“Sources close to Whyte” in economical with truth shocker!


Yesterday’s blog post revealed for the first time in any media outlet (mainstream or otherwise) that Rangers had prepared an appeal of the “wee tax case” and seems to have ruffled a few feathers in the process.

In this morning’s Daily Telegraph, Roddy Forsyth reports: “A source close to Craig Whyte, the Rangers owner, told The Daily Telegraph that an appeal had been lodged several months ago against the liability – incurred under the previous regime of Sir David Murray and not to be confused with the much larger potential debt to HMRC… … The source added emphatically that the existing appeal was not intended to be a defence against Uefa sanctions.”

First, Forsyth is confused or has been misled.  This appeal absolutely and categorically was not filed “several months ago“.  Assuming that Forsyth is not confused, his source is either a shameless liar whose opinions on any of these matters should be treated on a par with asking Joseph Goebbels how the defence of Berlin is going- or his source does not know what is going on.

Next, why did it require “a source close to Craig Whyte“?  Why not an on-the-record statement from the club or one of its executives?  Why have Rangers not made any reference to an appeal of the “wee tax case” assessment prior to my post yesterday?

The phrase “a source close to Craig Whyte” is reminiscent of all of those fabulous promises made in the run-up to the takeover.  Googling this phrase is instructive.  “A source close to Craig Whyte” has been responsible for the following gems being quoted in our mainstream media without critical analysis or qualification:

  • For a start, the deal Craig Whyte is putting forward is worth £52.5m, more than double the amount apparently to be raised by this unnamed Rangers director.  Further, the Craig Whyte investment in the club would begin on day one of a deal being completed.”
  • “…the businessman had decided to make available “significantly more” than the average sum of £5m-a-season to Ally McCoist when he succeeds current manager Walter Smith at the start of next term.”
  • “Ally knows he will have significant funds to spend on players”

With the track record of such “sources close to Whyte” one has to wonder why any member of the press would take them seriously?  Roddy Forsyth is one of the better journalists among a very poor bunch.  However, to repeat the words of someone who will undoubtedly be one of Whyte’s handsomely rewarded PR goons without getting objective proof is symptomatic of the malaise affecting Scottish football journalism.  The lazily and cheaply acquired quote is favoured over truth.  To repeat the words of someone who misleads others for a living without obtaining objective confirmation is just comically stupid or willfully negligent.    I must assume that the subject of Rangers’ accumulating unpaid PAYE & national insurance money just did not come up in conversation?

I do not claim to know with any certainty the motivation behind the appeal.  So I cannot swear that it is related to the mounting pressure for Rangers to make an official and unequivocal statement on the status of this liability to HMRC as of 31 March 2011.  However, the timing of the appeal does look convenient.  I must acknowledge that it is also very possible that it is simply driven by financial necessity i.e. it is an attempt to reverse the arrestment of the £2.3m which is currently frozen prior to it disappearing forever within the next couple of weeks. However, I can confidently state that the launching of this appeal is very recent indeed.

Of course, this can all be cleared up easily.  Mr. Whyte can tell us when the appeal was submitted.  He can produce the appeal documents and show the dates to members of the press.  Even members of his own trusted cadre of tame hacks would suffice.  The central facts of the case are not in dispute and have been a matter of public record since Rangers’ interim accounts were released on 1st April. There will not be many real confidentiality concerns. We know the amount and to what it is related.  All we need to know is the date of the appeal.  This could debunk both my post from yesterday and the theory (expounded by others) that the SFA improperly granted Rangers a UEFA license for the 2011/2012 season.

Go ahead Mr. Whyte.  Prove me wrong.  And Mr Forsyth, you could apply a bit more critical thinking in your work.  If you are interested in the question of Rangers’ UEFA license, you can ask your contacts at Ibrox and at Hampden to show you the evidence.  It would be a good bit of journalism and could lay this issue to rest once and for all.

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.

1,149 Responses to “Sources close to Whyte” in economical with truth shocker!

  1. Bawsman says:

    Adam

    Actually, didn’t expect a bite at all really, must have hit a chord.

  2. Adam says:

    a nonsense chord 🙂

    Yip 🙂

  3. TheBlackKnight says:

    paul on 07/12/2011 at 9:54 pm

    Nibble nibble 🙂

  4. OnandOnandOnand says:

    Corsica @4.44pm

    I’m confused. Why did you have to buy 10 shares to get a copy of the “m & a”? Where did you buy your shares and why not just get a copy of the Memo and Articles from Companies House like everyone else? I didn’t realise that you got a copy of the Memo and Articles with a share purchases.

    Last question, how did you come to find out that Ellis lied to you and your partner?

  5. Bawsman says:

    Does HMRC get paid in a few hours, or am I a day early?

  6. v says:

    If the MBB pulls the plug during the transfer window would the receiver he appoints be able to / be forced to sell players to satisfy the charge?

  7. corsica says:

    Barcabhoy says:

    07/12/2011 at 8:36 pm

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 4:49 pm
    btw agm is not a sideshow…failure to hold agm is breach of companies act and could (probably would) lead to suspension of shares and disqualification; for someone in cw’s position that is a big deal

    ==================================

    I think the penalty for a director of a plc who is convicted of failing to hold an AGM within 6 months of the financial year end, is a fine rather than disqualification.

    ***********************************

    Sorry, I was not clear (i was in a boring agm of my own this afternoon and not quite paying full attention to either the blog or my agm): my understanding is that punishment can include disqualification for persistent offenders. Would CW fall into that category? You be the judge…Mind you, has he got the cash to pay a fine?

    Just to repeat for clarity:

    Rangers must hold an AGM by 31 December unless they extend the financial year end or they request an extension to the deadline for filing the annual return (which is 31 December);
    Any extension to the deadline needs to be made to Companies House by 31 December giving valid reasons;
    Any extension to the financial year would need to be decided by resolution at a board meeting prior to 31 December and approval sought from Companies House and relevant stock exchange before 31 December – shareholders would also need to be notified;
    AGM requires 21 days notice to all shareholders;
    AGM can be called with less than 21 days notice but only if all those entitled to vote at such a meeting are consulted and 95% of shareholding agree (in other words there needs to be a formal meeting to pass such a resolution and shareholders must be given 21 days notice of said meeting at which that resolution is to be decided).

    In other words, he has to call an AGM by 10 December at the latest which would mean notices being distributed electronically on that day or by first class post on 9 December. He has passed the date by which he can change the notice period although he can still extend the financial year or seek an extension to the filing deadline. He does not need to send audited accounts prior to the AGM but he will need to lay them before the shareholders at the AGM.

  8. liveinhope says:

    Sorry just do not get this thing about naming someome could someone explain without getting themselves in trouble.I must be thick as shit

  9. Paulie Walnuts says:

    liveinhope (& others),

    There has been some eye-popping gossip doing the rounds about the identify of the mystery backers. Suffice to say that it would be major front page news if true and in the public domain. RTC, rightly in my view, has made it clear that though he is aware of it he can’t verify it at all and so will not mention it. He has also asked posters not to repeat it on here, and has made clear that if it is repeated he cannot undertake to maintain the anonymity of the poster.

  10. corsica says:

    OnandOnandOnand says:

    07/12/2011 at 10:11 pm

    Corsica @4.44pm

    I’m confused. Why did you have to buy 10 shares to get a copy of the “m & a”? Where did you buy your shares and why not just get a copy of the Memo and Articles from Companies House like everyone else? I didn’t realise that you got a copy of the Memo and Articles with a share purchases.

    Last question, how did you come to find out that Ellis lied to you and your partner?

    **********************

    It wasn’t just to get the m&a – it should give me access to other stuff (minutes of board meetings for example). I have a broker who buys and sells shares on my behalf. You don’t automatically get a copy of m&a but it gives you right to ask and not be refused.

    My business partner asked him outright as Ellis was touting for investment and my partner wanted more info on Ellis’ situation before making any decision. So he could be lying again but the circumstances would indicate that his previous assertion was a lie (unless of course he had been hoodwinked by CW but I very much doubt that). He’s not getting the investment – at least not from us!

    In relation to last post, forgot to add that you do need to call an AGM to change auditors.

  11. TheBlackKnight says:

    Wise words PW.

  12. liveinhope says:

    okay paulie understood could you tell me if true would it be good or bad news for R.F.C

  13. StevieBC says:

    I am still scratching my head re: the lack of staff reaction/complaining to the MSM, [or blogs].

    Say you where a professional working in Finance, Procurement, or HR for RFC. You could have been working there for many years, [my assumption is that staff turnover is low as staff are proud to work for RFC.] You could be executing your role in a highly professional manner.

    …then along comes the MBB !

    Within a matter of months;
    – the organisation is being dragged through the courts on a relatively frequent basis
    – ‘Final’ accounts are produced without audit sign-off for the first time
    – long-term relationships with suppliers are ruined due to non/late payments
    – senior executives leave under a cloud, [some with civil actions lodged]

    If I worked at RFC I would be going mad at the MBB. Agreed, that most staff may not say anything in the current job climate, but there must be long serving staff who are disgusted at the MO of the MBB ? The staff are – by association – also being tarred with the same brush. Would any Finance staff member be proud to say they worked in the RFC Finance Department today ?

    Maybe I am being idealistic/naive, but I would have thought someone from within RFC would be standing up to the MBB – and/or briefing against him by leaking all sorts of interesting information to the MSM and/or blogs. ❓

  14. John You're Immortal says:

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:36 pm

    In relation to last post, forgot to add that you do need to call an AGM to change auditors.
    =======================
    Thanks corsica – got there eventually 🙂

  15. gunnerb says:

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:36 pm

    In relation to last post, forgot to add that you do need to call an AGM to change auditors
    ______________________________________________________________________

    Chicken and egg here is it not. He has to produce audited accounts at an AGM but he has to hold an AGM to change the auditors.

  16. OnandOnandOnand says:

    Corsica

    Ah, I see. I suppose you’re correct, Companies House won’t have the M & A as it is such an old company, good thinking, buy some shares and write to Gary Withey to ask for a copy, as well as the board minutes. Good luck with that one.

    I suppose the trade in shares won’t show up on the plus market listing as settlement date hasn’t come yet. I always thought that shares showed up sameday but I would be wrong in that.

    I’m still not clear on what Ellis actually said but realise you have no obligation to say. Did Ellis say how much Wee Craigie was really worth?

  17. TheBlackKnight says:

    OnandOnandOnand on 07/12/2011 at 10:49 pm

    Stop leading the ‘witness’ 😀

  18. paulmac says:

    Thomas says:
    07/12/2011 at 7:09 pm

    Private Eye also done a very good piece on Whyte way before the takeover.

    Along the lines of “involved in numerous failed companies, fled UK under a tax investigation, alleged to owe £3m to creditors, has no discernable access to any kind of wealth…”

    They finished up with my favourite line ever:

    “Barring the above, Whyte is the perfect candidate to buy Rangers”
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I believe this is the Private eye piece you are referring to…

    BUSINESS NEWS SECTION

    PLANET FOOTBALL

    RANGERS

    Craig Whyte, who is 40 and lives in a Scottish castle, is a man of mystery for someone to whom others seems keen to confer billionaire status. He is a director of Pritchard Stockbrokers and a shareholder in the AIM-listed Merchant House corporate finance group. They are authorised by the FSA. Whyte is not.

    He was a director of LM Logistics Group, which was controlled by Merchant Corporate Recovery, where he is still a director, and Merchant House group is an investor. Warehousing group LM collapsed into administration in August last year. Whyte had resigned in March. The deficiency for creditors was a £3.4m, threatening to wipe out Merchant Corporate Recovery’s investment and, more importantly, a £661,000 loan.

    As a result of LM’s problems the January 2010 accounts for Merchant Corporate Recovery were filed late on 31 March this year and were qualified by the auditors Hazlewoods. The auditors disagreed about the accounting treatment of the companies in which it had invested, such as LM. Whyte said to include them would be misleading; Hazlewoods said that was required by both the Companies Act and accounting standards.

    Hazelwoods stated: In our opinion due solely to the non-inclusion of the controlled investee companies… the financial statements do not give a true and fair view of the state of the company’s affairs… have not been properly prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Companies Act 2006.

    Hazlewoods also raised an emphasis of matter issue over the ongoing concern basis upon which the 2009 accounts, filed only last February, for another investment, coach company Countryliner Group, had been prepared. Since the balance sheet date, one subsidiary had done a creditors’s voluntary arrangement and another had collapsed into liquidation.

    The accounts for Tixway UK are overdue from last October and it faces a proposal to be struck off, as do two other Whyte companies; Merchant Interactive and Semfill, from which he resigned last year.

    Otherwise, Whyte seems an ideal saviour for Rangers whom Sir David Murray, HMRC and the fans can clearly rely.

  19. longtimelurker says:

    liveinhope says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:23 pm
    Sorry just do not get this thing about naming someome could someone explain without getting themselves in trouble.I must be thick as shit

    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    Think about it mate and I’m not talking about an actual name, forget that.

    Why would it be game over for whyte if the name was mentioned?

    Can only be one of two reasons.

    1) Celtic Supporter with dosh

    2) Dodgy Celtic supporter with dosh

  20. paulmac says:

    gunnerb says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:49 pm

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:36 pm

    In relation to last post, forgot to add that you do need to call an AGM to change auditors
    ______________________________________________________________________

    Chicken and egg here is it not. He has to produce audited accounts at an AGM but he has to hold an AGM to change the auditors.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Don’t be surprised if CW decides to change Rangers financial year some time soon…

  21. Gwared says:

    Longtime,
    Naw jist Naw, I mean there’s business and there’s business but I can’t accept that one. That makes me smile so much. Naw.

  22. jockrock says:

    This is turning into the never ending story surely something or someone will bring matters to a head soon. On the subject of names I hear it would not do to get on the wrong side of them and they would rather stay unknown.

  23. OnandOnandOnand says:

    TBK

    Witness for the prosecution or defence……

  24. Paulie Walnuts says:

    liveinhope,

    There are several, mutually inconsistent rumours in circulation. None of them would be good for RFC.

    Stevie BC,

    Ibrox leaks like a sieve. There is major doom and gloom among the staff.

  25. TheBlackKnight says:

    OnandOnandOnand on 07/12/2011 at 11:01 pm

    😀

  26. curious onlooker says:

    Eye-popping gossip sounds interesting and may see the laughing smilies count be reduced for a few hours !!

    From back in the summer, the hypothesis that made sense to me was the mystery man ready to step into CW´s shoes after the messy business was cleared up (where there is muck there is brass).

    Obviously only rumour and we´ll just have to wait and see.

  27. longtimelurker says:

    Gwared says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:58 pm
    Longtime,
    Naw jist Naw, I mean there’s business and there’s business but I can’t accept that one. That makes me smile so much. Naw.

    ——————————————————————————————————————-

    Well what other scenario would ‘make it game over for whyte’?

    ragers supporters have accepted everything he’s done so far, they think that bumping the tax man is perfectly fine, bumping your lawyers is no big deal and paying bills on the steps of the court is the way to do business and poinding player’s medals is no big deal cause the medals are shite anyway so what would tip them over the edge?

    I can’t think of anything other than my suggestion that would do the trick, do you?

  28. sorrynocando says:

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:36 pm
    **********************

    It wasn’t just to get the m&a – it should give me access to other stuff (minutes of board meetings for example). I have a broker who buys and sells shares on my behalf. You don’t automatically get a copy of m&a but it gives you right to ask and not be refused.

    My business partner asked him outright as Ellis was touting for investment and my partner wanted more info on Ellis’ situation before making any decision. So he could be lying again but the circumstances would indicate that his previous assertion was a lie (unless of course he had been hoodwinked by CW but I very much doubt that). He’s not getting the investment – at least not from us!

    In relation to last post, forgot to add that you do need to call an AGM to change auditors.

    __________________________________________________

    You also now have the right to through the front door of Ibrox and ask to see a copy of each and every directors contract !

  29. Paulie Walnuts says:

    Wee Craig’s call to arms stirred the blood,
    But financially he’s really a dud,
    Though the rumour’s a cracker,
    ’bout a mystery backer,
    He’s just a goggle eyed wee fud.

  30. paulmac says:

    longtimelurker says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:56 pm

    liveinhope says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:23 pm
    Sorry just do not get this thing about naming someome could someone explain without getting themselves in trouble.I must be thick as shit

    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    Think about it mate and I’m not talking about an actual name, forget that.

    Why would it be game over for whyte if the name was mentioned?

    Can only be one of two reasons.

    1) Celtic Supporter with dosh

    2) Dodgy Celtic supporter with dosh
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I don’t suppose it would do the Celtic supporter with dosh…or the dodgy Celtic supporter with dosh any favours either….. 🙂

  31. longtimelurker says:

    paulmac says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:08 pm
    longtimelurker says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:56 pm

    liveinhope says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:23 pm
    Sorry just do not get this thing about naming someome could someone explain without getting themselves in trouble.I must be thick as shit

    ——————————————————————————————————————–

    Think about it mate and I’m not talking about an actual name, forget that.

    Why would it be game over for whyte if the name was mentioned?

    Can only be one of two reasons.

    1) Celtic Supporter with dosh

    2) Dodgy Celtic supporter with dosh
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I don’t suppose it would do the Celtic supporter with dosh…or the dodgy Celtic supporter with dosh any favours either…..
    —————————————————————————————————————-

    How about an ex-Celtic director who doesn’t give a feck mate 😉

  32. v says:

    It could be the vatican bank

    (that’s a joke, just in case any lawyers or albino assasin monks are reading this )

    🙂

  33. curious onlooker says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:02 pm
    liveinhope,

    There are several, mutually inconsistent rumours in circulation. None of them would be good for RFC.

    ———————————————-
    Put out to confuse the hounds perhaps !

    One lives in hope !

    Note to Jean and Brenda: In this politically correct age I feel that I should make clear that the above in no way refers to yourselves who I am sure are lovely ladies !

  34. the Don Dionisio says:

    Paulie@10.34,

    Sicilian proverb:” He who is deaf, blind and silent will live for a hundred years in peace”.

    The suspicion of being a “stool pigeon” or a “cascitunni” is considered the blackest mark against our code of honour, omerta, but just for old time’s sake, paisan, per piacere can you give us a nod–good or bad news and for whom?

  35. OnandOnandOnand says:

    TBK

    it would seem that the witness is reluctant to answer

  36. TheBlackKnight says:

    OnandOnandOnand on 07/12/2011 at 11:17 pm

    Allegedly 😉

  37. the Don Dionisio says:

    Paulie@10.34,

    Sicilian proverb: “He who is deaf,blind and silent will live for a hvndred years in peace”.

    The suspicion of being a “stool pigeon” or a “cascitunni” is considered the blackest mark against our code of honour, omerta, but just for old times’ sake, paisan, per piacere can you give us a nod—-good or bad news and for whom?

  38. jean says:

    curious onlooker says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:13 pm

    haha no offence taken 🙂

  39. corsica says:

    gunnerb says:

    07/12/2011 at 10:49 pm

    corsica says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:36 pm

    In relation to last post, forgot to add that you do need to call an AGM to change auditors
    ______________________________________________________________________

    Chicken and egg here is it not. He has to produce audited accounts at an AGM but he has to hold an AGM to change the auditors.

    ******************************
    Kind of, which is why I doubt we will see an AGM this year. Its also why the rule exists – to stop this kind of shenanigans.

    I don’t think he will extend the financial year (he can definitely do this legally but it would probably cause problems with licencing) but if he has half a brain then he would have already submitted a request to extend the deadline for filing the annual return (although, in that scenario, he would still have to call an AGM by 31 December and lay audited acounts before the meeting).

    The reality is that he is probably up the creek without the proverbial paddle and will have to take the hit of a fine at least for late filing and failure to hold an AGM in breach of statute. Question is will Companies House pursue tougher sanctions given his past record? My bet is, yes they would.

  40. paulmac says:

    longtimelurker says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:06 pm

    Gwared says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:58 pm
    Longtime,
    Naw jist Naw, I mean there’s business and there’s business but I can’t accept that one. That makes me smile so much. Naw.

    ——————————————————————————————————————-

    Well what other scenario would ‘make it game over for whyte’?

    ragers supporters have accepted everything he’s done so far, they think that bumping the tax man is perfectly fine, bumping your lawyers is no big deal and paying bills on the steps of the court is the way to do business and poinding player’s medals is no big deal cause the medals are shite anyway so what would tip them over the edge?

    I can’t think of anything other than my suggestion that would do the trick, do you?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Paul L’guen 🙂

  41. jean says:

    curious onlooker says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:13 pm

    “but if he has half a brain then he would have already submitted a request to extend the deadline for filing the annual return”

    I just had a vision of CW having a head slapping moment there…..Oh shoot I knew that there was something I forgot!

  42. paulmac says:

    longtimelurker says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:10 pm
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Fergus McCann….now there is a thought…

  43. Jimbo milligan says:

    I still think whyte is in this alone.

  44. OnandOnandOnand says:

    Corsica

    If you’ve changed the accounting reference date in the last 5 years, are you free to change it again, as a plc with traded shares?

    Still waiting to hear what Ellis actually said

  45. duggie73 says:

    paulmac says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:28 pm
    The Aluko family…now there’s another.
    Mohammad Al-Fayed…there’s a third.
    Michael Jackson’s bereaved chimpanzee Bubbles…

  46. Lord Wobbly says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 11:06 pm
    Wee Craig’s call to arms stirred the blood,
    But financially he’s really a dud,
    Though the rumour’s a cracker,
    ’bout a mystery backer,
    He’s just a goggle eyed wee fud.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Hence the eye-popping gossip?

  47. corsica says:

    OnandOnandOnand says:

    07/12/2011 at 10:49 pm

    Corsica

    Ah, I see. I suppose you’re correct, Companies House won’t have the M & A as it is such an old company, good thinking, buy some shares and write to Gary Withey to ask for a copy, as well as the board minutes. Good luck with that one.

    I suppose the trade in shares won’t show up on the plus market listing as settlement date hasn’t come yet. I always thought that shares showed up sameday but I would be wrong in that.

    I’m still not clear on what Ellis actually said but realise you have no obligation to say. Did Ellis say how much Wee Craigie was really worth?

    ************************
    The M&A are available on Companies House because they were amended a couple of years ago – I found that out the other day. I’ve got a copy now but not gone through them yet other than a skim read this morning which showed nothing untoward apart from a precise section relating to MIH and even then that doesn’t seem particularly worrying.

    Not sure why the shares have not shown up on market – not something I get involved in or overly worried about as long as I get my broker confirmation and share certificate (this one is going on the outside lavvy wall!). And lets face it, I’m not about to make any money on them 🙂

    I’m not going to give details on what Ellis actually said or indeed any more on the circumstances – that would give too much away. No skin off my nose whether anyone believes me or not, I know what I know and will share what is relevant and appropriate with the blog because I think this is important for Scotland and Scottish football as a whole. Do you seriously think that if I knew how much CW was worth, I wouldn’t be putting it out there?

    Witness for the prosecution by the way…I will not be going through the front doors of Ibrox ever.

  48. v says:

    Has anyone any idea what the maximum whyte could squeeze out of Ibrox?
    I just can’t see him making enough out of a liquidation to cover his outgoings

  49. corsica says:

    Ox3

    Sorry if I cannot type fast enough for you (I do have a life outside of this blog…sometimes) but hopefully my last post answers the question re Ellis.

    He can change accounting period as it has not been done in last 5 years – I thought we had established that the other day?

  50. Goosy says:

    Paulie Walnuts says:
    07/12/2011 at 10:34 pm
    liveinhope (& others),

    There has been some eye-popping gossip doing the rounds about the identify of the mystery backers. Suffice to say that it would be major front page news if true and in the public domain. RTC, rightly in my view, has made it clear that though he is aware of it he can’t verify it at all and so will not mention it. He has also asked posters not to repeat it on here, and has made clear that if it is repeated he cannot undertake to maintain the anonymity of the poster.

    Now if we needed an excuse to break 2000 posts on this blog then this is it……..

    How about

    Saviours

    Johnny Adair
    Paul Ferris
    Alex Ferguson
    Sean Connery

    Executioners
    ??
    ??
    ??

%d bloggers like this: