Rangers are Rocking; Scottys Financial insight inside.

[TartanJon]

Where did the money go?

Charles 1st of Normandy

He had a horse running last week in France called Ibrox

[Larky Masher]

Police extend probe into Rangers saga as Charles Green's buy-out of Ibrox club comes under the spotlight

AS well as investigating why Green was selected as preferred bidder when he took over at Ibrox in 2012, police want to know where large sums of money disappeared to during the Yorkshireman's reign at Ibrox.

DETECTIVES have widened their investigations into the Rangers saga to probe the Charles Green buy-out and a subsequent £70million cash burn.

Record Sport can reveal officers last week spent two days in London interviewing key individuals linked to Green’s chaotic reign.

It’s understood former chairman Malcolm Murray was one of those quizzed as a witness by the cops – who recently charged former owner Craig Whyte with fraud as part of a separate investigation into his initial takeover .

Green appointed Murray to the Ibrox board within days of completing his controversial £5.5m purchase of the club’s assets in a deal with administrators Duff and Phelps.

But the pair clashed repeatedly behind the scenes and Murray survived a number of attempted boardroom coups before finally being replaced as chairman by former manager Walter Smith in May 2013.

During this time Yorkshire businessman Green launched a hugely successful IPO raising more than £22m from selling new shares to institutional investors as well as Rangers supporters.

Now, as well as investigating why Green was selected as preferred bidder in the first place, the police want to know where large sums of that money disappeared to over the course of the next few months.

Earlier this year former Rangers chief executive Graham Wallace, as part of a 120-day business review, calculated that almost £70m had been spent by the club in the 18-month period following Green’s takeover.

It was only a matter of time before this happened and it's good that it has.

[sbcmfc]

I think it would be so interesting to hear Craig Whyte's side of the whole story. What his plan was, how big a factor the early European exit was in how it all panned out...

We'll probably never get any honest answers to these questions, but perhaps some of it will come out in court?

[johnnie x]

Its okay they are going to break open the warchest and sign some bloke called Danny Ings and pay him £40k a week.

Still less than Charlie is making

[Larky Masher]

Its okay they are going to break open the warchest and sign some bloke called Danny Ings and pay him £40k a week.

Still less than Charlie is making

Biting, contemporary satire there.

[bruce778]

I think it would be so interesting to hear Craig Whyte's side of the whole story. What his plan was, how big a factor the early European exit was in how it all panned out...

We'll probably never get any honest answers to these questions, but perhaps some of it will come out in court?

I think he had admin in mind all along unfortunately. When you read the ticketus case decision, he tried to say there was a condition of that deal that ticketus would assist him retain control of rangers in the event of any insolvency. The court said there wasn't evidence of that but it's an interesting assertion.

There was a lot he could have done to avoid admin and he sat on his hands. No one trying to admin would have done that. Perhaps he thought hmrc would fold and that was his plan but it's hard to avoid the conclusion that he was a cheating asset stripper.

[sbcmfc]

I think he had admin in mind all along unfortunately. When you read the ticketus case decision, he tried to say there was a condition of that deal that ticketus would assist him retain control of rangers in the event of any insolvency. The court said there wasn't evidence of that but it's an interesting assertion.

There was a lot he could have done to avoid admin and he sat on his hands. No one trying to admin would have done that. Perhaps he thought hmrc would fold and that was his plan but it's hard to avoid the conclusion that he was a cheating asset stripper.

Yeah, more than sitting on his hands, he appeared to actively steer them to oblivion, with the exception of wages, it appears he didn't pay a single bill from the day he took over.

He's probably not able to admit what the plan was even if he was willing, as it would almost certainly be an admission of guilt.

[bruce778]

Yeah, more than sitting on his hands, he appeared to actively steer them to oblivion, with the exception of wages, it appears he didn't pay a single bill from the day he took over.

He's probably not able to admit what the plan was even if he was willing, as it would almost certainly be an admission of guilt.

Absolutely. That and he appears to be a pathological liar. It's how he has operated in business since he started it seems. Incredible for him to do it with such a high profile business as rangers.

[BremnerLorimerGray]

Absolutely. That and he appears to be a pathological liar. It's how he has operated in business since he started it seems. Incredible for him to do it with such a high profile business as rangers.

I'd say that's the relatively easy part actually. His successors are making a grand job of bullshiting and stealing whilst getting away with it.

[Big Col]

I think it would be so interesting to hear Craig Whyte's side of the whole story. What his plan was,

if you remember the BBC programme on him, every company he was ever involved with went into administration.

It was the only business model he knew.

[sbcmfc]

if you remember the BBC programme on him, every company he was ever involved with went into administration.

It was the only business model he knew.

Which begs the question, was David Murray really duped, or was he so desperate to get out he didn't care?

[Larky Masher]

Which begs the question, was David Murray really duped, or was he so desperate to get out he didn't care?

Desperate, he thought the big tax case could bring down Murray International.

[Shotts56]

I think that's probably accepted by most now. Murray would have sold to anyone.

[johnnie x]

I think that's probably accepted by most now. Murray would have sold to anyone.

With the exception of his pals in the media like chic young, keith Jackson etc who continue to propagate the duped angle.

[Grumpyauldgit]

Which begs the question, was David Murray really duped, or was he so desperate to get out he didn't care?

A name who everybody seems to be forgetting in all this chaos is Donald Muir.

Mr Muir, for those of you who have forgotten, was Lloyds TSB's man on the Rangers board, he was/is a business associate of Dumbfeck and Fraudster's David Grier (last known address Glasgow Sheriff Court), and an "alleged" business associate of a certain Mr Craig Thomas Whyte (last known address London High Court).

I would love to know, if it was Mr Muir who first introduced Whyte to Murray, and what part he had, in making sure the deal went through.

[thewolf_1980]

Which begs the question, was David Murray really duped, or was he so desperate to get out he didn't care?

He was certainly being heavily influenced by Lloyds to the point where any offer which resulted in them recouping their debt would be considered.

[adamntg]

Tribunal says Premiership Dundee Utd must pay Championship strugglers Rangers £170,000 for young star Charlie Telfer. See, trickle-down does work.

[EddardStark]

£204k if you include VAT. Slightly higher than the original £60k that Utd originally offered. Thomson tried to play the new club and by their actions the panel decided this was not the case. This sends an important message to clubs who want to take advantage of clubs who develop their own talent. I think every decent football fan will applaud this decision.

[giblet]

United have previous in nicking players like Robertson, so not unhappy with this decision.

[adamntg]

How can you "nick" a player from a amateur club? Please explain.

[Parklife]

How can you "nick" a player from a amateur club? Please explain.

Indeed. Utd still acted like fuds though.

[adamntg]

£204k if you include VAT. Slightly higher than the original £60k that Utd originally offered. Thomson tried to play the new club and by their actions the panel decided this was not the case. This sends an important message to clubs who want to take advantage of clubs who develop their own talent. I think every decent football fan will applaud this decision.

If he's that good why did Rangers only give him 20 minutes in a game that was already won? I'm with Stephen Thompson - Rangers were stifling the player rather than developing him.

[Larky Masher]

If he's that good why did Rangers only give him 20 minutes in a game that was already won? I'm with Stephen Thompson - Rangers were stifling the player rather than developing him.

Whilst United were trying to steal him.

[thewolf_1980]

If he's that good why did Rangers only give him 20 minutes in a game that was already won? I'm with Stephen Thompson - Rangers were stifling the player rather than developing him.

If you are expecting a Rangers fan to stand up for our policy on youth development, then you may be waiting a while.

£170k is a decent outcome and all the more for the McCoist January warchest.

[adamntg]

Whilst United were trying to steal him.

Trying to sign him would be more accurate. I believe United used the established route of transfer tribunal when a fee couldn't be agreed for a young player available under freedom of contract.