Bluedell
-
Posts
17,908 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
100
Everything posted by Bluedell
-
I didn't say they weren't Celtic men.
-
There's absolutely no evidence that Celtic fans were involved in any decisions at LBG, other than Leggat's ramblings.
-
Or issue a whole load of shares at 1p to the Easdales to give them outright control of the club?
-
Thanks for the summary. Haven't registered yet. Don't think I've come across the email detailing how to do it yet as I don't use that email addy very much. Will need to do it over the next week or so.
-
Anything of note. Perhaps agreed was the wrong word but just interested if there were any major decisions made
-
So what was agreed at the meeting?
-
Perhaps, but as they have nothing to do with the club then I don't hold them to a level of high standard. If that changes then I would be equally critical of them if deserved. The behaviour of third parties cannot excuse the actions of the Rangers board.
-
Only one side represent Rangers.
-
Whoever penned the last paragraph should instantly be shown the door, followed by everyone who authorised it. Proof, if any was needed, that they have no idea about what our great club is about.
-
But you were using note 3 as your base and the costs in note 5 aren't included in note 3.
-
I don't see how revenue is going to increase by 20%. Gate receipts will stay static. Retail will probably increase but given what we got pre-JJB and the fact that we weren't negotiating from a position of strength, I doubt we will get more than £2m net. Most one-off costs would be included in note 5 and not note 3. There would be some, but I can't see it being anywhere near £5m. Knocking 10% off the cost base is a big ask as well and probably a bit over-optimistic. The £19m does not include any season ticket money from this season.. Agree with most of that.
-
Our figures are workable over the next 12 months with the proviso that we don't have anything up our sleeve for player or capex purposes. Moving on to the following season we may be about to run out of cash just as he season ticket money is due in, so we may have enough to last us another 6-9 months after that, although my "back of a fag-packet" calculation becomes relatively worthless taking it that far out. There are some big assumptions included in my calculations though (income increasing by £2m, costs decreasing by £2m and the costs relating to the 13th month can be taken out entirely) and I can't say whether they are accurate, but it's possible we have enough cash to see us through to the end of this season. However I'm still frustrated that we are sailing close to the wind given the amount of cash we raised less than a year ago and the approach of the directors continues to be short term.
-
Season ticket prices will increase. Perhaps 25% next year and then another 25% the following year to bring them back to where they would have been. However I would imagine that there may be some increase in players wages along the way as well.
-
Correct. There's no capital expenditure built into it and if we were to spend say £1m on a new player or on stadium improvements then it's reducing the balance that I've mentioned. On the other hand, we couuld increase cash by selling players....
-
I have done a little cash flow, making assumptions but I reckon that we have the following once we account for the season ticket cash: Bank balance at 30/6 11,181 Ranger Retail cash (946) Net balance 10,235 Season ticket cash 2,850 Balance going forward 13,085 I believe that we could have a deficit of £885K per month (giving the directors the benefit of increasing income by around £2m and reducing costs by the same amount), so we could still have around £10.4m in the bank. This could decrease down to around £4m by the end of April next year, and season ticket cash would start to flow in after that.
-
Arnold Black doesbn't give much of an opinion other than to state "it contradicts the explanations that costs are being reduced and brought under control" so I'm not sure why it brings your concern levels down. It's probably best that we don't hear from either. If they want to do something they should do it and stop talking about it. -
Will mainstream media report on sectarian singing by British troops?
Bluedell replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
So what songs do we sing that you think are actually offensive, Craig? -
You have to ask why he has been so critical if the accounts are "not that bad". The oldco football debts, acquisition and IPO costs are not included in the £14m operating loss so aren't tat relevant in the overall scheme of things. The legal fees were largely avoidable if the directors and ex-directors had done things differently so what's to say that they will not continue to act in ways that are going to cost us money. As for the Green pay-off, why did we have to do that? Again questions have to be asked of the directors as to why that cost was incurred. When did we last play Real Madrid? People keep saying that but failing to justify it. Where is the funding obviously required coming from? Then again, we were told that under Whyte as well. It will be too late by then. The time for acting is now. How naive is he, if he thinks the fact that auditors look at accounts prevent cash from disappearing. Look at all the cash that has gone over the last 9 months.
-
The potential future cashflow shortfall is obviously the biggest issue, but there are plenty of other points to sort out as well. There have been suggestions that this £3m+ had been a massive overspend by the directors or had mysteriously disappeared. Boss's theory is important as it potentially answers a query on expenditure that represents 15% of turnover.
-
So what you are saying is that it is: CR Share capital/share premium £3m DR Share premium £3m ?
-
I wonder if the club will make a statement about this threat against one of its employees? Or perhaps the fact that a Rangers fan wasn't involved will prevent them?
-
The remuneration committee is comprised entirely of independent non-executive Directors. It is chaired by Phillip Cartmell and the other members are Walter Smith and Ian Hart." "The remuneration committee is responsible for...determining the specific remuneration packages of each executive Director." No mention of Malcolm Murray being involved in any way in deciding the directors' high wages. More lies?
-
We aren't going into adminstration? That's a big assumption. The fact that it's a clean audit report doesn't mean a huge amount. Taking it to extremes the auditors may have seen a business plan whereby we sell the stadium for £10m on a sale and leaseback and that will keep us going for another 12 months but after that we run out of money and don't have ownership of the stadium. As for cash being stolen, the fact that directors can award themselves huge bonuses or earn effective interest on loans of 94% may not technically be theft but there's northing to be positive about it.
-
Will mainstream media report on sectarian singing by British troops?
Bluedell replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
If it's not that hard then why don't the people that call for us not to sing non-Rangers songs be a little more precise in what they are asking for? -
Will mainstream media report on sectarian singing by British troops?
Bluedell replied to ian1964's topic in Rangers Chat
The reference to Penny Arcade was in response to a comment that we should not be singing any non-Rangers songs. It seems that those who come out with this don't really mean it and it's just non-Rangers songs that they don't like. As for you quoting the Bill, those that are talking about offence aren't referring to it. They would be making the same argument been if the Bill had not been passed. I think that they have a reasoned argument (albeit I disagree with it) but it would cheapen it if they referred to some crazy Bill put forward for purely political purposes.