Rangers Unite Statement

[Bluedell 5,342]

RangersUnite did not walk out. Asked to leave following statement.

 

They were asked to leave? By who?

[thesins 0]

RangersUnite did not walk out. Asked to leave following statement.

 

If they read out the statement on their site then they were walking away from the whole process anyway so being asked to leave doesnt seem like a strange course of action to be honest.

 

If they arent going to be involved in the process, and are actually looking to harm the process, its quite understandable that they were asked to leasve.

[Stimpy 0]

I believe the fan groups were working together on a share proposal and Chris was an independent party attempting to ensure neutrality.

 

It now seems RU are unhappy at the way this has progressed so have pulled their support.

 

At this stage, I'd fancy the other groups will press ahead regardless and while I'd share some of RU's concerns there's also no doubt the RST, Ian Davidson and SD all have respective experience which are important to any purposeful strategy towards improved fan representation.

 

It's a real pity we can't move forward as one.

 

This it pretty much in a nut shell.

 

Over the course of the past two months the Trust have been working on a community share scheme. You may or may not recall we announced our intentions in late June and asked for volunteers, members or not, to get involved in the various aspects needing covered. We managed to get a number of supporters to help us. Some are members, some are not.

 

We also approached RU because if two organisations release something then it would make us all look silly with the usual drama and factions saying its a competition. The last thing anyone needs! We've had several meetings where RU have opposed RST membership. Just for clarity, this has to happen for legal reasons and if there is something else where we don't have to join but stay in a collective then I'm all ears. It was also recognised by all in attendance that RU's proposals are a membership scheme and it can only be introduced by having the club and its shareholders vote for it. Basically, you need to own or control the club before a membership scheme is proposed to the support

 

We have also asked the two RSAs to get involved, both are keen but want to speak with their other group reps. The club knows about this and are very receptive and encouraged to what is proposed. Three folk met the club, SD man Paul Goodwin, Ian Davidson and Chris Graham. Further meetings will happen when we have more to report.

 

There are supporters working very hard in the background on various aspects of the campaign. We are waiting on the go from the FSA; we have been through the legal minefield in ensuring this is all above board. We are in with SD because they govern us and we can use their resources like legal team which has saved us a fortune as they go through all our documents.

 

None of this is new to everyone involved.

 

Chris Graham, like the other supporters involved, have got involved because they believe in it and to ensure neutrality. This is bigger than the Trust but it just so happens the Trust is the only legal vehicle to set this up and see it through. Ian Davidson is also there for those reasons and because he's Govan's MP.

 

That is all fact, not my opinion, and more will be announced in the future.

 

This might sound condescending, it's not meant to be, but I won't be getting involved in a debate over what I just posted. The facts are there, folk have and still are working away on this, it will go ahead. Apologies if that isn't what you wanted to hear just now but I'd rather let the dust settle instead of drama and splitting hairs.

[GovanAllan 0]

Surely part of the reason we are in the mess we are in is your first statement above? If the majority of the RST board, a democratic fan group, was to change would you still hold this opinion?

 

The RST is what we the support make of it. It has the structure to be the one body if the fans decided they actually wanted a genuine 100% democratic fan group.

 

Rangers Unite should probably change their name to Rangers Dis-Unite after walking out of a meeting consisting of other Rangers fan groups, independent government bodies and one of the few political allies we have.

 

It would take a total clear out at the RST and that won't happen.

[chilledbear 16]

It would take a total clear out at the RST and that won't happen.

 

It could if there were enough members, and they attended meetings.

 

I don't understand why those who believe in the aims of the RST, don't join and try and change from within.

[Bluedell 5,342]

Over the course of the past two months the Trust have been working on a community share scheme.

 

We've had several meetings where RU have opposed RST membership. Just for clarity, this has to happen for legal reasons and if there is something else where we don't have to join but stay in a collective then I'm all ears.

 

This is bigger than the Trust but it just so happens the Trust is the only legal vehicle to set this up and see it through.

 

I guess I have to ask why you have decided to go down the community share scheme route?

 

If it is something that requires membership of the RST then it will fail and if you are going ahead with it on that basis then you are wasting everyone's time. A majority of fans will not join the RST.

 

There may not be another legal vehicle set up but perhaps one should have been.

 

This is not said from an anti-RST viewpoint but rather taking a realistic view of the RST amoung the general support.

 

It's also doomed to failure if you refuse to engage the support in discussion as you appear to be threatening, but hopefully you did not mean it in respect of the point that I am raising.

Edited August 29, 2012 by Bluedell

[foggy dewhurst 0]

enough hot air in the opening statement to fill a barrage balloon ,

[Stimpy 0]

I guess I have to ask why you have decided to go down the community share scheme route?

 

If it is something that requires membership of the RST then it will fail and if you are going ahead with it on that basis then you are wasting everyone's time. A majority of fans will not join the RST.

 

There may not be another legal vehicle set up but perhaps one should have been.

 

This is not said from an anti-RST viewpoint but rather taking a realistic view of the RST amoung the general support.

 

It's also doomed to failure if you refuse to engage the support in discussion as you appear to be threatening, but hopefully you did not mean it in respect of the point that I am raising.

 

Haha! no mate, that's certainly not the case. We all wanted the launch to speak for itself then engage with Bears once they've digested everything. I'm not interested in splitting hairs which these type of debates are usually based around from experience. Nothing good will come it and I'd rather let everyone see it at once and taking all the info on board before making an informed decision.

[Bluedell 5,342]

Haha! no mate, that's certainly not the case. We all wanted the launch to speak for itself then engage with Bears once they've digested everything. I'm not interested in splitting hairs which these type of debates are usually based around from experience. Nothing good will come it and I'd rather let everyone see it at once and taking all the info on board before making an informed decision.

 

Fair enough, but my point still stands and you're missing a great opportunity by not addressing it.

[foggy dewhurst 0]

you have to be carefull with community share schemes it allways seem to turn out that those who put in the least have most to say and want to run it their way .