Murray takes a hit from the Telegraph

[maineflyer 0]

This from Roddy Forsyth (I know, I know) in The Daily Telegraph - the heat is being turned up on Murray and his bullshit.

 

David Murray is supervising a careful retreat over Rangers' ambitions. Rangers are still on course for a clean sweep of the domestic honours and have it in their own hands to overhaul Celtic for the Scottish Premier League title and an automatic and lucrative berth in the group stage of next season's Champions League. So why are so many Ibrox supporters so vocally fearful?

 

The answer, quite simply, is the confusing mixture of actions and statements from the club chairman, Sir David Murray, over the course of a bleak month. Murray was in the headlines again this week, having provided his house journal, Rangers News, with a lengthy statement highlighting the virtues of prudent housekeeping, reduction of costs and the nurturing of new players. Since this was a rehash of his declarations at the start of the month in defence of Rangers' abortive attempt to sell top scorer, Kris Boyd, for a measly net gain of around �£2.5 million, what was the point? In this case, look at the timing, not the substance.

 

The transfer scene has been moribund since New Year, but it is a buyers' market and those with money to spend will drive hard bargains as Monday's deadline looms. Rangers have players who are surplus to requirements but, like Woolworth's stock in the latter days of that institution, what is on offer has been gathering dust for months. On the other hand, if Allan McGregor, Barry Ferguson and Boyd attract bids totalling Ã?£10-Ã?£11m this weekend, they will be off, no questions asked. Hence Murray's reiteration of his newfound commitment to an austerity regime in which – dread phrase – "youth is the future". Murray sarcastically observed: "I find it amazing that football scribes question my financial management." Well, a cat may look at a king and it requires no mastery of economics to see the contradictions in the Rangers' chairman's claim that defeat by Kaunas in the Champions League qualifiers had been "a disaster".

 

When Murray plans Rangers' budget each year, he makes a prudent assumption of no European revenue beyond that of the first round of the Uefa Cup. So the difference between projected European income and this season's reality adds up to only two home games. Moreover, Kaunas knocked Rangers out of the Champions League qualifiers on Aug 5 – but after that Murray sanctioned the spending of Ã?£8.6m on Pedro Mendes, Steven Davis and Maurice Edu, in the full knowledge that there would be no further European income. The earlier summer acquisitions of Andrius Velicka, Kyle Lafferty, Kenny Miller and Madjid Bougherra cost Ã?£9.8m.

 

Meanwhile, between January and September Rangers sold Alan Hutton (Ã?£9m), Carlos Cuellar (Ã?£7.8m) and Daniel Cousin (Ã?£1.5m). In total, then, expenditure in 2008 was Ã?£18.4m and income Ã?£18.3m – nothing there to petrify Mr Micawber. Plus the fact, the most recent accounts (to June 30, 2008) reported record turnover of Ã?£64.5m and a pre-tax profit of Ã?£8.3m. True, the overdraft was up to Ã?£21m and is now evidently around Ã?£25m – but debt never frightened Murray, except when he realised that he had allowed Dick Advocaat to become the Scottish football equivalent of Fred the Shred (and to much the same end). However, what does concern him is the health and morale of the other companies in the Murray Group. Murray's executives are famously discreet, but there have been mutinous mutterings about Rangers' place in the chairman's affections.

 

Put simply, their feeling is that when he is asking them to sweat the companies for optimum revenue and profit in torrid trading conditions, the time and energy spent by Murray on Rangers is not only disproportionate, but unseemly. The attempt to get shot of Boyd may have shocked Rangers fans, but it had exactly the opposite effect within the Murray Group. And this is more than gesture politics. When Murray's father went bankrupt while he was in his teens, the future tycoon began his business career selling shirts to schoolmates.

 

In that respect, he had a soul mate in Peter Cummings, who started in the Bank of Scotland at 17 by sweeping the floors and went on to be head of corporate banking at HBOS. But Cummings, a Glaswegian with a native sympathy for football, is one of the scapegoats for the HBOS debacle and lost his position in this month's takeover by Lloyds TSB. Under the new banking regime, there is no question of the benevolent attitude that allowed Murray to remedy Advocaat's excesses by buying up his own rights issue from other resources, as he did for �£50m from Murray MHL Limited in 2004.

 

All of which is a far cry from the bombast Murray once uttered about spending Ã?£2 for every Ã?£1 laid out by Celtic. Napoleon observed that an orderly withdrawal was worth a victory. Murray is supervising a careful retreat with the sensible aim of preserving his empire. Rangers fans, though, are not accustomed to occupying an outlying province. Nor, having been promised cakes and ale, do they have an appetite for powdered egg and Spam – and certainly not if Celtic should uncork the bubbly yet again this season.

[Big Spliff 0]

Ticks all the boxes for me, that does. Interesting mutterings from inside Murray's group too.

 

No more Moet on the Mound I think it was I wrote a couple of weeks ago.

[Bluedell 5,329]

This from Roddy Forsyth (I know, I know) in The Daily Telegraph - the heat is being turned up on Murray and his bullshit.

Shame on you.

 

The answer, quite simply, is the confusing mixture of actions and statements from the club chairman, Sir David Murray, over the course of a bleak month. Murray was in the headlines again this week, having provided his house journal, Rangers News, with a lengthy statement highlighting the virtues of prudent housekeeping, reduction of costs and the nurturing of new players. Since this was a rehash of his declarations at the start of the month in defence of Rangers' abortive attempt to sell top scorer, Kris Boyd, for a measly net gain of around �£2.5 million, what was the point? In this case, look at the timing, not the substance.

I believe that the net gain would be over �£3m, but usual inaccuracies from one of their journalists.

 

 

Murray sarcastically observed: "I find it amazing that football scribes question my financial management."

It's not only football scribes that question your financial management, David.

 

When Murray plans Rangers' budget each year, he makes a prudent assumption of no European revenue beyond that of the first round of the Uefa Cup.

I'm sure Murray has lots of budget scenarios at the start of each season. he won'tt work with just one. Perhaps Murray does have a point about football scibes after all.

 

Meanwhile, between January and September Rangers sold Alan Hutton (Ã?£9m), Carlos Cuellar (Ã?£7.8m) and Daniel Cousin (Ã?£1.5m). In total, then, expenditure in 2008 was Ã?£18.4m and income Ã?£18.3m ââ?¬â?? nothing there to petrify Mr Micawber. Plus the fact, the most recent accounts (to June 30, 2008) reported record turnover of Ã?£64.5m and a pre-tax profit of Ã?£8.3m. True, the overdraft was up to Ã?£21m and is now evidently around Ã?£25m

Try nearer �£30m.

 

ââ?¬â?? but debt never frightened Murray, except when he realised that he had allowed Dick Advocaat to become the Scottish football equivalent of Fred the Shred (and to much the same end).

I don't believe Advocaat sanctioned any spending so it was Murray himself who should be equated to Fred ("the world's worst banker").

 

 

However, what does concern him is the health and morale of the other companies in the Murray Group. Murray's executives are famously discreet, but there have been mutinous mutterings about Rangers' place in the chairman's affections.

 

Put simply, their feeling is that when he is asking them to sweat the companies for optimum revenue and profit in torrid trading conditions, the time and energy spent by Murray on Rangers is not only disproportionate, but unseemly. The attempt to get shot of Boyd may have shocked Rangers fans, but it had exactly the opposite effect within the Murray Group.

Sorry, but that's just bollocks. Murray's executives are there to do a job, and I'm sure they are glad that Murray spends a lot of his time on Rangers. if they can't manage their businesses without him handholding them then they shouldn't be there.

 

 

It's certainly refreshing to see a journalist trying to have a constructive go. Just a shame it wasn't that good an effort.