Financial Fair Play

[Gonzo79 13,589]

We have enough people in Scotland belittling us, without joining in ourselves. 

 

Very recently over 100,000 Rangers fans turned up for a match in Southern Spain.  

[weebluedevil 1,169]

1 hour ago, Bill said:

It is in financial terms I'm afraid

Rangers are currently 33rd in UEFA coefficient table, probably around 40-50th in terms of revenue (unable to confirm but is an educated guess - Man City are 1st with 644m revenue - Lazio are 30th with 163m revenue, Deloitte 2021) of about 1037 professional clubs across 37 professional leagues in Europe.

 

So we're well within the top 3-5% depending on whether it's based on performance or revenue. Dwarfed by the biggest clubs in England and Spain but not small by any means. 

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, weebluedevil said:

Rangers are currently 33rd in UEFA coefficient table, probably around 40-50th in terms of revenue (unable to confirm but is an educated guess - Man City are 1st with 644m revenue - Lazio are 30th with 163m revenue, Deloitte 2021) of about 1037 professional clubs across 37 professional leagues in Europe.

 

So we're well within the top 3-5% depending on whether it's based on performance or revenue. Dwarfed by the biggest clubs in England and Spain but not small by any means. 

Yes, you make very good points but I think quoting revenue figures counts for little in itself. What makes a "big" club is being able to spend big and with the financial freedom to spend when you want to. That means the ability to generate either profit or debt - whether operating profit or through realising assets. Since FFP is intended specifically to stop clubs spending beyond their means (ie accumulating large and inappropriate amounts of debt), being a big club in financial terms means being profitable over UEFA's 3-year assessment period. On that basis I don't think we are so big yet ... but I admit I have little idea how other clubs compare in these terms.

 

I'm still not sure what is counted in or out of FFP arrangements. If you take the director loans that were converted to equity, the loans are surely income in cash terms (we certainly used enough of it to service debt), while the sale of shares to cancel out the loans are an income-neutral movement on the balance sheet. What then if there's a new share issue to all-comers, is the cash generated counted as income ... it seems to me it should be in terms of how much we can then spend within FFP constraints. I'd love if one of our money mechanics could shed some light on this.

Edited September 5, 2022 by Bill

[buster. 4,808]

In the immediadte years prior to 2012 we had Donald Muir (Lloyds rep) placed on the board to assist in controlling our finances, a few months after Sir Duped left the hands on role, (August 2009).

 

Prior to that, we had for many years been spending more than we earned in revenue. Sir Duped would look for other ways of trying to balance outgoings with incoming, whether it be investors or creativity around the tax bill. However, the salient point being generally speaking, we struggled to earn enough money to pay for how the club was run and this goes back a fair way.

 

The support got used to a diet of big money transfers (and their wages) as a balm to soothe the occasional pain. We grew accustomed to the rumour mill being full of speculation around who would be the next name to come. Addiction is too strong a word but many missed it when it stopped.

 

 

 

Our operating  financial model back then was heavily flawed and not viable in the medium to long term.

Walter did what Walter tended to do (win leagues) and Champions League Football/Finance helped us continue on. Three out of 4 years between 07/08 to 10/11, making the CL group stages. We spent to soothe the balm of losing to Kaunas in 2008 (before DMuir), with Walter putting together a team that would win the next two leagues.

 

Then 2011/12 came and our financial chickens came home to roost.

 

Post 2015 was a strategy of constructive losses that were paid for by director/investor soft loans turned into equity. That has finished.

 

The point of the above is to say, we can't go back to how it was.

 

That an eventual 70% limit of revenue (part of new FFP regs.) on spend (transfers, wages, agent fees, etc.) is going to force us (and many others) into a fairly radical rethink. The board have obviously been thinking about this for quite a while and are trying to up revenues and strengthen youth development. The latter being the only realistic way forward, IMO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 6, 2022 by buster.

[rbr 1,247]

its amazing the number of fans who even after everything we went through , after the last few years of massive losses and the front loading of investment which culminated in winning 55, still have no clue as to how football finances work .

 

I had a discussion at work yesterday with a fellow fan and he thought we had all the transfer money already in the bank , there are fans that dont understand how these deals are structured and that usually they are paid over the period of the contract , also the VAT element , its mental how over the top our fanbase really is at times , there is never any logic applied .

[buster. 4,808]

14 minutes ago, rbr said:

its amazing the number of fans who even after everything we went through , after the last few years of massive losses and the front loading of investment which culminated in winning 55, still have no clue as to how football finances work .

 

I had a discussion at work yesterday with a fellow fan and he thought we had all the transfer money already in the bank , there are fans that dont understand how these deals are structured and that usually they are paid over the period of the contract , also the VAT element , its mental how over the top our fanbase really is at times , there is never any logic applied .

The club are changing but need to speed up the emphasis on youth. Not easy but necessary. As FFP regulations are gradually introduced, our youth system/pathway has to gradually take over and provide say, half of our starting XI.

 

The full details and ramifications of FFP need to be spelled out (via third parties?) prior to the club communicating with the support on the continuing way forward and the patience that will be required. eg. AGM 2022

 

We need to be clear that things are changing and resource allocation will be  different/challenging.

 

 

 

 

[Bill 13,717]

15 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

We have enough people in Scotland belittling us, without joining in ourselves. 

 

Very recently over 100,000 Rangers fans turned up for a match in Southern Spain.  

That's taking offendedness to a new level 😂

[Bill 13,717]

42 minutes ago, rbr said:

its amazing the number of fans who even after everything we went through , after the last few years of massive losses and the front loading of investment which culminated in winning 55, still have no clue as to how football finances work .

 

I had a discussion at work yesterday with a fellow fan and he thought we had all the transfer money already in the bank , there are fans that dont understand how these deals are structured and that usually they are paid over the period of the contract , also the VAT element , its mental how over the top our fanbase really is at times , there is never any logic applied .

Ha ha isn't that the truth. You should know by now, everyone is an expert - "I watch football so I know how to manage a football team" - "I've been to school so I'm an expert on education" - "I've been to a bank so I'm a finance expert". It explains a lot about why we elect so many idiots to parliament.

 

Seriously, the reaction to Saturday's debacle shows why fans should never be allowed to own and run Rangers.

[RANGERRAB 3,254]

8 hours ago, buster. said:

The club are changing but need to speed up the emphasis on youth. Not easy but necessary. As FFP regulations are gradually introduced, our youth system/pathway has to gradually take over and provide say, half of our starting XI.

 

The full details and ramifications of FFP need to be spelled out (via third parties?) prior to the club communicating with the support on the continuing way forward and the patience that will be required. eg. AGM 2022

 

We need to be clear that things are changing and resource allocation will be  different/challenging.

 

 

 

 

I’d doubt very much indeed if we’ll ever see half of our first team starting XI from our youth system. For whatever reason we don’t produce enough youths who are good enough for where we want to be. Last week against QoS we had three(Devine,King & Ure) in the starting XI and I can’t say I was greatly impressed with any of them.

Our future(in my opinion) lies with low cost Alfredo Morelos-type signings and out-of-contract players of the likes of Lundstrum, Lawrence, Jack etc. That may not be everyone’s cup of tea but I see little alternative 

[Gonzo79 13,589]

8 hours ago, Bill said:

That's taking offendedness to a new level 😂

Aye, undoubtedly.