DavidRST
-
Posts
22 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by DavidRST
-
-
So if we are £30M in debt, next summer we will be approx £20M following CL money coming in and our cutbacks. I would suggest it may even be as little as £17M. Why is there this hysteria or can someone enlighten me.
The OP seems to suggest the level of debt and the price for the club is the same thing, I don’t understand that at all….
The debt is now the asking price. I am told, that due to Murray's wider relationship with Lloyds and all that entails, his shareholding is virtually worthless.
So assuming the debt was zero, how much would Rangers be worth then? £20M?
Rangers are worth what the chairman values his shareholding at.
ooops Ex chaiman should i say
No it isn't. But we could go on like this all day.
One needs to take the majority shareholder's wider relationship with the bank into account.
-
So if we are £30M in debt, next summer we will be approx £20M following CL money coming in and our cutbacks. I would suggest it may even be as little as £17M. Why is there this hysteria or can someone enlighten me.
The OP seems to suggest the level of debt and the price for the club is the same thing, I don’t understand that at all….
The debt is now the asking price. I am told, that due to Murray's wider relationship with Lloyds and all that entails, his shareholding is virtually worthless.
So in laymans terms, if I give the bank £30 million sheets, I own the Rangers?
You would technically go through Murray, but yes.
-
So if we are £30M in debt, next summer we will be approx £20M following CL money coming in and our cutbacks. I would suggest it may even be as little as £17M. Why is there this hysteria or can someone enlighten me.
The OP seems to suggest the level of debt and the price for the club is the same thing, I don’t understand that at all….
The debt is now the asking price. I am told, that due to Murray's wider relationship with Lloyds and all that entails, his shareholding is virtually worthless.
-
Hello everyone,
Long time since I've been here, but having been criticised for not putting info out on various sources, thought I should share this here.
As you know, I don’t normally do such things, but given the circumstances, we feel it’s important and fair that the support should know this. Obviously I won’t name sources, but let me assure you, I wouldn’t be posting this if
a) I didn’t trust the source implicitly
b) they didn’t have a 100% track record
c) they weren’t as close to the situation or
d) it didn’t check out when we investigated it.
Allegedly;
• The bank are panicking
• Senior management are calling it ‘a PR disaster’
• They want out soonest
• Bain is not involved in the day-to-day running of the club
• Muir is effectively running the club
• Muir is hawking players to clubs
• If the club is not sold at least three first team players will be sold in January in an attempt to raise £10m. This will allow the bank to drop the price for the club to £20m. They believe this might encourage further investors.
The pressure that is being brought to bear on Lloyds IS having an effect. Keep up the good work Bears.
Dangerous times, but potential sunshine ahead.
-
I have one BIG critisism of the RST statement - it comes across as just a list of moans and gripes. What fan doesn't want better - christ I know fans of Man. U who think they are hard done by, Some Chelsea fans the same - perhaps 'We deserve better' should just be the motto of football fans everywhere.
Me, I look at Murray, his character, what he has put into the club both emotionally and financially; I look at the potential alternates and I say 'I would rather trust this man with Rangers, than some unknown' - Now what can I do to help? Me I will help by supporting him, Walter and the team to the best of my ability by defending them against some of the more outlandish 'statements' on here. Are they above critisism, No. Are they the best for the job? IMHO - yes! Experienced, Proven and Loyal. They will do for me.
The RST have given the Chairman advice privately many a time. If you don't believe me, ask the ex-RST Board members on here.
He's ignored the lot, constantly stating he knows best. He did so again in his response today.
So we are simply saying 'okay - if you are the best man for the job and you know best, here's what we are unhappy about; sort it.'
It's a bit of a weird relationship. If we are simply 'customers', then name me another business who hear complaints from customers and say 'what would you do to make it better?'
If you are upset with Tesco, do they ask you how to resolve your own complaint?
-
David, I have a mixed views on the we deserve better campaign, however the one i feel most strongly about is the lack of support and backing from the higharcy of the club i.e the TFS and TBB saga. It seems everywhere there is someone having a pop at rangers or its fans, may it be TV or radio and not a lot is getting said in our defence.
On the football side i agree that poor signings have been made and money has been wasted, however at a time where every industry is suffering from the current economic climate, i think being safe money wise is a sensible move. If we can go on a good run in the next month or so then I am confident of a championship win as celtic are in no great shape.
I really want us to be safe with our money. I just believe that the Chairman (Or CE) should make every penny a prisoner.
Non-football staff should never question a decision by the football people with regards to WHICH player they should sign, but they should always question WHY.
So for example, when Walter asked to sign three strikers in the summer when we already had six, the CE should step in and say 'no, you have six, until you move one or two on, you can't have another three.'
I hate to say it, but it's the Fergus McCann model. And it works.
-
Cool. Though my playing ability would see me get 'Hugh Burns'.
-
1. The Chairman has failed to react substantitively to any of the points raised, and instead chosen to ignore legitimate concerns of paying customers.
2. The Chairman has said the fans groups 'offer no solutions'. We have offered practical advice at every meeting we have had over a number of years. That the Chairman and Chief executive chose to ignore most of that advice is down to them, but it is simply misleading to claim they were never offered it.
3. He says people who are members of fans groups and populate websites are 'not exactly Captains of Industry'. That's a rather sneering put-down, by definition, of everybody who reads this post.
4. He says the Trust think they 'know more about tactics than Walter Smith.' We don't. Not only have we never said that, we have said several times that the football people at the club know far more about football than we do. You'd have to ask the Chairman why he chose to make such a patently untrue assertion.
5. He accuses the trust of 'mischief-making'. If he'd like to point out anything in the 17 issues raised which is incorrect, we'll happily rescind it.
6. He says the Trust is an extremely small band of people. 5,000 members isn't a full Ibrox, but I'd counter it's a fair representation of support - certainly a big enough customer base to avoid insulting and ignoring.
7. He says 'real fans' know he's doing a good job. Define a 'real' fan to us.
8. His overall assertion is that the RST is intent on de-stabilising the team. We'd simply like to point out that it isn't us sanctioning the transfer of our top goalscorer halfway through the season.
Thank you for your time.
We deserve better.
David Edgar I assume?
I see you only a have a few posts on this board… call me cynical (and in your case I’m entitled to be) but why wait until now to come onto this board with your usual agenda-driven nonsense?
Could it be that you somehow need our patronage? And anyway, what‘s wrong with cozying up to the Murray haters on follow follow these days?
Yes, I joined yesterday to launch the campaign on here. It was felt it may be beneficial to launch it in as many places as possible.
Re; patronage; Without wishing in any way to be disparaging - though that's not a courtesy you extended me - I would counter that very few Rangers fans in the country were sitting in pubs saying 'I'll say what RangersMedia say about it before I make my mind up'.
In the past the RST were criticised for launching news stories on FF only. This was an attempt to make sure we got out to more places. If we aren't wanted, we'll stop (though I have to say the reception I received from various admin was very kind.)
Agenda-driven? Damn right! I say what I believe in! Don't you?
Agree with us, disagree with us, it's your call.
Welcome aboard RM.
Pleasure to be here.
though could someone explain the 'Dave McPherson' bit to me?!!
-
1. The Chairman has failed to react substantitively to any of the points raised, and instead chosen to ignore legitimate concerns of paying customers.
2. The Chairman has said the fans groups 'offer no solutions'. We have offered practical advice at every meeting we have had over a number of years. That the Chairman and Chief executive chose to ignore most of that advice is down to them, but it is simply misleading to claim they were never offered it.
3. He says people who are members of fans groups and populate websites are 'not exactly Captains of Industry'. That's a rather sneering put-down, by definition, of everybody who reads this post.
4. He says the Trust think they 'know more about tactics than Walter Smith.' We don't. Not only have we never said that, we have said several times that the football people at the club know far more about football than we do. You'd have to ask the Chairman why he chose to make such a patently untrue assertion.
5. He accuses the trust of 'mischief-making'. If he'd like to point out anything in the 17 issues raised which is incorrect, we'll happily rescind it.
6. He says the Trust is an extremely small band of people. 5,000 members isn't a full Ibrox, but I'd counter it's a fair representation of support - certainly a big enough customer base to avoid insulting and ignoring.
7. He says 'real fans' know he's doing a good job. Define a 'real' fan to us.
8. His overall assertion is that the RST is intent on de-stabilising the team. We'd simply like to point out that it isn't us sanctioning the transfer of our top goalscorer halfway through the season.
Thank you for your time.
We deserve better.
David Edgar I assume?
I see you only a have a few posts on this board… call me cynical (and in your case I'm entitled to be) but why wait until now to come onto this board with your usual agenda-driven nonsense?
Could it be that you somehow need our patronage? And anyway, what's wrong with cozying up to the Murray haters on follow follow these days?
Yes, I joined yesterday to launch the campaign on here. It was felt it may be beneficial to launch it in as many places as possible.
Re; patronage; Without wishing in any way to be disparaging - though that's not a courtesy you extended me - I would counter that very few Rangers fans in the country were sitting in pubs saying 'I'll say what RangersMedia say about it before I make my mind up'.
In the past the RST were criticised for launching news stories on FF only. This was an attempt to make sure we got out to more places. If we aren't wanted, we'll stop (though I have to say the reception I received from various admin was very kind.)
Agenda-driven? Damn right! I say what I believe in! Don't you?
Agree with us, disagree with us, it's your call.
Very welcome David, I'm sure you have had an account before?
Indeed. Still do! Mostly for reading rather than posting as I find a lot of the articles here very interesting.
As I say, we were (rightly) criticised for being too inclined to think FF was the be all and end all. We are attempting to stop that. Though I see it's not a universally popular course of action with your regulars?
-
1. The Chairman has failed to react substantitively to any of the points raised, and instead chosen to ignore legitimate concerns of paying customers.
2. The Chairman has said the fans groups 'offer no solutions'. We have offered practical advice at every meeting we have had over a number of years. That the Chairman and Chief executive chose to ignore most of that advice is down to them, but it is simply misleading to claim they were never offered it.
3. He says people who are members of fans groups and populate websites are 'not exactly Captains of Industry'. That's a rather sneering put-down, by definition, of everybody who reads this post.
4. He says the Trust think they 'know more about tactics than Walter Smith.' We don't. Not only have we never said that, we have said several times that the football people at the club know far more about football than we do. You'd have to ask the Chairman why he chose to make such a patently untrue assertion.
5. He accuses the trust of 'mischief-making'. If he'd like to point out anything in the 17 issues raised which is incorrect, we'll happily rescind it.
6. He says the Trust is an extremely small band of people. 5,000 members isn't a full Ibrox, but I'd counter it's a fair representation of support - certainly a big enough customer base to avoid insulting and ignoring.
7. He says 'real fans' know he's doing a good job. Define a 'real' fan to us.
8. His overall assertion is that the RST is intent on de-stabilising the team. We'd simply like to point out that it isn't us sanctioning the transfer of our top goalscorer halfway through the season.
Thank you for your time.
We deserve better.
David Edgar I assume?
I see you only a have a few posts on this board… call me cynical (and in your case I’m entitled to be) but why wait until now to come onto this board with your usual agenda-driven nonsense?
Could it be that you somehow need our patronage? And anyway, what‘s wrong with cozying up to the Murray haters on follow follow these days?
Yes, I joined yesterday to launch the campaign on here. It was felt it may be beneficial to launch it in as many places as possible.
Re; patronage; Without wishing in any way to be disparaging - though that's not a courtesy you extended me - I would counter that very few Rangers fans in the country were sitting in pubs saying 'I'll say what RangersMedia say about it before I make my mind up'.
In the past the RST were criticised for launching news stories on FF only. This was an attempt to make sure we got out to more places. If we aren't wanted, we'll stop (though I have to say the reception I received from various admin was very kind.)
Agenda-driven? Damn right! I say what I believe in! Don't you?
Agree with us, disagree with us, it's your call.
-
Sorry PIB, but it was a decision taken by the elected board and we stand by it. It would be impractical to canvass the opinion of every member on everything we do. Should you be unhappy with what the Board do then there are avenues open to you - you can vote us out, resign your membership or simply choose not to back the campaign.
Obviously we hope you don't do any of these!
You have just said what I asked you not to say!!!! As far as I can remember there wasn't exactly a proper vote for the new senior members to be in place, in general making SOME decisions I'm happy to defer to the board, BUT when it is such a major issue with the possibility of such significant consequences then as far as I'm concerned there should have been a referendum for the members to have their say on the issues and to put forward ideas of how to tackle the issues before a decision is made.
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree, but that's the joys of democracy!
Where is the democracy if the every day member didn't get a chance to put forward their views on the matter before a statement was made?
Again, the board that were voted in, I don't remember ever getting anything about potential board members and/or given the option of voting, or even the option of nominating someone?
The current RST board could help themselves and have a chance of gaining a lot of respect IF they asked their members their views on such important matters before issuing statements such as this.
I'm not saying I disagree with a campaign, but it could have been handled an awful lot better and I feel has only left the trust open to a lot more criticism as what was released to me appear amateurish.
Faitr enough, your points are valid, but as I said earlier, I'm comfortable with the way this happened.
-
Sorry PIB, but it was a decision taken by the elected board and we stand by it. It would be impractical to canvass the opinion of every member on everything we do. Should you be unhappy with what the Board do then there are avenues open to you - you can vote us out, resign your membership or simply choose not to back the campaign.
Obviously we hope you don't do any of these!
:wacko: Thats an interesting reply, surely a quick email with an overview, and, yes/no/abstain voting buttons on it would have canvassed the entire membership, who would then have had a chance to offer opinions on it. Simple, quick, straightforward, given outlook records the votes for you so you dont have to count them. In which case, you wouldnt have had the necessity to advise of the avenues to voice concerns
In this instance, I'm comfortable with the way it happened.
Why? you have members who are not, surely that should be a concerngiven the role should be to represent membership? or is it only certain members, or, members who hold a certain viewpoint?
Apologies if this seems spikey, however, a very valid point I feel, since, in this instance, as you have stated, the decision was made by the board, without council with the members, which leads me to question the motives behind it. Were they not asked because they may have disagreed with it?
No, they weren't asked because as a board we have a mandate to act on the Trust's behalf and did so.
Anyone disagreeing with the statement, the way it was done or any other aspect of RST business has options open to them.
And, to re-iterate, we are comfortable with the way this happened.
-
Sorry PIB, but it was a decision taken by the elected board and we stand by it. It would be impractical to canvass the opinion of every member on everything we do. Should you be unhappy with what the Board do then there are avenues open to you - you can vote us out, resign your membership or simply choose not to back the campaign.
Obviously we hope you don't do any of these!
You have just said what I asked you not to say!!!! As far as I can remember there wasn't exactly a proper vote for the new senior members to be in place, in general making SOME decisions I'm happy to defer to the board, BUT when it is such a major issue with the possibility of such significant consequences then as far as I'm concerned there should have been a referendum for the members to have their say on the issues and to put forward ideas of how to tackle the issues before a decision is made.
Well, we'll have to agree to disagree, but that's the joys of democracy!
-
point 3 is this quote you are talking about"Making jokes about our position is mischievous. We have a small group of people who have never been in any serious kind of corporate or business set-up on the sidelines shouting as though they know what should be done
As it's quite different, if not where did you quote come from...cheers.....
Hi Calum,
The quote was from the Scotsman ""The people who are moaning and making most of the noise are not exactly captains of industry," said Murray. "They don't have vast experience in business. I don't see any solutions being put forward by them."
http://sport.scotsman.com/football/David-M...erve.4877879.jp
Thanks for all the feedback, the beauty of this campaign is that those who are comfortable supporting it can do so and those who aren't, for whatever reason, can choose not to.
I think you have me confused with someone else...my name isn't calum......if it was would it not be poor show to use it on a MB un less i volunteered it....
Disappointing to say the least.
Thanks for the quote though and I would agree with the poster above where many of us would like to consider ourselves successful at our own level are we in a position to tell people how to run there business....
I agree with the principle of the campaign but the devil is in the detail.....
It certainly would be, please accept my apologies.
And I'm glad to hear you agree with the campaign.
-
And by the way I'm still a member of the RST, but I don't remember being asked for views or warned about what might be happening, and don't give me the line about we're representing the trust, you can make representation if you're not happy about an incident or whoever is in charge, it's a wee bit too late if it's already done!
Sorry PIB, but it was a decision taken by the elected board and we stand by it. It would be impractical to canvass the opinion of every member on everything we do. Should you be unhappy with what the Board do then there are avenues open to you - you can vote us out, resign your membership or simply choose not to back the campaign.
Obviously we hope you don't do any of these!
:wacko: Thats an interesting reply, surely a quick email with an overview, and, yes/no/abstain voting buttons on it would have canvassed the entire membership, who would then have had a chance to offer opinions on it. Simple, quick, straightforward, given outlook records the votes for you so you dont have to count them. In which case, you wouldnt have had the necessity to advise of the avenues to voice concerns
In this instance, I'm comfortable with the way it happened.
-
1. The Chairman has failed to react substantitively to any of the points raised, and instead chosen to ignore legitimate concerns of paying customers.
2. The Chairman has said the fans groups 'offer no solutions'. We have offered practical advice at every meeting we have had over a number of years. That the Chairman and Chief executive chose to ignore most of that advice is down to them, but it is simply misleading to claim they were never offered it.
3. He says people who are members of fans groups and populate websites are 'not exactly Captains of Industry'. That's a rather sneering put-down, by definition, of everybody who reads this post.
4. He says the Trust think they 'know more about tactics than Walter Smith.' We don't. Not only have we never said that, we have said several times that the football people at the club know far more about football than we do. You'd have to ask the Chairman why he chose to make such a patently untrue assertion.
5. He accuses the trust of 'mischief-making'. If he'd like to point out anything in the 17 issues raised which is incorrect, we'll happily rescind it.
6. He says the Trust is an extremely small band of people. 5,000 members isn't a full Ibrox, but I'd counter it's a fair representation of support - certainly a big enough customer base to avoid insulting and ignoring.
7. He says 'real fans' know he's doing a good job. Define a 'real' fan to us.
8. His overall assertion is that the RST is intent on de-stabilising the team. We'd simply like to point out that it isn't us sanctioning the transfer of our top goalscorer halfway through the season.
Thank you for your time.
We deserve better.
You have a lot of "He says" within this post, but could you please post actual quotes, and the full quotes so a clear objective view could be made?
Rangers chairman's verdict on his most vocal criticsSIR DAVID MURRAY today hit back over Rangers fans' mounting criticism of his running of the club.
The Ibrox chairman has come under fire after he announced the club would be forced to cash in on one of their leading stars during this current transfer window to balance the books.
Murray came out fighting after a We Deserve Better' campaign was launched by supporters' groups.
That followed a banner which was displayed in the away end at St Johnstone on Tuesday night which called for him to go.
Murray now finds himself mired in the biggest crisis of his tenure at the club - just a couple of months after he celebrated his 20th anniversary at the helm.
The Gers owner blasted the supporters seeking to express disapproval of the club's leadership, telling disgruntled fans to get used to "reality".
He said: "The people who are moaning and making most of the noise are not exactly captains of industry. They don't have vast experience in business. I don't see any solutions being put forward by them."
It was last week's decision to agree to sell leading goalscorer Kris Boyd to Birmingham City in a £3.8m deal that has tipped some fans over the edge.
Although Boyd failed to agree personal terms with the Coca-Cola Championship side, Murray has made it clear one of Walter Smith's top players will have to be offloaded before the end of the month as the financial fall-out caused by their disastrous Euro exit in Kaunas back in August comes home to roost.
That means Boyd, captain Barry Ferguson, Allan McGregor and Madjid Bougherra could all move on if bids are tabled by interested clubs in England.
Murray, however, has dismissed the credibility of those behind the protest campaign. And he insists he remains the best-equipped individual to lead Rangers to better fortune on and off the pitch.
"I can understand the frustration of the fans, but I would ask them to look at the reality of the situation," Murray said.
"When I sit down and review the economic situation of my business, the football side of it cannot be treated in isolation.
"We have to reduce costs at Rangers and that is why, when we received a good offer for Kris Boyd, we accepted it.
"The debate goes on as to whether he is a good, bad or indifferent player, or whether he would win the club the title, but the fact is most clubs would accept a reasonable offer for their players at the moment.
"That is the reality, whether you like David Murray or not. Whether it is me, Stewart Milne, John Boyle, Tom Farmer or Dermot Desmond, these are the people who are the financial backbone holding clubs together.
"There is a hysteria out there, driven by people who spend most of their time on websites or trying to get on radio programmes. They go on about mistakes which have been made, but I'm tired of admitting mistakes."
Murray once again reiterated his willingness to sell Rangers and let someone else take over the reins if someone approaches him who can prove they are in a position to take the club forward.
By attending McDiarmid Park on Tuesday night to watch his team defeat St Johnstone 2-0 in the Scottish Cup, the chairman proved he won't hide during a difficult time for the club.
He said: "I have been doing this for 20 years now and I think I have a better hand on the tiller than anyone else could at the moment.
"I would be delighted to go tomorrow as long as I could genuinely believe there was a suit-able alternative for Rangers.
"But please do not doubt my endeavour to make Rangers successful. There is the David Murray must go' chorus. But I will be here until there is a viable alternative."
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/displa...of_industry.php
In bold are actual quotes.
http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/sport/displa..._going_bust.php
Another interesting article on the financial situation.
And by the way I'm still a member of the RST, but I don't remember being asked for views or warned about what might be happening, and don't give me the line about we're representing the trust, you can make representation if you're not happy about an incident or whoever is in charge, it's a wee bit too late if it's already done!
Sorry PIB, but it was a decision taken by the elected board and we stand by it. It would be impractical to canvass the opinion of every member on everything we do. Should you be unhappy with what the Board do then there are avenues open to you - you can vote us out, resign your membership or simply choose not to back the campaign.
Obviously we hope you don't do any of these!
-
point 3 is this quote you are talking about"Making jokes about our position is mischievous. We have a small group of people who have never been in any serious kind of corporate or business set-up on the sidelines shouting as though they know what should be done
As it's quite different, if not where did you quote come from...cheers.....
The quote was from the Scotsman ""The people who are moaning and making most of the noise are not exactly captains of industry," said Murray. "They don't have vast experience in business. I don't see any solutions being put forward by them."
http://sport.scotsman.com/football/David-M...erve.4877879.jp
Thanks for all the feedback, the beauty of this campaign is that those who are comfortable supporting it can do so and those who aren't, for whatever reason, can choose not to.
-
1. The Chairman has failed to react substantitively to any of the points raised, and instead chosen to ignore legitimate concerns of paying customers.
2. The Chairman has said the fans groups 'offer no solutions'. We have offered practical advice at every meeting we have had over a number of years. That the Chairman and Chief executive chose to ignore most of that advice is down to them, but it is simply misleading to claim they were never offered it.
3. He says people who are members of fans groups and populate websites are 'not exactly Captains of Industry'. That's a rather sneering put-down, by definition, of everybody who reads this post.
4. He says the Trust think they 'know more about tactics than Walter Smith.' We don't. Not only have we never said that, we have said several times that the football people at the club know far more about football than we do. You'd have to ask the Chairman why he chose to make such a patently untrue assertion.
5. He accuses the trust of 'mischief-making'. If he'd like to point out anything in the 17 issues raised which is incorrect, we'll happily rescind it.
6. He says the Trust is an extremely small band of people. 5,000 members isn't a full Ibrox, but I'd counter it's a fair representation of support - certainly a big enough customer base to avoid insulting and ignoring.
7. He says 'real fans' know he's doing a good job. Define a 'real' fan to us.
8. His overall assertion is that the RST is intent on de-stabilising the team. We'd simply like to point out that it isn't us sanctioning the transfer of our top goalscorer halfway through the season.
Thank you for your time.
We deserve better.
-
Who invited John Higgins on to the board ?
HE looks like ME, for the record.
-
A lot of good points on here.
What I would say is that, as a customer, a stakeholder or a shareholder, it isn't unrealistic to ask that the people who work for your institution do better.
That's what this is about. Murray says that the right people are at the club already. This campaign simply says; prove it.
-
Hi all. First time poster, so please go easy.
Firstly, this isn't solely an RST Campaign. It's a campaign backed by other fans groups and is inclusive of everyone who agrees with the sentiment.
Secondly, as someone pointed out, this is NOT a Murray Out campaign. This recognises he is here for the forseeable future and people have to accept this. What this is for is to make the people who run the club do it better.
We hope you will feel you can support it, be it through banners, songs, writing to the club etc. The people in situ can influence things immediately - let's get on to them!
Current Situation
in Jimmy Bell's Kitroom
Posted
What Rangers are worth, what SDM wants for it - all now irrelevant.
What is apparent is that £30m would buy you the club.
If you don't believe me, phone Lloyds and put in a bid and see what they say.
I'll leave you all to speculate what that means for/says about the rest of the Murray Group.