Bluedell 5,622 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Tell me that comment is tongue in cheek cal! It's hard to tell in black and white. No, it's not, mate. It would be clear if the cash was being syphoned off. Yes, there are transactions between Rangers and other companies within the Murray group, but these have been falling over the last 3 years. These transactions would need to be paid for anyway whether with the Murray Group or outwith. There are questions as to whether Rangers have received best value, but the amount involved doesn't amount to millions. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmck 117 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Can you tell me where McG said he's 'dying' to go? Must have missed that. no, as it turns out, i cant. i went back to the article and it was "a source close to macgregor". that'll teach me for skim reading. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,622 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 no, as it turns out, i cant. i went back to the article and it was "a source close to macgregor". that'll teach me for skim reading. It wouldn't be difficult to have the source rubbished if it was untrue. There have been no stories to contradict it, which suggests that there may be some truth in it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannochsidebear 2,405 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Are we just bitches now to any decent club with SKY money. Surely we can run our own club at our own level that we can afford to buy/keep players at our level and only sell them if and when it suits us, not having to sell to break even or pay off debt. 7 years of downgrading, 7 years of cost-cutting, 7 years of predominantly poor players coming in, 7 years and the highest fee paid is �£2.5M, 7 years of john McClelland/Martin Bain. It appears that our chairmans desire to beef up the balance sheet is taking precedence over the team on the park, and any decent if unspectacular cash offer is going to be snatched at, despite what it does to the team. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankie 8,552 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 The rumours about AM wanting leave have been strong for months. Various stories about the why, when and who but I think it's reasonable to suggest he may well be the man to move on to ensure our net spending is within our usual limits. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexscottislegend 2,306 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 It may be off the field issues which are behind this, but I still think that Alexander is much less of a keeper. I know he played his part, but AM's performance v Werder showed he's at a level few could match. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter 0 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Are folk trying to tell me that SDM is in it purely for the love of Rangers? I can see there's no naievity involved so I can only assume people are in denial here. Successful, i.e money making businessmen do not run football clubs in a selfless fashion for the good of the clubs. If they did SDM would have paid for players out of his own pocket while he was putting down a tenner to Celtic's fiver. Instead he waited nearly a decade then cleared a large portion of the debt to increase the chances of him selling the club at a large profit. The fact that Murray does not take a salary does not mean he does not make money from the club year after year. Let's have a look at the net profit from this year and then compare it to next year's costs when the figures become available. Then tell me he's doing the best he can for the club as a whole, not just the balance sheet. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 No, it's not, mate. It would be clear if the cash was being syphoned off. Yes, there are transactions between Rangers and other companies within the Murray group, but these have been falling over the last 3 years. These transactions would need to be paid for anyway whether with the Murray Group or outwith. There are questions as to whether Rangers have received best value, but the amount involved doesn't amount to millions. Those transactions between Rangers and Murray's other companies should also be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements under Related Party Transactions notes - are they disclosed there Bluedell (I know you have read the financials) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,622 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Those transactions between Rangers and Murray's other companies should also be disclosed in the notes to the financial statements under Related Party Transactions notes - are they disclosed there Bluedell (I know you have read the financials) Yes, mate, they are disclosed. they have fallen from over �£4m a few years ago to under �£1.9m. If we assume a profit margin of 10%, it's not huge figures we are talking about. Even if we said that we are paying 10% too much, it's still not that huge. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
calscot 0 Posted June 19, 2008 Share Posted June 19, 2008 Not many businessmen run a football club for the money. Most make a big loss. However, when you're wealth is in the hundreds of millions and upwards, you can afford it. What they get is two fold: prestige - if not fame, and their egos massaged. When you are as well known as SDM for being the owner of a club like Rangers, it surely makes business easier for him, and his companies. Taking clients on private jets with celebrities and then introducing them to famous footballers in the inner sanctum of a famous football club and then allowing them to watch the game as VIP's, all must surely oil the wheels of business - and make SDM seem to be "the man". I think SDM has also benefited from being the one to decide who to contract. His contruction company refurbished Ibrox with the club deck etc, he started and quickly grew a catering company on the back of a contract at Ibrox. The same goes for his ticketing company and I think he might also own the stewarding company. He also sold the Albion training ground to his son for a pound to build and run a profitable car park and has probably used various buildings as free office space. He's made money alright, although it's money someone would make - unless he allowed those companies to be owned by Rangers FC, with the profits going towards the team. Like Bluedell has said, the question is more about whether Rangers got value for money, rather than the club being conned. If businessmen don't run football clubs for the hell of it, can anyone explain how Brooks Mileson made money out of Gretna - or a multitude of owners of SPL clubs? SDM may not always have acted in the best interests of Rangers, and has done plenty to benefit himself; but to say he's bled the club dry, does not ring true. I believe he wants Rangers to be very successful as it reflects much better on himself and I think he'd rather hand over the club to someone else in great shape rather than a mess that makes him look like he's running away with his tail between his legs. The better the finances, as well as success on the pitch then the better he looks and the more money he'll get for the club. It's all win, win, win for him - except that he has the incredibly difficult job of delicately balancing the finances with the success on the field. 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.