Drooper

Assuming Minty doesn't secure his injunction

Let's be honest here, Green is leaving a hell of a lot of scope for people to speculate.

Ain't nothing bitter about it, my friend. Schadenfreude, perhaps Your club is fucked, and much as you'd love to drag the rest of us down with you, it isn't going to happen. TTFN

Dearie me, you should get out on your bike more and work some of that slabber out of your system ETA: I've highlighted one choice passage as an illustration of how out of touch you are, having existed in your delusional cheats bubble for too long. Diddy clubs have always given players away, FFS - frequently to the OF

It isn't worth anything like £65M or £80M a year. Try £15M or thereabouts.

The current deal is worth £80M over 5 years. As someone has already posted, something can be shaved off this for admin expenses and parachute payment etc. My estimate is that a club hovering in the mid-table area would lose about £600K p/a at most. A fair amount of money, but, as you say, Sky would most likely reduce the amount they pay as opposed to pulling the plug altogether. Even if they did withdraw entirely, who is to say we wouldn't get another deal, albeit at a reduced level. I reckon, all things told, clubs might have to settle with losing £300 - £400K p/a maximum. Aye, its a fair few bob, but its about time a bit of realism came into play.

Fair to whom? Certainly not justice for Rangers. There is absolutely nothing fair about what you're proposing, whatsoever. Think about it this way, if I were to be found guilty of a significant crime tomorrow, do you reckon the sheriff/judge would let me return home with a slap on the wrist on the grounds that my family would suffer by me being banged up and losing my job? The answer is a very definite no. Sadly, others often take a hit by way of association with the perpetrators of misdemeanours and crimes, and allowances are very seldom made for them. To be honest, if clubs are willing to exist, teetering at the mouth of the abyss by relying so heavily on TV revenue that losing this could send them under, then hey ho....so it goes.

I was having a nother look at some figures form the last set of St Mirren FC accounts. The wage bill had been reduced by a whopping £700K from the previous year. Even taking account of cup run bonuses and a few other factors (possibly paying off the rolling contracts of MacPherson and Millen), this indicates to me that there is certainly scope for clubs to make pretty substantial savings without it being too catastrophic if push comes to shove. Obviously, we wouldn't want to trim things by a similar amount again unless required, but if this had to be done, so be it. During the same period, our revenue from commercial activities increased, so this can help offset any loss from TV money and Rangers supporters coming to SMP (bearing in mind also that another club would take their place). Cup revenue (inc. any TV games) and league placings can also have a bearing, but I think its fair to say that clubs will not budget for these variables (certaily not in terms of essential budgeting factors).

Genuine question, where does the upward of £1M per annum per club come from?

I caught a couple of legs of this on TV last year, and it looked good. If I lived closer by and wasn't suffering from some horrendous gastro bug, I'd have been up for it.

It's good from the POV of mixing things up a bit, but Livingston wouldn't have a leg to stand on over this.

Damn, I had every intention of referring to you as 'roaster' in an infantile, playground stylee but this is actually a reasonable post (aside from the estimate of TV revenue loss for the other SPL clubs in the event of Rangers going ta ta - not at all sure where you got that from). Boo!

HMRC (likely to be the largest creditors) would never accept a CVA if they didn't know exactly where the money was coming from. That's all academic in any event, as they won't accept a CVA.

NURSE!!!!

Aye, the very day that the creditors are supposed to agree to the CVA

So what you're suggesting is that the creditors won't be remotely interested in where the money is coming from (assuming it is coming at all)? Hey, we don't have any issue with funds derived from an Eastern European human trafficking cartel, or a Columbian drug baron. We're sure it will be entirely kosher. We trust Mr Green, he seems like a stright-up kinda guy Yes, I can just imagine HMRC buying that, can't you?

How naive do you think they are? Once bitten and all that....

Not with football clubs, they don't.

Aye, you'd have to think that the creditors would have to know who is fronting the money prior to any cooling off period. With so many creditors involved, the chances of their identities (assuming they actually exist) remaining out of the public arena are negligible at best. Green will be under increasing pressure to spill the beans on this over the coming days.

I've ran out of speculation joice now. Time to sit back and see what unfolds.

Fixed.

What did you expect, FFS?

Good point. Yet another anomaly in the scenario that has been painted. In other news (apologies if already posted). Regan gets tough We Demand Names!

HMRC can scarcely afford to be lenient towards Rangers given their get tough stance with other British clubs in recent years. This article is quite an interesting read in that respect: Grauniad Article I don't think they have any scope to adopt a softly-softly approach with Rangers. This notion that they would disregard previous wrongdoing by former owners doesn't stack up at all. They will regard any attempt to circumvent paying what is due with hostility, regardless of who is at the helm. *edit: typo*

I'd be checking that my wallet is still in it, if I were you, cause this Green character is as shifty as they come.