Murray makes clearest hint yet that club is for sale...

[Laudbertz 0]

Now, the Kraft family that owns the New England patriots.... they are a different matter altogether and I would love to see them invest in Rangers !

 

I remember that name (Kraft), were they the ones who were reported to be interested in 'pool a while back?

[Danny 0]

Danny, I don't doubt their business acumen. However, their expertise is not in sports, and most certainly not in football.

 

However, take a look at the achievements that they have had with their sporting affiliations (actually just the Tampa Bay Buccaneers as they haven't been with Man U for long enough to warrant judgement).

 

Yes, they took the Buccaneers to the Superbowl and they won that for the first time in franchise history - but they spent a TON of money doing so and as quickly as they won it they became one of the worst franchises in the league. Since their SB victory they have been a shadow of their former selves.

 

Turning to Man U - Man U are financially solid because of what was built up BEFORE they took over - my numbers could be skewed but they bought Man U and paid for it with over 70% of debt - 70% of debt which then needs to be serviced - give that one 5 years and I reckon we could very well see fall-out from it.

 

Personally I don't care if they come from Timbuktoo and my comments were not derived from their nationality or personality.

 

Everyone has their own opinion and, for this Bear, the Glazer's are not the answer. Now, the Kraft family that owns the New England patriots.... they are a different matter altogether and I would love to see them invest in Rangers !

 

I didn't know half of that about the Glazers. I don't follow American sport at all.

[craig 5,195]

I remember that name (Kraft), were they the ones who were reported to be interested in 'pool a while back?

 

Chris, they are still being linked with liverpool - from what I know they are very much in tune with the franchise, the front office and even the fans - the New England fans adore what they have done for their team and they (the Kraft's) consider everyone involved (staff, fans etc) as part of their extended family.

[craig 5,195]

I didn't know half of that about the Glazers. I don't follow American sport at all.

 

Yeah, quite unfortunate Danny - to be fair they took that team from being a team that struggled to make the play-offs (but did make them, just didn't go far) into the best team in the land - but as soon as it happened they had salary cap issues and lost their better players and became a very mediocre team, despite having one of the most talented coaches in the game.

 

Again, to be fair to them, the dynamics are somewhat different between the sports.

[Jon 0]

Rangers fans may be ungrateful but David Murray deserves praise for rescuing their club and changing the face of Scottish football, believes Neil Drysdale

 

Those Rangers aficionados in their 20s and 30s will probably have no idea how close the Ibrox institution was to emulating Third Lanark and going bust in the mid-1980s. The Govan faithful ââ?¬â?? an oxymoron in certain respects ââ?¬â?? had drifted away, like snow in April, as Aberdeen, Dundee United and Hearts supplanted the existing order, to the stage where crowds of 8,000 were typical for mid-week fixtures.

Twenty years ago this month, Graeme Souness� arrival as player-manager, allied to his revolutionary plan to recruit the likes of Chris Woods, Terry Butcher and Trevor Steven from England, both rev italised Rangers and triggered the wage explosion at both halves of the Old Firm, which transformed a generation into millionaires and orchestrated a scenario where Scottish football advanced from dwelling in the biscuit-box to Bridge of Allan.

 

Yet the most significant feature of the clubââ?¬â?¢s post-Struth history was the decision by David Murray to buy Rangers for Ã?£6 million in 1989. It was a defining moment in the game, an act of faith by a man who had previously been rebuffed by Ayr United ââ?¬â?? whose then directors must feel similar now to the myopic record labels who turned down The Beatles ââ?¬â?? and whose dynamism, restless energy and occasional paranoia were the catalysts for an unprecedented sequence of events in the organisationââ?¬â?¢s chronicles.

 

They won nine titles in a row from 1989 to 1997, they signed a Catholic icon, Mo Johnston, invested in a magnificent new stadium, and, however belatedly, embarked on the development of a �£12m training facility, appropriately named Murray Park. For some of us, it seems transparent that Fergus McCannâ��s subsequent willingness to step into the fray at a desperately ailing Celtic FC might never have occurred without Murrayâ��s demonstration of how tradition and commercialism could be welded in a common purpose, even as he amassed a portfolio of metals, mining, property and venture capital businesses.

 

All of which would make one imagine that Rangers� adherents would be grateful to their saviour-in-chief, their principal investor and personal guarantor for the best part of two decades. But apparently not, if the reaction to Murray�s hint last week that he intends to sell the club within the next three years is any indication.

 

Listen, for instance, to Stephen Smith of the Rangers Supporters Trust, who responded thus to the news: ââ?¬Å?Our biggest nightmare would be a Malcolm Glazer taking control at Ibrox. One man who might be interested is Sir Tom Hunter, as he is known to be a big Rangers fan. But we donââ?¬â?¢t want one unaccountable rich man replaced with another. David Murray owns 91.8% of the club, that is unhealthy and, whoever takes over, we would like to see ownership radically overhauled and re-distributed.ââ?¬Â

 

He might have added a few, fleeting words of thanks to the fellow who rescued his club from oblivion. But there again, many of the most dyed-in-the-wool Ibrox affiliates seem to have a problem with their owner, which is inexplicable given the manner in which he has worked tirelessly on their behalf.

 

Why could this be? I recall, in the midst of a characteristically splenetic Old Firm clash at Rangers in the mid-1990s, one shocking instance of how a group of Rangers followers grew ever more critical of Murray as their heroes suffered a rare defeat, until the atmosphere turned noxious. One in their ranks, a sharp-suited, expensively-coiffured, thirtysomething, suddenly barked out: ââ?¬Å?Youââ?¬â?¢re a f***ing useless cripple, Murray!ââ?¬Â I glanced around at that part of the stand, whereupon the comment was repeated by several others, from that milieu of what is generously termed the ââ?¬Å?90-minute bigotââ?¬Â fraternity. They continued for several minutes in this vein, until I mentioned to a security guard, standing nearby: ââ?¬Å?Canââ?¬â?¢t you hear what these guys are saying?ââ?¬Â He glanced towards me and instructed me to shut up, otherwise I risked being ejected. At which juncture, a variety of insults, tasteless references to wheelchairs and liberal use of profanities, allied to Murrayââ?¬â?¢s alleged ââ?¬Å?treacheryââ?¬Â in buying Catholic players, reverberated from these so-called supportersââ?¬â?¢ mouths. To this day, I have never attended another Old Firm tussle, but that incident convinced me that Murray faced a mission impossible in reining in the worst excesses of those for whom sectarianism is a necessary Old Firm fix.

 

In the interim period, he has been traduced for not tackling the bigots with due diligence, as if it was his own problem, rather than a larger issue for collective Scottish society. On a Panorama programme last year, he was hectored by a female interrogator who virtually insinuated that Murray was ignoring the renditions of ââ?¬Å?the Sashââ?¬Â and ââ?¬Å?The Billy Boysââ?¬Â, oblivious to his retort that he is determined to erad icate this blight from Ibrox, even though there remain many private clubs in the west of Scotland, where these songs (and worse) are sung with gusto by normally conservative bankers, lawyers and accountants.

 

Simultaneously, whenever Murray enters the sectarianism debate ââ?¬â?? as he has done regularly in the past five years ââ?¬â?? he finds himself accused of procrast ination by his persecutors and of being a sell-out merchant by his own side. One doesnââ?¬â?¢t have to bask among his tabloid poodles to feel that the man canââ?¬â?¢t win, whatever he does.

 

Nor, impervious to whatever members of fans� associations might proclaim, has he invested in the club for cheap financial gain or personal glory. On the contrary, I suspect Murray had to swallow hard before selling the Rangers shops to JJB Sports and that he has exhibited a sentimentality during his tenure which has been at odds with his hard-nosed acumen in the business world. He was distraught when Souness departed Glasgow to rejoin Liverpool; he allowed Walter Smith and several ageing players to linger at Ibrox in search of a record 10-in-a-row championships when other, more ruthless chairmen would have wielded the axe; and his treatment of Alex McLeish last season was human itarian, which is not a word which one often associates with football owners.

 

In short, whatever oneââ?¬â?¢s opinions of the effects of the Old Firmââ?¬â?¢s quest for European success ââ?¬â?? Murrayââ?¬â?¢s sole conspicuous failure ââ?¬â?? and of the duoââ?¬â?¢s reputed wish to migrate to the English Premiership (a policy significantly driven by Celtic), it appears churlish in the extreme to excoriate the person who has safeguarded Rangersââ?¬â?¢ future. ââ?¬Å?I am confident Mr Murray would only sell to somebody with the best interests of the club at heart,ââ?¬Â declared John Macmillan, secretary of the Rangers Supporters Association. ââ?¬Å?Itââ?¬â?¢s true he has had his detractors, who say he only took over [at Ibrox] for his own profile, but he has invested lots of time and his own money in the club.ââ?¬Â

 

Yes, John, he has. Which perhaps entitles Murray to a richer tribute than a swathe of faint praise.

 

Not necessarily my view but did find it a very interesting article.....

[calscot 0]

The guy has ruined any credibility in piece by twisting facts and putting in an unbelievable part where a whole section of the crowd were insulting to DM's disability.

 

Firstly Murray didn't rescue Rangers from oblivion - If anyone did it was Lawrence Malborough and David Holmes. That is if we were facing oblicion in the face in the first place - which I think is a ridiculous thing to say. More of a deep slumber than near death.

 

Murray then bought Rangers at a bargain basement price of which the stadium and other properties more than covered never mind the club and expensively assembled team. In fact the team itself would have fetched more than �£6M on the open market.

 

He also did was not wholly responsible for Ibrox being a great stadium, he improved on what was already one of the most modern and best arenas in Britain built in the 80's to ensure there was never another Ibrox disaster and payed for by the highly successful Rangers pools.

 

He lowered the pitch to add some rows of seats all round while allowing the enclosure to be level with the pitch for more seating, then filled in the corners along with the jumbo screens and most significantly rebuilt the main stand with an extra tier to take the capacity from 45,000 with 36,000 seats to 51,000 all seater.

 

He should be thanked for taking the stadium to the standard of the elite UEFA 5-star status but it should also be remembered that his own companies both provided the steel and had the building contract.

 

He did bring us 9 in a row which was a fantastic achievement but it must be remembered that he was spending big money at a time when Celtic were in financial crisis and still using the biscuit tin while the rest of Scottish football quickly over spent trying to keep in the same league as Rangers fiscal muscle until they quickly ran out of money and challenge.

 

The first few years were very difficult but after that, winning the league became a breeze. It should also be noted that once Fergus McCann sorted Celtic out, our run quickly ended and Celtic have been our equals ever since. Which goes to show that DM is not unique in turning round a big club and despite DM's head start, we've ended up now playing catch up to Celtic.

 

That could be in large part due to DM almost taking us to a real oblivion by extremely careless profligacy that he blames the fans for encouraging which without knowing how the book balancing was going, is not surprising. I think most fans would have cried, "Stop!" if we knew what financial abyss we were heading for.

 

To then praise him for what could be construed as weak leadership is just baffling. Keeping managers and players beyond their sell by date is very dangerous in such a competative business, and although it's good to be loyal to your friends it should not be rammed down the throats of those who are not party to lunch with Walter Smith, Dick Advocaat or Alex McLeish. To the average football fan the needs of the club far outweigh any cosy cronyism by the chairman.

 

He did belatedly bring us a training ground that although expensive probably cost less that the amount we lost in wages and transfer values from our injury jinx which was greatly linked to the fact that players injured training on an uneven public park had to use a bit of ice and sit on a bus until the session was over before receiving proper medical help.

 

Murray has done a lot of good for our club, I agree with that but to conveniently forget the negative or negligent things he has done is not the way to hit out at his detractors. His detractors are there because his single minded control of the club has been a bumpy ride which is out of the control of 99.99% of the fans. His false promises, half truths and sometimes downright lies have aliented many of us as did his storming off in a huff when we didn't appreciate him taking us to the brink.

 

If Murray had run Rangers more in line with the rest of his companies, I think we'd have had an even better 17 years and be in a very strong and healthy position both financially and performance-wise. But Rangers seems to have been his plaything to massage his ego and he's let his emotions run away with him instead of using sound business sense.

 

There is nothing wrong with borrowing and spending as long as it's done wisely and geared towards bring a return. And there's nothing wrong with having loyalty and faith in your manager as long as it's not blind.

 

I think it probably is time for DM to move on and it would be better to have a consortium so that the club is not at the whims of one man.

 

We should thank DM for some of the things he has done but with the number of his mistakes and the money and prestige he has gained from Rangers FC, we don't owe him our blind homage.

[Frankie 8,136]

Amen to that calscot...

 

That Herald article is awful.

[pete 2,494]

Agreed Calscot, if we have anyone to thank for our great stadium, we have to thank Willie Waddle as he was the one planned to make it what it is. The reason we indeed did stand with 8 to 15000 supporters at the end of some seasons was because he put the safety of supporters higher than performances on the park. The Ibrox disaster helped him make this decision of course.

 

One person should never have been allowed so much control of the club as it has indeed given him a free hand to dispense of some of our assets for a minimum return. Mostly to his own companies of course. He has in fact played like a pawnbroker giving us small amounts for some of our best jewels.

 

Yes he did bring us success but in doing so he almost crippled the club. We did in fact all live the dream though, and i don't think many would change that. As long as he can turn things round and make the club financially safe again there will be few with any regrets of the last 17 years.

 

Rangers will probably never belong to Rangers again as football has become too much of a business these days, so i think the best we can hope for is a consortium of rich Rangers supporters working with supporter groups. Personally i would hate to see an idiot like Hearts have taking over.

 

I hope he keeps at least one promise, to sell to someone that will better the club. Unfortunatly it would seem not many people can afford it, except rich Russians looking for a toy.

[CammyF 6,761]

It is also interesting to read that in the year that we completed 9-in-a-row, Rangers were �£20M in the BLACK. The addition of the Club Deck was done at a horrendous cost (and guess who benifited from those costs).

 

He sold The Albion to his son for �£1 to be used as a car-park which charges people �£7 per car to park on matchdays (not a bad return). Azure catering was sold and it is predicted to make �£14M profit this year and freely acknowledge that most business it receives is form Rangers connections. Thats �£14M pounds that WE AREN'T GETTING.

 

David Murray has gotten more out of Rangers than Rangers has ever gotten out of him.

 

Cammy F

[pete 2,494]

It is also interesting to read that in the year that we completed 9-in-a-row, Rangers were �£20M in the BLACK. The addition of the Club Deck was done at a horrendous cost (and guess who benifited from those costs).

 

He sold The Albion to his son for �£1 to be used as a car-park which charges people �£7 per car to park on matchdays (not a bad return). Azure catering was sold and it is predicted to make �£14M profit this year and freely acknowledge that most business it receives is form Rangers connections. Thats �£14M pounds that WE AREN'T GETTING.

 

David Murray has gotten more out of Rangers than Rangers has ever gotten out of him.

 

Cammy F

 

 

Cammy i have stated before that it is modern management to contract companies to do the likes of catering so as not to have staff on your books that could end up being a financial noose around your neck. I am sure the 14 mill profit is not all taken from Ibrox so it is a bit unfair to say we have lost that amount of money. For Rangers to employ staff, managers, purchasers, accountants etc, for the few pies and hamburgers that they sell every second week would be bad business in my opinion.

 

Is it possible to sell land worth say a million for one pound? Would inland revinue not have something to say about that?