Bluedell 5,614 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 As for who replaces him, murray is and has been selective to who takes over. you cant fault for that, infact i applaud him for it. Only if you believe his story. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Murray says repeatedly that he will only sell to someone who he (Murray) believes has Rangers best interests at heart. All very laudable until you realise that he has never once been persuaded to reveal to us what such a person or group would look like - or what the criteria are by which he is judging potential buyers. The whole thing sound like a complete crock to me. I make no bones about it, like much of the business community in this country, I think Murray is deeply untrustworthy and I do not believe a word of what he has said on this subject. In fact, I'm far from convinced he has ever seriously intended to sell the club thus far. I hope that will soon change. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,614 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I do believe he desparately wants rid of the club. It's ceased to be a benefit to him, he can't see any potential (other than the redevelopment plans which ain't going to happen any time soon due the economic crisis) and will only be a drain to him. However I don't believe that there has been anyone serious enquiring about it (yet). 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I do believe he desparately wants rid of the club. It's ceased to be a benefit to him, he can't see any potential (other than the redevelopment plans which ain't going to happen any time soon due the economic crisis) and will only be a drain to him. However I don't believe that there has been anyone serious enquiring about it (yet). It's impossible to be sure about your first point, at least without reading Murray's mind. He SHOULD be desperate to sell the club and he MAY be coming to that conclusion. I agree on the second point. It is inconceivable that nothing would have leaked had Murray ever conducted serious discussions with a buyer or buyers. In which case of course, he would be guilty of overtly lying to every supporter of the club. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,614 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 It's impossible to be sure about your first point, at least without reading Murray's mind. Of course it is, and that's why I said "I believe" but my belief is based on the information that I have. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Of course it is, and that's why I said "I believe" but my belief is based on the information that I have. Then why not share it? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ascender 352 Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 Surely in the current climate, any potential, serious buyer of the club, could use the fans ill feeling towards SDM in their favour should their bid be knocked back? I find it hard to believe that in a country the size of ours, with a footballing community as small as ours, that any serious bid would be able to be kept quiet from the media. Much as I have a healthy skepticism when it comes to Murray's comments, I believe he wants to sell and I also believe there's no-one battering down his door to buy the club or we'd have heard about it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Barr 0 Posted January 17, 2009 Author Share Posted January 17, 2009 Murray wants the best for the club, right? So, he'll only sell if "it's in the clubs best interests" right? What if he sold it to us then like a chairman in England did, for a �£1? Then every Rangers fan in the country contributed say �£40 to �£50 to go towards wiping out debt, wages and transfer fees. Rangers have a potential of well over 250,000 fans who are willing to travel to Manchester to watch them lift a UEFA cup. So if these fans were sat down and told that this �£initial �£50 would save the club they love and buy them the players they think 'they deserve' then it could work out. IF and it's a BIG if that 250,000 fans contributed to the Rangers cause we would be talking about having 12.5 million as a starting price to clear debt, get the club on even keel and pay that months wages for the first month. If you say that about half of that was to go on the club debt(�£6m)(might be more or less, not too sure), we'd take around 2 million for wages. That would leave �£4.5m to buy a player or players to get the club going again. Then for the following months these 250,000 fans could contribute around �£20 towards the clubs monthly running. That would be a MONTHLY profit of �£5m to pay wages and buy players. If we say the �£2m is for wages and the �£3m is for transfers, that is another �£3m to buy a second player, and so it carries on... Obviously, Murray would have to make some profit from this because he sold the club for a pound, so any profits of around 20% would go to him for around 20 years and that should pay him off. The 250,000 loyalist of supporters would have to be rewarded with something, so special discounts, club access to Ibrox(a turn of free hospitality to them once a season, and free access to Murray park within certain limits), 10% off ticket prices and 15% off season tickets could help attract these 250,000 supporters, and possibly more. Obviously 250,000 supporters is a lot to ask, as is a one off payment of an initial 50 quid and 20 quid a month afterwards. But i seriously think if it came down to saving the club from ruin and having the chance to run it the way we wanted with a large transfer kitty, would help bring out a lot of these guys who only come out to support the club at big events. Just to note, i don't claim to be a business expert or anything like it, i am merely banding around ideas to see what people think is best for the club.:rfc::rfc: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cotter 0 Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) Can someone please clarify exactly what it is that we are protesting against David Murray about? I'll admit I'm deliberately playing the fool here, but this is simply a reaction to the sharp increase in posts of a repetitive and frustrating nature that all come to the same conclusion (Murray Out!) without offering any hint of a solution to the perceived problems. Of Course I'm not happy with the current state of affairs. The way the team performs affects my state of mind profoundly whether I like it or not and as a result I spend a good part of my day with the bears on my mind. Clearly our current problems should be placed at the door of our manager. He wasn't the ONLY viable option when he re-signed as some would have you believe, in fact he was flavour of the month as I recall, working minor miracles with an ordinary Scotland team. Le Guen was in the same boat, highly regarded and welcomed by the support at the time, his trouble was that Murray wouldn't back him financially. So Murray brings back Walter (AND Ally), backs him to the hilt with cash (albeit the bank's as per usual) and we start to look solid again. We get to a f#@king European final. Anyone that's actually looked at the figures knows that again, this season, Murray backed Walter amply. The pub team debacle is clearly and understandably when the "Murray Out" ball started to really gather pace, but it should be remebered that both Murray and Walter stated that CL qualification would not have an effect on this season's budget. Therefore we can only blame WS for failing to improve the team prior to the Kaunas games, no? Lafferty, Velicka, Edu, Aaron, Mendes, Bougherra, Miller. Murray has backed his manager and now we need to trim our oversize squad in january. Why is this surprising/ infuriating to some fans? WS was given free reign to sign players before the deadwood was moved on. Perhaps here is where we can justifiably point the finger at Murray. Before we do so though, we should remember that we demanded new blood after last years exploits, believing (wrongly) that we were cash rich and in a position to blow the tims out of the water on the back of our Euro run. Murray has many failings, but it seems to me that the logic behind the current "campaign" is based on is flawed logic. Surely it should be a "Walter You've Served Your Purpose" campaign. Christ I wouldn't be surprised if it Turned out that Murray told old Walt to play Fleck today. Edited January 18, 2009 by Cotter spelling! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Smith can go yesterday for me. I never rated him as a manager and don't see any reason to change my mind. I want Murray to go but it has to be in an organised He has obviously lost his enthousiasm for the club and has repeatedly said he wants out but my worry is: If he were to walk out the door tomorrow,where do Rangers football club stand? The words of Byonce come to mind. I am alone at a crossroads I'm not at home in my own home. David Murray has our club by the balls and can virtually do what he wants to with it. 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.