Jump to content

Big Rangers Administration/Liquidation Thread - All chat here!


Recommended Posts

We can afford the players wages, our players wages is like 30/35% of our turnover which is actually extremely good and most big teams would give anything for that. It's where the rest of that money is going which is the problem, not the wages.

Whatever you may think of Murray, Whyte, Green, The Bus Boys, et al., they really love people like you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: English lessons tonight is it ?. ?. ?.

I really dont see the point off higlighing spelling erors & grammar mistakes when the reader already nows what message has been connveyed !. Pointless point scoring excercise IMO.

says the guy whose only come back to one of my comments on the rangers v celtic forum was to point out 2 spelling mistakes??? 3 hours before you posted this . oh hb your hypocracy and patheticness make me laugh. Edited by forever_blue
Link to comment
Share on other sites

says the guy whose only come back to one of my comments on the rangers v celtic forum was to point out 2 spelling mistakes??? 3 hours before you posted this . oh hb your hypocracy and patheticness make me laugh.

"hypocracy" :lol:

"patheticness" :lol::lol:

These are obviously placed purposefully to divert attention from the rest of it... which has already been edited. :lol::lol::lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can afford the players wages, our players wages is like 30/35% of our turnover which is actually extremely good and most big teams would give anything for that. It's where the rest of that money is going which is the problem, not the wages.

1. You can't afford your off-field expenses; let alone your players.

2. During Minty years your wages to turnover ratio was roughly 40%. Yet you were still making £10m+ losses every year, and that was without people trying to siphon off money behind the scenes.

3. Fans and sponsorship don't bring in enough money to cover the fixed costs. So technically no amount of players wages is affordable.

Edited by Fotbawmad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. Fans and sponsorship don't bring in enough money to cover the fixed costs. So technically no amount of players wages is affordable.

Even taking away the entire player wage budget (£7m), Rangers would still have lost £7m in the last years accounts.

That is the very definition of unsustainable!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way rangers can compete with Celtic is using handouts from a money man who will give them money that allows them to spend far above what should be possible.

And there you are, back where you started under Murray, buying success.

Is that right, DJ?

We can only wonder how we secured so much success prior to Murray ever darkening our doorstep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Classic Bennett at the peak of his joyously inadequate game.

Rather than address a point, have a snide wee dig that's hopelessly wide of its mark.

It was meant as a bantery joke, sorry.

Has no concept of turnover. What a buffoon. You read that phrase in a paper and trot it out parrot fashion without understanding it.

Expenditure of 30/35% of turnover in one company does not equate to the same level of 'viability' as 30/35% in another ...

A company that turns over 40 million and has an annual 'profit margin' of 50% is different to company that has a turnover of 50 million and operates at a loss ...

The phrase on it's own means absolutely f**k all without the complete financial picture ....

Yet you bears lap it up like it means something .... unbelievable. No wonder you idiots get diddled.

My ten year old has a better grasp of accountancy .... FFS.

ETA: As another poster so eloquently summed this up ....

:thumsup2 :thumsup2 :thumsup2 :thumsup2

Densboy CA .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is that right, DJ?

We can only wonder how we secured so much success prior to Murray ever darkening our doorstep.

It's blatantly obvious. The game has changed greatly in the last 25-30 years.

You can't use the pre Murray era of Scottish football as any sort of comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's blatantly obvious. The game has changed greatly in the last 25-30 years.

You can't use the pre Murray era of Scottish football as any sort of comparison.

The leader has spoken lol

It's the very model that you yourself suggested, even celtic are going slowly going down that road too ffs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...