chilledbear 16 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 AS has already been made clear the Board has been in discussions with representatives of the group which requisitioned a General Meeting. One of the aims was to avoid the disruption which would have been the inevitable consequence of such a meeting, as well as the totally unnecessary and massive cost to the Club. Having to convene two meetings, a General Meeting and then the Annual General Meeting, back to back would have caused a huge drain on Club resources. However, the Board is pleased to tell the Club's fans that it has managed to avoid such a damaging scenario. Through negotiations with Jim McColl, who has endorsed the General Meeting requisition, Rangers Chief Executive Craig Mather has managed to persuade this group that it would have been wrong to double the Club's expense, time and effort when the solution was always obvious. The Chief Executive has secured verbal and written commitment from the requisitioners that they accept the validity and logic of Mr Mather’s stance and are now willing to roll the two meetings into one session. It must be stressed this would not have been possible had it not been for the insistence of the Club’s Board and Chief Executive. The requisitioners had originally wanted to press ahead with a separate General Meeting until Mr Mather made it clear this would have been an unnecessary waste of the Club's money. It is disingenuous now of anyone outwith Rangers’ Board to attempt to claim any credit for this initiative. The truth is Rangers would have been spending well in excess of £150,000 to convene a General Meeting and then an Annual General Meeting almost back to back and it is categorically the case that it was only through the determination of the Board which made the requisitioners back down on this issue. The upshot of all of this is that this agreement means it is not necessary to meet the statutory deadline for producing the circular which must be sent out to shareholders to convene a General Meeting. The Club had prepared the document and was ready to send this but common sense prevailed. That was one of the main objectives of Mr Mather and the other Directors, although they are also striving to achieve a positive balance in the Board room. That’s why Mr Mather has made it clear to Mr McColl in their discussions he was open to change and additions which would include Frank Blin along with potential others. It remains the case that only individuals capable of strengthening the Board and the Club should be taken on. So that Rangers fans may be certain on this issue, it is absolutely the case that from the outset the Board has been willing to consider new Directors joining the Board who are capable of enhancing the Club’s strategy and vision. Our supporters should also be aware that after serious and profound discussion with as many fans as possible - both in the UK and abroad - it will be our intention to introduce a proper and modern Membership Scheme. The fans of a club this size should have a greater connection and influence. Fan representation on the Board is not something this Club should fear. Arrangements for the Annual General Meeting will be revealed in due course but the Board has managed to avoid what would have been unnecessary extra expenditure. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 they are either morons or they think we are. pretty sure they think we are. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueflag 378 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 cringe Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 4 Beta 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 Total bullshit. The cost of an EGM would be a drop in the ocean compared to what was spent on legal costs defending Green & Ahmad followed by investigating them. Then there's the OTT bonuses, expenses, commissions........ Mather & Stockbridge OUT!!! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 I don't see the issue in them attempting to save costs. We complain we pay too much in wages but are now complaining that they are trying to save money on something that can be dealt with at the AGM. It is a fairly logical conclusion to deal with the EGM issues at he AGM. By having an EGM and an AGM they would be dedicating resources which should be dedicated to running the business. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 it's the claiming credit. the ignoring tat they could just make the changes and save the cost and the attempt to prop up a failing regime thats the issue. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 As I said in the other thread Craig, it's just stall tactics. The cost issue is just bullshit. These clowns have dished out millions in unnecessary payments are we're supposed to believe they've shut the purse strings and switched to smart corporate governance over a £75k EGM bill?? Aye, banana boat loyal. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 So you want them to continue dishing out money ht needn't be spent ? You can't have it both ways..... An AGM allows for the same board changes to be made as an EGM would. The difference is only a couple of weeks. What's the big deal loyal 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted August 22, 2013 Share Posted August 22, 2013 So you want them to continue dishing out money ht needn't be spent ? You can't have it both ways..... An AGM allows for the same board changes to be made as an EGM would. The difference is only a couple of weeks. What's the big deal loyal The big deal is they are not to be trusted. At best the stall tactics allow them more time to try to get the investors back on side and at worst it allows them time to potentially do all manner of things which could cost the club a hell of a lot more than £75k. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chilledbear 16 Posted August 22, 2013 Author Share Posted August 22, 2013 Membership Scheme with Stockbridge looking after the money !!!!!!! 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.