Rangers FC no longer for sale

[pete 2,499]

Unfortunately, everyone in these deals starts of by signing confidentiality agreements so none of will ever learn what happened from those involved. It was a dirty day when Murray walked into Ibrox and he could now be leading us into territory none of us can live with.

 

Is it too early to put any faith in Donald Muir or has the damage been done. As Craig said somewhere, we now have more questions than answers.

[ian1964 10,411]

Stephen Smith, chairman of the Rangers Supporters' Trust, told BBC Scotland that he felt the statement by MIH raised a number of questions.

 

MY SPORT: DEBATE

Is this good news or bad news for Rangers?

 

"Does this mean Murray is back in charge and running the show?" said Smith.

 

"Where does it leave Lloyds Bank and their role? Does Alastair Johnston continue as chairman?

 

"Does the business plan announced in the next couple of weeks still stand? And if so, this needs to be communicated to the support who are being asked to invest in season ticket money at this time.

 

"And if the Ellis offer is dead, what plans are there for securing the club's future? Murray needs to engage the supporters to involve them in the running of the club and make them a significant stakeholder.

 

"He needs to understand the fans are not customers but an integral part of the Rangers family."

[metlika 0]

Stephen Smith, chairman of the Rangers Supporters' Trust, told BBC Scotland that he felt the statement by MIH raised a number of questions.

 

MY SPORT: DEBATE

Is this good news or bad news for Rangers?

 

"Does this mean Murray is back in charge and running the show?" said Smith.

 

"Where does it leave Lloyds Bank and their role? Does Alastair Johnston continue as chairman?

 

"Does the business plan announced in the next couple of weeks still stand? And if so, this needs to be communicated to the support who are being asked to invest in season ticket money at this time.

 

"And if the Ellis offer is dead, what plans are there for securing the club's future? Murray needs to engage the supporters to involve them in the running of the club and make them a significant stakeholder.

 

"He needs to understand the fans are not customers but an integral part of the Rangers family."

Pretty much sums up the question I was asking in my previous post.

[craig 5,195]

Whether any one likes it or not I as much as the rest of you am entitled to my opinion ,if you dont like it I dont give two fiddlers fcks. Murray put money into the club to pay top wages and chase a dream,and brought some class players to Ibrox into the bargain that it was a pleasure to watch. Managers mis-judgements were as much to blame for money being wasted and helping to put us in this position.

 

Nonsense. Simply nonsense.

 

Murray paid 6 million into the club, ran it into the ground, underwrote a 55 mill share issue (or thereabouts) and ran it into the ground again with 30 mill in debt. He also sold off plenty of assets for less than market value to family members etc. And some of the other ancillary Ibrox services were carried out, at plenty of profit, by SDM-owned entities.

 

Also, utter nonsense that "manager misjudgements were as much to blame". Managers make requests of Boards, chairmen, owners. if the club do not have the funds then the Board, chairman, owner should say NO. Simple.

 

The financial custodianship lies at the feet of the Board - SDM was a very dominant Chairman of said Board. What he said went. Simple.

 

In the ownership of a business, maineflyer will tell you this as he owns some, the buck stops with those in charge - and SDM most certainly has been in charge of RFC.

 

I certainly respect your right to your opinion - but it certainly isnt being made in full knowledge of the facts.

[craig 5,195]

My "that's me believing in SDM....." comment was clearly a joke for those who cannot detect online sarcasm

 

You sneaky bugger......

 

Do we not ALL listen to what we receive in a text from our friends ?

[Gribz 743]

Nonsense. Simply nonsense.

 

Murray paid 6 million into the club, ran it into the ground, underwrote a 55 mill share issue (or thereabouts) and ran it into the ground again with 30 mill in debt. He also sold off plenty of assets for less than market value to family members etc. And some of the other ancillary Ibrox services were carried out, at plenty of profit, by SDM-owned entities.

 

Also, utter nonsense that "manager misjudgements were as much to blame". Managers make requests of Boards, chairmen, owners. if the club do not have the funds then the Board, chairman, owner should say NO. Simple.

 

.

 

Some of this goes back to what Pete mentioned - losing the Sky money was possibly unexpected and then there was the Setanta thing which meant less money from Sky again. - This doesnt explain the levels of debt we have but still has to play a small part - albeit small.

 

The selling off the assets was a joke. Turning the ticket office into a portacabin was embarrassing.

 

As for manager misjudgements, this is another debate. There are 2 types of managers. You get the Arsene wengers who are intelligent and take an interest in the clubs financial status and run the club within means with a view to having a future, then you get managers who purely take care of footballing matters and spent the budgets they are handed. Advocaat seemed to take an interest in the long term setting up of the youth policy but was obviously told he had an open cheque book. WS first reign was split, he built a strong cheap mainly Scottish team and almost took us to the brink of the CL in 1993, then the cheque book opened for him and whilst dominating domestically we were rank in Europe.

[craig 5,195]

Some of this goes back to what Pete mentioned - losing the Sky money was possibly unexpected and then there was the Setanta thing which meant less money from Sky again. - This doesnt explain the levels of debt we have but still has to play a small part - albeit small.

 

The selling off the assets was a joke. Turning the ticket office into a portacabin was embarrassing.

 

As for manager misjudgements, this is another debate. There are 2 types of managers. You get the Arsene wengers who are intelligent and take an interest in the clubs financial status and run the club within means with a view to having a future, then you get managers who purely take care of footballing matters and spent the budgets they are handed. Advocaat seemed to take an interest in the long term setting up of the youth policy but was obviously told he had an open cheque book. WS first reign was split, he built a strong cheap mainly Scottish team and almost took us to the brink of the CL in 1993, then the cheque book opened for him and whilst dominating domestically we were rank in Europe.

 

The Portacabin is more than embarrassing gribz, it is an abomination for a club of our size and supposed stature.

 

I agree Re the manager's point. However, the prime job of a manager is to put a winning team on the pitch given the resources he is provided. Wenger is the exception rather than the norm and, not to be too blunt, that could actually cost him his job. The only saving grace he has right now is his team plays attractive football - they havent won anything for 5 years and but for the type of football they play he would be facing the sack - and much of that is because he refuses to spend excessively, even if the purse strings are open for him. I respect his approach though.

 

But a manager ultimately operates within the parameters that the Board sets for him. If he spends a shed load of money on players then you can absolutely guarantee that the funding has been approved by the Board - who cuts the cheques for purchasing players ? Certainly not the manager.

 

It irks me that people will continue to attempt to pass the buck from SDM onto manager's over-spending. If managers over-spend it is ONLY because the financial custodians (Board, Chairman and in our case owner) have allowed, nay approved, it to happen.

[Gribz 743]

But a manager ultimately operates within the parameters that the Board sets for him. If he spends a shed load of money on players then you can absolutely guarantee that the funding has been approved by the Board - who cuts the cheques for purchasing players ? Certainly not the manager.

 

It irks me that people will continue to attempt to pass the buck from SDM onto manager's over-spending. If managers over-spend it is ONLY because the financial custodians (Board, Chairman and in our case owner) have allowed, nay approved, it to happen.

 

See your point and I certainly wouldnt want to attempt to pass the buck. Im maybe playing devils advocate (pardon the pun) but when you see how close the team was to being successfull in 1999-2000 you cant blame the board for maybe thinking we are "not far away". Spending 12 million on Flo was obviously what Advocaat rated him at - thats bad management for me - probably from board and manager. Then if you get a situation where the board step in and say "we feel this player inst worth that" you get friction between Board and manager and we have seen plenty coaches walking due to not getting their own way with transfer funds.

 

All said and done the buck lies with SDM for the state he steered the ship into but maybe he was just one bad apple.

[wabashcannonball 0]

Allegedly the info which spawned this thread came from John McLelland ex chairman, if we had known that at the beginning we could have saved a lot of bandwidth, a Murrayite lackey if there ever was one.

[Frankie 8,150]

But we wouldn't have had half as much fun during a crap World Cup and a boring summer!

 

Time to draw a line under this and move forward.