Jump to content

-£104.6m - The Rangers FC


Recommended Posts

Not sure many at Rangers will be overly concerned as it stands - they have been subsidised by internal/external investment within the last few years. 

 

The club envisaged that Covid had probably cost them in the region of £10m through revenue. 

 

There is a pot of gold on the horizon with automatic qualification to the Champions League for the winner of the league this season.

 

It is imperative that the club get their hands on that prize as it will balance the books accordingly.

 

In addition - Rangers for the first time in many a year - just like their neighbours - now have a number of assets on their hands which can be used to offset their loses - the likes of Barisic, Patterson, Hagi, Kamara, Morelos and Ryan Kent in the event of sales will attract good money.

 

Ross Wilson & John Bennett had been clear that once 55 was achieved the club would have to embark on selling their assets at their optimum values in order to be sustainable - just like their neighbours have in recent years. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was an article floating around yesterday by the guy at the University of Liverpool who runs the Price of Football podcast/Twitter, who didn't seem concerned either. Baring in mind his job is literally to analyse and scrutinise football finance, and is always one of the more notable voices in giving badly run clubs an absolute kicking.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, sheffield_dave said:

There was an article floating around yesterday by the guy at the University of Liverpool who runs the Price of Football podcast/Twitter, who didn't seem concerned either. Baring in mind his job is literally to analyse and scrutinise football finance, and is always one of the more notable voices in giving badly run clubs an absolute kicking.. 

 

Different story if they don’t win the league though..

 

Definitely requires selling assets then to make the model sustainable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, modboy said:

Gerrard to Villa according to Gers mate.

Looks all but confirmed. 
 

Don’t really know what this says about Scottish football that arguably the biggest club in the country (ducks) can have their gaffer pinched by a EPL also ran. 

Edited by owls maniac
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, owls maniac said:

Looks all but confirmed. 
 

Don’t really know what this says about Scottish football that arguably the biggest club in the country (ducks) can have their gaffer pinched by a EPL also ran. 


It’s ridiculous really but money is the factor. It has already happened to Celtic too with Leicester taking Rodgers.
 

To be fair Villa are a big club, they’ve won the European Cup previously, and are bigger than most clubs in England. There are probably only 6-7 clubs bigger than them down south.
 

As for the Glasgow pair and your comment - I don’t like either of them but Celtic are a bigger club than Rangers. Not even a contest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, edinburghowl said:


It’s ridiculous really but money is the factor. It has already happened to Celtic too with Leicester taking Rodgers.
 

To be fair Villa are a big club, they’ve won the European Cup previously, and are bigger than most clubs in England. There are probably only 6-7 clubs bigger than them down south.
 

As for the Glasgow pair and your comment - I don’t like either of them but Celtic are a bigger club than Rangers. Not even a contest.

I saw that Rangers are in line for £3m in compo, which is chicken feed to Villa. And whilst I accept that Villa are one of the 10 biggest clubs in England they aren’t going to win anything any time soon and Gerrard will have a big job on his hands to get them going again now Grealish has been sold. Seems a risky move, which if it goes wrong could cost him the Liverpool job, which presumably is his ultimate target. Then again, as he is Mr Liverpool none of the other top 6 clubs were gonna go for him, so Villa is the next realistic option. 
 

Any ideas who Rangers will turn to as a replacement? 
 

And yes, the “biggest club” remark was slightly tongue in cheek lol 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, owls maniac said:

Looks all but confirmed. 
 

Don’t really know what this says about Scottish football that arguably the biggest club in the country (ducks) can have their gaffer pinched by a EPL also ran. 


I’m not sure it says anything about Scottish football other than that like almost every other domestic league on the planet, they cannot compete with the draw or money of the PL. 

 

Villa are a massive club. You look at the way Spurs go off the way they do, trying to sneak into the Super League etc, and Villa will be looking at that and thinking why not them.

 

For me though I don’t think it’s the right move for Gerrard at this time. His ability to win trophies is actually still a question mark even at Rangers, and experience of European competition is vital for where he ultimately wants to be. Does he enhance either of those things at Villa? Not for me. The benefit here is money and more eyeballs and column inches, but I don’t know if there’s much else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, sheffield_dave said:


I’m not sure it says anything about Scottish football other than that like almost every other domestic league on the planet, they cannot compete with the draw or money of the PL. 

 

Villa are a massive club. You look at the way Spurs go off the way they do, trying to sneak into the Super League etc, and Villa will be looking at that and thinking why not them.

 

For me though I don’t think it’s the right move for Gerrard at this time. His ability to win trophies is actually still a question mark even at Rangers, and experience of European competition is vital for where he ultimately wants to be. Does he enhance either of those things at Villa? Not for me. The benefit here is money and more eyeballs and column inches, but I don’t know if there’s much else.

Agree 100%. To me money and increased exposure seems like the only attraction. But he could just as easily find himself sacked in 12 months time, whereas with Rangers he can keep picking up titles, European football and then walk into the Liverpool job in a year or two. 

Edited by owls maniac
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree with both of you. I think it’s a strange move for both parties. A huge risk for Gerrard if his ultimate aim is Liverpool, and I don’t see what he can achieve at Villa to make him a potential candidate at Anfield. He won’t win trophies at Villa and he won’t do anything in Europe either. And they are definite relegation candidates Villa.

 

And equally, like you say above, Gerrard hasn’t exactly been a roaring success at Ibrox. In Europe it’s arguable he has been, and yes he stopped 10IAR, but domestically he has only won 1 of 9 trophies available and they’ve not been close to winning most of the others. And that is with tens of millions spent. Good move for Villa? I’m not so sure.
 

A manager with a twentieth of his budget Callum Davidson won more trophies than Gerrard in one season at St Johnstone than Gerrard has in his 3 at Rangers.

 

They look bang average this season too. If Hearts can keep our key players fit, I think we can finish above one of the Glasgow pair. Our core of 15/16 players is no worse than theirs.

 

Gio van Bronckhorst is the odds on bookies favourite to takeover. McInnes is short odds too but they won’t go for him because he turned them down previously when he was at Aberdeen. Rangers will be petty like that. There’s talk of Alex Neil too but I don’t think as a Celtic man he will be accepted by the fanbase. It will be interesting to see who they go for.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, owls maniac said:

Agree 100%. To me money and increased exposure seems like the only attraction. But he could just as easily find himself sacked in 12 months time, whereas with Rangers he can keep picking up titles, European football and then walk into the Liverpool job in a year or two. 


But if he stays I don’t think it will be that easy picking up titles, and they need the CL cash or that £100m debt could become a big problem. They’ve been relying on directors loans to last every season ever since they started the newco. 
 

And as bad as Celtic were at the start of the season, Celtic are favourites for the title now IMO. They look the better side currently but they have their troubles too. They are going to have a huge compensation payout with the fallout from the historic Celtic Boys Club abuse. 
 

Potential opportunity in the future for another club with these problems in the background? I hope so lol
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, edinburghowl said:


But if he stays I don’t think it will be that easy picking up titles, and they need the CL cash or that £100m debt could become a big problem. They’ve been relying on directors loans to last every season ever since they started the newco. 
 

And as bad as Celtic were at the start of the season, Celtic are favourites for the title now IMO. They look the better side currently but they have their troubles too. They are going to have a huge compensation payout with the fallout from the historic Celtic Boys Club abuse. 
 

Potential opportunity in the future for another club with these problems in the background? I hope so lol
 

 

Jesus. Sounds like both Glasgow clubs with serious off field problems. The automatic CL group spot makes this seasons title race particularly important then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s a good title race this year.

 

They’ve both dropped some clangers. Celtic could have gone top the other week then drew 0-0 at home to Livingston, and are now 4 behind again. Bonkers.

 

I’m a Rangers man of the two but Hearts sneaking in for that CL group stage spot instead of either of them would be an all time story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edinburghowl is right as well actually that Rangers have looked honking at times this year. Talk about a team that’s coasting in 3rd gear at the minute and sleepwalking. They need a fresh boost from somewhere. Thought freshening up there squad was the answer, but perhaps a new gaffer might do the same thing? Gerrard’s rightly popular for 55 but as you say, there are question marks. I don’t think he’s an irreplaceable finished article.. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, edinburghowl said:


It’s ridiculous really but money is the factor. It has already happened to Celtic too with Leicester taking Rodgers.
 

To be fair Villa are a big club, they’ve won the European Cup previously, and are bigger than most clubs in England. There are probably only 6-7 clubs bigger than them down south.
 

As for the Glasgow pair and your comment - I don’t like either of them but Celtic are a bigger club than Rangers. Not even a contest.

 

I'll bow to your knowledge but what has Celtic as bigger club? Looking in they have similar fanbase but Rangers have more trophies.

 

As for Villa job could be a good move for him. Get a feel for managing in PL before huge pressures of Liverpool job. And he will get that job someday. Sure look at Ole getting United job.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, sheffield_dave said:

It’s a good title race this year.

 

They’ve both dropped some clangers. Celtic could have gone top the other week then drew 0-0 at home to Livingston, and are now 4 behind again. Bonkers.

 

I’m a Rangers man of the two but Hearts sneaking in for that CL group stage spot instead of either of them would be an all time story.


It would be great but it’s not happening this season bar implosions from both and an absolute miracle. On and off the pitch Hearts are in a great spot though. If we can keep improving then you never know in the future.
 

I’m loving the positivity because the employees of the club are actively talking about winning the title in the future. Ambitious maybe but it should be what we (and Hibs and Aberdeen) should be aiming for. 

 

25 minutes ago, sheffield_dave said:

Edinburghowl is right as well actually that Rangers have looked honking at times this year. Talk about a team that’s coasting in 3rd gear at the minute and sleepwalking. They need a fresh boost from somewhere. Thought freshening up there squad was the answer, but perhaps a new gaffer might do the same thing? Gerrard’s rightly popular for 55 but as you say, there are question marks. I don’t think he’s an irreplaceable finished article.. 

 

Agreed! Rangers definitely need something. They were very fortunate to get a point recently at home against a terrible Aberdeen side and like you say they have been very poor and sleepwalking through some games. New players or manager? They might need both.
 

It’s amazing that they are still top really. I think it’s maybe a good time for Gerrard to move because he has the opportunity and there are definite question marks around that team. 

 

11 minutes ago, Quickly Kevin said:

 

I'll bow to your knowledge but what has Celtic as bigger club? Looking in they have similar fanbase but Rangers have more trophies.

 

As for Villa job could be a good move for him. Get a feel for managing in PL before huge pressures of Liverpool job. And he will get that job someday. Sure look at Ole getting United job.


Why are Celtic bigger? Their fanbase is bigger, they’ve won the big trophy in Europe albeit a long time ago, they’ve had more success recently, they generate a larger turnover, and most crucially they are still the same entity. 
 

Anyone with a Rangers persuasion won’t like this but I helped to save my club from death, and I’m very proud of that, I have my name on the Foundation Wall at Tynecastle, and on the Hearts Foundation Kit. They can claim the oldco’s history and the trophies but Rangers fans let their club go to the wall. A sad moment in their history but it’s a big factor to me as to why Celtic are a bigger club

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah I’m not really sure which metric you could use to argue Rangers are bigger than Celtic. 
 

Celtic have a bigger ground, have won the European Cup, have been much more successful on the European stage in the last 20 years and have more money in the bank. Yes Rangers have more league titles, but only 4 more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, owls maniac said:

Yeah I’m not really sure which metric you could use to argue Rangers are bigger than Celtic. 
 

Celtic have a bigger ground, have won the European Cup, have been much more successful on the European stage in the last 20 years and have more money in the bank. Yes Rangers have more league titles, but only 4 more. 

Think you are splitting hairs tbh. 

 

Rangers were the dominant force of the 90s, Celtic largely bossed the first part of the 00s, but then Rangers came roaring back under Smith. 

 

Celtic have largely had it their own way for most of the last decade, though we all know a big part of the reason for that. 

 

Two huge clubs, but massively constrained by the league they are in and their dominance of said league. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...