plgsarmy

Since you said please - £13,611

And there you have it. By 'founder members' do you mean people who joined in the first year? What significance is that? How many of the current Board are on FF and how are we a mouthpiece?

Yes. Although the accounts are for the year to 5th April 2012.

Firstly, as you will probably know, our accounts are independently audited each year by a very reputable company. These accounts are available on our website. I disagree regarding the £ sign. Every year (not last year due to turmoil at the club) we hold a family day where families come along and are entertained for nothing. We hire bouncy castles for the kids, have face painting, a disco and each child gets a bag full of freebies including a tee-shirt and CD. This costs us quite a bit of money but we feel it's worth it to help introduce kids into the Rangers family. Of course we'd love a database of 188,000, who wouldn't. The other things you refer to happened years ago and were greatly exaggerated.

Firstly, there are about 400 life members included in my figure so no to your monetary figure. As for FB and Twitter, I was comparing to other Rangers groups. MUST count their free e-members as members so you can't really compare that either.

If you are going to get this horrible disease then the liver is a good place to get it. As long as it hasn't spread he has a good chance of recovery. Fingers crossed.

We're sitting at more than 1600 now. I think that the £10 membership is a factor but, more importantly, the vast majority of fans are mostly interested in what is happening on the pitch. However we have 22K following us on Twitter and over £16K likes on Facebook which I believe is more than any other fans groups or websites.

So, you know that 'most of the support' feels like this do you? What utter nonsense, perhaps you should broaden your outlook beyond a couple of websites. The main reason that we were unable to take forward fan ownership was due to one person owning 90%+ of shares.

At the meeting with fans CG stated that new strip designs had to be in by November (I thought he said the beginning of but I'm uncertain). I was wondering if we had signed a new kit deal or agreed a deal for naming rights whether we would be unable to announce it until after the IPO. Anyone know?

Confusion arises when people only post things that suit their agenda Craig. I've never heard any kind of scheme that says you can only get a refund if you are dead. That would have been hard to sell.

Craig, I was being facetious (if that's how you want to describe it) due to the wording of BH's post. I administered Gersave in the way it was shown to me when it was handed over in 2008. The rules also stated that we would buy shares on a monthly basis and that didn't happen because there were perfectly good reasons not to do this, namely the price we were expected to pay. Death was not the only reason that people could get a refund (or their estate to be correct). If they resigned membership of the Trust they could also be refunded but the Board voted against implementing that. People were coming to us due to financial difficulties and we agreed that it would be wrong to ask them to leave the Trust in these circumstances.

Correct. MIH owned the shares and LBG owned 23% of MIH.

I am not confirming or denying anything, except that the RST is sitting on £93K of members money. You are the one who brought up rules and other business that doesn't belong on a public forum.

Dear Gersave member, we are not giving you your own money back because you are not dead. That would have been popular.

The £93K bit is what is rubbish. I wonder where you got that figure from. Also, your assumption that someone from the RST is trying to descredit Alan Harris - why we we do that? The vast majority of the current Board don't even know him. The David Low thing was years ago and no doubt people have spoken about it over time but why would we come out with this now?

It certainly wasn't the reason he left but he did invite Mr Low to a meeting without consulting anyone else. It led to said gentleman being asked to leave.

Yes but if it wasn't for the potential BTC liability we would probably have had a credible buyer.

You are absolutely correct and I suppose, if the truth be told, that if you are looking at this from a purely business perspective then it probably wouldn't make sense to invest money in something where you wouldn't get a return and probably little kudos. I don't want this to sound like a party political broadcast but I think this is one of the reasons why if we bought shares as a collective we could really influence the decisions made.

Mind blowing when you think of who our Chairman was for 20+ years.

FS, I think that was due to the existence of the RDSA but if they are as ineffective as you say then perhaps we could take it up with the club.

The Assembly hasn't met since February so not many. However, you bring up some great points re disabled facilities so hopefully someone will listen.

My understanding (and I didn't see the article) is that it could be deemed as offering financial advice and therefore not legal.

Your definition of fun and mine must be very different. I'll ignore your other comments as that is what they deserve. Regarding your questions, I've fired them over to Supporters Direct Scotland but I suspect we have already had the answers later in the thread.

The most disturbing thing about this is that this boy is someone's son.

Why are you asking questions if you know the answers?