Jump to content

 

 

More SaveRangers stuff


Recommended Posts

MF:

 

I think most of appreciate the 'political' side of the project and you're right to express any doubts you may have.

 

Unfortunately we can ill afford to write off any scheme (or potential owner) at this stage. As ever that word vigilance is agreeable but in the absence of any other party we, to be crude, can only p!ss with the cock we've got.

Absence of any other party .... other than who? Are you tacitly accepting that the purpose of the RST scheme is to support Paul Murray and thereby conceding that the RST proposal that it is to support Rangers is blatant propaganda? After the time and effort you've spend studying the Rangers disease I'm disinclined to believe you can't see exactly what's going on here.

 

What I know for sure we can ill afford is to go through this pain and come out the other side in exactly the same situation.

 

It's taken long enough to reach the bottom. Now that we're here I'll take whatever time is necessary or whatever bitter remedy is needed to make sure we address properly the problems that caused this.

Edited by maineflyer
Link to post
Share on other sites

MF:

 

Like I say, I'm sure most of us can appreciate the political manoeuvring going on - I think I said as much last week. Nevertheless it would be remiss of us all not to examine opportunities within any buyout - be it Paul Murray or AN Other.

 

It's up to us to turn pledges and imperfect schemes into something we can buy into.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What I know for sure we can ill afford is to go through this pain and come out the other side in exactly the same situation.

 

It's taken long enough to reach the bottom. Now that we're here I'll take whatever time is necessary or whatever bitter remedy is needed to make sure we address properly the problems that caused this.

 

Agree 100%.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On FF there's another version in the making ... which may use paypal or paying via phone, starting at a low 2 pounds a week or the like. Something that may attract quite a substantial amount of people who do not want to shed the odd 500 pounds instantly.

 

As with the existing project, the aims and administrators of such schemes have to be completely clear and credible.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like so often with the Rangers support, we allow our energy to get drawn into schemes (scams?) like SaveRangers that are entirely political and sold on a practically false pretext. Then we spend endless time on forums that few ever read, debating and defending these pointless schemes.

 

SaveRangers has nothing to do with saving Rangers. It is about building a bridge between the RST leadership and Paul Murray, ostensibly to provide RST with a seat at the table if and when Paul Murray is asked how much he can scrape together. A better way to save Rangers would be to have nothing to do with it. The pledges have nothing whatsoever to do with funding contributions to Rangers, either gratis or subscribing for shares. It may be a clever PR exercise for the RST and it may further the personal aspirations of Mark Dingwall but the day a penny from it drops into the Rangers bank account isn't part of the calculation.

 

Any alternative that you suggest MF ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any alternative that you suggest MF ?

 

My own alternative would be to do nothing until there is an unambiguous and immediate objective that clearly helps establish a stable future for the club. Until the overall recovery strategy is known, it is disingenuous to ask fans to support it.

 

However, if the idea is to provide funds to help the club through administration, first accept this may be like opening the widow and throwing your roll of oncers in a bottomless pit. But if that is indeed the objective then I'd talk directly to the administrators and agree a transparent plan that money donated by supporters would be used for specific and pre-agreed purposes only, with this being confirmed in the management accounts.

 

If the aim is to build a war chest for use in some future recovery package then I would first want to see a detailed plan defining the purpose and limits of that use. I would want to be 100% clear who had control over those funds. People must know exactly what their money is to be used for before any request is made for donations.

 

Pledges I would avoid like the plague. They are always superficial, generally meaningless and open to misinterpretation, which is no doubt why they are the method of choice of the malignant RST. The SaveRangers scheme intended is to give credence to fan ownership - not you and me owning the club but a tiny tinpot group like the RST exercising that ownership on our behalf without any accountability whatsoever. I support the concept of fans being involved but that should be with the club's support by share subscription and at the last time of asking the fans gave the idea a resounding thumbs down. We could do with a supporter rep on the Rangers board but that does not require £1 of our money, let alone £10m, to achieve it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any alternative that you suggest MF ?

I'd add to previous comments that I find it utterly intolerable that an organisation representing a few hundred members can try to take centre stage in discussions about the use of £millions pledged by genuinely concerned supporters. This is one of the things that really does need to stop if the future is to be better than the past. The ONLY possible way forward for supporter representation is to create ONE completely NEW organisation, with all existing orgs (RSA/RST) dissolving and no officer or board member of existing orgs being able to be on the initial board of the new org. I saw someone suggest a Rangers Supporters Union, it sounded appropriate to me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

mainflyer ... while I see the points in your sentiments above, somesuch would take ages and right now, our club does not have these. What could be done is setting up a membership scheme with an interim president (Walter Smith) and some decent helping hands and get something off quickly. With an obligation to get restructured when times are better (say 12 months).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.