Blu_ultra
Well-Known Member
Do you seriously think we wouldn’t have sold a player if we had any offers? Morelos aside, we haven’t had 1 concrete offer for anyone.
2021 Accounts - The Investors who funded 55
- Thread starter Hollywood_RM
- Start date
Barrhead Bluenose
Well-Known Member
Confirmed bids for Kent and Borna as well.
Are we the only club in world football who can’t sell their players.
Aberdeen sold McKenna, Celtic sold Ajer and Christie in the last years of their contracts but we can’t sell because nobody bids for our players.
Blu_ultra
Well-Known Member
No, but Leeds bid 8.5 million for a player we paid almost 7 for. After wages and agent fee’s etc, we wouldn’t have made a profit. Literally, we would have been giving him away and paying Liverpool back what we owed and then have to buy a new player. Borna was a 2 million pound bid. We need to be operating in a different stratosphere from that to be honest.
We definitely need to get better at player sales. King highlighted it as the only area where we still trail Celtic and he is spot on. Ideally, a 15 million pound player leaves very year and we have a decent European run. That will give us money to invest in the team.
Barrhead Bluenose
Well-Known Member
Look at the Patterson transfer, that was about 6 months in the making.
You can publicly say your players not for sale but still deal with the agents in the background.
You can publicly say your players not for sale but still deal with the agents in the background.
Texas ranger
Well-Known Member
Which, by and large, I would say we have done over the last few years. Aribo, Bassey, Kamara, all bought for peanuts and worth a collective 30-35 million, maybe more. Even Kent at 7 million is worth more than what we paid for him. Of course there are exceptions but we’ve definitely got a squad today worth much, much more than we paid for it.
We have to start selling to allow squad changes.
Mr. T.
Well-Known Member
Spot on. As you say,everyone makes mistakes. In life, it’s how you deal with these mistakes that defines somebody as a person. Unfortunately, there are too many people (including a fair number in our support) who are unable to grasp that concept. One day one of them might let the rest of us in on the secret of how to be perfect.
Sheik Ma Shammy
Well-Known Member
King did not help himself coming out causing as much trouble as he could during the title run-in.
Euro Scooter
Well-Known Member
The HK lending rate is about 5% so those directors will not be making any money off of the loan, they will just be recouping the cost of making the loan.
Those lending money from UK or Euro-based financial institutions have a base lending rate of 0%, or close to, so can probably afford to lend at 0% interest with no real cost attached to it.
Laudrups Barnet 55
Well-Known Member
Still get really wound up at the sheer audacity of Watford. Loved ranieri but that’s soured it for me the speccy old lady's front bottom!
Croatia and Rangers first choice LB who can cut it in the business end of the Europa league? “They’re Scottish they’ll bite our hands off for 2 million”
They deserve relegation and a lifetime in the championship the no mark, useless yo-yo cunts
Grant K
Well-Known Member
Not sure that I would agree. The share are not all but irredeemable, they are a marketable commodity subject to the vagaries of supply and demand in relation to price. I’m also not sure about the argument about dilution of value on the same basis. At the end of the day it always comes down to how much a buyer is prepared to pay and if our club continues in its upward trajectory the price of the shares will increase.
the Board have done a fantastic job in driving us forward from the bleak days of the Spivs and it should be remembered that there is no dividend paid on the shares and no salaries paid to the investors. However it is, in my opinion, wrong to suggest the shares are all but worthless and that converting the loans to shares is akin to writing off debt.
Sir Sasa Papac
Well-Known Member
That is complete horseshit. We’ve had loads of bids for our players but clearly none that meet our valuation.
Fck sake this is even worse! No shares are unredeemable they are entirely dependent on the value of the business. They are vastly overvalued until now but, for example, our club won the Europa League last year and got to the knockouts of the champions league next year we could have been sitting with £100m + cash in the bank and a squad worth just as much. If you own shares they increase alongside the value of the business and a cash rich, well supported and successful club would be worth a shitload.
Your like the guy who bailed out of Apple in the late nineties because they were in a rough period. Imagine having a few hundred of those useless shares now
Some people seriously don’t understand the very basics of finances
Sheik Ma Shammy
Well-Known Member
Significant investment by the investors and the board.
I suspect we are overreacting to Australia. We have growing links, via some of our new shareholders, with the Far East of which Australia is an important part. I can easily see why those investors would want more visibility in Oz. Yes, it was a bit of a mis-step but sometimes shit happens. Fix it and move on.
IbroxForever
Well-Known Member
He is easily our wealthiest investor. Prior to covid it was rumoured he was investing up to £20m.
LJ50
Well-Known Member
It’s worth saying that though the intra-bank rate has been close to zero for some time, the institutions always have a margin on that rate (whether using LIBOR, now SONIA, or EUROBOR) that is likely to have been anywhere from 1.75% to now nearer 3.5% on that rate. So even just in opportunity cost, there will still have been a cost to those investors.
Don’t understand the basics of finance? Our shares aren’t on an open market. Therefor to redeem them the owner wouls need to seek a private buyer - which they won’t find at the value they were paid out at … because of the amount of share issues we have done.
Let me simplify it for you since you seem like you don’t really know.
I have 1 really special cake and cut it into 6 slices, and each slice is worth £5. I then cut my 6 slices in half, each slice is now worth £2.50, and I would struggle to find a buyer at £5.
Our shares have no price to increase, again, they aren’t on the open market and equally it is not guaranteed that the price of a share will go up. Especially not in a business which has recorded losses year after year.
That's the key point. All teams need refreshed no matter what business you are in. If you refresh with peanuts you get monkeys. We have to sell it's just a matter of who and how much. We also don't want to throw the baby out with the bath water as we want trophies and we want to compete and win in the latter stages of europe every year even if it's conference league.
One thing I trust about Gio above SG is he will understand the needs of Rangers first and foremost as I think he is a fan. No disrespect to SG on that but I think a balanced outcome can be reached between the football and the money sides with current incumbents.
Sir Sasa Papac
Well-Known Member
They aren’t always going to be off the open market in fact a financially successful rangers football club would likely go public.
If they can buy them on the private market so can anyone else. We’ve had a least a dozen private buyers who’ve already put in a million pound at least.
Take your cake example. Maybe you’ve overpaid for your cake yesterday. But let’s say your cake wins an award nobody thought it could win, maybe the cake is invited to the top table for the rich to feast on, suddenly your piece of cake is much more attractive to buyers and your slice however diluted early on is worth much more than you bought it for. We were a penalty away from this being a reality.
You said they were irredeemable but yet even now Dave King is currently in the process of selling his to Club 1872 for millions so you better tell him not to bother as nobody wants them and they aren’t actually worth anything anyway.
stillAlwaysblue
Well-Known Member
Usually by now some on here will want to sack the board or insist that they put in more cash. No doubt this will happen if we lose the first league game.
It would be great if we could sell the players we dont need. Might not get a lot for them but it frees up wages and allows one top player to come in. For us a top player would have a value of 6/8 million. Even if we can not sell those we dont need freeing up 30/60K in wages for a few is a plus.
It would be great if we could sell the players we dont need. Might not get a lot for them but it frees up wages and allows one top player to come in. For us a top player would have a value of 6/8 million. Even if we can not sell those we dont need freeing up 30/60K in wages for a few is a plus.
The value of Rangers doesn’t go up with winning things. It goes off a number of financial metrics such as PE and EPS.
I assume since you’re so financially clued up you know what these are but i’ll break it down for you anyway.
EPS is earnings per share, which is calculated by the profit divided by the number of shares, in which case we have over 400,000,000 shares. So if we profit by 17m one year, the eps is calculated by 17,000,000/400,000,000 which would give you 0.0425. To put that in to contrast, stocks which do well year on year such as google has an eps of 24.62. The EPS shows the profibility of a company and a low eps indicates a poor investment opportunity.
Then we can go into the PE which is price/earnings ratio and is calculated by stock price/companies EPS, and since our EPS is absolutely in the mud, our PE and in turn company value will also be very low
In short, our investors will get nowhere near what they were paid out at, regardless of what we win or how well we do in a cup. But i’m sure you knew that as you have basic knowledge of finance.
Blu_ultra
Well-Known Member
You’re living in a fantasy world if you think the majority of our investors did so to make money. They did it keep us going. I’m sure we are all aware how shareholding works, but let’s get real here.
Ted Rangers
Well-Known Member
I don't know anything about this, so I'll just ask.
If the shares were bought at 25p, is there going to be a time that they would be valued at 26p?
Is there no way for these shares to be sold at all?
If we aren't selling shares publicly, will we ever?
It sounds like these guys are very smart with their money, so why have they just thrown this amount away, especially any investor who doesn't have personal loyalty to the club?
Snoopproddiedogg
Well-Known Member
I thought all the loan to shares conversions were done below market price so in theory if the shares stay at the market rate or rise above then they will have made money automatically if they chose to or when they sell those shares.
More share issues will dilute that small gain though.
More share issues will dilute that small gain though.
Last edited:
As i said before that guy quoted me saying i knew nothing, they put money in knowing there is probably next to no chance they will recoup it, the value of the shares can and probably will go up, but football clubs aren’t run as good investments.
So even if the share price is low, there is high volume so the overall value of the club can still be high. The share price doesn’t really matter. Just a bheasts wet dream.
Many of our shares will be private sales at a set price, probably higher than the actual share value but that is people with love of the club and nothing to do with the actual value of the club and investment opportunity.
If for example someone wants to buy a controlling interest in the club, and we were listed on open market - a large sale would pull the price up.
High Society
Well-Known Member
Guys, you’re just point scoring against each other.
The main reason for our major shareholders invested was to refinance the club. That also applies to small investors via C1872 and Tifosy.
Nobody is looking to sell their shares for the foreseeable future except DK who is using C1872 as a vehicle.
the reality is that NEW shares are still being issued to bring in capital . There is no real market for buying existing shares at the moment.
Thurny72
Well-Known Member
Was there not rumours of him wanting to up his shares?
Which is precisely why they can be worth more of they were to hit open market they take the risk of someone like Ashley etc trading to get ownership in the background and also why the board can in essence set share price.
This board and investors have done well and put in a lot but they will make money out of these shares even though diluting to an extent those that have done so through loans etc as well.
As interest rates rises it will be interesting if some of the institutional investors decide to pull cash out by selling shares and putting into other opportunities.
TPP
Well-Known Member
Your miles off mate in every central point.
Tell me how they can be worth more if hitting the open market sorry?
Bluechip
Well-Known Member
He certainly is and a very generous young man.
Supply and demand of who wants to buy
There's lots of different little bits involved number of shares value of those shares what share are the in the company how many buy and sell, what price those shares were achieved or initially bought at.
The biggest thing is ease of access to buy the shares to everyone it means that if we went public if shares are not selling the price can increase or go down.
Say we went public investors refuse to sell we post a profit on annual accounts then a little sell at over the the market price share price creeps up investors decide to sell at that price and make money if loads start buying shares even small amounts those shares creep up again.......... it can go two ways
Supply and demand? There are over 450,000,000 shares in circulation.
Did you see my post about P/E and EPS?
Posting a profit will do little to nothing to our share price.
I'm giving examples that's all supply and demand is their though reality is most fans buy as a keep sake not as a profit
However doesn't make it less valid football clubs in general as share investments are risky by with high reward on occasion normally due to the initial shareholders being bought out with mandatory offers especially when low initial share prices.
Let's come back to Mike Ashley he paid 130ish for Newcastle tied then up in loans and merchandising then sold them for what 300 mill may be die a painful death as its similar what he tried to do with us.
The glaziers at man utd they basically loaned money through owning man u to find the purchase of shares then tied the debt to the club to repay
Mccann at the scum paid 9 mill walked away with what 30ish mill
All of these the owners of the shares made more than double at least
stillAlwaysblue
Well-Known Member
Having worked as trader in London many moons ago good to see our poster Crispy Bacon knows his stuff.
Shares in football clubs are not for the ordinary investor other than as a show of support.
Club shares are for owners and directors and even then they can lose everything they have put in.
If you want to invest buy a few shares in Astra Zeneca as an investment for growth or Chesnara for income but take professional advice first as I am now just a bloke who when retired no longer have a license for advice.
Meanwhile well done to our current board for putting up their cash.
If I was on the board I would consider getting a group to purchase Mr Kings shares as it appears loans are attracting a high rate of interest but I dont have all the information on that.
Shares in football clubs are not for the ordinary investor other than as a show of support.
Club shares are for owners and directors and even then they can lose everything they have put in.
If you want to invest buy a few shares in Astra Zeneca as an investment for growth or Chesnara for income but take professional advice first as I am now just a bloke who when retired no longer have a license for advice.
Meanwhile well done to our current board for putting up their cash.
If I was on the board I would consider getting a group to purchase Mr Kings shares as it appears loans are attracting a high rate of interest but I dont have all the information on that.
Ok so Newcastle has 130,000,000 ordinary shares and have a revenue of £179,000,000 which would give them an EPS of around £1.3, so for every share outstanding they make £1.30. We earn 4pence per share if we turned a £17m profit. We don’t. We lose money year on year. That is how Mike Ashley made his money. You would say someone would be happy to pay 130m for a company which makes 179m a year. Would someone pay 150m for a company which loses money every year?
In short no. Unless they had a deep love for the club, and even if they did - the value of the ordinary shares won’t go up much.
You’re comparing apples and bananas. Newcastle was bought by a rich family as a play thing.
Big thanks to our investors but they won’t make much money, if any, from this. Just look at Dave King whos been trying to sell his shares for months and will still be trying to sell them this time next year.
Rick Springfield
Well-Known Member
Naive as furk some are to think these guys will just be pumping money in out of the goodness of their heart with absolutely fck all self gain
tazzabear
Well-Known Member
What does this mean.
That they’ve lost money?
I didn’t think that’s what being converted to shares meant.
Last edited:
High Society
Well-Known Member
It’s out of love for our club and they could make a lot more money if they invested it out with football. Stupid as fcuk to think otherwise
Giffnock Bluenose
Active Member
First post on site , some good information from contributors on this particular topic.
In this financial year Directors & Investors are continuing to to support the Club ,
In July 2021 a further £8.5million was received to assist the Club's finances, some of this
would have been used to repay Dave King's loan of £5.25 million .
Another £7.5 million was needed by end of November 2021 & as Stewart Robertson said
@ The AGM "this was received and a bit more " .That's at least £16million this financial year .Loans to equity from this total is £5.85 million , Companies House notified on
26th Nov , 29th Nov , 5th Jan & 22nd Feb of changes to equity.
Julian Woolhardt , John Halstead , George Letham & George Taylor increased their holding
by £1million (4,000,000 shares each ) John Bennett £500000 (2,000,000 shares )
& other Investors by £1.35million .
Interesting that Stuart Gibson holding hasn't increased since 30th June 2021 , but still a
major player as he was sitting beside Vice - Chairman John Bennett at the Europa League
Final.
In this financial year Directors & Investors are continuing to to support the Club ,
In July 2021 a further £8.5million was received to assist the Club's finances, some of this
would have been used to repay Dave King's loan of £5.25 million .
Another £7.5 million was needed by end of November 2021 & as Stewart Robertson said
@ The AGM "this was received and a bit more " .That's at least £16million this financial year .Loans to equity from this total is £5.85 million , Companies House notified on
26th Nov , 29th Nov , 5th Jan & 22nd Feb of changes to equity.
Julian Woolhardt , John Halstead , George Letham & George Taylor increased their holding
by £1million (4,000,000 shares each ) John Bennett £500000 (2,000,000 shares )
& other Investors by £1.35million .
Interesting that Stuart Gibson holding hasn't increased since 30th June 2021 , but still a
major player as he was sitting beside Vice - Chairman John Bennett at the Europa League
Final.
But your over complicating it purchase football clubs isn't just about dividends, eps, roi, income/exp, profit/loss etc
It's about holding the shares and building until you have someone willing to purchase a blocks. And sell above market value ie 10 mill shares at even an increase of 1p makes 100k.
The other part of being involved and the board do have big share numbers is influencing what contracts are issued and to who. Either is sponsorships, merchandising deals, catering, WiFi, hospitality, loan with interest to share conversion, 100s of different contracts that that can be influenced to make money on side.
You then have the basically free marketing as name being attached to a high profile business,
Accounts last year alone said they resisted investors from both institutional investors private and family sphere investors ..... so someone is sniffing around purchasing the club even as a potential scoping excercise.
No one is saying buying shares alone is profitable its not for smaller purchasers especially for football clubs but its bigger investors that make money more often than not
There's is a reason football clubs are seen as high risk businesses due to all the addons that go with it
We aren’t talking about buying a football club though we are talking about investors making money on the shares that were paid out and then diluted down.
You’ve jumped into the middle of a conversation and got your wires crossed on a mad tangent about buying football clubs.
If their shares go onto open market they lose money on them. Simple. You can’t dictate who get your shares on open market.
stillAlwaysblue
Well-Known Member
Our Investors have put up cash because of their love and support for the club.
Our next set of accounts will give us a better view as to the financial situation.
Meanwhile the only people who would want to buy into the club or takeover would be those who are prepared to lose all they put in and not have to worry about the loss.
Dave KIng now finds himself in a position where he has been so far unable to sell his shares and get back some cash.
Although unlikely I would like to see a rights issue but that would mean our current investors again investing and is why I would say unlikely. IF we are to spend big (ish) money on players we need to sell current players or another investor comes in.
Looking at inflation the cost of maintaining the stadium and its running costs will increase and we can not expect Directors to again invest.
One interesting shareholding is Club 1872. Do we know the number they hold to date.
IF the holding could be sold to an investor the cash could be given to the club to assist with player purchases. Important to ensure the buyer would be 100% Rangers and known to the board as such.
Our next set of accounts will give us a better view as to the financial situation.
Meanwhile the only people who would want to buy into the club or takeover would be those who are prepared to lose all they put in and not have to worry about the loss.
Dave KIng now finds himself in a position where he has been so far unable to sell his shares and get back some cash.
Although unlikely I would like to see a rights issue but that would mean our current investors again investing and is why I would say unlikely. IF we are to spend big (ish) money on players we need to sell current players or another investor comes in.
Looking at inflation the cost of maintaining the stadium and its running costs will increase and we can not expect Directors to again invest.
One interesting shareholding is Club 1872. Do we know the number they hold to date.
IF the holding could be sold to an investor the cash could be given to the club to assist with player purchases. Important to ensure the buyer would be 100% Rangers and known to the board as such.
Rick Springfield
Well-Known Member
It's irrelevant they are still making money. I could have a better night shagging Mila Kunis instead of my wife
Different opinions that's all
My opinion is there has been a long term goal with a maximum amount of shares to be created in the longer term plan to fund the club through loans to share conversion (growing or at least keeping share ownership %) with the intention of then moving into more IPO and aiming to sell at a premium when that happens ........ mainly to fans as the excitement will get them pay over the odds for owning part the club.
Ie what mccann did to scum fans they paid a fortune for shares and were worth less weeks later.
With the intention of retaining ownership of the club (not all board members/ investors will sell)
The issues with c1872(I don't rate them but they are against current board) which impacts club ownership of above if true.
The issues with King again impacts above
Pretty sure 25% of company needs to be have shareholdings under 5% ie the share issue to fans starts that process would need to check our total percentage under 5%
Focus from board and interviews/ accounts around achieving profit - we need to be operating within our means but it seems a big thing to board
It looks very similar model to what mccann did as to what we are doing we are just spreading it over more people than he was .
load of other little points but to me we are heading for a public offering that's where profits for current shareholders that wish to sell will be made
For me c1872 isn't fit for purpose but we do need a fans vehicle that can help protect the club
It makes no sense. The club can’t set the share price. We don’t have enough fans to buy 450m shares at a premium. In terms of finance what you have said is absolute scrambled eggs. We’ll leave it at that.
Valley Bluenose
RTV? Completed it mate!
How are they making money? Right now. I guess there are certain circumstances in which they might get their cash back in the future but I'm struggling to see how they get a return on investment from Rangers that would be greater than simply letting their cash sit in even a basic interest-bearing account, never mind investing in a far more lucrative sector.
Do explain please.
stillAlwaysblue
Well-Known Member
Directors are responsible to shareholders and to ensure the business is profitable.
Fans who buy
tickets rightly or wrongly think that the directors have to look after their interest when it is only in the interest of the shareholders that fans continue to buy tickets and thus contribute to the company.
I buy food each week from a supermarket but that does not mean the directors have my interest at heart other than to ensure I keep buying.
However I am sure their are a great many fans who hold shares in their own name and in that case the Directors have a responsibility to them to ensure the well being of the club.
At present a shareholding in Rangers is a poor investment and other than wining the CL each season it is unlikely to change.
Fans who buy
tickets rightly or wrongly think that the directors have to look after their interest when it is only in the interest of the shareholders that fans continue to buy tickets and thus contribute to the company.
I buy food each week from a supermarket but that does not mean the directors have my interest at heart other than to ensure I keep buying.
However I am sure their are a great many fans who hold shares in their own name and in that case the Directors have a responsibility to them to ensure the well being of the club.
At present a shareholding in Rangers is a poor investment and other than wining the CL each season it is unlikely to change.
The new owners of Chelsea just have - paid over £4b for business that has lost money every year for about 10 years….
