Super_Ally 0 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 Dailly would have been on reasonable money at West Ham but has since signed for us permanently so I doubt we would have gave him anywhere near the kind of wages he earned down South. �£9K seems about right. And that's too much... Agree about the last but. Don't imagine he's on the mega bucks he would likely be bringing in down south but find it hard to believe that a player who has plied his trade in the EPL for years and has so much international experience (ha ha) could not negotiate a better wage. Perhaps you are right though, as i'm not basing my supposition on any kind of facts. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,353 Posted August 19, 2008 Author Share Posted August 19, 2008 The Hutton and Sebo cash was needed to pay for last season's transfers. You know this for a fact or are you making it up mate. Also was it not the fact that "We don't budget for europe" their is no 12m hole is their. Q. How much did we earn for our european run in total. Am I making it up? No, we do have to pay for the players. The half year accounts that Frankie refers to shows that we needed transfer money in to be able to pay for the �£10.5m that we had spent on players. The quote about the budget was said many years ago when Rangers economic outlook was totally different from today's. I'm sure they still do budget to have no European run. The only problem is that the budget shows a �£14m loss. Don't know how much money we made from Europe. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,182 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 Agree about the last but. Don't imagine he's on the mega bucks he would likely be bringing in down south but find it hard to believe that a player who has plied his trade in the EPL for years and has so much international experience (ha ha) could not negotiate a better wage. Perhaps you are right though, as i'm not basing my supposition on any kind of facts. Maybe mate but if we're being honest, him playing at Rangers (he would have expected CL football) at a belated stage of his career means I doubt we'd have needed to offer much to get him to sign... Same with Weir. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 The fees for the purchases of players are capitalised and then amortised over the length of their contract, presumably as a straight line. Without CL we generally make in the region of a �£5M loss or more. With CL we make a million or two profit. With the UEFA run we make a bit more. The summer spending will not be included in this years accounts and neither will the sale of Cuellar. It seems to me that after a semi-successful season we will normally have very little retained profits to spend on players. The only way we can spend much is after a season like last or using the income from the sale of players. Otherwise we have to increase our borrowings. I think our spending over the last two and half years will be a combination of all three as the Hutton and Cuellar sales have really boosted the coffers as has the CL and the good UEFA cup final run but the spending has been huge, so I'd imagine our debt may also increase slightly - but it also may reduce slightly as my mere speculations could easily be millions out. The debt is probably starting to become uncomfortable again and attracts quite a bit in interest. However, the fans generally seem to be dead against paying any debt off and are always clamouring for increasing it more for more spending on players. Many militants see reducing the debt as "syphoning off the money in Murray's pockets". It will have to be addressed at some point. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMS 0 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 Am I making it up? No, we do have to pay for the players. The half year accounts that Frankie refers to shows that we needed transfer money in to be able to pay for the �£10.5m that we had spent on players. The quote about the budget was said many years ago when Rangers economic outlook was totally different from today's. I'm sure they still do budget to have no European run. The only problem is that the budget shows a �£14m loss. Don't know how much money we made from Europe. Re the 14m loss as you say, I wonder what happened to the 18m cash that JJB gave us mate. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 PS as the spending of this summer won't count the accounts should look reasonably healthy at the snapshot of the end of the financial year. They will not look so healthy next year. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,182 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 IIRC, the �£18million JJB money is to be released over the 10 years in equal installments...? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,353 Posted August 19, 2008 Author Share Posted August 19, 2008 Re the 14m loss as you say, I wonder what happened to the 18m cash that JJB gave us mate. Most of it was used to reduce the debt in 2006. The net debt fell from �£23m to �£5.9m. It increased again to �£16.5m in 2007. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 The money that JJB gave up front is actually released to the P&L account in stages, probably over about 5 years. The rest is paid at 3M per year. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 Frankie is probably right about 10 years, I was only guessing. 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.