Leadership, Responsibility, Belief, Passion, Commitment..

[calscot 0]

A white charger? Kenny Scott will have you banned for that language........

 

As for our wealthy supporters, we all know some have spoken to SDM but for various reasons the deal has not happened. What i am suggesting is an alternative to a private deal. We need as a business a large cash injection and the sooner the better. In this instance i would like those who tried to broker a deal with Murray to test the water for public support for a share issue. I know many will say the last share issue was largely ignored but a new share issue with the result if successful meaning a change of ownership, could in my opinion turn out substantial support.

 

I think the problem is that there is no incentive to invest in Rangers. For what the fans want, it makes the club a money pit. Few business will want to invest in a club where there is no return and instead a guaranteed loss, and all the money in football is elsewhere in the top four leagues of Europe.

 

If anyone took over the club, they will at least want to break even and so I can see them "rationalising" the club and cutting costs all over the place - and with the biggest costs in the squad...

 

There is little opportunity to increase income at the moment with the credit crunch and the current saturation of the Scottish market.

 

Ibrox is too expensive to expand due to it's original design making it uneconomical at a time when increased attendances are not guaranteed. It would also need to have it's costs absorbed in some sort of retail and housing development for which there is no commercial appetite at the moment.

 

Raising ticket prices are a no-no and there's not much chance of increasing income from advertising or media - in fact we could see this income dropping soon.

 

Our only decent source of extra revenue is the Champion's league which will be getting more difficult to get into from next year. Ironically, you need a spend on a decent team to get there but you have to compete with the likes of Liverpool and Arsenal in the qualifying rounds.

 

The future of our club is not the brightest and most of it is caused by external pressures which are not caused by SDM.

 

What the Chairman has done, however, is put us in a very fragile financial position through poor fiscal management which makes us ill equipped to cope with the economic downturn.

 

Our debt is too high and our revenue streams are too low. Celtic may have built a legoland stadium where you're lucky to get an unobstructed view or even a roof over your head to keep out the rain, but the bigger capacity brings in at least �£4M more a year.

 

Their financial crash was at a good time for them as they were able to turn the club round on a boom of football income and therefore had the finances to build a team that consistently achieved the group stages of the CL.

 

In contrast, Murray's overspending meant that we were cost cutting just as we needed to maximise our income from the CL and have been fire-fighting since. Ironically, Celtic have benefited even more from taking 100% of the Scottish pool of media money, time and again and reducing their debt to almost zero gives them another advantage while we pay �£1.5M a year to service our debt.

 

All this makes the purchase of the club look pretty unattractive and so anyone taking over will want to pay a knock down price to allow them to spend some money and address the debt. That price is probably too low now for Murray since his last �£50M investment for which he'll want the majority back.

 

That will be the big sticking point, nothing to do with what is best for Rangers.

[Zappa 0]

It's quite alarming to me the number of supporters that want to see the back of SDM so desperately, that they'd be delighted if he just handed over all his shares to a new custodian or group for NOTHING thinking that THAT would be in the best interests of the club. Personally, I think that would be nothing more than a risky gamble & I don't think that gambling with the future of the club is a particularly smart move if we want it to still exist in 10 years time. No matter how well thought out & planned, no matter how good the intentions of any new owner or group of owners, there's no guarantee of success, no guarantee of improvement or of secured longevity. I ask myself if the club will still exist in 10 years time if SDM sticks to his guns & stays on as owner & chairman, with our support & with a change of personnel such as the chief executive position for a start & I honestly think the answer is a definite YES! Despite what we're told, or should I say is being systematically hammered into or consciousness by some about the downward spiral of the club for the last 10 years of Murray's tenure & the looming & inevitable collapse of the club if he doesn't GTF asap, I honestly think that the club would be in better hands if he were to stay & that the club will undoubtedly still be here in 10 years time if he does. That's not to say that I think Murray is the only answer, but without the right person, with the right amount of money to invest (IE- A LOT) & the right passion for Rangers Football Club to be a success, I honestly think that the club is in safer hands with him than it would be with a small group of semi-wealthy investors & a share scheme whereby the club's financial security could well be significantly less than it is currently. I actually think it's quite reassuring for the longevity of the club that Murray isn't prepared to sell to just anyone or worse - give away his shares to a group of people with big ideas & no serious cash to back them up & secure the future of the club. I'm reading the likes of Cammy & others saying that they fear the club won't be here in a few years. Well in my mind we need to be careful not to push Murray over the edge because I personally think that he will do everything in his power to save this club & to secure that it's future is safe, even if he needed to take drastic measures elsewhere in his business portfolio to generate emergency funding for RFC.

[Norris Cole 0]

Push Murray over the edge? I will dance on his grave.

[Zappa 0]

I've suggested (albeit sarcastically) on another thread Norris, that I think maineflyer, yourself & probably many others would have SDM & WS burned at the stake. It certainly comes across that way to me. Well you can count me for one not only well & truly out of your campaign, but also completely opposed to it. We've all got the right to voice our opinions though, so .... on guard.

[Norris Cole 0]

No matter how well thought out & planned, no matter how good the intentions of any new owner or group of owners, there's no guarantee of success, no guarantee of improvement or of secured longevity.

 

What has Murray done in the last ten years to make you think he can guarantee us any of the above?

 

I ask myself if the club will still exist in 10 years time if SDM sticks to his guns & stays on as owner & chairman, with our support & with a change of personnel such as the chief executive position for a start & I honestly think the answer is a definite YES!

 

Firstly, you, me, and everyone else on this board are shite on Murray�s shoe so he certainly won�t be getting any support from me. Secondly, a change of chief executive is pointless because Murray has shown time and again that he only works with Murray men. FFS why do you think we lost the most talented chief executive in the country to Hearts? Bain�s in the CEO�s office for the exact same reason Smith is in the dugout.

 

Despite what we're told, or should I say is being systematically hammered into or consciousness by some about the downward spiral of the club for the last 10 years of Murray's tenure & the looming & inevitable collapse of the club if he doesn't GTF asap, I honestly think that the club would be in better hands if he were to stay & that the club will undoubtedly still be here in 10 years time if he does.

 

Are you denying the last decade has seen us embark on a downward spiral? In what areas have we improved? Where is the evidence that Murray will turn it all around in the next 10 years?

 

You support Murray and that�s your opinion, but I have to ask you - Just what are the positive things you think Murray has done for Rangers since Advocaat left?

[Zappa 0]

What has Murray done in the last ten years to make you think he can guarantee us any of the above?

Put 50 million pounds worth of shares on the market & bought the majority of them back himself when they didn't sell. No matter how you spin that whole scenario, the club was in serious debt that Murray was responsible for due largely to giving DA a blank cheque book with the intention that it would improve his chances of bringing major European success to the club - which it didn't. So, from at least one perspective, he took responsibility for the mistake by investing significantly to bring down the debt he had allowed to grow, something which I think he will do again with our current debt when he can if given the chance (time). As for success, well we were in a UEFA Cup Final last year, missed out on a quadruple by a gnats bawhair & yet did that in the middle of this supposed 'downward spiral'.... mmm.

 

Firstly, you, me, and everyone else on this board are shite on Murray’s shoe so he certainly won’t be getting any support from me.

Now this is one serious piece of irony & completely laughable in my opinion when you consider that we are not shite on Murray's shoe at all compared to what we are on the Queen's & yet a huge percentage of Rangers fans worship the ground she walk's on & not only fully support her rule over our 'Kingdom', but partake in singing & rejoicing about it while she taxes our asses off & enslaves us as her pet proles. Do you see the irony I'm getting at here???

 

Are you denying the last decade has seen us embark on a downward spiral? In what areas have we improved? Where is the evidence that Murray will turn it all around in the next 10 years?

Yes, I am denying that that we've been on a downward spiral for 10 years. I'm not saying we've improved, but there is the European Cup final & we ARE in less debt, despite it having gone back up again slightly since the PLG disaster.

 

You support Murray and that’s your opinion,

I only support Murray in the sense that despite what I read on forums about him being the anti-christ, I think he does have the clubs best interests in his heart & will do his best to secure the clubs longevity & future until someone suitable is willing & more importantly able to do the same. None of that is news to any of us though, so I'm only saying what's already widely known & recognized as being the case.

 

but I have to ask you - Just what are the positive things you think Murray has done for Rangers since Advocaat left?

This is actually in interesting question, because I sincerely thought that bringing in a successful European manager such as PLG was a positive thing, but unfortunately & very surprisingly, for a multitude of reasons it turned out to be a complete disaster & one which Murray really can't be blamed for to any great extent. After that 6 month long PLG disaster, I then personally thought that bringing Walter Smith back with Ally McCoist as his assistant was a positive thing. It's certainly been a bit of a roller coaster ride, but I think they've actually done pretty damn well for the club, both last season & this season, despite us having a couple of shock defeats against the bottom team in the league.

[Norris Cole 0]

Put 50 million pounds worth of shares on the market & bought the majority of them back himself when they didn't sell.

 

As I understand it that was simply moving the debt to MIH. Most fans didn't want to purchase shares because Murray would remain the majority shareholder and continue to do as he pleased. Added to the huge overdraft he has run up, Murray has effectively made the club unbuyable, nobody in their right mind will want to purchase a club in huge debt and pay for his shares.

 

Now this is one serious piece of irony & completely laughable in my opinion when you consider that we are not shite on Murray's shoe at all compared to what we are on the Queen's & yet a huge percentage of Rangers fans worship the ground she walk's on & not only fully support her rule over our 'Kingdom', but partake in singing & rejoicing about it while she taxes our asses off & enslaves us as her pet proles. Do you see the irony I'm getting at here???

 

That's not irony. That's just ignoring the fact that Murray's steadfast refusal to defend anyone but himself has resulted in Rangers fans being portrayed as the big bad bigots in the mhedia and treated like lepers in the country at large. And then saying something about the Queen.

 

Yes, I am denying that that we've been on a downward spiral for 10 years. I'm not saying we've improved, but there is the European Cup final & we ARE in less debt, despite it having gone back up again slightly since the PLG disaster.

 

OK, so we've not been on a downward spiral and we've not improved. Which, presumably, means we're the same as we were 10 years ago, right? Take a look at the season review videos of 98/99 and 99/00 and tell me we're at the same level. The Uefa Cup Final simply cannot be allowed to wipe out 10 seasons of mediocrity (and two last-gasp title wins to paper over the cracks).

 

This is actually in interesting question, because I sincerely thought that bringing in a successful European manager such as PLG was a positive thing, but unfortunately & very surprisingly, for a multitude of reasons it turned out to be a complete disaster & one which Murray really can't be blamed for to any great extent. After that 6 month long PLG disaster, I then personally thought that bringing Walter Smith back with Ally McCoist as his assistant was a positive thing. It's certainly been a bit of a roller coaster ride, but I think they've actually done pretty damn well for the club, both last season & this season, despite us having a couple of shock defeats against the bottom team in the league.

 

I agree that bringing in PLG was a positive. Unfortunately the day Murray took a player's side over the manager was the day he lost all authority as chairman.

 

As for Smith, you know my thoughts.

[Zappa 0]

As I understand it that was simply moving the debt to MIH. Most fans didn't want to purchase shares because Murray would remain the majority shareholder and continue to do as he pleased. Added to the huge overdraft he has run up, Murray has effectively made the club unbuyable, nobody in their right mind will want to purchase a club in huge debt and pay for his shares.

The fans were NEVER going to buy all of those shares no matter whether Murray would remain majority shareholder or not. Never in a month of Sundays. As for him making the club unbuyable, I'm not so sure about that, but as I mentioned on the thread about Big_Spliff's Setting the standards article, the sort of people with the sort of wealth the club needs, tend to want to invest in businesses that will provide them extremely healthy returns on their investment & imo that's a problem with selling a football club whether it's in �£25m of debt or not. Even with NO debt & a slightly more attractive account, a football club like ours is NEVER going to provide an attractive return on a �£70m or even �£50m investment within an attractive timescale. An investor might get a return on their money over a 10-20 year period if the club can turn a 5-7 million profit almost every year, but even that's no big attraction to most businessmen with money to invest. We're looking for someone with money to burn for the sake of a seat in the directors box, not someone with money to invest for a worthwhile financial return & yet you say that's Murray's fault? It may be his fault that we've got some debt & aren't turning a profit, but it's not his fault that even if turning a profit & not having debt, we'd still not be an attractive investment.

 

That's not irony. That's just ignoring the fact that Murray's steadfast refusal to defend anyone but himself has resulted in Rangers fans being portrayed as the big bad bigots in the mhedia and treated like lepers in the country at large. And then saying something about the Queen.

Oh, but it WAS & IS irony. You mentioned the notion that we're nothing but shite on Murray's shoe & for that reason he'll never get your support - a sentiment which I'm sure a lot of other Rangers fans have as well. My point about the irony in that sentiment is that the support sing & rejoice about the Queen & her Kingdom when we are nothing but shite on HER shoe & merely proles that she can tax the living daylights out of & screw up the arse at every opportunity that can be concocted/thought of.

 

OK, so we've not been on a downward spiral and we've not improved. Which, presumably, means we're the same as we were 10 years ago, right? Take a look at the season review videos of 98/99 and 99/00 and tell me we're at the same level. The Uefa Cup Final simply cannot be allowed to wipe out 10 seasons of mediocrity (and two last-gasp title wins to paper over the cracks).

What I'm saying is that football is a rollercoaster & we're on it. Winging on about downward spirals the supposed evil that is David Murray isn't going to take us off the rollercoaster & make us consistently world beaters, never mind put us onto some mythical exponential curve of greatness.

 

No I don't subscribe to settling for second best & no I'm not a Murray ass-kisser, but I think we can do better for our club & for ourselves than screaming for Murray & Smith's heads in some sort of blind rage fueled by hatred of them & what they've done in their positions at the club.

 

I agree that bringing in PLG was a positive. Unfortunately the day Murray took a player's side over the manager was the day he lost all authority as chairman.

 

Sorry Norris, but it's a complete farce to try to twist the PLG disaster in favour of an anti-Murray agenda. It's highly likely that PLG lost the confidence of a good number of the players in the dressing room, a good number of the fans (look at what happened at Firpark) & eventually SDM himself, due to (amongst other things) not getting the results we needed. I'm actually one of the people that think PLG might well have been able to rectify his terrible start & turn things around if given about 3 years & some transfer money, but that's history now.

[calscot 0]

I can't believe anyone can vilify WS and his results and want him sacked because of them when his biggest crime is to be 3pts behind Celtic while not losing a single cup tie, then want to defend a manager who was 17pts behind halfway through the season, out of one cup and his team immediately put out of the other just after he left.

 

It just shows the complete irrationality of the anti-Smith brigade.

 

PLG was not a messiah forsaken for the devil's child in BF. He is undoubtedly a manager of talent but he failed abysmally to apply that talent to Rangers and came across arrogant and ill prepared

 

When you're doing so badly AND you've completely lost the dressing room, it's time to give up a bad job and move on. THAT is a proper reason for a sacking.

 

In comparison with WS, it really does make you wonder what people have against him when there is absolutely no consistency in their judgement

 

Can you imagine people shouting for PLG's head if he gave us last season and this?

 

Perhaps the only difference is that with PLG there is a perception of "hope" that it is the start of something amazing, while with Smith, the perception is that this is as good as it gets. That's the only conclusion for that kind of hysteria that I can think of that makes the slightest bit of sense, but without PLG getting WS results, it's based on a false premise.

 

I was as excited as anyone by the PLG appointment but it turned out to be a horrific train crash. I was underwhelmed by the appointment of WS but at least we are on the rails and only running a smidgen late.

[maineflyer 0]

Push Murray over the edge? I will dance on his grave.

 

Quick step?