Accounts out this morning

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

BBC headline just reading full thing now nit as bad - don't know where 40m is from but it's after one of costs - operating profit exists but small - give 15 min

£14m loss not £40 m bbc!!

Perhaps the BBC got their info from minii?????

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,493]

our highlights are on the same program as always just after the spl highlights, we also get the same tv figures as previous years, we sold several of our own games for the first time including a large uptake in Rangers TV. If it doesn't make money then why are we wasting money on Rangers tV?

Sky and pals are showing the same amount of rangers games as they always have. It was our choice as a club not to take action against the spl with respect to share of income, so it is entirely down to the board they let others make money off the back of our fans viewing figures without any fight for a fair share. We had them over a barrel but we caved for the good of scottish football.

The books should also balance without european football if they don't then we are just heading down the same path as we did under Murray. Coverage in the press has grown worldwide with reports from inside ibrox accross the world, season ticket sales are up or at least the same levels so inhouse advertising should not have deminished.

it doesnt matter about sky etc, its the standard of game, apart from rangers fans, do you expect some wee spanish guy to tune into sky and go "there's rangers away to airdrie, im gonna watch that"

Sponsors arent stupid, they are basically advertising to 45k home crowds and rangers fans watching in, nothing else, they wont pay top dollar for scottish lower division games no matter how good we are

our rep took a battering last season and throughout the summer beforehand, it will probably take an SPFL win to get us back to top dollar advertisment income imo

[RFC55 108,714]

That's the whole point - this season we have Puma, Blackthorn, Sports Direct/retail, other sponsorship deals etc. There is likely growth across a number of income streams.

I'd agree with that boss, but are we honestly expecting puma and blackthorn to be paying much more if anything more than tennants and Umbro.

Infact I'd go as far as saying the blackthorn deal will be the exact same as tennants due to it being the same company

[boss 1,941]

I'm in the same boat. The accounts are as clear as mud to me. It doesn't help when you have dozens people on here playing amateur accountant, trying to pick them apart and put their own slant in. I have 3 questions

How much money did we take in in total?

How much money did we spend in total?

What is our current balance?

Page 27 answers these questions:

http://www.rangers.co.uk/images/staticcontent/documents/AnnualReport2013.pdf

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,493]

I've already gave my opinion on this loads of times. I. Not going through it all again. Why do you and others continually think anyone who doesn't like this board wants "the other side" to get in

Fucking chronic place on here these days.

There are no fucking sides for me, I'm a rangers fan from drumchapel ffs, I don't cut about in circles that mix with businessmen unless drug dealers can be classed as businessmen then aye a know businessmen.

I'm worried for my club, I still am, I have no boardroom allegiances other than the club.

okay so fuck the other side then, who could do a better job than the current guys that know the club now, as ive been told many many times regarding ally and co, if they are doing a good job currently then they deserve to stay

im the same, the club means more to me than anything else, but the phrase "better the deveil you know" springs to mind after the whyte debacle,

[now then forever 298]

The various reports are trying to put a positive spin on the accounts as expected, but it is quite a worrying set of accounts in my opinion with the most important figure being a £14m trading loss, quite a significant figure to try and overturn.

Also a detailed breakdown of the 'other costs' of over £13m are required. This is said to relate to matchday costs etc, but when the ticket revenue is only making £14m surely something isn't right here? Definitely more detail is needed.

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,493]

This is said to relate to matchday costs etc, but when the ticket revenue is only making £14m surely something isn't right here? Definitely more detail is needed.

you do realise where in scottish football we are dont you?

[boss 1,941]

I'd agree with that boss, but are we honestly expecting puma and blackthorn to be paying much more if anything more than tennants and Umbro.

Infact I'd go as far as saying the blackthorn deal will be the exact same as tennants due to it being the same company

From the accounts:

"Profits from the sponsorship business unit are expected to increase in season 2013/14 by more than 70% on season 2012/13."

[boss 1,941]

I dont think we are going bust this year, it is just not going to happen.

In the medium term, i still dont know how strong we will be when we get back to the top. The party who can prove to me that they have the best plan will get my approval.

Perhaps:

- lower loss this season

- break even next season

- new share issue (primarily fans) for the season back in top tier ("player investment, overhaul them, blah blah...")

?

[RFC55 108,714]

From the accounts:

"Profits from the sponsorship business unit are expected to increase in season 2013/14 by more than 70% on season 2012/13."

But that could be all added in? That's decent to read. I struggle like fuck reading big documents and forget bits I've read so thanks for pointing that out mate

I may be coming across as a prick, but I still mind feb14th in work on cathedral street and breaking down in tears. That day was fucking hellish and it may just be my backing of whyte that now won't allow me to properly back anyone else but I just never want any Rangers fan to suffer that again.

If it means we have to ask question the board and forum members don't like then so be it.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

You seem fixated by some mythical "12 month rule". None exists. I can't be bothered explaining to you again.

For someone who is supposidly some form of guru on the matter, you seem to be very disconnected from general opinion from the industry.

It is not a cast in stone rule, but the 12 month assertion is concidered best practice.

In the near future, more focus will be on going concern definitions over a longer period, but right now the 12 month definition is considered to be the norm. See below.

http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2240440/auditors-going-concern-judgment-to-extend-beyond-12-months

Im being quite civil on the matter, so im not sure why you are trying to be so condesending, especially since you are going against fairly common knowledge.

[CanadianBacon 2,088]

The scaremongers and Sack The Board screamers amongst the support (you know who you are) have a decision to make.

1: Do they continue with their now discredited stance, or - 2: Do the fess' up and say "sorry....we got it wrong"?

They should be ashamed of themselves and really should go for Option 2.

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

I am still on the fence to be honest.

I was hoping for some projections on future revenue to give me an idea of the boards plans and if they were realistic.

I still feel completely in the dark about the current boards plans and projections.

Murrays crowd are no better. Lots of talk but nothing to back it up. We need info.

I dont think we are going bust this year, it is just not going to happen.

In the medium term, i still dont know how strong we will be when we get back to the top. The party who can prove to me that they have the best plan will get my approval.

I'm sure, if you are at the AGM, you will hear the plans and projections for the future of the club. That would be the appropriate forum for such announcements. Assuming it does not get leaked to the bbc in advance.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

When you add up, Football debt, IPO expenses, Investigation expenses, acquisition expenses, Charles Greens money, Ahmads money, set up loans and our managers justified pay cut, the non recurring expenses are close to £6m.

Turnover should be higher given that we will have a full 12 months sponsorship from Puma, Blackthorn and Sports Direct as some of these deals were done as late as March 2013. The £14m gap could easily be down to £4m this season and as Boss has said, we can be working towards that being £0 for 2014-15

I said it wouldnt be easy reading these as there is a lot of shite in them that wont repeat itself but by taking the step of declaring the amount of matchday money included in our cash balance allows us to look ahead and clearly see that Dave King, the RST and all the other doom mongers who said we would be bust by xmas are looking like a total bunch of wanks.

I see the RST are out peddling dhim like nonsense because they simply cannot handle the truth of what the accounts show.

To summarise my view though:

1) Nothing I really didnt expect.

2) Healthy cash position explained.

3) Clear cost reduction opportunities.

4) Certain directors took the piss but in the main, they are now gone.

5) No wonder our manager is volunteering a pay cut. He should be embarrassed.

6) Auditors have signed off as a going concern (This is what Whyte failed to get auditors to do months before we went into admin)

7) There is no way we will run out of money this season.

8) Still a lot of work to be done on other costs and the jury is still out for me if we have the right people to do it.

9) Paul Murray can fukk off

[RFC55 108,714]

Also folk need to stop with the "he doesn't like the board he must want Murray" look where a lot of us guys come from. I'm a guy from drumchapel, there's guys from other "schemes" who aren't exactly jumping through rings (see what I did there ) with how this current board have handled a lot of matters. We don't understand a lot of it but we don't like what we are seeing. The closest some of us will get to a businessman is a guy that owns a nice cream van ffs. We have no allegiances to anyone other than the club.

A lot of us are your average guys, we're trying to be vigilant for the club, no one else.

A lot of this stuff goes way over a lot of people's heads and some folk need to mind that when posting narky posts as if people should understand these things like its an everyday occurrence.

[RFC55 108,714]

When you add up, Football debt, IPO expenses, Investigation expenses, acquisition expenses, Charles Greens money, Ahmads money, set up loans and our managers justified pay cut, the non recurring expenses are close to £6m.

Turnover should be higher given that we will have a full 12 months sponsorship from Puma, Blackthorn and Sports Direct as some of these deals were done as late as March 2013. The £14m gap could easily be down to £4m this season and as Boss has said, we can be working towards that being £0 for 2014-15

I said it wouldnt be easy reading these as there is a lot of shite in them that wont repeat itself but by taking the step of declaring the amount of matchday money included in our cash balance allows us to look ahead and clearly see that Dave King, the RST and all the other doom mongers who said we would be bust by xmas are looking like a total bunch of wanks.

I see the RST are out peddling dhim like nonsense because they simply cannot handle the truth of what the accounts show.

To summarise my view though:

1) Nothing I really didnt expect.

2) Healthy cash position explained.

3) Clear cost reduction opportunities.

4) Certain directors took the piss but in the main, they are now gone.

5) No wonder our manager is volunteering a pay cut. He should be embarrassed.

6) Auditors have signed off as a going concern (This is what Whyte failed to get auditors to do months before we went into admin)

7) There is no way we will run out of money this season.

8) Still a lot of work to be done on other costs and the jury is still out for me if we have the right people to do it.

9) Paul Murray can fukk off

Just going to ask you now as well mate, as you where a staunch critic of whyte.

Is this a good result for us? Would you say I should go to bed and sleep easy tonight? The thing I'm most worried about is can this board with a lot of the shenanigans that have gone on attract enough extra investment?

[gogzy 31,195]

I'll give some credit to FF.

I have been on there arguing my points over the last 12 hours, and I have not been banned for my opposing view to the party line.

[Shuggy 1,308]

So can we tell from the accounts what happened to the £22M IPO money?

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,493]

But that could be all added in? That's decent to read. I struggle like fuck reading big documents and forget bits I've read so thanks for pointing that out mate

I may be coming across as a prick, but I still mind feb14th in work on cathedral street and breaking down in tears. That day was fucking hellish and it may just be my backing of whyte that now won't allow me to properly back anyone else but I just never want any Rangers fan to suffer that again.

If it means we have to ask question the board and forum members don't like then so be it.

thats the main thing mate, there is no "whyte" or any one guy that can fuck us over,

[Zappa 358]

This article from the New York publication The CPA Journal dates back to 2004, but it's an interesting read nonetheless, especially the section titled "Why Auditors Fail to Comment on Exceptions to the Going-Concern Assumption" - The Going-Concern Assumption Revisited: Assessing a Company’s Future Viability

[RFC55 108,714]

thats the main thing mate, there is no "whyte" or any one guy that can fuck us over,

But there are still questions to be asked, mind some of us only want answers for the benefit of Rangers not so a Paul Murray or the like can move in

[TheLawMan 6,240]

Just going to ask you now as well mate, as you where a staunch critic of whyte.

Is this a good result for us? Would you say I should go to bed and sleep easy tonight? The thing I'm most worried about is can this board with a lot of the shenanigans that have gone on attract enough extra investment?

I dont think we can sit back with the cigar in the mouth and think everything is rosy. The bottom line is that without Green and Ahmad getting the £22m in last season, we would have been stuffed. They should be congratulated and rewarded for that, though i still think the "wages" they took were a bit of a disgrace as their reward, for me, was their 1p shares.

I think its good they are gone now and I would get rid of Stockbridge as he is far too tainted for my liking with the Video stuff as well as not being able to answer questions honestly in my opinion.

We 100% NEED to cut costs. The additional cash balance at 30th June 2013 will not be the same as at 30th June 2014 if we dont either cut our costs dramatically or secure more income via natural means or a secondary share option. We need to be working 24-7 to secure 2014/15 season in my opinion mate.

[TheLawMan 6,240]

So can we tell from the accounts what happened to the £22M IPO money?

£15.5m of it was used to run us between December and 30th June.

[bawsburst 1,381]

This article from the New York publication The CPA Journal dates back to 2004, but it's an interesting read nonetheless, especially the section titled "Why Auditors Fail to Comment on Exceptions to the Going-Concern Assumption" - The Going-Concern Assumption Revisited: Assessing a Company’s Future Viability

Beelin'

[Non_Sucumbi 876]

But that could be all added in? That's decent to read. I struggle like fuck reading big documents and forget bits I've read so thanks for pointing that out mate

Are you Jimmy Hill