SPL Season 2009/10

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rangers post pre tax profits of 13.1 million for year to Dec 2009. Not bad. Shows value of Champs league.
 
OK a couple of things strike me about the figures, one being that they're 'unaudited' which I would assume means the accountants have a bit more flexibility in what they count. Another is the following quotes:

Whilst the Interim Results are pleasing, a degree of caution is required as the future outlook is fraught with challenges.

The Board appreciated the understanding of Lloyds TSB Bank plc in supporting our initiatives to stabilise the Club without totally compromising the ability of the management team to field a competitive squad of players for the current season.

Until such time as this is achieved, we are compelled to maintain our working relationship with Lloyds TSB Bank plc.

The Board understands that reliance on such a facility going forward is not desirable if we are to retain control over the Club's destiny and avoid negatively impacting the potential for future success.

However, a balanced view is required at this stage amongst operating sustainability, ambition, and the commensurate underlying value of the Club.
Click to expand...

This carries a very different tone from what the numbers suggest (to the layman at least), which makes me suspect the figures are a bit of spin.
 
doopydug said:
I have a funny feeling that mowbray is the type who WOULD resign if things are as bad by the midway point next season
Click to expand...

He took West Brom down and showed no sign of resigning. He even seemed pleased that he had put style in front of points as well.
 
St Johnstone 5-1 Hibernian

:/

Hibs have enjoyed a fair dollop of luck this season, but clearly not tonight.
 
Jock Dodds said:
OK a couple of things strike me about the figures, one being that they're 'unaudited' which I would assume means the accountants have a bit more flexibility in what they count. Another is the following quotes:



This carries a very different tone from what the numbers suggest (to the layman at least), which makes me suspect the figures are a bit of spin.
Click to expand...

The reports are saying that the debt to the bank remains at £31m so I take it they're only servicing the debt until the new owners come in to pay it off?
 
Jock Dodds said:
OK a couple of things strike me about the figures, one being that they're 'unaudited' which I would assume means the accountants have a bit more flexibility in what they count. Another is the following quotes:



This carries a very different tone from what the numbers suggest (to the layman at least), which makes me suspect the figures are a bit of spin.
Click to expand...

Err they cant release false figures pal. The reason for caution is second half of season is always harder as season ticket money is already in and no CL revenue. Actual profit at end of season will be lower just like Celtics will. AJ hinted that Rangers problems are caused by MIH problems. When and I do expect this to happen MIh go into administration one of the first things to be sold off will be Rangers this I believe is why new buyers are holding off as they will get Rangers for a good price freeing up capital to lower debt (which the bank is happy to accept 1 million a year) and strengthen squad. Sooner Murray is away the better. I is his mismanagement and living on tich across his socalled empire that is the problem.
 
McMav said:
Err they cant release false figures pal.
Click to expand...

Actually the rules of accounting allow figures to be spun one way or another to a surprising degree, pal. Especially when they haven't been verified by an independent auditor. The profit figure is great for a headline but there's no mention of the debt (which leads me to believe it's higher than 31M) and there's no indication of cash flow.

I'm not sure how MIH and Rangers are entangled but I do remember Murray putting in 50M a few years ago when the share issue was largely ignored by the loyal bears. I imagine that 50M is a significant part of the problem.
 
He actually stated in an interview last nighit that the debt remained at 31 Million as clearing Rangers debt was not a priority as they have arrangement with the bank to reduce the debt by 1 million a year.

Murray did not put 50 Million into Rangers (Not of his own money) MIH took £50 million worth of shares but they didnt pay it they just moved the debt.This is common with Murray he moves debt around his organisation. Only now it is estimated his Empire owes the banks somewhere between 400 - 700 million. This is the problem and Rangers as seen as an Asset of MIH.
 
McMav said:
He actually stated in an interview last nighit that the debt remained at 31 Million as clearing Rangers debt was not a priority as they have arrangement with the bank to reduce the debt by 1 million a year.

Murray did not put 50 Million into Rangers (Not of his own money) MIH took £50 million worth of shares but they didnt pay it they just moved the debt.This is common with Murray he moves debt around his organisation. Only now it is estimated his Empire owes the banks somewhere between 400 - 700 million. This is the problem and Rangers as seen as an Asset of MIH.
Click to expand...

I know he didn't actually withdraw 50M from his Supersaver account but he still provided Rangers with 50M of liquid assets.

Anyway, this is accountancy, something in which I'm even less qualified to comment than football.
 
Aye suffice to say IMO Murray has taken loads more out of Rangers than he has ever put in. Last 10 years he has asset stripped the club. Deal with JJB where did that cash go? 18 million downpayment then 3.5 million a year? Murraty for the past 10 years has been the problem he got tired of his play thing and took what was best and sold it off to himself/family.
 
Looking at it from an accountants point of view, you have to wonder where the profit has gone, if it hasn't brought the debt levels down.

On another note, the season ticket sales will be shared between the two accounting periods so, although, the cash flow will "spike" at the start of the season, as far as the accounts are concerned, it is spread over the entire accounting period.

I would imagine that it would be weighted by the number of games in each accounting period. For example, if the season ticket salers were designed to cover 20 games per season and 11 games took place in the period to 31/12 , then the income ratio would be 11/20 in the first periods accounts and 9/20 in the 2nd period (just a simple example, I don't actually know how many games they are designed to cover).
 
McMav said:
Aye suffice to say IMO Murray has taken loads more out of Rangers than he has ever put in. Last 10 years he has asset stripped the club. Deal with JJB where did that cash go? 18 million downpayment then 3.5 million a year? Murraty for the past 10 years has been the problem he got tired of his play thing and took what was best and sold it off to himself/family.
Click to expand...

If it wasn't for Murray, Rangers would never have attracted Souness and the plethora of stars they bought at the time. Effectively, they bought 9 in a row to match Celtic's achievement and is surely, the most succesful period in rangers history?

My memory isn't great but weren't rangers playing in front of abysmal crowds and in the doldrums financially when he turned things around?

I remember wishing, for all of those years, how much I wish we could buy such success instead of the "biscuit-tin" board that hampered Celtics campaigns domestically and in Europe.
 
He bought Rangers on tic. He built Ibrox with his own steel that was paid for by Rangers pools. Yes he had a good 1st 10 years followed by an appaling 10 the latte 10 putting us in this position and I'm including MIH in this he bought up loads of property on tic (see a pattern here?) anf the market colllapsed leaving MIH with loads of empty properties worth less than the loans secured on them.
 
So, McMav, this is a really interesting point. Would you say that it was better to NOT have won the 9 in a row and attracted a plethora of top stars to the Scottish league and stayed in the black or would you prefer to be feeling financial pain but still have enjoyed the success?
 
No the financial pain came in the last 10 years when he allowed advocat to run up huge debts. Financed purely on loans.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom