Are Rangers actually skint?

[Fraggle]

Not skint, as others gave mentioned, there are some hefty large wallets propping them up. What they do have is a substantially large blackmore, that eat,  sleep, repeats,each time a new large wallet comes along to replace the last guy.

[Dick Dastardly]

11 hours ago, Wee Mikey said:

 

A way better lyric for a certain song. 🙃

Up to their knees in debts and loans

Surrender all your assets

[Bill Sikes]

Yes, they are skint.

 

The wage bill every month is millions more than income. 

 

They are currently one owner away from saying enough is enough, spend within your means or go bust again.

 

Will the 49rs be that owner ?

 

They need a massive reality check and sitting around the middle of the table for a few seasons is whats required imo.

 

 

 

 

[TheBigO]

6 minutes ago, Gregorski said:

Whilst I'm considering becoming a diehard 49ers fan because of it. And, I don't even like American Football.

 

I think they're doing a wonderful job at Rangers and fully support their approach. 

 

All seriousness though, I'd stick with them if that's your team and you feel a genuite affinity towards them. Nothing can be truly black and white. 

 

A wee club like The Rangers 2012 are a very small part of their ongoing concerns anyway.

 

Anyway, it's not like we get to choose our allegiances. Once we're in, we're in.

 

 

Yeah i kinda feel once we're in, we're in too.  Not like its a big part of my life or that, but hmmmm, imagine the pride if they liquidated the huns I guess!!!

3 minutes ago, A_A wehatethehibs said:

You are now a Seahawks fan. Afraid that’s now mandatory. We need Seattle flags everywhere, lets go Seahawks, SMASH the 49ers 💯 

Na!!! If anything I think it'd be the Saints.  Just cos I loved Tremé, Dr John etc etc..!

3 minutes ago, Gregorski said:

I hated Thatcherism, the Tories, multiple pit closers in Scotland in the 80's but when it came to Hearts, needless to say it didn't change a thing despite our Chairman's obvious political leanings.

 

And that's even after he put a Conservative party billboard up outside the Gorgie End. Or, did I imagine that? Maybe it was a bad dream.

Good point!

[EH11 2NL]

Of course they're not. Spent a fortune in the summer. Tired old patter from everyone else in Scotland hoping for another administration.

 

They are shite tho. 

[Drumjambo]

3 hours ago, jambo_74 said:

That deal smells of money laundering, or at best paying back an under the table debt when Everton bought Patterson for an ungodly amount.

 

Thats exactly what I was saying to my mates. Also they took in £4 mill for Dessers 10 for Ingamane didn't buy Cerny and sent 60 goals out the door !  Also got 6 for the pish brazil left back Jefty and money for Yilmaz too 

 

Are they not still paying Cifuentus as well  he was an inspired signing?

 

They don't have the cash they are pretending too - Also Tav on 35k a week a bit of an issue as is Dejon Mustard eh Sterling he's on 22k a week allegedly 

 

LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL !! 

 

They'll be walking away again hopefully

[Always the Hearts]

1 hour ago, Ex member of the SaS said:

If you can believe Phil three names the sacking of Martin has to come out of the player budget. Martin and backroom staff on two years wages when sacked. Like I said if you can believe him that means little to spend in Jan or to entice a new manager.

And you have to be exceptionally thick to do so. Even the Tims don't take him seriously. 

[jambo_74]

2 minutes ago, Drumjambo said:

 

Thats exactly what I was saying to my mates. Also they took in £4 mill for Dessers 10 for Ingamane didn't buy Cerny and sent 60 goals out the door !  Also got 6 for the pish brazil left back Jefty and money for Yilmaz too 

 

Are they not still paying Cifuentus as well  he was an inspired signing?

 

They don't have the cash they are pretending too - Also Tav on 35k a week a bit of an issue as is Dejon Mustard eh Sterling he's on 22k a week allegedly 

 

LET THE GOOD TIMES ROLL !! 

 

They'll be walking away again hopefully

Something doesn't sit right with football as a whole. It feels so awash with money that it would be a no brainer for more nefarious business people, or potentially criminal enterprises to do a bit of money laundering. I could be wrong, but it certainly appears from the outside looking in to offer that potential.

[OmiyaHearts]

I doubt when coaches are sacked, they get their full contract paid out. There will be an agreement to pay X amount of months as a pay-off if/when they lose their job. 

 

Are Huns skint? It does feel like they live month to month but there always seems to be someone there to top up the funds.

[DxB Hearts]

Think there needs to be a definition of what people mean - they aren’t skint in terms of admin 2 on the cards, there would be zero point in the 49ers buying them to do that. 
 

But I certainly don’t believe they are in a position to continue to spend £10-15m every season without successful/extended European campaigns and good player sales.
 

Their biggest issue moving forward will be the lack of sellable assets in that squad - Raskin and Gassama are the only two who look like they’d have any value at all.
 

If (and it’s obviously a massive if) we manage to secure 2nd and they don’t get a shot at the Europa league or even worse miss Europe all together then they aren’t going to get bank rolled to the values they need to compete with Celtic. £8m on that donkey from Everton is money down the drain. Nobody is going to trust the current DoF with that kind of cash again if they don’t turn it around, and quickly, this season. 

[Jambo in Bathgate]

14 minutes ago, Bill Sikes said:

Yes, they are skint.

 

The wage bill every month is millions more than income. 

 

They are currently one owner away from saying enough is enough, spend within your means or go bust again.

 

Will the 49rs be that owner ?

 

They need a massive reality check and sitting around the middle of the table for a few seasons is whats required imo.

 

 

 

 

The 49rs business model is based on media revenue and major player trading. At the moment the media revenue is poor. Improvement is not going to happen in Scotland. They will be pressing soon for an all British League as they have a stake in Leeds. This will be done hand in hand with Celtic. Unless this happens the next owner will be looked for within a few years. 
Aslo, Rangers fans have learned nothing since liquidation. They are still in self entitlement mode. 

[gordon simpson]

47 minutes ago, Gregorski said:

I hated Thatcherism, the Tories, multiple pit closers in Scotland in the 80's but when it came to Hearts, needless to say it didn't change a thing despite our Chairman's obvious political leanings.

 

And that's even after he put a Conservative party billboard up outside the Gorgie End. Or, did I imagine that? Maybe it was a bad dream.

bad dream me thinks 

[DixieNormous]

1 hour ago, TheBigO said:

Here's a question, which doesn't require its own thread, but I'm struggling with....!

 

I've recently rediscovered how much I enjoy NFL (been sick for a few weeks so a lot of sofa time and enjoying the Ch5 footage, and not JUST cos of Sam Quek!).  I was always a 49ers fan as a kid, had the shirts etc etc, during the time of Montana and Rice et al.

 

But now, I'm not sure I'm allowed to support the 49ers with the hun link!?  Whats the thoughts on this???  I'm wrestling with needing to chooe a new team which doesn't feel right either!

42 not 49

[Hagar the Horrible]

had a bit of a think on this as to if they are skint or not, I would say YES, however and the BUT is that they are a going-concern, they can still operate as a business.  Last season and after the last set of accounts that were published, they made a £17m loss, over all the other losses.  There was a list of directors loans.  When the 49ers bought them over....oh wait they did not, Its a consortium who also own the 49ers AND Andrew Cavenagh, who purchased the company as a going-concern.  That raised some unanswered questions, such as did they repay any or all of the massive amount of directors loans?  They never had any banking facilities including overdraft as of close of play season 24/25?  Do they now have it.

 

The consortium put in a £20m war chest including buying a dud from Everton for £8m,  net result they are 11 points behind us, and not even in the top six.  They have to pay a lot out to Martin, and from memory they only just paid of Beale.

 

They needed a directors input just to see the season out last time the £17m.  what will their operating losses be this year?  I guess on the 1 to horrendous scale a wee bit closer to horrendous????

 

So the question is , Are rangers skint, then it is an emphatic yes!  However are the owners skint then NO, so the business are still trading and will continue to do so.

 

The real question is, how long will American owners chuck money into a basket case.  £20m went into a war chest, and it disappeared into a squad worth heehaw.  But never mind the playing squad,

 

how much are the consortium putting into the running the business?

Did they repay loans yet? 

Whats their plan to break even with their investment so far, because it is not working?

What their business model as again it is not working.

have they just not got what Ra Peepil demand?

 

The bottom line is Americans are not charitable, how long before they cut their losses?

It is down to DOLLARS,  they wanted to sell big, but to do that you buy cheap and sell big, they have bought cheap for a premium and cant sell. coz they are cheap.

 

I think they have bought a bucket of bolts, but it could still go either way, Us finishing above them will not bode well, and who will the 49ers sell to,?  They have what they need right now, nowhere near the sugar daddy they expect

[Cruyff]

I hope their owners Glazer the shit out them and just saddle them with epic, unrepayable, amounts of debt where this time, Ibrox will be getting sold as a liquidated asset. 

[OTT]

14 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

I hope their owners Glazer the shit out them and just saddle them with epic, unrepayable, amounts of debt where this time, Ibrox will be getting sold as a liquidated asset. 

 

Nothing, I mean NOTHING would please me more. 

 

They slide into obscurity and Hearts become regular title contenders. 

 

Yes, ****ing please. 

[JackLadd]

Somebody needs to add up all the compo payments to sacked Sevco managers and backroom since 2012. Must be massive. 

[Ribble]

We'll find out a bit more by the end of the month when they release their accounts to June 25, they blamed their previous loss of 17 odd million on lack of player trading yet this summer they've spent £3m more than they brought in, another significant loss and someone at the 49's will surely be looking to do similar to Ineos at Man Utd and cut costs across the whole operation at Ibrox, no more freebies for McCoist, Durrant etc, catering cuts, youth teams getting binned

[EVHearts]

Have they ever declared a profit in any of their Financial Statements.

 

They must be be flying close to the sun on financial fair play 

[132goals1958]

1 hour ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

had a bit of a think on this as to if they are skint or not, I would say YES, however and the BUT is that they are a going-concern, they can still operate as a business.  Last season and after the last set of accounts that were published, they made a £17m loss, over all the other losses.  There was a list of directors loans.  When the 49ers bought them over....oh wait they did not, Its a consortium who also own the 49ers AND Andrew Cavenagh, who purchased the company as a going-concern.  That raised some unanswered questions, such as did they repay any or all of the massive amount of directors loans?  They never had any banking facilities including overdraft as of close of play season 24/25?  Do they now have it.

 

The consortium put in a £20m war chest including buying a dud from Everton for £8m,  net result they are 11 points behind us, and not even in the top six.  They have to pay a lot out to Martin, and from memory they only just paid of Beale.

 

They needed a directors input just to see the season out last time the £17m.  what will their operating losses be this year?  I guess on the 1 to horrendous scale a wee bit closer to horrendous????

 

So the question is , Are rangers skint, then it is an emphatic yes!  However are the owners skint then NO, so the business are still trading and will continue to do so.

 

The real question is, how long will American owners chuck money into a basket case.  £20m went into a war chest, and it disappeared into a squad worth heehaw.  But never mind the playing squad,

 

how much are the consortium putting into the running the business?

Did they repay loans yet? 

Whats their plan to break even with their investment so far, because it is not working?

What their business model as again it is not working.

have they just not got what Ra Peepil demand?

 

The bottom line is Americans are not charitable, how long before they cut their losses?

It is down to DOLLARS,  they wanted to sell big, but to do that you buy cheap and sell big, they have bought cheap for a premium and cant sell. coz they are cheap.

 

I think they have bought a bucket of bolts, but it could still go either way, Us finishing above them will not bode well, and who will the 49ers sell to,?  They have what they need right now, nowhere near the sugar daddy they expect

 

I am sceptical about the £20 million net spend they claim to have incurred on the playing side. They got rid of Igamane . Dessers, Jefte and others for a substantial sum. Arguably the players they have brought in are a downgrade and its revealing they were unable to retain or buy Cerney who was probably their best player last year. In all likelihood whilst the capital spends on new recruits is significant I suspect the wage bill has been slashed due to inheriting huge liabilities which require to be extinguished in the short term.  It is doubtful if their paymasters will repair the hole in the Balance Sheet by throwing good money after bad the way the previous incumbents did.  Long term financial indiscipline in relation to satisfying the insatiable wants of the hordes has created an absolute basket case. Of course the consortium is well heeled but that doesn’t come from bailing out companies as and when they come running. Suspect the natives revolting have come as a bit of a culture shock to the new owners. One thing is fairly clear the emotional investment from prior years is a thing of the past.  

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

14 hours ago, OTT said:

Btw I suspect we might see Rangers attempt to mimic Chelseas recruitment from Brighton with us. 

 

They've repeatedly tried to use us over the years as some kind of a feeder club, but largely we've not caved to their pathetic bids. I don't think much imagination is currently going on in their recruitment team, so it wouldn't surprise me if we get some derisory bids over January/Summer for our key players. 

 

I can't remember a transfer window when they weren't heavily linked with one of our players, yet they never make a realistic offer for them. Does my tits in. 

[hmfcbilly]

3 hours ago, Head The Brick said:

Gustaf Nilsson was bought in July 2022 for 500k by USG. They sold him to Club Brugge in January for 6.9 million.

I'd settle for us buying any player for 500k and selling for nearly 7million!

[hmfcbilly]

53 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

Nothing, I mean NOTHING would please me more. 

 

They slide into obscurity and Hearts become regular title contenders. 

 

Yes, ****ing please. 

The Scottish government would probably get involved at that point on the basis that Scotland 'needs' a strong old firm 🤪 wrote with tongue firmly in cheek but, actually, this wouldn't surprise me if it actually happened either!

[Always the Hearts]

25 minutes ago, hmfcbilly said:

The Scottish government would probably get involved at that point on the basis that Scotland 'needs' a strong old firm 🤪 wrote with tongue firmly in cheek but, actually, this wouldn't surprise me if it actually happened either!

Aye, because the SNP and Rangers are best buddies.🙄😂

[Deevers]

4 hours ago, kingantti1874 said:

oh they’ve definately been done over. Will be the igamane money.  Though they spent £20m net.  
 

Sadly they are backed by very wealthy people so I don’t think they are skint, I also think they are run by clowns 🤡 hiring your own son as head of recruitment.   Where have we seen that before.  

No matter what, little or nothing will change there until January. Who ever does take the job is going to have a massive restructuring job on their hands.  Dyche has apparently ruled himself out of the position. He obviously decided it was a suicide job at present.

[Hagar the Horrible]

56 minutes ago, Stupid Sexy Flanders said:

 

I can't remember a transfer window when they weren't heavily linked with one of our players, yet they never make a realistic offer for them. Does my tits in. 

They could have had Shanks for Zero, but spent £8m on a dud and an god know what on an ex-aberdeen dud

[Ribble]

6 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

They could have had Shanks for Zero, but spent £8m on a dud and an god know what on an ex-aberdeen dud

 

Sure Miovski was around 3.5m, so in total they've spent 11.5m instead of giving Shanks 20k a week

[Hagar the Horrible]

1 hour ago, 132goals1958 said:

 

I am sceptical about the £20 million net spend they claim to have incurred on the playing side. They got rid of Igamane . Dessers, Jefte and others for a substantial sum. Arguably the players they have brought in are a downgrade and its revealing they were unable to retain or buy Cerney who was probably their best player last year. In all likelihood whilst the capital spends on new recruits is significant I suspect the wage bill has been slashed due to inheriting huge liabilities which require to be extinguished in the short term.  It is doubtful if their paymasters will repair the hole in the Balance Sheet by throwing good money after bad the way the previous incumbents did.  Long term financial indiscipline in relation to satisfying the insatiable wants of the hordes has created an absolute basket case. Of course the consortium is well heeled but that doesn’t come from bailing out companies as and when they come running. Suspect the natives revolting have come as a bit of a culture shock to the new owners. One thing is fairly clear the emotional investment from prior years is a thing of the past.  

looks like they spent over £28m 

In

Chermiti £8.6m

Antman £4.4m

Cortes £4m

Aasgard 3.95m (Luton???)

Miovski £3m  (yeah Shanks is 10 time that player)

Fernandez  £2.9m from Posh WTF

Gassama £2.4m  Good deal

Rothwell £460k

Cameron  a copy of the beano

5 Loan players in

£29.75m Total spent to be 8th in League

 

Out

Ingame reported £11.5m  but I heard it was just £5m

Jefte £6m

Dessers £4.3m  their only goalscorer???

Yilmaz £2.9m

Propper £1.7m

 

Total £26.73m  if they are to be believed

 

so they said they would get the wage bill down...Ok we don't know the net difference 

 

We have had a real investment and within our budget we have spent £2.97m  huge by us, sold penrice for 2.3, A net overspend by £670k,  MIND THE GAP

 

[tian447]

16 hours ago, Canscot said:

Except, what happened in 2012? They all walked away!

 

 

[Ray Gin]

4 hours ago, TheBigO said:

Here's a question, which doesn't require its own thread, but I'm struggling with....!

 

I've recently rediscovered how much I enjoy NFL (been sick for a few weeks so a lot of sofa time and enjoying the Ch5 footage, and not JUST cos of Sam Quek!).  I was always a 49ers fan as a kid, had the shirts etc etc, during the time of Montana and Rice et al.

 

But now, I'm not sure I'm allowed to support the 49ers with the hun link!?  Whats the thoughts on this???  I'm wrestling with needing to chooe a new team which doesn't feel right either!

 

Get this hun punted from the forum IMO. 

 

[Hagar the Horrible]

15 minutes ago, Ribble said:

 

Sure Miovski was around 3.5m, so in total they've spent 11.5m instead of giving Shanks 20k a week

Yes and to add to that, 11.5m on 2 players, they could have kept Dessers and had Shanks, both with 20+ goals in them, They have scored 6 goals with a "£29.75m spend, Shanks has scored 4 league goals..  Stupid is stupid does

[TheBigO]

29 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Get this hun punted from the forum IMO. 

 

aw man

[boag1874]

3 hours ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

had a bit of a think on this as to if they are skint or not, I would say YES, however and the BUT is that they are a going-concern, they can still operate as a business.  Last season and after the last set of accounts that were published, they made a £17m loss, over all the other losses.  There was a list of directors loans.  When the 49ers bought them over....oh wait they did not, Its a consortium who also own the 49ers AND Andrew Cavenagh, who purchased the company as a going-concern.  That raised some unanswered questions, such as did they repay any or all of the massive amount of directors loans?  They never had any banking facilities including overdraft as of close of play season 24/25?  Do they now have it.

 

The consortium put in a £20m war chest including buying a dud from Everton for £8m,  net result they are 11 points behind us, and not even in the top six.  They have to pay a lot out to Martin, and from memory they only just paid of Beale.

 

They needed a directors input just to see the season out last time the £17m.  what will their operating losses be this year?  I guess on the 1 to horrendous scale a wee bit closer to horrendous????

 

So the question is , Are rangers skint, then it is an emphatic yes!  However are the owners skint then NO, so the business are still trading and will continue to do so.

 

The real question is, how long will American owners chuck money into a basket case.  £20m went into a war chest, and it disappeared into a squad worth heehaw.  But never mind the playing squad,

 

how much are the consortium putting into the running the business?

Did they repay loans yet? 

Whats their plan to break even with their investment so far, because it is not working?

What their business model as again it is not working.

have they just not got what Ra Peepil demand?

 

The bottom line is Americans are not charitable, how long before they cut their losses?

It is down to DOLLARS,  they wanted to sell big, but to do that you buy cheap and sell big, they have bought cheap for a premium and cant sell. coz they are cheap.

 

I think they have bought a bucket of bolts, but it could still go either way, Us finishing above them will not bode well, and who will the 49ers sell to,?  They have what they need right now, nowhere near the sugar daddy they expect

The bits in bold sum it up.

 

Put it this way - we brought Braga & Kyzi in for less than a million combined & if I'm being very conservative I'd fully expect their combined fee when they depart to be higher than the amount of money Rangers manage to claw back for Chermiti when they move him on.

[Always the Hearts]

1 hour ago, Ray Gin said:

 

Get this hun punted from the forum IMO. 

 

What on earth did you take from his post to think that he's a Rangers fan? 

[AndrewB]

6 hours ago, OmiyaHearts said:

I doubt when coaches are sacked, they get their full contract paid out. There will be an agreement to pay X amount of months as a pay-off if/when they lose their job. 

 

Are Huns skint? It does feel like they live month to month but there always seems to be someone there to top up the funds.

I think someone explained it once about paying X as you say and avoiding Unfair Dismissal scenarios.  I presume contracts have relevant clauses.  I find it really funny, but can't believe it was true that Hibs were paying about 3 ex managers at once.

 

In terms of challenging your dismissal, it would be quite something to see Critchley, Naisy, Martin, Warnock etc trying to tell an employment tribunal how unfair their sacking was.  🤣  I believe the contracts will be structured accordingly as sackings are so common in football.

[Cruyff]

5 hours ago, OTT said:

 

Nothing, I mean NOTHING would please me more. 

 

They slide into obscurity and Hearts become regular title contenders. 

 

Yes, ****ing please. 

It's very possible. 

 

They had a massive opportunity when they started again to build something massive but they instead just did the same thing as before - chuck money at it to keep up with Celtic. 

 

They do this weird thing where they signed a lot of English Championship type players who, are good technicians but haven't got much experience or, the backbone to play in the SPL. They literally look down their noses at their own league that they cannae even win. On top of that, they've got a clueless board who don't understand the league and consistently appoint the wrong manager. 

 

They deserve everything that comes with trying to cheat their way to the top instead of being self sufficient. 

[OTT]

Just now, Cruyff said:

It's very possible. 

 

They had a massive opportunity when they started again to build something massive but they instead just did the same thing as before - chuck money at it to keep up with Celtic. 

 

They do this weird thing where they signed a lot of English Championship type players who, are good technicians but haven't got much experience or, the backbone to play in the SPL. They literally look down their noses at their own league that they cannae even win. On top of that, they've got a clueless board who don't understand the league and consistently appoint the wrong manager. 

 

They deserve everything that comes with trying to cheat their way to the top instead of being self sufficient. 

 

Oh yeah, Rangers have been masters of their own downfall massively. 

 

Very poor decisions made when they started again from the 4th division/League 2 has sort of followed them. 

 

Not convinced the hole they're in can actually be fixed because of the fan demands for immediate results. 

[jambo_74]

2 hours ago, Always the Hearts said:

What on earth did you take from his post to think that he's a Rangers fan? 

I'm going to hazard a guess here and say the poster in question took absolutely nothing from the post to think that he's a Rangers fan. It was a joke, just a joke, nothing more.

[Ray Gin]

2 hours ago, Always the Hearts said:

What on earth did you take from his post to think that he's a Rangers fan? 

 

I wasn't being serious  

[Always the Hearts]

30 minutes ago, Ray Gin said:

 

I wasn't being serious  

Drat. You got me good and proper.😐

[Australis]

They have had so many "new" share issues over the years.

 

Don't think football club shares are ever really worth anything, but zombie shares constantly seem to get diluted and diluted.

 

 

Edited October 7 by Australis

[Jack Torrance]

[The Hogfather]

20 hours ago, OTT said:

Btw I suspect we might see Rangers attempt to mimic Chelseas recruitment from Brighton with us. 

 

They've repeatedly tried to use us over the years as some kind of a feeder club, but largely we've not caved to their pathetic bids. I don't think much imagination is currently going on in their recruitment team, so it wouldn't surprise me if we get some derisory bids over January/Summer for our key players. 

 

I wouldn't worry about that. I think a good number of those players will have bigger aspirations than Rangers in their current form. We also clearly don't need the money.

[Spellczech]

8 hours ago, Always the Hearts said:

And you have to be exceptionally thick to do so. Even the Tims don't take him seriously. 

It's he still talking about Rangers going bust? Haha

[soonbe110]

9 hours ago, TheBigO said:

Here's a question, which doesn't require its own thread, but I'm struggling with....!

 

I've recently rediscovered how much I enjoy NFL (been sick for a few weeks so a lot of sofa time and enjoying the Ch5 footage, and not JUST cos of Sam Quek!).  I was always a 49ers fan as a kid, had the shirts etc etc, during the time of Montana and Rice et al.

 

But now, I'm not sure I'm allowed to support the 49ers with the hun link!?  Whats the thoughts on this???  I'm wrestling with needing to chooe a new team which doesn't feel right either!

Never give up on your teams whatever happens. 

[Always the Hearts]

36 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

It's he still talking about Rangers going bust? Haha

I honestly don't know. I gave up reading his mental ramblings a very long time ago. 

 

"My Rangers insider tells me" 😂😂😂

[JamboGlen]

Jed York is a multi billionaire. Rangers are as skint or unskint depending on how much he was to invest.

[hmfcbilly]

7 hours ago, Always the Hearts said:

Aye, because the SNP and Rangers are best buddies.🙄😂

Like I said, wrote with tongue firmly in cheek 🤦🏻‍♂️

[Threedoorsdown]

8 hours ago, hmfcbilly said:

I'd settle for us buying any player for 500k and selling for nearly 7million!

 

Braga.

[jambo_74]

1 hour ago, JamboGlen said:

Jed York is a multi billionaire. Rangers are as skint or unskint depending on how much he was to invest.

Cursory search on google suggests he is worth around $500million, not quite the multi billions you are suggesting. Not skint either, but less likely to throw tens of millions at Rangers without caring about it.