'We WILL sign 3 players', says Bain

[andy steel 0]

I may be the only one but I honestly wouldn't mind a couple of seasons without a pot if it meant a secure future thereafter.

[bmck 117]

I may be the only one but I honestly wouldn't mind a couple of seasons without a pot if it meant a secure future thereafter.

 

No, but the question is whether cutting so drastically compounds the problem or resolves it. Getting rid of waste and living within your means are important, but if you dillute your stock too much it becomes harder to recover - to mix metaphors awfully.

[Guest Northampton_loyalist]

When people start worrying about losing Kenny Miller in a transfer window, that's a signal to me that we're at a low point personnel-wise. Miller has generally played the best football of his career since coming back, but that doesn't mean he'll keep it up. Most fans didn't even want him to come back & not because of his wander into the dark side, but because they didn't rate him as a striker. I didn't rate him myself & still have my apprehensions about his value in the side, but as things stand we actually need the guy big time because without Miller & Boyd our SPL-winning attack is gone.

 

I think that is a little unfair on Miller tbh, people are not just worried because we would have no-one left, they are worried because the best striker in Scotland would be away.

[Totti 0]

We have to speculate to accumulate.

 

These drastic cutbacks are going to mean we have a squad worth sod all and there's a much higher chance we'll lose out on top spot and the CL qualification, which is required just to break even.

 

For much of the last ten years, we've just been one shambles after another.

 

Something we are really bad at is making profits on players . We make a LOSS on the vast majority of our signings. Murray is the route problem but a start would be to have a chief executive that can run the club efficiently and effectively.

 

Buying Thomson for �£2m and selling him for �£2m just makes you want to bang your head against a wall. If we spend �£2m on a young player they should be worth at least double 3 seasons later. Factor in his wages and we've actually made a loss.

 

Again, Pedro Mendes signed for �£3m and sold for �£1.5m not long after. You think a player in the starting lineup for Portugal in the world cup is worth only �£1.5m? Jesus, theres players in the conference probably worth more than that.

 

When Smith first came in, he was given a good chunk of money to spend on players and other than Bougherra and Cuellar none of his signings are really worth anything.

 

PS - Why reveal the amount of players we are going to sign? We seem to reveal some very odd things. Cousins minimum fee release clause being a recent one that springs to mind. Saying that we will sign players is enough.

Edited July 23, 2010 by Totti

[Gribz 743]

 

On the squad size, Smith played very few games, Beasley likewise and while Thommo and Boyd played far more, we have cover for them (although the quality is, lets say, debatable) Most of the guys who have gone over the last wee while have been guys that were litterally getting paid for a maximum of 10 games a year. Which ever way you paint it that is folly, for a club in our situation, more so. There is no way you can convince me that replacing Steve Smiths contirbution with a teenager is going to seriously hamper us, Beasley likewise and most of the other fringe players too.

 

 

 

Yip Beasley and Smith barely kicked a ball for us. So whilst 6 have gone out the door if we do manage to this 3 players we are looking for it will be like maybe only losing 1 or 2.

 

Its the midfield that worries me the most. Any squad needs at least 6 midfielders which includes wide men, at the moment we have 3 regulars and possibly Fleck who is also a striker. If we add 1 wide man and another good centre midfielder then the team will look stronger.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Yes that was always the agreement but was reiterated by Johnston who said it would be the case until December this year.

 

Yet more conflicting information which helps no-one.

 

It was not the debt that was to be reduced by �£1 million per year it is the borrowing facility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In fact, as set out in our

financial statements at June 30 the bank has agreed that the Club's only

obligation is to operate within a credit facility that reduces by �£1 million

per year.

[Frankie 8,150]

It was not the debt that was to be reduced by �£1 million per year it is the borrowing facility.

 

 

 

 

 

 

In fact, as set out in our

financial statements at June 30 the bank has agreed that the Club's only

obligation is to operate within a credit facility that reduces by �£1 million

per year.

 

I was talking about the �£22million HBOS/Lloyds loan that kicked in a couple of years back.

 

That was to be paid back at �£1million per year over 22 years so I've always assumed (perhaps wrongly) that when they talk about increased payments to our debt, primarily they mean this loan which forms the majority of our �£27-31million overdraft.

 

If they mean the credit facility, then are they're talking about the �£15million rolling loan which MIH historically supplied? If that is to be reduced by �£1million per year then I'm unsure where that would leave us as, IIRC, it is used usually to tide us over during the 2nd half of the season.

[wabashcannonball 0]

I was talking about the �£22million HBOS/Lloyds loan that kicked in a couple of years back.

 

That was to be paid back at �£1million per year over 22 years so I've always assumed (perhaps wrongly) that when they talk about increased payments to our debt, primarily they mean this loan which forms the majority of our �£27-31million overdraft.

 

If they mean the credit facility, then are they're talking about the �£15million rolling loan which MIH historically supplied? If that is to be reduced by �£1million per year then I'm unsure where that would leave us as, IIRC, it is used usually to tide us over during the 2nd half of the season.

 

It's pretty clear Frankie, the credit facility reduces by �£1 million a year, no mention of paying back �£1 million anywhere. The bank as AJ stated expect Rangers to be eventually funded by equity as opposed to rolling debt/facility, in short .....to stand on our own feet.

[stewarty 1,876]

No, but the question is whether cutting so drastically compounds the problem or resolves it. Getting rid of waste and living within your means are important, but if you dillute your stock too much it becomes harder to recover - to mix metaphors awfully.

 

Rangers' predicament parrallels the major economic discussions prior to and after the recent General Election. How much should be cut back to address our debt (deficit), and over what timescale should we be doing it?

 

No-one denies we need to reduce our debt and, therefore, our reliance on Lloyds. But, similar to the economy which relies on growth for recovery, Rangers need investment in the playing squad to secure future income and to stand any chance of maintaining the success to which we have become accustomed.

[bmck 117]

Rangers' predicament parrallels the major economic discussions prior to and after the recent General Election. How much should be cut back to address our debt (deficit), and over what timescale should we be doing it?

 

No-one denies we need to reduce our debt and, therefore, our reliance on Lloyds. But, similar to the economy which relies on growth for recovery, Rangers need investment in the playing squad to secure future income and to stand any chance of maintaining the success to which we have become accustomed.

 

I thought about that analogy as I was typing it out, and I'm wary about drawing comparisons between two really complex things. I think the best part of the analogy, though, is how we look at it from a fan's/citizen's perspective - accepting cuts have to be made, do we trust those that are making them? I'm giving the Tories a chance - Cameron seems influenced by Red Toryism, which I think cares far more about the downtrodden than anything the left's produced, if I were to care about these sort of things, which I don't, but ffs shuttup me - but I'm not sure I have enough evidence left to give a uber-corporation-Lloyds and Murray a chance.