henryhallsdanceband Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 Notwithstanding the income Stevensan predicts - and that this does not seem to match outgoings - cannot The Rangers get income from the directors/owners/investors of the company that would offset that imbalance? Or am I missing something about others pumping money into that business to enable the football club to buy and pay players apparently beyond their means. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted August 9, 2012 Report Share Posted August 9, 2012 In terms of Charles Green's investment and for that matter any future investors what is the normal percentage range of wages/turnover and player-contracts/assets (excluding stadium)? Is there a normal range? O course capital investment to pay costs is a dangerous long term move. 30,000 season tickets x $200 = £6m 10,000 pay at the gate per home game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stamford Saintee Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 an anagram of Charles Green is "Clangers Here" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevensan Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Notwithstanding the income Stevensan predicts - and that this does not seem to match outgoings - cannot The Rangers get income from the directors/owners/investors of the company that would offset that imbalance? Or am I missing something about others pumping money into that business to enable the football club to buy and pay players apparently beyond their means. Yes henry, they could and probably will. But that will require money to be pumped in annually... money that will at some point need to be repaid. They could easily end up in the SPL with debt of 20m again (10m from initial investment and 10m from trading loss). They will then spend more to guarantee Champions League football which will in turn lead to more losses as they have had over the last 10 years. Remember, Celtic are now going to stockpile cash over the next few years so will be able to match anything Rangers have in 3 years time. Either Sevco go bust now, or they will go bust again in 5 - 10 years time when they fail to qualify for the Champions League. Unfortunately most Rangers fans (read this thread on FF) don't seem to be getting my message. http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=896239&page=4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevensan Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 stevensan don't be discouraged i find yer posts very interesting and enlightening.your doing the job most of the lazy seemingly old firm biased press and media should be doing. thanks SFL. not getting discouraged - i expected the reaction to this one as it touches a nerve with some. I purposely left the line re: 4 divisions to stir up the FF brigade. Seems a few Rangers fans do get it re: the spending and they don't like Green either. Unfortunately they think the rest of us are doing it just because we want Rangers dead. They don't seem to understand we are actually trying to help them before its too late (again!)... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Enough credit to off set their losses? Like I suggested the only way they'll get a cash boost is through an injection of money from one of Green's friends be it a loan via purchase of shares. This is probably what has been arranged behind closed doors in order to keep this new company/club going, probably not for the benefit of the club or the fans. Rangers fans should be asking where the money is coming from but as with Whyte before they don't care, they just want a man in a suit to tell them good news stories. With regard to the value of the assets D&P, as suspicious as many people (including me) are about their behaviour, clearly stated the valuations in the CVA document. I have to agree that I would have though they could have got more but only the liquidators can judge that and take any action the see fit. Until that happens all we can say for sure is that the market value a few weeks ago was around £5 million, some of the assets have walked so it can't be any more than was paid and is more than likely less. You can say they are worth more but without producing buyer willing to pay more that opinion would go wildly against the only facts we have to hand....unless one of your sources put in a £10 million bid but was told to beat it ;-) But surely this is the standard practice from administrators to help keep the club going. I can't remember a single instance of administrators selling off a stdium to anybody other than somebdoy taking control of the club. And incidently I would have thought anybody reading the comment regards my sources could have detected the sarcasm in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevensan Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 But surely this is the standard practice from administrators to help keep the club going. I can't remember a single instance of administrators selling off a stdium to anybody other than somebdoy taking control of the club. And incidently I would have thought anybody reading the comment regards my sources could have detected the sarcasm in it. an administrators job is soley to get the best return possible for the creditor. If that involves selling the stadium and the silverware, then that is what they should do. If the best return can be had by having the company continue through a CVA then that is what they will do. In the case of Rangers a CVA was rejected and therefore selling the assets was the next best step. The assets should have been marketed on the open market before being sold as a pre pack. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Yes henry, they could and probably will. But that will require money to be pumped in annually... money that will at some point need to be repaid. They could easily end up in the SPL with debt of 20m again (10m from initial investment and 10m from trading loss). They will then spend more to guarantee Champions League football which will in turn lead to more losses as they have had over the last 10 years. Remember, Celtic are now going to stockpile cash over the next few years so will be able to match anything Rangers have in 3 years time. Either Sevco go bust now, or they will go bust again in 5 - 10 years time when they fail to qualify for the Champions League. Unfortunately most Rangers fans (read this thread on FF) don't seem to be getting my message. http://forum.followfollow.com/showthread.php?t=896239&page=4 I'm sorry but this post pretty much sums up what I've said. You've taken the Daily Record approach of knowing what outcome you want and writing to try and justify it. This is ridiculously speculative at best and that is being kind to it. If you want to be the antidote to the poor journalism that we see day in day out then you have to actually avoid wild speculation and making things up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) an administrators job is soley to get the best return possible for the creditor. If that involves selling the stadium and the silverware, then that is what they should do. If the best return can be had by having the company continue through a CVA then that is what they will do. In the case of Rangers a CVA was rejected and therefore selling the assets was the next best step. The assets should have been marketed on the open market before being sold as a pre pack. Ok name one instance of that actually happening. Numerous clubs have gone into admin both here and in England. Give me an example from all of these cases where a stadium was sold on an open market to anybody other than somebody wanting to keep it as a football ground. Oh and an administrators job is actually two fold, they must also try to rescue the company as a going concern. Edited August 10, 2012 by ODAB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_gain Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 But surely this is the standard practice from administrators to help keep the club going. I can't remember a single instance of administrators selling off a stdium to anybody other than somebdoy taking control of the club. And incidently I would have thought anybody reading the comment regards my sources could have detected the sarcasm in it. So perhaps football stadiums have no real market value and are only worth something to someone wanting to run a football club from them. As I have stated before there is nothing to suggest that the current Ibrox assets are worth more than £3 million and certainly not more than what Green paid. Just to recap nobody else showed any real interest in paying more than Green did at the time and as you have pointed out it is not common for a stadium to be sold to anyone other than someone taking control of club. So there is nothing to suggest that someone is willing to pay more therefore the assets have no real market value....just as the administrators stated in the CVA. Although it is worth pointing out that the administrators did not sell of the stadium to come out of admin. Rangers were liquidated and that was what triggered the sale as they deemed Green's offer as the best available and the only way to get not only some money for the creditors but also for themselves. It should also be noted that Green only paid £1.5 million for the stadium and Murry Park. I don't think the figures add up but only D&P and the liquidators will really know. P.S. I though my ;-) would indicate I was only poking fun and did not take your sources statement seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_gain Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Ok name one instance of that actually happening. Numerous clubs have gone into admin both here and in England. Give me an example from all of these cases where a stadium was sold on an open market to anybody other than somebody wanting to keep it as a football ground. Oh and an administrators job is actually two fold, they must also try to rescue the company as a going concern. Perhaps best to compare Rangers with other liquidated clubs i.e. Gretna. I think they sold Raydale to the council last year for a nominal fee. The resurrected Gretna don't play there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 So perhaps football stadiums have no real market value and are only worth something to someone wanting to run a football club from them. As I have stated before there is nothing to suggest that the current Ibrox assets are worth more than £3 million and certainly not more than what Green paid. Just to recap nobody else showed any real interest in paying more than Green did at the time and as you have pointed out it is not common for a stadium to be sold to anyone other than someone taking control of club. So there is nothing to suggest that someone is willing to pay more therefore the assets have no real market value....just as the administrators stated in the CVA. Although it is worth pointing out that the administrators did not sell of the stadium to come out of admin. Rangers were liquidated and that was what triggered the sale as they deemed Green's offer as the best available and the only way to get not only some money for the creditors but also for themselves. It should also be noted that Green only paid £1.5 million for the stadium and Murry Park. I don't think the figures add up but only D&P and the liquidators will really know. P.S. I though my ;-) would indicate I was only poking fun and did not take your sources statement seriously. I wasn't referring to you! It is quite a unique situation to football. As a stadium to be used by Rangers, it does have a limited value. However I would argue that the value has increased as a result of the tax case no longer being there. But selling it for commercial uses or housing would have a far greater value. Now purely from an investment standpoint, I 'd say an investor could put in money and know that if push came to shove they could get a pretty penny from Murray Park, or whatever it is called now, let alone Ibrox, would represent a decent investment. And I don't believe that there was any money paid for the tranfer of the players over to the new regime either, but I could be wrong on that. So that to would indicate they have greater assest than some are saying. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Perhaps best to compare Rangers with other liquidated clubs i.e. Gretna. I think they sold Raydale to the council last year for a nominal fee. The resurrected Gretna don't play there. But the point was about whether the administrator did their job, not the liquidator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_gain Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I wasn't referring to you! It is quite a unique situation to football. As a stadium to be used by Rangers, it does have a limited value. However I would argue that the value has increased as a result of the tax case no longer being there. But selling it for commercial uses or housing would have a far greater value. Now purely from an investment standpoint, I 'd say an investor could put in money and know that if push came to shove they could get a pretty penny from Murray Park, or whatever it is called now, let alone Ibrox, would represent a decent investment. And I don't believe that there was any money paid for the tranfer of the players over to the new regime either, but I could be wrong on that. So that to would indicate they have greater assest than some are saying. So why are football stadiums not regularly sold to developers? If something has value it means there is demand for it. For Ibrox to be worth more for non-football use than for football use there would have to be a greater demand to purchase it for such a use. There's no evidence that this is the case. As for the player transfers: http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/11/rangers-charles-green-players-contracts Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_gain Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 But the point was about whether the administrator did their job, not the liquidator. D&P sought a CVA to save the business. This failed so the administrators the sold the assets to Green as per the agreement they had made with Green. Once the assets were sold the liquidators were appointed to investigate the goings on at Ibrox for the last decade. I do not trust D&P very much at all but until someone finds them to have not acted for the business or the creditors I have no option but to believe I am only being paranoid. If they say they got the best price as it stands today we have to believe they did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 (edited) Wasn't sure about the contracts. Anyway with regards to the stadiums, perhaps because they would have to pay more to rebuild plus the damage to relationships with the fans. Let's say Rangers could sell their properties to Tesco for £20mil. How much damage would it do with the fans and how much would it cost to build a new stadium? Edited August 10, 2012 by ODAB Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 D&P sought a CVA to save the business. This failed so the administrators the sold the assets to Green as per the agreement they had made with Green. Once the assets were sold the liquidators were appointed to investigate the goings on at Ibrox for the last decade. I do not trust D&P very much at all but until someone finds them to have not acted for the business or the creditors I have no option but to believe I am only being paranoid. If they say they got the best price as it stands today we have to believe they did. But surely that agreement was made when they were still trying to save Rangers as a going concern? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike_gain Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Wasn't sure about the contracts. Anyway with regards to the stadiums, perhaps because they would have to pay more to rebuild plus the damage to relationships with the fans. Let's say Rangers could sell their properties to Tesco for £20mil. How much damage would it do with the fans and how much would it cost to build a new stadium? So no demand from the commercial sector for Ibrox then? Remind me again who is going to be paying a huge amount (more than Green paid) for Rangers' assets? All the football people had their chance and only Green came in. The agreement to sell the assets was outlined in the CVA as being the best option available in the event the CVA was rejected (i.e. liquidation). It was only liquidation that triggered the sale of assets to Green. The agreed price was around £5 million. The liquidators of course have the power to reverse this sale if they see something wrong but I would have thought they would have done this already. Christ knows what will happen if they reverse the sale in the middle of the season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themole Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 well well weell,listening to charles green this morning, i had to laugh. we are all bigots because we would not listen to his proposals, well i am sorry had it been any other club they would have been vanished to the 3rd no questions asked. this guy is dillusional just like the rest of the ibrox old chairman etc. why should they be an exception because they have money. get a grip green nobody wants you and to call any1 bigots take a look at ur own fans they dont come any bigger in bigots than the old firm faithful Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric Openshaw Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 well well weell,listening to charles green this morning, i had to laugh. we are all bigots because we would not listen to his proposals, well i am sorry had it been any other club they would have been vanished to the 3rd no questions asked. this guy is dillusional just like the rest of the ibrox old chairman etc. why should they be an exception because they have money. get a grip green nobody wants you and to call any1 bigots take a look at ur own fans they dont come any bigger in bigots than the old firm faithful pathetic response Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 So no demand from the commercial sector for Ibrox then? Remind me again who is going to be paying a huge amount (more than Green paid) for Rangers' assets? All the football people had their chance and only Green came in. The agreement to sell the assets was outlined in the CVA as being the best option available in the event the CVA was rejected (i.e. liquidation). It was only liquidation that triggered the sale of assets to Green. The agreed price was around £5 million. The liquidators of course have the power to reverse this sale if they see something wrong but I would have thought they would have done this already. Christ knows what will happen if they reverse the sale in the middle of the season Liquidation triggered the sale but the deal was done when Rangers could have been saved as a going concern. Therefore the administrator did their job on both accounts, accepting a deal that gave them as much money as they could get whilst still keeping the opportunity to save the club as a going concern. If liquidation spelled the complete end of Rangers with no Sevco, pheonix clubs or the likes then do you genuinely believe there would be not interest for the two properties from the commercial sector? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevensan Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Liquidation triggered the sale but the deal was done when Rangers could have been saved as a going concern. Therefore the administrator did their job on both accounts, accepting a deal that gave them as much money as they could get whilst still keeping the opportunity to save the club as a going concern. If liquidation spelled the complete end of Rangers with no Sevco, pheonix clubs or the likes then do you genuinely believe there would be not interest for the two properties from the commercial sector? Your missing the point though. If Sevco had not been there, and the only option was to break up the assets and sell them separately, are you telling me they wouldn't have raised more than 5.5million? Seriously - someone would have paid that just for the trophies - even if it was a rich Celtic fan would just wanted to melt them down! IF (its a big IF) a creditor challenges the sale, they would have quite a good chance of compensation from D&P as they didnt even explore the possibilities of selling assets on their own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peterheed Saint Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 A nice greeting for them at the roundabout as you come into Peterhead :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ODAB Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Your missing the point though. If Sevco had not been there, and the only option was to break up the assets and sell them separately, are you telling me they wouldn't have raised more than 5.5million? Seriously - someone would have paid that just for the trophies - even if it was a rich Celtic fan would just wanted to melt them down! IF (its a big IF) a creditor challenges the sale, they would have quite a good chance of compensation from D&P as they didnt even explore the possibilities of selling assets on their own. No your missing the point as an Administrator's job is not only to look after the creditors. They also have to try and keep the buisness as going concern. I've said throughout what I've been posting today that the retail sector and housing sector would almost certainly have paid more but the administrator was never going to accept that as it would kill the compnany as a going concern. This has also happened in every administration I can think of, the stadium is required to try and help the company continue as a going concern. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Percy Johnston Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Your missing the point though. No your missing the point Is it not the apostrophe that you are both missing? Quote Link to comment 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.