StuGers 477 Posted January 15, 2017 Share Posted January 15, 2017 Mr. Waddell, Rangers didn't go into into administration due to overspending. It was due to a fraudster putting the company into administration on purpose. Something that he had done previously, yet the Daily Record peddled the story of his "off the charts" wealth. WAS THAT THE TRUTH? If you took some time to look at the facts, Rangers were reducing their debt year-on-year. You don't mention that as it doesn't suit your agenda. You don't mention that in your article. WHY NOT PRINT THAT TRUTH? Now Mr. Waddell, why would any Rangers fans take your article to have any truth in it? How many retractions, corrections or even apologies have you had to issue in recent history on articles relating to Rangers or the fan's of Rangers? In fact, one of your articles made out the fans to be thugs who used their children as human shields. WAS THAT THE TRUTH? No it wasn't. It was a lie. Yet you still employ that sectarian woman. WHY SHOULD ANY RANGERS TAKE ANY LESSONS ON WHAT IS THE TRUTH FROM THE DAILY RECORD? They shouldn't. As it is full of proven lies. Time and time again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I think the core of the article is true...however the delivery is terrible. The rebuilding of the club will take time. Whyte & Green stripped the club to it's bare minimum - both on the park and behind the scenes. These things are being rebuild & it appears to be going well so far. Up until this season, the club was getting a pittance from the SFA etc due to being out of the top league. After this season, our coffers will be fuller. Next season, we should hopefully pull in extra cash via the Europa league - not 10's of £M's - but enough to see a healthy boost in the bank balance. Once we start regularly bring in that EXTRA cash, that is when we look to start some decent spending on players. The club must be financially stable, with regular streams of income before we consider increasing debt levels. At the moment our income streams are increasing @ a good rate, but we must not get careless. As for the mantle falling on Rangers to Challenge Celtic.....Hearts, Aberdeen etc have had the past 4 years to mount their challenge & have failed to do so. We are the ONLY club realistically capable of mounting any challenge. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Next season I can't see us being so relatively far behind Celtic in income even with the CL money. I think we'll jump from about 20m to the low 30s. I think they will increase to be up to close to 60m. The difference will be several million in merchandising, several million in prize money, a few million in gate receipts, and the CL money which might be up to 20m gross but probably a lot less net. Our two biggest problems are merchandising and CL money - with the latter really skewing the figures hugely for two similar clubs. I don't think UEFA know how bad their system is for the smaller leagues with only one entrant - especially as the money is of such a high order compared to other income in these countries. It means if a team gets to the CL a few years in a row, they have such an advantage they will continue to win the league and get there. It's too much of a golden circle. All countries need two clubs to have a potential path to the riches to give the second or third team a chance to get on an even pegging. We pretty much need Celtic to go out of both while we have a half decent Europa run. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Next season I can't see us being so relatively far behind Celtic in income even with the CL money. I think we'll jump from about 20m to the low 30s. I think they will increase to be up to close to 60m. The difference will be several million in merchandising, several million in prize money, a few million in gate receipts, and the CL money which might be up to 20m gross but probably a lot less net. Our two biggest problems are merchandising and CL money - with the latter really skewing the figures hugely for two similar clubs. I don't think UEFA know how bad their system is for the smaller leagues with only one entrant - especially as the money is of such a high order compared to other income in these countries. It means if a team gets to the CL a few years in a row, they have such an advantage they will continue to win the league and get there. It's too much of a golden circle. All countries need two clubs to have a potential path to the riches to give the second or third team a chance to get on an even pegging. We pretty much need Celtic to go out of both while we have a half decent Europa run. Also, of note with Ceptic. They may pull in £40m+ (or whatever it is).....but very little of that actually gets invested in the team - maybe £10-12m.......where does the other £30m go??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Us going into administration had nothing to do with over spending!, I keep hearing this from the gutter press, fans and ex managers/players..... That's not true. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 (edited) Next season I can't see us being so relatively far behind Celtic in income even with the CL money. I think we'll jump from about 20m to the low 30s. I think they will increase to be up to close to 60m. The difference will be several million in merchandising, several million in prize money, a few million in gate receipts, and the CL money which might be up to 20m gross but probably a lot less net. Our two biggest problems are merchandising and CL money - with the latter really skewing the figures hugely for two similar clubs. I don't think UEFA know how bad their system is for the smaller leagues with only one entrant - especially as the money is of such a high order compared to other income in these countries. It means if a team gets to the CL a few years in a row, they have such an advantage they will continue to win the league and get there. It's too much of a golden circle. All countries need two clubs to have a potential path to the riches to give the second or third team a chance to get on an even pegging. We pretty much need Celtic to go out of both while we have a half decent Europa run. It's called the Champions League for a reason. There's already too many teams in it without giving the diddy leagues automatic entry. If Scotland is to get 2 places back, it needs to be earned. Edited January 16, 2017 by Ser Barristan Selmy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERRAB 3,396 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 That's not true. No Whyte would have meant no administration. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 Also, of note with Ceptic. They may pull in £40m+ (or whatever it is).....but very little of that actually gets invested in the team - maybe £10-12m.......where does the other £30m go??? I would say on wages... The rest on operation running costs. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 No Whyte would have meant no administration. Yet... We still have to win the appeal in the BTC. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 3,938 Posted January 16, 2017 Share Posted January 16, 2017 I think we can do better with the money that we have. Money doesn't guarantee success either. 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.