Brackley Bluenose 4,479 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It is beyond me how we have managed to get ourselves on such a poor financial footing again after the supposed £25 million we made from the UEFA cup run and the sales of Hutton and Cuellar which must have been in the region of £15 million combined. Can anyone shed some light on this? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlippinEck 3,751 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 poor signings, build up of deadwood, players sitting doing nothing taking a huge chunk of our wage bill in the process Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Newells Sexist Army 2 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Someone let Advocaat go mental with the spending years ago which we never quite recovered from, also we still have a large-ish squad with a large wage bill on top of wasting money on players that hardly even play such as Lafferty, Edu, Velicka, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brackley Bluenose 4,479 Posted January 8, 2009 Author Share Posted January 8, 2009 did we not get over the aftermath of advocaat with the shares scheme, i thought that had wiped out all the debt, obviously not!!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thermopylae 15,287 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It annoys me that we have beaten a total basket case like Hearts to the fire sale <_< Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blueshorts 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 One word...Murray! Not only did the Grade A tossbag manage it once..a few years later he does the same thing again.....honestkly, the guy's a f*cking moron. The time has come to physically remove the clown. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff crap in the head 120 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 We had a huge debt. Money made went into signings. Paying off debt in the longer term makes sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasGers 96 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It is sad to see the state the club is in now, but just take a quick look around Europe. There aren't too many clubs now that are financially viable as a business model. Most of them run up serious debt, debt that would put Rangers to shame. Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal are all owners of massive debt, so this is not something unique to our club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueBlue73 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 poor signings, build up of deadwood, players sitting doing nothing taking a huge chunk of our wage bill in the process Yeah I agree with that. Signings like Velicka, Daily, Webster, Darcheville and Beasley have all been poor ones and similar players (except Darcheville) are taking our money for not doing anything. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
damien1 29 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Someone let Advocaat go mental with the spending years ago which we never quite recovered from, also we still have a large-ish squad with a large wage bill on top of wasting money on players that hardly even play such as Lafferty, Edu, Velicka, etc. We actually recovered quite well from Advocaat's spending spree. Bad management and allowing no-marks high wages has lead us to where we are, not the Advocaat chasing the dream era. He can't be blamed for us being £6m in the black in 2007 to £16m in the red in 2008. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saudibear 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It is a vicious circle. The cost of servicing the debt also goes a long way to increasing the debt. However because of our situation we can't afford to buy quality players thus we seem to buy second rate players hoping they will do a turn and wasting more money. Many people on here still want to see us buying others and getting deeper in debt. At some stage we are going to have to bite the bullet, play home grown youngsters until we balance the books. Not a good outlook for our club. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
damien1 29 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It is a vicious circle. The cost of servicing the debt also goes a long way to increasing the debt. However because of our situation we can't afford to buy quality players thus we seem to buy second rate players hoping they will do a turn and wasting more money. Many people on here still want to see us buying others and getting deeper in debt. At some stage we are going to have to bite the bullet, play home grown youngsters until we balance the books. Not a good outlook for our club. And herein lies our current problem, we have a manager who is currently unwilling to play the fruits of Murray Park. We have several young guys who would do better in our first team than some of the picks, if not for a long term option then to put them in the shop window, but Walter would rather persist with Dailly, McCulloch and Weir, etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rfc_no1fan 13 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 SDM moved the debt. He didnt pay it off Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LegendofCoop 17,490 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 As I understand it, before PLG came in we had got our debt almost clear. I think it may have been hovering around anything between £3m - £6m. That's not massive for a club of our size. We didn't spend that much during his short reign, but some of the wages we were paying were still quite high. We're paying around £7m in wages per season for players who are not even in the first team! That's the problem. Add to that the wages of the first team squad an that figure more than doubles. Couple that with no C/l money this season and it's soon clear where some of the debt comes in. We've also spent a fair bit on players this season, not all of it (if any of it) wisely. The only real source of income this season has been from us, the fans through season tickets & merchandise. TV money is sweetie money in comparison to other leagues. That's why Murray has to sell on some of his assets, just to keep us in a semi healthy state. Unfortunately for Boyd, he was the first big name we had an offer for. Last seasons Euro money, plus the money we got for Hutton & Cuellar probably did no more than get us slightly into the black. That £25m will easilly be down to wages & transfer fee's! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numan5 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 If we can't spend heavily because we get in debt and all cheap buys become deadwood then there is only one solution, a decent youth system. That was the idea behind the PLG appointment but that didn't quite work out. Walter goes to the other extreme and signs players that are too old and are past their best. If it wasn't for Advocaat coming in all those years ago Barry Ferguson may well have been out of Ibrox without being given a chance. How many more gems have we got unearthed because of Smiths unwillingness to play them? To me we need to reply more on youth if we can't spend a lot of money, but the youngsters never get a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numan5 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 If we can't spend heavily because we get in debt and all cheap buys become deadwood then there is only one solution, a decent youth system. That was the idea behind the PLG appointment but that didn't quite work out. Walter goes to the other extreme and signs players that are too old and are past their best. If it wasn't for Advocaat coming in all those years ago Barry Ferguson may well have been out of Ibrox without being given a chance. How many more gems have we got unearthed because of Smiths unwillingness to play them? To me we need to reply more on youth if we can't spend a lot of money, but the youngsters never get a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Numan5 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 If we can't spend heavily because we get in debt and all cheap buys become deadwood then there is only one solution, a decent youth system. That was the idea behind the PLG appointment but that didn't quite work out. Walter goes to the other extreme and signs players that are too old and are past their best. If it wasn't for Advocaat coming in all those years ago Barry Ferguson may well have been out of Ibrox without being given a chance. How many more gems have we got unearthed because of Smiths unwillingness to play them? To me we need to reply more on youth if we can't spend a lot of money, but the youngsters never get a chance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biotechnology 2 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 It is a vicious circle. The cost of servicing the debt also goes a long way to increasing the debt. However because of our situation we can't afford to buy quality players thus we seem to buy second rate players hoping they will do a turn and wasting more money. Many people on here still want to see us buying others and getting deeper in debt. At some stage we are going to have to bite the bullet, play home grown youngsters until we balance the books. Not a good outlook for our club. But one good thing is the interest rates have came down a lot-so they will be saving-My mortgage has fallen over £160 per month. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Manticore* 1,893 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 How the f**k are we in so much debt again? Ask the man in charge, Murray. The man who took over a great Football Club in fine form, for a few million and made us a second rate basket case. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecossescotia 0 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 How the f**k are we in so much debt again? Ask the man in charge, Murray. The man who took over a great Football Club in fine form, for a few million and made us a second rate basket case. I think it is because of his business ventures REALLY. SEE THIS:Perhaps this is utter nonsense FROM ANOTHER WEBSITE, maybe posted before maybe not though... "Received this in an email that started as a question about whether Mendes could move on or not. The little debate earlier about the Charity Shield being a competitive match got me intrigued. I googled and couldn't get an answer but I am lucky enough to have in my phone the number of a man who does know, that I do some work for. It isn't a competitive match I am told so Mendes is free to move on, but that isn't the reason for this. My little man in the know told me some very interesting stuff regarding our south side friends. As Paul alluded the press have been FULLY briefed regarding moving players on. Rangers are in dire dire straits. Make no mistake, it is the waters we were charting just before a ship captained by a little man in a flat cap came a calling! Bougherra has already told them he won't play again. Newcastle and Sunderland in but Marseille his preference. Mendes too has said he wants to move now, regretting coming to Glasgow. The real interesting part however has been the bank. MIH have been told no more credit and assets have to be realised to bring the haemorrhaging of cash under control. The bank know full well the bulk of the assets are property and that is not shifting so all assets currently available to be sold are to be sold, and actively sold. With MIH that leaves only one thing. Football players. The bank are of the opinion, as are most, that things are about to get much worse economically. They also know due to the fact footballers can only be traded during windows they need to move now as although MIH don't need the cash flow this second, when they do the window will be closed and therefore they will be unable to realise the assets that can be moved quickly. As I said above the bank have already told them there will be no more credit so if that point came, they will not bail them out. The bank were in two minds regarding the player sale as they know football is different. Success on the field can bring in some big cash on and off the field. The defeat on the 27th, 7 points behind and the fact Celtic will now strengthen as they usually do in Jan has firmed their resolve. the league will very likely not be won and therefore no CL carrot which was how Minty was keeping their eyes away from the obvious assets at Rangers. Media House have done a sterling job here keeping this out of the press. 2 weeks ago a little snippet got in about the full reserve squad being sent on loan to save wages. The whole first team squad have already been told they are for sale and agents have been instructed. Friends it is very likely come February the Rangers first 11 will not contain Bougherra, Mendes, Ferguson, McGregor or Boyd. Davies played for Fulham so he wont be going. They expect that little lot to realistaclly net them 12 - 15m with ALL of that going to MIH for cash flow. There is only one small chink of hope for them. Mikel Arteta. Rangers are apparently due 20% of his next transfer and Arsenal have him on a shortlist of players for this window. (They need back up for Fabregas). Arshavin is the preferred option as Arteta is being quoted at £20m. Arteta going will get one of the high value assets a stay of execution. Rangers fans will baulk at seeing this but in the banks opinion they will have to deal with having a mid table team as the other option is no team at all. All the usual Rangers minded have been sounded out for a quick deal. Nobody is interested due to the money Murray needs for the club to ensure his entire empire doesn't disappear the second he sells the club. Some were interested but they now cannot raise the finance required due to little credit available and the hits personal fortunes have taken recently as these are usually under pinned by property also. The bank have been stunned how heavily the whole MIH empire is intertwined with one subsidiary. The balance sheet is propped up by its over inflated value, alot of the other smaller subsidiaries exist purely to serve Rangers. If Rangers go, and these contracts are not honoured, more than just the value of Rangers disappers from the MIH balance sheet. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OmarLittle 2 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 Smith has spent nearly £30 million. Not all of it wisely it has to be said Just think about 10 million on transfer fees on these 4 players who haven't given us any return yet (not to mention wages) Take McCulloch @ £2.5m Lafferty @ £3.5 m Edu @ £2.5 m Velicka @ £1 m Sanctioned new deals for Burke, Dailly, Webster none of whom have played. Had guys like Hemdani and Buffel on big wages but sitting in the stands. A useless CEO in Martin Bain who is unqualified for the job but who takes home nearly 600k a year in wages. All that means we have been losing money fast on top of which the lack of CL football this year is costing us greatly. The underlying financial mismanagment is due to Murray but Smith with his failing in the transfer market and failure to secure CL football has made a difficult situation extremely precarious. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gronaldo 38 Posted January 8, 2009 Share Posted January 8, 2009 As I understand it, before PLG came in we had got our debt almost clear. I think it may have been hovering around anything between £3m - £6m. That's not massive for a club of our size. We didn't spend that much during his short reign, but some of the wages we were paying were still quite high. We're paying around £7m in wages per season for players who are not even in the first team! That's the problem. Add to that the wages of the first team squad an that figure more than doubles. Couple that with no C/l money this season and it's soon clear where some of the debt comes in. We've also spent a fair bit on players this season, not all of it (if any of it) wisely. The only real source of income this season has been from us, the fans through season tickets & merchandise. TV money is sweetie money in comparison to other leagues. That's why Murray has to sell on some of his assets, just to keep us in a semi healthy state. Unfortunately for Boyd, he was the first big name we had an offer for. Last seasons Euro money, plus the money we got for Hutton & Cuellar probably did no more than get us slightly into the black. That £25m will easilly be down to wages & transfer fee's! Wages are certainly part of the problem. The football finances website has an illustration of our wages over the past few seasons (wages ratio means our wage bill as a percentage of our total turnover): The target is to have the "wage ratio" at about 50%, so we've been achieving that of late, but you worry what the figure is going to be for this season given the loss of the Champions League money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts