chilledbear 16 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 I think we can expect some serious cost cutting measures and not before time perhaps. However it's hard to see how he can save money on players wages unless we can ship some out on loan; can't see the likes of Cribari, Smith, Shiels etc attracting much transfer interest. Templeton possibly, but more likely a loan candidate as well. There might be players going on loan, but I would bet Rangers will be paying a good proportion of their wages. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Going on loan is no use, that merely prolongs the problems. We need them OFF the wage bill PERMANENTLY. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTinMan99 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Our playing staff wage bill isn't the problem, although it's arguably excessive for the level we're playing at. We have a business model that requires Champions league money, just to almost break even. All this while playing in the lowest two tiers in Scottish football. We can expect a hefty season ticket hike, and having to borrow funds from the self-same people that put us in this mess. They may well dress it up as 'investment', but past history doesn't suggest it will be to clubs benefit. We may well have to have to hit rock bottom again before we rid the club of these parasites. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Our playing staff wage bill isn't the problem, although it's arguably excessive for the level we're playing at. We have a business model that requires Champions league money, just to almost break even. All this while playing in the lowest two tiers in Scottish football. We can expect a hefty season ticket hike, and having to borrow funds from the self-same people that put us in this mess. They may well dress it up as 'investment', but past history doesn't suggest it will be to clubs benefit. We may well have to have to hit rock bottom again before we rid the club of these parasites. Arguably TinMan? We are using a sledgehammer to batter in a flooring pin. There are no clubs in our league or the league above who have even 1/10 of our budget. His budget could be cut by 90% and he should still be expected to win the league comfortably. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Arguably TinMan? We are using a sledgehammer to batter in a flooring pin. There are no clubs in our league or the league above who have even 1/10 of our budget. His budget could be cut by 90% and he should still be expected to win the league comfortably. None of the clubs we're playing against have 10% of our budget because they don't have 10% of our turnover. I also doubt any of the teams in our league have a player wage bill less than 5% of their turnover which is the level you're suggesting we should cut back to. Just because we've been forced to play against minnows doesn't mean we should reduce ourselves to that standard. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tumshie RFC 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 The club should be aiming to break even every year. We need to have a more streamlined club and the board need to be looking at ways of maximising revenues in other areas. We simply don't do enough to build our brand across the globe. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 4,035 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Well, we had the budget issue last year and people willing us to sell most people and buy a QoS-lookalike for the time being. To essentially have what, a budget that is a touch more competitive to where we are now and a team that would be made up of ex-half-pros? Or throw in all the youngsters who swapped company? Maybe some did not notice that we not eased passed all teams even in the fourth tier, and matter of fact played some of the most woeful football ever done by a Rangers team ... and did that for weeks. So how do people think to balance that and have a) a decent enough team that will (and not might) ease past the rest of Division One and the Championship and b) provide decent enough football that will attract 30k plus ST people and investors alike? TV deals et al are done by our grade of attraction and I for one don't want that to become a show of miserable failures on the park against decent enough part-timers who simply know their trade or have a good night out there. We can obviously cry foul about our current wage bill of probably still the best supported team in the country. But compare that current squad wage bill to seasons past, where income was or was not generated by European money too (and resulted in massive debts). I guess we are running at roughly a third of that right now? IMHO, we were rather prudent during the summer and our only failure was to get some of the peripheral folk off the bill along the way, one way or another. We bit the bullet (and half of that voluntarily) and need to see that any money coming in is used in an appropriate manner from now on. As some have already said, King could come in in a win-win scenario, lend the club money against e.g. Ibrox and/or Auchenhowie. Give him a pay-back plan over 20 years or he gets the keys of Ibrox. Anyway, people outwith our reach will do what they deem necessary. We'll see what this will include in due course. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrahimHemdani 1 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 There might be players going on loan, but I would bet Rangers will be paying a good proportion of their wages. More than likely that will be the case. I would not be in the least bit surprised if the entire playing staff were told that there will need to be a hefty across the board cut in wages if a number are not transferred. And yes deja vu. I realise of course that all players are on fixed term contracts but I wonder if the new CEO couldn't simply say that after a thorough review it has been determined that we only need x number of first team players (which would be approx. the current number minus 10 say) or can only afford a budget of £y milliion for the rest of the season and therefore players a , b, c , d, e, f, g, h, I and j are hereby made redundant (subject to the appropriate consultation period). A first team squad of more than 30 players including 7 CB's and a dozen midfielders just cannot be justified at this level or indeed any level of Scottish football. Something ruthless has to happen and Wallace might just be the man to do it. It will need something like that to convince investors to put in more serious money. Ally must have been on the Christmas spirit a bit early. There's no chance of him being allowed to bring anyone in unless a lot of others are shipped out and/or he and his staff take the much promised pay cut and finance newcomers themselves. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTinMan99 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 Arguably TinMan? We are using a sledgehammer to batter in a flooring pin. There are no clubs in our league or the league above who have even 1/10 of our budget. His budget could be cut by 90% and he should still be expected to win the league comfortably. I said arguably because we have more than enough income to support playing staff costs. You could argue that a lesser standard of player would affect crowds, enjoyment etc. I agree that a lot has been wasted though with Sandaza/Kyle etc. Our playing costs can only get higher as we progress. I don't see much wiggle room for cut-backs on the playing side. Not enough to impact on the direness of our position. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted December 23, 2013 Share Posted December 23, 2013 None of the clubs we're playing against have 10% of our budget because they don't have 10% of our turnover. I also doubt any of the teams in our league have a player wage bill less than 5% of their turnover which is the level you're suggesting we should cut back to. Just because we've been forced to play against minnows doesn't mean we should reduce ourselves to that standard. I understand all of that but there is obviously a balance to be found. The percentages to turnover and wages talk is nonsense though. If we can win the leagues we are in whilst paying a fraction of what we currently are then we should have done that. We have easily wasted at least £10m in wages over the last 2 years. Paying players thousands of pounds per week to play in these part time leagues is just wrong. We cannot keep paying so much more than our rivals as we go up the leagues. When in the SPL we won't be able to outspend Celtic, we will need someone with enough knowledge and ambition to beat them within budget, not someone who wants to bring out a cheque book when he wants. Fans will demand we beat them and win titles despite not being financially on the same level. 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.