maineflyer 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share Posted December 2, 2009 Thanks for responding. Was there a timescale at the outset of the RST? You'll have to forgive my ignorance on that one, I wasn't part of the Trust from the start. If not then I don't see why there needs to be now? Especially as it's plain for all to see that a supporters owned club is now far more likely than it ever has been. Surely, even if the RST are not SOLELY responsible for this (whilst still playing a part) then it's mission accomplished? Are you suggesting objectives shouldn't have timescales? That's plain ridiculous and an unacceptable position in any walk of life. But please, dig the hole deeper and let me enjoy the spectacle. Are you putting across a Trust policy that aims and objectives should have no timeframe? Have you seriously come here as a Trust member to say that whatever it is the Trust is trying to do there is no need for it to consider time as a constraint. Maybe you're just trying to say that the Trust should never give up, no matter how long it fails. As for mission accomplished, when hell freezes over - but of course I can't possibly put a date on that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share Posted December 2, 2009 Very dismissive generalising... Care to enlighten those educated people then? That'll be another activity without a timeline then. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wabashcannonball 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 The RST or any other body can deliver nothing, the club is the only body that can deliver any form of ownership/ involvement, for that to happen fans wills have to be affiliated to the club not some outside body. Without the goodwill of the club nothing will happen. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Very dismissive generalising... Care to enlighten those educated people then? You appear to know what you're talking about so don't worry ! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 That'll be another activity without a timeline then. I have no connection to the trust :fish: 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share Posted December 2, 2009 The RST or any other body can deliver nothing, the club is the only body that can deliver any form of ownership/ involvement, for that to happen fans wills have to be affiliated to the club not some outside body. Without the goodwill of the club nothing will happen. And THAT, in my opinion, is the truth of it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maineflyer 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Author Share Posted December 2, 2009 I have no connection to the trust :fish: More than you know. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnlyOneAmoruso 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Are you suggesting objectives shouldn't have timescales? That's plain ridiculous and an unacceptable position in any walk of life. But please, dig the hole deeper and let me enjoy the spectacle. Are you putting across a Trust policy that aims and objectives should have no timeframe? Have you seriously come here as a Trust member to say that whatever it is the Trust is trying to do there is no need for it to consider time as a constraint. Maybe you're just trying to say that the Trust should never give up, no matter how long it fails. As for mission accomplished, when hell freezes over - but of course I can't possibly put a date on that. This isn't any walk of life though, this is a bit different. I don't believe definitive timescales should be set on this, make fun of that if you will. Is there a timescale on the war in Afghanistan? (realise that's not an accurate comparison but I'll use it anyway) No, there are various obstacles to over come before this comes to fruition. We all know the problems encountered during the Murray years so it's safe to say supporters ownership was very unlikely during this tenure. Now he's been gone what? 2 months and it's already a very real possibility. I'd say those timescales were pretty good to me. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totti 0 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 Did someone in the RST hump your bird or something MF? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted December 2, 2009 Share Posted December 2, 2009 I dont understand how anyone can consider it "mission accomplished". IF we get fan ownership (I actually thought that one of the mission statements was fan representation at board level, is that not correct ?) it will not be BECAUSE of the RST but because of the perilous state of the club's financial position and a lack of very high net worth investors looking at pumping money into us. Sorry but I just cannot accept it as mission accomplished when it is achieved by default. We had a huge opportunity a couple of years ago for fan representation on the board at Rangers and the club seemed to be warming to that - then personal egos and agenda moved in and all was lost pretty swiftly. So it is mission accomplished because the end justifies the means ? It is almost as if we are at the bridge of fan ownsership despite the RST, certainly not because of it. And there is still the very real possibility that any new owner does not include the fans in either the boardroom or voting rights. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.