Rangers Rumours Archive April 10 2012

 

Use our rumours form to send us rangers transfer rumours.


10 Apr 2012 22:35:36
WBAs new bid has triggered the release clause in naismiths contract. It's now up to the player to decide and if all reports are true he is off....

Believable46 Unbelievable46

Naismith is not leaving rangers.

Agree0 Disagree0

Steven Naismith won't b going anywhere, he's contracted until 2015 and along with greegs is our biggest playing asset. Obv if liquidation happens he'll b away. Had dinner with him a couple of nights ago and he's well aware of WBA bid/bids. He wants to stay and concentrate on getting bak to his best as this is the 2nd really bad injury he's had at rangers. It's not as though in his moments of need , the club said get on with it. They give him everything to assist him in a full recovery. He doesn't and won't forget that, a rangers man thru and thru. I'm not saying he won't leave eventually as he is destined for English prem as he's class, he is a friend and have known him 11yrs. We met on holiday and still meet up reg and I stay in Edinburgh. The lad is a star!!!

Agree0 Disagree0

Honestly you still think that the players have small release clauses in their new contracts? Don't you think if the administrators did this then it would devalue the club quite a lot for potential bidders? Use some common sense mate

Agree0 Disagree0

Why don't West Brom wait a couple of weeks and get him for free?

Agree0 Disagree0

What's the point in him staying with Rangers?

Agree0 Disagree0

No but Rangers is leaving Naismith.

Joeshmo1888

Agree0 Disagree0

Was succulent lamb on your menu? He is
just like every other footballer and will go
where the money is.

Agree0 Disagree0

He's a friend who is no doubt over the moon that your posting about him on here

Agree0 Disagree0

Going down to the premiership still recovering from injury isnt a good idea. Getting warmed up and running rings round the crap up here then picking between a few bids is better. You have to be 100 percent when you go down there or you will be watching the games rather tham playing in them for a long time.

Agree0 Disagree0

He was well aware of bid or bids, so he didnt know then, so the posts a lie

Agree0 Disagree0

The administrators did put release clauses in the contracts. They had no option but to do so to sweeten the deal for players considering that they had to slash the wages by 75%

Dave King has since confirmed it in a paper.

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers can not afford to pay Naismith or any other high earner, its the reason the club is in such a financial mess. No new owner is going to run up a 10 million pound loss in their first year, there is no Europe to even gamble on, its a guaranteed loss if they do not reduce wages significantly.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 22:06:06
I think we should sell all our big earners like Mcgregor naismith davis and whittaker and pay our debts

Believable45 Unbelievable45

Oh ok timmy lol...jsm

Agree0 Disagree0

Great, 8m down, 126m to go. back to the drawing board.

Agree0 Disagree0

I think we should sell them too and pay all the small bills and work out payments to pay the rest in full,i think you will agree as we do not want to be known as the tax dodgers for evermore

Agree0 Disagree0

Ye that will amount to £130 million, good idea!

Agree0 Disagree0

Eh, can they pay their EBT loans before they go thanks very much....

Agree0 Disagree0

Bearing in mind the company that supplied Weirs' leaving present are listed as a creditor they shouldn't hold their breath for much of a sending off.....

Agree0 Disagree0

It's not being a tim to want to support a club you can be proud of and not one that basically cheated it's obligations. We're ripping off the local newsagent for £500 FFS. This is Rangers we're talking about. I don't want to be embarrassed about being a Rangers fan next season. Losing games with a bunch of teenagers so that we can pay our debts is more honourable, than shafting everyone just so we can be competitive with Celtic in the short term.

Agree0 Disagree0

Great idea, then nobody will be interested as the league will be over before it is started and everyone will start to lose money. Different class.

Agree0 Disagree0

May not pay it all but most honest folk start somewhere,you cant afford them, so sell them and pay some debts. That would be the honest and dignified way

Agree0 Disagree0

I have been surprised that Rangers fans haven't put more pressure on ex board to pay back monies taken out of EBT how much do they care for your club its not like they couldn't afford it and it would set a positive example from the top

Agree0 Disagree0

We might not have any choice..
craig+babybear

Agree0 Disagree0

Selling is the right thing to do for two reasons, one to pay the creditors and two to stop Rangers losing another 10 million next year, there is no Europe after all. The squad wll be decimated in the summer to accomodate the new financial realities of football, operate within your means.

Agree0 Disagree0

Can we get somebody to take whittaker ?

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 19:57:56
On a realistic note why would any business man buy a football club other than for an ego trip.
Football clubs rarely make money let alone Scottish football clubs.
Look at Celtics accounts.A well run club financially with Approx 30Million turnover a year and the profit margins are in the hundreds of thousands. You are looking about 1% profit margins on turnover. You would be better puting your money in a Savings account and earn 6%.
So If rangers owe £134Million how long would it take new owners to get their money back - not in their lifetime...

Believable41 Unbelievable12

Celtic's turnover is around 55 million a years Rangers turnover around 33 million per year.

Agree0 Disagree0

What bank are you with to get 6%?

Agree0 Disagree0

Anyone running celtic n rangers should be able to ecxeed 30m turnover , in my opinion there not being utilised to there full value comercially , i think if a real clever buisness man with innovative ideas comes in to either club they could take the clubs to new hieghts

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers turnover for 2011 was 57 million.

Agree0 Disagree0

That must have been before tax ...as you dont pay any do you...

Agree0 Disagree0

A good fund will serving a UK PLC will earn them 15% p/a on their cash today?

Agree0 Disagree0

I'm a realist and Scottish football has seen its best days. Rangers WILL be liquidated as the debt is too great. All clubs in Scotland will have to function within their means. Celtic and rangers thought the premiership awaited them but it never prevailed. The next generation will not have the same interest in football and the overpaid players with their over inflated egos will find this insane era is not sustainable!! Mr Realist

Agree0 Disagree0

I worked for an international car rental firm for 10 years which lost money year in year out. I didn't understand it until the business logic until I discovered that our shareholders were car manufacturers who used the car rental side ($3 billion p/a) as nothing more than a car showroom/marketing tool and it was part of bigger picture. That's the only model that football can fit into and be able to justify an investment, we have to be part of a sports portfolio on a worldwide or European basis. If not, it is good money being thrown after bad, or as previous poster said, rich man's ego.

Agree0 Disagree0

On a realistic note there is always some fool somewhere willing to spend silly money on that ego trip. we'll see

Agree0 Disagree0

How do you know rangers turnover, no accounts for 2011

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers turnover is 40+ milion if they do not qualify for group stages of CL, and 50+ million if they do. Their recent operating costs are over 50 million, a new owner will knock this down to 40+ million.

The club will break even if it fails in CL, instead of losing 10 million, this can only be done by reducing the wage bill by at least 5 million, or 5 players on 20k per week.

The biggest games of the year for both Rangers and Celtic are not against each other, it is the knock outs for the group stages of CL, it NETTS a cool 10 million, and most of it is pure profit.
The football battle between Celtic and Rangers will be decided by the financial success of both in Europe, whoever qualifies the most will win a 10 million pound advantage over the other, an advantage that will strengthen their squad.

Agree0 Disagree0

D&P described their gross turnover for 2011 as £45m cost v £35 turnover.

Agree0 Disagree0

Agree with the post that Celtic & Rangers are not marketed properly. I am in Singapore right now and all over Asia its Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool and Chelsea (Man City starting to come more). The EPL is massively publicised (check out singtel). Unfortunately OF dont have the finance to push the publicity more. You have to speculate to accumulate.

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers turnover in there last released audited accounts was 33 million this is the reason the club is in trouble. This was confirmed by then chairman Alistair Johnstone.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 19:49:32
glasgow cup final ibrox .monday night rangers v celtic under 17 get along and support the young bears

Believable32 Unbelievable13

Thats the future, :>

Agree0 Disagree0

Thats your first team next year in div 3

Agree0 Disagree0

And a chance to finally win something ahead of them this year.

Agree0 Disagree0

No bad timothy,yet again look at your own team 4 years,3 managers,36 players and a 10 point deduction.Thats good!

Agree0 Disagree0

What was the score in this game ?

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 19:48:23
To the guy below a floating charge. A standard charge is if u borrow 10 quid, then they place a charge. A floating charge means there is no specific amount. People with an offset mortgage will have a floating charge as you are able borrow more without going for a further application! Not.some of the nonsense posted

Believable3 Unbelievable5

I think you are confusing a floating charge with a variable interest mortgage .

Agree0 Disagree0

Err, no. I'm afraid your explanation is incorrect. A standard security (a scots law term - in England the equivalent is commonly called a mortgage or fixed charge) is a security over land and buildings - e.g. Ibrox, Murray Park, car park etc. A standard security can secure "all sums" borrowed from time to time by the granter of the standard security. A floating charge is a different sort of charge - it "floats" until the security holder enforces it. It can also secure all sums. When the security holder enforces it (crystallises it) the charge brings into the security net all of the then assets of the company (excluding any which are the subject of a prior ranking standard security). A bank will typically take both a standard secutity and a floating charge - the standard security to cover land and buildings, the floating charge to pick up everything else such as moveable property (cash in bank, furniture, equipment etc). Anyone who has a "mortgage" will have granted the bank a standard security not a floating charge.

Agree0 Disagree0

For clarity

A Fixed Charge is over propery and is known in Scotland as a Standard Security.

A Floating Charge or more correctly a Bond & Floating Charge is a security over Current Assets such as Stock and Debtors. The powers contained within a Floating Charge also give the holder the right to appoint an Administrator.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 19:38:25
WBA have made a second bid tonight for Steven Naismith

Believable23 Unbelievable11

10 Apr 2012 18:46:09
Scottish referee Charlie Richmond on Sportsound Radio tonight, has given some startling revelations about the going ons within the Scottish referees association, this story is just breaking but it's going to be a another huge embarrassment for Scottish Football.

Believable33 Unbelievable7

So maybe some of the "conspiracy" theories have foundation then?

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 18:34:24
Bill Ng owns £40million only and will use £12million to buy the club, Yea but the idots that believe he has only £40million he is in a consortium, and one of the men in it is Peter Sim who owns over £1 BILLION

Believable20 Unbelievable24

Craig Whyte was ment to be worth a billion, through his companies. Look what happened with him. This time the new owners should be looked in to properly before a deal is done

Agree0 Disagree0

His personal wealth is 40million not his company value

HAMILTON LAD

Agree0 Disagree0

Craig Whyte was only worth a billion according to that t**l Daryl Jackson. They know nothing!

Agree0 Disagree0

We need to know more about this Singapore Consortium. Other than Bill Ng, who else is involved ?

Agree0 Disagree0

A Rich owner is not the answer the answer we need is a Fergus McCann type who makes us a public limited company and for us the fans to buy the shares issue.

Agree0 Disagree0

Do you mean Peter Lim - the guy that tried to buy Liverpool a while back for £320 million quid?

Agree0 Disagree0

Mr Ng is supposedly in a consortium of 5 Singaporeans who are interested, so not just HIS personal wealth in the spotlight (+4 others if my arithmetic is correct?)
Maybe people should give every new opportunity for Gers a chance without dissing and pre-judging. If only fans did the same a year ago with a certain mr whyte and not trusted the supposed trustworthy mr Murray! Lets just wait and see. Afterall, they say a change is as good as a rest?! And Celtic and mr McCann situation was poles apart from this situation with rangers!

Agree0 Disagree0

Do you mean Peter Lim - the guy that tried to buy Liverpool a while back for £320 million quid?

Yes the man is a billionaire
There is many sources it is quoted in alot of papers but Bill Ng said so


This is what is said:
The bid by Ng's Singapore-based consortium marks the second time investors from the wealthy city-state have attempted to buy a British football club.
Singaporean billionaire Peter Lim in 2010 attempted unsuccessfully to buy English club Liverpool for 320 million pounds.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ha ha,looking for a quick fix as usual

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 17:11:30
Ally McCoist has admitted Steven Naismith could pull on a Rangers jersey again before the season is out Great news RTID...jsm

Believable19 Unbelievable23

Yeah great news for all the prospective buyers looking for another bargain buy! We are going to get ransacked this summer! Jellyfish doing a great job and certain to have put spotlight on Rangers squad! Bargain Hunt!

Agree0 Disagree0

That is great news, I hope they don't rush him but would be good for everyone if he could maybe come on in the last home game for a wee while. The main thing is we have him back ready for pre-season.

GovanFR

Agree0 Disagree0

It would be utterly rediculous to bring Naismith back before the end of the season for a number of reasons.

1) If rangers intend to keep Naisy then why risk a recurrence of an injury before the end of what has turned into a meaningless end to the season.

2) What if we do plan to sell Naismith and he gets a recurrence of the injury and a potential 2-3 Million becomes nothing but wages spent.

I hope to got we are not gambling on the boys health to show the teams in england that hes worth more than 2-3 million.

Ally McCoist is far to much of a professional for that but we all know anything is possible at the moment.

Allow Naisy to work hard during the summer, get back to match fitness and good luck to him wherever he may be!

Agree0 Disagree0

He's leaving during the summer with several others.

Agree0 Disagree0

Must be trying to get his price up.

Agree0 Disagree0

Naismith will be off, he has spent most of his time abroad sunning himself since the wage cut was announced, he was one of the players who wasn't keen and would have left if he wasn't injured. Before all the keyboard warriors pounce on this and throw the usual timmy BS about, my source is Jimmy Bell. Deal with it numpties. Real Rangers men will get us through this, but liquidation looks the most likely outcome as of right now.

Agree0 Disagree0

I think if I was Naismith and new I was on the way out the door I wouldnt be coming off the treatment table.

It wouldnt surprise me if he is sold before the end of the season and will be registered when the transfer window opens.

Agree0 Disagree0

They can't bring him back, insurers are paying wages.

Agree0 Disagree0

2 words:
Shop Window.

Agree0 Disagree0

Wee Ally is giving the support false hope again.

Agree0 Disagree0

Naismith has been injured remember, he has been getting his full wage for most of this time because the insurance is paying him not rangers. His wages only go to the arranged amount once in full training not light training

Agree0 Disagree0

Liquidation may not be inevitable but getting rid of high earners is. The club is forecasted to make yet another 10-12 million loss next year due to no Europe.
Any new owner must downsize the wage bill to match the turnover, the only way this can be achieved is to sell most of the high earners. If Rangers can sell them for approx 10 million and save 5 million in wages then its a win-win solution.
Like Celtic it will take time to produce a reasonable team that can be afforded, but in a few years Rangers should be back competing with Celtic for titles and CL money.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 15:35:01
Turns out the BK’s HAVE secured funding from Tickitus with a floating charge on Ibrox.

what is a floating charge ???....jsm

Believable9 Unbelievable9

Did ticketus have a floating charge? I don't think they did

Agree0 Disagree0

Bit like a secured creditor if IBROX were to be sold they would receive every penny of that sale whether it be 5mill or 100mill

Agree0 Disagree0

Nonsense, CW already has one in place. Was reported on this site and in press that he had re-secured it to one of his offshore companies a couple of weeks ago. CW will only release once he has sold his shares.

Agree0 Disagree0

This couldn't happen until CW has sold shares to BK and the existing charge is lifted. Cannot happen presale. Can understand Ticketus wanting this moving forward as it would give them secured creditor status in the future should BK/RFC go bust post sale.

Agree0 Disagree0

A floating charge is a charge over assets that only crystallises upon liquidation.

Basically this means that there is not a specific fixed charge over Ibrox and Murray Park, but over all assets of RFC, so if we went into liquidation in the future and we the sale proceeds from heritable property (for example) was not enough to cover the debt, Ticketus would also be able to take hold of other assets, such as inventory (erm... replica shirts?!?) and possibly players registrations.

(Note I am not sure about the rules about player registrations, and with the whole Tevez saga then I'm would imagine would avoid/be unable to do this).

This is different to a fixed charge, which is one over 1 asset/class of assets, like you would have with a mortgage with a bank. (You don't pay, they repossess!)

Agree0 Disagree0

I would be very surprised if Ticketus did not have some security in place with the original deal, either Rangers or CW would be liable for the advance in the event of liquidation.
Ticktus were well aware of the BTC and its potential financial repercussions when they did the deal with CW last year.

Agree0 Disagree0

Sorry, paragraph two is supposed to say "if", not "we", that'll teach me not to proof read properly....

Agree0 Disagree0

With all this uncertainty HMRC With 4,000 EBT cases coming along in Rangers’ wake, HMRC will surely be hoping for an example to be set that encourages most of them to settle. Doing a deal with Rangers that accepts 10% of what is owed after allowing a decade of fiddling will do little to dissuade others from appealing their cases to the bitter end. The actual amounts received from the Rangers case will likely be immaterial to HMRC’s hopes for collecting on EBT users

Agree0 Disagree0

CW claims he gave a personal guarantee to Ticketus for about 30 million pound which I assume was why they made the money available to CW to pay off the bank before he actually owned the club. Presumably he was able to convince Ticketus that he had assets worth that much. If Ticketus deal goes t*ts up they will have to chase him for their money - good luck with that!

Agree0 Disagree0

He does have £30 million plus, Ibrox, Murray Park and Albion Park, as main shareholder and floating charge he owns every major part of Rangers, if liquidated!

Agree0 Disagree0

It seems likely that if he gave Ticketus a guarantee then he would ensure he held a floating charge over the assets of RFC to the tune of the guarantee ( 30 million).

IF TICKETUS IS NOT PART OF ANY NEW OWNER DEAL, THEN THEY WILL GO AFTER CW, AND HE WILL GO AFTER THE ASSETS. ONE WAY OR ANOTHER TICKETUS WILL NOT LOSE ANY MONEY AND NOR WILL CW.

Agree0 Disagree0

He does have £30 million plus, Ibrox, Murray Park and Albion Park, as main shareholder and floating charge he owns every major part of Rangers, if liquidated!

NOT correct he maybe the prefered credior (duff and phelps say not) which would mean that he would have first dibs on the funds realized by the sale of assets upto the value of the club's debt to him (duff an phelps say zero). If Ibrox, Murrey park etc are sold then they will not realize their 120 million book price but realistically could raise significantly more than 30 million. St Mirren sold their satadium for about £10 million as a development site. Tynecastle is valued at about £60 million as development site, that value does not include selling of bits of the ground as mementos, scrap value of metal, Selling on lights, big screen TV, seats , trophies. Add in player contracts (if allowed this might be challenged under the law) something for murrey park etc £60 million in total does not look unrealistic. i.e. Liquidation would realize about 50p in the pound for creditors. Even if the prefered creditor status is accepted, then the ticket us deal would be voided and Whyte would be liable, (or if ticketus get preferred credior status) that would leave about 30 million to cover 90 million in debts about 33p in the pound

Agree0 Disagree0

A floating charge is when the wife blames me for not flushing the lavvy

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 14:51:36
rangers potential new owner bill ng has a personal fortune of £40m(yes u heard right). we are becoming a total laughing stock. the list of potential new owners don't have 2 bob to rub together yet we need serious investment in our first team. i fear the worst!

Believable24 Unbelievable14

Bill ng is part of a consortium he's not just bidding on his own !

Agree0 Disagree0

To be honest this post really shows that it hasnt sunk in yet for a lot of people that very hard times are ahead for Rangers. By next season RFC will be a small club that just happens to have a big and loyal support. Like Leeds United. Serious investment in the first team? That doesn't even begin to register. Next season will be about re-building from the ground up and it will take more than a year.

Agree0 Disagree0

Even so, it doesn't fill me with much optimism.

Agree0 Disagree0

Would hardly call having £40 million not having to bob to rub together. as its a heel of a lot more than we know whyte has,

plus is that the money in his bank or is total business worth,

also he's part of a group of people bidding together, he is just the face of the group. we dont have a clue about the finances of the group as a whole...

Agree0 Disagree0

It was serious investment in players that got you into this mess, the OF can not afford high wage earners, please come to terms with this fact.

Casino football is over, the tax payer is not going to finance football losses anymore.

Agree0 Disagree0

Forget investment in the first team, the club has to be saved first and foremost, even if it means fielding a team of untried youngsters next season.

Agree0 Disagree0

Serious Investment will be needed.
26000 smaller shareholders at the last rough count £10 per week for a year =£13million.Bring on board all the rest of the fans who can afford investment=high investment .The only problem with this level of investment is who can we TRUST.

Agree0 Disagree0

In the world of football £40m is nothing, especially a club in our position which needs serious investment. we need a powerful figure who can take the club forward. i don't see that in the people who are vying for control. we need to bring in 8-12 players in the summer and will require a descent budget to strengthen what is a poor squad of players.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ng Fanily are worth 9 billion the other 4 investors in group are reputedly in the top 10 richest in Singapore big money men tend to stick together and you dont get anything on face value if you tell seller what you have in your pocket (simple common sense)

Agree0 Disagree0

Bill Ng has not only put in a bid but put in a serious bid. If he's worth £ 40 Million then maybe it's because the guy has a brain eh! How can anyone criticise him for doing so when other more wealthy Rangers fans didn't bother?

Agree0 Disagree0

Is the bill ng guy not part of a consortium ?./biggles

Agree0 Disagree0

Lets be honest here , if rangers manage to keep the squad intact and manage to bring in 2or3 players we will be ok , our squad is a lot smaller than celtic and thats a problem but put up our best 11 against celtics best and there,s nothing between them , people are flapping a bit here for no reason , yes a bleak picture is bein painted by non gers fans , we kno weve got a lot of things to get sorted out but lets wait and see ,

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers are never going to as big as they where, who is going invest huge money to win spl?

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers can not afford the current squad, the high earners will be sold by either the administrator or liquidator or new owner.

Agree0 Disagree0

It's now working smarter with the resources than splashing cash we don't have. Have to look at youth squad and trying to scout young talent from abroad. Need to nurture and develop talent and sell on. Only way Rangers and any team in smaller european league can survive

Agree0 Disagree0

Remember that every player who took a wage cut has had a clause inserted into their contract which means either they can move for a vastly reduced transfer fee or recieve a massive percentage of any transfer fee.

This was confirmed by Dave King so save the Timmy bullsh*t accusations please.

Just keeping the squad intact as it is now will cost any potential new owner a fortune as contracts will have to be renegotiated with all the players.

Mac

Agree0 Disagree0

The man is a billionaire thats his money in the bank and its a consortium so no need to worry as long as we get someone to takeover ill be a chuffed bluenose

Agree0 Disagree0

Would you listen to these clowns an their useless speculation. Bill Ng knows the financial details of the takeover, what amount of money is required etc etc and he certainly thinks he can afford it! Its actually a minority of wealthy businessman that are stupid so could all the voluntary financial advisor's please wind their necks in.

Agree0 Disagree0

His personal wealth helps but these guys have other ways of generating income. Their other business involvements open doors for them also.

I wouldn't pay too much consideration to his own wealth. If he genuinely has Rangers interest at heart, then he/they will make the funds available.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 14:45:48
Andrew Ellis to sue Craig Whyte over share issue, Ellis was promised 25% shareholding which never materialized, why would Ellis do this now? Are Whytes shares not meant to be worthless? A strange new twist.

Believable24 Unbelievable1

I feel Whytes 85% share is more important than D&P are letting on, Whyte is a seasoned liquidator with years of experience of stripping assets before driving off into the sunset! Ellis is a intelligent man why waste money chasing worthless shares? A worried bear!

Agree0 Disagree0

I think this is another delaying tactic and he is in this with CW. More delay will make potential buyers walk and virtually ensure liquidation which is what CW wants. Ellis is just another part of the plan to strip assets as is the administration team. All of them are associated with CW.

Agree0 Disagree0

Dont you just love the stuff coming out of the big house just get the big wrecking ball and put yous out your misery

Agree0 Disagree0

I cant honestly believe any right minded individual who believes the D&P spin that Whyte is an irrelevance and his shares are worthless. Whyte is the owner.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why did Ellis not speak up sooner about his share of the club? is this just more delaying tatics? The questions just keep growing by the minute.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 12:22:32
bill ng has said that he cant wait to talk to ally mccoist about potential signings if he gets the keys to ibrox. he has also said that he wants to make sure that we win another european trophy.

Believable20 Unbelievable25

Ha......stop my sides are splitting hahhaha.....Signings, cups.


wake up man

Agree0 Disagree0

This guy's personal fortune is only £40m. Hardly enough to pay 30% of our projected current debt never mind big signings and the prospect of another European trophy.
He should be mindful of his comments before shouting off. And I did laugh when I heard that he has supported Rangers as a boy. Aye, very good..I'm afraid that does not cut it with me. Another unknown businessman trying to make a quick buck at RFC's expense.

Agree0 Disagree0

Literally, Oh My God!

Just when you think you've seen gullible...

Agree0 Disagree0

Capacacity at his club's existing stadium is only 2,500 to put it in context.

Agree0 Disagree0

First thing any new owner will be doing (if there is one) won t be discussing new signings with Sally but looking fot a road to get rid of him !, Seriously people do you think any new owner will be ringing ,inviting over or discussing RFC with one of the worst managers in SPL history ..... TTTS

Agree0 Disagree0

Hes only worth 40 mil but the other 5 guys in the consortium are worth alot, and as for number 1 post, your laughin at the thought of signings and cups? compare your measly 43 with our 54(61), we never needed signins the last 3 years and the cups were still coming home to the big house!

Agree0 Disagree0

You never needed signings in the past 3 years you still spent more than celtic and tell me what was your excuse when celtic won 3 in a row are rangers fans the most deluded contradictory gullible confused fans in the world

Agree0 Disagree0

The original post is only letting fellow Rangers fans know what the guy was quoted as saying in todays paper. so firstly to disagree with the post is stupid and to class the guy as gullible is equally stupid. But thats what we have come to expect from Selik fans. Just because you constantly talk about liquidation and rubbish rumours of potential buyers doesn't mean it will actually happen. A buyer is out there and once we are sorted financially we'll go back to winning titles.
J1985

Agree0 Disagree0

You spent more money over the last 5 years ya bam than us oh wait you did not pay for some of them cheats thieves vagabonds no class pay your taxes before you start bragging remember some of the titles are getting took back for your cheating

Agree0 Disagree0

Celtic never cheated to get their measly 43 looking forward to the stripping of the tainted titles

Agree0 Disagree0

The Ng family are worth of 8.9billion dollars

Agree0 Disagree0

Are you one of the many thousands who also cheered the Whyte Knight on his arrival at Ibrox with his war chest of many millions for new signings? Whyte is involved in both the overseas bids! Blue Knights are our only hope!

Agree0 Disagree0

J1985 a buyer is out there and so is EBT a mean ET. what exactly is a buyer getting 140 years of unsurpassed dignity i mean over 100yrs with a sectarian signing policy, fans rampaging their way through cities tax scams non payment of just about everytyhing.no income streams cheating their way to titles the only thing a buyer has in his favour are how gulible the fans are dont ask questions and he has lapdogs to airbrush and print it. yeah a buyer is out there he bought rangers for a £1

Agree0 Disagree0

Why are so many rangers "fans" so negative. yes we may be in admin and this but now everyone is saying things like ally should be sacked because he one of the worst managers in our history, f&^k off. he is the one staying with us all the way, he is the one offering to work for free, he is the one whp has gotten our pride back and on his vey first year of management guided us to beating celik twice(going to be third) and guided us to be unbeaten for more than 20 games. yeah we f&^ked up but its also CW,SDM and the players fualt so get off his back

Agree0 Disagree0

Don't know what to think hearing these guys will put millions into the club but heard the same about Whyte just want one bid accepted then wanna see the colour of their money not empty promises

Agree0 Disagree0

These sound like the same populist, unrealistic, egotistical boasts of Murray and Whyte.

Surely what Rangers should be looking for is a guy who is not going to pump in a load of money but instead build a sustainable business model which will secure the future of the club and never put it in the irresponsible hands of an egomaniac again. Surely a lack of success in the short-term is worth taking for some much needed stability.

Agree0 Disagree0

Rangers fans are negative because the club is in trouble with everyone except the Pope.

It is hard to overestimate the current pilght of your football team.

Agree0 Disagree0

A buyer gets a club , which if marketed right could generate millions as a "brand". A fan base that pump millions into the club through thick and thin season after season.
I wondered how long it would take before you lot started bringing up sectarianism, is this because liquidation may not be as close as once thought. Once we come through this normal service will resume with you lot bringing up sectarianism and refs and the SFA right??!!
And by the way, your club wasn't squeky clean back in the day was it??
J1985

Agree0 Disagree0

The Ng family are worth of 8.9billion dollars

The problem is he is not from the Ng family and owns £40m, but he is part of a consortium of 5 people, which could own up to a couple of billion together but he is the one that knows about this things because he is a Chairman of a club in Singapore it is not Rangers but still.

And also I saw this

"The bid by Ng's Singapore-based consortium marks the second time investors from the wealthy city-state have attempted to buy a British football club.
Singaporean billionaire Peter Lim in 2010 attempted unsuccessfully to buy English football club Liverpool for 320 million pounds."

That chap Sim must be invloved and owns 1.7billion dollars, over £1 billion. That is one person too and if we add Ng+Sim together that is £1.1 billion and there are 3 others as well

Agree0 Disagree0

Just a point- when do the new uefa rules kick in with regards to how much a club can spend. Those rules mean no scottish team will ever win the champions league. So anyone saying they will come to rangers and spend big money to improve the team is talking pish

Agree0 Disagree0

Yes you may win a European Trophy when you move to Scadinavian League.

Agree0 Disagree0

Stop it Ive cracked a rib with all the
laughter.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 11:59:30
If we owe 55M then the only way to go is with the BK's and ticketus if they are willing to wipe of 17M and defer any other payments for two years. Remember that there is also 7.5M owed to the fans who have debentures, if thay keep the debentures thats another 7.5 plus ticketus 17m wiped out. Settle with the other creditors, win the BTC, raise the season ticket money for working capital. FFS somebody make it happen.


JG

Believable12 Unbelievable34

10 Apr 2012 11:26:02
With all this chat about Singapore Business man maybe buying the club I thought I would check out there football. Rubbish in one word, then I came across one of there staduims and holy s**t its in the middle of a lake, marina Bay floating stadium. Go check it out. Those guys are mental. Dont think it would fit in the clyde though.
Don

Believable8 Unbelievable7

You could use the Govan Ferry .

Agree0 Disagree0

My sister lives in Singapore and this floating pitch is for hire for 11 asides and does not belong to any team.

Plus, my brother in law tells me that the quality of football in the S league is really really bad.

Agree0 Disagree0

Agree the standard of football is very poor but no real investment in football. They are crazy for the EPL and it is given max publicity over here (I stay here just now). I submitted previously Bras Basar stadium is the main one and not too bad for Singapore.

Agree0 Disagree0

I am currently in Singapore and their main stadium is the Bras Basar Complex in Little India. It is a public utility but not a bad stadium for Singapore football standards. (All sports caterd for including swimming)

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 09:23:35
Andrew Ellis claims he's co owner in rangers and working as a middle man with the American bid as he has 24.9 shares and is looking after the clubs interests ! Fingers crossed whyte has booed as this paints a very different picture , CVA to possibly be aggreed very soon with HMRC ...? The airport bear !!

Believable15 Unbelievable28

Mr Ellis is worth the watching remember he tried to buy before

Agree0 Disagree0

Ellis claims to have helped CW acquire club, hence he's owed the shares. Wonder if he had a hand in helping the Ticketus deal?

Agree0 Disagree0

Did he give whyte 25p out of the pound?

Agree0 Disagree0

These 2 put you in mind of Scrooge & Marley

Agree0 Disagree0

Does this mean he owes 25% of the debt accrued since Whyte took over - put that to him and see how quick he is mention shares percentages then lol.

Agree0 Disagree0

Ellis is a big chancer just like Whyte

Agree0 Disagree0

He says he was promised but a verbel contract is not worth the paper its written on.

Agree0 Disagree0

10 Apr 2012 00:44:34
The Mail are reporting that the new owners will be announced by Wednesday. HMRC could scupper any deal but it is reported that D&P have been in discussions with HMRC over the weekend to discuss a CVA.

Bill Ng is saying he is looking forward to discussing signings with Ally.

Believable21 Unbelievable40

Think this week will bring decisive news either way. If all goes well and we are in SPL next year then that is time to judge ally regardless of squad he has left to work with. The only good things this season has been the introduction of young players and the septic keeping hold of gingertim. We may have been 15 ahead but that was with them having games in hand - not much we can do to protect a lead when others games to play ! then the admin and loss of form which is understandable. We lost the league and they took advantage - fair play and congrats to them. Gingertim is not a great manager like they think and will be found wanting big time next season, as for the dignity of him and lawell - folks can make their own minds upbut i know i would not want to be represented in the press by either whatever the situation ! No comparison with the dignity respect and diplomacy shown in recent years by Smith or McCoist and I am sure Stein would turn in his grave at some of antics of gingertim in representing septic - long may gingertim remain !!!!!

Agree0 Disagree0

They havent even chosen a preferred bid yet so this can't possibly be true

Agree0 Disagree0

Signings with Ally? Thats when he claims job seekers.
Malmo, Maribor, Falkirk, lost a 15point lead guys got a worse record than le Guen

Agree0 Disagree0

The future is bright and soon we will be able to make some good signings and challenge celtic again.

Agree0 Disagree0

Well actually Bill Ng is about to discuss loan deals for a bunch of unknowns from Singapore.

Agree0 Disagree0

Admins talking to HMRC about CVA = Nonsense.

Agree0 Disagree0

Why is it nonsence talking about a cva to hmrc it has to be done now

Agree0 Disagree0

Companies (CVA)
Companies and partnerships

Company Administration / Administration Order

Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA)

Companies and partnerships
There is no interim order procedure for companies. When protection from creditors is needed companies may obtain a moratorium, or companies and partnerships can go into administration before putting CVA proposals to their creditors. CVA or PVA proposals may be made by the

Administrator when a company or partnership is in administration
Liquidator when the company or partnership is being wound-up
Partners or company directors acting through an IP as nominee.
Company Administration / Administration Order
Once a company is in administration no proceedings can be taken by any creditor for pre- or post-administration debts without the permission of the Administrator or the Court.

The purpose of an administration under the IA 1986 (as originally enacted) is to achieve one or more of

The survival of the company or its undertaking
The approval of a company voluntary arrangement
The approval of a scheme of arrangement
A more advantageous realisation of assets.
There is no mechanism for this administrator to distribute realisations hence a need for an exit route such as CVA.

The objectives of an administration under the 1986 Act as revised by Schedule 16 Enterprise Act 2002 are

The rescue of the company as a going concern
Achieving a better result for the company’s creditors as a whole than would be likely if the company were wound up
Realising property in order to make a distribution to one or more secured or preferential creditors
The administrator is obliged to give primacy to rescue measures and is able to distribute directly to creditors with the sanction of the court.
Administrations traditionally have been very costly because of the heavy involvement of the IP and staff in running the company and were only really suitable for very large concerns. The changes introduced in 2003 are aimed at making entry into administration easier, faster and cheaper. They may not reduce ongoing costs.

Whilst in administration the administrator

May have day to day control of the business and its finances
Acts as agent for the company
May take measures to make the business more viable, for example process re- engineering, downsizing, tightening financial and credit controls.
Within eight weeks of the company going into administration, the administrator must send to creditors details of the administrator’s proposals for achieving the objective of the administration. In certain circumstances a creditors’ meeting will be held.

Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA)
A CVA may be put forward by

The directors of the company through an IP as nominee or
A liquidator or administrator.
When the directors put forward a proposal: their nominee must report to the Court whether in the nominee's opinion

The proposal has a reasonable prospect of succeeding should be considered for approval at separate meetings of the company’s creditors and members
When the meetings should be held.
Creditors must receive not less than 14 days notice of the meeting, which must be held not more than 28 days from the date of the nominee's report.

When the administrator or liquidator is putting forward the proposal with themselves as nominee

There is no report to Court, they simply have to give 14 days notice to creditors.

If the proposal is approved creditors have appeal rights under Section 6 IA 1986.

Agree0 Disagree0

Nonsence, cos the BTC no decided yet - so scale of HRMC involvement unclear. who is the 75% needed to agree a CVA ?

Agree0 Disagree0

I've read this too, I just hope who ever does buy the club have been through strict due dillagence and stricter checks than with CW, fingers crossed for some good news coming out of Ibrox in the next day or two WATP

Agree0 Disagree0

Well there might be news coming out tomorrow good? I don,t think so!Alex Thomson ch4 wed 7pm will be speaking to Uefa about certain MSP government involvement in RFsee which is very serious in Uefa,s eyes and the 2-3 letters from thommo and top lawyer paul macgonnigle to the MSP,s concerned asking why they are helping rfsee breaching government rules too.Evidence there in black and white so lets see what good news will come out of this when Uefa see the evidence .Don,t believe?Watch ch4 tomorrow!

Agree0 Disagree0

Why not sell some of the bigger names and pay a lot of the smaller bills now and pay the rest in full over time as we have assets to sell and work with the younger players but still keep our name and not be known as the tax dodgers

Agree0 Disagree0

@11 - Typical Eastender moaning and greeting into their cornflakes.Fascinated by all things Rangers, hell bent on running us into the ground,writing to any CFC affiliated personnel in a position of power to smack our club down. What's so incredible about an mp/msp saying it as it is, and looking at the bigger picture? Take away the hatred Celtic supporters have for RFC, and all your left with is someone trying to do what he can to save his club, save jobs, and save Scottish football. Regardless of what the RFC haters think,their views are distorted,and delusional. Anyone who thinks RFC going out of existence is good for Scotland, Scottish football, is clearly not worth listening to. Be careful what you wish for bhoys!
Stevie-A-Bear

Agree0 Disagree0

 
Change Consent