be proved right, perhaps post them in the Gullit lounge where they should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david mcgee Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Lets rejoice in the fact Vlad said he would end the old firm dominance.....................and with Kaunas he quite possibly has. Not quite the way i thought he was planning?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Bishop Posted January 15, 2009 Author Share Posted January 15, 2009 Sure i am sweetheart, sure i am. Remembering its a family board means im unable to post my thoughts on you but i will ask, looking at your threads, does that make you the biggest fool or biggest liar then? because as far as i can see your "sources" feed you crap and you rush on here to tell us all or you make it all up trying to look like mr football insider. Others? not sure, simply posted what i recalled from you. Keep posting what your "sources" give you, post enough rumours and one is bound to be proved right, perhaps post them in the Gullit lounge where they should be. So you recall 1 thread? :108years: Check my thread history. I only post what i hear and as i have said before this is a football forum for posting and discussing rumours etc etc. As for posting what your thoughts about me are feel free if it makes you feel like a hardman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.