calscot

It seems a bit of an 'apprenticeship' position, working with Kirkwood coaching the reserves and U20's. Apprentices don't tend to require too much experience...

Just thinking, he should have a bit of knowledge of the second division teams too, including a lot on East Fife...

He has experience as assistant Manager at East Fife, then caretaker manager and then given the job full time. Shows progression and happy employers. It's not as if he's going to be manager, assistant manager or even head coach at Rangers - it's kind of a step down in role but a step up in club status. Worth noting he actually started his playing career at Methil. Other credentials are a successful playing career for Hibernian, Chelsea, Tottenham, Rangers and Hearts, with 43 caps for Scotland and playing in the World Cup and European Championships. I think he won six SPL championships with Rangers. Maybe that's not enough for some...

This is one place where I disagree with you. I hope one day we can afford to pay wages that give us a team that competes reasonably well in Europe... We also needed to pay high wages before for the level we were aiming at, although it's debatable we often paid the right players those wages or received value for money. Although one of the problems is that the same players are paid similar money elsewhere until they are found out. I do think one of Rangers' problems is that we are expected to pay higher than anyone else. This isn't because we are not attractive to come to but the opposite. If you're playing in front of a far bigger crowd you expect a piece of the action. Some negative fans use the likes of Dundee Utd's 3.8m wage bill as a stick to beat us with but is there any chance we could bring in those players on the same wages? (Not withstanding the actual fan reaction to having a signing spree of say Gary Mackay-Steven, Keith Watson, Mark Millar, Michael Gardyne, Brian McLean and Chris Erskine.) I think we'd have to pay double as the agents thinks "kerching" and the player gets pound signs in his eyes. That means to have DU's squad instead of ours, our wage bill would go UP. And look how well they did in the SPL last season (and you can't blame Ally for that)... It's got to be remembered that the OF weren't so dominant because the wages were double everyone else's, it's because they were 8 to 10 times everyone else's. Double guarantees nothing, and if my postulate is correct, not even a slightly better team.

But Rangers have a great legacy of good coaches and managers - just look at Alex Ferguson. Personally I'd be happy to see the likes of Laudrup, Gattuso, Mykhaylychenko, Frank De Boer, Weir, McCall, Wilkins, Gough or McInnes taking up a coaching role... Others around are Ian Murray, Alan Johnston, Butcher and Brown.

I take the view that it's unlikely our financial people are THAT stupid - I really hope not. I personally think that it's more logical that we paid off something like half his wage. I also expect it's probably around the same as we'd have to pay if he went out on loan which doesn't necessarily save us money but more crucially we don't have to find him a club or have the risk that we can't get him one. Basically it makes it risk free. I think from Goian's side that he'd be unlikely to find a club to pay more than about half his current wage and so as he can take a wage cut, he now becomes marketable and might not lose out financially. Taking the previous point, I doubt we could give him away for free on his Rangers wage, never mind bring in a fee. I could be completely wrong but at least it makes financial sense and is a win-win situation or more realistically a no-lose - no-lose situation. It also agrees more with reports of his 16k wage being bandied about. BTW I might be wrong with the half, it could be another fraction but I would expect we don't lose out massively compared to the scenario of loaning him or worst, keeping him.

As we don't usually get real insider footage of what happens at a football club, the most prevalent insight we get into this kind of thing is films. And while they are fictionalised and have excessive artistic licence leading to gross exaggeration, they tend to be based somewhat in fact. When they portray a new manager taking over some sporting team by himself, they do give a vivid impression of the isolation, the frustration and the banging the head against a wall difficulties they experience when trying to impose doing things their way with their philosophy. You get a great sense from that about how much easier it would be if you brought your own team of coaches, trainers and other specialists and can see why it's done. Trust is a major issue even when it's just trust that what you say will be done your way. When others are brought on board I can see the attraction of knowing them, and being easily able to communicate your philosophy to them and having a high probability they won't stab you in the back. At least with the likes of Durie, he must have all the qualifications and some significant experience, as well as a reasonably illustrious playing career at the highest levels. He's no old school mate who needs a job but has none of the qualities required.

If journalists would spend two minutes walking in our shoes they would understand where we are coming from, but then that's the last thing you do when you are in a persecution frenzy.

I was watching a bit of the Gadget show and they mentioned Derby County had a season ticket price of under £300 so thought I'd look them up to compare them (figures are probably a couple of years old). They reputedly have a 9-10m wage bill which is 60% of turnover - putting the latter at about 15m. They have a 33k all seater stadium and average 23k fans at about £12 a ticket. They made a 7.7m loss and are 25.5m in debt. Leeds who I need to look at next as they have a bit in common with us, made a profit a couple of years ago of about 1m with a 17m wage bill. Their turnover was 32.5m so wage was at 35%. Acturally here's some facts from the supporters trust this year: [h=4]- Group turnover decreased by 4% from £32.6m to £31.1m - Gate receipts decreased by 10.6% from £12.7m to £11.3m - Wages to turnover ratio increased from 51% to 57% - Overall admin costs increased from £8.6m to £9.8m - “Unknown” admin costs increased from £4.5m to £5.2m - Shaun Harvey was paid £259k including pension payments and benefits - Since administration, the club has spent £17.7m in cash on building works - Yorkshire Radio, LU Pavilion, LU Media and Leeds City Holdings lost a combined £781k in 2011/12 - The combined losses of these companies now total £4.94m - Yorkshire Radio and the Pavilion owe LUFC £3.7m; LUFC owes LCH and LU Media £600k - Profits from player sales - £2.5m - were required to keep the club afloat - Preference shares issued to Lutonville Holdings - apparently controlled by Ken Bates - incurred admin costs of £107k - £4m was payable to Lutonville upon “change of control,” which occurred a year to the day after the £3.2m share issue - Future income from two years of season tickets and five years of catering profits has been mortgaged - Net debt increased by 297% - £3.89m - in 2011/12 - The new owners look set to inherit £19.4m worth of debt. [/h]

Is he any good as a coach?

Questions are: did he really get his full wage? What would we have paid towards his wage on loan? Is there actually even a remote chance we'd get a fee for him? In what way could we have saved the wage bar not bringing him to the club? I've got to say, no wonder this guy was accused of ‘not being proper Rangers fans’. It's not the actual point of criticism itself, it's the 'Rangers are shit no matter what' method of delivery along with pure speculation treated as fact. As for the things we could buy, I stopped after the second. It's so dull it makes the Sun seem like a very interesting newspaper. Really not impressed with the negative pap that CRO are churning out.

To be fair the press didn't have a scooby about Whyte, they just dug up what dirt they could because we are Rangers. Just because a fraction of the stuff was correct on hindsight does not change their preconceived agenda. In that instance it's hard to separate the wheat from the chaff and even poster like yourself seemed to be posting stuff that came across as innuendo instead of convincing facts.

Yeah, I was just making it up with what sounded like reasonable amounts which didn't seem out of place when you consider our previous 40+m turnover without European money. I forgot about VAT which reduces ticket income by a sixth but isn't it still part of the income figure before tax? I don't see how the catering and hospitality income would be reduced to nothing when we were being ripped off before by SDM and still made over a million a year. Are people eating a lot less? As for the other stuff, I don't have much of a clue but if we were making 40+m with only something 60% more income from tickets, then we were making over 20m from non-ticket income. I'd be surprised if that's dropped below 40%. We used to make about 5m a year from merchandise and even make that with JJB if you include the up front payment so even if we didn't make that last year, the topic is about ongoing financing and I did say we were suffering from a hangover of the change of ownership for last year and probably this year. Until I'm disabused of my naivety with real figures, I'll struggle to believe a club like ours has a turnover of less than 20m. We may not be making a profit but I can't see how we shouldn't be able to afford a proportional wage bill that is much higher than any SPL club bar Celtic. Usually you also get economy of scale, not a premium. You'd think that with four times the fans through the gate we'd have more than four times the available cash - minus the TV and sponsorship money for the SPL clubs.

I would imagine we're making at least 12m from ticket sales alone, then another 1m from catering and 3m from merchandising - and that's just conservative guesses. Corporate packages must bring in another 2m and advertising/sponsorship, at least 5m. Then there's plenty of other revenue streams like the car parking, programmes, overseas streams, Rangers TV and you're looking at a conservative 25m turnover, down from 40-60m. With wages of 7m that's a pretty low wage ratio, which even with the high costs of running Ibrox and police/security etc should still see a good possibility of us breaking even at some point. If we're making a loss, how are all the Championship clubs surviving? In fact, how are the SPL surviving with half our wage bill but about a quarter of the income?

PS It looks like an even more stupid article when you consider that Rangers are a huge club who average 45k fans, had such a small squad and are now signing players for FREE, and will have one of the lowest wage to turnover ratios in professional football. Oh my god, how galling...

"IT is a simple question with an answer which manages to be both surprising and somehow all too familiar: which Scottish club has signed the most players this close season?" It's a strange question as the answer is obvious. It's the biggest club in the country, who lost about 25 players who didn't TUPE when transferring ownership to a new company, then had not much time at all to sign players before a year long, illegal transfer ban, who can now sign free players to play on September 1st when the ban ends. Surprise, surprise... It's not exactly difficult if you know a few of the facts but hey, let's twist it. It's even less surprising that nobody else is signing anyone when all the SPL clubs punted the goose that lays the golden eggs. Who mentioned 'financial mismanagement'?

I think right now we need all the extra income we can pull in. It's the perfect time to rent the name of the stadium - if the offer is good enough and "Ibrox" stays in there somewhere.

PS I think our last years wage bill of 7m probably had half of it made up from the wages of those who TUPEd over; just the five of Bocanegra, Goian, McCulloch, Wallace and Alexander probably made up between 3 and 4 million if they were on an average of say 14k a week. I still think a lot of the money we lost last year was front ended costs and hangovers from the previous company. This will probably be another expensive year but the budget should settle down to match the income in the third and fourth years. It would be good to see the audited accounts to find out what the real figures are. I also still think that the reputed losses we made of a million a month, were probably just over a few months, and the attempt to extrapolate to the year was erroneous. There has been a lot of money wasted on pay-offs, made up fines, stupid loan arrangement fees, and legal fees that really shouldn't really have materialised.

I don't quite get an early release payment where you get ALL the money - what is the point? It's a lose - win situation. If nothing else, keeping him and paying him but not playing him gives leverage for a smaller pay-off where he can leave and play for someone else and even take a big wage hit but earn the same, and at least his career is still fluid. If the pay-off is a full wage then if you keep them, considering players as non-emotional, you at least have their services if there is an injury crisis. Sounds to me like the pay-off may have been something like half his wage - and what we'd have to pay if he went on loan. That would certainly make more sense.

Albion Rovers seems a bit too much of a coincidence... Fix?

For the "prods" on here, the guy you supposedly worship was the epitome of humility and being humble was at the centre of his teachings. He also taught against pride which in your religion is one of the deadly sins... Psalms 25:9 He leads the humble in what is right, and teaches the humble his way. Proverbs 11:2 When pride comes, then comes disgrace, but with the humble is wisdom.

You know it's going to be an unfair piece when it starts by including any player seen in the vicinity of Ibrox. Itgoes on to allude to a rate of loss that implies we're heading for financial ruin unless we equal Queens Park's wage bill ie zero. If we're losing a million a month then we can't afford even a penny of the speculated 7.5m wage bill and we're fucked no matter what we do.

.In what kind of free, democratic country do you have the tax man putting companies into liquidation for non existent tax bills? We need an answer to that and heads should roll.

Eh, when is 9.5m more than 10m? Craig gets the point, maybe you should listen to him...

Another 2 year deal. As said before, we seem to be signing most players on two year deals which means will will have the option to renew or walk away when we should be promoted to the top league. These players are here to help take us up the in the next two seasons - and I can see us making more signings next summer with the transfer ban lifted. THOSE ones will be more for the future, although the current ones will be playing to be part of the long term squad, at least as backup players. There will not therefore be another Sandaza fiasco. We just keep the good ones.