Jump to content




  • Posts

  • Joined

Everything posted by WATP_Greg

  1. I don't really get it to be honest. But it is what it is - I think Rangers First is a fantastic idea so I will be badgering everyone I speak to about it. I think it is right to question but it does get on my nerves when someone repeats the same point day after day no matter how many times you answer.
  2. They may believe it but it doesn't make it true and it doesn't justify their actions imo - though to be fair the RST board have not said anything against Rangers First. I joined the RST in Autumn last year - I am in Rangers First. The two aren't mutually exclusive.
  3. I think Rangers First deserves its own thread on there but it won't get one at the moment - shame but it is not a disaster imo. I am pleased with the response on day one with little promotion other than word-of-mouth, I keep saying this but I think there is something in this
  4. Cheers mate, not entirely sure what to do with praise I honestly believe that Rangers First has the makings of something special. But we need to make sure it is transparent and robust so all constructive criticism should be welcomed - at the end of the day we all love the club. All that being said the site is live now so hopefully some of the questions can be answered there and everyone can get a clear opinion of what RF is about.
  5. I appreciate the timing of your response - I have no real issue with you reacting like that. My only concern is that I make it clear that the views you reacted to do not represent the views of Rangers First or any BuyRangers members that will work with RF. I think I have done that - I would hope that you ensure that the individuals you reported this information too will have the full facts at their disposal now as we do not need misinformation spread about RF or anyone else. We are all in this together in my eyes
  6. As transparency is one of the key tenets of RF I think allowing the minutes to be posted before the 'official' minutes is not a great concern. However, the fact that the posting of this minutes has granted the individual some perceived authority is mildly concerning. As long as it is made clear that any views are personal and not representative of RF then we should be fine and I believe we have now gotten to that point
  7. To be fair to my dad (Rab) - I think his patience was severly tested and broken on that thread over there. There was little intention to debate Rangers First from some on there IMO Which I continue to believe since the thread title still doesn't include 'Rangers First'. But that is an aside. I agree with your point that it seems like some individuals are scouring for something with which to use against RF - I would ask that any of us in The Rangers Community try and enter into debate in an honest manner - we all want the same thing after all.
  8. You can quote his opinion as much as you like, but it is still his opinion and not representative of Rangers First. I know what has been said at the meetings because I have been to them all. I have countered his assertions that someone else in the room had the same thoughts - I didn't hear that. Please read the posts I have made if you seek elaboration on that topic. I can't be clearer
  9. I'm sorry to disagree with you but this is purely the views on one individual on here who chose to take their own minutes at the meeting and publicise them - His opinion is allowed to stand as it is his opinion. That does not mean that it is representative of Rangers First - It is not. Mr Harris has no special position at Rangers First. I can't be clearer I have been present at every meeting of Rangers First - the issue that you have a problem with does not exist. You are merely creating a straw man. I repeat this is not an issue. I would also hope that you inform those whom you told that that is not the view of Rangers First and is just the view of one individual. We, as a support, have no need to spread misinformation about any groups as far as I can see.
  10. I don't think it represents the views of Rangers First as a collective and hopefully it will not be held against RF or indeed Mr Hemdani
  11. I have answered several times that this was Mr Hemdani's own personal opinion - That is not anything from Rangers First. Mr Hemdani is one of circa 50 people at each meetings - he has no special position and is allowed his own opinion - I am disappointed that you cannot separate that from Rangers First as a whole. Rangers First and BuyRangers are separate entities and will continue to be so with no intention of that changing in the future - this is not a coup. I would however, hope that both shareholder bases could work together in the future to work to our mutual aim of creating a better Rangers
  12. There has been the suggestion put forward at the meeting that no directors should be paid. I am of agreement with that as were the majority of nodding heads within the room. Everyone that has carried out work so far has done so on a volunteer basis and any financial losses have come out of their own pocket. I for one hope that this continues. I think it is important in establishing trust with the wider Rangers Support that no one fan is making money from Rangers First. We are all in it together for the betterment of Rangers Football Club. The number of directors will be decided in due course.
  13. The conversation you refer to was Shares in Rangers FC (bought at the IPO, or through brokers) being used to offset the lifetime membership fee. Personally I thought this was a brilliant idea. We have committed to donating all but two of our £1000 worth of IPO shares to Rangers First and will also be paying the full life membership fee. BuyRangers wasn't mentioned at all to my recollection at this point, and I don't that is possible even if any BuyRangers member wanted to do. For the avoidance of doubt this idea was not brought up. So can we just leave it there - there is no point in antagonising other Rangers Fans
  14. There is no heavy hitters in our group - we are all part of the collective. However, our own personal opinions should be taken as such. That suggestion to me is simply non of Rangers First's business - we have no right discussing what BuyRangers or anyone else does with their shares or their assets - that is their business.
  15. Look I've had a long think about this - the only comment that even came close was one from my Dad - He was sitting next to Christine and said something along the lines of 'using the shares together' - I know for a fact he was talking about both Buy Rangers and Rangers First utilising their combined voting power to vote together for the benefit of fans. There was no reference about taking over anyone's shares. Its a bit sad that this point is being misinterpreted this way as it is the opposite of the point that was being made. We should all work together for the benefit of the support Thats the only thing I can even think that was close - it wasn't discussed or elaborated on.
  16. I know who he means - I have discussed this long enough now. The point is that Rangers First is not the small band of former RST board members that some would portray it as. There are far more people like myself who have no history with anyone (although I did join the RST a short while ago). I think it should be accepted that there are people who come from different backgrounds who have came to work together on this. The lad Ian for instance who worked on his own scheme for months and donated the name is no less important than some of the Former RST board members. I feel that myself and my family have had an impact on this. I think Rangers First is worth more respect than that - it is from a wide variety of Rangers Supporters encompassing a broad spectrum of the support from what I can see. Thats how I feel at least - RF can make a difference to my club and I am confident it will be a success
  17. That is the question I would like to ask those criticising - What is the issue? If it a legitimate concern that should be addressed then by all means lets address it - we have to get this right. Now is the time, this our shot, our moment and we have to capture it (to paraphrase Eminem) - The zeitgeist is changing amongst our support. This opportunity will only come once and I believe we can make a difference.
  18. Can I just point out that Mr Hemdani was speaking on his own behalf and his views do not necessarily represent the views of Rangers First (as neither do mine) - No one is telling you what to do with your shares and neither should they.
  19. You have not been asked to vote on anything that I am aware of. If you don't wish to be a part of Rangers First then don't be - it is a personal decision- I would expect you to buy into BuyRangers and I commend you for seeking greater fan influence at the club. I have not been 'less than honest' with the RST and I am a member of Rangers First. Everything since day one of the meetings is thoroughly documented on the minutes - The first meeting in The Louden is where Rangers First began, it was named at the second meeting and launched to the members present at the fourth. I am entirely comfortable with Rangers First and that is why I have committed my money and offered my shares to them. I believe this can work and that it will be for the benefit of the Support at large and the club in the long term.
  20. I think a key part of The Rangers First meetings have been discussions on how those with egos will be pushed aside - we are all cogs in a much larger machine. If everyone does a small amount then RF will be successful. It must also be upfront and transparent in order to obtain the trust of the support at large and be a success. I am entirely confident that this is the route that we are going down (now that I have joined I can say we )
  21. I think they will be run in parallel - I agree competition is good as it drives innovation. I do foresee that on many big issues both BuyRangers and Rangers First will end up voting together as they both have the supporters interests at heart.
  22. I'm sorry to disagree but Richard proposed the name 'Rangers COOP' including the URL above - Ian then countered with Rangers First as he had the name in mind for his own membership scheme that he had been investigating for several months on his own. It was then through discussion, unanimously decided that Rangers First would be chosen. I for one am happy with the name 'Rangers First' as I feel it captures the mood of the meeting succinctly. I am impressed with the level of uptake - that is not including the two memberships that my family intend to obtain. There is something in this Rangers First scheme - of that I am positive
  23. As long as you do something to help put the club first then thats great. I will say I have heard nothing negative from any of the Rangers First lads and girls about any other fans groups or their schemes. Choose what you think is right for you
  24. The way I see it is the point was raised and no one objected, same as we have for other points - If you remember the name Rangers Coop was suggested and we decided against it as a group and chose Rangers First unanimously. If you had any concerns you should have raised it last night imo Thats what we are all there for - talk it out and come up with what we think is best. We are only there to help the club in the long term. infact, Club 1872 was well received - 16 people have signed up for it already last night. Its not bad in a meeting with 54 people.
  25. It was voted for last night - you were there? Only people that comfortable with it will give over their money. We are confident in the scheme (and the people who are involved). We as a family have taken up 3 memberships at £18.72 and we have indicated that we are going to donate all but of our shares bought at the IPO for £1000 and we will take up 2 (possibly 3) of the life memberships for Club 1872. The way I see it is: If you don't like it don't buy in. I trust Rangers First
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.