Credit Where Credit Is Due


The idea of Rangers ever facing an insolvency event was once dismissed as being in realms of science-fiction fantasy.  Scotland’s biggest football club could not go bankrupt.  It was just unthinkable.  Yet, in the past few months the idea has gained more currency.  The main EBT tax case, which was variously denied or said to be the responsibility of others, is now discussed openly in the media (albeit with the characteristic  commitment of Scottish journalists to getting the facts wrong).  “The Other Rangers Tax Case” has shot to prominence with the serving of court documents by Sheriff Officers last week. Contrary to Rangers’ media spin, these documents are part of a process that will lead to a winding up order being issued within weeks if the £2.8m underpayment and interest bill is not paid.  The £1.4m in additional penalties, which were not part of the original agreement, can be delayed by initiating an appeal that will start yet another First Tier Tribunal.

This less heralded tax case, which centres around the offering of share options to employees at below current market prices, is a strange case to precipitate a crisis at Rangers.  However, the full impact of Rangers’ failure to qualify for the Champions’ League is starting to show.

The defeat over two legs to Malmo will result in a net reduction of Rangers’ turnover by approximately £13m this season (allowing for an estimate of Europa League revenues).  In terms of cash flow, the club could face a shortfall of about £8-12m for the year.

Timing of cash flows are critical for any football club teetering on the brink.  Alastair Johnston’s warnings to Rangers fans to be vigilant stemmed from concerns that Craig Whyte had failed to appreciate the risks and the amount of financial support that Rangers will need in years without Champions’ League money.   In any season, as tickets are renewed, cash reserves pile up for football clubs.  In a season without Champions’ League money, that cash pile has to be stretched until renewals resume towards the end of the season.
Some additional cash will come in from commercial operations, TV, domestic cup games, and Europa League games. However, the Europa League is small beer compared to the money from the big European stage.

Despite promises of providing cash money for ‘front loaded’ investment in the team, Whyte is using season ticket receipts to support capital investment in playing staff.  However, whether enough cash will remain to cover wages and all other expenses before season ticket renewal money starts to come in is in doubt.  Rangers have been in this situation before and have not faced a crisis.  What is different this season?

The problem for Rangers appears to derive from their lack of a credit line with a bank.  When Rangers had loans with Lloyds, the bank would extend credit to prevent insolvency.  It was in the bank’s interests to support its clients through short-term funding gaps.  Now that Rangers’ debt is owned by Craig Whyte’s company, no bank has a compelling reason to lend to Rangers.  A troubled firm facing unpayable tax bills, and a supporter base that threatened a bank with boycotts for daring to exert its legal rights to get its money back: what bank manager would take on such risks after Lloyds Banking Group worked so hard to escape them?

Cash flows are uneven for every business.  Sometimes your outgoings exceed cash coming in and vice-versa.  This is not a problem if you have a cash pile or a credit line to draw upon.  Credit lines from banks are usually secured.  For troubled businesses, unsecured credit lines are virtually unheard of.  If Rangers had established a new line of credit with a bank, a new floating or fixed charge would have been published on the Companies House website.  (Lloyds, in the form of Bank of Scotland, are still listed as the holder of the floating charge on Rangers assets.  It seems inconceivable that they would reopen old wounds by lending to the club and beginning that cycle again).

I am told by someone familiar with the timing of cash flows at Ibrox, that with £2m having been spent on players and a £2.8m tax bill due to be paid within weeks, that the club would almost certainly have periods this season where it could not pay all of its bills.  To boil this down to its essence: unless Rangers find a source of credit or Whyte is willing and/or able to invest more cash, Rangers survival to even hear a result in the EBT tax case is in doubt.

Mr. Whyte could clear this all up quite easily.  He could tell us that he has invested more cash or is providing the club with a credit line from another source.   Or he could release his PR hounds again to continue spreading disinformation and deceit.

What would happen if Rangers became insolvent before the big tax case is heard?  It gets messy.  Craig Whyte may be forced to use his ‘silver bullet’ and to file for receivership.  Legal battles would then begin on whether the tax debts of the existing company, The Rangers Football Club plc, would carry forward to a new incarnation.  HMRC has had its powers extended in recent years to deal with the alienation of assets for the explicit purpose of avoiding a legitimate tax debt.  However, Rangers do have a floating charge of sufficient vintage to allow for a receivership process.  I doubt that there are many lawyers in Scotland who would confidently predict the outcome of such a battle.  It will be a knock-down, drag-out fight.  The one aspect that is clear is that SPL rules require that a team that experiences an insolvency event in the middle of a season is subject to an immediate 10 point deduction.

So, lots of ifs, buts,  and conditions.  Whyte might find funding from the same people who helped him buy Rangers or he might be able to obtain an unsecured loan from friends to cover the immediate bills.  With the transfer window still open, becoming insolvent for the lack of selling a player would look like carelessness.  However, the clock is ticking very loudly for Mr. Whyte.

About rangerstaxcase
I have information on Rangers' tax case, and I will use this blog to provide the details of what Rangers FC have done, why it was illegal, and what the implications for what was (updated) one of the largest football clubs in Britain.

1,362 Responses to Credit Where Credit Is Due

  1. Lord Wobbly says:

    timtim says:
    15/08/2011 at 10:26 pm
    I’m not RTC but I am prepared to have his babies !
    is there a way of contacting you by pm or email ?

    My my Timtim. You ARE keen! (do ya see what a bit of judicious editing can do?)

  2. Truth seeker says:

    RTC,

    I will need to further question this source about the extent of his relationship with whyte. I believe he found him a property to rent in london. as part of the process of renting this property, the applicant ( whyte) would have been referenced to ensure he could pay the rent. This would have been either documents from his accountant or an HR department of a company he worked for verifying his gross annual salary, as part of the process of finding him a house to rent has spent a reasonable about of time with whyte, hearing his back story etc etc. this is from a bloke from london, with no allegiance or axe to grind or agenda. he said to me the guy is wealthy in his own right and a rangers supporter.

  3. Duggie73 says:

    Celtic’s financial statement is a snapshot of a fluid situation, presumably one that has to an extent been manipulated to show the club as financially healthy as possible.
    A snapshot of a galloping racehorse may show that none of its feet touch the ground. It would be ill-advised to conclude from such a picture that horses fly.

    Anyhoo…
    did no-one think that having a transfer bid turned down, then tabling a later, lower bid indicates that Rangers are being deliberately unsuccessful on the transfer market? It’s a level of incompetence which can’t be achieved accidentally, are we agreed on that?

  4. ramsay smith says:

    I assume that the Chris Irvine referred to on Jack Irvine’s twitter page is his son.

    Can anyone confirm?

  5. TheBlackKnight says:

    LOL tomtom,
    You’re a very naughty bhoy! 😉

    LW, PMSL!!!!!
    SIZE OF A TAX BILL!!! Brilliant!!! 🙂

  6. JJ says:

    Truth seeker says:
    15/08/2011 at 10:33 pm
    RTC,

    I will need to further question this source about the extent of his relationship with whyte. I believe he found him a property to rent in london. as part of the process of renting this property, the applicant ( whyte) would have been referenced to ensure he could pay the rent. This would have been either documents from his accountant or an HR department of a company he worked for verifying his gross annual salary, as part of the process of finding him a house to rent has spent a reasonable about of time with whyte, hearing his back story etc etc. this is from a bloke from london, with no allegiance or axe to grind or agenda. he said to me the guy is wealthy in his own right and a rangers supporter.

    Oh well, that’s me convinced. RTC, it was good whilst it lasted but you can close the blog NOW. After all, this astounding new information did not come from a taxi driver but from a “bloke from London” (Wee sarcastic face if I knew how to find and paste)

  7. oisin71 says:

    Ramsay Smith
    @csirvine Chris Irvine, son of..

  8. Truth seeker says:

    When I heard it from my source, I was a bit disappointed too. but the guy who told isn’t a taxi driver , but a successful professional with no reason to lie.

  9. JJ says:

    Truth seeker says:
    15/08/2011 at 11:00 pm
    When I heard it from my source, I was a bit disappointed too. but the guy who told isn’t a taxi driver , but a successful professional with no reason to lie.

    ———OK, this is a wind up, yes? (Head in the hands a la Homer Simpson if I wasn’t a luddite)

  10. Truth seeker says:

    its not a wind up mate, i will have to double check all the facts from the source. but it looks like he is wealthy, not desmond or abramovich level of wealth tho.

  11. timtim says:

    Oh Wobbles you are naughty
    but I like you

    as for proving to an estate agent you can afford to rent a house
    is a bit different from proving you have sufficient funds to run Rfc
    there are many paper millionaires who play the rich game because they can show
    assets while keeping their debts hidden
    all fur coat and no knickers ,they simply rob Peter to pay Paul while kicking the can down the road

  12. Lord Wobbly says:

    Truth seeker says:
    15/08/2011 at 11:00 pm
    When I heard it from my source, I was a bit disappointed too. but the guy who told isn’t a taxi driver , but a successful professional with no reason to lie.

    So not CW then?

  13. JJ says:

    Truth seeker says:
    15/08/2011 at 11:21 pm
    its not a wind up mate, i will have to double check all the facts from the source. but it looks like he is wealthy, not desmond or abramovich level of wealth tho.

    ————-RTC, can we keep this guy for the entertainment value?

  14. Lord Wobbly says:

    JJ says:
    15/08/2011 at 11:26 pm
    Truth seeker says:
    15/08/2011 at 11:21 pm
    its not a wind up mate, i will have to double check all the facts
    from the source. but it looks like he is wealthy, not desmond or
    abramovich level of wealth tho.

    Maybe weathy enough for Camelon Juniors? They could certainly use some new ‘facilities’. A roof on the mens urinals maybe?

  15. Auldheid says:

    Easyjambo 4:42

    HMRC will have the details of when the bill was served and at what point it became ovrerdue.

    What AJ says from a Rangers perspective could be a reflection of his ignorance of the facts but it is irrelevant to the rules as it is not in Rangers power to decide a bill is due.
    They can influence that decision but not decide when tne money is demanded.

    What I want is Rangers pay their taxes and live within their means and if that means pledging all future UEFA money to HMRC and competing on a level basis with all
    other Scottish clubs I would welcome that novelty.

    Celtic do not factor CL money net of Europa money into their budgetting so there would be a return to the days the club with the biggest crowds has the advantage

    This was never enough to stop other clubs outside Celtic and Rangers winning titles and if Hearts were also jiggery pokery free then they too might be in with a shout.

    I do not want Rangers to go under, I want them to once and for all stop messing up Scottish football and every day this farce is allowed to continue by their aiders and abetters is another nail in tne integrity coffin of Scottish football

  16. Lord Wobbly says:

    Auldheid says:
    15/08/2011 at 11:51 pm

    Here Here. Rangers working on an even keel is all that I crave. Although I wouldn’t have any objections if that process was drawn out!

  17. Auldheid says:

    Henry Clarkson 5:15

    If my memory serves me right the statement had the word “rigor” in it and I thought it strange at the time unless Celtic were complaining about the lack of it.

    When have a club already under threat for dodgy tax behaviour it is difficult not to think they are less than honest about their other tax dealings.

    Add in the SFA’ dodgy behaviour in the application of disciplinary rules and their antagonistic attitude towards Celtic and the case that something is wrong is strong enough to have questions asked.

    All it takes is to find out from HMRC when THEY decided the tax was due and why they added a penalty.

  18. Auldheid says:

    Make that “rigour”

  19. andy says:

    Lord Wobbly says:
    15/08/2011 at 9:48 pm
    TheBlackKnight says:
    15/08/2011 at 9:33 pm

    TBK. Superb clip. Was it just me or was the reporter outside Castle Greyskull struggling to stop grinning during that report?

    the orcs on FF wanted him banned from ibrox and the surrounding areas because he looked too happy when he was on camera discussing the tax story

  20. andy Fitzpatrick says:

    I would like to know what the SFA are doing from now and until the news comes through that rangers are going bust,,finding out ways to ease the pain so they don’t have to join the third div or get deducted 10 points,I’m sure they will try and find something.

  21. SBhoy says:

    andy Fitzpatrick says:
    16/08/2011 at 8:04 am

    Call me paranoid, but I believe the ‘New SFA Rules ‘ being set out for this season will / have included for some kind of ‘ get out ‘ for them.This will be on a ‘one off ‘ basis and the excuse will be something around the ‘ difficulties ‘ the league faced last season. Optimistic…Me….yea ok.

  22. theaccountant says:

    Story is , Thornhill of Pump Court Tax Chambers, is suggesting that those favoured by the scheme, were not direct employees of Rangers, that they were in fact subcontracted due to the nature and structure of disputed scheme. There could be a problem there with SFA registrations, however Thornhill is said to be claiming that the players/subcontractors gifted control of said registrations to Rangers FC, which would also affect tax status.

    Appears he has blind sided HMRC with this justification of the scheme, insisting no defence is necessary, for a perfectly legal use of taxation law and legislation. The general consensus is that Thornhill is leading by a country mile, HMRC being a poor second at this stage.

  23. I STILL See No Subs, Except... says:

    Great to hear from you RTC – though they had maybe gotten to you – not hat I’m paranoid or anything!

    I thought Rangers have alrady agree to pay the £2.8M, with only the fine disputed (as you say probalby another FTT beckons)?

    As a worst case scenatio, they coudl prbalby sell a palyer to cover off any such liability. The fans won’t be happy, but it’s waaay better than admin and losing 10 points, even from a narrow “fan approval rating” perspective. Losing a player would cause outcry – entering admin, and effectively losing the league would cause mayhem.

  24. iain says:

    ” Not so, the ‘champions’, tainted or not, are not automatically entered into any UEFA competition. It is at the sole discretion of the SFA as to who is nominated to compete. They could choose to enter Albion Rovers if they were inclined to do so. Granted it is the ‘done thing’ to nominate the league winners but it is in no way incumbent upon them to do so.”

    Perhaps true of competitions outwith the CL.
    UEFA only allow the Champions of Scotland to compete. The runner up wounld under no circumstances be allowed to enter.

    RTC, given that I am “Factually wrong on absolutely everything” and as a result that Rangers’ licence was clearly given illegally, and that this stopped Celtic entering the CL, when does Celticsr court action against the SFA start? I wouldn’t imagine many company’s happily writting off upwards off £15 million because of malpactice of a regulatory body. And as it’s such an open and shut case that a nameless blogger can say with such certainty, I can’t imagine it would take too much of McBride’s time to win the case.

    Oh thank you for allowing me to entertain you.
    I will now return to the hinterland where my comments “await moderation” for ever more.

  25. Johnbhoy says:

    Duggie73 says:
    15/08/2011 at 9:10 pm
    if Whyte was not legit in business dealings, we would have heard about it surely. Scotland’s a small country and a large no. of people are looking out for anything that would discredit him.
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    There were a number of newspaper articles in the 1990s detailing the collapse of his Vital Holdings business empire, with workers complaining they were not being paid, people who won tribunal judgments not getting their cash, alleged tax bills, a single creditor being owed £3million and so on. All to do with companies that Whyte owned, then ceased to be a director of, and which subsequently were wound up.
    Someone spent a lot of time and money getting those reports removed from Google.
    There was also a scathing Takeover Panel report on a failed takeover that Whyte was heavily involved in.
    Whyte has spent a lot of cash on hiring PR men whose main task appears to lie in encouraging newspapers to NOT look for “anything that would discredit him”.
    The more cynical among us might wonder if he perhaps has something to hide.

  26. iain says:

    In fact if anyone still believes it’s at the SFA’s discrection who they put forward to the CL, and that the runner up could have been enteres I suggest the look here:
    http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/Regulations/competitions/Regulations/01/48/42/49/1484249_DOWNLOAD.pdf

    Aftre reading sections
    2.02 (section a)
    2.04 (section a)

    Maybe someone could explain how the runners up from Scotland could have come to be entered as Scotlands sole representative in the CL?

  27. thomthethim says:

    IF and it’s a big IF, a club was stripped of it’s title, for any reason, then the club who finished second would automatically be promoted to first place.

    Hence, they would become the champions, similar to a gold winning athlete being disqualified, for substance abuse which was detected at a later stage, after the medals were distributed.

    So, in the event of Rangers being convicted of financial doping, non payment of tax, or any other of their indiscretions, then their title(s) would be null and void.

    Will never happen, though.

  28. tomtom says:

    Maybe someone could explain how the runners up from Scotland could have come to be entered as Scotlands sole representative in the CL?

    2.10 A club which is not admitted to the competition is replaced by the next best placed
    club in the top domestic league championship of the same national
    association, provided it fulfils the admission criteria. In this case, the access
    list for the UEFA club competitions (Annex Ia) is adjusted accordingly.”

  29. iain says:

    “IF and it’s a big IF, a club was stripped of it’s title, for any reason, then the club who finished second would automatically be promoted to first place.”

    It isn’t a case of Rangers being stripped of the title though.
    It’s a case of whether they are awarded a licence for Europe or not. And if the runners up could take their place if no licence was forthcoming.

    “So, in the event of Rangers being convicted of financial doping, non payment of tax, or any other of their indiscretions, then their title(s) would be null and void.”

    Can you point to the “offence” of “financial dopping” in and SFA (or indeed UEFA or FIFA) documentation? Or anywhere in the SFA’s regulations which say if you don’t pay tax you are stripped of your titles?

    Wishfull thinking in the minds of Celtic bloggers does not make things so

  30. tomtom says:

    This section is also interesting as it allows UEFA to deem a club unsuitable if during the competition they fall foul of the regulations.

    2.11 UEFA may carry out spot checks and/or investigations with clubs at any time
    after they have been admitted to the competition to ensure that the
    admission criteria continue to be met for as long as they remain in the
    competition. If such a spot check and/or investigation reveals that admission
    criteria were not fulfilled at the time a club entered the competition or are no
    longer being met in the course of the competition, the club concerned is
    liable to disciplinary measures in accordance with the UEFA Disciplinary
    Regulations.

  31. thomthethim says:

    For one, any incident of unpaid tax, due to the Government, would/ should deny the granting of a UEFA licence.

    IF a club was guilty of, say, for instance, faking their accounts, then I would call that financial doping.

    Falsely inflating the value of assets would be another example of financial doping, as, say in the event of a club over stating the value of their assets, like stadium or training facility.

    If this is done to a significant level, then it could disguise the fact that a club was insolvent and should cease trading.

    Any club who would use these practices would be dependent on a compliant National Association and, of course, media, to get away with it.

    Admittedly, that couldn’t happen in Scotland, though.

  32. iain says:

    “IF a club was guilty of, say, for instance, faking their accounts, then I would call that financial doping.”

    You could call it what you wanted.
    But since the phrase is essentially “weasel words” with no actual meaning then what you call it is of no significance

  33. tomtom says:

    Iain,

    Other than being miffed at RTC’s comment what exactly are you trying to say? Not being flippant, just want to get clear in my head where your argument is going.

  34. ramsay smith says:

    Truth seeker says:
    15/08/2011 at 10:33 pm

    Is that a wind up?

    An estate agent (it wasn’t Dave Ellis, was it?) reckons he can pay the rent on a rented house and we’re supposed to be impressed? It’s not exactly Dun and Bradstreet.

  35. easyJambo says:

    Auldheid says: 15/08/2011 at 11:51 pm
    Easyjambo 4:42

    HMRC will have the details of when the bill was served and at what point it became ovrerdue.

    What AJ says from a Rangers perspective could be a reflection of his ignorance of the facts but it is irrelevant to the rules as it is not in Rangers power to decide a bill is due.
    They can influence that decision but not decide when tne money is demanded.

    What I want is Rangers pay their taxes and live within their means and if that means pledging all future UEFA money to HMRC and competing on a level basis with all
    other Scottish clubs I would welcome that novelty.

    Celtic do not factor CL money net of Europa money into their budgetting so there would be a return to the days the club with the biggest crowds has the advantage

    This was never enough to stop other clubs outside Celtic and Rangers winning titles and if Hearts were also jiggery pokery free then they too might be in with a shout.

    I do not want Rangers to go under, I want them to once and for all stop messing up Scottish football and every day this farce is allowed to continue by their aiders and abetters is another nail in tne integrity coffin of Scottish football

    I agree with you almost 100%.

    The clubs with the biggest crowds (income) will have an advantage, but in the days when that was the case there was always that chance that that a club with a good crop of players coming through together and a good coach would make the difference as in the case of Aberdeen and Dundee Utd in the 80s. We would have a much healthier game if the duopoly was broken 2 or 3 times in a decade.

    But if you want financial fair play across the board, then you have to look at things like the distribution of SPL TV money. The 32% shared by the top two SPL side only serves to perpetuate the status quo, as does the 11 v 1 voting structure which aloows Celtic and Rangers to operate a a cartel (i.e. what’s in their best interests)

    The SPL TV money is actually a very small proportion of Celtic and Rangers turnover, but is much more significant for the other teams. A small change in the distribution away from the top two would benefit the other teams substantially, but that would not be in the selfish interests of Celtic and Rangers.

    Rant over 🙂

  36. tenerifetim says:

    How did this guy Whyte ever get a line of credit with his history ?

    http://www.scottishfootballforums.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3021&p=15270

    And was jack Irvine his PR man the too?

  37. tenerifetim says:

    sorry “then too “

  38. salah al din says:

    According to a poster on Follow Follow:

    “Tweets doing the rounds that Andrew Thornhill may have blown HMRC out of the water, on the big one, details sketchy, employment law and loan deals said to be the possible explanation”

    First, unless it is one of the judges sitting at the FTT, how could anybody know this?

    Second, does anybody know how these factors may be used to argue their case? Also, I assume by loan deals the reference is to the loans coming out of the EBTs rather than Diouf being their saviour.

  39. Thomas says:

    Adam says: 15/08/2011 at 9:40 pm
    TBK – in the accounts
    Interest-bearing liabilities/bank loans = 10,968m
    This is the outstanding loan to the Co-operative bank
    ———————————————————————

    The Co-op loan was for Lennoxtown and it was being repaid on an interest only basis. Thereby as long as Lennoxtown retains most of it’s value the asset is valued similarly to the liability. The statement does read “bank debt minus cash at hand” so we could infer Celtic have £10m of working capital.

    What’s your thoughts Adam?

    I’m unsure.

  40. Thomas says:

    salah al din says:
    16/08/2011 at 12:37 pm
    According to a poster on Follow Follow:

    “Tweets doing the rounds that Andrew Thornhill may have blown HMRC out of the water, on the big one, details sketchy, employment law and loan deals said to be the possible explanation”

    First, unless it is one of the judges sitting at the FTT, how could anybody know this?

    Second, does anybody know how these factors may be used to argue their case? Also, I assume by loan deals the reference is to the loans coming out of the EBTs rather than Diouf being their saviour
    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    The paranoid Tim in me is saying that’s Whyte’s media arm attempting to bring some credibility back to Rangers’ ability to pay in instalments for transfers.

    Strange Thornhill should “blow them out of the water” and that very same day Sir David Murray sells the club for £1.

    I don’t suffer from paranoia, I enjoy it.

  41. tomtom says:

    “Oh what a tangled web we weave” comes to mind on this one. If Goebbels had access to twitter and facebook he would have been a sensation, and all deniable at a later date!

  42. salah al din says:

    Thomas says:
    16/08/2011 at 1:10 pm
    Adam says: 15/08/2011 at 9:40 pm
    TBK – in the accounts
    Interest-bearing liabilities/bank loans = 10,968m
    This is the outstanding loan to the Co-operative bank
    ———————————————————————

    The Co-op loan was for Lennoxtown and it was being repaid on an interest only basis. Thereby as long as Lennoxtown retains most of it’s value the asset is valued similarly to the liability. The statement does read “bank debt minus cash at hand” so we could infer Celtic have £10m of working capital.

    What’s your thoughts Adam?

    I’m unsure.

    Victor Arbuckle, one of the accountants on Celtic Minded, has posted an analysis which confirms uyour suspiscion.

  43. Dapr says:

    Love this blog. It’s must read internet. The comments and analysis are great and I look forward to every new chapter.

    Keep up all the good work.

  44. H says:

    Just incased we missed it (tomtom also pointed it out),

    Iain said:

    “UEFA only allow the Champions of Scotland to compete. The runner up wounld under no circumstances be allowed to enter.”

    But 2.10 of the rules Iain himself provided, prove him completely wrong:

    “A club which is not admitted to the competition is replaced by the next bestplaced club in the top domestic league championship of the same national association, provided it fulfils the admission criteria. In this case, the access list for the UEFA club competitions (Annex Ia) is adjusted accordingly.”

    RTC is right to allow Iain on for entertainment purposes!

    It certainly entertained me!

  45. timtim says:

    If Thornhill as Thomas points out had the tribunal over a barrel then
    he would have reported so to Murray and the result would not have been
    a £1 firesale to a scavenger. Seeing as it was the report back to Minty would have been highly negative. So far Whyte has spent £1 for Ibrox and Murray park ,had his secret consortium
    pay off Lloyds using the real estate as collateral .ST money has been used to finance less than £500k (net spend) on transfers , 3 resigning fees and 100 litres of paint for their pie stalls.
    All their big transfer targets Cuellar etc have not materialised ,the Goodwillie saga in particular
    (payment in installments, cuts of future transfer etc) show that either Whyte has no real money
    or he is unwilling to invest until the tax cases are concluded and in his favour.
    In short he is not walking the walk and even the followfollow brigade are expressing real doubts
    I have also noted that not a single poster on FF has claimed to know Whyte or can confirm that he is and always has been a fan , there was even a report in the early days that his own father
    stated he wasnt aware he even was a rangers fan . IMO Whyte is a front man for Ellis and Co
    If you were buying a business ,would you involve a business rival who had just been rebuffed by a man desperate to sell ?Would you involve a man whos intentions for the club had been described as not in the best interests of Rfc ? It seems obvious to me that Whyte should not need or want Ellis but Ellis desperately needed someone like Craig Whyte

  46. The Mighty Quinn says:

    My favourite publicised RFC transfer story is the Cuellar balderdash.

    Aston Villa accepted RFC’s offer and everything looked fine.

    Then RFC pulled out of the deal.

    Now they’re going back in for him?

    Now, is it just me or is this mental. You don’t negotiate then pull out and go back in to renegotiate if your deal has already been accepted unless you realise you don’t have the money you originally tabled.

    Too obvious.

    Whyte is shite.

    I’d love to play him at poker. I’d have his shirt.

  47. tomtom says:

    Didn’t you know that Craig Whyte is a huge Hokey-Cokey fan?

    You put your first bid in
    Your pull your first bid out
    You leak it to the media
    and shake it all about
    You do the “naebody likes us”
    Then do a turnaround
    That’s what it’s all about

    You put your second bid in etc

  48. To those posting the rumour that Thornhill has scored a body blow with some innovative arguments…

    Put it down to Media House and move on.

    Arguing that players are sub-contractors? Aside from them being guilty of illegally registering players, Rangers would have to demonstrate why some players and not others were contractors. And most important of all, why contractors were paid through an EMPLOYEE Benefit Trust! 🙂

    It’s a comically weak argument and I hope that this is all they have. It has all of the thumbprints of Whyte’s PR driven regime. All effort expended on appearances- to deceive their own fans first and foremost- and nothing done to affect substance.

    Remember that the tribunal sat in October 2010 and April/May 2011. This great piece of good fortune for Rangers is only leaking now? Now? Once the truth of the tax case and the magnitude of the bills has finally been widely acknowledged? Right!

    Let me just say that regarding the progress of the FTT to date, I am not worrying. 😉

  49. Duggie73 says:

    JohnBhoy
    if Whyte had left unpaid employees, why has no-one heard a post from them in the time since he took over Rangers?

    On a cursory look at his business history, it looked very much as if Vital Holdings was the exception rather than the rule for the way that Whyte makes his money(and it was around 20 years ago) as it at a glance looked liked a genuine attempt to run a business in the medium-long term which didn’t work, leading to the business being wound up.
    Since then Whyte seems to have operated by getting investors to put money into running
    ailing businesses on a very short-term basis, paying himself a salary from such companies, then seeing them go bust. That is a legitimate way of making money- it COULD even be done for ethical reasons- to allow employees a greater amount of time to adjust to the inevitability of becoming redundant, and giving such companies a chance to become profitable.

    Whyte does have something to hide- what he would do were Rangers to lose the legal battle over the big tax case? If he genuinely had something to hide about his past that we don’t already know, it would be a surprise that it hadn’t turned up by now.

  50. Adam says:

    Salah al din. The £11 m is defo a loan to the co-op. As you stated, the first few years of the loan were interest free. The last 2 years have been capital and interest. Perhaps you could copy and paste the guys post for me to comment on as I’m not really sure what he confirmed.

    For the benefit of any doubt though, my analysis is not a suspicion. It’s a fact.

    Would be good to read the analysis though if you can post it.

%d bloggers like this: