Attitude to SDM

[rbr 1,256]

David Holmes the much respected chairman who was the brains behind the Rangers revolution has in the past credited hugh Adams as the man who paid for the stadium , if holmes gives him the credit I aint goin to argue with him, also i am not arguing that I may have been wrong with my quote on the �£28 million , also with regards to what we spent remember we went from 15,000 season ticket holders and crowds averaging 22000 t over 33000 season ticket holders and average croeds above 42000 in the first season , murray didnt appear for nearly three years , but dont let that spoil the Murray is mr rangers story.

 

One final thing in the very early 90's we were in profit and didn't have any debt until 1999 so though I may have been wrong with regards my times I am certainly right with regards to us having money in the bank , which davie certainly spent

[Bluedell 5,627]

One final thing in the very early 90's we were in profit and didn't have any debt until 1999 so though I may have been wrong with regards my times I am certainly right with regards to us having money in the bank , which davie certainly spent

I believe that we were in a net debt position during most of the 90s. The only time that we weren't was following the Enic investment. For example in 1994 we had loans of �£8m, and an overdraft of over �£700K

 

The club made losses in 1989, 1992 and 1994. We made a profit of �£43K in 1991 so hardly substantial, and the �£1.2m profit in 1990 was only because of the sale of Albion. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make about us being in profit in the very early 90s, but it doesn't seem overly relevant.

 

Going back to the situation when Murray bought the club, I have looked into it further and the club had an overdraft of �£4.5m at the start of the year and an overdraft of �£7m at the end of the year.

 

I'm not sure where you are getting your information?

[franker 3]

I believe that we were in a net debt position during most of the 90s. The only time that we weren't was following the Enic investment. For example in 1994 we had loans of �£8m, and an overdraft of over �£700K

 

The club made losses in 1989, 1992 and 1994. We made a profit of �£43K in 1991 so hardly substantial, and the �£1.2m profit in 1990 was only because of the sale of Albion. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make about us being in profit in the very early 90s, but it doesn't seem overly relevant.

 

Going back to the situation when Murray bought the club, I have looked into it further and the club had an overdraft of �£4.5m at the start of the year and an overdraft of �£7m at the end of the year.

 

I'm not sure where you are getting your information?

 

 

What did we get for the Albion Bluedell-was it 2 million?

[Bluedell 5,627]

What did we get for the Albion Bluedell-was it 2 million?

Yes, it was �£2m.

[rbr 1,256]

Sorry bluedell and thanks for clearing that up , the point I was trying to clear up was that we were using our own money and not being bankroled by murray as so many believe , but what is clear from your research is that even back 14 years ago Murray had started to strip away assets and started to bring outside investment instead of using any of his own or his companies money

[calscot 0]

Seems to me that SDM spent our money, King's money, Lewis's money and then borrowed the rest before finally, reluctantly having to put in a huge whack of his own money in the share issue.

 

In the end he's paid about 70M for shares in the club and is unlikely to get all this back with the club worth between 50 and 60M.

 

However, his companies have made profits out of Rangers and he has grown a few companies on the back of guaranteed trade with Rangers. So in the end he's probably still made a small profit but at the same time been able to use his standing as Rangers chairman, to broker many deals for MIM etc.

 

If he hadn't overspent in the Advocaat years and kept Rangers successful, he'd have made 50M easy - ie the 50M he just put into the club during the share issue.

 

Basically he hasn't run Rangers very well recently and has undone any good he did at the beginning. On the other hand, he hasn't really lost anything either and has many intangible gains.

 

Seems to me that he was latterly trying to fatten the cow for sale and failed and so should now probably just take what he can get. I can't see how he can continue and be successful with so much animosity from the fans.

 

I don't think "Murray out" protests are too far away which would weaken his selling position further.

[Frankie 8,562]

Seems to me that SDM spent our money, King's money, Lewis's money and then borrowed the rest before finally, reluctantly having to put in a huge whack of his own money in the share issue.

 

In the end he's paid about 70M for shares in the club and is unlikely to get all this back with the club worth between 50 and 60M.

 

However, his companies have made profits out of Rangers and he has grown a few companies on the back of guaranteed trade with Rangers. So in the end he's probably still made a small profit but at the same time been able to use his standing as Rangers chairman, to broker many deals for MIM etc.

 

If he hadn't overspent in the Advocaat years and kept Rangers successful, he'd have made 50M easy - ie the 50M he just put into the club during the share issue.

 

Basically he hasn't run Rangers very well recently and has undone any good he did at the beginning. On the other hand, he hasn't really lost anything either and has many intangible gains.

 

Seems to me that he was latterly trying to fatten the cow for sale and failed and so should now probably just take what he can get. I can't see how he can continue and be successful with so much animosity from the fans.

 

I don't think "Murray out" protests are too far away which would weaken his selling position further.

 

A perfect, succinct appraisal of his time mate.

[Guest enigmablue]

I've 'enjoyed' reading this informative thread and thanks to all who have added something to it (unlike me). I'm off to bed with my head buzzing but the next logical step for me is to try to do a timeline of all these assumptions/certainties re SDM's reign; start position SDM day one, Albion car park & Edminston House sell off, Sky deal on, ENIC, King, managers in & out, trophies, assets sold or contracted out to MIM holdings companies or ones with SDM connections, Tore Andre Flo, sky deal off, Auchenhowie, JJB, Hutton, UEFA, Cuellar - position as at 1st home game of season 2008/09.

 

I was 11 in 1986 when Souness came and 13 when SDM took over which i think was 1988. In over 20 years of being an active fan and given my 3 years now in exile in Australia (of which i actually still paid and kept on my season ticket for 2 seasons...my wife doesn't know that...LOL!!!) I'd say that i've never felt more disgusted than i have this week (well perhaps the morning after Manchester would be close).

 

It might not be much, but i'm going to send a letter to SDM with some of the facts that i know and some that are assumed, state that if he does indeed want to leave with his head held high as he has stated then it should be by way of a legacy to the next generation of Rangers fans. I also think the support needs to get organised on a financial basis and show me mean business. With all respect to the RST Gersave it just didn't think big enough and if we're to get out of this hole and change the current regime then we need to assist SDM to fast track his plans with a viable option even its a plan where if the support raise $X million then Murray writes off the same from his shareholding.

 

E.G. On a simple equation if SDM's holding is valued at $50million, we raise $25M to buy him out and then out the goodness of his heart he donates his $25M of shares to a supporters trust/rangers charitable foundation type organisation (i'm sure they're must be tax break in there somewhere). $25M - 100,000 supporters worldwide at 250 quid...not that much really. If indeed his intentions for Rangers are good then now is the time to test this theory with him making a 'once only' offer to the support.

 

If that idea seems far too idealistic or perhaps unachievable in the current UK (and world) financial climate. What can we do now?

 

The RST (or any fans group) could try to set up a Kevin Rudd style 2020 summit (Aussie PM). Ask Gers fans to send a short one page statement why they should be involved and invite the 1,000 smartest brains from within the support to work together to set out some way to make change happen and give us a vision we can all look forward to and more importantly a financial model that can work towards a (successful) team that doesn't always have to sell its best players year in, year out....perhaps a Rangers 2022 summit when the club be 150 years young. I'm away to sleep on it....

[Bluedell 5,627]

Enigmablue, getting the cash together to buy the club is the (relatively) easy part. The club has then to be funded as Frankie has pointed out elsewhere. There is the debt to guarantee or repay, there is a transfer budget, there is the working capital requirements etc.

 

I understand that there have been moves made to try and raise some big money, but it wasn't successful.

 

I just can't see anyone wanting to buy out Murray as the business model is inherently loss-making, and we as a support have shown no desire to want to fund the purchase at all levels.