Accounts out this morning

[lutonblue 1,974]

Said a couple of weeks ago the accounts may not be as bad as the doom mongers wanted them to be. Any new company that aquires a football club is bound to make a loss in the 1st few years unless they win the c.l twice on the trot. It still wont shut up the murray lovers. If these leaks to bbc stop then I'll back the board 100 percent.

i think green said this from the off mate

[bawsburst 1,381]

We also had a one off benifit of £20m which wont happen again in the negative goodwill release. This is not £20m that can be used by the club, its just a revaluation of assets.

Should keep balance here!

Double rid beelin'

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

so are you backing the board or not ?

I dont know yet, I need to fully read the accounts.

The operational loss is higher than I would have wanted, but if the revenue stream seem genuine and looks like we can be sustainable long term then they will have my backing.

Will give a conclusive answer tonight when I can get a chance to really read the results.

[JM1872 3,708]

We need to be realistic. It costs around £30 million to run the club for a year.

We had £11 mill in the bank if we add another let say £4 million for ticket sales and even another (generous est.) 10 million for other income we are only up to 25.

If the accounts are only as at 30 June, and revenue for the previous year was £19m... How on earth did you arrive at your "generous est" of £10m for other income for the next year ?

Not forgetting we have no non-recurring items for the next year. Therefore, we have 3 months unaccounted for which will include merchandise sales, catering sales, ticket sales, more ST money and so on.

Go and re-evalute your "generous" estimations.

[crombie1873 142]

Dear god ! This

Is that definitely the case mate, I hope it is but by the looks of the accounts it's a 14 million normal operating loss, the one off payments seem to be covered in a separate page which amount to £4 million and aren't counted in the 14 million loss? So including the one off costs it would be more like a loss of 18 million? Really hope someone can rubbish this as I've only had a quick glance on my break?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

If the accounts are only as at 30 June, and revenue for the previous year was £19m... How on earth did you arrive at your "generous est" of £10m for other income for the next year ?

Not forgetting we have no non-recurring items for the next year. Therefore, we have 3 months unaccounted for which will include merchandise sales, catering sales, ticket sales, more ST money and so on.

Go and re-evalute your "generous" estimations.

Were the one off costs included in the operating loss?

Im not sure they were.

[Redwhiteandblue 3,330]

The money being paid on wages to players and management is the biggest concern. We should not be paying such vast amounts in the league we are in at the moment. Many players need to go and Ally McCoist needs to lead from the front and reduce those obscene wages by a considerable amount.

Heard you the first time ffs. Go tell the man yourself instead of bumping your gums to us.

[Redsox1 1,361]

I think a few agendas will be outed today on this thread.

[better than all the rest 153]

Far to much being paid to non Football staff. Incoming revenue looks not to bad and that should increase of the years. Don't think we need to spend anything on buying new players next year. So not to bad.

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

People focusing on McCoist's wages really need to take a look at themselves. That's the least of our problems.

Your wrong

It's a major part of exactly what's wrong - our inflated wage bill

[bawsburst 1,381]

Your wrong

It's a major part of exactly what's wrong - our inflated wage bill

[Carsons Dog 9,878]

I dont know yet, I need to fully read the accounts.

The operational loss is higher than I would have wanted, but if the revenue stream seem genuine and looks like we can be sustainable long term then they will have my backing.

Will give a conclusive answer tonight when I can get a chance to really read the results.

"Vexatious, ineffective, frivolous"

[DarcheVinny 1,003]

Until someone more intelligent than I can tell me that the club can continue to operate as it is today until ST renewal time, I cannot say whether the accounts look good or bad.

I'm not clever enough to very roughly forecast our results for June 2014, but I think that's what we need to see to be able to decide whether the Rangers are safe from another insolvency event, as suggested by Dave King (I think).

[Gillete 1,338]

.

[Brick54 15]

.

[scarkev 3,540]

People focusing on McCoist's wages really need to take a look at themselves. That's the least of our problems.

I agree to an extent and some were always going to jump on that however I'd hardly say it's the least of our problems in a general sense as our coaching staff (not just ally) are being overpaid IMO....

[trublusince1982 768]

how do those who understand accounts feel the revenue streams are doing?

Is rangers tv worth while? are we making more from increased merchandising? How are the deals struck with ladbrooks etc compared to other boards?

to my untrained eye they look terrible, only £19.5m in revenue, understand the drop in leagues has effected ST by 33% but that is slightly off set by larger numbers aquired, and prize money has dropped by £2m along with tv money falling by about £2m aswell but why are all revenue streams accross the board down by about £15m - £20m? If anything sponsorship should be up as we are discussed accross the world now on a regular basis with more eyes in the stadium as well

i am sure others along with myself feel that us the fans have made sure we have invested far more into the club through merchandise, tours etc than we have ever done. Why do these revenue streams still seem down are we the fan base really spending less at the club than we have before.

[JerGer 69]

Is that definitely the case mate, I hope it is but by the looks of the accounts it's a 14 million normal operating loss, the one off payments seem to be covered in a separate page which amount to £4 million and aren't counted in the 14 million loss? So including the one off costs it would be more like a loss of 18 million? Really hope someone can rubbish this as I've only had a quick glance on my break?

I'm afraid that's my reading of it as well. The Revenue appears roughly £19m and the Expenditure is £33m.

The Expenditure figure is largely made-up of two items - Staff Costs at £18m (£8m playing and £10m non-playing) and 'Other Operating Charges' of £13m. I can't find any breakdown on this £13m figure other than a note saying 'Other operating charges include matchday costs,such as policing, stewarding and pitch costs'. I'm assuming that this includes items as heat, light, rates, maintenance materials, admin costs, etc. as well as the police, stewarding and pitch costs specifically mentioned.

If this is the case, then as things stand we appear to be running with an annual defecit of over £12m, which is obviously unsustainable and likely to put pressure on cash reserves in the short to medium term, but I'm happy to be shown where I have gone wrong on the above numbers.

[bawsburst 1,381]

Until someone more intelligent than I can tell me that the club can continue to operate as it is today until ST renewal time, I cannot say whether the accounts look good or bad.

I'm not clever enough to very roughly forecast our results for June 2014, but I think that's what we need to see to be able to decide whether the Rangers are safe from another insolvency event, as suggested by Dave King (I think).

Deloittes have told you that, in their opinion by signing off a going concern..

[woodvale1690 43]

i am fairly comfortable with accounts, yes room for improvement, asset worth increased, share price stable, may even rise once the accounts are digested fully, many one off non-recurring charges which will not be in next yrs accounts, well done THE BOARD

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

The reaction on FF is the polar opposite of the reaction on here. I find it staggering that two different sections of the support can have such differing interpretations of the same set of figures.

You typed that with a straight face?

Is it not obvious why? They have never seen things clearly and have always agendas and arrogance beyond belief

They will put their own spin on things regardless to justify the destruction and brain washing they've been responsible for

[DarcheVinny 1,003]

Deloittes have told you that, in their opinion by signing off a going concern..

Now you've said it, it sounds obvious. I genuinely don't understand these things.

[simplythechamps08 2]

These accounts are at first look absolutely disastrous.

Two points which are clear and terrifying:

1) Even without the 4.2 million of non-recurring costs we have a deficit of around £10 million a year which means costs have to be slashed or income needs to be increased massively to fill that gap. So far the board have produced no tangible plan to do this and worryingly don't even appear that interested in tackling the issue.

2) It is clear that with current operating expenses and no credit line we will run out of funds very soon, I would guess although it is difficult to be specific due to unknown variables that this will happen at some point in February. There has been no plan produced by the board about how they plan to raise the necessary capital to avoid us running out of money and essentially becoming insolvent.

We need wholesale changes to the board as with the current lack of transparency and long term planning we have no chance of obtaining sufficient investment to stave off administration.

[1st_Jan_1994 4,868]

We need wholesale changes to the board as with the current lack of transparency and long term planning we have no chance of obtaining sufficient investment to stave off administration.

Going on that logic we need wholesale management changes too

[BRITNEY IS NOT FEELING IT 8,293]

So in all of this there are no receipts for coffee then , all is good then