Crimson Dynamo
-
Posts
1,566 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Crimson Dynamo
-
-
Not much we didn't know here.
My main question would be when Craig Whyte and his lawyers were stonewalling the SFA/SPL's attempt to get him to provide proof he was a fit and proper person to control Rangers last October. Why was there no special enquiry then? Why wait until we are in administration and on the brink of liquidation?
0 -
I would say the blame lies 50/50 just now between Craig Whyte and David Murray:
Craig Whyte by the sounds of it paid hardly any bills or allowed any bills to be paid during his stewardship of Rangers if they were paid it was usually only on the steps of the court!!! CW spoke about a 10 million pound shortfall in the finances of Rangers. So what did he do he ran up more debts gave Davis, Whittaker and McGregor bumper new deals. He bought Wallace from Hearts. Made a crazy deal "IMO" with Ticketus which in truth at the moment is the thing that has really f***ed us I think. Never paid HMRC etc.. That shortfall was there before Whyte took over he must've known about it or his accountants must have known about it. But instead it was all 5 millions war chests for transfers and all the rest of it. If Whyte had been honest from the start and told the fans we don't have money we are going to have to cut back Paid HMRC what they were due etc.. I think fans would have understood and supported the team and Whyte throughout it all why we sorted ourselves out. But there is more chance of Elvis making a comeback than Craig Whyte being honest.
Which is why the rest of the fault lies with Murray and the previous board they should have done proper due dilligence on this man. Find out is he a “billionaire” or is he full of shit. It almost seems as if they couldn't wait to get rid of Rangers
I thought Walter Smith gave an excellent interview as ever and agree with everything he said
0 -
saw this on Rangers Media interesting article: http://www.rangersmedia.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=707:defining-rangers-the-club-versus-the-legal-entity&catid=101:club&Itemid=529
Definitions:
A Limited Company - a legal entity which owns assets and liabilities with the purpose of seeking profit ("Company" or "legal entity")
Newco - the continuation of a company in a legal format; usually taking assets from the OldCo whilst it's liquidated ("NewCo")
A Football Club - a community formed by fans working towards a common goal ("Club")
Rangers FC, the club, the community, was formed by the Gallant Pioneers in 1872.
The Rangers Football Club PLC was incorporated on 27 May 1899. This is the legal entity which holds the Club's assets and liabilities, the legal entity which seeks profit to its shareholders, and the legal entity which the Club aims to progress on.
As we are all painfully aware, the Limited Company as a profit making business and going concern legal entity has failed by the fact it has entered into an insolvency process.
The Club has not failed. From 1872 to 2012, fans continue to support Rangers Football Club as a Club not as a legal entity. We support the Club, the community that bonds Rangers fans; Bill Struth's words, Rangers 1972 European team, its miserable lows in the 1980's, its 9 in a row team, its title winning #54 team, its losing 2011/12 team. Did 48 thousand fans turn up to see Rangers old boys vs. Ac Milan Glorie in support of the Club, or the Company?
The Legal Entity is simply the body which is required by law to hold the assets and liabilities, can open a bank account, can take out a loan, can be floated on the stock exchange etc. It is not who the players play for - they play for the Club; the fans, the community, the history.
Although there are concerns over the SPL shamelessly and utterly ludicrously moving the goalposts on NewCo in a deliberate attempt to punish Rangers FC, regardless of Rangers' format next week or in six months or in six years, the Club will still exist. Rangers fans won't forget the SPL's tactics and other club's attempts to kick Rangers when they're down. Rangers will exist after David Murray, after Craig Whyte, after the new owners, after the owners after them regardless of the legal format.
Did The Celtc Football and Athletic Company Ltd (incorporated by Fungas in 1994) lose its history from 1888? Or since 1897 when Celtc incorported? Did the Celtc fans refuse to support this legal entity, or did they continue to support their Club?
Businesses fail. Legal entities fail. Rangers FC as a Club will move on.
If Rangers got beat next week, we will continue to support the Club. If the legal entity gets beat, we should continue to support the Club.
0 -
There (as expected) is a lot of bravado and beating of the chests - but within a short space of time the reality will set in. If either 1 or 2 happens for me 1 will be akin to a FATAL heart attack while 2 will be getting HIV, with death taking longer...
You do know you're talking about a football team at the end of the day don't you? I really don't see how you can compare a "football" team going out of business to either of those terrible things!
If people choose to support a "new" Rangers it could be the rebirth of something great back to what the "old" Rangers stood for and at the end of the day it will still be Rangers won't it?
0 -
Yes it's a non-liquidation liquidation despite what Miller says it's not a CVA.
Thanks. Tis all very confusing. Lots of games being played by all parties involved I think
0 -
Of course it is, dress it up any way you like.
Is it? If we pay debts in some form or another through a CVA then "Rangers" would continue. I've been led to believe CVA (that everybody agrees to) for Rangers = Good. Whereas if we liquidate they just strip the assets and sell to the highest bidder and the creditors get a bit of money after D+P have been paid. Then perhaps we would get the newco
I may be completely wrong here as I have absolutely no idea how a lot of this works :-)
0 -
Once this is over i'm hoping Rangers go back to being on the back page of the paper and I think starting a campaign to have him stripped of the sir would keep us on the front page and I don't want that. I think SDM has questions to answer but he chased the dream and at the time it was was what alot of Rangers fans wanted at the time perhaps if we knew what we know now it would've been different. But who knows.....
0 -
Interesting that Celtic haven't really spent any money but have a large squad when we have 'spent' 13m & have a skeleton squad. Is this just bad investment? Poor scouting? Being unable to negotiate a good fee for our departing players? Financial difficulty or just plain bad financial control?
Think this report misses out our run in UEFA Cup plus we had a couple of runs in Champions League/Europa League which would probably balance out the profit/loss ratio. You're right tho we went through a phase of signing players for big money with no hope of making any money back on them JCD for example. The players highlighted at the bottom of the story (Svensson, Thomson and Sebo) we should have made something out of all them (even just our money back) instead we virtually gave them away
0 -
Very interesting article on stv news.
The perceived wisdom around Scotland is that clubs in the SPL donâ??t pay transfer fees anymore.
The severe financial cutbacks that were forced on our game by the collapse of the Setanta deal, coupled with falling crowds are key reasons given for the lack of spending power within Scotland.
What the following table shows is that is certainly not the case. While weâ??re unlikely to have a transfer deadline day bonanza in the way that certain other leagues may, there are still financial movements being made to acquire and release players.
The following table shows the transfer spend of each of the current SPL clubs. Weâ??ll get a couple of caveats out of the way first of all. The data we have here is the best available, but in some cases itâ??s not gospel.
In the cases of Aberdeen, Celtic and Rangers all of the figures used were taken directly from their annual reports with the exception of Rangers in 2010/11, which has yet to be released. This info is straight from the horseâ??s mouth and is accurate to the nearest £1000.
For the clubs that donâ??t publicly release their books weâ??ve used a number of trusted sources and the reports from transfers at the time. These figures may not be quite as close to the dead-on figure that we have for the three clubs mentioned previously, but theyâ??re pretty damn close.
In some cases there is a £0 transfer outlay for the season, which means there were no reports or suggestions that any transfer money changed hands in that particular year. Again, that is not absolutely gospel; it is based on the players signed, their ages, whether they were previously under contract and any other indicators that a fee was paid.
Secondly we need to define what counts as a transfer fee here. In the case of annual reports a transfer fee is known either as a â??payment to acquire/receipt from sale of playerâ??s registrationâ? or a â??payment to acquire/receipt from sale of an intangible assetâ?. Very basically speaking, this is accountant speak for a transfer fee. What counts as a transfer fee? Money received for a player or manager to move clubs. It may also include fees paid for loaning a player.
Itâ??s also worth noting that some of these figures donâ??t tally exactly with transfer fees reported at the time. That is because annual reports for each year only count the money that has already been received, and donâ??t include instalments due in the future or bonus performance payments, which will only be recorded when theyâ??re received.
For example, Carlos Cuellar moved to Aston Villa for a reported £7.7m, but Rangersâ?? incomings for that year were £7.6m and that also included the sale of Daniel Cousin and Jean-Claude Darcheville. That would suggest that at least part of the Cuellar fee was made up of instalments and/or bonuses to be paid at a later date.
Clear enough? Now, hereâ??s the science partâ?¦
Transfer fees spent
Team 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 Total
Aberdeen £25,000 £106,000 £453,000 £81,000 £85,000 £750,000
Celtic £5,865,000 £5,598,000 £7,434,000 £8,350,000 £8,150,000 £35,397,000
Dundee Utd £650,000 £53,000 £69,000 £52,800 £15,300 £840,100
Dunfermline £48,400 £0 £39,000 £0 £20,560 £107,960
Hearts £1,188,000 £1,180,000 £176,000 £450,000 £0 £2,994,000
Hibernian £240,000 £490,000 £166,000 £540,000 £102,000 £1,538,000
Inverness £80,000 £66,000 £56,000 £0 £0 £202,000
Kilmarnock £30,000 £10,000 £20,000 £0 £88,000 £148,000
Motherwell £132,000 £180,000 £23,000 £23,000 £0 £358,000
Rangers £3,759,000 £6,994,000 £8,798,000 £7,339,000 £6,420,000 £33,310,000
St Johnstone £44,000 £0 £28,000 £153,120 £0 £225,120
St Mirren £130,000 £0 £0 £30,000 £10,000 £170,000
The first revelation is that every club in the division has paid a transfer fee over the last five seasons. These may not be the exorbitant fees that are seen in the English Premiership, but business is being done. Celtic have the highest outlay, with a spend of just over £35 million, closely followed by Rangers who have spent around £33 million in the same period.
As expected, there is a significant drop off in money out after the Old Firm clubs. Hearts have spent almost £3 million in that time, with over half of that spent on the arrivals of Mauricio Pinilla, Christos Karipidis, Laryea Kingston and Christian Nade.
Hibernian have spent around £1.5 million acquiring the likes of Anthony Stokes, Derek Riordan, John Rankin and Torben Joneleit, while Dundee United have spent just short of seven figures, the largest chunk of that being on Jon Daly. Almost two thirds of Aberdeenâ??s transfer spending was on Tommy Wright, Charlie Mulgrew, Sone Aluko and bringing Mark McGhee back to Pittodrie.
A third of Motherwellâ??s spend was in bringing back Steven Hammell from Southend. Inverness, St Johnstone and Kilmarnock have spent small amounts taking in the likes of Dougie Imrie, Liam Craig and Connor Sammon. Dunfermline and St Mirren paid out small fees for the likes of Kevin Rutkiewicz and Eddie Malone.
But who are the teams that are making money from selling their players?
Transfer fees received
Team 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 Total
Aberdeen £689,000 £278,000 £46,000 £415,000 £222,000 £1,650,000
Celtic £9,397,000 £5,695,000 £1,540,000 £5,712,000 £13,230,000 £35,574,000
Dundee Utd £0 £1,300,000 £600,000 £50,000 £0 £1,950,000
Dunfermline £66,000 £0 £66,000 £30,000 £154,000 £316,000
Hearts £1,614,000 £9,978,000 £2,525,000 £0 £0 £14,117,000
Hibernian £2,800,000 £7,100,000 £240,000 £4,488,000 £1,738,000 £16,366,000
Inverness £44,000 £141,000 £638,000 £58,000 £0 £881,000
Kilmarnock £0 £2,050,000 £0 £0 £616,000 £2,516,000
Motherwell £264,000 £950,000 £780,000 £1,144,000 £0 £3,138,000
Rangers £1,015,000 £7,671,000 £6,171,000 £500,000 £4,818,000 £20,175,000
St Johnstone £25,000 £150,000 £0 £0 £10,560 £185,560
St Mirren £222,000 £26,400 £0 £299,200 £0 £545,600
Again we see Celtic leading the way in terms of pure numbers, with big transfer fees received in particular for Aidan McGeady and Stilian Petrov. Rangers have made sales of just over £20 million, with the departure of Carlos Cuellar a large part of that.
Here is where Hibernian really punch above their weight. The Easter Road side have sold just over £16 million of players in five years, including very large fees for Steven Fletcher, Scott Brown and Steven Whittaker.
Hearts have also sold well, and while they have not received all of the £9 million for Craig Gordon, the sale of the Sunderland goalkeeper, Roman Bednar and Andrius Velicka made a huge amount in 07/08. Kilmarnock also owe their healthy sale figure to one deal in particular; Steven Naismith moving to Rangers.
Motherwell and Dundee United have sold well, getting good fees for David Clarkson, Paul Quinn and Barry Robson. Aberdeen have also fared fairly well, particularly with the sales of Lee Miller and Russell Anderson.
Inverness and St Mirren have returned modest amounts, while almost all of St Johnstoneâ??s transfer incomings have come from the â??saleâ? of Owen Coyle to Burnley. Dunfermlineâ??s sale of Willie Gibson to Crawley accounts for the vast majority of their dealings.
So, who has been turning a profit?
Balance of transfer spend over five years
Team Profit
Aberdeen £900,000
Celtic £177,000
Dundee Utd £1,109,900
Dunfermline £208,040
Hearts £11,123,000
Hibernian £14,828,000
Inverness £679,000
Kilmarnock £2,518,000
Motherwell £2,780,000
Rangers -£13,135,000
St Johnstone -£39,560
St Mirren £375,600
Again we see Hibernian as big winners, because their business model is so focused on bringing through youth players and moving them on for healthy fees. Hearts too have done well with the wheeling and dealing of player sales.
Almost every club in the division has turned a modest profit, although that may well be by necessity rather than by design, as financial threats and the lure of bigger money south of the border take hold. The fact that so few clubs make operating profit, even after positive balances in the transfer market, suggests that is still the case.
Celticâ??s transfer balance is interesting, given the figures involved, as they seem to spend exactly what they make, reinvesting the money taken from sales into the playing squad. The club transfer policy seems to be to find players with a sell-on value, put them in the metaphorical shop window, sell them on at a profit and then repeat the process with the proceeds.
Only two clubs make a loss in their dealings. St Johnstone look to have made a modest loss of around £40,000 because they havenâ??t managed to move on many of their current crop. With interest in players like Murray Davidson or next yearâ??s inclusion of any compensation for the loss of Derek McInnes that may well change overnight.
Rangers also have a significant deficit, particularly down the lack of player sales. Again, this may change suddenly if the likes of Nikica Jelavic are moved on for a good fee, and there will be some positives from next yearâ??s report with the sell-on fee for Charlie Adam. However, significant fees were paid on players such as Filip Sebo, Jeremy Clement, Kyle Lafferty and Jelavic himself.
The only significant sales were of Carlos Cuellar, Danny Wilson and Alan Hutton, with the likes of Sebo, Clement, Svensson, and Kevin Thomson moved on for a loss. There are signs of this attitude changing, with Ally McCoist somewhat forced into less glamorous markets in search of young, marketable talent.
And that is what every Scottish manager is after.
0 -
Speirs is only stating the obvious...what else is he good at?
Indeed.....
0 -
Complete sensationalism. I'm not a fan of Graham Speirs but he made a point on Superscoreboard last week where he said that people with an agenda against Rangers no matter how reasoned their point it always has the same tone wjich is that they want Rangers to die no matter. He was addressing a Celtic fan at the time. But I think it rings true for everything going on at the moment
0 -
Lots of scaremongering going on. On twitter and different news sites. I'm not sure what alot of this means but I don't the media sensationalising it helps
0 -
Yes! Of course we should. We should also give them 3 cheers for being the best team. We should also let them win the last old firm game of the season 10-0. Because i'm completely convinced that if the situation was reversed Celtic would applaud Rangers on to the park.
meanwhile back in the real world......
0 -
Something is going to happen 1 way or another in the next few days. There are too many stories flying about. It is really hard and frustrating tho to seperate the facts from fiction.
0 -
very strange...
Apparently Brian Kennedy is back in as well. We have a deal with Ticketus then we don't. All spin I think. Major news is defo coming tho lots of games getting played by all parties!
0 -
Exclusive: I’m just off the phone to the ever-loquacious Craig Whyte.
He was driving, but nevertheless very happy to talk.03 Rangers g blog Craig Whyte: Rangers liquidation absolutely unnecessary
First off, he describes the story flying around Glasgow, that he has agreed to sell his 85 per cent stake in Rangers to Paul Murray, as “absolute crap”.
He said this was not about to happen and reiterated his point, made to me some days ago, that he is not about to walk away from Rangers without the £30m he is owed for his stake.
Read more: SPL boss says rules are applied ‘without fear nor favour’
He described any liquidation of Rangers as “absolutely unnecessary”.
He said: “What I want to see here is a company voluntary agreement (CVA) as a way out of administration, to preserve the company and the club. I believe that is what fans wish to see, and that is certainly what I wish to see.”
RangersCrisis Craig Whyte: Rangers liquidation absolutely unnecessary
(Click on the picture above for more on the Rangers tax crisis)
I put it to him that given the debt Rangers could face, only an oligarch or Gulf sheik could stump up the £80m-odd required to kick a football in earnest at Ibrox. He replied: “It doesn’t necessarily come down to that. All Rangers has to do is live in future within its means, and then it has a future.
“I have spoken to all the potential bidders except for Club 9, and from what I see none of these bidders wants to see liquidation.”
You can follow Alex on Twitter @alextomo
0 -
According to one caller on the Radio Clyde phone-in, it's because the police visited both Rangers and Celtic during the week and told them to behave on the park, and because of the threat of arrest celtic players were too scared to tackle for the first 20 minutes.
They are not normal.
lol really?
0 -
I think Sebo and Sionko both suffered from all the infighting at Rangers during there time there. I would have liked to see them play in a different era it might have been different
0 -
This seems a bit sensationalist from "The Sun". But Regan should be allowing investigations to take there course and then passing comment and it also quite clear that the SFA's fit and proper test is in desperate need of an overhaul
0 -
I think you click on edit to clear it?
thanks very much :-)
0 -
Apologies I only meant to post this once! Can 1 be deleted please?
0 -
At 86 former Rangers director Hugh Adam may be hard of hearing, but hard of recollection and understanding he most definitely is not.
Meeting at his house just outside Glasgow for his first TV interview since the current Rangers implosion began, he is precise in what he wants to say. He’s made notes in preparation for our visit.
After some time on camera it becomes clear Mr Adam wants to go significantly further than in a couple of previous, ground breaking interviews with the Daily Mail.
He already told that paper that there were, double contracts to pay players under the so-called Employee Benefit Trusts (EBTs) introduced by Sir David Murray who lavishly expanded Rangers on borrowed money until its spectacular collapse and sale for £1.
Murray flatly denies double contracts, saying there were just discretionary payments.
But speaking to Channel 4 News Hugh Adam goes further.
He’s clear that these other payments to players were not declared to the football authoritiesthe Scottish FA (SFA) and Scottish Premier League (SPL): “No I ‘m quite sure they didn’t declare them. I’m quite sure. The SFA isn’t pure in all this you know either. If something was put in front of them they’d have to examine it. It’s not a standard business.”
The SFA says it followed the rule book and denies wrong doing (blog to follow).
Now until the SPL inquiry is complete we don’t know whether or not the payments were declared. If they weren’t every player Rangers fielded with out telling the SFA/SPL full details of their money, would be ineligible and Rangers have to forfeit the match 3 – 0 to the other side. A lot of silverware in Govan could end up being moved and re-engraved. But like I say, it is all an if at the moment, assuming the SPL can be trusted competently to investigate itself in effect, over all this.
Is it cheating, I ask: “It is. It is. But in football it’s standard practice. I mean it’s not serious cheating in that they were not putting money into their own pockets. The point is nobody really knew it was going on. You were a director and that was because you wanted to get a seat in the directors’ box.”
And he paints a bizarre picture of life at Ibrox across the past fifteen years or more. A club where few – if any – of the directors were, he says, interested in directing Rangers at all. Everyone more or less happy to leave things to Sir David Murray and hop along to Ibrox to enjoy the box and the hospitality and that was really the meaning of being a director at Ranger PLC and that was it, beginning, middle and end. On that Hugh Adam is quite open.
Of the EBT scheme itself he confirms again there were other payments made to players but nobody knew much and nobody asked.
All in all it paints a strangely autocratic picture of a football club that was for some time expanding, winning and living the football dream. Sir David Murray came, expanded the business, talked big then crashed and burned
And all the while everyone just seemed prepared to go along with the dream on borrowed time and a vary large amount of borrowed money.
From Alex Thomsons Blog. Nothing we haven't heard already!
0 -
http://twitter.com/#!/alextomo
EXCLUSIVE fmr RFC director says RFC directors weren't interested in directing. SFA/SPL not interested in governing.
EXCLUSIVE fmr RFC dir Hugh Adam say extra payments weren't notified to SFA/SPL
So is it cheating? I ask. "It is. It is." Says fmr RFC director Hugh Adam
EXCLUSIVE fmr Rangers director makes new claims on how RFC broke SFA rules on player eligibility
not really "exclusives" are they Hugh Adam has been saying this for weeks!
0 -
First 'exclusive' interview is with Hugh Adam.
Hoping these "exclusives" are not just more of the same of what we have have already been hearing lots of hot air with no real substance
0
Vladimir Romanov
in Rangers Chat
Posted
Strange title I know but I have a quick question regarding Vladimir Romanov in light of the SFA's treatment of Rangers. Apologies in advance if this shouldn't be in the Rangers section
Vladimir Romanov has said all sorts about Scottish Football in his time here everything from scottish football is corrupt and Rangers and Celtic bribing referess the list could go on.
He never seems to be punished for any of this (I do think he got fined a couple of years ago but since then nothing). He doesn't always pay players wages on time in which I would presume he doesn't pay HMRC on time. Yet the SFA do nothing. There are no special investigations into whether or not he is a fit and proper person.
Why? Is my question
Is it something to do with him not holding a position at Hearts other than being the owner?