Rangers Football Club was in a "pretty perilous" financial state when it was taken over by Craig Whyte, a court has been told.
Jurors heard from former managers Walter Smith and Ally McCoist during the first day of evidence in the trial of the former Rangers owner.
Mr Smith, 69, told the High Court in Glasgow about his first meeting with Whyte, who is accused of acquiring the club fraudulently in May 2011.
Read more: Walter Smith recalls first meeting with Rangers trial accused Craig Whyte
The ex-manager, who was in charge of the team between 1991 and 1998, and then again from 2007 until 2011, said he had told Whyte it required investment and a "level of freshness".
Mr Smith told the court that, at the time, he was aware of a tax case relating to the use of employee benefit trusts (EBT) at Rangers but was not directly involved.
He said he was also aware of an overdraft the club had, which he agreed was in the region of £18 million when he left, just days after Whyte took over the club.
Donald Findlay QC, representing Whyte, asked: "The finances were in a pretty perilous state it would seem, was that your impression?"
"Yes," Mr Smith said.
Read more: Walter Smith recalls first meeting with Rangers trial accused Craig Whyte
Mr Findlay continued: "For someone like yourself with your experience and affection for the football club, it must have been very distressing to see it, the club, in a state like that."
Mr Smith responded: "Yes, it was but we had been trying our best to handle the situation while it was there."
He agreed with Mr Findlay's assertion the "future was not exactly bright at that time in terms of the quality of the team" and there were "real problems" in getting the squad to a level that allowed it to compete with rivals Celtic.
The jury of eight men and seven women later heard from his successor Mr McCoist, 54.
He told the court he had a "very positive" response from Whyte in relation to the need to refresh the playing squad.
Read more: Walter Smith recalls first meeting with Rangers trial accused Craig Whyte
Under questioning from advocate depute Alex Prentice QC, he said: "There was a number of players which I would have liked to have signed.
"I just felt that the offers that were being made for these players were certainly, just in my opinion, not realistic for us to have any chance of getting the players."
Under cross-examination from Mr Findlay, Mr McCoist said he could not be sure exactly when he had signed his contract to become Rangers manager but confirmed no discussions had taken place with Whyte about the terms of that contract despite him inheriting it as the new owner.
He also acknowledged a number of signings took place after Whyte had taken over the club, including now captain Lee Wallace.
Read more: Walter Smith recalls first meeting with Rangers trial accused Craig Whyte
Mr Findlay said: "More was being spent on your squad in terms of player salary than had been spent on the previous squad on which you were assistant manager. You may or may not have known that."
"No," Mr McCoist replied.
Whyte, 46, denies two charges relating to the purchase, one of fraud and another under the Companies Act.
It is alleged he pretended to then Rangers owner Sir David Murray, and others, that funds were available to make all required payments to acquire a ''controlling and majority stake'' in the club - including clearing an £18 million bank debt, £2.8 million for the ''small tax case'' liability, a £1.7 million health-and-safety liability and £5 million for the playing squad.
The Crown alleges Mr Whyte had only £4 million available from two sources at the time but took out a £24 million loan from Ticketus against three years of future season ticket sales ''which was held subject to an agreement or agreements being entered into between the club and Ticketus after said acquisition''.
The second charge under the Companies Act centres on the £18 million payment between Mr Whyte's Wavetower company and Rangers to clear a Bank of Scotland debt.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article