So where has it been, this RST?

[maineflyer 0]

Totally agree and no matter how much i love John Greig we really need to have a young managerial fan based input in the board room. The are you being served days with young mister Grace day's are far gone. We need young managers with young and modern idea's.

 

I have to disagree that young is necessarily effective or modern is enlightened. It isn't age that's been our problem, it's lack of ability and vision.

 

I do agree with you that there need to be fans on the board...... perhaps I'd rather say that directors of Rangers should all be fans of the club anf guided by an emtional attachment. Mr Murray wasn't a Rangers man and neither will be Ellis. In fact it looks increasingly like we could be about to leave the frying pan and leap into the fire.

[Danny 0]

Sorry to cherry pick your post Danny but I'd rather we didn't concentrate on such stuff and kept the thread constructive as indicated in my initial musings. I don't think it is fair to generalise in such a way as I know good people in every group I've worked with.

 

I should clarify. I stand entirely by my view on the RST, indeed it's one of the reasons you and a couple of others quit. However I accept not all the staff on RM consider their board more important than the club, but a number of them absolutely do and they were the ones I referred to. I cannot especially speak for FF as I've successfully avoided it but the reputation it has earned itself thanks to who runs it seems to back up my point of view.

 

There is no doubt there are also failings in some/all of the groups that may be causing problems as opposed to solving them but I doubt any of us could could comment objectively in that regard because of the experiences we may have had.

 

I didn't entirely intend to smear all the staff members on both boards, but a disturbing number of them do indeed have the failings you refer to. Although my direct experience of at least one of these forums would make my view subjective. That said, I've no experience bar reputation and articles of the RST and FF - and my view of them is mirrored.

 

By all means discuss these failings but lets avoid the kind of needless (and often inaccurate) personal stuff we read elsewhere that often spoil debates that should be useful ones.

 

I think when it comes to folk posting personal allegations, it detracts hugely from the often valid point being made and gives excuses to people not to take part in such debates. I won't allow that to happen here.

 

No offence Frankie but you probably already have here. The opening post in this very thread slags off the RST on a personal basis citing agendas and hypocrisy - all I did was agree.

 

It's an impossible situation you're in, and as someone who's been in your kind of shoes before I know how difficult it is to manage discussion and get the balance right.

 

And when it's a thread about the RST, FF, RM or similar, you will inevitably get posts like mine or on the opposite fence.

[Frankie 8,182]

I agree that if we're going to increase income (which we desperately need to), we need to give many more people something that they want and are prepared to pay money for. The idea of having a big support simply pay moneu every year for a "membership" won't work beyond the first few years. A decent TV or internet platform giving the supporter what he/she wants in return for that money - better access to the club, to merchandising, etc. - is a much more sustainable concept. But not the pathetic propaganda we've seen in the past - we need something run by fans, not by the club..... which brings in some of Enigma's ideas.

 

I definitely think we have to get beyond thie popular notion that the season ticket holder is the only important customer to cater for. Playing the numbers game, those fans who almost never see Ibrox are where the real earning potential lies - IF you can connect with them, which the club currently doesn't begin to do.

 

Good points there...

 

The RangersTV.tv project is a decent idea so perhaps this could be extended to allow supporters the chance to use it to our advantage.

[Frankie 8,182]

I should clarify. I stand entirely by my view on the RST, indeed it's one of the reasons you and a couple of others quit. However I accept not all the staff on RM consider their board more important than the club, but a number of them absolutely do and they were the ones I referred to. I cannot especially speak for FF as I've successfully avoided it but the reputation it has earned itself thanks to who runs it seems to back up my point of view.

 

 

 

I didn't entirely intend to smear all the staff members on both boards, but a disturbing number of them do indeed have the failings you refer to. Although my direct experience of at least one of these forums would make my view subjective. That said, I've no experience bar reputation and articles of the RST and FF - and my view of them is mirrored.

 

 

 

No offence Frankie but you probably already have here. The opening post in this very thread slags off the RST on a personal basis citing agendas and hypocrisy - all I did was agree.

 

It's an impossible situation you're in, and as someone who's been in your kind of shoes before I know how difficult it is to manage discussion and get the balance right.

 

And when it's a thread about the RST, FF, RM or similar, you will inevitably get posts like mine or on the opposite fence.

 

Thanks for that Danny - there's not a lot I can disagree with there.

 

To be clear, I don't have a huge problem with people wanting their organisation or forum to be the best out there. That's natural and the competition should mean better quality for the rest of us. Unfortunately, when that competition becomes problematic (as it has done on occasion) that's when the rest of us are entitled to question the situation.

 

Regarding the opening post, in my defence, I did immediately suggest MF could have been more constructive and while I want to avoid needless slagging matches, I do also want people to be able to express their opinion - erroneous or not. The good thing about here is anyone can challenge said opinions and, for the most part, it is done properly here so we don't see the same false accusations and unnecessary abuse we've seen elsewhere (be it on FF or RM).

 

[maineflyer 0]

Thanks for that Danny - there's not a lot I can disagree with there.

 

To be clear, I don't have a huge problem with people wanting their organisation or forum to be the best out there. That's natural and the competition should mean better quality for the rest of us. Unfortunately, when that competition becomes problematic (as it has done on occasion) that's when the rest of us are entitled to question the situation.

 

Regarding the opening post, in my defence, I did immediately suggest MF could have been more constructive and while I want to avoid needless slagging matches, I do also want people to be able to express their opinion - erroneous or not. The good thing about here is anyone can challenge said opinions and, for the most part, it is done properly here so we don't see the same false accusations and unnecessary abuse we've seen elsewhere (be it on FF or RM).

 

To be fair, is anyone seriously prepared to claim the RST hasn't been hampered by agendas and hypocrisy? However, the OP was clearly pointing to the lack of comment by the RST during recent events and that still strikes me as an entirely relevant subject to raise. I could say that I think my approach to the RST is at least as constructive as the acquiessent back-slapping that characterises much of the comment on that dysfunctional organisation. Don't confuse easy words with constructiveness.

[Frankie 8,182]

There have been some really good comments on here. I've spent most of today getting things ready as we will shortly be sending out renewal notices. With there being a game tomorrow and it being Mother's day then it might be the beginning of the week before I can respond properly. I would like to point out one thing though. The RST has not backed any proposed bids. People will quote the interview in NOTW with David Edgar. This was a phone call to David where he made a comment about Duffy being the only party to have come out and publically stated his plans and suddenly it was quoted as 'the only show in town'. This was never stated but we have to live with these things.

 

I understand the RST renewals process is a challenging one so look forward to your contribution when you get the chance.

 

With regards to the Duffy stuff, I'm sure the Trust know more than anyone the pitfalls of working with tabloids such as the NotW. As such, while I'll accept your explanation of what happened in the good faith it is offered, the reaction of a few RST board members to valid criticism of Duffy from elsewhere (unnecessary added RST swipes notwithstanding), suggests the RST's involvement with the Duffy bid was more substantial than commenting in newspapers and/or unofficial forums.

 

Add in the protest stuff which was highlighted/supported by the fan organisations and allegedly backed by other potential buyers then you should appreciate is is very easy for fans to directly associate the RST with protests and buyers even if it may not be as clear on the surface.

 

All the more reason for said organisations (not just the RST) to very clear in their operations for their members via open, constructive debate.

 

[Frankie 8,182]

To be fair, is anyone seriously prepared to claim the RST hasn't been hampered by agendas and hypocrisy? However, the OP was clearly pointing to the lack of comment by the RST during recent events and that still strikes me as an entirely relevant subject to raise. I could say that I think my approach to the RST is at least as constructive as the acquiessent back-slapping that characterises much of the comment on that dysfunctional organisation. Don't confuse easy words with constructiveness.

 

I'm certainly not claiming that not to be the case.

 

Your opening comments have catalysed some interested debate so hopefully your concerns will be addressed by the Trust reps who are aware of this thread.

 

Such threads are much better that the abuse and/or bland praise we read elsewhere.

[OnlyOneAmoruso 0]

Just to pick up on Frankies point about Innovation.

 

This is key to our future success imo.

 

We have to become smarter in what we do. We need to get to the point where we control all our current revenue streams 100%. Then we need to maximise these and develop new ones. We have Edu & Beasley which should give us access to a massive market in the USA and Canada. When you add in the amount of expats then it's practically like printing money. More efforts should be made in emerging markets such as these.

 

We have to employ a team of PR/advertising/marketing gurus and develop ways to minimize costs whilst maximizing gains and get the Rangers brand out there.

 

To quote a much used phrase, we need blue sky thinking. Revenue streams need to be brought back in house, stripped down, examined and built back up.

 

We can't rely on TV money like other countries so we have to box clever with what little potential we do have.

[Zappa 0]

Just to pick up on Frankies point about Innovation.

 

This is key to our future success imo.

 

We have to become smarter in what we do. We need to get to the point where we control all our current revenue streams 100%. Then we need to maximise these and develop new ones. We have Edu & Beasley which should give us access to a massive market in the USA and Canada. When you add in the amount of expats then it's practically like printing money. More efforts should be made in emerging markets such as these.

.

TBH, I think it's unlikely that Beasley will still be here next season, so that leaves Mo...

 

We have to employ a team of PR/advertising/marketing gurus and develop ways to minimize costs whilst maximizing gains and get the Rangers brand out there.

.

The club employ/contract Perform to do a lot of the advertising and marketing. I don't know the full extent of what they're doing, but it appears to be extensive including all of the new digital media and advertising deals associated with it. That link was just to the company's 'about us' page. Browse through their website for more info.

[stewarty 1,877]

Just to pick up on Frankies point about Innovation.

 

This is key to our future success imo.

 

We have to become smarter in what we do. We need to get to the point where we control all our current revenue streams 100%. Then we need to maximise these and develop new ones. We have Edu & Beasley which should give us access to a massive market in the USA and Canada. When you add in the amount of expats then it's practically like printing money. More efforts should be made in emerging markets such as these.

 

We have to employ a team of PR/advertising/marketing gurus and develop ways to minimize costs whilst maximizing gains and get the Rangers brand out there.

 

To quote a much used phrase, we need blue sky thinking. Revenue streams need to be brought back in house, stripped down, examined and built back up.

 

We can't rely on TV money like other countries so we have to box clever with what little potential we do have.

 

The trouble with 'blue sky thinkers' is that they get all wrapped up in jargon and process and forget what the hell they are meant to be doing. I've never met one I didn't think sounded like a fanny!

 

Back to the main thrust of your post- I agree totally. But how can this be achieved and why haven't the gurus employed previously been able to do this? For me the answer lies in strategy. I dont ever remember hearing of a club strategy at any level, be it on or off the pitch. That's not to say that valid strategies don't exist, but rather, we may be falling down on their execution. Either that or they're just crap. :devil: