Follow Follow Rangers. Season 2023/24

[Ranaldo Bairn]

Are these (and the others issued) shares in The Rangers Football Club, or Rangers International, the holding company?

 

sevco/ both of which were formed in 2012 /sevco

[gastropod]

Rangers International , the holding company ..Which has now issued roughly 390 million shares.

[8MileBU]

On 29/05/2021 at 08:27, johnnydun said:

@bennett is #22

Actually you’ll find that’s Romeo.

[DukDukGoose]

Strange. G51 told us they were close to being self sustaining.

[SANTAN]

It's going to be a long summer.. .

[DMCs]

1 hour ago, Stormzy said:

It's going to be a long summer.. .

I think it's going to fly by to be honest.

• Euros on
• Country opening up again
• Lots of little trips planned
• We're Champions 
• Glasgow's 2nd team providing a lot of laughs. I mean they can't even hire a manager after months of searching!

[AJF]

2 hours ago, Merkland Red said:

Strange. G51 told us they were close to being self sustaining.

I think you're deliberately missing the points he made though. The whole basis of becoming self sustaining is improving player trading and potential access to Champions League money, neither of which are possible at the moment until the transfer window opens/CL Qualifiers take place.

[DukDukGoose]

11 minutes ago, AJF said:

I think you're deliberately missing the points he made though. The whole basis of becoming self sustaining is improving player trading and potential access to Champions League money, neither of which are possible at the moment until the transfer window opens/CL Qualifiers take place.

No. He said you will be self sustaining. There was no caveat.

[AJF]

1 minute ago, Merkland Red said:

No. He said you will be self sustaining. There was no caveat.

And how do you think a club like Rangers would become self sustaining? By selling players and/or qualifying for the Champions League! It's not difficult to comprehend.

It's the model that Celtic have followed for numerous years - either they qualify for the CL, or they sell an asset. It'll be no different for Rangers and this is the first season since we were promoted that we've had the opportunity to qualify for the CL and it's the first time we have a squad full of numerous players that would attract considerable transfer fees.

[DukDukGoose]

1 minute ago, AJF said:

And how do you think a club like Rangers would become self sustaining? By selling players and/or qualifying for the Champions League! It's not difficult to comprehend.

It's the model that Celtic have followed for numerous years - either they qualify for the CL, or they sell an asset. It'll be no different for Rangers and this is the first season since we were promoted that we've had the opportunity to qualify for the CL and it's the first time we have a squad full of numerous players that would attract considerable transfer fees.

And yet we're told there's going to be a share issue?

So it's obviously not through selling players or qualifying for the champions league. There's a shortfall that obviously can't be made without doing too much of asset selling.

 

[AJF]

1 minute ago, Merkland Red said:

And yet we're told there's going to be a share issue?

So it's obviously not through selling players or qualifying for the champions league. There's a shortfall that obviously can't be made without doing too much of asset selling.

 

As I mentioned before, if you believe what the club are saying, this is a different share issue to the ones we've had before to plug funding gaps. It is being marketed as an opportunity for Rangers to widen it's shareholder base and increase the involvement of supporters as investors and give them voting rights. It's the first time in a while where they're inviting the "average" fan to invest and the use of the proceeds is to be invested into projects aimed at growing the potential of the club.

To put it simply, the target amount from this share offering is £6.75M which I'm quite confident we could have otherwise made with the sale of a single player.

[DukDukGoose]

9 minutes ago, AJF said:

As I mentioned before, if you believe what the club are saying, this is a different share issue to the ones we've had before to plug funding gaps. It is being marketed as an opportunity for Rangers to widen it's shareholder base and increase the involvement of supporters as investors and give them voting rights. It's the first time in a while where they're inviting the "average" fan to invest and the use of the proceeds is to be invested into projects aimed at growing the potential of the club.

To put it simply, the target amount from this share offering is £6.75M which I'm quite confident we could have otherwise made with the sale of a single player.

[AJF]

4 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

You don't agree we could make £6.75m from the sale of a player? Kent alone would probably net us near 2.5x that amount.

[Henrik's tongue]

Skint beggars imo 

[Empty It]

Rangers tribute act taking the tribute too seriously with following in the financial tracks and what makes it even better all the fans that let their club die are still making excuses for over expenditure.

[DukDukGoose]

41 minutes ago, AJF said:

You don't agree we could make £6.75m from the sale of a player? Kent alone would probably net us near 2.5x that amount.

Of course you could, but that obviously weakens your squad and you also have to replace them.

I'm saying you bury your head in the sand because it's your lack of critical thinking which is why your club is where they are. 

Aberdeen are self sustaining. We're self sustaining because a wealthy family of supporters just cleared the debt with no questions asked. We'd have been fucked with the effects of Covid otherwise.

To believe that this share issue is to give them voting right is nonsense at best.

[AJF]

6 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

Of course you could, but that obviously weakens your squad and you also have to replace them.

I'm saying you bury your head in the sand because it's your lack of critical thinking which is why your club is where they are. 

Aberdeen are self sustaining. We're self sustaining because a wealthy family of supporters just cleared the debt with no questions asked. We'd have been fucked with the effects of Covid otherwise.

To believe that this share issue is to give them voting right is nonsense at best.

But that's exactly the model Rangers are looking to emulate - you either get the funding from elsewhere (e.g. Champions League) or you sell a player which ultimately weakens your squad until you can recruit the next bit of talent and develop them. Celtic have done it for years.

Also, we are where we are... what, champions?

What's the difference between a wealthy family of supporters clearing debt compared to investors clearing debt? With previous share issues Rangers have made no secret about us requiring additional funding to see out the seasons, which is why this seems different to me.

There is no mention of funding gaps, season ticket income has just started to come in and historically share issues have been released when the season ticket income has dried up.

[Dons_1988]

Just now, AJF said:

But that's exactly the model Rangers are looking to emulate - you either get the funding from elsewhere (e.g. Champions League) or you sell a player which ultimately weakens your squad until you can recruit the next bit of talent and develop them. Celtic have done it for years.

Also, we are where we are... what, champions?

What's the difference between a wealthy family of supporters clearing debt compared to investors clearing debt? With previous share issues Rangers have made no secret about us requiring additional funding to see out the seasons, which is why this seems different to me.

There is no mention of funding gaps, season ticket income has just started to come in and historically share issues have been released when the season ticket income has dried up.

Well the clear difference is the wealthy family clearing historic debt that was a result of our f**k ups from 20 years earlier, whilst rangers are planning to spend more than they earn and rely on investment to clear it, up until the point they can either qualify for the CL or sell assets as you say. 

Look, it’s not that high risk as the investors aren’t exactly crying for their money back but if you were playing this game with bank debt it would be fucking madness. One thing it is not is self sustaining. 

[DukDukGoose]

1 minute ago, AJF said:

But that's exactly the model Rangers are looking to emulate - you either get the funding from elsewhere (e.g. Champions League) or you sell a player which ultimately weakens your squad until you can recruit the next bit of talent and develop them. Celtic have done it for years.

Also, we are where we are... what, champions?

What's the difference between a wealthy family of supporters clearing debt compared to investors clearing debt? With previous share issues Rangers have made no secret about us requiring additional funding to see out the seasons, which is why this seems different to me.

There is no mention of funding gaps, season ticket income has just started to come in and historically share issues have been released when the season ticket income has dried up.

Well, it's because we only had to do it once. I read a page or so back that you've had twelve since Oldco/Newco blah blah. Why do you suddenly believe that it'll be twelfth time lucky?

Yes. champions (deservedly) but put yourself in to unsustainable debt to achieve it. That's exactly the point I'm making. 

[AJF]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

Well the clear difference is the wealthy family clearing historic debt that was a result of our f**k ups from 20 years earlier, whilst rangers are planning to spend more than they earn and rely on investment to clear it, up until the point they can either qualify for the CL or sell assets as you say. 

Look, it’s not that high risk as the investors aren’t exactly crying for their money back but if you were playing this game with bank debt it would be fucking madness. One thing it is not is self sustaining. 

I'd entirely agree if it were a bank debt it would be madness, but this has been a period of sustained investment which was always the plan, set out by King and Co when they took ownership of the club where those providing the funds for us to continue to trade agree to have their debt turned into equity.

I have not said we are currently self sustaining, but I believe that we are now very close to being so with many assets available to us and the potential for Champions League prize money which is the first time we have been in this position since being promoted - although I do believe it will need to be the sale of a player or two as I think it will be difficult to qualify for the CL given the teams we will need to face,

1 minute ago, Merkland Red said:

Well, it's because we only had to do it once. I read a page or so back that you've had twelve since Oldco/Newco blah blah. Why do you suddenly believe that it'll be twelfth time lucky?

Yes. champions (deservedly) but put yourself in to unsustainable debt to achieve it. That's exactly the point I'm making. 

Because we are now in a position where we have multiple players that could fetch us the £6.75m figure many times over whereas before our squad value was negligible in comparison.