WATP_Greg

What exactly did the support, or rather the approx14000 who voted , vote for . The exact question asked was the preposterous " do you want to unite the fans groups " with an attached woolly not yet agreed wish list that we were told would be changed after the vote went through .

 

So basically what did we vote for .

 

Plus there were people who put themselves up for election on RF who have done a 180 on their election pledges and what they stood for .

Who's that?

Hope to see a few of you along tonight!

Cheers Greg , it's a tough ask for some to trust this going forward. RM is mental. As was Twitter last night . When you asked yesterday about what I thought about the dual life memberships , the reason I didn't answer was because it would have come across as being selfish and its not that at all , I just wanted it discussed and some decision made . I don't agree with Chris,s point as you can be a member of the RST and not contribute to buyrangers. You can't do that with RF so they are completely different as you know

Aye I do get that there could maybe be something done - my first instinct is to allow the transfer one life membership to a family member or friend so that the vote still exists but thats just a very on the face of it thought - I think it does deserve a discussion but until the membership lists are allowed to be looked at together I'm not sure how many it effects.

I think Chris' point was valid that the your life membership still allows a vote in the org and that your money went to its stated goal but I understand that we maybe need to look at something a bit more - what that is I'm not too sure but one thing about our support is that someone will have a good idea somewhere

And yes RM is mental - I do enjoy it at times but a few of the new members are I think only there as their accounts on twitter got suspended... But there are many good bears on there too and its my go to place for an argument, I mean debate

And twitter is what it is - block the abusive and try and talk to the rest - though its been properly time consuming!

I had just finished writing this on RM in answer to a question over there and was just in the process of copying onto here Frankie lol , these are my own notes so apologies to anyone if any point was incorrect , there was another gersnetter in attendance stuarta i believe again appologies stuart if I got your username wrong .

 

 

Very decent meeting yesterday , all questions that were asked were fully answered , to the satisfaction of those who asked them , they may not agree with some of the answers given , but none were dodged imho.

 

Some of the questions .

 

 

 

Who came up with the idea of merging the various groups .....Answer was that it came from the meetings the club had with the groups , it was mentioned several times that there were too many factions , hence a working group was set up .

 

Who was invited onto this working group....answer Any group that had a properly set up organisation with an elected committee (there was more to it than this Greg maybe better fully answering this point )but you get my jist

 

What is happening to those that have dual life memberships in both RF and the RST .....answer was it hadn't been fully thought out as until the new organisation is up and running or rather if the new org gets the go ahead then the records of membership of both schemes cannot be compared ,several opinions were given but until the working group get the figures on how many people this affects its pointless speculating.

 

Why the rush ....answer was the working groups had been working on this for over 8 months , emails went out to all relevant groups over 4 months ago with the draft proposals and the vast % , over 96% were in favour of further talks

 

 

 

What would happen to RST members who decided to take their save Rangers money/shares out instead of transferring over ....their would be a period of time after any new group was formed where any fan would be given the choice of what they wanted to do with their money/shares

 

 

 

What is the purpose of the CIC club 1872....this is just a holding company to bring the RF and the RST CIC,s under , it would also be the company that would hold the licences for any website or anythin else required for the new company( again there is a better more detailed answer than this that hopefully Greg can give )

 

 

 

Does James Blair understand the term Conflict of Interest ....Answer was fully debated and I was satisfied with the answers given , it is a tricky one this but it was answered properly.

 

 

 

What about season ticket holders .......Answer , this is awkward because of financial rules around the club offering incentives to fanswhich would lead to receive financial gain , though there were various things being discussed.

 

 

 

In finishing , there were other points raised that I cant full remember , I apologize to Greg in advance if I have left him to answer questions that I have raised or if I have misrepresented. any questions raised or answers given

 

 

 

 

 

In short it was a very good meeting , I would strongly advise anyone with any doubts or misgivings to go and ask them in person , the internet is great , twitter is great for some things but debating something as important as this , nope not in 140 characters .

 

 

 

Any way hope this helps in some small way it certainly helped me come to a decision.

Thanks for posting mate and I appreciate you coming and asking Qs

"What is the purpose of the CIC club 1872....this is just a holding company to bring the RF and the RST CIC,s under , it would also be the company that would hold the licences for any website or anythin else required for the new company"

That's close - but club 1872 is a ltd not a cic - there are two CIC's in club 1872 - one for Shares (which is RF) and one for projects (which is RST's cic) - Club 1872 ltd is also not sitting 'above' the cic's, its a flat structure with the same elected members serving on the board of each org and all the members of club 1872 having voting rights for all the orgs in OMOV.

I think the rest of it is good and I'm sure everyone on here appreciates you taking the effort - I'll hopefully be able expand on some of it later

25.1% isn't a limit - its a goal.

Members would decide what the upper limit is - One member one vote

We'll know at the end of the week when the squads are announced

I think we can win the league next year with the correct signings and a bit of luck.

The premiership will be harder but from what I see they aren't better footballers generally than the championship just a bit more physical

Like I say, I don't doubt his intentions are/were honourable but the FF thread comes across as grandstanding and any meeting should have been negotiated privately.

In your opinion of course - my dad has his own (even quite often far from my own).

Its how he deals with things and I can understand him trying to shine a light on what so far has been whispers in the back ground. Some of these lads have spent 50+ hours in The Louden talking RF so I don't see what difference another couple will do except maybe make their position clearer as My dad can't see where they are coming from.

Again though its his opinion I just wanted to make clear his intentions are good even if his methods aren't to everyones tastes

Most certainly you...as if you didn't know already

Well I wasn't a rep at the time and I stand by what I said to AH. Misinformation is the enemy in my experience online. Ghost stories become facts within a few posts. If I see deliberate (imo) misinformation about myself or something I'm involved with I tend to challenge it (though some people are better ignored in my experience as they aren't interested in the correct info).

So I take issue with you having issue with me

I've never met Rab but although I'm sure his heart is in the right place he's certainly clumsy at times in the way he addresses some issues.

I don't have an issue with anyone not agreeing with what my dad says - He's very brash at times. The only issue I would have is if people questioned his intentions. Anyone who knows him will tell you he doesn't care about anything but what is the best for the club and the support.

Not sure that this was the best way to go about it. It would have had more chance of success if it was done privately and without the suggestion that they have done something that affects "the Rangers support in General". It's not for Marshall1873 to dictate on behalf of the whole support.

 

It seems to have been done in a way that a refusal was inevitable and more about scoring brownie points and having a prejudged agenda than wanting to find a way to work together in the future.

Well not for me to explain the actions of my dad when he has a bee in his bonnet but he's always been upfront about people with issues should talk about them.

We have as the pub in the past try to facilitate communication to various degrees of success - Tbh though all the people he has invited have been happy enough to attend the louden at various points in the past so I don't see why they would refuse now.

Without commenting on whatever BH has done or not done, as I don't really get the hooha, I find the apparent representatives of RF and RST on here have behaved incredibly poorly. I don't think BH is the only one to be interested in transparency of the numbers - and to have a go at him about numbers he took from the official site, and then go on to snidely defend that site, is astonishing.

 

Then to refuse to give the numbers just because it "pisses someone off" sounds about as petty as you can get.

 

Maybe it's all about a bunch of people who don't get on in person, and have a bit of history, but when you don't know anyone, it all just looks a bit bitchy on here. That still wouldn't be that important on a forum, if it wasn't for the fact that some of the people appear to be involved in leading the fan investment groups...

Who is the RF representative on here that you have issue with?

It wasn't a dig , it was an honest question , it has always been a bug bear of mine the RF ticker , these numbers should be freely available , that's my opinion on both schemes

To be fair in principle I agree - I know initially due to the ad hoc way RF was set up it required manual checks which is why the ticker was used iirc.

With the size of the org now I think we could do a better job of sorting that kind of thing (I say that with no knowledge of what has been investigated or not by the current board)

Fine, wrong word, which I'll correct.

 

The point and you know full the point is that the site indicates that 13,954 people are CONTRIBUTING, and it seems that is WRONG.

 

"Regsitered contributors" implies that number are contributing; and please don't tell us it doesn't imply that because it obviously does have that implication.

 

It's not often I agree with Zappa on here but he appears to be correct when he says the counter only ticks upwards.

 

Why doesn't it say 9,000 or whatever number, perhaps you can answer that, Greg?

Where have you been for the last year and a half? The number has always only counted upward and was often spoken about online etc and from what I can see was never hidden (it was a quick fix implemented to help give an indication of membership interest that has remained in place longer than anticipated imo). Writing in caps and adding an "ing" to contributors doesn't change that you read it wrong, although I can see why you did.

I can't answer why it doesn't say 9k or whatever as I have never been involved with the set up of the website - Personally I favour going with the numbers as is rather than the total number that has contributed as its more relevant to RF going forward.

The website needs an overhaul anyways so maybe in the future we can have a number that represents current membership numbers

I wrongly assumed that the number on the web site was correct, but I stand corrected.

 

The web site says 13,954 registered donors.

 

I would suggest that the misinformation comes from RF not me.

It says registered contributors actually as it has always done - the misinformation is from you, again.

I would like to thank everyone to who voted for me in The Rangers First Election.

I am pleased to have been voted on and I look forward to the hard work ahead in helping Rangers First achieve its aims.

Thank you

Greg Marshall

Can't quite believe low vote for Graeme Henderson.

 

Decent CV and statement, put his money where his mouth is and a bought a substantial shareholding which he'll proxy irrespective of his personal outcome. A refreshing change from those basically saying vote for me or I start a new group and those who'd hitch a ride with them them to fluff their ego's.

I don't know him directly and I think a lack of exposure may have been a reason for the low score in the poll on here - he owns 0.8% of shares iirc and you can't argue with someone putting their money where their mouth is.

Hopefully if he doesn't get on he'll look to get involved

Well the voting is now closed and thanks for everyone who voted for me.

Whether I am elected or not I sincerely hope we can progress Rangers First and help improve Rangers and The Rangers Community as per RF's aims.

I'd put money on certain candidates having voted for themselves and Alan would be one of them!

I voted for myself

There was no intent to mislead, Greg; most of the candidates stated Twitter names but my statement is the only one that shows my web forum names. Perhaps you should have asked RF or SD to amend your statement accordingly.

Its your statement I had issue with - you stated something which was incorrect as fact (that people did not disclose their forum names) with the obvious connotations being that such individuals were being dishonest. I think that's unfair and I assume you withdraw your initial point.

If you posted your twitter name to SDS I'm sure it would have taken precedence over your forum one.

I don't know who changed the heading but the email that was sent out from RM had "The Louden Votes on RF" which is different from telling people how they should vote - I also question who chose to change it and for what purpose.

RF members now being given advice from a pub on how to vote!

 

Advice from the Louden Tavern on the Rangers First vote

Vote for those who you think will put Rangers First

 

 

Rangers First Elections

 

Rangers First elections are live today, anyone who can vote should vote and put The Rangers first.

 

Everyone will have their own opinions on who should be voted on, for what it is worth here are mine.

 

In no particular order,

 

James Blair

James is company secretary of Rangers and is also secretary of Rangers First, he has been involved from the first meeting and been one of the reasons RF prospered, He is an outstanding Solicitor and a very decent human being, he like all the rest has never received a penny for the work he has undertook.

 

Greg Marshall ( for those that don't know Greg is my son )

Greg has been with RF from the beginning and was instrumental in spreading the word through social media, he spent most of his time promoting RF through the various different outlets. Greg, if elected will always be available at The Louden on matchdays to address any issues that the members want clarified. He is an 1872 life member of RF and has been a season ticket holder since he was six. He also has a Honours degree in accounts from Glasgow University

 

Richard Gough

Our iconic 9 in a row captain ,Hall of Fame member and 1872 life member of RF, Despite stories elsewhere it was myself that asked Richard and he accepted without hesitation. Rangers worldwide Ambassador and would be a fantastic addition to the RF board, There is nothing else I need to say about Richard.

 

Ricki Neil

Since Ricki joined RF about 18 months ago he has worked his socks off and has grew into his role as RF spokesman in the last year and deserves to be re- elected.

 

Iain Martin

Iain is another one who has been involved in RF from the beginning and done a tremendous amount of work getting the working groups up and running.

 

Stuart MacQuarrie

He is a fine upstanding member of the community, the club chaplain and a former councillor so could bring a lot of skills to RF.

 

For the final position I am struggling to choose as there are so many good choices. Lads like Peter Ewart and Derek Miller who have put so much work into Rangers First. Guys like Graeme Henderson who has bought large numbers of shares to try and help the club move forward.

 

Vote for whoever you think will put Rangers First – RF is there to help Rangers and The Rangers Community and that is what the future board must do!

 

Thanks

 

Robert Marshall

Founding Member of Rangers First

 

The Louden Tavern: RF Life member #0001

Thanks very much. I used to use do the bouncy forum a fair amount but I just didn't have the time now to use it a lot. My shifts ore odd due to work so it varies when I get on. I was on follow follow but that didn't last long haha. We've been trying to reduce the time of the pod but the format we use makes it tricky. Constructive criticism is always welcome so thanks for the feedback

I wouldn't worry about the time bud - think its suits what you guys are aiming for - its very "mates down the pub" and I think its a strong selling point.

As I said to Baz and Paul when I saw them getting the pod out asap after the game will always help your listens imo but its much easier said than done and real lives are hard to get around.

I like WWTC pod and think the more Rangers related content the better - It is chaos and a bit mental but they are all Rangers fans that show passion for the club and complements some of the other podcasts that are/were out there (Heart & Hand, CROpod, WATP pod, Aye Ready).

I think there is a gap in the market for a shorter more timely game by game pod and if anyone wants to put one together it would be great . A consistent weekly pod would get a fair amount of listens imo

Cheers for the votes so far

No other candidate declared a web forum presence (though there is at least one apart from me on RM)

Thats not true - I marked that I was either "The Louden Tavern" or "WATP_Greg" on Rangers forums - I assume as they are the same as my twitter names they were left off the list.

Misinformation doesn't help anyone here