And what is the alternative?
Without Ashleys cash we'd be insolvent.
Don't see anyone else bringing anything to the table. Honestly don't know what some fans think. The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 6 minutes ago
And what is the alternative?
Without Ashleys cash we'd be insolvent.
Don't see anyone else bringing anything to the table. Honestly don't know what some fans think. The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No there was a £16m alternative and a £3m alternative
Call me synical but my point is I don't believe these alternatives were either viable or existed.
Always same names in the papers 'failing' to help, how many shares does Kennedy own? What about King?
So, 7.5% . How does that compare to other clubs?
Interesting point Schizo. Still at first read looks an outrageous deal
The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
---------------------------------
Only now? Only now people care?
Where have you been hiding?
You're not synical, you're blinded by Ashley and Easdale. King can't get near the Board Room cause these spivs are milking my club and don't want someone like him in there. Don't put Ashley up as some sort of saviour, we already had that with Green and look where that got us !
It astounds me that people believe Ashley will be good for Rangers and that its a bad thing that King, Letham and Murray are Rangers supporters . do any of you think these guys would have sold the club down the river like Green has ?
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 17 minutes ago
So, 7.5% . How does that compare to other clubs?
Reply | Add Comment | Complain | Share
comment by BB (U13430)
posted 14 minutes ago
Interesting point Schizo. Still at first read looks an outrageous deal
I'm sure the deal is weighted heavily in favour of Ashley, just wondered if anyone knew what other clubs receive from there merchandise sales. 7.5% is not much, but it is better than what a bank will give you. I do think that Boycott after boycott becomes repetitive and ineffective
King, Letham and Murray are Rangers supporters . do any of you think these guys would have sold the club down the river like Green has ?
Where are they then?
'We have £16m for you...'
'Ahh nice, where's it from and who's backing you?'
'Ehhhh, no tellin ye '
King is a fvckin windbag. Ashley is a greedy slimeball. The Easedales are crooks. Whyte is a wretched, lying waste of skin. Green is a chancing old snake. And Murray isn't much better than any of the above for selling us into their hands to begin with.
The only people getting a rotten deal here are the loyal paying, long-suffering supporters. If we go down the tubes again, leave us be.
"No there was a £16m alternative and a £3m alternative"
Regardless of these, the retail deals would still be in place, so there was no alternative.
Whether King got control or Kennedy just bankrolled us for a period, the retail deals would still be in place.
Green did that, not Ashley.
I do not understand why people blame Mike Ashley for taking advantage of a brilliant offer Charles Green handed to him on a silver platter...blame Green for that, not the man who benefitted from it.
Ashley is now taking control, and yes, he is going to try and make money out of us, but the very fact he is making money out of us, is the very reason why he will keep our club afloat and alive.
If the details revealed here are true, Ashley will not let us go down the tubes as long as he is getting 92.5% of our retail revenue
I do not understand why people blame Mike Ashley for taking advantage of a brilliant offer Charles Green handed to him on a silver platter...blame Green for that, not the man who benefitted from it.
Mainly because the club is making massive losses, the retail made millions of pounds more than it did previous that would be handy for a club making huge losses but it's not going to the club it's going to guy with less than 10% of shares
"Mainly because the club is making massive losses, the retail made millions of pounds more than it did previous that would be handy for a club making huge losses but it's not going to the club it's going to guy with less than 10% of shares"
Well previously, before the JJB deal, the clubs retial revenue was anything from £15-£20m.
Celtic's retail revenue in the past two years was in the region of £13-15m.
Our retail revenue is now half of that, so if people are expecting to make in the region of £4-5m from retail, as we did before and during the times of the JJB deal, we need to sell a shed load more than £7.6m worth of stuff!!
I am not defending this deal for a second, but I keep hearing this argument about us having to pay for stock at a ridiculous price. It keeps being skipped over that the only reason we have to do this is becsue sales targets have not been met.
The club used to rake in £20m from retail and now we are selling less than £8m of merch??
Considering that, I would imagine we are not meeting targets by quite some way, so perhaps if we met those targets, the club would get more than 75p for every £10 spent, and we might actually get something closer to the headline 50% figure quoted when this deal was struck....no??
I hate to say it but doesn't boycotting rangers retail make it worworse
From the reading of various statements the reason we are not making money from it is because we are not hitting targets (selling less than half Celtic do) and that's why we are having to buy the stock from sports direct?
So buying nothing would actually lead to the club incurring costs?
Does anyone know enough about the deal to say what the targets actually are and how Mich the club makes if they are hit?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
What is being said here is that instead of getting 50% of profits we are only getting about 6% of profits.
The Union of Fans said in the Record yesterday, that there was £7.6m of retail revenue recorded by Rangers Retial, but there were more than £4m of costs, meaning there was approximately a £3m profit made by the company, of which, if we were getting 50%, means we would get £1.5m and Sports Direct would get £1.5m
They have had accountants study the figures and now say we are not getting £1.5m, we are getting £590k. So if there is a £3m profit being made, we are getting £590k which is only 20%, and Sports Direct are getting £2.41m, 80%
On top of that, due to stock not being sold, and again referring to the record yesterday, the UoF are saying we had to pay Sports Direct £410k for unsold stock.
So Sports Direct are actually getting £2.82m of the £3m profit 94%, and we are getting just £180k for the year 6%...the £2k figure is irrelevant as it only talks about the second half of the year, likely when most of this £410k was taken.
The point I want to make is, what if we had met targets???
This is purely guess work, but its using the figures quoted as its basis.
We had to pay £410k back to Sports Direct for unsold stock. What if we sold that stock. We are paying RRP prices, so if its £410k, thats approx an extra 10,000 home shirts.
If we sold that, our retail revenue would jump form £7.6m to £8m.
If it costs £4.6m to sell £7.6m worth of shirts, I'm estimating it would cost £4.8m to sell £8m worth of shirts.
If we did this, we would no longer have to pay £410k for unsold stock.
A £3.2m profit could be made
If its actually only 20% of profits we are getting, we would get £640k instead of £180k
It isnt even known if the reason we are only getting 20% of profits and not 50% as quoted is down to sales targets not being met, if it is, and we did by selling all this stock, we could make £1.6m instead of £180k.
Given that at the time of the JJB deal, we were selling around £15-20m of merch, to justify £4.8m a year, that works out at a 24-32% profit to revenue ratio.
At the moment, we are getting just £180k from £7.6m, that works out at a ratio of just 2.3% profit from revenue, thats $hite.
If the stock we had to pay for here was sold, and we were still only getting 20%, £640k from £8m, that a ratio of 8%, still $hite
If our percentage went up from 20% to the headline 50% due to targets being met, £1.6m from £8m is a ratio of 20%, and with that, we are starting to get close to the JJB deal.
A lot of speculation yes, but a lot of these things are unknown and they really need to be known, as the picture could change significantly if they were
To be honest though it's all far too complicated and I can't be bothered to get into it.
If sick of requiring to be a chartered accountant, stockbroker and PR guru just to be a rangers fan these days.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
"If sick of requiring to be a chartered accountant, stockbroker and PR guru just to be a rangers fan these days."
Well put spr, most of the last 3 years stuff has just done a Boeing over my head, left me unable to participate in the bantz
comment by Rising up the ranks (U2420)
posted 10 hours, 28 minutes ago
The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
---------------------------------
Only now? Only now people care?
Where have you been hiding?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My view of caring is doing more than writing a fecking letter, or holding a protest with 100 folk.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
No one is blaming Ashley for taking advantage of a crooked deal from Green. What should worry all Rangers supporters is that Ashley will bleed us dry, rattles up debts in the club and continue to extend the deal that allows it. Sure, the contract would be in place irrespective of who was in control , but do you really believe King or Letham would renew it ?
Further, it surprises me that no one is concerned about the UEFA announcement whereby Newcastke and Rangers would not be allowed to participate in Europe at the the same time. Given Newcastles co efficient is bigger than ours , Europe is a pipe dream .
But, yeh Ashley,s our saviour !!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Defending the indefensible Stevie.
No way can this deal be considered good for Rangers in any way, shape or form.
What amazes me is that this arrangement has been common knowledge for a long time, it's just the first time the press have printed it and that's just because SOS forced their hand.
Sign in if you want to comment
75p
Page 1 of 6
6
posted on 1/12/14
And what is the alternative?
Without Ashleys cash we'd be insolvent.
Don't see anyone else bringing anything to the table. Honestly don't know what some fans think. The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
posted on 1/12/14
comment by RenegadeOF (U9457)
posted 6 minutes ago
And what is the alternative?
Without Ashleys cash we'd be insolvent.
Don't see anyone else bringing anything to the table. Honestly don't know what some fans think. The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No there was a £16m alternative and a £3m alternative
posted on 1/12/14
Call me synical but my point is I don't believe these alternatives were either viable or existed.
Always same names in the papers 'failing' to help, how many shares does Kennedy own? What about King?
posted on 1/12/14
So, 7.5% . How does that compare to other clubs?
posted on 1/12/14
Interesting point Schizo. Still at first read looks an outrageous deal
posted on 1/12/14
The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
---------------------------------
Only now? Only now people care?
Where have you been hiding?
posted on 1/12/14
You're not synical, you're blinded by Ashley and Easdale. King can't get near the Board Room cause these spivs are milking my club and don't want someone like him in there. Don't put Ashley up as some sort of saviour, we already had that with Green and look where that got us !
posted on 1/12/14
posted on 1/12/14
It astounds me that people believe Ashley will be good for Rangers and that its a bad thing that King, Letham and Murray are Rangers supporters . do any of you think these guys would have sold the club down the river like Green has ?
posted on 2/12/14
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 17 minutes ago
So, 7.5% . How does that compare to other clubs?
Reply | Add Comment | Complain | Share
comment by BB (U13430)
posted 14 minutes ago
Interesting point Schizo. Still at first read looks an outrageous deal
I'm sure the deal is weighted heavily in favour of Ashley, just wondered if anyone knew what other clubs receive from there merchandise sales. 7.5% is not much, but it is better than what a bank will give you. I do think that Boycott after boycott becomes repetitive and ineffective
posted on 2/12/14
King, Letham and Murray are Rangers supporters . do any of you think these guys would have sold the club down the river like Green has ?
Where are they then?
'We have £16m for you...'
'Ahh nice, where's it from and who's backing you?'
'Ehhhh, no tellin ye '
King is a fvckin windbag. Ashley is a greedy slimeball. The Easedales are crooks. Whyte is a wretched, lying waste of skin. Green is a chancing old snake. And Murray isn't much better than any of the above for selling us into their hands to begin with.
The only people getting a rotten deal here are the loyal paying, long-suffering supporters. If we go down the tubes again, leave us be.
posted on 2/12/14
"No there was a £16m alternative and a £3m alternative"
Regardless of these, the retail deals would still be in place, so there was no alternative.
Whether King got control or Kennedy just bankrolled us for a period, the retail deals would still be in place.
Green did that, not Ashley.
I do not understand why people blame Mike Ashley for taking advantage of a brilliant offer Charles Green handed to him on a silver platter...blame Green for that, not the man who benefitted from it.
Ashley is now taking control, and yes, he is going to try and make money out of us, but the very fact he is making money out of us, is the very reason why he will keep our club afloat and alive.
If the details revealed here are true, Ashley will not let us go down the tubes as long as he is getting 92.5% of our retail revenue
posted on 2/12/14
I do not understand why people blame Mike Ashley for taking advantage of a brilliant offer Charles Green handed to him on a silver platter...blame Green for that, not the man who benefitted from it.
Mainly because the club is making massive losses, the retail made millions of pounds more than it did previous that would be handy for a club making huge losses but it's not going to the club it's going to guy with less than 10% of shares
posted on 2/12/14
"Mainly because the club is making massive losses, the retail made millions of pounds more than it did previous that would be handy for a club making huge losses but it's not going to the club it's going to guy with less than 10% of shares"
Well previously, before the JJB deal, the clubs retial revenue was anything from £15-£20m.
Celtic's retail revenue in the past two years was in the region of £13-15m.
Our retail revenue is now half of that, so if people are expecting to make in the region of £4-5m from retail, as we did before and during the times of the JJB deal, we need to sell a shed load more than £7.6m worth of stuff!!
I am not defending this deal for a second, but I keep hearing this argument about us having to pay for stock at a ridiculous price. It keeps being skipped over that the only reason we have to do this is becsue sales targets have not been met.
The club used to rake in £20m from retail and now we are selling less than £8m of merch??
Considering that, I would imagine we are not meeting targets by quite some way, so perhaps if we met those targets, the club would get more than 75p for every £10 spent, and we might actually get something closer to the headline 50% figure quoted when this deal was struck....no??
posted on 2/12/14
I hate to say it but doesn't boycotting rangers retail make it worworse
From the reading of various statements the reason we are not making money from it is because we are not hitting targets (selling less than half Celtic do) and that's why we are having to buy the stock from sports direct?
So buying nothing would actually lead to the club incurring costs?
Does anyone know enough about the deal to say what the targets actually are and how Mich the club makes if they are hit?
posted on 2/12/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/12/14
What is being said here is that instead of getting 50% of profits we are only getting about 6% of profits.
The Union of Fans said in the Record yesterday, that there was £7.6m of retail revenue recorded by Rangers Retial, but there were more than £4m of costs, meaning there was approximately a £3m profit made by the company, of which, if we were getting 50%, means we would get £1.5m and Sports Direct would get £1.5m
They have had accountants study the figures and now say we are not getting £1.5m, we are getting £590k. So if there is a £3m profit being made, we are getting £590k which is only 20%, and Sports Direct are getting £2.41m, 80%
On top of that, due to stock not being sold, and again referring to the record yesterday, the UoF are saying we had to pay Sports Direct £410k for unsold stock.
So Sports Direct are actually getting £2.82m of the £3m profit 94%, and we are getting just £180k for the year 6%...the £2k figure is irrelevant as it only talks about the second half of the year, likely when most of this £410k was taken.
The point I want to make is, what if we had met targets???
This is purely guess work, but its using the figures quoted as its basis.
We had to pay £410k back to Sports Direct for unsold stock. What if we sold that stock. We are paying RRP prices, so if its £410k, thats approx an extra 10,000 home shirts.
If we sold that, our retail revenue would jump form £7.6m to £8m.
If it costs £4.6m to sell £7.6m worth of shirts, I'm estimating it would cost £4.8m to sell £8m worth of shirts.
If we did this, we would no longer have to pay £410k for unsold stock.
A £3.2m profit could be made
If its actually only 20% of profits we are getting, we would get £640k instead of £180k
It isnt even known if the reason we are only getting 20% of profits and not 50% as quoted is down to sales targets not being met, if it is, and we did by selling all this stock, we could make £1.6m instead of £180k.
Given that at the time of the JJB deal, we were selling around £15-20m of merch, to justify £4.8m a year, that works out at a 24-32% profit to revenue ratio.
At the moment, we are getting just £180k from £7.6m, that works out at a ratio of just 2.3% profit from revenue, thats $hite.
If the stock we had to pay for here was sold, and we were still only getting 20%, £640k from £8m, that a ratio of 8%, still $hite
If our percentage went up from 20% to the headline 50% due to targets being met, £1.6m from £8m is a ratio of 20%, and with that, we are starting to get close to the JJB deal.
A lot of speculation yes, but a lot of these things are unknown and they really need to be known, as the picture could change significantly if they were
posted on 2/12/14
To be honest though it's all far too complicated and I can't be bothered to get into it.
If sick of requiring to be a chartered accountant, stockbroker and PR guru just to be a rangers fan these days.
posted on 2/12/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/12/14
"If sick of requiring to be a chartered accountant, stockbroker and PR guru just to be a rangers fan these days."
Well put spr, most of the last 3 years stuff has just done a Boeing over my head, left me unable to participate in the bantz
posted on 2/12/14
comment by Rising up the ranks (U2420)
posted 10 hours, 28 minutes ago
The club has been run into the ground the last year and a half and people only seem to care now the results aren't going our way.
---------------------------------
Only now? Only now people care?
Where have you been hiding?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My view of caring is doing more than writing a fecking letter, or holding a protest with 100 folk.
posted on 2/12/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/12/14
No one is blaming Ashley for taking advantage of a crooked deal from Green. What should worry all Rangers supporters is that Ashley will bleed us dry, rattles up debts in the club and continue to extend the deal that allows it. Sure, the contract would be in place irrespective of who was in control , but do you really believe King or Letham would renew it ?
Further, it surprises me that no one is concerned about the UEFA announcement whereby Newcastke and Rangers would not be allowed to participate in Europe at the the same time. Given Newcastles co efficient is bigger than ours , Europe is a pipe dream .
But, yeh Ashley,s our saviour !!
posted on 2/12/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 2/12/14
Defending the indefensible Stevie.
No way can this deal be considered good for Rangers in any way, shape or form.
What amazes me is that this arrangement has been common knowledge for a long time, it's just the first time the press have printed it and that's just because SOS forced their hand.
Page 1 of 6
6