Rangers Banter Archive October 09 2013

09 Oct 2013 16:52:57
What's the point of getting Dave kings millions if the business model continues?

There is none. He, or someone of similar ilk, has to be in charge with a complete clear out of the rogues.

He could be a director maybe even chairman and have big input on how the clubs being run

Dave King needs to be part of a takeover and must be the prominent figure

I think Dave King would want control, would not get that with current bunch of chancers.

@1) ok but whoever goes in needs to spend less than £19m a year.
Cause that's the revenue ceiling. Or do u want Santa Claus to chip in with £20m extra each year to chase Celtic? Getting from here to challenging Celtic needs a £50m cash catch up injection.

There is no chance of Dave King investing unless all of Green's men are gone. This will include the major investors and I'm sure there will be interesting dialogue with the Easdales.
He'll need assistance and I am sure Brian Kennedy would be the right choice.
billyb

It's a £19m revenue club who needs more than £19m to win div 3, div 2, div1? Spending £34m to win part time fourth div is careless.
SPEND NO MORE THAN £19m this season and next season.
Accounts are one thing but where's the cash flow forecasts?

There needs to be a total clearout in order for the club to move on and have a chance at challenging Celtic. The entire board, the manager, coaching staff and the people who are in charge of the continually failing youth academy. King can only be involved as owner and he needs to show the over rated and inept manager the door first

@5. 50m to catch Celtic! Your having a laugh. It wouldn't take much to catch them!

I agree that the current business model does not work.

Unless there is a complete change in the business model. Along with a realistic wage structure and youth policy

Unless a new way forward is found our great club will stumble along as a method for rogues and thieves to rob the loyal fans.

Again I question Sir David Murray in his haste in selling for £1?

09 Oct 2013 21:12:26
I'm praying dave king comes home to take up his position as owner of rangers, I have been for 2 yrs now, he won't accept any remnants unless they are really involved in rangers welfare, everything King did was open and honest were we were concerned, he warned us all about what was happening, he gave sdm millions so we could sign great players and win titles, he is born and bred blue red and white
He has to all intents and purposes won his dispute with the SARS, he is delighted with the outcome, is there anyone else who ticks these boxes? Maybe we can hope that he and mcoll can finally join forces to take us away from the precipice, it amazes me how some gers fans (?) Can take the likes of mathers side, he is not a gers fan, he is a moneyman, end of, David Murray tore our club to pieces when he decided to sell to a rogue who he knew was going to take us down, murray could have went to the Rangers fans and explained he needed help, he didn't, he sleeked away like the rat he is, we desperately need men like Mr King and Allister Johnston, and even MM, to sort this mess out now, hopefully the end is in sight, we can't take any more heartbreak,, now I await the objectionists who can't see the wood for the trees,
Tommyblue

@11 agree with your take on Murray total rat who ran away in the middle of the night like a thief and left Rangers to possibly one of the most contemptable weasels in the country. Astonished that he has been able to walk away scot free {The Ed039's Note - Walk away?)

09 Oct 2013 21:45:33
Can somebody tell me why Easdales bros get such bad press for a minor VAT fraud but DK is welcome with open arms after having to pay forty four million to SA tax authorities or spend 2 years in jail?

Found not guilty--- you're having a laugh!

Easdales have put their money in when it mattered and %wise probably more than DK ever did so why not give them a chance, DK is a Rangers man but so are they! {The Ed039's Note - I will tell you now, some of the answers to the question you ask I will not be able to publish)

@10 I agree all roads eventually come back to David Murray. The bunnet did so many things right which helped the Eastenders. Hire Hampden for a year to allow the construction of a much larger stadium which any construction cost analyst will tell you is a far cheaper option than doing it the piece meal 1 stand at a time way David Murray did. Also on a match day their potential income is always 20% bigger than ours.
He did try to increase the revenue streams with a state of the art Hotel which bears could have stayed in before and after matches and could have hosted weddings christenings, birthdays and funerals etc. But wee Dick Advocat threatened to walk out if he did not build the youth academy- Murray Park. Now that is a great idea and what Rangers should be doing - producing their own homegrown talent then selling on at decent profits the harvest from the academy. However the huge gap between expenditure and income forced Murray/ Smith to chase the champions league money which kept the club afloat. This conundrum of needing to win the league every year to get the finances to plug the gaps was a vicious circle and effectively negated the Youth facility. The stark choice facing Rangers is build for the future with youth accepting any transfer fees for more marketable players like Wallace and Templeton whilst still cutting costs or go for broke by hiring Hampden and rebuilding a larger Ibrox with greater revenue generating potential such as integral hotel. Or the unthinkable in most bears eyes sell Ibrox and rebuild a purpose built facility somewhere else- won't work- ask Arsenal. Highbury was their shrine but a new 60,000 stadium with an extra 15,000 bums on seats every home game has transformed that club. Whatever decision is made for the future the current costs are too high for the paltry income and that is not just staff costs it is premises and upkeep also. Keep Murray Park if you are going to give youth it's chance if not then sell the place- wrong option IMO but things need to change big time.
Rangers couldn't fill a 60,000 stadium? Try telling that to the thousands locked out the pay at the gate Davie Cooper testimonial or the 65,000 inside the old Ibrox when John Greig paraded round Ibrox in a chariot with the old first division title in 1978. (Someone forgot to tell Airdrie who one and almost spoiled the day)

N13 is that you mr easdale the lse don't show you having anywhere near the shares you claim to own I disagree with your post completly and I have answered your post in the most polite way so as it will be posted

@13 dave king put in 20mill how much have easdales put in?
the worst post I have ever heard

South Africa is lovely this time of year. Just approaching high summer. A nice wee first class jaunt would be fine. Maybe take in some time on a game reserve whilst enjoying a good hotel. Not much change from 20 grand. Per person.

09 Oct 2013 09:03:33
but I have a sense of optimism for the simple reason that RANGERS IS TO BIG A CLUB AND TO GREAT AN INSTITUTION TO CONTINUE TO RUN IN THE MANNER IT IS AT THE MOMENT. Walter Smith

Aye Les, but he also said

“You can’t sit on the board of directors at Ibrox and tell the Rangers fans, ‘We can’t afford to do this. ’ You have to go out and find the money to do it.

“If you get into the Champions League you make a profit. Celtic have shown that. So Rangers have to use their money to create a situation where they put a challenge in to Celtic.

“That’s the gamble you take. It’s not a sensible gamble but that’s what you have to do. "

The last part about gambling is exactly where the club don't want to be. It will be three years at least before competitive european football is played at Ibrox.

And also, its the fans money that the club is gambling with. The directors are custodians of the club on behalf of the fans.

The same mistakes in the past should not be repeated as it messes about with the emotional bond that the fans have with club. And leaves the club in disarray. OKJaz

Walter knows cause he was there. LAST TIME. Didn't do him much harm tho'

And the titanic was too big to sink

09 Oct 2013 10:34:59
Question guys, in the last 20 years how many of those years have Rangers made a profit?

Very well put okjaz. it was a rallying call for the AGM nothing more, the points you raise will need to be brought up after what's left of the spivs are asked to leave. and the fans asked what direction the club is to go. Les

@4) RFC since SDM bought it was reported to be technically insolvent every year he owned it.

This new piece from Smith following from yesterday reflects his piece prior to the first administration. Same language even mentioning admin as the tool for change. Smith speaks conflicting nonsense at times actually, but I think he called King last night and there's no money going in. Smith knows it and hence this gem of more pain. Smith himself has been useless in all this.

I think the Celtic board proven to be prudent operators have a completely different philosophy to Smith. This spend big with what you don't have and gamble rhetoric is grossly incompetent. The guy clearly thinks money takes care of itself, it always turns up in bucketloads and it turns out fine as this is rangers. Utter incompetence. Keep him far far away. Right there is the problem and McCoist has stated the same stuff. Money isn't his problem he'll keep demanding better players.

Well it as some said another admin. and an aside to this see that sfa are to relagate clubs that go into admin. funny how that comes out on the same day. Les

@7 how have the celtic board been prudent operators am pretty sure celtic wer in debt until last seasons run in the cl so all that proves getting into cl is how you make money and also Lennon stated that had they not qualified this season more players would have been sold and was celtics figures for last season 20m players sold and between 20-25 m from cl but only 10m profit and season before that was a 7m loss

Celtics profit was before the sales of Hooper, wanyama and Wilson

09 Oct 2013 12:51:56
�All the people saying this, that and the next thing don�t realise that you can�t sit on the board of directors and tell people: �We can�t afford to do this. �

Walter Smith.

Lots of directors have to do that Walter and much as it pains me to say it Lawwell has the right idea. Can't believe so many Celtic fans only months ago wanted them to sign a centre forward for over 5 million. A couple of early KOs from the CL qualifers and they're in trouble and to be honest no Scottish club can take the group stages for granted.

When ill it sink in that football clubs like the OF can't afford to gamble.

@9 you answered your own question. if Celtic did not make the CL they would have sold more players, not gone out and bought more! Honestly!

@9, the point is Celtic could handle thier debt for they keep it reasonable and not so far out of reach to hurt the club. Selling players is part of the game and with the talent they bring in they would make good money off of a sale and pay down the reasonable/manageable debt. That is the key and not over spending!

@12) & 13) hence Celtic ARE prudent operators.
Debt isn't a problem it's too much unrepayable debt.

Celtic or Rangers or any other club from a similar league set-up cannot spend to 'guarantee' CL football - suicidal madness. Teams from Scotland will have 3 qualifier rounds for the next 5 years or so. Celtic scraped in just and will make a few million profit on the season. that's it. Not worth risk. Rangers will keep making that 14M loss per year until they are in Europe

@15) Celtic lost three vital players at the beginning of their season, to their criticism they were still doing striker business well into the CL qualifiers, it should have been done earlier, more so with the Wanyama/Hooper money banked.

But that aside they will be qualifier seeds for as many years as it comes and by that route SHOULD qualify each time, this while essentially being in a one horse race domestic league. So Celtic don't need to spend to "guarantee" CL football in the sense of being the team representing Scotland or indeed to beat qualifiers but it sure as hell makes them more competitive when they get there.

Celtic made £9m last year, are already £10m or so net profiteers from player sales this year, add CL on top of that and I think your "few million profit" will be out a good bit too.

Rangers will keep making that £14 million loss, as long as they keep paying their players, their manager and coaches, their Directors, those ridiculuos wages, with the sort of crowds they get and the loyal supporters they have they should be the most solvent club in europe.

@17

There has been a ridiculous vanishing of funds since Greens' reign began. There is no need for same spending or 'wastage' as a lot of those fees went on 'one off' payments. Still would not trust the chancers around at the moment. They need to do a vanishing act themselves, without leaving any baggage.

09 Oct 2013 21:34:17
I think celtic do run a tight ship, nowadays, not always, most clubs have learnt a valuable lesson in the last couple of years, celtic are extremely fortunate that they can depend on funds from overseas benefactors, they know that simple cl qualification will keep the cashflow decent and out of danger, they buy and sell, we will do the same soon hopefully, What has happened to Rangers could really have been any big club, the guy who owned it loved the glory so much he forgot to tell anyone he didn't actually have the cash to fund the good times, so he walked away and handed our club over to rats, leaving us decent taxpaying supporters to suffer the abuse and hatred of other fans and indeed some journalists who determined never to comment on the heartbreak we the fans suffered, simply to highlight what Rangers had done, well it may have been Rangers in name but nobody I have ever met knew anything about it, nor would ever want it, this is not a plea or a excuse, it is a fact,
Tommyblue

N14 you hit the nail on the head mate and most posts have not tippled to your point but I catch your drift its a good job people can not see round corners eh