The Rangers saga as it happened…

By

It’s my view – and I know not everyone agrees …

Comment on The Rangers saga as it happened… by jockybhoy.

It’s my view – and I know not everyone agrees – that this site is to educate as well as investigate. To illuminate as well as castigate.

For this reason I will continue to reply to those I think need either explanation or exposure. Such as Enfakid.

To make them drop their mask and, despite their fine words, typed with their “off” hand, expose them as wee njaffs who have their own agenda is (thanks for the reminder about Ross County, yet you say Celtic will sweep all before them. How does that work?), I think, an uplifting experience.

It is in this context that I respectfully decline the requests to “not feed the troll” but instead shine the light on them. If nothing else it’s folk like Enfakid that help unite this site and bring it back ON topic, not off. It reminds us of the dark forces, paid or otherwise, that have been the root cause of the situation we find ourselves in.

In other news….
“Celtic allowed to totally dominate” – 1 trophy out of 3 last year. A year when 25% of the SPL won silverware and 33.33% reached a final. Now Enfakid says that’s because Celtic were overconfident – I think it was quite the reverse, most games Celtic lost were because of a lack of confidence, but either way, I am sure Killie and hearts fans have a more positive view of last year’s cups than Enfakid.

jockybhoy Also Commented

The Rangers saga as it happened…
enfakid says: August 30, 2012 at 11:42
“Yes and what were their respective coefficents, would you have been suprised if Celtic had not progressed”

I’m a Celtic fan and I would not have been at all surprised had Celtic not progressed. In fact as eminent a Scottish manager as Sir Walter Smith of Cardigan would not have been surprised had a Scottish club not progressed to Champos league.

What I think is unusual, given the oft reported parlous nature of Scottish football by MSM and Scottish footballing authorities alike that the press, and you, seemed to think Celtic’s qualification was a foregone conclusion, I can assure you no Celtic fan thought so….


The Rangers saga as it happened…
I was really just chucking a few arguemtns out there in response to the suggestion that silence meant approval of Auldheid’s comments. I am open to debate, as indeed I was when the subject came up on RTC, but echoing Danish Pastry’s point that as Celtic have finally, after 4 years (3 of which they were of course not Scottish Champions as despite What Was Rangers being apparently technically insolvent they still bought those titles) it will raise hackles to bring this debate to the fore today, when we should be celebrating a Scottish team getting into the group stages.

Oh and btw Enfakid 10:36: “It has been widely reported that Celtic will benefit by circa 12m by simply participating in the CL” – Celtic had to get through two qualifying rounds, beating the league champions of Finland and of Sweden (Sweden are ranked 29 places above Scotland in the World Rankings btw) to gain entry to the CL proper, so I think saying “simply participating in the CL” is rather minimising the team’s accomplishment.

Serious Questiojn: Are there any ideas for generating income in Scottish football other than just redistributing Celtic’s gate money or Celtic’s prize money? What about the windfalls from the other teams in Europe? Are they also ripe for redistribution? Or is it only Celtic int he cross-hairs?


The Rangers saga as it happened…
How about the danger that teams might think the team lying second may progress further in Europe and allow that team to take the European place on the basis the other teams may profit more by that team progressing further?


Recent Comments by jockybhoy

Who Is Conning Whom?
“Take away non-reoccurring expenditure like stadium repairs and Sports Direct compensation and add historical retail profits plus some extra football prize money” – so take away actual costs and add hypothetical revenue and hey presto the books will balance!

With financial acumen like that, you should be on the NewGers board!


The Vice Closes
After these distressed assets, only of use to a football team, actively playing in a professional league, were bought, there were immediately revalued:
“Revaluation increase on land and buildings is put at £33.98 million in total, though the club also notes if those properties were to be sold at that value the tax bill would be £7.8 million.
…Finance director Brian Stockbridge said: “A revaluation process was undertaken during the period; Ibrox stadium and Murray Park were revalued at £40 million, and intangibles (brand and er history? JB) were valued at £19 million on acquisition.”
Administrators of the oldco Rangers, Duff & Phelps, sold the “intangible” assets to Green’s consortium for £1.” Source: http://www.insider.co.uk/company-results-forecasts/rangers-report-7m-operating-loss-9872346

Arguably the fact that it was sold to a football team who could make use of the facilities there was a greater value than £4.5m that wasn’t realised, but that may be being churlish.
What we do know is that all the assets of worth were bought for £5.5m and that included everything, property, brand, history, fixtures and fittings, seemingly playing contracts (people are assets too – I’ve been sold in my time! JB) as well as prize money apparently owed to the previous entity…
For the full breakdown I refer you to the sadly missed Paul McConville site: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/scotslawthoughts.wordpress.com/2012/08/25/for-sevcos-5-5m-it-bought-all-rangers-players-fixed-assets-goodwill-and-2-67m-prize-money/amp/
its clear the assets were hugely undervalued when sold. 


The Lost Voice of the Armageddon Virus
Hasn’t Chris Sutton also said Alves is going to Ibrox? He probably was tipped off by someone and obviously King’s statement was well crafted. Annual PR overdrive.
Remember what they say “loose lips sell tix”


THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
IIRC if a loan is received to a company doesn’t it appear on both sides of the balance sheet? As cash in the assets but as a liability in loans liable? Now the interest would make the liability higher than the loan under normal circumstances but if the loan is interest free it’d just be equivalent. Why would anyone do this? As has been said the requirement is for short term cash, the presence of longer term liabilities is apparently of little consequence. Unfortunately, as we know, these liabilities add up over time, until the straw breaks the camel’s back…
I am sure my fellow Essex boy EBC can steer me right on this.

BTW these lessons apparently unlearned down Ibrox (and indeed Hampden) way…


THAT Debate, and the Beauty of Hindsight
I wonder how much will be due to NewGers players in terms of bonuses for qualifying for Europe? If they do fall at an early hurdle in the Europa League then that may leave them further out of pocket, given costs incurred and low prize money…


About the author