Generic clubs in financial crisis Thread

[Ian Royal]

i expect rangers are just spinning us all a line in order to rush through semi interested buyers.

but what is interesting is that with the current company set to be liquidated and a new one created, sources are telling sky that that could mean the club is removed from the professional leagues in scotland as they would lose their golden share. which brings me back to a point raised earlier in this sorry affair; could rangers then apply to the english leagues and start from say where afc wimbledon did and be prepared to work their way up and earn the right to play here?

I'm sure they could apply. No idea if it's be accepted or not. Not very helpful, am I.

[Deadlock]

The last time a big club went bust in Scotland - Airdrieonians in 2002 - a local Airdrie businessman tried to get the newly formed Airdrie United entry into the Scottish League, but was rebuffed when the league elected Gretna instead. So he went and bought Clydebank out of administration instead, changed their name to Airdrie United, and moved them to Airdrie playing in the Scottish League 2. Meanwhile the SFA bent over and said "thank you sir may I have another."

Wouldn't surprise me to see the Huns employ such underhanded tactics if they had to.

[Barry the bird boggler]

IF Rangers go under a new company will be formed and they will just take over Rangers position in the SPL so that the division remains "competitive"

[Mr Angry]

The Board of the SFA have ruled that Craig Whyte is not a fit and proper person to run a football club.

Well done the SFA! Showed some testicles that our own authorities should take note of.

What it means is that QWhyte's Baldrick-like cunning plan of putting Rangers into administration, shafting all their creditors, then re-starting with a clean sheet has basically been shot down in flames with anyone parachuting out being machine gunned to boot.

[Stranded]

IF Rangers go under a new company will be formed and they will just take over Rangers position in the SPL so that the division remains "competitive"

This. The SPL simply cannot afford to lose Rangers. The SPL and SFL are two separate entities and the only link between the two is promotion/relegation. They will not be able to promote a 2nd club and won't want a 11 club top flight. If Rangers go, expect a Ranger 2012 FC or a Govan United to take their place.

[Ian Royal]

The Board of the SFA have ruled that Craig Whyte is not a fit and proper person to run a football club.

Well done the SFA! Showed some testicles that our own authorities should take note of.

What it means is that QWhyte's Baldrick-like cunning plan of putting Rangers into administration, shafting all their creditors, then re-starting with a clean sheet has basically been shot down in flames with anyone parachuting out being machine gunned to boot.

I think our FA would have a hard job not making that ruling if an English club went into administration and then the administrators found out that £24mhad gone missing and the club had been bought with money that would come from future ticket sales.

[PieEater]

What's so different to that and the Glaziers leveraged buyout?

[Franchise FC]

What's so different to that and the Glaziers leveraged buyout?

The Glazers were completely upfront about what they were doing (well, at least they didn't deny it).

Whyte on the other hand ......

[Mr Angry]

What's so different to that and the Glaziers leveraged buyout?

The Glazers bought Man Utd with money borrowed on the preceived value of Man Utd, and using the club as a whole as collateral; Rangers were bought with money borrowed using future ticket sales as collateral. Therefore, there is no way of using that avenue as a revenue stream to get them out of a hole should it - as it has done - arise.

The Rangers situation is like taking out a loan to pay of your credit card debts; thats fine, as long as you then don't use your credit cards again. If you do, you will rapidly end up not only have to repay the loan for the original credit card debt, but also have new credit card debt to service.

The Man Utd situation is fine as long as the debt repayments can be serviced, which they can be through the revenue generated by Man Utd through TV revenue, sponsership and merchandising. The level of Rangers debt is such that, even with ticket sales generating usuable revenue, they would be struggling to service it on the income levels they can generate.

Why do you think the Auld Firm want to join the Premier League?

[PieEater]

So you're saying it's pretty much the same except there is less TV money so Rangers couldn't run the club and service the debt.

It's all about mortgaging your future, and if you get he sums wrong you're fooked. In ManU's case they were lucky that despite selling off millions of pounds worth of players to balance the books, or rather service the loans, they still kept a competitive team that won games.

I really can't see the difference with Rangers other than the sums are lower. A large part of the income, be it ticket sales, TV money, transfers or merchandising went to service or repay the debt used to buy the club in the first place.

[Wax Jacket]

So you're saying it's pretty much the same except there is less TV money so Rangers couldn't run the club and service the debt.

It's all about mortgaging your future, and if you get he sums wrong you're fooked. In ManU's case they were lucky that despite selling off millions of pounds worth of players to balance the books, or rather service the loans, they still kept a competitive team that won games.

I really can't see the difference with Rangers other than the sums are lower. A large part of the income, be it ticket sales, TV money, transfers or merchandising went to service or repay the debt used to buy the club in the first place.

the difference is it's a large part of future income that's being used to service that debt, not current cashflow. essentially the gamble is that some other stream of money will open up to replace the 4 years' worth of season ticket sales you've already spent.

Utd's case is different as they're using current income to service the debts, not income due from the 2015-16 season ( when you write it like that)

[Mr Angry]

So you're saying it's pretty much the same except there is less TV money so Rangers couldn't run the club and service the debt.

It's all about mortgaging your future, and if you get he sums wrong you're fooked. In ManU's case they were lucky that despite selling off millions of pounds worth of players to balance the books, or rather service the loans, they still kept a competitive team that won games.

I really can't see the difference with Rangers other than the sums are lower. A large part of the income, be it ticket sales, TV money, transfers or merchandising went to service or repay the debt used to buy the club in the first place.

the difference is it's a large part of future income that's being used to service that debt, not current cashflow. essentially the gamble is that some other stream of money will open up to replace the 4 years' worth of season ticket sales you've already spent.

Utd's case is different as they're using current income to service the debts, not income due from the 2015-16 season ( when you write it like that)

Earlier in the thread someone asked how was it that Pompey seem to be able to attract potential buyers, yet Rangers don't appear to be able to; Waxers has given the answer. (Although it even seems that Pompeys "attractiveness" has finally fallen away this time).

[Silver Fox]

The Board of the SFA have ruled that Craig Whyte is not a fit and proper person to run a football club.

Well done the SFA! Showed some testicles that our own authorities should take note of.

I'd be more impressed if they'd spotted this when he took the club over really

[Cobi]

Earlier in the thread someone asked how was it that Pompey seem to be able to attract potential buyers, yet Rangers don't appear to be able to; Waxers has given the answer. (Although it even seems that Pompeys "attractiveness" has finally fallen away this time).

Pompey's biggest problem now is that they have zero assests. They don't own the stadium, the land around the stadium, the training ground, and I think I read the academy.

Who would see them as a good investment?

[Wax Jacket]

if you bought it debt free and for a peppercorn value...maybe but still probably not

[Mr Angry]

Thats the point though, it wouldn't be debt free; there is £17M owed to Chalmain alone which he wouldn't walk away from.

Even to buy it for a penny would mean needing to find approx £36M for the outstanding debts, with, as has been said, no way of raising the required revenue.

As when they went into administration a couple of Years ago, they are insolvent and whilst the money released to them by the FL will help with the immediate cash flow, it goes nowhere near what they require to save them.

Their only hope is someone coming in, writing a cheque for £36M and accepting annual running costs of another £10-12M, and understanding that they are likely to NEVER see a return on that money.

[PieEater]

If they cleared Chanrai's loan surely they could secure their debt as he did, so they may get something back if and when they ever managed to sell the club on again.

IIRC the land is only worth £3m but he has £17m of loans secured on it.

[Royal With Cheese]

3000 posts!

Nothing more to say on this.

[Wax Jacket]

If they cleared Chanrai's loan surely they could secure their debt as he did, so they may get something back if and when they ever managed to sell the club on again.

IIRC the land is only worth £3m but he has £17m of loans secured on it.

if that's true then that's another £14m to cover

[Mr Angry]

Port Vale officially go into administration.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17230886