i think the main factors in how things move forward go like this..

1. rangers are bust - cheerio.
2. oops now we are losing money without rangers in the league - so ****ing what, deal with it and cut your cloth accordingly.

nowhere in number 2 does consideration for what rangers can bring to the table come into it.

lastly, the same club chairmen that will care about the money are the same chairmen that cost Scottish football ****ing millions by rejecting the Sky deal to go with Setanta (that ended well) - ****ers shouldn't even have a say after that.

Marty, consider this, as said by Stephen Thompson just down the road from me:

"This season we got £1.4m from the SPL. If we only get £200,000 to £300,000, then how do we fill the £1m?" he said.

Now, this is the question that clubs that aren't Celtic are facing. It's easy for Celtic to deal with that, £1 million is just the wages of one of your players on £20k a week that needs punted, or just lope £1 million off each years transfer budget.

Other clubs can't do this. Most have been constantly chopping and gutting their budgets as much as they can since the Setanta deal collapsed. This will literally kill several other clubs if things go as badly as they feel.

St Mirren have got things running almost perfectly for example, got their losses down and are consistently running at a small profit. Now, boom, -1 million a season? Bye, gone.

Maybe it doesn't seem like a problem to you since Celtic will probably come off financially better from this, but for every other club in the SPL this could be the end.

So when you say this:

You mean die or go part-time pretty much. It's staggeringly ignorant to ask these clubs to cut their cloth accordingly when that's all every single non-Old Firm club has been doing since the aforementioned Setanta crash.

Or, think of it this way:

Club chairmen to their fans: "Do you want rangers in or out?"

Fans : "Out"

Chairmen: "Good chance we also go bust, still want them out?"

Fans "erm........."

DS...

--

you seen the post by the Aberdeen trust?

i'll find it soon, worth a read.

my summary won't do it justice.

Marty,

Of course every club should just shut the door on them and tell them to **** off but can you REALLY not see what we are saying here? It just isn't as easy as that when your own clubs future is at risk because of what could happen financially.

So you're saying the chairmen that cost their clubs millions once should now vote for sanctions that will (potentially) cost their clubs millions again?

^^no, i said they should have no say

--

losing money, try this...

http://www.thecourier.co.uk/News/Per...expansion.html

why are you assuming that there will be no tv deal?

i posted already, sky show speedway/fishing/pool/bingo/Irish football.

why won't there be a deal for SPL? Stephen Thompson said so won't do.

--

Super League rugby gets >>>than SPL in monetary terms.

Spl>>>Super League in viewing figures.

somebody needs to get the finger out imo.

You clearly haven't read any of the posts that i've made today very well. You do this with everyone though in every thread, but I have more patience than most. Here is the first paragraph from the very first post I made in here today. I have used bold to help understand the problem:

Now, what's the result of that bolded part?

Once again it's potentially this:

"This season we got £1.4m from the SPL. If we only get £200,000 to £300,000, then how do we fill the £1m?" he said.

sorry, i obv worded that badly.

should have said - why won't there be a deal on a similar level to now?

it is just taken for granted that sky will rip up the existing contract and offer pennies for a new one. nobody knows the truth of this.

--

i read everything you posted DS, just sometimes i don't do too much thinking before replying.

i appreciate the patience, i feel all privileged now.

Think of it from Sky's point of view. If the clause is in the deal, as reported, then of course they are going to use it. They have a duty to their shareholders and put it in for a reason. And if they are going to use it they won't be ripping it up to give the same or more money to clubs. The headlines in sports pages worldwide about Rangers have certainly not made the league more appealing, even if they stay in the league. And if they are found guilty of financial doping to win all those titles that's even worse. this isn't Serie A, we don't have enough big clubs to take up the slack.

Rangers and Celtic are the 2 clubs that attract the viewers. They are the ones with the worldwide following. They are the Wonderbra of Scottish football, without both of them it's lopsided and unattractive. Why would Sky pay the same for much less of a commercially viable product? And regardless of the fact that the league will be more competitive for the 11 clubs that aren't Celtic it seems to be a much less commercially viable product.

While we don't know for certainty that it's going to happen if Rangers are demoted the fact that it's been brought up before (with the league reconstruction talks) indicates it's more than likely to be true and when all the chairmen say "we face a reduction in TV revenue from this" then they probably know where they are coming from.

DS, tbh with you, i didn't mind chatting with you at all but now as i seem to be trying your patience (not just in this thread but in all of them lol) i think i'm gonna split.

pompous arsehole.

My post clearly means that you don't pay attention to what a lot of posters say everywhere, not to what I say in multiple threads, your failure to read and understand that shows that again you don't pay attention so you validate my post nicely. I know that 'you do this with everyone' because I see the post report forum when you periodically flip out and get banned over the most pointless things.

Not sure how this makes me a pompous arsehole though.

Seriously, can you tell everyone something they don't already know?

Your post clearly meant to me that you are an ignorant **** and you enjoyed letting me know that, but hey if you think this is on me and my lack of comprehenshion, that is your choice.

Today's meant to be the day that CharlesGreen reveals who is in his consortium, instead we've got this:

Former Rangers manager Walter Smith has confirmed in a statement that he is leading a new bid to buy the club.

Walter Smith statement

"I can today confirm that following talks over the last few weeks I am leading a new bid for Rangers Football Club.

"I have been assisted by Jim McColl, Douglas Park and other prominent Scottish businessmen with a shared objective - that Rangers Football Club should be in the hands of Rangers people who will stabilise the club and protect it from future situations like we find ourselves in today.
"With this in mind, representatives have, on behalf of my group, made representations to BDO, Duff and Phelps and indeed Charles Green, notifying them of our willingness to offer on the "Newco" basis on which Mr Green is proceeding.
"We would call on Mr Green to step aside and allow us to proceed with our deal which is in the best interests of the creditors, the employees, the fans and the various other stakeholders of Rangers Football Club.


"None of our group has any desire to own Rangers Football Club but we have put this deal in place to save the club.
"However, our overriding objective is to ensure that the stadium, the history and everything else magical about Rangers Football Club is protected and nurtured back to good health and provide a platform for Rangers for generations to come.
"Let's be clear, this is an acquisition designed to stabilise the club and ensure history does not repeat itself.
"We are not in this to take money out of the club but more so to do whatever it takes in a turnaround plan to ensure within a few years the club can be passed on intact and to the right people.
"The supporters should be under no illusion that it will be extremely hard but with their support we can overcome financial hardship that lies ahead by lending their support to what we feel is the correct way forward - for Rangers people who know the club inside and out to control its destiny.
"The prominent Scottish businessmen involved have agreed to provide acquisition funding to allow myself and a management team to take on Rangers Football Club and make the business self-sufficient with long term sustainability being essential.
"I would hope that this offer is fully supported by everyone in the Rangers Family as without them the club cannot and will not survive.
"We therefore want to ensure honesty and transparency in everything we do. We want to rebuild Rangers Football Club and in doing so return the institution to the standards it is known for."

I want the best possible Celtic and if that means having to vote Rangers back into the league then so be it.

It's hard enough to keep hold of our best players as it is but if you take out the OF fixture then that task becomes even harder.

I feel like their club will be in a state for some time so why not have them in the SPL bringing in revenue to other clubs as well as being able to negotiate a better TV deal with the guarantee of OF games.

insane

Too late Walter

I'd say this is definitely the case.

From Celtic Official Website:

Derby Daze magazine is a fantastic souvenir

By: Newsroom Staff on 15 Jun, 2012 12:09

ON May 28, 1888, the newly-formed Celtic Football Club played their first
ever game, beating Rangers 5-2. On April 29, 2012, the newly-crowned
Scottish champions took to the field for the last derby match, and beat Rangers 3-0.

In between these two impressive victories... cont

The fixture list for the SPL is out on Monday.

Rangers been replace with 'Club 12'. When is this vote taking place?

There's a board meeting today to discuss this and all the related stuff and they will probably announce an official meeting date after this as soon as possible.

what, no mention that Sky have spoken and they say the TV deal will remain in place?

why am i not surprised?

--

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/foo...g-TV-deal.html

i'd imagine the source is at least as credible as the one used by the record and co.

picked this up just now - obv talking about letting the new team parachute straight in.

poor show.

That might be enough to do in a bunch of clubs on its own.

I could easily see a situation where the existing deal stays intact for this season but gets reevaluated after the year's ratings become available. Lower viewing numbers will decrease advertising demand, which will decrease ad revenues, which will hurt the margins created by the existing deal...

I don't think it's a question of whether or not Sky wants to cover the SPL, but Sky doesn't need the SPL; the SPL needs them.

"A degree of renegotiation" is a very polite way of saying the SPL is about to get bent over the table and forced to take a severe slash in revenue.

It's time for Celtic to abandon ship and gtfo asap. I'd be pushing pretty damn hard to get into the English Championship right about now, and seriously considering life in League One. Short term pain with a far greater potential for long term gain.