One of the many posts where Dev doesn't complain about the ban. http://www.not606.com/showthread.php/123968-Fao-mick-syd?p=2287096&viewfull=1#post2287096
As long as we're using a decent biscuit this time. I'm sick to the back teeth of those boring Hob Nobs.
I haven't read so much bollocks since that anthology of harryhood's posts. The biggest threat to Rangers is the tax case, a situation which is entirely down to the old board. To suggest otherwise is stupidity.
Rangers’ tax problem goes back to the 2000-2001 financial year. A tax plan was purchased from the Baxendale-Walker law firm and Rangers dipped their toes in the waters of a tax scheme which would, a decade later, place a cloud over the solvency of the club.
He HAS to say this **** while he's still picking Murray's pubes out his incisors. I'm seriously thinking about asking my son to hand in his notice and stop working for this stupid Hutt as a henchman.
Is that right? When Murray handed over Rangers to Whyte, Rangers were in a relatively healthy position. They had an agreement to pay £1m per year to the bank and the debt had been halved. Now, less than a year later the club could find itself in administration BEFORE the result of the court case is even known. They've gone from £18m in debt to zero to £40m+ in the space of a few months. Explain that please.
Since Whyte has yet to publish the accounts, none of us know the true state of Rangers' finances. This is all speculation by Traynor who is a shameless apologist for the old regime, and has an axe to grind with Whyte after being frozen out. Since virtually nothing has been spent on the team, and only superficial improvements made to the stadium, it's difficult to see where £40 million could legitimately have gone.
What do you disagree with? You know that Rangers are £40 million in debt? How come you've seen the accounts when they haven't been published yet? You think Whyte has spunked £40 million somewhere? If so, where? You don't think Traynor is up Murray's arse?
