Debt of Both Rangers & Celtic....Long
SM
Not great reading if you are a Rangers supporter
On the pitch, it's never been so close. Goal difference alone may separate
Celtic and Rangers as the race to be Scottish Premier League champions
reaches a nail-biting finale this week. But a yawning financial gap is
opening up between the two great Glasgow rivals.
Both clubs, who have shared 17 titles between them over the past 20 years,
are suffering from the monetary constraints of Scottish football and its
tiny TV audiences. Both, like their English and European counterparts, have
splurged more millions than they could afford on glamorous players. But
Celtic, at least, can look forward to a potential windfall of up to £15
million from getting to the Uefa Cup Final in Seville this week.
Rangers, whose dominance of the Scottish League came to an abrupt end three
years ago, are labouring under an increasingly insupportable burden of debt.
So worried are the money-men at Ibrox, the club's headquarters, that some,
it is rumoured, would ironically rather see Rangers lose at Hearts today
than pay its players hundreds of thousands of pounds in bonuses for winning
the league. The Observer can reveal that:
· Rangers' debts, £52m in the last financial year, have climbed to nearly
£80m this season, drawing comparisons with Leeds United, which has been
forced into a fire sale of top players.
· Under pressure from creditors, Rangers will sell off some of its top
stars, and is open to offers for Barry Ferguson, its captain and leading
goalscorer.
· Some shareholders are considering an investigation into the club's
financial affairs and transfer dealings.
The cash and credit crunch looming over Rangers has been obvious since last
September, when the club unveiled a gloomy set of full-year financial
results. It posted a loss of £35m for 2001-02, double that of the previous
season.
Turnover was down from £47m to £45m, which the club said was largely due to
non-qualification for the Champions' League. European football is crucial to
a club like Rangers, which derives little TV revenue from its domestic
league. David Murray, the metals magnate and two-thirds owner of Rangers,
has admitted it was banking on £10m from 'media income' last year, but got
just £2m.
And while earnings were down, Rangers' spending continued to soar. Staff
costs as a proportion of turnover at Rangers were 82 per cent last year, far
more than Celtic (57 per cent) and much higher than big English clubs such
as Manchester United (50 per cent).
Rangers spent £13m more than it earned from transfers in 2001-02. Over three
seasons, new signings have cost nearly £50m. Nor were all of these recruits
outstanding successes on the pitch: Tore Andre Flo, the striker signed from
Chelsea for a club record of £12m in 2000, failed to set Ibrox alight and
was later sold to Sunderland for £5.25m less.
The club's debts rocketed from £28m to £52m last year. Most are long-term
loans, and the club is not threatened with insolvency. But its borrowings
continue to spiral. A source familiar with the situation said last week that
Rangers now owes its creditors up to £80m. The club declined to comment.
Rangers' debt mountain is alarming its bankers, principally the Bank of
Scotland, known as HBOS since its merger with Halifax. According to the
source, relations between the Ibrox board and HBOS have cooled since the
recent retirement of Gavin Masterton, the bank's former managing director.
Small wonder, perhaps, that since last summer Rangers has been engaged in
some belated belt-tightening. Murray stepped down as executive chairman, to
be replaced by John McClelland. The new boss quickly parted company with
Dick Advocaat, Rangers' free-spending director of football, and installed
the less flamboyant Alex McLeish as manager.
At the beginning of the season, McClelland declared he wanted to change the
blend. We're looking at between 16 and 17 experienced players and between
six and seven less experienced players via our youth programme. That will
cut our cost base, but it does not mean we are less ambitious'.
There will be few expensive signings in future, and ageing superstars such
as Lorenzo Amoruso and Ronald de Boer are likely to be shipped out in an
attempt to cut the wage bill. McClelland cited Barry Ferguson and Stephen
Hughes as players he wanted to keep, but the club will listen to good offers
for either.
McClelland has also moved Rangers' merchandising - worth a quarter of its
total income - in house by taking control of the entire supply chain. The
club's corporate entertainment facilities are being extended, and ticket
prices raised.
These measures seem to be having some effect. The latest half-year figures -
for the six months to 31 December 2002 - show losses dropping from £9.6m to
£5m, and turnover up from £22m to £26m. McClelland has also negotiated a
£1m-plus a year contract with Carling to replace NTL as sponsors of both Old
Firm clubs. On the other hand, Rangers have lost out on the European TV
stakes again this season, going down to Zizkov in the autumn. Celtic, in
contrast, will reap the rewards of money-spinning clashes with Blackburn,
Stuttgart, Liverpool, Porto and Boavista.
Celtic's finances, though better, are still not healthy. The club's latest
interim results recorded a pre-tax loss of almost £6m in the six months to
December 2002. Turnover fell by £6m to £30m. And Celtic's debt rose £8m to
stand at £24m.
The club, whose principle shareholder is Dermot Desmond, was rocked last
month by the abrupt departure of its chief executive, Ian McLeod, after only
two years in the job. McLeod's tenure had been controversial: he led an
abortive attempt to break away from the SPL in negotiations over TV rights,
and was embarrassed by an old photograph of him wearing a Rangers shirt.
Celtic's partisan fans will probably be dismayed to hear that McLeod has
received a payoff of around £700,000 - a huge amount for a club with a
market value of £11m. Much of it, The Observer understands, is to compensate
McLeod for share options he had to give up when he left Wal-Mart, his
previous employer.
Both Old Firm teams face the same problem: with their million-strong fan
bases, they are much too big for Scottish football. Celtic and Rangers each
earn about £2.5m a year from televised matches in the Scottish Premier
League. If they were in the English Premiership, that figure would rise to
at least £15m.
To realise their footballing ambitions - and to save themselves from a
financial nightmare - Celtic and Rangers need to be playing at Old Trafford
and Highbury, rather than Dunfermline and Dundee. Both clubs are praying it
will happen sooner, rather than later.
How the teams lined up, 2001-02
Rangers / Celtic
Losses £35M / £2M
Turnover £45M / £57M
Wage bill £37M / £33M
Debt £52M / £16M
T_Bhoy
reducing their dept. If they were to have a bad run in Europe then it
could cripple the club.
Celtic should start by getting rid of some of the squad players ie
Guppie etc. We now have enough good youngsters that this kind of player
keeps out of the team when selected.
Danny
These are facts which are positively fearful. I suppose we've been burying
our heads in the sand for the past 2 seasons. So much of our debt is all of
DA's fault. He brough us forward in some respects, but has financially
crippled us. I seriously hope we don't have to lose the likes of de Boer and
Ferguson to stay afloat.
Celtic are a lot better off, but are basically in the same type of trouble
as us. As this rate we'll both end up having to vastly scale down ourselves
if we have no choice but to stay in Scotland. Which is looking inevitable.
Only way out is a crock of gold from some investor (s) - unlikely given our
rate of loss.
Ach.
T_Bhoy
Danny wrote:
>These are facts which are positively fearful. I suppose we've been burying
>our heads in the sand for the past 2 seasons. So much of our debt is all of
>DA's fault.
>
I tend to think Murray is more to blame than advocatt. Murray seemed to
lose the plot the year rangers lost the title to celtic with Wim Jansen.
Giving DA all that money and himself choosing players like Hendry
coming to Rangers was the turning point. Murray should have told DA
thats enough (which it should have been) long before he did.
The last move that I never understood why Rangers fans never questioned
DM at one of the AGM's was Flo. DM must have known at that time that
rangers were having a few bad years financially, but still payed 12
million for one player.
>He brough us forward in some respects, but has financially
>
What steps forward do you think DA brought you?
>crippled us. I seriously hope we don't have to lose the likes of de Boer and
>Ferguson to stay afloat.
>Celtic are a lot better off, but are basically in the same type of trouble
>as us.
>
I have been arguing for years with celtic fans who have said buy buy
buy, and moaned when we havent. Celtic and rangers can only grow so big
in scotland. They have two choices.
1) Except it and have a good european run now and again, but build for
it like Ajax have to. This means possibly not winning the league for a
few years while your team is built up slowly as you bring through
younger players.
2) Moving out of scotland, but the more money gained here would probably
just go on players anyway. I dont think Leeds will be the only club in
England soon been run by non footballing people.
Danny
"T_Bhoy" <T_B...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3EC94620...@hotmail.com...
>
>
> Danny wrote:
>
> >These are facts which are positively fearful. I suppose we've been
burying
> >our heads in the sand for the past 2 seasons. So much of our debt is all
of
> >DA's fault.
> >
> I tend to think Murray is more to blame than advocatt.
He has to put faith and trust in the manager's vision.
If he can't do that he can't be a chairman.
> Murray seemed to
> lose the plot the year rangers lost the title to celtic with Wim Jansen.
> Giving DA all that money and himself choosing players like Hendry
One player, that's all.
> coming to Rangers was the turning point. Murray should have told DA
> thats enough (which it should have been) long before he did.
Possibly agreed.
>
> The last move that I never understood why Rangers fans never questioned
> DM at one of the AGM's was Flo. DM must have known at that time that
> rangers were having a few bad years financially, but still payed 12
> million for one player.
Because the excitement of 'one over' on Celtic as well as the arrival of a
apparent top quality striker kept the wolves at bay.
>
> >He brough us forward in some respects, but has financially
> >
> What steps forward do you think DA brought you?
European credibility the past 4 seasons. Uefa past Xmas for the first time
in a LONG time, defeats of the likes of Bayer, Parma and Eindhoven who we'd
have never stood a chance against under WS, and the speeded development of
the finest Scottish player for many years, Barry Ferguson.
Plus he brought Craig Moore back.
>
> >crippled us. I seriously hope we don't have to lose the likes of de Boer
and
> >Ferguson to stay afloat.
> >Celtic are a lot better off, but are basically in the same type of
trouble
> >as us.
> >
> I have been arguing for years with celtic fans who have said buy buy
> buy, and moaned when we havent. Celtic and rangers can only grow so big
> in scotland. They have two choices.
>
> 1) Except it and have a good european run now and again, but build for
> it like Ajax have to. This means possibly not winning the league for a
> few years while your team is built up slowly as you bring through
> younger players.
Intolerable and you know it.
>
> 2) Moving out of scotland, but the more money gained here would probably
> just go on players anyway. I dont think Leeds will be the only club in
> England soon been run by non footballing people.
Moving out of Scotland would be a quick fix, but would it sort the problem
out long term? ffs, the Spanish, Italian and English leagues are all going
through crippling debt issues. Look at Parma - 4 seasons or so ago they were
one of the finest clubs in the world. Now they've lost all their best
players and have foolishly splashed out on Nakata who they just can't
afford.
The game will implode at this rate.
Dazza
Danny <danny__grant///@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:babetj$rco1h$1...@ID-149535.news.dfncis.de...
Looking at the accounts again and reading that article shows there are too
many hangers on at Ibrox for whom their input is not enough to warrant the
amount of money they are receiving.
Manchester United can run their club with staff costs being 50% of turnover
(granted, their turnover is much higher than ours, but proportionally, the
staffing percentages are a good measure), whilst Rangers staff costs account
for 83% of turnover, that is unbeliveable and just goes to show where the
cash is going. Did we really need someone like Cannigia at the club this
season? What about Nerlinger, what is he on? Plus all the other staff from
the ground staff right up to the PR guys, we need to cut back and cut back
today.
I hope the shareholders start investigating soon otherwise Rangers football
club will be saying goodbye to a number of key players.
Daz
bob
>
> >These are facts which are positively fearful. I suppose we've been
burying
> >our heads in the sand for the past 2 seasons. So much of our debt is all
of
> >DA's fault.
> >
> I tend to think Murray is more to blame than advocatt. Murray seemed to
> lose the plot the year rangers lost the title to celtic with Wim Jansen.
> Giving DA all that money and himself choosing players like Hendry
> coming to Rangers was the turning point. Murray should have told DA
> thats enough (which it should have been) long before he did.
I agree wholeheartedly. DM gave DA the money up front to spend as he liked.
I think DM got off on spending the money on players.
It is also interesting that when there was no more money to play with DM
promptly took a step back. If DM is as good a business man as his media
poodles would suggest, why isn't he turning the club around himself? What
happened to all those endless press conferences where DM told the public
that he was putting _massive building blocks in place_ that would propel
rangers forwards? Where are the said building blocks now?
-bob
bob
"Dazza" <da...@shotmail.com> wrote in message
news:badcb9$ocv$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
The big mistakes were guys like Jesper Christensen, how much have we paid
out in terms of wages and transfer fee per game on this guy? Also Micheal
Ball, there is a clause in the contract to send him back to everton if he
doesn't play a predefined number of games. Send him back now! As I have said
before, how could anyone forsee that Nerlinger would be injured? Well anyone
who has looked at his record before coming to rangers would realise that he
was perpetually injured for the two years prior to joining. Another Jonas
Thern who was always injured before/after joining.
FWIW, I'd move on: Caniggia (out of contract anyway), Nerlinger, Konterman,
Ball, Malcolm, either McCann or Lovenkrands, Arteta (no heart), and
Arveladze (too slow).
Players we should keep at all costs: Klos, Moore, Numan, Ferguson, De Boer.
Players worth hanging onto: Ross, Hughes, Ricksen, Muscat.
-bob
Stevie
"bob" <ea...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bafef5$slmtt$1...@ID-89289.news.dfncis.de...
>
>
> FWIW, I'd move on: Caniggia (out of contract anyway), Nerlinger,
Konterman,
> Ball, Malcolm, either McCann or Lovenkrands, Arteta (no heart), and
> Arveladze (too slow).
>
> Players we should keep at all costs: Klos, Moore, Numan, Ferguson, De
Boer.
>
> Players worth hanging onto: Ross, Hughes, Ricksen, Muscat.
>
> -bob
>
>
I hope you do get rid of Lovenkrands & Arteta, and keep Muscat. I really,
really do. *lol* Keep Michael Ball though, it always cheers me up to think
of the players Rangers have wasted vast sums of money on. Knowing Rangers'
luck, if Ball was sent back to Everton he'd be fit in no time & back in the
England squad.
Stevie ;-)
Moody Marco
"Stevie" <stewar...@notmail.com> wrote in message
news:baflf2$2o0$1...@titan.btinternet.com...
Hedman & Scheidt were good buys.
Papa-Bear
"bob" <ea...@nospam.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bafef5$slmtt$1...@ID-89289.news.dfncis.de...
>
>
> FWIW, I'd move on: Caniggia (out of contract anyway), Nerlinger,
Konterman,
> Ball, Malcolm, either McCann or Lovenkrands, Arteta (no heart), and
> Arveladze (too slow).
>
> Players we should keep at all costs: Klos, Moore, Numan, Ferguson, De
Boer.
>
> Players worth hanging onto: Ross, Hughes, Ricksen, Muscat.
>
> -bob
...I'd add Numan to the list to get punted and Ross and Hughes to the
keep-at-all costs list...Ross has the makings of the most cultured right
back since Sandy Jardine and Hughes has been outstanding in the last two
games and is starting to realise his potential...Ricksen is a good enough
player, but if we got a decent amount for him he could go without the team
suffering too badly...I'd also offer Thompson and Averladze to Hearts for De
Vries - he's exactly the guy we need up front, fast, strong sharp and
skillful and he and Mols would be a superb pairing
pb
Stevie
"Moody Marco" <ma...@zoom.co.uk> wrote in message
news:bafll0$svqe9$1...@ID-68982.news.dfncis.de...
very well turn out to be a good buy - (he's an international keeper who is
nearing fitness) but we don't have anything that rivals the likes of Flo,
Rozenthal, Prodan etc. (very long list).
Thankfully, so far, MON hasn't made any noticeably bad buys. I think
Fernandez is as bad as it gets. Since you've quoted Hedman & Scheidt, you
could just about buy them both twice with the money spent on Flo.
Is anyone really arguing that Celtic have been as irresponsible & had the
same bad judgement in the transfer market as Rangers? That's at least
partly the point of this thread isn't it - how much debt we're both in? I
appreciate that Rangers have had shite luck (which is why I joked about Ball
getting back into the England set up) but for the main part they have spent
badly.
Stevie.
AndyM
> Where are the said building blocks now?
He had to sell them on. The maintenance was costing too much
Angof
Konterman,
> Ball, Malcolm, either McCann or Lovenkrands, Arteta (no heart), and
> Arveladze (too slow).
>
> Players we should keep at all costs: Klos, Moore, Numan, Ferguson, De
Boer.
>
> Players worth hanging onto: Ross, Hughes, Ricksen, Muscat.
>
> -bob
>
>
Dump Numan and keep Ball. Muscat...your joking I take it?
Angof
James smyth
"SM" <s...@nomail.net> wrote in message
news:nvaya.4803$Uk6.37...@news-text.cableinet.net...
Celtic aren't worth £11m, I would nae give 50p for the piss heads.
Græme
>...I'd add Numan to the list to get punted and Ross and Hughes to the
>keep-at-all costs list...Ross has the makings of the most cultured right
>back since Sandy Jardine and Hughes has been outstanding in the last two
>games and is starting to realise his potential...Ricksen is a good enough
>player, but if we got a decent amount for him he could go without the team
>suffering too badly...I'd also offer Thompson and Averladze to Hearts for De
>Vries - he's exactly the guy we need up front, fast, strong sharp and
>skillful and he and Mols would be a superb pairing
>
Fing hell.... I've been saying it for months and getting slaughtered!! Punt Ricksen
and cash in!
----------------
Birdiñho
Carpe Diem.
bob
"Angof" <an...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:bag8io$srg5u$1...@ID-78362.news.dfncis.de...
Nope. I just feel we need a few old pros at the back. Muscat is probably
being paid peanuts.
-bob
bob
"Papa-Bear" <p...@railtrack.com> wrote in message
news:bafvas$jde$1...@newsg4.svr.pol.co.uk...
As much as I'd like to see Ross and Hughes progress and become great
players, they aren't yet. It is rather difficult to think that two players
that are not even 1st team regulars should be must keep players.
Both players have all the qualities to make it in the game. The challenge
they now face is to take more initiative on the park when they are selected.
-bob