Murray's Ibrox facelift must mirror the ambitions and hopes of Rangers fans

[Frankie 8,104]

I think the capacity was ~44,000 before the addition of the Club Deck and filling of corners...

 

http://www.gersnetonline.net/newsite/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=30

 

In general your post is pretty accurate though Cal. But we must remember that, for the most part, SDM gained out of the work so I'd expect MIH to be involved in any future development again.

[calscot 0]

I agree with you Frankie that Ibrox held about 44000 but I think it was 36000 seats with about 8000 standing in the enclosure of the main stand.

 

I just looked at your reference and it says:

 

"A capacity of around 44,000 was considerably smaller than the 85,000 or so that had preceded it. However, the redeveloped Ibrox, with some 36,000 seats,"

 

 

The reason I specified it is that expanding from 44000 to 51000 was more complicated than just adding 7000 seats. If we'd just added seats to the enclosure the capacity would have gone down to something like 39000. Basically room had to be found for 15,000 seats, hence the club deck, lowering the pitch and filling in the corners.

 

Like I said I'm not averse to Murray bashing but only for the real reasons. Have a go at him for making money out of it by all means, but no-one can honestly say he didn't deliver a revamped stadium and training facility.

 

I have no problem if his companies do the next phase of work as long as we pay competitive rates and the quality is high. In fact that may motivate him to actually go out and do it rather than just musing about it, so it could be a good thing.

 

So like I say, on delivering building projects, his track record is very good - it's for other stuff that he deserves the flak for.

[Frankie 8,104]

Thanks for clarifying mate...

[maineflyer 0]

I don't believe I stated that Murray wasn't chairman when some of the current stadium was redeveloped. Some even say he built the entire affair with his own hands. Others believe the location of the museum will one day be discovered.

 

What I did do was hint at his well-travelled strategy of diverting attention (criticism) by obliquely introducing significant news at critical times - news that usually fails to materialise. I envy your faith in the man but I doubt you will ever see the stadium redeveloped under Murrays tenure. Still, as long as it is being discussed he will have achieved his aim.

[calscot 0]

I've no idea whether the stadium will be redeveloped - I was merely pointing out that if you base it solely on his track record then it probably will be.

 

I know all about his smoke and mirrors to divert attention but like I say, let's have real criticism, rather than just making it up to demonise him.

 

I for one think it will happen, as Frankie pointed out, it will bring business to his building company particularly during the credit crunch when other plans may be mothballed due to people not being able to borrow. Whether Rangers will be able to borrow is another matter but it shouldn't be a problem if underwritten by MIM.

[maineflyer 0]

I've no idea whether the stadium will be redeveloped - I was merely pointing out that if you base it solely on his track record then it probably will be.

 

I know all about his smoke and mirrors to divert attention but like I say, let's have real criticism, rather than just making it up to demonise him.

 

I for one think it will happen, as Frankie pointed out, it will bring business to his building company particularly during the credit crunch when other plans may be mothballed due to people not being able to borrow. Whether Rangers will be able to borrow is another matter but it shouldn't be a problem if underwritten by MIM.

Who told you it wasn't possible to borrow money? My company has no such problems and outside the world of tabloid financial reporting I don't particularly think there is a problem. What there always has been is a problem raising finance for projects with poor return on investment, which is why I have no doubt that any redevelopment of Ibrox would have to involve a transfer of ownership.

 

I love the way Murray manages to sell these dreams of grandeur to an audience whose club he has taken to the brink of failure. Robert Maxwell didn't sell the illusion half as well as our David. Tell me, is it May yet?

[Wija 0]

I've no idea whether the stadium will be redeveloped - I was merely pointing out that if you base it solely on his track record then it probably will be.

 

I know all about his smoke and mirrors to divert attention but like I say, let's have real criticism, rather than just making it up to demonise him.

 

I for one think it will happen, as Frankie pointed out, it will bring business to his building company particularly during the credit crunch when other plans may be mothballed due to people not being able to borrow. Whether Rangers will be able to borrow is another matter but it shouldn't be a problem if underwritten by MIM.

 

Can you possibly expalin how that makes any sense when talking about SDM.

[calscot 0]

Can you possibly expalin how that makes any sense when talking about SDM.

 

I explained earlier and the facts speak for themselves. You may not like SDM or trust him one iota. And without prejudice for or against the man, the FACT is that when it comes to building work at Ibrox and of course the training centre, it really cannot be reasonably disputed that Mr Murray has delivered on these projects.

 

When he promises to build then it gets done.

 

At the moment and times in the past he has promised nothing.All he is doing is commissioning feasibility studies which I believe have been actioned.

 

You can dislike anything SDM does, but you can't argue with the facts.

 

I believe in praise where it is due but even if you don't want to praise someone you can at least acknowledge what they have done.

 

SDM may have taken Rangers to a dangerous financial position, but that does not change the fact that he improved Ibrox and was instrumental to it becoming a 5 star stadium of above average quality. He was also instumental in the construction of Murray Park.

[calscot 0]

Who told you it wasn't possible to borrow money? My company has no such problems and outside the world of tabloid financial reporting I don't particularly think there is a problem. What there always has been is a problem raising finance for projects with poor return on investment, which is why I have no doubt that any redevelopment of Ibrox would have to involve a transfer of ownership.

 

I love the way Murray manages to sell these dreams of grandeur to an audience whose club he has taken to the brink of failure. Robert Maxwell didn't sell the illusion half as well as our David. Tell me, is it May yet?

 

 

Unless you have different knowledge to the rest of the world and media or that the media are continuously lying, it is common knowledge that there is a credit crunch. Maybe you don't watch the news much or are one of these people who believe we are being lied to all the time.

 

Your company may not have a problem but to generally apply that to the rest of the UK is akin to a slim American discrediting the fact that the US is one of the most obese countries in the world purely because they themselves are not fat.

 

Maybe I'm naive for believing all the news programs on telly, internet and newspapers about the Credit Crunch - or maybe you need to start catching up on the news because from where I'm sitting, you sound incredibly uninformed.

 

So let's get this straight and in a nutshell. As far as I'm aware from various, generally creditable news services, it is currently a lot harder for people to borrow money for mortgages, and not only that with products having higher interest rates, and a gloomy financial climate less people are motivated to buy a new house.

 

This means that building companies have dramatically reduced the amount of house building they are doing due to the difficulty of finding buyers. Not only that, they are mothballing projects that have already started and well underway.

 

Now if you think this is untrue, then please enlighten us with your version of the "truth" and explain why the media are lying to us...

 

Now it doesn't take a leap of logic to realise that these companies will as a result be facing cash-flow and income problems as well as reduced profits and will be looking for alternative projects with guaranteed payments.

 

As far as I know Murray's companies are well involved in building and therefore he may decide to enhance Ibrox in some way to stimulate cash income for his companies while becoming more popular with Rangers fans and more impressive to the public in general.

 

Perhaps (and I don't know one way or the other), like your company, Rangers, with the backing of MIM will have little trouble raising capital from the banks compared with your average new home buyer, which could lead to the project going ahead.

 

Now with regard to the return in investment, I put it to you that this is EXACTLY what the feasibility studies are about. They will be about the complexities and possibilities of what can be done, how much each scenario will cost and what the the length of time as well as the likelyhood that the investment will be returned, and then of course the annual increased income from the stadium.

 

That is why the cost of a 70,000 stadium must be balanced with how often the seats will be filled. It may be more cost effective to have a 60000 stadium that is 95% full most of the time.

 

I do not see how this needs a transfer of ownership in the slightest as the scenarios will be unaffected except for the ability of the owners to raise finance - something that I doubt will be difficult for SDM unless there is some information that I'm not privy to. The only other way ownership affects things is the motivation of the owner to go ahead with the project.

 

With the situation I have described and by the fact the feasibility study is in progress, I think it's fair to say that Murray's motivation cannot be completely ruled out.

 

As to bringing the club to the brink of failure, that is a mistruth. At no time was Rangers in any danger of going into receivership. The debt was very high but and although it was close to the maximum of what the club could support, it was within those limits. Leeds went over the edge yet the club is still in business.

 

Murray always knew he could pay of some of the debt with the money he's made from Rangers and eventually did so - probably due to his own culpability and with his plaything unable to function so well it wasn't so enjoyable. He also had not raised cash previously from a share issue like Celtic have twice, but when he did so he must have been very disappointed by the fans investment even taking the mitigating circumstances into account.

 

Murray does have a habit of selling dreams but as we are so used to it now, not many fall for them, including me. However, there are times when he delivers to a certain extent and even at the end of the season we were two games away from basking in his "moonbeams".

 

I've been one of Murray's biggest critics during our darkest time but I think it is time to stop demonising him for past mistakes and judge him on his current form as well as not negatively spinning everything he has done like some propaganda agent.

 

At the moment, the only thing I can see for which to criticise him for is that he is late with his announcement for the revamp of Ibrox and has not informed us why. Fair enough have a go about that, but don't try additionally to malign him with mistruths about the past.

 

And to try and boost your argument by inferring that the media are know nothing about the current financial climate is totally baffling and reduces your credibility. "What Credit Crunch?", indeed...

[Wija 0]

 

SDM may have taken Rangers to a dangerous financial position, but that does not change the fact that he improved Ibrox and was instrumental to it becoming a 5 star stadium of above average quality. He was also instumental in the construction of Murray Park.

 

He did improve Ibrox as you state here.

 

Of course he was instrumental in building Murray Park. It was going to have his name on it, also his M.I.M. company made a fooking mint from not only the Murray Park project but the improvement of Ibrox.

 

Its all spin. Some can see through it, some can't. I just choose to ignore it and concentrate on what is fact. Not what will be done - that is apparently the thing God does if you believe the Lord's prayer.

 

 

Oh and you don't answer the questions, you only point out what you see as the answers. Which as you point out can differ from person to person.

 

We shall see what transpires but Murray announced that there WOULD be a significant plan for Ibrox. Don't remember him saying any credit crunch would hinder this.