Who is most responsible

[CentreBear 7]

Wasn't it Murray who did the following:

Spun off the the Travel Club so Rangers were effectively paying MIH to run it for them? All profits to MIH.

Spun off catering to MIH or some other subsidiary. MIH again benefitting financially and Rangers paying for the privilege?

Used Rangers as collateral to fund further acquisitions for the MIH portfolio?

Selling all the Rangers Shops?

I'll be honest here and say that having someone from the bank on the Board scares me less than that halfwit Murray continuing his tenure. The bank guy will hopefully help Rangers to function and grow but within the confines of sensible debt management. When I say sensible debt management I don't mean

"...Hmmm, that vineyard looks nice and it's for sale. Tell you what. Lend me the money to buy it. You can use Rangers as security..."

or

"...Fuck me, MIH isn't doing too well. Never mind, though, Rangers are the jewel in the crown. We'll use them to leverage more and more credit to prop up failing parts of the group. Trebles all round..."

People here are suddenly talking about asset-stripping? We have players that could have been sold but weren't. I don't see Ibrox being sold to Barratts to build houses. If you want to talk about asset-stripping some of you might want to look a little bit further back. Murray and his group have made plenty from Rangers and the fans. It's time for money going into the club to stop funnelling straight out again to prop up SDM's empire and ego. I believe that's what the guy from the bank is ensuring.

[Jimenez 1]

So protesting and making messages against Murray is what ? belittled by what you done

I've lost counts on how many times I've contacted the club on a various issues. So all I can say is a big massive WOW WEE

Aren't we self conscience huh ? You're more prepared to make an arse of yourself online than you are to risk what you believe in in public yeah ?

You are a fucking coward in my eyes. All you have done on here today is mock fellow Rangers fans for caring and preparing to take a stance. IF you are a Rangers fan then you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself in the way you have continuously mocked others with your dismissive off hand ways.

Bravo on not investing in Murray's Rangers, I'd have almost been with you about a year a go when Murray was a character of significant note at Ibrox.

You're all the names I've called you and fucking more.

PM me if you have a problem with it.

[wearrapeepul 0]

as far as were lead to believe thats the idea of the new owners a no brainer really. mih has taken soooooo much money

[flecky1 4]

So protesting and making messages against Murray is what ? belittled by what you done

I've lost counts on how many times I've contacted the club on a various issues. So all I can say is a big massive WOW WEE

Aren't we self conscience huh ? You're more prepared to make an arse of yourself online than you are to risk what you believe in in public yeah ?

You are a fucking coward in my eyes. All you have done on here today is mock fellow Rangers fans for caring and preparing to take a stance. IF you are a Rangers fan then you should be thoroughly ashamed of yourself in the way you have continuously mocked others with your dismissive off hand ways.

Bravo on not investing in Murray's Rangers, I'd have almost been with you about a year a go when Murray was a character of significant note at Ibrox.

You're all the names I've called you and fucking more.

PM me if you have a problem with it.

i dont do pm's

i have nothing to hide

yer slabbering now, sounding pathetic and getting desperate

games a bogey

[djgazbcm 55]

this is going to sound bonkers but I was talking to a guy who knows his stuff when it comes to financial markets etc. and though he doesnt know anything about the Rangers situation he said if looked at from a business perspective things are not as "bad" as we may think when it comes to the future of rangers! Obviously might be completley wrong due to a number of assumptions but he persumes that Rangers are owned not by Murray but by MIH and this is what is causing the current problems. Rangers as a standalone company would have no difficulties from the bank due to a 31m debt as Rangers assets i.e. Stadium , players , Murray Park etc would more than cover the debt and as long as Rangers are servicing their debt by paying their installments their would be no reason for the bank to get involved as a standalone rangers would easily pass the Banking Covenants (example Liverpool 300 odd million in debt and still passed its Banking Covenant + we were ourselves only a few years ago over 50m in debt and the banks werent really bothered) . The most likely reason that the bank is involved is that MIH is not currently in a position to service their debt/their commercial property portfolio has taken a heavy beating in the Credit Crunch and the depreciation in value of MIH assets has put it in a position that it can not currently pass the Banking Covenants required by the Bank. Their are however positives to be taken from this - Llyods are currently only involved in MIH and Rangers with a view to reducing costs and it must be seen as a positive that their has been no news of Lloyds forcing MIH to sell any of it´s property portfolio at massive losses to pay off any of its debts. The reason for this is that the bank knows itself that Markets will rebound to higher levels than before and MIH will again be in a very healthy state and they can step back out again however they have to get involved at the moment as doing nothing would be seen as "risky banking". This is also persumably the reason the bank wont budge on the debt - they would only have reason to reduce the debt for new owners if they could not recover the money by selling Rangers assets.

The positive to be taken from this is that the property market rebound is expected in late 2010 early 2011 therefore we only need to get through the next transfer window intact and then as long as markets do their stuff the bank will be gone! Murray would still be here though and I seriously think we have yet to see the last of him .. similar to the last time he is getting himself out of the direct firing line so that someone else has to answer the questions and once everything settles down he will be back ...

this might be all a load of gibberish so apologies if someone knows more about the ins and outs and can explain it all to be nonsence

mate whoever you spoke to is correct ,MIH owe LlOYDS over 700million we are a small pawn in monitary terms but the QUEEN in importance terms..

LlOYDS see us as the most important piece on the MIH games board ..and if they lose us to a buyer they will lose their best and biggest bargaining piece

they have .....

MURRAY will have to reduce the rest of the MIH debt substantially to LlOYDS before the bank concentrate on us ....In other words we are being used ....

so all in all its currently MURRAYS FAULT...

[Jimenez 1]

Cowardly runt.

Send me a viscous e-mail. Admin have my permission to give you it.

You've acted jovial throughout today's threads but as soon as were called out went running.

Cheerio.

[Iserdo 1]

Aw ffs,stop the bitching yous 2?were in the same boat ffs.

[cooper1989 0]

this is going to sound bonkers but I was talking to a guy who knows his stuff when it comes to financial markets etc. and though he doesnt know anything about the Rangers situation he said if looked at from a business perspective things are not as "bad" as we may think when it comes to the future of rangers! Obviously might be completley wrong due to a number of assumptions but he persumes that Rangers are owned not by Murray but by MIH and this is what is causing the current problems. Rangers as a standalone company would have no difficulties from the bank due to a 31m debt as Rangers assets i.e. Stadium , players , Murray Park etc would more than cover the debt and as long as Rangers are servicing their debt by paying their installments their would be no reason for the bank to get involved as a standalone rangers would easily pass the Banking Covenants (example Liverpool 300 odd million in debt and still passed its Banking Covenant + we were ourselves only a few years ago over 50m in debt and the banks werent really bothered) . The most likely reason that the bank is involved is that MIH is not currently in a position to service their debt/their commercial property portfolio has taken a heavy beating in the Credit Crunch and the depreciation in value of MIH assets has put it in a position that it can not currently pass the Banking Covenants required by the Bank. Their are however positives to be taken from this - Llyods are currently only involved in MIH and Rangers with a view to reducing costs and it must be seen as a positive that their has been no news of Lloyds forcing MIH to sell any of it´s property portfolio at massive losses to pay off any of its debts. The reason for this is that the bank knows itself that Markets will rebound to higher levels than before and MIH will again be in a very healthy state and they can step back out again however they have to get involved at the moment as doing nothing would be seen as "risky banking". This is also persumably the reason the bank wont budge on the debt - they would only have reason to reduce the debt for new owners if they could not recover the money by selling Rangers assets.

The positive to be taken from this is that the property market rebound is expected in late 2010 early 2011 therefore we only need to get through the next transfer window intact and then as long as markets do their stuff the bank will be gone! Murray would still be here though and I seriously think we have yet to see the last of him .. similar to the last time he is getting himself out of the direct firing line so that someone else has to answer the questions and once everything settles down he will be back ...

this might be all a load of gibberish so apologies if someone knows more about the ins and outs and can explain it all to be nonsence

Terrific post mate.

[djgazbcm 55]

Wasn't it Murray who did the following:

Spun off the the Travel Club so Rangers were effectively paying MIH to run it for them? All profits to MIH.

Spun off catering to MIH or some other subsidiary. MIH again benefitting financially and Rangers paying for the privilege?

Used Rangers as collateral to fund further acquisitions for the MIH portfolio?

Selling all the Rangers Shops?

I'll be honest here and say that having someone from the bank on the Board scares me less than that halfwit Murray continuing his tenure. The bank guy will hopefully help Rangers to function and grow but within the confines of sensible debt management. When I say sensible debt management I don't mean

"...Hmmm, that vineyard looks nice and it's for sale. Tell you what. Lend me the money to buy it. You can use Rangers as security..."

or

"...Fuck me, MIH isn't doing too well. Never mind, though, Rangers are the jewel in the crown. We'll use them to leverage more and more credit to prop up failing parts of the group. Trebles all round..."

People here are suddenly talking about asset-stripping? We have players that could have been sold but weren't. I don't see Ibrox being sold to Barratts to build houses. If you want to talk about asset-stripping some of you might want to look a little bit further back. Murray and his group have made plenty from Rangers and the fans. It's time for money going into the club to stop funnelling straight out again to prop up SDM's empire and ego. I believe that's what the guy from the bank is ensuring.

EXACTLT mate ,and as i eluded to in my post a few back ....Lioyds are now playing him at his own game ......

[cooper1989 0]

Aw ffs,stop the bitching yous 2?were in the same boat ffs.

Naw... keep it going. Getting some pretty good entertainment here free!

But you're right... we're all Bears ... And the "fight" is now way off topic.

[flecky1 4]

Cowardly runt.

Send me a viscous e-mail. Admin have my permission to give you it.

You've acted jovial throughout today's threads but as soon as were called out went running.

Cheerio.

why would i want to send you a viscous email? that would be childish and on your level

admin have given you permission? what did you ask for it?

went running? where?

[djgazbcm 55]

Aw ffs,stop the bitching yous 2?were in the same boat ffs.

Naw... keep it going. Getting some pretty good entertainment here free!

But you're right... we're all Bears ... And the "fight" is now way off topic.

partial to a set 2 or 3 myself ,but what we talking about again?

[Dietspam 733]

:chang:

[viennabear 2]

Wasn't it Murray who did the following:

Spun off the the Travel Club so Rangers were effectively paying MIH to run it for them? All profits to MIH.

Spun off catering to MIH or some other subsidiary. MIH again benefitting financially and Rangers paying for the privilege?

Used Rangers as collateral to fund further acquisitions for the MIH portfolio?

Selling all the Rangers Shops?

I'll be honest here and say that having someone from the bank on the Board scares me less than that halfwit Murray continuing his tenure. The bank guy will hopefully help Rangers to function and grow but within the confines of sensible debt management. When I say sensible debt management I don't mean

"...Hmmm, that vineyard looks nice and it's for sale. Tell you what. Lend me the money to buy it. You can use Rangers as security..."

or

"...Fuck me, MIH isn't doing too well. Never mind, though, Rangers are the jewel in the crown. We'll use them to leverage more and more credit to prop up failing parts of the group. Trebles all round..."

People here are suddenly talking about asset-stripping? We have players that could have been sold but weren't. I don't see Ibrox being sold to Barratts to build houses. If you want to talk about asset-stripping some of you might want to look a little bit further back. Murray and his group have made plenty from Rangers and the fans. It's time for money going into the club to stop funnelling straight out again to prop up SDM's empire and ego. I believe that's what the guy from the bank is ensuring.

not sure if its right but even if rangers were debt free we would still be in the same situation as we are an "asset" of MIH. As long as MIH is in bother no matter how much rangers save or raise through player sales the bank will not be going anywhere untill MIH is able to pass it´s banking covenants

[Jimenez 1]

why would i want to send you a viscous email? that would be childish and on your level

admin have given you permission? what did you ask for it?

went running? where?

Someone doesn't get Irony

You've acted like a total bellend all day long, laughing in the face of people showing they care for the club.

If you can't handle a bit of feedback then :pierre: and all other shit smilies you've used in response.

You're too busy trying too be argumentative for the sake of it that you don't realize wHat a clown you have made of yourself and worse totally missed the whole point on any debate.

Congratulations.

[flecky1 4]

sad, really sad

your mutterings are not making sense now

lets leave it there

[djgazbcm 55]

Wasn't it Murray who did the following:

Spun off the the Travel Club so Rangers were effectively paying MIH to run it for them? All profits to MIH.

Spun off catering to MIH or some other subsidiary. MIH again benefitting financially and Rangers paying for the privilege?

Used Rangers as collateral to fund further acquisitions for the MIH portfolio?

Selling all the Rangers Shops?

I'll be honest here and say that having someone from the bank on the Board scares me less than that halfwit Murray continuing his tenure. The bank guy will hopefully help Rangers to function and grow but within the confines of sensible debt management. When I say sensible debt management I don't mean

"...Hmmm, that vineyard looks nice and it's for sale. Tell you what. Lend me the money to buy it. You can use Rangers as security..."

or

"...Fuck me, MIH isn't doing too well. Never mind, though, Rangers are the jewel in the crown. We'll use them to leverage more and more credit to prop up failing parts of the group. Trebles all round..."

People here are suddenly talking about asset-stripping? We have players that could have been sold but weren't. I don't see Ibrox being sold to Barratts to build houses. If you want to talk about asset-stripping some of you might want to look a little bit further back. Murray and his group have made plenty from Rangers and the fans. It's time for money going into the club to stop funnelling straight out again to prop up SDM's empire and ego. I believe that's what the guy from the bank is ensuring.

not sure if its right but even if rangers were debt free we would still be in the same situation as we are an "asset" of MIH. As long as MIH is in bother no matter how much rangers save or raise through player sales the bank will not be going anywhere untill MIH is able to pass it´s banking covenants

correct mate ,as part of the MIH group we will be the last "set free"until MIH repay their debt..we aint seen as different entity by the bank because

we are probably the biggest bargaining asset of MIH that LLOYDS are able to work with tbh....

[Jimenez 1]

sad, really sad

your mutterings are not making sense now

lets leave it there

Let's.

You were doing yourself and Rangers no favours earlier. I'm happy to call it a day if that means you are going to think before posting.

Friends ?

[flecky1 4]

sad, really sad

your mutterings are not making sense now

lets leave it there

Let's.

You were doing yourself and Rangers no favours earlier. I'm happy to call it a day if that means you are going to think before posting.

Friends ?

ye just keep going

fair doos

just mind and rethink that protest, you will be doing our club no favours whatsoever

not friends, Bears

[Jimenez 1]

Of course I do. I fight for what I believe in.... in all ways (imagine that)

I'd rather try and do something than nothing, crazy huh!

Anyway, I'm done with you.

[djgazbcm 55]

lets .lets....lets you 2 sound like a pair of fannys ffs......lol

oh no another 10 page argument ensues ....lol

jokin guys lets all get on please ,you both have opinions but did get a bit personal tbh....no real need for that though..

constructive criticism maybe ,but you both where a bit close to the bone tbh...

agree to disagree sounds like the best option ya pair of fans yeez

[Iserdo 1]

lets .lets....lets you 2 sound like a pair of fannys ffs......lol

oh no another 10 page argument ensues ....lol

jokin guys lets all get on please ,you both have opinions but did get a bit personal tbh....no real need for that though..

constructive criticism maybe ,but you both where a bit close to the bone tbh...

agree to disagree sounds like the best option ya pair of fans yeez

well said Gaz

[bluenose48 952]

this is going to sound bonkers but I was talking to a guy who knows his stuff when it comes to financial markets etc. and though he doesnt know anything about the Rangers situation he said if looked at from a business perspective things are not as "bad" as we may think when it comes to the future of rangers! Obviously might be completley wrong due to a number of assumptions but he persumes that Rangers are owned not by Murray but by MIH and this is what is causing the current problems. Rangers as a standalone company would have no difficulties from the bank due to a 31m debt as Rangers assets i.e. Stadium , players , Murray Park etc would more than cover the debt and as long as Rangers are servicing their debt by paying their installments their would be no reason for the bank to get involved as a standalone rangers would easily pass the Banking Covenants (example Liverpool 300 odd million in debt and still passed its Banking Covenant + we were ourselves only a few years ago over 50m in debt and the banks werent really bothered) . The most likely reason that the bank is involved is that MIH is not currently in a position to service their debt/their commercial property portfolio has taken a heavy beating in the Credit Crunch and the depreciation in value of MIH assets has put it in a position that it can not currently pass the Banking Covenants required by the Bank. Their are however positives to be taken from this - Llyods are currently only involved in MIH and Rangers with a view to reducing costs and it must be seen as a positive that their has been no news of Lloyds forcing MIH to sell any of it´s property portfolio at massive losses to pay off any of its debts. The reason for this is that the bank knows itself that Markets will rebound to higher levels than before and MIH will again be in a very healthy state and they can step back out again however they have to get involved at the moment as doing nothing would be seen as "risky banking". This is also persumably the reason the bank wont budge on the debt - they would only have reason to reduce the debt for new owners if they could not recover the money by selling Rangers assets.

The positive to be taken from this is that the property market rebound is expected in late 2010 early 2011 therefore we only need to get through the next transfer window intact and then as long as markets do their stuff the bank will be gone! Murray would still be here though and I seriously think we have yet to see the last of him .. similar to the last time he is getting himself out of the direct firing line so that someone else has to answer the questions and once everything settles down he will be back ...

this might be all a load of gibberish so apologies if someone knows more about the ins and outs and can explain it all to be nonsence

Great post and you're spot on. Murray has been using RFC as his security for years. The bank have allowed RFC to borrow money on the strength of its assets ie Ibrox stadium, Murray Park and the value of its playing staff. Collectively worth far in excess of 30 Million and they are using us to hit over the heid with.

Yet according to the papers Murray has just gone and bought Cockburns of Leith, winemakers for 3 million. So who is irresponsible.

[viennabear 2]

this is going to sound bonkers but I was talking to a guy who knows his stuff when it comes to financial markets etc. and though he doesnt know anything about the Rangers situation he said if looked at from a business perspective things are not as "bad" as we may think when it comes to the future of rangers! Obviously might be completley wrong due to a number of assumptions but he persumes that Rangers are owned not by Murray but by MIH and this is what is causing the current problems. Rangers as a standalone company would have no difficulties from the bank due to a 31m debt as Rangers assets i.e. Stadium , players , Murray Park etc would more than cover the debt and as long as Rangers are servicing their debt by paying their installments their would be no reason for the bank to get involved as a standalone rangers would easily pass the Banking Covenants (example Liverpool 300 odd million in debt and still passed its Banking Covenant + we were ourselves only a few years ago over 50m in debt and the banks werent really bothered) . The most likely reason that the bank is involved is that MIH is not currently in a position to service their debt/their commercial property portfolio has taken a heavy beating in the Credit Crunch and the depreciation in value of MIH assets has put it in a position that it can not currently pass the Banking Covenants required by the Bank. Their are however positives to be taken from this - Llyods are currently only involved in MIH and Rangers with a view to reducing costs and it must be seen as a positive that their has been no news of Lloyds forcing MIH to sell any of it´s property portfolio at massive losses to pay off any of its debts. The reason for this is that the bank knows itself that Markets will rebound to higher levels than before and MIH will again be in a very healthy state and they can step back out again however they have to get involved at the moment as doing nothing would be seen as "risky banking". This is also persumably the reason the bank wont budge on the debt - they would only have reason to reduce the debt for new owners if they could not recover the money by selling Rangers assets.

The positive to be taken from this is that the property market rebound is expected in late 2010 early 2011 therefore we only need to get through the next transfer window intact and then as long as markets do their stuff the bank will be gone! Murray would still be here though and I seriously think we have yet to see the last of him .. similar to the last time he is getting himself out of the direct firing line so that someone else has to answer the questions and once everything settles down he will be back ...

this might be all a load of gibberish so apologies if someone knows more about the ins and outs and can explain it all to be nonsence

Great post and you're spot on. Murray has been using RFC as his security for years. The bank have allowed RFC to borrow money on the strength of its assets ie Ibrox stadium, Murray Park and the value of its playing staff. Collectively worth far in excess of 30 Million and they are using us to hit over the heid with.

Yet according to the papers Murray has just gone and bought Cockburns of Leith, winemakers for 3 million. So who is irresponsible.

MIH is a company in which Murray owns shares .. it is a PLC and therefore Murrays liability is his investment and nothing else! Any personal fortune murray has remains untouched by any difficulties MIH encounters. It´s basically the same as all the bank shareholders who for years got thousands of pounds in dividends but when things went pear shaped only the initial investment was at risk. as long as murray has not been doing anything illegal when running MIH or fiddling the books there is nothing that says murray cant use money previously earned through dividends of his share holding in MIH to accumalate personal property.