The RST AGM

[Frankie 8,182]

Did the RST ever give a reason for not supporting the last demo at Pacific Quay?

 

I'm assuming, like their negative reaction to STS, it is because they have issues with the people involved.

[Bluedell 5,354]

Did the RST ever give a reason for not supporting the last demo at Pacific Quay?

 

I don't believe that they gave any official reason, although one may have been mentioned on FF at the time.

 

There was no mention of this or interacting with any non-RST Rangers fans during the BBC discussion.

[Tannochsidebear 2,320]

TB, the 10 that I counted were Ben Campbell, Mark Dingwall, Gordon Dinnie, David Edgar, Simon Leslie, Kenny Park, Joanne Percival, Stephen Smith, Christine Sommerville and Alan Truman. Did I miss someone?

 

I dont know all the names BD, but I counted 10 at the top table and then Joanne round the corner. I might be wrong, or I might be double counting Simon as he was re-elected.

[Tannochsidebear 2,320]

TB:

 

I think the problem is one would have to rejoin the Trust to put across their concerns/suggestions and people are not prepared to do that.

 

The numbers present at the AGM (and the overall Trust membership) are most disappointing but perhaps indicative of the increasing apathy from supporters in the organisation.

 

Moreover the lack of activity within the organisation itself suggests there isn't much for lapsed members (or potential new ones) to get their teeth into. Gerspride is interesting enough and the other external projects Bluedell listed obviously worthy of support but other than that, not much seems to be happening in terms of genuine representative policies.

 

For example, the Trust were asked to be involved in STS where they could join fans of a similar viewpoint in examining various issues allowing for some unified debate resulting in increased pressure on the Assembly (and the club). Yet, they didn't even give the courtesy of a reply.

 

Elsewhere there appears to be widespread interest and support in this project yet the Trust - an organisation supposedly interested in improvement, fan unification and open debate, isn't interested and refuses to say why.

 

I'd contend it is this kind of attitude that is holding the organisation back. That is extremely sad given I'd guess many, many Rangers fans agree with the Trust model and share its aims and objectives.

 

 

I think that is all true, sadly, especially the highlighted part. I think there is always going to be a fall in numbers when we have a fairly successful couple of years on the park, UEFA Cup final and the SPL title in the last 2 years will be enough for the average bear to feel satisfied.

 

But there is every chance that when the Rangers accounts are released showing a huge increase in debt, coinciding perhaps with a large deficit in the SPL table, and no doubt stories in the papers about us having to sell again in January and not improving the squad, that the RST numbers will increase again with another couple of interviews with DE on the radio and perhaps on Sky and in the papers.

 

Until the RST is no longer seen to be the polar opposite of those running the club, it's fortunes will exactly mirror the club's, however ironic that actually is.

 

Like most other bears, I am hopeful the recent new blood will invigourate the board into some pro-active work, instead of merely more defensive work when we are under attack from the media.

 

A case of watch this space I suppose.

[Frankie 8,182]

Trust membership numbers are certainly directly related to club performance but irony is no excuse for not working hard behind the scenes to maximise their numbers and activity outwith the usual peaks and troughs.

 

I don't know all the new people but I wish them luck in looking to address the organisation's obvious faults while maintaining the good work in other areas.

[franker 1]

Having attended the last four AGMs, the numbers attending have always been on the low side,probably around 40 at best, with last years around the low 30s. The RST board said that in discussion with the supporters direct organisation,and their experience of trusts at other clubs, there is a surge of interest at inception gradually tailing off around the 5 years mark.

 

Another example given was where one single issue can be a recruiting agent but when it recedes there can be a massive drop in membership. Manchester Uniteds trust saw an astonishing growth in numbers to circa 25,000 at the height of the Glaziers takeover. Now that subject is proving less headline grabbing, particularily with the success of the team, their numbers have dropped by around 17.500.

 

Whatever the reasons for supporter apathy, anyone who commits time to contribute to the RST or collaborates in the production of STS deserves all our appreciation for what must seem at times a thankless task.

[Zappa 0]

Delighted the BBC is finally on the agenda with these people.

I actually don't understand the logic behind singling out the BBC when we all know that a massive chunk of the Scottish media appear to have a bias. If people want to get organized enough to petition & protest, what about aiming a lot higher & going for the roots or the base of the tree instead of standing pointing fingers at one of the branches??? The government are the only ones who can regulate our media... unless the government is corrupted of course.

[bmck 117]

I actually don't understand the logic behind singling out the BBC when we all know that a massive chunk of the Scottish media appear to have a bias.

 

it's probably because we have less free-market choice to excert pressure over what they print.

[Tannochsidebear 2,320]

Having attended the last four AGMs, the numbers attending have always been on the low side,probably around 40 at best, with last years around the low 30s. The RST board said that in discussion with the supporters direct organisation,and their experience of trusts at other clubs, there is a surge of interest at inception gradually tailing off around the 5 years mark.

 

Another example given was where one single issue can be a recruiting agent but when it recedes there can be a massive drop in membership. Manchester Uniteds trust saw an astonishing growth in numbers to circa 25,000 at the height of the Glaziers takeover. Now that subject is proving less headline grabbing, particularily with the success of the team, their numbers have dropped by around 17.500.

 

Whatever the reasons for supporter apathy, anyone who commits time to contribute to the RST or collaborates in the production of STS deserves all our appreciation for what must seem at times a thankless task.

 

 

I heard that statement also, and while it has some merit, to me it is a pretty lame excuse for this trust. They have ambitious targets for membership numbers, and they cannot just wait for the next crisis to boost the numbers. To me they have focused on the negative for far too long, and need to be more progressive and forward-planning and forward-thinking.

 

I understand this has been discussed recently by the board and I look forward to seeing more from this area in the coming period.

 

Like you, all board members deserve, and get, my full respect for giving up their time and putting in the effort to try to make a difference for the betterment of our club, and even when fellow supporters disagree with what they say, or how they say it, the fact they are trying to do something is worthy of some appreciation.

[Norris Cole 0]

I actually don't understand the logic behind singling out the BBC when we all know that a massive chunk of the Scottish media appear to have a bias.

 

You don't like Graham Spiers? Don't buy his newspapers.

 

If you don't like the BBC, you still have to give them �£146 of your hard-earned every year.

 

It's not nice forcibly funding systematic hatred of Rangers.