andy steel 0 Posted October 7, 2012 Share Posted October 7, 2012 Small idea to the RST guys , with the upcoming share issue and therefore the demise of the gersave scheme , as a way of increasing the trusts membership without additional costs , would it not be a better idea to give every season ticket holder an honorary membership to the trust , that way you are working with the club and gaining a far better spread of members , just an idea And if said season ticket holder would rather take the kitchen scissors to his card than be spoken on behalf of by the RST? The RST has had years to get a broad membership going - they can hardly just co-opt nigh on 40k ST holders and think no-one would notice! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 And if said season ticket holder would rather take the kitchen scissors to his card than be spoken on behalf of by the RST? The RST has had years to get a broad membership going - they can hardly just co-opt nigh on 40k ST holders and think no-one would notice! Thats why I also said there could be an opt in/opt out option ,I am also against certain people on the RST at present , however I still believe in the ideals od a RST 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 (edited) If the RST get 40k new members those 40k will decide who runs it and what the objectives are. It's not a dictatorship where new members get forced in and told what to do and think. It's one of the few fans groups that allows all members to vote and elect the representatives,, so it's a bit unfair to suggest they'd be taking your voice when depending on how much you choose to contribute the opposite is true. Edited October 8, 2012 by bigy 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 You have more faith in them than I do. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,348 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 It's one of the few fans groups that allows all members to vote and elect the representatives,, so it's a bit unfair to suggest they'd be taking your voice when depending on how much you choose to contribute the opposite is true. Were there any elections at the AGM on Friday? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plgsarmy 111 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Were there any elections at the AGM on Friday? Yes there were elections of five new Board members and the re-election of a few others. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,348 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Yes there were elections of five new Board members and the re-election of a few others. It raises the question of how members who are unable to attend AGMs can vote on these elections. There was no agenda issued, no notice given to members of who is being voted on and therefore a total inability of members to submit proxy votes. It's not very democratic if voting is limited to the normal 1.5-2% who attend the AGMs. There is also no way for members to find out what went on at the AGM given the refusal to issue minutes. I know I keep harping on about this, but it is very frustrating. I have requested the minutes of the 2010 and 2011 AGMs and they have not been forthcoming. They should be put on the website so that all members can view (together with the accounts). Members should not have to specifically request this information. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plgsarmy 111 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 It raises the question of how members who are unable to attend AGMs can vote on these elections. There was no agenda issued, no notice given to members of who is being voted on and therefore a total inability of members to submit proxy votes. It's not very democratic if voting is limited to the normal 1.5-2% who attend the AGMs. There is also no way for members to find out what went on at the AGM given the refusal to issue minutes. I know I keep harping on about this, but it is very frustrating. I have requested the minutes of the 2010 and 2011 AGMs and they have not been forthcoming. They should be put on the website so that all members can view (together with the accounts). Members should not have to specifically request this information. If we had more applicants than places available then we would have to hold an election and write to all our members but, as usual, there were not enough applications. Regarding the minutes, I've no idea why the 2010 minutes aren't there but the 2011 ones weren't approved until Friday night. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 General point and I know i say this as something of a Charles Green fan but I don't really get the share issue being demonised. It's a chance for the fans to invest, emotional or otherwise. Green has answered the questions about Whyte being involved and where the money from shares is going, if the conclusion is he's lying anyway then what can he do? Bar inviting us all into the boardroom to forensically examine the accounts (like I could manage that anyway) than how can he even prove the conspiracies wrong beyond all doubt? I know the small shareholders got shafted and lost shares that emotionally meant a lot, but that isn't the new regime's fault is it? They're trying to move Rangers forward and this is part of it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,348 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 If we had more applicants than places available then we would have to hold an election and write to all our members but, as usual, there were not enough applications. Regarding the minutes, I've no idea why the 2010 minutes aren't there but the 2011 ones weren't approved until Friday night. Waiting for approval is unsatisfactory. Why should members have to wait a year for minutes to be produced? They should be made public within a reasonable time-frame (a month?) and be subject to approval. As for the applications, they should still need to be voted in and members should still have the power to refuse to sanction their appointment. 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.