calscot 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Jelavic for a start, we still own money for him Plenty of clubs owe money for players - payments are usually spread. How do you know that the Jelavic debt won't be paid in the next year or two? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Well, we were apparantly making a loss of over £1million a month. We could afford it when SDM was rich and able to bankroll things, but not when he lost the majority of his fortune (hence his EBT shenanigans), and certainly not when he sold to a man without any money of his own. These myths really get to me. How can a club that reduces its debt from £33m to £18m in three years be making a loss of £12m a year? Surely the debt would have increased to £69m? Maybe you need to think about the basic arithmetic? Due to the way Whyte ran things last year, Rangers made a shortfall. It was not a normal and continuous, operational loss. I would also disagree that Murray bankrolled us and when he paid up with the share issue, it was only a few years worth of debt that he himself created through mismanagement that he was paying off. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 6,070 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Well, we were apparantly making a loss of over £1million a month. We could afford it when SDM was rich and able to bankroll things, but not when he lost the majority of his fortune (hence his EBT shenanigans), and certainly not when he sold to a man without any money of his own. Murray never "bankrolled" us. He stuck in £10m at the same time as King invested and them there was the £50m rights issue when he was forced to bring the debt down but that is it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 I think many people who on the surface, think of themselves as fans, have to actually work out if they are more like customers after all. People have to realise that for the team to compete the way they would like, needs money and patronage - so while people baulk at £400 for div 3 football you have to realise you get what you pay for and the fans have the biggest ownership in this. Do you want a half decent team that sweeps all before them on a march back to the SPL, or to pay for an above average div 3 team and battle your way to the top watching that level of football? And at that level of spend, it may take a long time. If you're a fan rather than a customer you're part of team and your money decides what level of "equipment" the team has. If you started competing at something yourself and seen your level as a lot higher than where you start would you pay for the level of equipment for where you aspire to be, or think, "I'm only in the lower division so I'm only prepared to buy cheap stuff". Say it's cycling, do you buy a bike from Halfords or a proper carbon framed bike from a decent shop with decent components? It depends on your level of ambition I suppose and how much you can afford. Our level of ambition is the SPL and so we need an SPL team to get there and so we need to pay SPL prices. Paying less for lower quality is only sabotaging your own goals and I can't see how that will be satisfying. People have to decide whether they are part of the team, in ownership of the club, or merely spectators looking for value for money. Yeah, I'm not sure about this. Your cycling analogy only works if you're cycling around a velodrome, but if you're cycling through your public park, over curbs, round prams, slowing down for dogs and trying to avoid rain filled pot holes you might be grateful your bike came from Halfords because the carbon fibre racing bike isn't suited for that terrain. Once you've made the journey to the racing track you can use your carbon fibre bike again. It would be foolish for us as a club to try and sign or keep SPL players for the 3rd Div. For a start the cost is prohibitive, you'd be looking at 3 year contracts, agents fees and insurance on top of any transfer fee (assuming we're allowed to sign someone). Then you have the motivation issue. Why would an SPL player with any ambition want to play in Div 3? Okay, for some a love of the club will play a part, and indeed the chance to say they played for Rangers will be an attraction, but for most, even the bluenoses will struggle to adapt to the drop in level. Motivation on the field is a factor too. How often have we seen our club struggle against obviously inferior players and teams? Plenty, because in reality it is harder to motivate a better player to perform against a poorer one than the other way around. For me it isn't a lack of ambition that means we'll need to sign some Div 3 players, it's the opposite. We'll need players who know that level, who know the players and personalities at that level, who know that someone is weak on their left side, another is easily wound up but can shoot from distance etc. Don't underestimate the need for knowledge. Just because you have better players doesn't mean you'll win, it's a team game and the team must be greater than the sum of its parts. It would be essential that we brought someone in on the coaching side who knew that level too. If we can secure a handful of experienced players, players like McCulloch, who have played at lower levels and understand the game I'd be happy to build a squad around him using younger players and lower league players. I'd be very happy to see the club approach Barry Ferguson and see if he fancies spending the twilight of his career rebuilding the his reputation and his old club. By all means have a couple of top players at the end of their careers who could still be playing at a higher level, that makes sense. But I think it is unrealistic and potentially ruinous to go into that Division with a team of SPL players and SPL salaries. All of this is of course hypothetical. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,890 Posted June 13, 2012 Author Share Posted June 13, 2012 Jelavic for a start, we still own money for him As posted yesterday, almost every club in world football pays and accepts services (including transfers) in instalments. C'est la vie when one loses out due to financial difficulties of others. Finally, the original post says Rangers fans are as disappointed, embarrassed and angry as anyone else at the dubious actions of our recent owners. It's a real shame people won't accept this in their eagerness to point the finger. Even worse when it's our own doing so. Do you just sit and nod at your work as these people have a go at your club, Hamy? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Before Whyte arrived things were difficult but not impossible, the Club was paying its way. Whyte engineered this situation. He increased our overheads by giving unsustainable increases to a number of players, a big chunk of the season ticket money went to ticketus causing cash flow problems, he was working towards liquidation from the day and hour he got involved in the Club. Up till then the Club had been getting by. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Am not putting us down am just stating the obvoius Don't think you've stated anything obvious or even understandable so far. One line statements are never the way to gain respect for contentious views; so what is it you are trying to achieve? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 6,070 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 These myths really get to me. How can a club that reduces its debt from £33m to £18m in three years be making a loss of £12m a year? Surely the debt would have increased to £69m? Maybe you need to think about the basic arithmetic? We made a loss of £20m before player sales and tax in 2009 and the debt increased from £21m to £31m. It's not unreasonable to think that the operating loss could have been close to £12m last season. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 Before Whyte arrived things were difficult but not impossible, the Club was paying its way. Whyte engineered this situation. He increased our overheads by giving unsustainable increases to a number of players, a big chunk of the season ticket money went to ticketus causing cash flow problems, he was working towards liquidation from the day and hour he got involved in the Club. Up till then the Club had been getting by. The club were getting by but that is ignoring the 4000lb gorilla in the room... Whyte did what he did for a reason - an attempt to slay the gorilla and make a tidy sum for himself in the process. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted June 13, 2012 Share Posted June 13, 2012 We made a loss of £20m before player sales and tax in 2009 and the debt increased from £21m to £31m. It's not unreasonable to think that the operating loss could have been close to £12m last season. That would go against most of the evidence and messages from the board. I could swallow something like a £5m loss which could have been cleared by the sale of Jelavic but £12m? What the hell was Muir doing then? We had massive cuts since 2009 which reduced our squad dramatically as well as the wages. You also have to wonder then, how Celtic can afford a much bigger squad on not that much more income than us and still make a small profit... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.