Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

To gauge the possible state of this seasons finances it would be best to look at last seasons financial disaster.

They had three non recurring financial boosts from The Commonwealth games, wee share issue and the selling of a player totalling £5 million thereabout.

I am sure the figure you are looking for is £1.3M

Does this £5M include the cup semi finals and the Scotland game?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

fúck off to somewhere you feel more comfortable.

Whit? f**k off to a thread about my own team? I'll do that if you do too. Deal?

I have as much right to post on this thread as you get over it.

Nothing about rights, chappy. You are perfectly welcome to post all you like about Rangers - and you do. Often.

Were I to post as much about St Mirren as you post about Rangers then I'd worry about myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone factored in Dave Kings £30M kids inheritance?

He said he would invest it and he's not known for lying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone factored in Dave Kings £30M kids inheritance?

He said he would invest it and he's not known for lying.

Dodgy Dave will buy a Davycopter/Hindendavy/Davydactyl to fly around the big hoose to show the Rangers masses he has wealth of the radar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whit? f**k off to a thread about my own team? I'll do that if you do too. Deal?

Nothing about rights, chappy. You are perfectly welcome to post all you like about Rangers - and you do. Often.(1)

Were I to post as much about St Mirren as you post about Rangers then I'd worry about myself.(2)

1. No, fúck off to somewhere you can post nonsense without being pulled up for it. If you'd like to post some kind of rebuttal to points made, feel free - or maybe even offer your considered opinion of the actual state of affairs. Tedi has the right idea (of the topic at hand, not that I necessarily agree with his reasoning, but he's given his understanding), why do you feel the need to simply play the man while yet again completely ignoring the ball?

2. Were his club as fúcked up as the mob at ibrox and their predecessors, I'm sure he would be worried as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The figure for Gate receipts and hospitality should be fairly easy to work out, this figure includes ST revenue, in 2012 / 2013 it totaled £13.224M this was based upon (38k total season tickets sold)

ST sales this year look to be heading in the exact same direction, approx 31k sold so far which should reach 35k this summer and 38k after Christmas.

Tickets prices rose 33% last season and are up another 5% for this year.

That would give a projected revenue for Gate receipts and hospitality this season of £18.5m

Tedi, you've got more idea of the various inciome streams available than I or many outsiders. Can you sort of itemise them for the general populace?

As has been done to death (and you're the biggest culprit by a country mile, tbh) here and elsewhere, wages - especialy for playing staff - are a bugger to get an accurate account of, but an idea of the fixed running costs would be handy as well.

In all honesty, while I will continue to point and laugh at your lot's continuing travails, I am genuinely intrigued as to how the rangers can ever be sustainable while maintaining the infrastructure currently in place. EPL clubs and the like can easily maintain big stadia and massive training facilities, but is the money actually there in the Scottish game, no matter how many bums they get on seats every fortnight?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whit? f**k off to a thread about my own team? I'll do that if you do too. Deal?

Nothing about rights, chappy. You are perfectly welcome to post all you like about Rangers - and you do. Often.

Were I to post as much about St Mirren as you post about Rangers then I'd worry about myself.

You should worry about yourself 8)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the slight outbreak of bickering*, and also (intentionally) not seeking to find too detailed an absolute position on the numbers, there is a reasonable consensus on the ability of the club to cover its costs. I would put it as follows:

There is no immediate or obvious medium-term prospect of annual income matching annual expenditure; and this season there is a significant deficit to start with, in the form of loan liabilities.

Because of the cyclic nature of the income and expenditure, I have gone for trying to establish that "a significant number of months each year are not covered", rather than attempting to quantify current and projected balance without sufficient information. It appears that about as many months are not covered as are covered; in any case, there's not a very high ratio between the two (not 1:10, for example). This season it may be that the starting position means there are significantly more months that are not covered. I don't know if anyone else finds this to be a useful heuristic, but it helps me to see the wood for the trees.

So, we return to the crux of the matter: by their actions, the current board appear to have exacerbated the position both through having no current listing, and through apparently having no intention of "donating" the implied funds. It looks very much as though there are two possibilities: an improbable and significant raising of funds, or some sort of extraordinary action such as an insolvency event. I think that only the former can possibly ward off the latter. I just can't understand what else could be going on.

*

Whatever you think about Rangers, or even the OF, the Gers posters on this sub-forum who come on to a pretty hostile board in order to make their cases deserve a bit of credit, IMO. Whatever their contribution to the debates, it sometimes seems that there's something of a mob mentality for getting stuck into them. Doesn't seem all that fair and can appear a bit obsessive. That's just my take on it as an occasional contributor in this section.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the slight outbreak of bickering*, and also (intentionally) not seeking to find too detailed an absolute position on the numbers, there is a reasonable consensus on the ability of the club to cover its costs. I would put it as follows:

There is no immediate or obvious medium-term prospect of annual income matching annual expenditure; and this season there is a significant deficit to start with, in the form of loan liabilities.

Because of the cyclic nature of the income and expenditure, I have gone for trying to establish that "a significant number of months each year are not covered", rather than attempting to quantify current and projected balance without sufficient information. It appears that about as many months are not covered as are covered; in any case, there's not a very high ratio between the two (not 1:10, for example). This season it may be that the starting position means there are significantly more months that are not covered. I don't know if anyone else finds this to be a useful heuristic, but it helps me to see the wood for the trees.

So, we return to the crux of the matter: by their actions, the current board appear to have exacerbated the position both through having no current listing, and through apparently having no intention of "donating" the implied funds. It looks very much as though there are two possibilities: an improbable and significant raising of funds, or some sort of extraordinary action such as an insolvency event. I think that only the former can possibly ward off the latter. I just can't understand what else could be going on.

*

Whatever you think about Rangers, or even the OF, the Gers posters on this sub-forum who come on to a pretty hostile board in order to make their cases deserve a bit of credit, IMO. Whatever their contribution to the debates, it sometimes seems that there's something of a mob mentality for getting stuck into them. Doesn't seem all that fair and can appear a bit obsessive. That's just my take on it as an occasional contributor in this section.

I concur with your summation here. The worry for fans of the rangers, imho, should be that European football isn't going to make things all better. I may be misremembering*, but I seem to recall that some Scots clubs actually lost money through fulfilling European fixtures recently. Early round trips to eastern Europe don't come free, after all.

It would seem that, with all due respect to Tedi for his sensible post, "European Football" will have to mean "later stages of European tournaments" - a much more distant prospect, which will require proportianately more rebuilding and "investment". As a benchmark, just look at how excited the green trogs get when their lot get into the CL group stages, then look at the different financial landscape celtic operate in, depending on whether they've banked those millions or not the previous season. No matter what, the rangers are some distance away from that (not exactly world-beating) level, and it's going to take years to get there. All the while, ibrox needs maintaining, and everybody needs paying.

Plenty more pointing and laughing for the rest of us, then - as long as the new club continues to limp along, filling Ashley's pockets while emptying those of the fans.

As for your perception that the rangers' fans on here are victims of some kind of gang culture, I'd argue that the opposite is true if anything. I've been accused of all kinds of bigotry and prejudice, had a poster suggest that I should kill myself, and had my family, from my late parents to my children, slandered as a matter of course. All by followers of one club. Others claiming the same allegiance, rather than pulling up their fellow-fans for reinforcing the stereotype of the moronic orc, gleefully joined in. Very few fans of the rangers are immune to this habit, and even fewer of them post in the likes of the BRALT.

*Thanks, Hilary. Cracking neologism, that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Leaving aside the slight outbreak of bickering*, and also (intentionally) not seeking to find too detailed an absolute position on the numbers, there is a reasonable consensus on the ability of the club to cover its costs. I would put it as follows:

There is no immediate or obvious medium-term prospect of annual income matching annual expenditure; and this season there is a significant deficit to start with, in the form of loan liabilities.

Because of the cyclic nature of the income and expenditure, I have gone for trying to establish that "a significant number of months each year are not covered", rather than attempting to quantify current and projected balance without sufficient information. It appears that about as many months are not covered as are covered; in any case, there's not a very high ratio between the two (not 1:10, for example). This season it may be that the starting position means there are significantly more months that are not covered. I don't know if anyone else finds this to be a useful heuristic, but it helps me to see the wood for the trees.

So, we return to the crux of the matter: by their actions, the current board appear to have exacerbated the position both through having no current listing, and through apparently having no intention of "donating" the implied funds. It looks very much as though there are two possibilities: an improbable and significant raising of funds, or some sort of extraordinary action such as an insolvency event. I think that only the former can possibly ward off the latter. I just can't understand what else could be going on.

*

Whatever you think about Rangers, or even the OF, the Gers posters on this sub-forum who come on to a pretty hostile board in order to make their cases deserve a bit of credit, IMO. Whatever their contribution to the debates, it sometimes seems that there's something of a mob mentality for getting stuck into them. Doesn't seem all that fair and can appear a bit obsessive. That's just my take on it as an occasional contributor in this section.

Did you have a problem with my post or with me ?

The post I posted earlier was the reality of the clubs financial plight for the upcoming season. They lost 11 players taking a supposed £5 million of the wage bill but that may actually be a fudged figure with the bonuses to the players being paid to them by some other mechanism to portray the wage bill as anything but what they posted in the accounts. How do I come to this conclusion ?, simple, by the amount of debt or operating losses the club posted in their accounts which does not add up with the so called wage bill they claim to the debt they ran up. If their wages were anything close to the operating losses there wouldn't be a huge black hole in the accounts showing money disappearing as if by magic.

Even though they did manage to achieve some non recurring revenue last season it is not guaranteed for the upcoming season and that puts a £5 million dent in next seasons finances. It just about cancels out the 11 players basic wages that left leaving a £15 million deficit as things stand. Extra ST sales and on the day cash if they are successful on the park through the season may or may not take another big chunk out of the operating losses they posted last season but it's hardly likely they will cover the expected losses for this season. Yes the new players are more than likely on smaller wages than the lot that left in disgrace but that only adds debt on top of the £15 million black hole.

King and the T3B's tenure is a tricky situation because they need success on the park or they will face a backlash from the fans expecting them to plough that expected tens of millions of pounds investment to ensure they stay successful. This may or may not work out for the board as they appear to be playing poker with high stakes, failure on the park whilst trying to pull the belt in and saving up the pennies is a risky strategy for the club as the fans will abscond from attending games as well as other activities the fans indulge in when things are going badly on the park.

Success on the park then they can expect to plug that black hole but they will definitely not post anything close to a profit and will take with them into the season after more accrued debt on top of the £40 million plus they already have over the past 3 years. Yes the new board can exchange their soft loans for equity in the form of shares but there are only so many shares left to absorb any financial aid from the board and at what value do the board place on the shares they take in exchange ? above or below 20p ? my initial thoughts are they will value the shares well below market value to procure as many as they can on the cheap.

So the boards strategy is to be successful on the park whilst pulling in the debt they run up which goes against King's mad ravings about overspending if the need be. The fans are happy they are pulling in the belt for the moment but it depends upon winning and winning often to help boost the clubs finances. Will the fans be happy this season to go up via the play off's if Hibs or any other club start running away with the division ? my gut instinct says no fucking way as they have a mind set and mentality that they have to pummel their opposition into a pulp on the park or they will not be happy.

So it's over to the board and will they give the fans what they crave ? automatic promotion, the challenge cup and reaching the final stages of the major cup competitions or even winning one. We'll see eventually what prevails and did the board do the right things albeit not soon enough but is it enough and have they got it right this time, or will they fail because they promised big spending but won't actually put in what they promised because they didn't actually have it to begin with and was just King trying to be a big shot saviour of the club.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of the major investors at Rangers, King, Ashley or whoever became wealthy by making bad investments.

Until a sustainable financial model is worked out, only self serving loans and back-handed deals will be offered up to keep the club afloat and protect investments already made.

No announcements will be made on the planned cuts like Murray Park, Albion car park until the season starts and the season tickets have been bought and paid for. (That's if they can do much with Ashley's loan security over them).

Over investment and transparency indeed!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are this seasons ST sales been taken in as cash like last season ? this was the problem that lead to the many soft loans to keep the club solvent as Christmas approached.

Is this a ploy for the new board to post maybe even a slight profit should they be successful up until Christmas or later and then the loans are depended upon to keep them going until the end off the season ?

Will the new board convert their soft loans into shares or will they take their money back from the ST sales ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ST are payable by Cash / Credit Card / 4 Month Credit card or DD / 10 Month Credit card or DD

ST income for games not yet played is treated as deferred income in the accounts, but the club can still spend it prior.

If the SPFL/SFA/RANGERS definition of a club is true then the club cannot spend anything. It is the gift of the company running the club to spend money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ST are payable by Cash / Credit Card / 4 Month Credit card or DD / 10 Month Credit card or DD

ST income for games not yet played is treated as deferred income in the accounts, but the club can still spend it prior.

That sounds about right Tedi, I'm assuming it will be spent early and then relying on loans at the latter part of the season like last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That sounds about right Tedi, I'm assuming it will be spent early and then relying on loans at the latter part of the season like last season.

And 'the latter part of the season' is likely to come around much faster than it did last season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will continue (be allowed) to trade while insolvent with no proof of funding or bond posted to ensure they can fulfill fixtures. I will be surprised if they get to June without grinding to a halt, certainly admin is highly likely in the New Year given King has no cash and the only benevolent funding source (Ashley) is hostile to this board. Talk of share issues is fanciful given the lack of auditor, listing and Ashley controlling assets at present. I do see a collapse with no Rang3rs comeback, especially if they are struggling to improve on last season. I think Hibs will get at least 80 points, maybe 85-90, so they The Rangers will need to match this and if they don't the hordes will melt away. Not that it matters, I think they are in admin before season end and will not emerge from it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will continue (be allowed) to trade while insolvent with no proof of funding or bond posted to ensure they can fulfill fixtures. I will be surprised if they get to June without grinding to a halt, certainly admin is highly likely in the New Year given King has no cash and the only benevolent funding source (Ashley) is hostile to this board. Talk of share issues is fanciful given the lack of auditor, listing and Ashley controlling assets at present. I do see a collapse with no Rang3rs comeback, especially if they are struggling to improve on last season. I think Hibs will get at least 80 points, maybe 85-90, so they The Rangers will need to match this and if they don't the hordes will melt away. Not that it matters, I think they are in admin before season end and will not emerge from it.

FFS, you know you've just jinxed your team, opening day humiliation by Dumbarton immanent.

Jeeze, don't Hibs fans ever learn. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will continue (be allowed) to trade while insolvent with no proof of funding or bond posted to ensure they can fulfill fixtures. I will be surprised if they get to June without grinding to a halt, certainly admin is highly likely in the New Year given King has no cash and the only benevolent funding source (Ashley) is hostile to this board. Talk of share issues is fanciful given the lack of auditor, listing and Ashley controlling assets at present. I do see a collapse with no Rang3rs comeback, especially if they are struggling to improve on last season. I think Hibs will get at least 80 points, maybe 85-90, so they The Rangers will need to match this and if they don't the hordes will melt away. Not that it matters, I think they are in admin before season end and will not emerge from it.

I've been thinking the same for over a year now... and yet, they keep bobbing along. Somehow.

I think the AIM de-listing is part of the endgame, though, and things are now so bad that they just can't be exposed to stock market scrutiny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FFS, you know you've just jinxed your team, opening day humiliation by Dumbarton immanent.

Jeeze, don't Hibs fans ever learn. :rolleyes:

:thumsup2 Fingers crossed!!!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The interview between Jim White and Dave King has at least made it clear that the tens of millions of investment from King et al. isn't going to be happening, and the only real sustainable source of money is the fans.

While that has clarified some aspects of the finances, even with King's pretty poor reputation for honesty it does make all of his manoeuvrings over the last couple of years appear fairly shameless. Dangling the promise of so much investment, then simply saying that it's all about the fans spending more than the Celtic fans: if he'd come clean with that line pre-regime change EGM it would have convinced no one to join his camp. The other "big promise", of ousting Ashley's influence, was the main rallying call against the old board: now he's telling the fans to go ahead and buy SD goods in order to join the war effort.

This is sort of a game changer for me. There's no longer any pretence about King and allies being the good guys who will provide the necessary finance and rescue Ranges from Mike Ashley, which was the driver behind starting this thread. It will be interesting to see if this statement incites the same level of fury and rebellion as if Somers or Llambias had made it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...