Frankie 8,552 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 http://www.gersnetonline.net/newsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=587&Itemid=1 From the Rangers FC plc accounts - 30/06/2007 "Net debt at the year end stood at GBP16.5m (2006 - GBP5.9m). The increase in the net debt position from last year primarily reflects the trading loss in the period, working capital movements, investment in the playing squad, and costs associated with the exit from our retail operations." [1] Obviously since then we've also spent around Ã?£12million on transfers (including Carlos Cuellar, Steven Whittaker and Lee McCulloch as well as signing on fees and other associated costs). Our reasonable performance in the Champions' League and the expected sale of Daniel Cousin would probably cancel most of that out. As such, when Rangers release their interim accounts at the end of February, I think it's fair to say that the status quo will be the case when we examine the news with regard to the net debt figure. Given our current 4 point lead in the SPL and our continued presence in all other competitions (including the UEFA Cup), the relative financial gamble taken by the plc board has paid off. Now, as we all know, despite the various sound-bites and extravagant media fairy-tales about Ã?£700million Ibrox regeneration projects, Sir David Murray has been actively trying to sell the club over the last 2 years. Several parties have showed an interest but for whatever reason nothing concrete has resulted. The most obvious reason for that is the increased debt from 06-07 as well as other limited ways for any investors to A) make money or B) be imaginative with almost all club revenue streams being outsourced in the medium-long term. Add in an unsuccessful team for nearly 3 years, Rangers FC are not the glamorous investment opportunity that we all like to think they are. As such, the question that would immediately arise for a chairman who wants to sell is – how can I improve the situation and how can I make the club more attractive to any buyers (let’s not mention large-scale investors as we’ve not had any now for a long time)? That’s a very difficult question to answer and one he’s tried and failed to since 2005. Any solutions have been running out. Step forward Alan Hutton. Hutton has been outstanding since around November 2006. Even under Paul Le Guen he regained the form he showed when he initially broke into the team under Alex McLeish and since then he’s grown in stature at every level. Outstanding Champions’ League performances and Man-of-the-Match displays for Scotland have helped his value soar beyond that of any outfield player in Scottish football history. No shortage of teams have expressed an interest with Spurs being the first to offer a Ã?£10million package to entice the player to London and the wages gravy train that is the English Premier League. Thus, if you deduct that Ã?£10million from the figure in the opening paragraph you have a much improved financial situation to report. In many ways such transfers are the only way our team can compete in monetary terms with the bigger European leagues. Quite simply, we need to survive and profiting from our improving youth system is one such source of oxygen – no matter how disappointed we’d be to lose our better players. Meanwhile with the club leading the league, the fans reasonably happy with progress and consultation reports complete into expanding the stadium (although not to the scale mentioned in the media), suddenly the ‘For Sale’ sign above our stadium seems much more alluring to buyers. More so, if automatic CL qualification is secured and (as revealed recently) the club are again negotiating with the ‘European Club Association’ – an independent body but recognised by FIFA/UEFA. I think it’s fair to say no Rangers fan wants Alan Hutton to leave. However, the above shows that his sale makes business sense from every point of view. Most fans will be happy with a reduced debt offering further opportunity for more transfer funds (who can remember the ‘Capucho Days’ of earlier this decade?) while other fans will be happy that the chances of the club administration and owner moving on have increased. Nevertheless, business sense doesn’t always win trophies in football. That’s what we all want. The SPL championship must return to our club and it’s up to Sir David Murray to deliver it. The sale of Alan Hutton may well be the right thing for the future of our club but compromise must be found in terms of ensuring that when we do have to sell any key players we can still compete successfully. That’s a challenge we’ve failed upon in recent years and another season without domestic silverware is wholly unacceptable. We have to decide what the costs will be in changing that and are we willing to pay them? [1] - http://www.plusmarketsgroup.com/story.shtml?ISIN=GB0007237380/GBP/PLUS-exn&NewsID=25453 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delbear 0 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 good read as norm m8 :cheers: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon 0 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Agreed a good read. I think we all know that the sale of Hutton will be very good business, just like our club to be in a position where we didnt encourage a player to leave because of the money we would get. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delbear 0 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Agreed a good read. I think we all know that the sale of Hutton will be very good business, just like our club to be in a position where we didnt encourage a player to leave because of the money we would get. not good business if we lose the spl....... need good players to win it 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Good read Frankie. Not sure I agree entirely that it does make good business sense - on the face of it then yes..... but automatic CL qualification goes tot he SPL winners and we have a better chance of winning the league with Hutton in our team (at least until the summer) and the CL riches that are then to be gained. To me it would be a win-win for club and player if we waited till the summer to sell Hutton. We get a guy on top form till the end of the season, Hutton gets to stay as he would like, the club potentially get to win the league and then auto CL qualification. We then sell Hutton (won't be for any less than currently touted), the club get CL riches, the club potentially win the league. That makes far more sense to me - but then no doubt SDM will be trying to reduce the debt in the current accounting year and selling in the summer would go into next years accounts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 people seem to forget this is NOT our debt. this is david murrays debt. as fans it is none of our concern. its like caring about someone elses credit card bill. im dismayed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 people seem to forget this is NOT our debt. this is david murrays debt. as fans it is none of our concern. its like caring about someone elses credit card bill. im dismayed. hopefully we can get a buyer soon and someone who cares about the club, surely there must be someone out there!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazza_8 233 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 people seem to forget this is NOT our debt. this is david murrays debt. as fans it is none of our concern. its like caring about someone elses credit card bill. im dismayed. That's the impression I was always under. DM is using Rangers to free the debt up in his other businesses. Looking at the bigger picture, I suppose we should worry about the way DM goes about business cause it has an adverse affect on us as fans are beginning to figure out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,552 Posted January 29, 2008 Author Share Posted January 29, 2008 people seem to forget this is NOT our debt. this is david murrays debt. as fans it is none of our concern. its like caring about someone elses credit card bill. im dismayed. Sorry I'm confused... Yes, MIH absorbed �£50million from underwriting the share-issue in 2005 but the rest of the debt is the clubs... The last year's accounts told us we have losses of �£5 million per annum with net debt at �£16 million and with �£22 million long term debt in the background. That has everything to do with us. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 we spent �£12m in the summer which I'm sure was over the budget allocated, he kept the fans happy then, it was only a matter of time before we started selling IMO. Until someone is willing to invest in us this will be the way now won't it? 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.