29 May 2016 09:41:22
Not posted on here in a while but felt the need to post this after listening to my bear pals gloating over the signing of Barton and "spending what it takes" to compete with Celtic.
Your very own money man Stewart Robertson is quoted as saying the club "will need investment" to see out the new season, even with your raised season ticket revenues you are still running at a loss.
King is once again falling into the same trap as all the others, spending money the club does not have and running up more debts in the process. (Not counting all the legal fees the club will have to pay for)
All your fans gloating of big money signings is so far off the mark, you are heading for another administration if your board are not careful. FACT.
29 May 2016 10:09:06
Timalloy. Any sensible Bear will not be gloating or boasting. Yes, things are looking the best for our club for nearly five years. We are back in the SPL next season and showed by beating Kilmarnock, Dundee and Celtic that we aren't far away. I'm sure King and co will be very aware of budgets this time round. We've the makings of a very good team indeed and Barton may prove to be a shrewd signing. Celtic were nothing spectacular last season and it doesn't say much for Scottish football that they were hardly pushed to win the league again, though they couldn't win either of the cups and bombed out of Europe. I'd worry more about Rodgers making Broon his lynchpin next season and we welcome the chase.
29 May 2016 10:22:16
Our fans are not gloating over any signing. Joey Barton arrived because he agreed to take a drop in wages and he also fancies the challenge. Let's get one thing straight. Your club took Brendan Rogers as a reaction to losing the semi final. I would be more concerned about the wages Rogers is being paid than what we do. He is a good appointment Timalloy but if got don't make the champions league "again" where will that leave you.
2.25 million to win the SPFL.
Is that money well spent?
Concern yourself with your own club.
We will do just fine.
29 May 2016 10:22:18
Tell me Tim, were you talking to your bear pals or your ex-bear pals? It's nice of you to warn us all about the spectre of ANOTHER administration. Maybe you're finally having to admit to yourself we're the same club after all eh 😉.
29 May 2016 10:27:43
Get a grip pal, have you access to the financial documents?
Do you do the banking and finance for Rangers?
Every team in the world requires new investment at the start of each season. Your team lives within its means, well done Fergus for splashing your cash.
If you can't handle your Rangers supporting mates comments then tell them you aren't interested.
Don't come on here giving the admin story you lot seem to come out with every month about us. It's not going to happen, FACT.
We are a club on the increase financially, but it takes more than one season to climb over existing debts while still supporting daily running costs.
29 May 2016 10:29:58
What big money signings would that be?
29 May 2016 10:32:27
Ah feck tim. Thanks for the heads up. Just a couple of questions as to how you know this 'fact'
Do you have access to information or accounts the rest of us aren't privy to?
And
Can you see into the future tim, and if so, should we be calling you septic?
29 May 2016 10:33:40
Where did you read that then?
Suggestive terms "need investment" means more than oh we're skint and can't afford to keep going. We don't get the investment we should because of the commercial deals put in place by the other board, which are being disputed as we speak. We've shifted some massive earners from our squad as those players who were just released were on a bonus/ percentage increase for every season we got promoted so signing Joey Barton for what 15k a week makes sense when that's what templeton was near enough on alone.
A new commercial agreement, increased TV, money, more season tickets and general sale tickets and we'd be in good stead. Plus we're only looking to spend 4 million on transfers this year so not overspending as such.
I think we'd be the first to intervene if we suspected any overspending or if we were going backwards. i'm sure you'd be the first to know though given the Financial Experts FC are well and truly in the fold for all things rangers. as per.
29 May 2016 10:39:56
What big money signings? Barton was on a free and his wages aren't breaking the bank. to be honest I don't think we have to spend that much to compete with Celtic. How much money do Celtic owe Desmond? . Rather a lot from what I'm told.
29 May 2016 10:56:12
Oh and you don't pay legal fees in civil matters when you win the case.
29 May 2016 11:00:14
Terrible post, Barton might be on good money but windass, crooks and rossitet won't be on crazy money . you are forgetting that after a couple of years they could be sold for a large profit just like a lot of players in our team . we are in debt to king and ttb but they will be converted to shares I think we have someone scared and green with envy at what is happening at Ibrox.
29 May 2016 11:19:18
Why do you waste your time thinking about rangers finances without realising your own are a mess. You had Derk Boerrigter on 25k a week or more no even on the bench basically retired, as well as putting clowns like brown Lustig Izagere (no i'm no googling his shite name to get the spelling right) Blacket Richards gremlin James Forrest and Boyata all on similar contracts while our wage structure has now only introduced players over the 10k mark, the hat is just getting a contract extension to 12k a week, while your manager takes in 30k more than that, what are YOU going to do if you don't make the champions league this year with all this dead weight? What are you going to do if ambrose decides to sit on his contract for the next year or so? Honestly your own clubs finances are a riot relying solely on champions league qualification as a primary income, and I'm as stupid as you for putting the time in to smite you down you cretin away back to the unwashed forum and we will worry about your own deadweight club.
29 May 2016 11:20:55
when you put IF and FACT in the same line its not a FACT.
29 May 2016 11:21:55
Can you please show us hard evidence of your FACTS or is it a case of your mouth being a few minutes ahead of your brain?
29 May 2016 11:22:25
and the reason you ****ed off and stopped posting is because your teams football was dribble and you couldn't touch us with a barge pole in terms of the quality we played and we showed that in the semifinal, but I'm glad you finally found a reason to post here again, about finances you have no idea about on a forum you have no business being on, obsessed twat.
29 May 2016 11:46:59
With regards to the majority of football fans, all they care about is what happens on the pitch and most of us are hoping that we can challenge Celtic next season. The more staunch fan thinks we will pump Celtic based on the cup game and the more realistic fan knows we will be doing well if we manage to challenge Celtic because they have a much better squad. Our only hope of winning next season is if the Celtic players don't take to Rodgers and they underperform.
With regards to our finances, we are in a mess with a debt close to 20M and as you pointed out, our current business model involves us borrowing more just to survive. Obviously this business model is not sustainable and I reckon our board know that. However, they also know that our fans won't accept playing second fiddle to Celtic and that is why we have signed Barton, to appease the fans so we buy season tickets (you have done the same with Rodgers) . Our board are taking a massive gamble by doing this and if we don't get CL football soon we are in real danger of a 2nd liquidation.
29 May 2016 11:49:25
Not posted in a while?
Would be delighted if you never posted here again.
Can never understand the need for the unwashed to come on here.
29 May 2016 12:06:28
Don't worry about us timalloy. We're heading on the right track. You just worry about your on team and we will see yous on the pitch next season. Dry your tears and don't be jealous. Does it hurt you inside that we are back in the top league. I bet it does FACT!
29 May 2016 12:48:25
You can check our finances at company house if you doubt me. Based on those figures I can say for a fact that we had a debt of 18.1 million pounds when our accounts were filed in March 2016.
So basically we have made losses of nearly 40 million pound to get from the bottom tier of Scottish football to the top tier. I get the 40 million figure by adding our current debt to the money made from share issue as we normally don't have that money.
You may not find this worrying but I do and we will be in deep trouble if we don't reverse the trend and learn how to live within our means.
29 May 2016 13:34:51
Boss Hogg - a debt that's owed to dave king/ "the three bears".
Somethins DK has openly admitted.
Living within our means is what we've done since he's came in.
29 May 2016 13:37:37
Why are "they" so interested in our club? Seems like "they" are all fascinated by Rangers.
29 May 2016 14:03:36
delete reply.
29 May 2016 14:04:21
@Super Ally - to the best of my knowledge 5-6M is owed to a 3rd party in Hong Kong (borrowed to pay back Ashley) and the terms of the loan were never released by the current regime. With regards to the rest, yes it is owed to the 3 bears but I don't think any of it was put in by Dave King.
Regardless of who it is owed to, it will need to be paid back at some point which means it affects future finances as well as our current financial position. The only good thing about the majority of the debt is that it is unsecured and interest free. However, it is not sustainable to continually borrow money every season just to keep the lights on.
I should also point out that if we are now living within our means then we would not need to still borrow money. Not only that last financial year was actually our biggest rise in debt in a season (i. e. 9 million) . In addition we have just released a statement saying we will need to borrow more money to keep the lights on next season, which again does not suggest we are living within our means.
If you doubt what I am saying then why don't you start a business and continually spend more than you make and see how long you last before you are shut down.
29 May 2016 14:18:34
Bosshogg we will not be going into administration again that's nonsense the18.1 million is debt to the 3 bears and king which will be converted into shares they have already clearly stated this. we have operating losses of 9 million on top of that but if the retail deal gets sorted then that will negate a portion of that aswell as a 20 percent rise in season ticket prices and increased revenue from being back in the top division will also help as for living within our means you can't have it both ways people are complaining that we can't compete in the top flight with free transfers and players from league 1 etc surely that in itself shows we are living within our means as we are not spending big sums we can't afford.
29 May 2016 14:46:33
The reality is that we almost went into administration last season because we had a bunch of shadesters plundering the club and giving away the clubs assets.
Not convinced by king but there is absolutely no chance that he and the likes of Murray would let the club go into administration again.
Sorry to disappoint you Tim. Not really.
29 May 2016 14:48:06
I never said we were going into administration, what I said was continually spending more than you make is not sustainable and will lead to a second liquidation.
I disagree with you about the debt only being owed to the three bears as well because I know for a fact that we borrowed money from a consortium in Hong Kong to pay back Ashely. You also say it will be converted into shares but you may have noticed that it is not a possibility at present because Ashley blocked that from happening by taking us to court. Do you honestly think that the current board are going to continually loan us 9M a year from now until eternity? Common sense tells you that it will reach a point where they say enough is enough and cut their loses.
Yes sorting the retail deal would help us financially but there is no guarantee we will win the case and until we do we are going to be spending lots of cash on lawyers fees.
Yes increased season ticket prices and being back in the SPFL will help but I am certain that we already took that into consideration and we have stated that we will still need more loans this season.
Unfortunately for us we are stuck between a rock and a hard place just now. Our current revenue does not allow for us to sign players without borrowing more money. If we don't sign any players then we cannot get into Europe and generate the necessary funds to keep us solvent.
If you want to bury your head in the sand about our financial predicament then feel free to do so and I understand why you would. However, I am more of a realist and prefer to deal with the facts even when they are not particularly pleasant.
29 May 2016 15:01:52
Anyone that says "FACT" at the end of a post yet gives absolutely no facts isn't to be listened to.
Pretty much that simple.
29 May 2016 09:56:08
200,000 for 4 players so far is big money spending is it?
29 May 2016 10:22:29
Timalloy hate to break this to you but Celtic have more debt than Rangers FACT. And do you understand the difference between debt and investment, clearly not.
29 May 2016 15:19:48
So you are saying that it is not a fact that we are in 18.1M debt? Are you saying it is not a fact that we borrowed money from a Hong Kong consortium to pay off Ashley? Are you saying it is not a fact that Mike Ashley took Rangers to court to block the issuing of more shares?
There are legal documents and newspaper stories in reputable papers that show everything I am saying is 100% correct. Just because you may not have seen them or may not be able to understand them does not make me any less right, In fact, your statement only shows your ignorance on the matter.
29 May 2016 15:24:08
Bury my head in the sand about our financial predicament lol your the same person I had to tell we had audited accounts the other day lol I see you finally got round to checking. and I'm not saying for one minute that our financial situation is ideal I'm just saying your point about liquidation is nonsense and did I say the loans would be converted right now mike ashley will hopefully no longer have a say due to new castles relegation so at some point the loans will be converted and as for your knowledge on 5 or 6 million being borrowed from2 hong kong business men they helped along with 3 bears to pay back the 5 million how much of that they paid no one knows so your making those numbers up.
29 May 2016 16:04:34
F85 I am happy to admit that I was wrong when I said there were not audited accounts. However, I don't think you can blame the majority of us for not knowing about them. The reason I say that is that our board released a set of unaudited accounts before the audited accounts. These unaudited accounts were well publicised in the MSM and on our website as they had failed to put in all the bad bits. Then not long after the unaudited accounts we produced a set of audited accounts which were not on our website and were not given much column inches in the press. I actually had to do a bit of digging to find them.
You say my point about liquidation in nonsense which I also find hard to understand because it means you think that you can continually spend more than you make without danger of ever being liquidated. (you may notice that I am not saying we will be liquidated only that if we continue doing what we are doing we will)
With regards the loan to pay Ashley, I was going of memory of what I read at the time. However, it would appear that Dave King through a separate company, Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor had contributed along with director John Bennett and two additional Hong Kong based businessmen, Barry Scott and Andy Ross. The actual amount was 6.5M. As you and I both said we don't know the actual details of this loan.
29 May 2016 17:24:20
M8 I'm not saying for a minute we can continually spend more than what we make I understand that would be unsustainable just feel that the talk of liquidation is a bit harsh I no dave king inparticular hasn't done hi self any favours with the 30 million war chest comments but I feel that the board definitely deserve some plaudits for what they have achieved in a short space of time they have certainly steadied the ship, the negativity really annoys me after the Motherwell game last year we were at our lowest we have now won the league convincingly with a good style of football and beat celtic to get to the sc final and have a board with rangers genuine interest at heart who imo wouldn't let us go into administration / liquidation yet some people still look for a way to be negative.
29 May 2016 18:48:54
If you were to ask me if I was happier at the end of this season than I was at the same time last season, then it would be a resounding yes.
As you rightly pointed out we have made great progress on the pitch and the brand of football is vastly superior than McCoist's brand. Not only that I think we have a good manager who is capable of developing players, which is essential for us because we do have limited funds.
I personally realise that we are in a transition phase and that it is going to take time to challenge for the league and this is what worries me, coupled with the fact that we are continuing to rack up debt. While I personally accept we are where we are and the sensible thing to do is to proceed with caution and not to over spend. However, I don't think all the fans will share my patience if we are not beating Celtic. Rangers need the fans support now more than ever. If we are to become financially secure we are going to need to fill Ibrox every week.
29 May 2016 22:44:26
As long as the team is there to play ever other week, that's all that matters.
29 May 2016 23:34:22
BOSSHOGG, we will never go into Adminstration again believe me, onwards and upwards.
30 May 2016 11:28:18
@WhatATeam - When you have a debt that is larger than your turnover you need to be worried. The lack of transparency at the club is also worrying, especially when King promised us transparency (among other things) that he has not delivered.
If you go on the SFA website and check our membership status for finance, we are listed as basic which is the lowest possible status. We have a long way to go before we can stop worrying. Personally I will continue to worry and question the board until I see the debt come down and the need for loans disappear. If you want to think everything is rosy then that is upto you but I know different.