SteveC 150 Posted October 1, 2013 Author Share Posted October 1, 2013 (edited) Good news at last decent figures and no problems with signing off the audit, very good all round. Are you kidding? over a million a month operational loss and £10 million paid to non-playing staff (almost a tenth to Green in his wonderful globe trotting, million making year) while storm damage at Auchenowie goes unmended. To say nothing of the fact that this is them polished up as nicely as possible to give the best possible view from October of what the situation was in June. there's also this to take into account: http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmnw/discounting_any_spin_on_the_rangers_accounts__167m_will_need_to_be_knocked_off_any_profit_808588/index.shtml The accounts for 13 months to June 2013 will benefit from the non recurring items already declared in the interim results. It is therefore conceivable that RIFC could report a profit before tax in the accounts about to be published. However this will be entirely due to the £20.465m 'profit' created by revaluing the brand and properties on the balance sheet which was shown in the interim accounts. There were also £3.7m of non recurring expenses recorded in the interim results giving net non-recurring credits of £16.7m Therefore, whatever the headline profit reported, the underlying result will be £16.7m worse and that does not include costs incurred in relation to fund raising which don't go through the profit and loss account and were £4.373m in the interim accounts. Edited October 1, 2013 by SteveC 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crucible 0 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Are you kidding? over a million a month operational loss and £10 million paid to non-playing staff (almost a tenth to Green in his wonderful globe trotting, million making year) while storm damage at Auchenowie goes unmended. To say nothing of the fact that this is them polished up as nicely as possible to give the best possible view from October of what the situation was in June. there's also this to take into account: http://www.followfollow.com/news/tmnw/discounting_any_spin_on_the_rangers_accounts__167m_will_need_to_be_knocked_off_any_profit_808588/index.shtml The accounts for 13 months to June 2013 will benefit from the non recurring items already declared in the interim results. It is therefore conceivable that RIFC could report a profit before tax in the accounts about to be published. However this will be entirely due to the £20.465m 'profit' created by revaluing the brand and properties on the balance sheet which was shown in the interim accounts. There were also £3.7m of non recurring expenses recorded in the interim results giving net non-recurring credits of £16.7m Therefore, whatever the headline profit reported, the underlying result will be £16.7m worse and that does not include costs incurred in relation to fund raising which don't go through the profit and loss account and were £4.373m in the interim accounts. You would have to ask Deloitte they signed a clean audit. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Over a 15 million quid loss Spending over 2 million a month. 5.6 million in ipo costs. Green 900k plus 1.5 ish from ipo plus 5.5 million shares 11 million won't last long. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,245 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Well, I'm no financial expert and you get all sorts of reports on the accounts, the usual new "business-guru" sports media will soon be at it too. What you hardly get is a objective analysis like you had from Brock Stoker (or the like?) a few years back. What remains are not just accusations about how the money was spend and the amounts paid to certain ex-employees, but also what the plans of the current board are? What sort of money will come in to see us through the season? I would assume that Puma and other sponsorship money won't be paid in one go, likewise the ST money (pending on the payment options). Likewise, you would assume that the current board has plans to raise money too, sell the naming rights to Ashley (who has been rather quiet indeed), and the like. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 You would have to ask Deloitte they signed a clean audit. Which confirms so far as thwy can tell the figures are accurate. No less worrying of course. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crucible 0 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Which confirms so far as thwy can tell the figures are accurate. No less worrying of course. I would have thought apart from the figures being accurate Deloitte signing off would have confirmed all was above board so to speak, I am of course open to correction if wrong. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Above board perhaps but tell me this isnt rape In 13 months (up to June 2013), Charles Green was paid £933, 376. Breakdown: salary 333k, severance pay 217k, bonus 360k, benefits 22.5k 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I would have thought apart from the figures being accurate Deloitte signing off would have confirmed all was above board so to speak, I am of course open to correction if wrong. Above board doesn't mean the numbers aren't worrying. About the only comfort you get, and very small comfort it is, is that an unqualified audit means Deloitte are comfortable that the club is a going concern for the next twelve months at least. Why small comfort ? Because things can change in a hurry ! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
crucible 0 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 Above board doesn't mean the numbers aren't worrying. About the only comfort you get, and very small comfort it is, is that an unqualified audit means Deloitte are comfortable that the club is a going concern for the next twelve months at least. Why small comfort ? Because things can change in a hurry ! Good to see Deloitte disagree with the predictors of another administration before Xmas, anyhow if Deloitte don't have any great concern neither do I others may differ. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
True_Ger_1872 2 Posted October 1, 2013 Share Posted October 1, 2013 I would have thought apart from the figures being accurate Deloitte signing off would have confirmed all was above board so to speak, I am of course open to correction if wrong. They would have signed off if the comapny could prove it would last out the following 12 month financial period and cant be classed as "a going concern". At the time of these accounts (to end June 2013) there was a significant amount of cash in the bank (11M) and a lot more season ticket money to come in which would cover a larger portion of the predicted loss over the next 12 month perioid. What the accounts doesnt state is how the remining shortfall will be covered. That is the big question here i think! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.