Fans meeting analysis – Between a rock and a hard place

[Frankie 8,151]

http://www.gersnet.co.uk/index.php/latest-news/195-fans-meeting-analysis-between-a-rock-and-a-hard-place

 

First things first – I must say I’m pleased that last night’s meeting at the Hilton in Glasgow went ahead. Unfortunately, I was unable to make it due to family commitments but the hard work of the organisers and those who tweeted updates meant I was able to be there in spirit; if not in person. As someone who has criticised McCollco long and hard for not reaching out to the wider fan-base, I can only praise them for finally going to the support for what seemed a very open and challenging Q&A.

 

But, there’s always a bloody but nowadays, it’s debatable just how useful this meeting was. Yes, further negative points were made about parts of the current board; yes, McCollco did highlight a few areas where they’d seek to improve matters; and yes, most fans present seemed impressed by the talking done. Fair enough. Unfortunately, I’m not convinced that enough was said to really persuade huge swathes of our support that the issue is as simple as voting for X instead of Y come the AGM in December. In saying that, to his credit, Jim McColl did underline that himself and was definitely the most conciliatory of the top table in acknowledging the difficulty in suggesting none of the present Rangers board are worth backing. Indeed, I think that was the most important point made of the evening. Let’s not forget that as we retreat to the trenches this morning.

 

At almost two hours long the meeting was certainly well attended, most of the questions valuable and many points well made – both by the top table and a few obvious critics from the floor. In that respect, it was a pity McCollco appeared unable to underwrite their opinions with genuine evidence to confirm them. For example, we were told MediaHouse is on a huge financial package to operate PR for the club yet this was denied immediately by the company online. Jack Irvine doesn’t have many fans amongst the Rangers support but are we really to believe he earns more than the majority of the playing staff? In addition, I’d agree with the criticism of Brian Stockbridge and the contention his position is certainly untenable going forward. However, if his performance is poor (and it is) then I’m not sure I could vote for Paul or Malcolm Murray to replace him given neither of them set the world alight during their own periods on the board. Consistency on that basis is required so it may be only Alec Wilson and Scott Murdoch may be agreeable. I particularly liked the cut of Wilson’s jib but given both of these gentlemen were involved with previous failed Blue Knights bids, just how much faith can we put in them? That’s up for debate for sure…

 

With that in mind, we can at least praise McCollco for being prepared to go to the fans and hold an open meeting like last night. The empty seats at the top table which were reserved, more in hope than expectation, that the club would send along a few representatives arguably said a lot about the existing board’s reluctance to be accountable to fans and shareholders. Of course next month’s AGM will determine their situation but I’m already disappointed by new chairman David Somers’ eagerness to release petty statements on the club website. He and Graham Wallace may have only been in their jobs for two minutes but at what point will they consider a similar meeting with fans to iron out the various issues that were evident from last night? Is waiting until the more formal AGM really an option for them or should they look to answer our concerns beforehand?

 

The next 3 weeks in the lead-up to that event will be fascinating – if not tedious and tiresome. Indeed, it could be argued that fatigue will induce the kind of apathy that has helped place us in this ongoing awful position. Such a luxury isn’t one we can afford if we want to secure our club’s future and, preferably, improve the way we’re represented in the longer term. To that end, the final meeting point made about not standing back and allowing the situation to pass us by was another important one. Not just in terms of clarifying many of the problems we have with the existing board (or their linked predecessors) but by asking more from McCollco who, once again, struggled to put the meat on the bones of their ‘manifesto’ last night. Scouting, PR, fan representation, director pledges, break-even budgets and asset ring-fencing may all sound impressive ideas but it would be argued anyone could highlight the same areas for improvement. What the support needs is the finer detail – not least how the club will be funded from our financial low point of next April which is now less than six months away! The golf courses of South Africa certainly appear more attractive to Dave King than sitting beside his fellow fans sorting out the club’s future.

 

In conclusion then, while this article discusses last night’s meeting, attention now must turn to the club itself. Irrespective of what we think about McCollco, the existing boardroom is wholly responsible for the future. They may wish to release more soporific statements blaming other people for the challenges ahead but the buck stops with them. Last night McCollco made an effort (imperfect or otherwise) to engage with the support to show why their nominations are a better option instead of or, perhaps more accurately as Jim McColl conceded, alongside the incumbents. It’s now up to the Easdales of this world (we’re continually told they hold a large percentage of voting rights) why their plan is a better one. Yet they’ve given us no indication of how they intend to fund and run the club.

 

As it stands the support and shareholders are between a rock and a hard place. Can anyone address that or will the farce continue?

[Darthter 542]

honest & well balance....thanks

[rbr 1,247]

Whilst I agree with the above Frankie , one thing is baltanty obvious in all of this , it wont be the fans that get change through , though we can demonstrate and attend meeting like last night , ultimately this will be determined by the large institutional investors who have and who in the future will be required to further fund the club .

 

How we change this , either through a membership scheme , or by the recent buyrangers scheme I dont know , but 12% is not anywhere near enough to hold sway and influence .

 

However as they say the longest step in a 1000 mile walk is the first one

[Frankie 8,151]

Whilst I agree with the above Frankie , one thing is baltanty obvious in all of this , it wont be the fans that get change through , though we can demonstrate and attend meeting like last night , ultimately this will be determined by the large institutional investors who have and who in the future will be required to further fund the club .

 

How we change this , either through a membership scheme , or by the recent buyrangers scheme I dont know , but 12% is not anywhere near enough to hold sway and influence .

 

However as they say the longest step in a 1000 mile walk is the first one

 

12% is enough of a bloc holding to influence the issue but we're not close to putting that together so your general point of impotence is correct.

 

However, our reaction on a match-by-match, season-by-season basis is vital to the success of the club.

[26th of foot 5,837]

Frankie,

 

Sitting on a granite rock in the Med' and also unable to attend, thank you for a most objeive report/update.

 

My take on events is remarkably similar, I suspect those of us mining this seam for a dozen years all tae a jaundiced vew?

[chilledbear 16]

Thanks Frankie, I have read a few times about putting meat on the bones, I may be wrong but without more knowledge of the financial situation, can we expect more meat at this time?

 

You also say.....''Scouting, PR, fan representation, director pledges, break-even budgets and asset ring-fencing may all sound impressive ideas but it would be argued anyone could highlight the same areas for improvement.''

 

Anyone could, but the present Board don't....why?

 

Agree with the rest, just a couple of queries I would like answered.

[Frankie 8,151]

Thanks Frankie, I have read a few times about putting meat on the bones, I may be wrong but without more knowledge of the financial situation, can we expect more meat at this time?

 

You also say.....''Scouting, PR, fan representation, director pledges, break-even budgets and asset ring-fencing may all sound impressive ideas but it would be argued anyone could highlight the same areas for improvement.''

 

Anyone could, but the present Board don't....why?

 

Agree with the rest, just a couple of queries I would like answered.

 

I do realise I'm perhaps being hypercritical of McCollco and almost certainly naive when it comes to looking for the fine detail ahead of their involvement. However, I do this genuinely because I believe they should be the answer but seem to fail time and time again. That worries me.

 

As for the present board, of course they should be offering the same detail and the fact they haven't says a lot about their capabilities. In saying that Wallace is only just in the door so I'd hope for something more from him pre-AGM.

 

Like I say, we're between a rock and a hard place.

[Bluedell 5,334]

I do realise I'm perhaps being hypercritical of McCollco and almost certainly naive when it comes to looking for the fine detail ahead of their involvement. However, I do this genuinely because I believe they should be the answer but seem to fail time and time again. That worries me..

 

Given they have the former chairman in their camp, it shouldn't be that difficult for them to come up with fairly detailed plans as they should have a lot of inside knowledge.

[der Berliner 3,249]

As it stands the support and shareholders are between a rock and a hard place.

 

The sad thing is that by the looks of it, the support and the sharholders who are supporters have hardly any influence of how the vote will go. For all the bad mouthing that is being done on various levels on on either side, are we really to believe that such campaigning may sway the "major" players in this whole sad affair?

[Mountain Bear 0]

Thanks Frankie, I have read a few times about putting meat on the bones, I may be wrong but without more knowledge of the financial situation, can we expect more meat at this time?

 

You also say.....''Scouting, PR, fan representation, director pledges, break-even budgets and asset ring-fencing may all sound impressive ideas but it would be argued anyone could highlight the same areas for improvement.''

 

Anyone could, but the present Board don't....why?

 

Agree with the rest, just a couple of queries I would like answered.

 

You saved me a lot of typing there Chilled Bear, as I was going to make a virtually identical post.

 

And by the way, there was a hell of a lot of detail in the IPO prospectus and the then Board have delivered precious little of it for our money.