Guest scotzine Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 am sorry to see that rangers fans say that murray doesnt care about rangers. He has ploughed how much money into your club since he took over?? he came back as chairman of rangers after relinquishing control because of the debt rising. He practically won rangers nine titles in a row as well as all the cups as well with him bankrolling souness, then walter smith. Advocaat came in and spend tens of millions and wasted it as well buying up a few duds here and there - then mcleish and leguen came in. For fans to say that he doesnt care is a disgrace - maybe he doesnt care anymore after the treatment he has been receiving of late and maybe he feels he cant take the club further than he already has but at least let him leave the club whenever he does with his head held high and the fans thanking him for his time at the club. And without him getting back Coisty and Smith and bankrolling the new team you might have been in a worse position than u were under le guen. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest scotzine Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 as for hutton you lot were trying to get rid of him last year for what 500k??? now he has reached some form and is seen as one of the bets youngsters in the country and hes selling for �£8 million thats really good business for the gers - what happens if huttons form dips or he gets injured??? rangers have shareholders to answer too as well as the banks and if they dont try and clear the debt of each year then in comes the vote of no confidence and the banks increasing the payments the club has to pay back each month/year. Good business sense to sell him - on the pitch however its not but you still have whittaker to fill the gap. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 am sorry to see that rangers fans say that murray doesnt care about rangers. He has ploughed how much money into your club since he took over?? he came back as chairman of rangers after relinquishing control because of the debt rising. He practically won rangers nine titles in a row as well as all the cups as well with him bankrolling souness, then walter smith. Advocaat came in and spend tens of millions and wasted it as well buying up a few duds here and there - then mcleish and leguen came in. For fans to say that he doesnt care is a disgrace - maybe he doesnt care anymore after the treatment he has been receiving of late and maybe he feels he cant take the club further than he already has but at least let him leave the club whenever he does with his head held high and the fans thanking him for his time at the club. And without him getting back Coisty and Smith and bankrolling the new team you might have been in a worse position than u were under le guen. he could've been a legend at Ibrox IMO but not many like him now, he got us in this state especially with Advocaat, you can't say those years were good business, so why defend him Is there anyway we can find out how much of his own money he has actually put into Rangers and how much he is down?? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanmidd 0 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Murray does care about the club. If he didn't he'd have sold out a long time ago. What fans are angry about is the fact we've sold a player who didn't want to leave and is key to the way we play. We were all resigned to losing Hutton, but selling him at this stage of the season is massive damaging to our title hopes and european progression. Why not wait till the summer and sell him then? The form he has been in this season, his price tag would have only went up. poor show mr chairman, poor show 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted January 29, 2008 Author Share Posted January 29, 2008 am sorry to see that rangers fans say that murray doesnt care about rangers. He has ploughed how much money into your club since he took over?? he came back as chairman of rangers after relinquishing control because of the debt rising. He practically won rangers nine titles in a row as well as all the cups as well with him bankrolling souness, then walter smith. Advocaat came in and spend tens of millions and wasted it as well buying up a few duds here and there - then mcleish and leguen came in. For fans to say that he doesnt care is a disgrace - maybe he doesnt care anymore after the treatment he has been receiving of late and maybe he feels he cant take the club further than he already has but at least let him leave the club whenever he does with his head held high and the fans thanking him for his time at the club. And without him getting back Coisty and Smith and bankrolling the new team you might have been in a worse position than u were under le guen. He hasn't ploughed as much into the club as the fans have. As for practically winning 9iar, well I think the managers, players and supporters would all disagree with that - no matter the positive influence SDM did have on the period. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Scotzine, He came back to take control of the club because the debt was rising..... SDM was the one that ALLOWED that debt to happen. No taking away the feat of NIAR - but Celtic were at death's door and no-one else could cope with us financially - so not as difficult as it should otherwise have been. Don't blame the debt specifically on Advocaat - without SDM APPROVING those player purchases there would have not have been as much debt. Some people prefer to see SDM as some sort of messiah.... I choose to think with an open mind. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyk 158 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 as for hutton you lot were trying to get rid of him last year for what 500k??? now he has reached some form and is seen as one of the bets youngsters in the country and hes selling for �£8 million thats really good business for the gers - what happens if huttons form dips or he gets injured??? rangers have shareholders to answer too as well as the banks and if they dont try and clear the debt of each year then in comes the vote of no confidence and the banks increasing the payments the club has to pay back each month/year. Good business sense to sell him - on the pitch however its not but you still have whittaker to fill the gap. He was a target for the boo boys when he came back from injury but the whole team were not playing well under PLG. It is good business yes but the fans of any club don't like seeing their best players being sold especially when he was wanting to stay. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 So could we afford to turn down this sort of money for one of our players who we have brought through and developed? Every player has his price and surely that's even more true given our financial position? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted January 29, 2008 Share Posted January 29, 2008 Sorry I'm confused... Yes, MIH absorbed �£50million from underwriting the share-issue in 2005 but the rest of the debt is the clubs... The last year's accounts told us we have losses of �£5 million per annum with net debt at �£16 million and with �£22 million long term debt in the background. That has everything to do with us. it absolutely doesnt frankie. david murray OWNS rangers, just like you or i own a car, or a house. if he has run into arrears, then its ultimately his problem. now i know you are talking pragmatically - but this idea that the customers should be the ones caring about the companys debt is just wrongheaded. but he has essentially palmed off his responsibility onto the supporters with cute phrases like "everyone knows the current realities", but they arent *our* realities. they are his. constantly pointing to the debt he created as a reason why X,Y & Z are happening, and not only expecting us to *tolerate* but support him in it is ridiculous. we absolutely did NOT have to sell Alan Hutton - anyone painting a reality other than "David Murray/Walter Smith just wanted the money" is just buying into the whole cunningly handed down language. the fact that we didnt have to sell alan hutton can be demonstrated from the impossibility of knowing when all our financial plans were made, the financial plans that dont see us shut down, how much alan hutton would be worth. my original comments werent aimed at your analysis of the situation, which is correct, but really just an affirmation of the ridiculousness of it. i can accept we are in dire financial straights, i can accept that rangers will always be more than a product to me: but if alan hutton is to be sold then the high heid yins should be coming out grovelling to the fans for doing it, not just matter of factly stating it and expecting everyone just to get on with it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,145 Posted January 29, 2008 Author Share Posted January 29, 2008 Of course it's his problem per se. But we all know it's not as simple as that. And I'm a shareholder so it is my problem as well... Further, I don't buy into the sharing blame issue, so while I may understand the debt responsibility situation, by analysing and criticising I'm pushing the attention back to Murray. Or at least I'm trying to... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.