The outbreak of internecine warfare at RIFC is being acted out through a real pea-soup fog right now. The war is being fought on so many fronts that it is difficult to see just exactly how many armies are involved, and how the alliances are shaping up.
Craig Mather would appear to be in the Charles Green camp, but it is difficult to imagine that he would be happy to hear old blunderbuss-mouth peppering Ally McCoist with shot. McCoist’s in-character but inelegant riposte, whilst a valiant attempt at deflection and self-preservation, put his mentor and chairman, Walter Smith in a rather awkward position. It gives Mather a double headache as he tries to head off Clyde Blowers boss Jim McColl – and his blowhard ally Paul Murray – at the EGM-pass.
If Mather stands by Green, and Smith does the same for McCoist, then the two main officers of the company will be in opposite, and hostile, camps.
As I say, making sense of it is difficult, but one thing is as clear as an empty window frame: the acrimony, which has been in existence for months, is only now being aired in public because the season ticket drive is over. The one policy that the warring factions have been in agreement with is “Not in Front of the Children”.
Now that the fans have been compelled to buy season tickets in substantial numbers through a mixture of fear, loyalty and a never-ending stream of press spin telling them that “Rangers are on the cusp of greatness if only the supporters cough up”, it seems acceptable that the real war can begin – but what is the prize?
There can be little doubt that all of the factions are aware that a conservative business model is necessary if Rangers are to establish themselves in Scottish football – certainly a more conservative one than that followed by RFC (IL). I infer therefore that the war is not over a Murray vs McCann approach. My best guess is that the war is one of ideals – between one faction which aims to make as much money in the short term as possible, and another which, whilst not averse to a bit of nest-feathering, sees the health of the club and the notion of a continuity Rangers as paramount.
The trouble for Rangers fans is that it is the former faction which holds all the cards – all the shares in fact. I think that all fans of the game of football would hope that people with football at heart would win out here, irrespective of what their partisan loyalties dictate on a day to day basis.
The problem for either warring faction is that the loyalty of the Rangers fans is finite. The “long road (back)” to the top is one which might engage them for while. It is a great journey which is not without its rewards and adventure, but expectations will be massive if and when they get to the top league. When the acceleration of progress meets the buffers of premier championship aspiration, gate money will be in the front passenger seat. Managing unrealistic expectations is extremely difficult, and evidenced by the use of McCoist’s recruitment sledgehammer to crack the nut of the bottom two divisions.
But here are some questions to which I honestly do not know the answer;
- How does the Rangersness faction wrest control away from these spivs?
- How will the spivs attempt to ensure that the Rangersness faction fails in their objective?
- Can the people in the Rangersness camp REALLY be trusted to act in the best interests of the club even if it is at odds with their own? This, given the close association with the terminal decline of the club they all profess to love.
- Is there any realistic scenario which allows this club to prosper and challenge for honours within a ten to fifteen year period?
My belief is that the key to the new club being able to establish itself is managing the expectations of the fans. Despite the MSM willingness to cut and paste RFC and RIFC press releases unadulterated, the ability of that same MSM to impress a message of realism into Rangers fans is zero. Not in front of the children in fact.
Is it really a sociological bridge too far to expect Rangers fans to turn down the expectation-ometer? I don’t believe it is. In the eighties, if I recall correctly, a seriously underachieving Rangers team were not met with demands for big spending. There was pressure on them to get better managers who could pick better players, but no demands for Fort Knox to be breached. If Rangers fans really want a club called Rangers playing in blue at Ibrox, and competing fully in the game, they need to find leaders who can sell the long-termism of such an aspiration. Many will hope, including the spivs and the MSM, that no such leader emerges.
upthehoops says:
August 4, 2013 at 1:10 pm
………………………………………
Don’t disagree with what you say….my point is in the majority of occasions there is no hidden bias…just either poor refereeing or the team we support just wasn’t good enough on the day…human emotions tend to skewer this towards refereeing injustice…
It will happen in every country…not just ours…that bias will take place in small degrees…in most other countries it generally is driven by money…TV and modern social media has meant the opportunity to apply the bias you suggest is less likely…
Thanks Brenda
No mention on NUFC website about any upcoming friendly with TRFC!
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 1:02 pm
If Rangers can trim operations down to 25 million.
===============================
You were saying in the previous thread that you thought Rangers could break even with a £25m turnover next season.
Could you tell me how you think that can be achieved.
Paulmac2 says:
August 4, 2013 at 12:11 pm
Quantcast
The game at Forfar yesterday was scheduled to be shown on Rangers TV.. but was unexpectedly ditched? Coincidence?
……………………………………………………………………………
Got this link from a mate,well done the loons
http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/rangerstv/item/4683-video-forfar-highlights#.Uf4-kqejajA.facebook
Scottish journalism at it’s best the sun today ……….. ” McCoist ACCUSSES Green ” pretty much sums them up 😳
torrejohnbhoy(@johnbhoy1958) says:
August 4, 2013 at 12:16 pm
—————————————————-
I’ts coming back as “The Wagon”.
—————————————————-
I disagree TJ – if it’s coming back at all, it will be as “The Wheel”
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 1:02 pm
… the timescale for financial parity between two hopefully identical business models will depend on how much profit Celtic can bank over the next 2-3 years, and it could be nothing and it could be a lot, only time will tell.
=========================
Domestically Celtic and Rangers have not been comparable for quite some time.
On average Celtic had 4,000 more paying customers per SPL home game. Worth around £2m
They had much more lucrative merchandising income, net of about £1.5m per year more if I remember correctly.
They have the Nike deal worth £5m / year.
All of that is effectively net income and it is around £8.5m per annum.
That is the fundamental problem Rangers have had for some time and have yet to face. Domestically Celtic do not break even without player trading. Rangers financially, based on domestic football, were in a worse position. That was never accepted by the fans, and was basically denied in the media.
The myth has been around for years, that the clubs are the same size. It simply isn’t true. Celtic have a bigger domestic following and have a greater international appeal. Nike do not give them the money they do based on a timmy conspiracy, it is business and it is based on exposure.
upthehoops says:
August 4, 2013 at 1:10 pm
=======================================
I think when a senior referee and the head of referees development were caught cheating, lying and conspiring with others the refereeing profession in Scotland lost any right to take the moral high ground as far as I am concerned.
Interesting comment at the 1st Forfar goal on the link I posted, “This wasn’t in the script”…..
I know that result wasn’t expected but there will be someone with a script & it’s all going to plan for them.
thanks Angus….it was due to be streamed live on RTV…but got pulled…
bect67 says:
August 4, 2013 at 1:50 pm
No mention on NUFC website about any upcoming friendly with TRFC!
=========================
http://www.nufc.co.uk/articles/20130802/ticket-alert-secure-your-rangers-seat_2281670_3335073
Ticket Alert – Secure Your Rangers Seat
By Anthony Marshall – Newcastle United Managing Editor
Time is running out for United fans to secure their seat at next week’s pre-season friendly against Scottish giants Rangers.
Newcastle head to Ibrox on Tuesday, 6th August (kick-off 7.45pm) to take on Ally McCoist’s men, who stormed to the third division title last term and remain one of British football’s most famous names.
Tickets are on sale to season ticket holders and Members only and are on sale now, priced at £15 for adults, £5 for under-16s and £10 for concessions – 65 and over and 16 and 17-year-olds.
The deadline for booking seats using the postal system is 3pm on Friday, but tickets will continue to be on sale until Monday lunchtime in person only, before being returned to Rangers.
The fixture will be Newcastle’s penultimate pre-season friendly of the summer and their final away match before the Barclays Premier League campaign starts at Manchester City.
And Alan Pardew will use the game to fine-tune his team ahead of the final friendly against Braga and the trip to the Etihad Stadium, with his strongest available side likely to head to Glasgow.
Friday, 14 June, 2002, 13:07 GMT 14:07 UK
Tycoon faces tax charges
Mr King invested in Rangers two years ago
A Scots tycoon who invested £20m into Rangers Football Club has been arrested and charged with tax evasion in South Africa.
Dave King, 44, faced eleven counts of fraud when he appeared at the Regional Court in Randburg, near Johannesburg.
He is alleged to owe the South African revenue service almost £60m.
He was taken to court and charged with 11 counts of fraud by contravening income tax laws
Mr King, who is due to appear in court again in September, has been released on bail and his passport and assets have been seized.
He claimed he was being “bullied” by the South African Revenue Service (SARS).
The SARS alleges that he owes it a total of 2.5bn rand (£167m) – but Mr King has disputed the size of the claim.
Sipho Ngwema of the South African Government’s investigative agency said Mr King had handed himself over to investigators on Thursday morning.
“He was taken to court and charged with 11 counts of fraud by contravening income tax laws.
Assets seized
“The figure involved at the moment is around 900m rand (£59.7m).
“He was released on bail, but his passport was taken off him and he is due back in court in September.”
Mr King agreed to pay £295,000 last week without conceding any liability following a hearing at Pretoria’s High Court – which also decided to seize his assets.
Dave King faces a further court appearance
He said he was shocked at the sequestration order, and said: “I’ve gone on record as saying, based on my experience with the receiver, it really amounts in my opinion to extortion.”
He admitted that there was some merit to the SARS tax claim “on a lifestyle basis” but denied that the figure was so high.
Mr King also claimed that the assessment for 2.5bn rand was “just a big number to frighten you, to bully you and to beat you up.”
The former Glasgow milk boy invested £20m into Scottish club Rangers two years ago.
Mr King – who is said to have a personal fortune of about £200m – founded Specialised Outsourcing, which is now known as Enterprise Risk Management, in the late 1990s.
Allyjambo says:
August 4, 2013 at 7:59 am
66 0 Rate This
Just watching ‘Breakfast’ on BBC this morning and noted that the Sports news coverage of Scottish football only covered the Celtic v Ross County match. Not even a mention of the ‘shock’ result of the day at Forfar. Or maybe it’s no longer a shock, when a 3rd tier team is beaten by a 3rd tier team, and not actually all that noteworthy 😉 In fact, the only game involving a ‘Rangers’ mentioned was the one involving QPR, and this on ‘British’ television.
==================================
Allyjambo, I usually listen to Radio Clyde in the mornings when travelling around. They carried a match report each morning after their ‘great’ pre season games, stating 3,4 and 5 wins in a row. I listened as usual the morning after their defeat at Sheffield Wed, not a peep, they did not even mention they were playing. Suppressing bad news all around…….
“Time is running out for United fans to secure their seat at next week’s pre-season friendly against Scottish giants Rangers.”
Rather than have a maintenance company do it?
Tif Finn says:
August 4, 2013 at 2:02 pm
…………………………………
The late ex rangers director Hugh Adam said exactly that….Rangers could not hope to match the global attraction Celtic had due to the Irish connection…
Hugh was rounded on by the usual suspects for his assesment.
Paulmac2 says:
August 4, 2013 at 2:22 pm
Did he not also sell up his shares and leave when David Murray came in, because he did not like the way the club was going.
Tif Finn says:
August 4, 2013 at 2:30 pm
………………………………………….
He did sell his shares and left his post as a director….stating SDM’s fiscal management was madness and unsustainable and if continued would destroy the club…again the usual suspects in the media rounded on him.
So, a prominent businessman and Rangers director told them two things twenty years or so ago. That they did not have the fanbase and potential income they thought they had, and that David Murray was sailing the good ship Rangers onto the rocks.
They did not listen, they’re not listening still. Perhaps they never will.
(Good line for a song that.)
http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/latest/adam-shakes-ibrox-pillars-with-warning-of-bankruptcy-1-595808
An extract from the 2002 article
…
“We got back 2,800 names and three-quarters of them didn’t know they had been nominated. It’s no surprise that Celtic are officially the best-supported football club in North America, with more official clubs than anybody else. The difference is the Irish connection.
“Many Irish people may support Manchester United, Liverpool or whoever, but they all – every one of them – have an affection for Celtic. And, of course, Celtic also have a great Scottish following.
“The difference is that, while the Irish all have an allegiance to Parkhead, there are millions of Scots who not only don’t support Rangers, but actively dislike them.
“Despite the claims of international appeal, Rangers are, essentially, a West of Scotland club. They talk of supporters’ buses leaving from all parts of Scotland, but if you look closely, you’ll see there aren’t many from each area and they are not all full.
“This doesn’t mean that even Celtic will earn fortunes from emigrant supporters. There may be more of them than Rangers fans, but it doesn’t mount to the kind of income necessary to fund their ambitions. But Celtic have been, since Fergus McCann’s arrival, much the better-run club.
“Fergus was the most unjustly maligned man in the history of the game, when you consider that he took the club from bankruptcy into the mainstream and built that stadium along the way.
…
O/T but the reply even made this bhoy smile.
Had a wee sneaky look at RM to see what they’re saying. Some still have a sense of humour.
…………………………………………………………………………………..
Posted Today, 11:02 AM
POPULAR
Malmo
Maribor
Falkirk
Dundee utd
Inverness
Queen of the South
Dundee Utd
Forfar
Look at those teams! Unacceptable. He’s got to go. Let’s not forget the lead he threw away over Celtic in little over a month or two.
He isn’t a manager.
……………………………………………………………
Posted Today, 11:06 AM
It was windy in all the games listed
Very small Twitter rumbling of McCoist sacking.
@Tif Fin
” Could you tell me how you think that can be achieved. ”
Historically Rangers fixed overheads outwith players has been around 24 million, this included a million per year in bank charges, it is feasible to trim a few million without seriously affecting operations, I believe the costs at Celtic are not dissimilar so it can be done.
The interim accounts for 7 months breaks down income and one can extrapolate using these figures.
Income for 12 months at approx 16 million this year with no gate receipts and hospitality for 2 months( June &July), lets call it 18 million.
35% increase in ticket prices should raise another 3 million takes it to 21 million leaving a 4 million shortfall, CG did mention the unplanned drop in revenue from commercial, retail, sponsorship and advertising and I believe these will return to near their historical levels over the next year and beyond. The amounts shown in the interim accounts for commercial, retail, sponsorship and advertising( approx 6 million) are almost half the historical average and only a pessimist would believe they will stay at these low levels now all the new agreements are in place, I would expect significant increases especially in commercial and retail income.
I predict Rangers will lose 4 million this year due to no ticket increases, cost cutting takes time and drops in TV and sponsorship income, all of these will balance out next season. I believe Celtic used to break even on a 30 million turnover with a 10 million wage bill and I see no commercial reason why Rangers cannot break even with a 25 million turn over and a 5million wage bill.
I accept all this is pure guesswork and it will be a lot easier after the accounts come out, to me the key is getting the fixed overheads down to 20 million or so, I have no doubt commercial and retail income will increase substantially.
I’ve been putting together a summary of the weeks discussions. It has turned into a hefty exercise so I will post articles one at a time, starting with current affairs. I’ve stitched together a series of comments with as little linkage as possible.
Current discussions
The week started with unfortunate news.
Liquidation threat hangs over Hearts as UKIO Bankas knock back bids…
Which begged the question: Liquidate the football club you say?
UBIG/UKIOs admin could expect to get £10m for the debt and land, it was thought.
This was countered by the more hopeful; Dunfermline CVA approved by creditors.
What a dignified and powerful statement from Dunfermline, which acknowledges the victims of their financial mismanagement.
This was not allowed to mask the obvious; Whilst on a level, being happy for Pars everywhere, I must stop short of the celebratory hi 5s being shared around the place this evening. IMO admin is a legal scam, which shafts creditors, having put them in a terrible situation.
Meanwhile on the Rangers saga, obfuscation was still rife.
Anyway…the point is…yes…the fact that “the taxman did it” and it was no fault of “ra gers” does seems to be a common perception…
The football support dynamic was put under scrutiny with this comment. Unquestioning loyalty – which may not be the case for you, but certainly is true for the majority of your club’s support – will always, always be exploited by unscrupulous individuals.
And
Any losses cannot now be ‘absorbed’ by another corporate entity. Property values cannot be manipulated to reflect a healthy balance sheet. TRFC & RIFC will have to stand or fall by their business model.
Further.
“Sevco Scotland Ltd have also undertaken to accept all other outstanding conditions relating to Oldco’s charges of bringing the game into disrepute.(Telegraph)
Which referred to the £50,000 fine imposed on The Rangers Football Club questioned by Rangers CEO Craig Mather. Further information was offered to Mr. Mather on his hazy memory of events:
Does the nearest thing to match fixing mean nothing down Govan way.
The only people putting money into the club in the end were UK taxpayers to bail out the bank that gave away its cash and its soul to the likes of Murray, Masterton and their cohorts.
No recognised football body, club, official, Team Official, or other member of Team Staff, player, referee, or other person under the jurisdiction of the Scottish FA shall bring the game into disrepute.”
5 non-payment of PAYE income tax, National Insurance Contributions and Value Added Tax to HMRC.
What happened to all the talk of transparency and making friends on their journey back to the top?
Then, the first of a series of interesting developments:
He’s back
ChuckieG – Consultant (Sevco)
It’s not clear (to me at any rate) if its TRFC or RIFC that he’s back to as a consultant. The club? the company? the club company? or the company that holds the company of the club? or the club of spivs that holds the companies that hold the club?
Good to see Charlie is back, Walter will be over the moon with that as well.
Also:
Blue Knights re-enter the fray. The return of Paul Murray on his shining steed?
Some mood music seemed appropriate at this point.
More Johhny Nash on the Juke Box
With a summary observation:
And so the endgame begins? Cannae wait!! Chick’s back. The Blue Knights appear to be saddling the chargers. Ally ‘to be honest’ (if he says that once more) still husnae a clue. Sir Wattie shaking the head.
A light hearted reference to Dad’s Army lifted the mood briefly:
Don’t tell him (Steer) Pike !!
Indeed the news for Rangers was not all bad:
“journalist of the year” Keith Jackson hunts another billionaire haha.
However a more realistic tone observed:
The real heart of the matter lies in the deliberate failure to tell the Footballing Authorities, as clubs are required to do, that they were remunerating their players far more generously than they declared in the players’ contracts that were submitted to said Authorities.
A speculative business venture was mooted:
Celtic buys TRFC. Along with: Scottish Football needs a strong Aldi.
An attempted rehabilitation of Campbell Ogilvie’s reputation was not warmly received:
Have you ever thought of repaying that money, or conversely accepting it as a payment (and paying the tax due) that is a perfectly acceptable thing to do with these types of “loans” where the beneficiary wants to make the payment permanent.
A syntactical error was highlighted in one post which looked forward to emerging events:
I suspect there is a ride to hell still to come. Fixed that for you.
No sooner was extra provisioning being arranged:
Think I will restock the popcorn cupboard…
Than the trailer ended and the main feature began:
RANGERS Chief Executive Craig Mather has issued the following statement today.
That’s one long, rambling, emotional – and ultimately – totally pointless statement from the CEO.
Rangers manager Ally McCoist has launched a sensational attack on Charles Green, branding the former chief executive “an embarrassment”.
Yorkshireman should know that boys from the West of Scotland don’t scare easily.
“If he does come back, I’ll certainly go and pick him at the airport. I won’t have a problem doing that.
Boardroom warfare, Green/Mather/McCoist slanging off each other via the media, the Forfar result…. Has Armageddon finally come?
Parallels were sought in other affairs.
Happy Loon here.
Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind?
Just in case you are unfamiliar with a certain Monty Python sketch involving a parrot:
Rangers are dead, remember this or nothing wonderful can come of the tale. It is the constant inability of many responsible people in Scotland to remember this that has caused all of these problems.
Araminta Moonbeam QC says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:10 pm
Very small Twitter rumbling of McCoist sacking.
========================================
Is it from anyone with credibility though?
Trials, trails, t’liars
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:10 pm
@Tif Fin
” Could you tell me how you think that can be achieved. ”
========================
The interim accounts for 7 months breaks down income and one can extrapolate using these figures.
Income for 12 months at approx 16 million this year with no gate receipts and hospitality for 2 months( June &July), lets call it 18 million.
===========================
Firstly thanks for the reply, I appreciate the effort.
I see you are extrapolating the 12 months income figures from the 7 months interim accounts, then adjusting for June and July. Sorry to be a pest but I don’t have those interim accounts, can you tell me how the income in that is made up.
Taken from RM 😯 This kind of delusion suits me fine,all very entertaining
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Posted Yesterday, 11:31 PM
*
POPULAR
This is the hard times, we are building up the quality of the squad, and we are re-establishing ourselves as a financial force again. Rangers have winner written all over them but we are in the build up period. The money men know this and want to be in at the start of something big. Think of it this way; if Rangers were a lost cause the money men would be running away from it, but they are fighting tooth and nail to be part of it, every dirty and underhand trick appears to be being used to get on that board because this club equals money, winners, power and prestige for those in the board when Rangers come back with a vengeance. They know that is only a matter of time.
So, we lost. Our sticking plaster third division team were no match for Forfar. None of our recent signings were playing and the team out today will not be the Rangers of this year. We have to wait until September before the real first team shows up, then we can see how teams like Forfar stack up against us. Roll on September.
Today was a bad day but better is to come, they train with us, they wear our shirt, they just wait until September so the can play for us and show what the real Rangers first team can do in the full blood and thunder of competitive football. We have things to look forward to on the field; lets go and enjoy it when it comes right.
The lean Green talking machine is back, so hang on to your hat time. We will see the board once again fighting like cats in a sack and it will be unbecoming to our club but that is unfortunately where we are at the moment. I think the reasons for this are because they all want to position themselves in positions of power for when the club truly takes off they can then bask in reflected glory. Do not be mistaken Rangers will spark and get back to where they were in Scotland and in Europe and they know the tipping point will come with in the next 18 months. I believe that we may have almost perpetual boardroom fighting until the biggest crocodiles have killed off their competition.
We have always been here; we are the power that drives Rangers forward, the money that goes from your pocket into Rangers will continue to push Rangers forward. We will have our money men who will take from the club but the revenues that will come in will propel the club upwards. We the fans are the true unstoppable force behind Rangers and next month we will see our true first team for the first time this season. Roll on Law and Daly creating havoc in the oppositions defence.
Regarding Hugh Adam, there is a summary of what he has said here:
http://w11.zetaboards.com/ReportsOfTheDeathOf/topic/7666650/1/
Hugh Keevins
WE all know which team Walter Smith supports, but whose side is he on?
It was two weeks ago during Rangers’ pre-season tour of Germany that the non-executive director and chairman at Ibrox flew in with chief executive Craig Mather for a meeting with Ally McCoist.
Manager and chairman then spoke in glowing terms about Mather and how he deserved the chance to be appointed CEO permanently.
McCoist held another media briefing two days later at which he spoke about the chemistry he’d developed with Mather, a man he could have a pint with while sharing a mutual trust.
Now it would appear there are well heeled Rangers shareholders who don’t have the same high regard for the Englishman and want him removed from the board.
The call for an Extraordinary General Meeting of club shareholders to try to make this happen is being spearheaded by multi-millionaire businessman Jim McColl.
The same man Smith sided with in a failed attempt to take control of Rangers not so very long ago.
You will allow me, and the other members of the press who were in Germany, a sense of bewilderment.
Is Mather worthy of the chance to be chief executive or not? Or was all of the stuff we were fed in the Rhineland a giant smokescreen?
The Rangers fans love to accuse the media of having an agenda, as well as a willingness to kick the club when they are down.
But we reported in good faith that the chairman and manager believed Mather was doing a grand job.
Were we deliberately misled and will there be a change of tune if the EGM eventually goes ahead?
It really doesn’t matter to me on a personal level.
I’ve been duped, deceived and diddled by club representatives for well over 40 years. I don’t expect to be given a straightforward answer to a straightforward question.
But the Rangers fans, particularly the tens of thousands who have bought season tickets for lower league football over the last two championships, are surely due an explanation.
Andy Cameron, comedian and lifelong Rangers fan, used Twitter on Friday night to warn supporters that more blood-letting behind the scenes at the club wasn’t a great idea.
“Divided we fall,” he said.
But division has been a recurring theme at Ibrox since Craig Whyte destabilised the club, and I’m struggling to see how anyone can blame that on Neil Doncaster, the SPFL’s chief executive and official whipping boy to the masses.
A lot of Rangers’ problems over the last 18 months have arisen from a failure to disclose.
It wasn’t disclosed that former owner Whyte was once banned from holding company directorships. That led to an SFA punishment.
The club didn’t disclose properly audited accounts. That led to a three year ban from Europe by UEFA.
But it’s now time for transparency, assuming such a thing is possible.
If you’re a Rangers fan you’ll take McColl at the helm in a heartbeat because he has wealth to improve the club, and there’s plenty of rumour and insinuation that money is one thing Rangers are short of at the moment.
He must also have the support of the chairman because they were allies when Rangers were up for grabs.
Being an icon is a big responsibility and Walter rightly refuses to be entrusted with the club’s soul.
He told us in Germany he wasn’t Rangers’ conscience or moral guardian. Smith’s there because he’s Rangers’ most recognisable face in the eyes of the support.
The club’s in a situation that’s crying out for clarity, and now Charles Green’s back as an Ibrox consultant to fuel the notion that we’re working at an even higher level of confusion.
Rangers is a club not at peace with itself and never mind the high falutin’ stuff about the soul of the Ibrox club.
It’s a business and there appears to be a severe lack of trust among the hierarchy and shareholders– and that’s bad for business.
It’ll all need to be sorted out soon because Barry Ferguson has just announced his ambition is to be the Rangers manager one day.
The press will need all their energy and strength to cope with that development if it ever happens.
And they’ll be too exhausted to be bothered with this seemingly interminable civil war in Ibrox.
upthehoops says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:14 pm
Is it from anyone with credibility though?
—————————
Oh no, not at all 🙂 I can’t work out who has credibility in this fiasco anymore, anyway.
Couple of Walter Walking Away tweets just popped up too, but we’ve heard that so many times, I’m inclined to dismiss them.
@Tif Fin,
I do not accept Ireland supports Celtic, Ireland supports Liverpool or Man Utd, they shoot each other over their rivalry, my daughter has lived in Dublin for years and she is a lonely Celtic fan.
I also do not accept Celtic negotiated larger sponsorship deals because they have a larger fan base, that is why they shared sponsorship contracts, one cannot claim international support as commercially significant on one hand and then admit Celtic cannot make money in their domestic market.
From purely a commercial standpoint they are fairly equal in my opinion, averaging 45,000 in the bottom tier of football is testimony to the strength of their domestic support and that is where the money is for both clubs.
@ Steerpike
I have had a look at the interim accounts, they are available online
http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/296
The £9.5m income for the period isn’t broken down really so it’s a bald figure of £9.5m as far as I can see.
I think to extrapolate that on a straight line basis for a 12 month period would be a risky way to look at things. Football is very much a front loaded business, with a lot of the income coming in at the start of the season. Basically the season ticket sale. So that would not be reflected in the second 5 months of a hypothetical 12 month period.
=================================
Here are the Financial Highlights
· Revenue of £9.5m
· Operating expenses of £16.6m
· Loss before non-recurring items and finance costs of £7.0m
· Profit before tax £9.5m driven by non-recurring release of negative goodwill of £20.5m
· Investment in football personnel of £1.6m in line with strategy
· Finance leases of £1.9m at 31 December 2012
· Cash of £21.2m as at 31 December 2012
· Undertaking of debts of former Rangers Football Club plc of £2.8m (£251,000 remains to be paid in accordance with the terms agreed)
====================================
I would note that “Loss before non-recurring items and finance costs of £7.0m”
and that “Profit before tax £9.5m driven by non-recurring release of negative goodwill of £20.5m”
Which would suggest that for the 7 month period the actual losses (including non-recurring items and finance costs) would be £11.5m.
In short, unless I am missing something (and I often do) I think you may be being a bit optimistic.
@Tif Fin,
http://rangers.g3dhosting.com/regulatory_news_article/296
Scroll half way down to point 3 Revenue, there is a break down of the income.
Sponsorship and advertising was only 381,000 for 7 months= roughly £ 650,000 for this year, I am sure Puma and Blackthorn will surpass this by some margin. Commercial and retail are a pittance due to the collapse of previous retailer.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:33 pm
@Tif Fin,
I do not accept Ireland supports Celtic, Ireland supports Liverpool or Man Utd, they shoot each other over their rivalry, my daughter has lived in Dublin for years and she is a lonely Celtic fan.
I also do not accept Celtic negotiated larger sponsorship deals because they have a larger fan base, that is why they shared sponsorship contracts, one cannot claim international support as commercially significant on one hand and then admit Celtic cannot make money in their domestic market.
From purely a commercial standpoint they are fairly equal in my opinion, averaging 45,000 in the bottom tier of football is testimony to the strength of their domestic support and that is where the money is for both clubs.
======================
I don’t believe I have mentioned Ireland in any post on this forum, so I’m not sure where you are getting that from. I have no desire to discuss people shooting each other.
I note what you believe, so why do you think Celtic got the Nike deal worth £5m a year, over several years and Rangers have nothing similar. I took it as being a commercial decision by Nike based on exposure, do you think it was something different. Whatever the reason Celtic have it, Rangers don’t.
With regard Rangers attendances in the bottom division, at two thirds of the price paid in the SPL, that’s not what I was talking about. In the SPL Celtic had paying customers of on average 4,000 more than Rangers. If Rangers can get into the SPL and maintain their attendances then clearly there will be parity in that area. Historically their wasn’t though.
Whats the odds on there being 2 Mcoll’s involved at Ibrox shortly
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:45 pm
@Tif Fin,
===============================
Thanks again
Ok so if TRFC does transfer over to ‘real Rangers men’ – and significant additional funding is available – and the club is stabilised and focused on the football…
Does anyone believe that it will be best ‘for the good of Scottish football’ to see the Govan club in the top league?
IMO, if / when that club reaches the top league it’s just going to create a whole lot of other problems… 🙁
Steerpike on August 4, 2013 at 1:02 pm
…
I predict this time next year there will be a new Rangers board and a new manager,
——————————
By this time next year, I predict…
1. RIFC plc is in liquidation.
2. TRFC Ltd has been sold to “real” Rangers men.
3. Ibrox & MP has been sold to a property investment consortium based in south east Asia.
4. TRFC Ltd have agreed to rent Ibrox for around £2.5m per year.
5. TRFC plan to become a plc and raise around £2m from fans.
6. TRFC plc downscale & plan to break even with turnover of around £15m
@Tif Fin
” Football is very much a front loaded business, with a lot of the income coming in at the start of the season. Basically the season ticket sale. So that would not be reflected in the second 5 months of a hypothetical 12 month period.”
In the accounts season ticket sales, sponsorship deals etc are divided by 12 and multiplied by 7, this enables one to study the monthly profit and loss of a company.
HirsutePursuit says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:58 pm
There is nothing in that which I find fanciful.
I would possibly change the order of 1 and 2, where the holding company sold the limited company then liquidated itself and the owners “cashed in”.
I could also accept a hypothesis where the PLC kept the properties and rented them directly, giving the owners an income.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 4:04 pm
And thanks again for explaining that part.
So assuming a straight line extrapolation we get the £16m you suggest. Then up those figures based on your estimates.
The real trick will be to maintain the level of season ticket sale when they are increased by the amount you have suggested and the team is working on a £5m wage bill as you have suggested.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 3:33 pm
0 14 Rate This
Steerpike I’m afraid your well off track there. I think you may well just be looking for a reaction now yes?
I digress, Jim McCall is it safe to say that he is rich? Because if he is why did he not just buy them for the paltry 5.5 million. I know Green had the lock in or something along those line’s, but why didn’t he just bid 7.5 million etc as money talk’s. Something a little fishy going on as a simple search tell’s you he is worth 800 million, anyone know if it’s tied up in assets etc?
@Tif Fin,
” I note what you believe, so why do you think Celtic got the Nike deal worth £5m a year, over several years and Rangers have nothing similar. I took it as being a commercial decision by Nike based on exposure, do you think it was something different. Whatever the reason Celtic have it, Rangers don’t. ”
Rangers had a similar deal with Nike and declined to renew it for commercial reasons.
Steerpike@3.10 post.
I realise you were asked for comparisons between Celtic and Rangers support/funding/sponsorship (but only because posters were puzzled by your upbeat forecasts). Deja vu. Should RFC/Sevco not be concentrating on steadying the ship? Breaking even and not going out of business instead of continually comparing themselves with Celtic?
Thinking like that caused their liquidation in the first instance. Of course the Sevco fans might not be in it for a ten year slog only to never compete at the end of it, so naturally PR and those who inflitrate message boards will avoid all mention of the rocky road ahead and paint a rosy picture in case crucial season ticket revenue stops.
In the midst of posting this I just saw your last post. I cannot believe you are John McEnroeing us. RFC (deceased)/Sevco DECLINED a similar lucrative deal with NIke when they were robbing Peter not to pay Paul, trading whilst insolvent? When every penny was a prisoner in Ibrox? They turned down a £25 million deal with a global, prestigious brand?
You are a cool customer.
@Ryan
” Steerpike I’m afraid your well off track there. I think you may well just be looking for a reaction now yes? ”
I may indeed be well off but until we see the accounts we are all guessing, even you, and no I am not looking for a reaction, only putting my perspective.
I am more concerned about Rangers trading position than cash flow, and if Rangers was really trading aT a million a month loss then they would not be holding ticket prices this year, let us not judge all CEO’s as reckless as CW.
Spivco says:
August 4, 2013 at 4:34 pm
But they did it for “commercial reasons”.
I cannot for the life of me imagine what those might have been or who made the decision, but there you have it. Rangers gave up £25m in free money and Celtic took it. Financial genius.
@Spivco,
” RFC (deceased)/Sevco DECLINED a similar lucrative deal with NIke when they were robbing Peter not to pay Paul, trading whilst insolvent? When every penny was a prisoner in Ibrox? They turned down a £25 million deal with a global’ prestigiou brand? ”
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
Rangers had the same 5 year deal in 2003 and chose not to renew it in 2009, Celtic did and good luck to them, I fail to see the outcry, there are other prestigious brands who offer other types of deals.
What I will say is the new Puma deal is unlikely to be as low as £500,000 per year as some have suggested, the Rangers brand has not devalued by 90% compared to Celtic.
” I cannot for the life of me imagine what those might have been or who made the decision, but there you have it. Rangers gave up £25m in free money and Celtic took it. Financial genius.”
I imagine the new deal with the new sponsor had similar returns to the old deal with the old sponsor, well one hopes so, these deals can be quite different in nature, I assume they had their reasons.
Steerpike at 4.47
Rangers had the same 5 year deal in 2003 and chose not to renew it in 2009, Celtic did and good luck to them, I fail to see the outcry, there are other prestigious brands who offer other types of deals.
What I will say is the new Puma deal is unlikely to be as low as £500,000 per year as some have suggested, the Rangers brand has not devalued by 90% compared to Celtic.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Indeed there are other types of deals. A business decision generally operates on the MO that one declines to renew on the basis that the new deal offers either circa the same amount of cash/benefits or more. What did RFC(deceased) sign up to instead? And how much was it for? For the life of me I do not recall.
I do, however, recall SDM’s fury at the Daily Record backpage at the time when it juxtaposed RFC(deceased)’s financial woes against Celtic’s windfall Nike £25m deal.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 4:53 pm
So what deal did they take up, rather than the Nike one similar to Celtic’s which was on the table.
I am genuinely intrigued by that.
” Does anyone believe that it will be best ‘for the good of Scottish football’ to see the Govan club in the top league? ”
Since when did Rangers or Celtic care about the good of Scottish football, the 11-1 voting structure rather gives it away, I want to see Rangers back in the top league for my own selfish reasons, I tend to avoid moral high grounds, I suffer like most humans from vertigo.
Steerpike – seems you are guessing at a lot of things and getting your facts wrong in your haste to reply to each and everyone responding to you – would request you slow down on the scatter gun responses, take a breath, do more research and then reply – quality over rides quantity every time. As with Adam on RTC, becoming a Q&A show to one person becomes rather tiresome – well, for me anyway.
Tif Finn says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:05 pm
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 4:53 pm
So what deal did they take up, rather than the Nike one similar to Celtic’s which was on the table.
I am genuinely intrigued by that.
***********
This is an example of the scatter gun approach going awry.
Celtic did not have the same deal on the table – they were with Umbro and Nike gave them a good deal to move over in 1999
RFC moved from Nike to Diadora in 2002
http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Scottish_Football_League/Celtic/Celtic.htm
http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Scottish_Football_League/Rangers/Rangers.htm
There was no deal RFC denied but Celtic took – sorry
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 4:47 pm
0 2 Rate This
@Spivco,
” RFC (deceased)/Sevco DECLINED a similar lucrative deal with NIke when they were robbing Peter not to pay Paul, trading whilst insolvent? When every penny was a prisoner in Ibrox? They turned down a £25 million deal with a global’ prestigiou brand? ”
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
Rangers had the same 5 year deal in 2003 and chose not to renew it in 2009, Celtic did and good luck to them, I fail to see the outcry, there are other prestigious brands who offer other types of deals.
………………………………………………………..
Steerpike it is hard to see why in 2009 Rangers would have turned down a deal involving 25 million when the clubs debt was running at 31million in very difficult economic times…and had suffered an early European exit causing further revenue loss andincreasing debt?
Now AJ was chairman at the time…could he have been the fiscal genious to turn down such a cash injection to a declining business?
” So what deal did they take up, rather than the Nike one similar to Celtic’s which was on the table. ”
From memory they tied up a deal with JJB, and they went bust, birds of a feather springs to mind.
I do not buy nor wear football attire nor foot wear, and have no intentions starting unless I move to the moon where no one can laugh at me.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 4:47 pm
@Spivco,
” RFC (deceased)/Sevco DECLINED a similar lucrative deal with NIke when they were robbing Peter not to pay Paul, trading whilst insolvent? When every penny was a prisoner in Ibrox? They turned down a £25 million deal with a global’ prestigiou brand? ”
—————————————————————————————————————————————–
Rangers had the same 5 year deal in 2003 and chose not to renew it in 2009, Celtic did and good luck to them, I fail to see the outcry, there are other prestigious brands who offer other types of deals.
What I will say is the new Puma deal is unlikely to be as low as £500,000 per year as some have suggested, the Rangers brand has not devalued by 90% compared to Celtic.
——————————-
Nonsense – RFC did not have the same 5 year deal in 2003 – they went with Diadora in 2002 as per my post above – they subsequently changed to Umbro in 2006………
http://www.historicalkits.co.uk/Scottish_Football_League/Rangers/Rangers.htm
” RFC moved from Nike to Diadora in 2002 —————————-
Good move, it worked out well, the point is no one knows the details of the deal, we cannot just say they did not move for sound commercial reasons.
Exiled Celt,
You will have to forgive me, I am not an expert on football boots, if Rangers moved from Nike to whoever then one assumes they did it for sound commercial reasons, I stand corrected on the dates, Rangers used to be with Nike and moved in the financial interests of Rangers.
Methinks wee Ally’s latest broadside, lambasting CG is actually an exit strategy. He has, over the past year painted himself into a corner with all of the” we don’t do walking away” stuff. Now he wants out, he is trying to provoke a face saving sacking and the return of CG has presented him with a get out that will help retain his popularity with the people who think they are.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:23 pm
” RFC moved from Nike to Diadora in 2002 —————————-
Good move, it worked out well, the point is no one knows the details of the deal, we cannot just say they did not move for sound commercial reasons.
——————-
Deflecting inaccuracies in your post with more inaccuracies? No one knows the details? Took me 10secs to find it………….
http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Football%3A+Diadora+in+Gers+kit+deal.-a083572595
Quote – They will pay Rangers around pounds 1million per season to have their brand displayed on the club’s kits. And the Ibrox club will cash in further by making and selling their own strips
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:28 pm
Exiled Celt,
You will have to forgive me, I am not an expert on football boots, if Rangers moved from Nike to whoever then one assumes they did it for sound commercial reasons, I stand corrected on the dates, Rangers used to be with Nike and moved in the financial interests of Rangers.
………………………….
Or it was the only offer available to them…
How and ever I believe Exiled has it nailed…you do appear to be trying to counter all posts…regardless of facts….
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:28 pm
Exiled Celt,
You will have to forgive me, I am not an expert on football boots, if Rangers moved from Nike to whoever then one assumes they did it for sound commercial reasons, I stand corrected on the dates, Rangers used to be with Nike and moved in the financial interests of Rangers.
*****
Boots? Thought we were talking kit suppliers LOL! If you think they moved in the financial interests of Rangers, then let’s see how that one panned out for you. Oh yes – I forgot – the financial giant now ceases to exist….
Done feeding the troll!
” Steerpike it is hard to see why in 2009 Rangers would have turned down a deal involving 25 million ”
They did not, I got my dates wrong, I blame my age.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:20 pm
” So what deal did they take up, rather than the Nike one similar to Celtic’s which was on the table. ”
From memory they tied up a deal with JJB, and they went bust, birds of a feather springs to mind.
==========================
From memory the JJB deal was Rangers giving up all of their merchandising and shops and getting a fixed amount from JJB. £18m up front then £3m a year. So they would get in the region of £48m over 10 years. But that was instead of doing their own merchandise sales.
Rangers effectively sold their merchandising rights for a fixed amount per year.
Celtic’s deal with Nike was for £5m a year, on top of still owning all of their own merchandising.
So Celtic will get £50m over 10 years. in addition to doing their own merchandising. If I remember right that netted about £4.5m last year.
Apples and bananas I think.
Back to my original really. Celtic had more coming in from merchandising on a yearly basis, around £1.5m. In addition to that they had the £5m income from Nike. Rangers got £18m up front, and presumably they used it to pay off some of the huge debt they had at the time.
@Exiled Celt
” Deflecting inaccuracies in your most with more inaccuracies? No one knows the details? Took me 10secs to find it………….They will pay Rangers around pounds 1million per season to have their brand displayed on the club’s kits. And the Ibrox club will cash in further by making and selling their own strips ”
I am not deflecting nor inaccurate, we have no knowledge how much Rangers earned by making and selling their own strips on top of the million pounds, and only then can we compare it to the Nike deal which pays only a commission on sales. As I said they are two different types of deal, it is apples and pears. AJ had close inks with Nike, he is not going to agree to an identical deal for 1 million while Celtic renew a 5 million deal, give people the benefit of the doubt for having some business sense.
TommyB says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:30 pm
—————————–
I agree, Ally is working his ticket and a pay off for him and his backroom team
He doesnt do walking away but a man of dignity with his record in management really should
Of course when there is £2.1m at stake and lets face it he will never get another job in football management with a £750k wage he will wait until he is horsed out the door.
Green of course will point the finger at him for costing the club/company* money they could ill afford to lose ,ignoring the fact he was willing to back him with a £10m warchest just 12 months ago .
McCoist will claim he is being undermined from the sidelines and his position is untenable
altho he will stay and fight for the club* til the end
Despite all the finger pointing and accusations of who is to blame ,isnt it ironic that both these chancers
have and will continue to fill their pockets with other peoples money . The worst CEO and the worst manager in the history of Rfc* are both inline to profit by millions of £s each for 18 months work
Kerching!!!!
@Tif Fin
” Back to my original really. Celtic had more coming in from merchandising on a yearly basis, around £1.5m. In addition to that they had the £5m income from Nike. Rangers got £18m up front, and presumably they used it to pay off some of the huge debt they had at the time.——————————
….and it is impossible to judge the value of Rangers new arrangements with Puma and Sports Direct, but we can assume it is not the amount stated in the interim accounts.
As for the past, it is difficult to add up who won or lost, the deals were not structured in the same way, maybe Rangers sold cheap in 2009 because they needed the cash.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:07 pm
0 1 Rate This
” … I tend to avoid moral high grounds …”
———-
Height can be a question of personal perspective. One man’s moral high ground can be another man’s common decency.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:47 pm
… give people the benefit of the doubt for having some business sense.
———————————————
You do know Rangers were liquidated owing tens of millions of pounds.
Steerpike says:
August 4, 2013 at 5:56 pm
….and it is impossible to judge the value of Rangers new arrangements with Puma and Sports Direct, but we can assume it is not the amount stated in the interim accounts.
========================
I’m done TTFN
Isn’t it funny, all the chaos that’s unfolding down Ibrox way and all of a sudden everyone is suddenly talking about the merits of old Nike/Diadora kit deals. Completely irrelevant.
Steerpike is doing a fine job steering everyone off course!
However I’m pretty sure the events that unfold this week will have absolutely nothing to do with kit deals dating back circa 10 years.
There’s every chance the forthcoming week could be the most entertaining one of the entire saga!
@PaulMac
” How and ever I believe Exiled has it nailed…you do appear to be trying to counter all posts…regardless of facts….”
I am trying to establish the fact the two deals were not identical, and it is impossible to say which one benefited the most over the long term, I do not believe Celtic have traditionally earned 5 million per year more than Rangers in this revenue stream, their customer base is not that disproportionate.
I think a very interesting twist to the saga may be on the horizon.
With the events of this weekend likely to lead to some upheavals this coming week we could well see a proper manager installed at TRFC in time for the next game.
I suspect almost anyone could deliver better results that AM but you could see someone like Stuart McCall being tempted by a fairly strong squad – way beyond current requirements – and the potential for a triumphant march to the Premier League (for the first time that is…).
Decent playing strategies and man-management could at least sort out that part of the equation and give ‘The Rangers Men’ the platform to then separate TRFC from the property side which is all the spivs really want to keep hold of anyway
Some kind of sweetheart deal (a one year rent honeymoon and AM’s team severance borne by RIFC) could be on the cards.
Still a lot to address but ‘The Rangers Men’ have access to funds and supporters that will probably let them go to that well once more.
Interesting times ahead perhaps?
Scottish football needs a strong Arbroath.