That Nice Mr Beale admitted today that his Gumtree Galacticos were “second best” at Celtic Park last weekend.
Correct answer!
There has been some excellent deflection from the Blue Room recently.
Consider this:
Firstly the club chairman stepped down with immediate effect.
Then their Director of Fantasy pulled a fantastic piece of transfer business out of the hat and took himself off to Nottingham Forest!
Sevco’s annual accounts have been just published with some strange revelations.
Fortunately for the Sevco High Command, the Ibrox klanbase is fixated on Kevin Clancy.
Consequently, those other matters essentially go unnoticed.
The published accounts contain some issues that require further scrutiny.
Firstly, the remarkable revelation was that Mr David Cunningham King had been telling the truth about his £5m loan.
It had indeed been paid back in October 2021 and not June 2021.
Then there is the huge cost overrun on New Edmiston House (HEH) is entirely believable given the current economic climate.
Now, it had been put to me that some of the money paid to Big Mike had been hidden in that overall figure.
Personally, I don’t believe that such accounting skulduggery has taken place.
Several unforeseen factors have badly hit construction costs in the UK.
Regardless, it will extend the period before NEH becomes a profit generator for the club.
Still, it is a sensible move as it increases football income.
Dear reader, this brings us to UEFA.
They’re still watching, and sensible heads in the Blue Room are fully cognisant of that.
That is why the Sevco High Command cannot afford to lose the services of the Serious Professional.
If the Ibrox klanbase knew the extraordinary job he was doing, then they wouldn’t have his face on a banner.
The favoured franchise is now being subjected to a level of scrutiny by our gallant allies in Europe that is unprecedented.
Moreover, only the Serious Professional seems to have grasped this new normal.
The irony is that UEFA’s new FSR ordinances are designed to keep clubs afloat by preventing them from overspending.
If the brethren in the Blue Room listen to the Serious Professional, then they will stay solvent.
However, that will mean that they will remain, as Mickey Beale admitted today, “second best”.
Discover more from Phil Mac Giolla Bháin
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ever since I can remember the denizens of Ibrox have forever dined out on the undeniable achievement of the record number of titles and trophies won by the Govan club.
With another Celtic treble just a couple of matches away, no offence to Caley, it’s just dawning on the blue side of Glasgow that Celtic will overtake that number next season and that claim to fame will be in future be framed with green and white.
Their fans forums are in uproar over that probability and are not shy on indicating who and how many of the current squad have to go/stay and who will replace the leavers?
There are huge questions marks as to why the likes of Morelos and Kent were not sold for top bucks, bucks that could have been used to revamp the squad.
That boat has long since sailed with significantly reduced fees for both now the order of the day if they move on.
Its a funny day when your rivals fans are questioning why their club has not followed the Celtic model of recent years where players have been moved on for considerable profit at their peak and replaced with well scouted excellent individuals mostly from the far East market.
Given the number of trophies finding their way to Parkhead, despite the frequent ins and outs over the last decade, the Celtic board have done an excellent job and long may it continue.
I sorely miss the insight of Rugger Guy and his skills in translating accountancy gobbledygook into English. The wages to income ratio looked healthy, however that was a bumper season for them in terms of income.
The CL money should also help with the this season’s figures. The biggest problems they face will be from next season onwards.
I’m curious to know if any single factor can ease their situation with UEFA and get them off the watchlist.
The CL .money is not guaranteed.
There is a qualifying round to negotiate and Beale’s objective is to strengthen the squad to a qualifying level.
Last year it was Feyenoord and it was a close run thing so a squeaky bum occasion lies ahead.
A bit like Celtic faced under PL in qualifying with new players brought in at last minute.
This season’s CL money will come into the 2023 accounts. As I said, next season, where no CL money is guaranteed, is where the problems can set in. And, like you, I think CL qualification is far from a certainty. In fact, unless they can bring in some real quality freebies, I think they’ll really struggle.
They will though, drop straight into EL group stage, I think.
I will go one further than that.
I can see them forget champions league in order to overspend (outwith fsr ), just to stop us.
Just a thought
I never actually thought of that. Although If if they won the title by doing that, would they then be allowed to play in Europe the following season? They WILL need European money just to exist in the future, otherwise they’re just a a money pit for stupid people to throw cash into.
Not sayingng they will….but its always been a month ey pit for stupid peepul….
Keep in mind, following events in 2012, I believe the SFA changed laws so a team can come straight back from bankruptcy as the same persona.
I’m dying g to see how that one would work out if it happened, because not only does it bring Scottish football into direct confrontation with UEEFA laws…it breaches so many employment, tax etc laws.
The orcs have always been able to find cash…and it’s my honest belief their guy from noon Ireland, landed there to keep an eye on paramilitary money put in from drugs etc.
Might sound far fetched…but that’s my honest opinion…
For the orcs…giving up European money to stop us is probably acceptable….but they need a lot of cash to do that…..hh
If as they claim they are the same club, do their accounts actually state on page 19 that The Rangers Football Club limited were incorporated on 29 May 2012 withe registration number SC425159, registered office at Ibrox Stadium and carry out the operations of a football club ?
That’s in somewhere every year. I didn’t read them in detail this year, but it also used to say something along the lines of “Formerly known as” or “Formerly trading as Sevco Scotland.”
Plenty of wording acrobatics on show… page 19 states the truth about date of incorporation of the club/company these accounts are for yet previously states that ‘rangers’ were ‘formed in 1872’ (this will be the eternal notion of rangers) 😉
The accounts should bring cheer to any numerate bear. They will see that if they hadn’t paid Mike Ashley 8.25 million then they would have turned a profit.
But what did it cost them apart from cash ?
surely the government covid loan must be repaid now.
Auditor comment: “In our opinion the financial statements give a true and fair view of the state of the Companies affairs as at 30 June 2022 and its loss for the year then ended”
Whoah there, wait a minute, what about the ‘profit’ they made which was reported all over the SMSM last year???
Hi Dixie….perhaps someone can tell me if I’m correct or incorrect here…but the “profit” was pre-tax etc, and they actually made a loss…..something like that…hh
Yeh James, that’s correct. Good to see Auditors actually calling it for what it was though (a loss), when all of the SMSM were desperately trying to portray it as the klub having made a profit.
Surely they should get punted out of European Competition for life in the first paragraph of the published accounts;¬)
Don’t worry about that. The truth is found elsewhere in the accounts, at the top of page 19: “The Rangers Foodball Club Limited was incorporated in Scotland on 29 May 2012”.
Even the more educated fans (I know.. ) of the Ibrox club are concerned.
Hi Phil, if they are on the UEFA watch list, what effect does posting another loss in the accounts have?
Will whoever finishes 3rd in the league get at chance at champions league football?
Hi Phil….so the accounts have been published……where can we get a look at them, and how good or bad are they ?
Tia
Click the link…
Cheers phil
You’ll certainly not find any true analysis from the local media. An article appeared in the sun claiming they made a profit, which was factually inaccurate. They lost £3.5M last year. Can you imagine the glee in reporting if Celtic posted a loss.
To get a copy of the accounts simply go onto companies house. Type in The Rangers, then look for the company established in 2012😉
Cheers Neil…I already have a downloaded copy, and have been going through it meticulously.
I’m not an accountant, so could be missing some things….but it appears the tax repayments are not listed as losses….due I believe to the fact they have a payment programme in place.
I also don’t see where the confetti shares are listed as debt…probably cos they are directors loans..
I don’t see the debt for the government loan listed….
In fact….what I do see is a list of outgoings against a list of credit that relates to valuations…but who’s valuations ?
I also note that last year’s accounts included payment to king…who at the time claimed otherwise…..and his version has turned out to be true….so did they pay king out twice ?
I know they didn’t, but that’s an inconsistency that needs looked at as it says, we are hiding something.
All in all….if they are declaring around 3.5 million losses…you can times that by 5….when you take into account the unlisted debts.
As I say…am no accountant…but those books look very jackanory to me
Hh
The confetti shares are not debt – they are basically cash donations. Companies do not have to buy back shares.
Can they buy back shares without having it approved at an EGM?
@Charger – a football club would never buy back its own shares. The only real reason for doing so would be to return surplus cash to shareholders in a tax efficient way – and football clubs will always find other uses for surplus cash.
Equity confetti is theoretically neutral in value. Say a company has 100 shares, each worth a pound. The company is worth 100 pounds and share is 1% of the company. Now if the company releases 100 more shares for a pound each, the company is worth 200 pounds (the 100 it was worth plus the 100 pounds now in the bank). A share is now 0.5% of the company because there are twice as many of them, but the value of the share remains unchanged – half the stake in twice as much. It falls down, though, when the money in the bank is used to cover operating losses, because this erodes the value of the company.