Burst the Bank Dave

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

17 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

where is the growth since King & Co came in exactly?

We have grown turnover- ffs keep up

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

2 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

We have grown turnover- ffs keep up

don't try and skew this, the increased ST Sales is what is increasing  the accounts, the boards 5 year plan seems to be "make hay while the sun shines", such a pity then that it's about to turn stormy with the fans.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

15 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

RE: Long term project

I can't see what you are seeing from the process so far, I would like to understand your point of view.

Please in your opinion, could you outline the steps that have been taken for this long term project onfield/off field so far?  It seems to me  the board are winging it and have no plan that  has been set in stone 

... why? are you to lazy to read the thread?

in essence...

1. we must work within our means - the club must never be put in financial jeopardy again. This is the number one rule - this is more important than even stopping 10iar

2. Due to 1 we can’t just buy our way to the top - it’s a longer term project - buying and developing young players, developing our own youth - moulding a team. We have only recently got a DofF and very recently a scouting network. 

3. Any manager we hire needs to be given the time to implement 2. 

A tadge simplistically but you get the gist. 

 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

6 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

don't try and skew this, the increased ST Sales is what is increasing  the accounts, the boards 5 year plan seems to be "make hay while the sun shines", such a pity then that it's about to turn stormy with the fans.

So ignore increased turnover - can’t give credit for that but they can take the blame?  ... and then you accuse me of skewing it?  

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

2 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

So ignore increased turnover - can’t give credit for that but they can take the blame?  ... and then you accuse me of skewing it?  

how can you attribute the fans work in keepng the club afloat through ST sales to the board? they've done fuck all to get any kudos for that - the fans have done this.

[Sweetheart 8,458]

1 minute ago, Bluepeter9 said:

... why? are you to lazy to read the thread?

in essence...

1. we must work within our means - the club must never be put in financial jeopardy again. This is the number one rule - this is more important than even stopping 10iar

2. Due to 1 we can’t just buy our way to the top - it’s a longer term project - buying and developing young players, developing our own youth - moulding a team. We have only recently got a DofF and very recently a scouting network. 

3. Any manager we hire needs to be given the time to implement 2. 

A tadge simplistically but you get the gist. 

 

I've read the thread but don't get where your coming from.  I don't think anyone has suggested the club buy their way back to the top and I think all believe we should live within our means. There needs to be a plan we've gone from owing 5m to owing 20m despite increases in revenue from ST Sales, fans supporting the development fund etc.  What happens when the debts are more than the club can service?

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

16 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

how can you attribute the fans work in keepng the club afloat through ST sales to the board? they've done fuck all to get any kudos for that - the fans have done this.

Same argument! 

Look there is no doubt the huge support we have is an asset and stuck a lot of cash into the club through season ticket sales. As the merchandising deals get sorted it’s the fan base that will buy the gear and add to our income. 

But the board have also put in decent amounts of cash to stabilise the club, provide working capital etc. And seem to be slowly getting the infrastructure out. 

If you see them as the problem - fine - I just don’t think it’s as easy as you want it to be. 

 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

16 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

I've read the thread but don't get where your coming from.  I don't think anyone has suggested the club buy their way back to the top and I think all believe we should live within our means. There needs to be a plan we've gone from owing 5m to owing 20m despite increases in revenue from ST Sales, fans supporting the development fund etc.  What happens when the debts are more than the club can service?

 the thread is titled ‘Burst the Bank Dave’ so how you can say no one is suggesting we live beyond our means? 

Those debts ( we are all led to believe) are soft loans that will convert to equity once that can happen. 

We cant ‘buy’ instant success therefore we have to ‘grow / develop it! 

Whats your plan to get to the top? 

[Gman36 3,455]

I would say be careful what you wish for - he's bursting the bank at present. Just not his own. 

[Smile 26,600]

1 hour ago, Bluepeter9 said:

Well some of that is true but we have only got out from under Ashley, we have only just got a scouting network in place. I think the current squad is better than last years crop. 

Our shirt sponsorship deal - once sorted will be 2nd to the great unwashed but better than every other spl team - once in place. 

Our results show Warburtons team was better than this team.

[Wullies_bowly_legs 3,779]

22 hours ago, Bluepeter9 said:

I know 2.5 years sounds long but it’s not with the shite we have to sort - we only just managed to put our scouting network back together for instance. 

Im not here to defend the board - I think they are shocking at communication for instance, but as you said they are keeping the lights on, they have invested their own cash ( even in loan form) so not all bad.

 

Sorry but 2.5 years should be plenty to make a radical difference in our standing. We have one of the highest season ticket sales in Britain. Merchandising should also be as high as most other teams in the EPL but it is not and do not make the MA excuse.

Whenever I was put in to turn a business around I would be given a year at the most to show solid improvement or I was not doing my job. Everyone makes excuses for the board as in - the mess left behind etc, but it seems from the outside they are not acting quickly or decisively enough when it comes to the business side. On the football side it will be more difficult but with our fanbase and spend we should be second by some distance. 

This makes me question the job our CEO is doing and was he the right appointment. A common theme as anyone appointed by the Board so far seems to be failing. We need a top businessman to run the club and a top manager for the team. At the minute we have neither.

[gj923 1,457]

35 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

... why? are you to lazy to read the thread?

in essence...

1. we must work within our means - the club must never be put in financial jeopardy again. This is the number one rule - this is more important than even stopping 10iar

2. Due to 1 we can’t just buy our way to the top - it’s a longer term project - buying and developing young players, developing our own youth - moulding a team. We have only recently got a DofF and very recently a scouting network. 

3. Any manager we hire needs to be given the time to implement 2. 

A tadge simplistically but you get the gist. 

 

I have never advocated another billionaire coming in and throwing money everywhere instead that people qualified are put in place to dramtically increase our turnover.

With your points here well 1 is already bust as we are approaching about 24 million in debt come the end of next season. Its debt before someone labels it quasi equity.

There is no project rather a haphazard approach where millions is wasted on the likes of Senderos, Kranjkar, Barton, Alves to name a few whilst still playing Miller. Will we claim Windass as someone who is being developed.?

Point 3 is fine however you need to see progress.....McCoist was brutal, Warburton's was found out after about 6 months but still remained long after this. Pedro plumbed new depths on a frequent basis.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

7 minutes ago, Wullies_bowly_legs said:

Sorry but 2.5 years should be plenty to make a radical difference in our standing. We have one of the highest season ticket sales in Britain. Merchandising should also be as high as most other teams in the EPL but it is not and do not make the MA excuse.

Whenever I was put in to turn a business around I would be given a year at the most to show solid improvement or I was not doing my job. Everyone makes excuses for the board as in - the mess left behind etc, but it seems from the outside they are not acting quickly or decisively enough when it comes to the business side. On the football side it will be more difficult but with our fanbase and spend we should be second by some distance. 

This makes me question the job our CEO is doing and was he the right appointment. A common theme as anyone appointed by the Board so far seems to be failing. We need a top businessman to run the club and a top manager for the team. At the minute we have neither.

Your first paragraph - Our merchandising should be one of the best but don't use MA excuse? So are you saying that problem did NOT exist?

Your second paragraph - sounds like we have similar jobs! While one can make solid improvements in 12 months or so, how often did you take a company back to a number one spot in that same time? We have shown some solid improvement all round - most just want to ignore it - the number one position is all most are focused on. We will get there but anyone that thinks its just round the corner with the appointment of a manager is delusional. How easy do you find it to bring stability if management and workers are chopping ad changing all the time. (I understand sometimes one or two may need removed!) but companies making wholesale changes (in my experience) find it very difficult to stabilise. 

We may need top business men to run the club, but who are these people they that are so different to the current board - we have some of Scotland's most successful business men, we have AJ with his international experience and success,  and we have King who has proven very adroit at business. If Robertson was so bad would they not have spotted that weakness - they don't seem like a group that would suffer fools likely.

Perhaps you should put your name forward. (Perhaps I should!) 

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

17 minutes ago, gj923 said:

I have never advocated another billionaire coming in and throwing money everywhere instead that people qualified are put in place to dramtically increase our turnover.

With your points here well 1 is already bust as we are approaching about 24 million in debt come the end of next season. Its debt before someone labels it quasi equity.

There is no project rather a haphazard approach where millions is wasted on the likes of Senderos, Kranjkar, Barton, Alves to name a few whilst still playing Miller. Will we claim Windass as someone who is being developed.?

Point 3 is fine however you need to see progress.....McCoist was brutal, Warburton's was found out after about 6 months but still remained long after this. Pedro plumbed new depths on a frequent basis.

Its always easy from the sidelines and hindsight!

[gj923 1,457]

11 minutes ago, Wullies_bowly_legs said:

Sorry but 2.5 years should be plenty to make a radical difference in our standing. We have one of the highest season ticket sales in Britain. Merchandising should also be as high as most other teams in the EPL but it is not and do not make the MA excuse.

Whenever I was put in to turn a business around I would be given a year at the most to show solid improvement or I was not doing my job. Everyone makes excuses for the board as in - the mess left behind etc, but it seems from the outside they are not acting quickly or decisively enough when it comes to the business side. On the football side it will be more difficult but with our fanbase and spend we should be second by some distance. 

This makes me question the job our CEO is doing and was he the right appointment. A common theme as anyone appointed by the Board so far seems to be failing. We need a top businessman to run the club and a top manager for the team. At the minute we have neither.

Nail on the head and if you compare our figures to the sheep we should be miles ahead. Bear in mind using our 2017 figures and their 2016 figures.

73% of our turnover is derived from gate receipts and hospitality whereas they are sitting at 29% which shows we are still mostly reliant on season book sales

Our sponsorship and advertising still lags behind theirs by nearly 300k - we brought in 1.53m

Commercial is sitting 4.2m behind the sheep - yip we only brought in 375k

If shite like this is not sorted we will never come close to catching them.

[Brian Fantana 28,894]

45 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

Same argument! 

Look there is no doubt the huge support we have is an asset and stuck a lot of cash into the club through season ticket sales. As the merchandising deals get sorted it’s the fan base that will buy the gear and add to our income. 

But the board have also put in decent amounts of cash to stabilise the club, provide working capital etc. And seem to be slowly getting the infrastructure out. 

If you see them as the problem - fine - I just don’t think it’s as easy as you want it to be. 

 

the boards cash through soft loans will not help us long term- it will make us worse when they convert to shares as it further dilutes the shareholdings but gives them more. It only benefits the board if they ever sell up.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

22 minutes ago, Brian Fantana said:

the boards cash through soft loans will not help us long term- it will make us worse when they convert to shares as it further dilutes the shareholdings but gives them more. It only benefits the board if they ever sell up.

Yes - that is how equity works??? 

.... but it does NOT make us worse. That is a good thing in general for a company - a straight equity injection or a loan to equity swap in this case.

Some shareholders might not like it - especially the smaller ones and they will be diluted, but the company will be stronger. The smaller shareholders are also likely to have pre-emption rights, but I accept they might not have the cash.

[Bluepeter9 5,167]

37 minutes ago, gj923 said:

Nail on the head and if you compare our figures to the sheep we should be miles ahead. Bear in mind using our 2017 figures and their 2016 figures.

73% of our turnover is derived from gate receipts and hospitality whereas they are sitting at 29% which shows we are still mostly reliant on season book sales

Our sponsorship and advertising still lags behind theirs by nearly 300k - we brought in 1.53m

Commercial is sitting 4.2m behind the sheep - yip we only brought in 375k

If shite like this is not sorted we will never come close to catching them.

... and was the issue with merchandising not down to the MA mess inherited by this board? And only just cleaned up? 

[gj923 1,457]

6 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

... and was the issue with merchandising not down to the MA mess inherited by this board? And only just cleaned up? 

Rather than bring out the Ashley line what about looking at the sponsorship figures....why are they lower than the Sheep.

 

[Sweetheart 8,458]

1 hour ago, Bluepeter9 said:

 the thread is titled ‘Burst the Bank Dave’ so how you can say no one is suggesting we live beyond our means? 

Those debts ( we are all led to believe) are soft loans that will convert to equity once that can happen. 

We cant ‘buy’ instant success therefore we have to ‘grow / develop it! 

Whats your plan to get to the top? 

The thread title 'Burst the Bank Dave’ I took to mean for him to invest what he promised. The soft loans are debts until converted. I agree we can't buy success but there is no business model from King's board  to take the club forward. What happens when the debts are more than the club can service?

I don't see your argument for being patient with this board   

We have had untested managers being hired

limited investment in the youth system 

loans have increased

no bank overdraft

no shares issue 

no NOMAD

no listing on AIM

no plan

Buying out MA when it could have been dealt with behind closed doors, through a court decision without all the posturing.

King's litigations and costs

I think we all know Rangers needs a sustainable business model  and to ‘grow / develop youth. but I don't think King's board are the one's to do it. 

I would tell King and Murray to step down and ask for another board member to become chairman.

I'd then get a NOMAD, and listed back on AIM as soon as possible and have a share issue to bring money into the club. I'd seek a small credit line with the banks to pay off DK's loans secured on the car park and pay this back over a two season period to improve the credit rating with the banks.

I'd invest in reputable manager who can do the job and control the changing room as the last two managers have let the players be boss.  

I'd seek investors for the youth set up as a separate business ran from the training ground and also seek a Rangers TV youth channel to show youth matches and generate more income for youth, scouting etc.

 

[Perth_Campsie_Ger 17,977]

1 hour ago, Bluepeter9 said:

 the thread is titled ‘Burst the Bank Dave’ so how you can say no one is suggesting we live beyond our means? 

Those debts ( we are all led to believe) are soft loans that will convert to equity once that can happen. 

We cant ‘buy’ instant success therefore we have to ‘grow / develop it! 

Whats your plan to get to the top? 

By burst the bank I meant pay the money for someone decent. I think we could easily within our means afford a top quality manager on a wage similar to the tranny shagger

[Perth_Campsie_Ger 17,977]

2 minutes ago, Sweetheart said:

The thread title 'Burst the Bank Dave’ I took to mean for him to invest what he promised. The soft loans are debts until converted. I agree we can't buy success but there is no business model from King's board  to take the club forward. What happens when the debts are more than the club can service?

I don't see your argument for being patient with this board   

We have had untested managers being hired

limited investment in the youth system 

loans have increased

no bank overdraft

no shares issue 

no NOMAD

no listing on AIM

no plan

Buying out MA when it could have been dealt with behind closed doors through a court decision from the courts without all the posturing.

King's litigations and costs

I think we all know Rangers needs a sustainable business model  and to ‘grow / develop youth. but I don't think King's board are the one's to do it. 

I would tell King and Murray to step down and ask for another board member to become chairman.

I'd then get a NOMAD, and listed back on AIM as soon as possible and have a share issue to bring money into the club. I'd seek a small credit line with the banks to pay off DK's loans secured on the car park and pay this back over a two season period to improve the credit rating with the banks.

I'd invest in reputable manager who can do the job and control the changing room as the last two managers have let the players be boss.  

I'd seek investors for the youth set up as a separate business ran from the training ground and also seek a Rangers TV youth channel to show youth matches and generate more income for youth, scouting etc.

 

Hit the nail on the head!

[Cadman 342]

25 minutes ago, Bluepeter9 said:

... and was the issue with merchandising not down to the MA mess inherited by this board? And only just cleaned up? 

I read the minutes of a RFB meeting with one of the Easdales (can't remember which one) that gave a breakdown of the figures for the cost of a top. Rangers got £10 per top from Puma, Sports Direct got £25 per sale and, I'm assuming on the £50 selling price, the remaining £15 going to costs. Was the deal really as bad as some made out? I suppose it was an easy mistake to make ,, 20 percent of each top sold to 20 pence from each top sold or 4p from every tenner.

[Blueenose 8]

What money is the op referring to exactly. We don’t have any. This is why we need to get behind Murty. He’s a cheap option and he can get the best out of our current team. 

[Perth_Campsie_Ger 17,977]

4 minutes ago, Blueenose said:

What money is the op referring to exactly. We don’t have any. This is why we need to get behind Murty. He’s a cheap option and he can get the best out of our current team. 

Did you ever see the Hamilton result?