The intricacies of football finances are debated with fervour from the snug of the public bar to the private corner of the boardroom. But when David Low says that “it is a great time to buy Rangers”, his view is invested with something more than mere opinion.
Low has the experience. He is the man who helped Fergus McCann rescue Celtic in 1994. He does not view the club’s historic rivals as a lost cause. There may be financial misery at Ibrox but there is opportunity, too.
Low tempers his bullish view of Rangers, saying that any deal must be “done at the right price”.
And what would that be?
The 50-year-old businessman pauses and makes a quick calculation. “Subject to due diligence, I would offer a nominal sum for the share capital and take out the bank debt for a total cost of around £30m and provide funds for working capital. In the current market that would be a good deal for all stakeholders or those with an interest in seeing the club move forward,” he said.
But it would never be Low’s money. The Glasgow businessman is an investment manager. He handles other people’s money and has earned a more than decent living doing so.
Low, who has advised many sporting franchise holders, was presented yesterday with the hypothesis of a wealthy businessman approaching him and asking him if Rangers were a decent opportunity.
“I would say yes, at the right price,” he muses as rain batters against the window of his substantial offices in the heart of Glasgow. “It would have to be a person with means. Big soccer franchises are a billionaire’s game now. This is no longer a sport for local worthies to chip in a couple of million each and put an Elastoplast on the problem. This needs root and branch change.”
Low is adamant about how radical the surgery would have to be, but he maintains buying Rangers would be a decent bet. “The only good thing about investing in Celtic and Rangers at the moment is that you have a good chance of participating in the Champions League. In the longer term, however, they will become more uncompetitive at that level as the financial disparity grows, and it will if matters stay the same. You might only be buying a licence to get knocked out of the Champions League at the qualifying stages.
“But buying Rangers comes with the excellent chance of winning the league. Rangers also have an excellent chance of winning domestic trophies and they have excellent chances of competing regularly in Europe.”
This, says Low, offers any potential investor a solid platform with a good, enduring fanbase. Low said the next stage, after wiping out debts, would be to bring in an experienced board to “run the club within their means”. He adds: “If Celtic can break even, why can’t Rangers?” But how can the investor ever recover the £30m spent wiping out the debt?
“If Rangers want to compete at the highest level,” says the businessman, “they have to stand with Celtic and try to change their jurisdiction.” This means simply that the Old Firm must play in another league. “There is nothing in Scotland for Rangers or Celtic,” says Low.
But if a new league were found then Rangers’ annual turnover could “immediately soar by £30m”. Low asserts there is the possibility of “a quantum leap” in resources. The financial goalposts would have been moved substantially.
Much of this will be seen as blue-sky thinking of the most delusional sort. But Low is used to people saying things cannot be done, clubs cannot be bought, and promptly proving his detractors wrong. He was instrumental in the rescue of Celtic in 1994 when the club was within just eight minutes of having the very carpet pulled from underneath them by the bank. In a riveting book to be published shortly, Low tells how Celtic were saved from financial ruin to rise again with the substantial aid of Fergus McCann and a galvanised support. But it was Low who saw the opportunity and formulated the strategy that ousted generations of “cosy, private” rule.
“I learned one major lesson from this episode and from other moments in my life. It is this: football changes. Nothing stays the same in the game. We forget just how much football has changed over the years.
“We have forgotten the clubs that have disappeared. We have moved from the era of drinking in the ground with the big carry-out to sitting in comfort. People say that football cannot change but it will.”
Low knows what drives this evolution. “It is about money,” he says. “People opposed the formation of the Premier League in England but money changed hands and it came in. Similarly, people were against the setting-up of the Scottish Premier League but money smoothed many objections. Vested interests can try to be obstructive, but they usually fade away in the face of money.”
The businessman who formed an alliance to buy Celtic with the most ambitious, audacious raid in football history believes that the Old Firm could be considered “safe bets with no downside”.
He adds: “Celtic and Rangers at the right price is a better bet than a Newcastle, Bolton or a Sunderland. All the primary clubs in England are gone so you are left with secondary or tertiary clubs.
“But the Old Firm are big daddies. If you run Rangers or Celtic properly, in the short/medium-term you will break even or make a small profit. But in the medium/long-term there could be a change in the landscape. And if this change of jurisdiction comes then Celtic, Rangers, Ajax and Benfica will be major beneficiaries to the tune of £30m-40m annually.”
So how does the man who helped change Celtic forever view the chances of a further seismic move? “I think it will happen and it could be within the next five years,” he says with the quiet of relish of being a Celtic season-ticket holder and a Rangers shareholder.
“I have one share,” he smiles. “I like to get a copy of their accounts and they are late this year.” He may have no major financial interest in football, but he still keeps his eye on the game.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article