Hang your heads in shame

[maineflyer 0]

You've got to love footy forums. Even as we start to crawl out of the morass of David Murray's inept mismanagement, there are still dear sentimentalists climbing over each other to excuse his incompetence and cherish his good points (there must have been some, right?). Which is all fairly predictable - they bought his claptrap when he was here so why not after he's gone - but when I see alleged Rangers fans backslapping Murray for his acumen in appointing good people I really have to respond.

 

Who are these good people? The ones who were better than Campbell Ogilvie for instance? I could give you Walter Smith but even then I'd have to point out that he was the default choice who only got the job because Graeme Souness left - and who got the job second time around because Murray had already lost all confidence in his ability to select a new manager. Sure, Walter has been a success but let's put that down to Walter rather than any discerning judgement on the part of the Fat Snake. But otherwise, has Murray picked effective people in our ticketing office, our PR department, our merchandising department? Has he chosen a top CEO then? Perhaps he chose the best man in charge of stadium security? Maybe he chose a dynamic and effective board of directors? No? Who then?

[TheWeissMan 0]

Interesting take on it.

 

I'm not familar with the details of the Southampton case but assuming that there is minimal transactions in Wavetower (just the debt in and out) then it shouldn't have too much effect on us, but it all depends on the plans for Wavetower, I guess.

 

The basics of the Southampton case were that the authorities could prove that Southampton Leisure Holdings were only in existence due to Southampton FC. This meant that when SLH filed for administration, the authorities deemed Southampton FC in administration even although technically speaking they were not.

 

So, if MIH were to have went under a few months back, which lets face it, was a real possibility, then Rangers status with the Football authorities would have been fine, as long as we could prove we were able to operate efficiently, which we have been.

 

Now that Wavetower has taken over, this is a game changer. If Wavetower has borrowed �£18m from the city or some other investor and they fail to make payments and are taken to court and wound down, then irrespective of our Balance Sheet, P&L or Cashflow being healthy at that given time, we will be deemed as being in administration and subject to the footballing penalties that go with that.

[craig 5,199]

The basics of the Southampton case were that the authorities could prove that Southampton Leisure Holdings were only in existence due to Southampton FC. This meant that when SLH filed for administration, the authorities deemed Southampton FC in administration even although technically speaking they were not.

 

So, if MIH were to have went under a few months back, which lets face it, was a real possibility, then Rangers status with the Football authorities would have been fine, as long as we could prove we were able to operate efficiently, which we have been.

 

Now that Wavetower has taken over, this is a game changer. If Wavetower has borrowed �£18m from the city or some other investor and they fail to make payments and are taken to court and wound down, then irrespective of our Balance Sheet, P&L or Cashflow being healthy at that given time, we will be deemed as being in administration and subject to the footballing penalties that go with that.

 

 

This of course assumes that the rules in Scotland are the same as England. Have you looked into that ?

[TheWeissMan 0]

This of course assumes that the rules in Scotland are the same as England. Have you looked into that ?

 

There hasnt, to my knowledge been any tested cases in Scotland, specific to this issue, but the parallels are drawn and if faced with the case, it would be much easier to follow a precedent rather than trying to dance around their own rules in my opinion.

[Bluedell 5,330]

The basics of the Southampton case were that the authorities could prove that Southampton Leisure Holdings were only in existence due to Southampton FC. This meant that when SLH filed for administration, the authorities deemed Southampton FC in administration even although technically speaking they were not.

 

So, if MIH were to have went under a few months back, which lets face it, was a real possibility, then Rangers status with the Football authorities would have been fine, as long as we could prove we were able to operate efficiently, which we have been.

 

Now that Wavetower has taken over, this is a game changer. If Wavetower has borrowed �£18m from the city or some other investor and they fail to make payments and are taken to court and wound down, then irrespective of our Balance Sheet, P&L or Cashflow being healthy at that given time, we will be deemed as being in administration and subject to the footballing penalties that go with that.

 

Is it really a problem? We were previously owned by by Murray MHL Ltd, a subsidiary of MIH. We are now owned by Wavetower Ltd which is owned by Liberty Capital, which I believe is not just involved in buying Rangers.

 

Anyway, hopefully Wavetower has agreed a repayment schedule on the same terms as it has with rangers, so there should not be an issue.

[Guest scotranger]

It has been made clear to me that this site does not like SDM's influence. I would say that dislike is based on the past few years, but Murray has expressed an opinion that he has wanted to get out of football for at least a year before the 'credit crisis' became apparent. Still, SDM seems to be blamed for everything that is wrong with Rangers today.

 

There seems to be no discussion that can support the great things that SDM has done for our club in the past, other than to be pilliored by the 'top dogs' on this site. Although not an expressed ideal, it is evident that anyone supporting SDM's tenure is slated, by said 'top dogs'.

 

 

There is no doubt that SDM has minimum support not only on this board but also by the like of Stephen Smith RST. There are however no "top dogs" on this forum, only fans with differing view points. Your analysis is, as far as I am concerned fairly accurate, and SDM's record is supported by people like Walter, Ally, past managers and Rangers stars of the past.

[Guest scotranger]

maineflyer

Your post outlines your opinion well. That is your take which, in my opinion, reflects nothing worthwhile. In fact total rubbish! On Walters second spell at the club �£10m was provided to him to buy players.

[craig 5,199]

maineflyer

Your post outlines your opinion well. That is your take which, in my opinion, reflects nothing worthwhile. In fact total rubbish! On Walters second spell at the club �£10m was provided to him to buy players.

 

Who provided that funding ? Certainly not SDM. I think ou may ask LBG about the funding of WS's second stint.

[CumbernauldGers 0]

This of course assumes that the rules in Scotland are the same as England. Have you looked into that ?

 

Dont worry Craig he will not have looked into it. Just have a look at RM and see some of the stuff he has been comeing up with. If nothing else it's always a good laugh.

[maineflyer 0]

maineflyer

Your post outlines your opinion well. That is your take which, in my opinion, reflects nothing worthwhile. In fact total rubbish! On Walters second spell at the club �£10m was provided to him to buy players.

 

Wtf are you on about now? I posted about Murray's inability to appoint good people - you come back with some shit about funding. Listen mate, either keep up or shut up. Btw, by 'provided to' I assume you mean borrowed for.