And don’t forget Ticketus

Super A

Well-Known Member
did Ticketus not give CW 27 mill

HE then gave 18 mill to the bank and pocketed the rest.

He then put the 18 mill debt to him on Rangers accounts.
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
I thought Ticketus were genuine innocents in this. They were shafted by Whyte lying to them - partly their own fault really - and then were awarded damages in the High Court only for Whyte to declare himself bankrupt.
 

JD1872

Well-Known Member
There must surely has been someone at ticketus in on the act and working with whyte. Why else would they lend the money before he owned the club or were they also duped by a man that can barely string a complete sentence together
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
There must surely has been someone at ticketus in on the act and working with whyte. Why else would they lend the money before he owned the club or were they also duped by a man that can barely string a complete sentence together
What did Ticketus gain out of it? They lost every penny.
 

Super A

Well-Known Member
What did Ticketus gain out of it? They lost every penny.
well as we have 9 million missing from the pot then its possible individual gain

Ticketus would also be insured against bad debt, you would think.
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
well as we have 9 million missing from the pot then its possible individual gain

Ticketus would also be insured against bad debt, you would think.
What's the £9m? Ticketus lent Whyte £24m and haven't seen a penny of it back.
 

albatronic

Active Member
The thing I don't understand about Ticketus and the Whyte/David Murray deal is:-

How can Ticketus provide a loan to Whyte secured against future season ticket sales when he had no authority within the club? This could only have been done with David Murray's signed security. It's like me taking a loan out secured against a strangers house. Doesn't happen.
 

Earl of Leven

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
It is 100% clear that whyte had some guarantee that only he would be getting the club from Murray...how and why this came about is not yet known.
 

JD1872

Well-Known Member
The thing I don't understand about Ticketus and the Whyte/David Murray deal is:-

How can Ticketus provide a loan to Whyte secured against future season ticket sales when he had no authority within the club? This could only have been done with David Murray's signed security. It's like me taking a loan out secured against a strangers house. Doesn't happen.
I find it hard to believe ticketus could be that incompetent. I’m sure the story was whyte submitted the application using Rangers headed paper but surely they do not make a payment that size without doing significant due diligence. Lets not forget the club had an existing relationship with ticketus, whyte has basically asked them to pay £27m into an account that isn’t Rangers account.

I appreciate regulations were not as strict in those days but surely the alarm bells were ringing
 

govanite

Well-Known Member
I think we need to investigate the bank somebody there must have gave ticketus a garauntee. No way a company is given so much money to lend without guarantee from an associated bank.
 

blueismycolour

Well-Known Member
The thing I don't understand about Ticketus and the Whyte/David Murray deal is:-

How can Ticketus provide a loan to Whyte secured against future season ticket sales when he had no authority within the club? This could only have been done with David Murray's signed security. It's like me taking a loan out secured against a strangers house. Doesn't happen.
Did Whyte not get the loan to make out he was fit and proper (yes I know) so the deal with Murray could go through?
 

Bluedell

Well-Known Member
I thought Ticketus were genuine innocents in this. They were shafted by Whyte lying to them - partly their own fault really - and then were awarded damages in the High Court only for Whyte to declare himself bankrupt.
Ticketus must have known that the cash that they were advancing was to be used as part of the purchase agreement, something that is borderline illegal.

They would have seen the oldco circular to shareholders stating that Whyte was to put in £xm and known that the cash that they were advancing was not from Whyte, but was effectively generated by the club themselves, on the back of future income.

Ticketus acted very immorally and potentially illegally and there's no way they were innocents in this. They were about the only party who got what they deserved.
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
The thing I don't understand about Ticketus and the Whyte/David Murray deal is:-

How can Ticketus provide a loan to Whyte secured against future season ticket sales when he had no authority within the club? This could only have been done with David Murray's signed security. It's like me taking a loan out secured against a strangers house. Doesn't happen.
Whyte offered his own personal guarantees to secure the loan - think he claimed to be worth £33m.
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
Ticketus must have known that the cash that they were advancing was to be used as part of the purchase agreement, something that is borderline illegal.

They would have seen the oldco circular to shareholders stating that Whyte was to put in £xm and known that the cash that they were advancing was not from Whyte, but was effectively generated by the club themselves, on the back of future income.

Ticketus acted very immorally and potentially illegally and there's no way they were innocents in this. They were about the only party who got what they deserved.
Whyte told them he had his own personal and corporate wealth and this was used to secure the loan from Ticketus. I don't know if it was certain that Ticketus would have known the Lloyds overdraft was being repaid with their money.
 

BroomloanWATP

Well-Known Member
Whyte told them he had his own personal and corporate wealth and this was used to secure the loan from Ticketus. I don't know if it was certain that Ticketus would have known the Lloyds overdraft was being repaid with their money.
Was this the whole hoo-hah with his solicitor's holding account allegedly not actually having the money in it that the statement said it did?

It's been so long that it's difficult to remember the details.
 

Craigie

Well-Known Member
For me it's still a pertinent question as how Whyte secured the Ticketus loan before he had control of the club.
That's where Collyer Bristow come in. Gary Withey (now deceased?) was the man who managed to wangle that deal on whyte's behalf.
 

Jonzin

Active Member
Something suspicious with the Ticketus deal. Did they have a part to play and was Gary Witney involved with this .
 

Bluedell

Well-Known Member
Whyte told them he had his own personal and corporate wealth and this was used to secure the loan from Ticketus. I don't know if it was certain that Ticketus would have known the Lloyds overdraft was being repaid with their money.
They must have known if they did any sort of due diligence. It was public knowledge that the loan had to be repaid.

Also I believe that the purchase of the company had to be done in various steps, at least some of which Ticketus would have been a party to. They paid the cash to a lawyer, who wouldn't release it until various parts of agreement were carried out, and the final transfer of ownership wouldn't happen until the cash had been p[aid to Lloyds. It's how these things work.

There's no chance Ticketus could not have been aware of it as they were party to it.
 

Grant K

Well-Known Member
Next part to consider which is in the liquidators report.

Why have Ticketus reduced their claim in the liquidation from £27m to £11m ?

Could it be they couldn’t provide satisfactory evidence to support their claim ?
But, they will also be taking a keen interest as they will be outstanding funds and they will be considering loss of future potential income. They might be asking why an apparently solvent business was placed in an insolvency process impacting upon their profitability. And, they will not be alone, think about the poor face painter who has been shafted by HMRC.
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
They must have known if they did any sort of due diligence. It was public knowledge that the loan had to be repaid.

Also I believe that the purchase of the company had to be done in various steps, at least some of which Ticketus would have been a party to. They paid the cash to a lawyer, who wouldn't release it until various parts of agreement were carried out, and the final transfer of ownership wouldn't happen until the cash had been p[aid to Lloyds. It's how these things work.

There's no chance Ticketus could not have been aware of it as they were party to it.
I don't doubt Ticketus were careless but as they lost £24m in this, I'm struggling to see why it would be malice rather than incompetence.

Yes, the money from Ticketus was held by Collyer Bristow who told Lloyds it was Whyte's own money.
 

aayjay

Active Member
Ticketus were naive and ignorant in my opinion. They loaned Whyte (or his company) £!8m (and the rest) secured on future season ticket sales as part of Whyte's purchase of the company in order to pay off debt (to the bank). It is illegal to borrow from a public company you are puchasing (or have borrowings secured by that company) in order to purchase the company - the financial assistance provisions of the Companies Act. That is partly what Whyte got charged with. Unfortunately oor Donald managed to bamboozle a jury into acquitting him since they couldn't understand the case - case should have been in front of judges rather than lay people, as is the case with all major fraud trials.
 

Taki

Well-Known Member
Ticketus were naive and ignorant in my opinion. They loaned Whyte (or his company) £!8m (and the rest) secured on future season ticket sales as part of Whyte's purchase of the company in order to pay off debt (to the bank). It is illegal to borrow from a public company you are puchasing (or have borrowings secured by that company) in order to purchase the company - the financial assistance provisions of the Companies Act. That is partly what Whyte got charged with. Unfortunately oor Donald managed to bamboozle a jury into acquitting him since they couldn't understand the case - case should have been in front of judges rather than lay people, as is the case with all major fraud trials.
I was going to post that Whyte was found not guilty even though, as you say, any objective assessment would say that's exactly what happened.

Donald Findlay really is a fucking arsehole.
 

Bluedell

Well-Known Member
I don't doubt Ticketus were careless but as they lost £24m in this, I'm struggling to see why it would be malice rather than incompetence.

Yes, the money from Ticketus was held by Collyer Bristow who told Lloyds it was Whyte's own money.
Just because they lost money and were taken in by a better shyster than they were doesn't mean that they didn't act (at least) immorally.
 
did Ticketus not give CW 27 mill

HE then gave 18 mill to the bank and pocketed the rest.

He then put the 18 mill debt to him on Rangers accounts.
Ticketus first advanced £24m to Whyte in April 2011 advanced on 3 years of around 27,000 season ticket sales. He repaid Lloyds their £18m, used club cashflow of £3m to repay Ticketus and gained a further £6m tranche from Ticketus in September 2011 for another similar year of season ticket sales
which he immediately used to further pay Ticketus, ie, £9m in total.

Ticketus, for advancing total of £30m on security of 4 years of 27,000 season tickets, were due £36m in total in 4 yearly amounts of £9m, the £9m above deducted from £36m to the £27m shown in creditors report.

Under Whyte's scam, Rangers as well as owing Ticketus the £9m yearly, were still due HMRC the VAT element of the cost of season tickets, a truly horrendous deal for the club which always was going to end, and intended, in administration.

Also, to my knowledge, the full amount paid to Whyte has never been accounted for, obviously Lloyds were repaid in full,Ticketus their first year of payments, but Whyte paid no tax or creditors, my suspicion has always been he diverted monies elsewhere, possibly to offshore accounts, but we'll probably never know this for sure.
 

Koba

Well-Known Member
The Ticketus deal has got to be the strangest thing about everything that happened to us in 2012. Anyone that scratched the surface of Whyte could see something wasn't right. Yet he gets a massive loan to buy Rangers. Come on, give us a break! Surely there is someone out there that could get to the bottom of that. Who did the background checks? Who signed the deal? Was there any repercussions for the employees involved?
 

Marty101

Well-Known Member
Where is this mentioned? It’s still showing as £27m for Ticketus in the statement of affairs column.

I think there was some earlier reduction re vat though?
 
Top