4 bidders
- Thread starter Girvan Loyal 1690
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
And another 2 to drop out today , leaving just the Blue Knights , their 10 million wont make much of a hole in 140 million debt . The pain could be over this horrible ,disgusting club that has cheated everybody in this country for years is about to disappear .
You do realise that £100 million of the "debt" is potential? That is excluding nearly £8 million worth of debenture holders that are only included in the creditors list as a technicality.
Celtic owe more money to Rangers than Rangers owe to Celtic. Rangers have more football debtors than creditors.
Don't let that sway your blinkered view of Rangers finances
How are Rangers due more from Celtic than the other way round ??? Rangers way always blame someone else !!! Paint facing 40 quid , flower shop 70 quid ,corner shop 500 quid , every football fan in the world would be embarrassed by this , Rangers fans seem quite proud of it
Why is £100m potential debt? I genuinely don't know. Certainly 75 is. As for the more football debtors than creditors neither of us know whether than is through the quite usual process of staggering payments or through a failure to meet payments due. An educated guess based on to whom the monies are owed leads me to the concludion that it matters not one single **** if there are more debtors than creditors....the point of note is whethrr Rangers have met payments they should have made.
It doesn't look like it at first glance.
It doesn't look like it at first glance.
I included the £27 million ticketus money. Nobody is quite sure how that is going to pan out, however they have made it clear that they will settle for less than that, supposedly £10 million if the media is to be believed (big if).
As for whether they have made the payments on time, there is no indication if payments have been missed or if they have been made as scheduled. Only the invoices would indicate terms of payment etc so impossible for us to say. If payments have been missed then I would agree it is unacceptable and an embarrasing situation to be in. Personally, I always ensure I pay any debts I have on time and would be embarrased to miss any. If I did I would expect to be punished so I would expect a football club that misses payments to be punished accordingly.
Harry, Celtic have not yet paid Rangers for the last Old Firm game. You like to bang on about Rangers not being able to afford Jelavic. The next installment due to Rapid Vienna is in the summer. Why would Rangers pay them before any money is due? Everton have paid £5 million plus VAT for Jelavic, however they only paid £2.5 million in January with 3 installments due in 2013, 2014 and 2015. Does this mean Everton are playing a player who they 'can't afford'? Of course not.
Celtic will be keeping the last old firm money as insurance for the up coming old firm game and rightly so . Your club prides itself on dignity ( biggest joke ever ) you failed to pay the old woman 40 quid for doing half time face painting !!!! To save further embarrasment would it not be better if Rangers called it a day and died . I am hearing the sale of your star players in the summer is how the administrators are going to get their money owed .
Always wrong Trevor , how is the sell out going tomorrow , slowly but surely the interest in your homes games is dying just like your club . Will any Rangers fan ever be able to look into the eyes of any other Scottish football fan ??? At the end of the day we know your cheats
1. How old was the 'paint facer'?
2. How do you know it was done at half time?
3. How do you know she isn't due the money at the end of this month?
4. Where are you hearing Rangers star players are to be sold?
5. Are you ignoring Rangers rejecting a multi million pound bid for Steven Naismith?
6. Rangers withhold money owed = no dignity. Celtic withhold money owed = perfectly fine?
[video=youtube;tdGrB3Za4_o]http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=tdGrB3Za4_o[/video]
Was reported that Rangers turned down a £2 million bid for Naismith from West Brom.
You're playing fast and loose with the expression 'multi million pound bid' there ML!
You're playing fast and loose with the expression 'multi million pound bid' there ML!
Perfect example of how easily something can be twisted to fit an agenda
rogueleader
suave gringo
It isn't a hypothetical debt though. It is an actual debt. Ae debt which we know that Rangers have already defaulted on.
As I said, with the information released it is not possible to say with any great certainty that Rangers have missed payments, but it is reasonable to conclude that they have. Manchester city are amongst the creditors, the only deal that springs to mind is Weiss. It is not usual for loan payments to be made over such a period. I could have the wrong end of the stick, but it is a reasonable conclusion. Lots of noises have been made about payments for Lee Wallace. True or not, it fits the bill for what has been going on at Hearts.
You demonstrate you know how it works when you talk about the Jelavic deal with Everton so I don't really understand why you were apparently using having more creditors as a defence. You know it is irrelevant until someone defaults. Maybe I picked up the inflection wrong.
The point I was trying to make was that a lot has been made of Rangers owing other clubs money, however it has not been mentioned that Rangers are owed more money from other clubs.
I think the money owed to Man City is probably from the Weiss deal, but last May we signed two Norwegian 18 year olds from them, could possibly have something to do with that as well.
With regards to the Ticketus deal, I said the figure is potential because of the willingness of ticketus to do a deal. The judge seems to have stated that ticketus have no hold over either seats or tickets sold, so the 'debt' could be seen as 0 or it could be seen as £27 million, depending on how you look at the deal.
I can't claim to know any the details of the deal so can't make a judgement on what I think the debt is, which I have not written it off as 0 or accepted it as being £27 million.
I have more important things to worry about than the finances of the football team I support. Can't help but cringe when I see people saying how we can't lose the history of the club etc. Makes **** all difference in the lives of the majority