ranger_syntax 3,774 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 The two main ones that jumped out at me are 3 and 5. In terms of 3 we should just secure the best deals for the club financially. If that's a director's mate or family member I don't care. Point 3 is a good way to rule out many deals that will not be the best. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_Ally 0 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 Point 3 is a good way to rule out many deals that will not be the best. True. May rule out some beneficial deals though. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 point 8 why should non executive directors get any extra payments if the club are in Europe ponit 3 why should a member of a directors family not be rewarded if they are employed by the rangers and bringing in much needed income point 2 most of the fans cant even agree between e each other and I cant see any of them bringing anything to the club and no I am not related to a director just a lifelong fan who wants the best for the club I read this differently , Point 8 states they would ONLY get paid if the club were in Europe , and since they stated that they would only budget on domestic income , that leads you to the fact that the European money would be extra income , which seems fair enough to me . Point 3 , this should be self explanatory and as has been disclosed before contracts should only be signed/taken out if in the clubs best interests not because someone is getting a kickback , any one in a position to award any contracts is getting paid to do that . Point 2, dont get drawn into the world of internet bampottery , just because some of the idiots in our support make a tit of themselves online doesnt mean that there aren't articulate people who could represent us on the board 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveC 150 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 Seems quite simple. This proposal for the future is the opposite of what we suffer under at the present. Now, which of these two scenarios would any supporter of Rangers want? Not exactly a poser. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluebear54 0 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 It's not a constitution per se, or at least of the nature I would like to see. This is an election pledge. A properly consulted constitution would be an excellent idea. We do, however, need the right kind of governance structures to be able to hold any office bearers (board, fans or otherwise) to account. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,050 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 I don't see the first pledge as being a permanent bar to any future move more a way of making it an option of our own choosing rather than a force majeure. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 Maybe I'm too much of a cynic, but I'd believe a word of it will truly come to fruition - they are simply telling the fans (not necessarily the shareholders) what they want to hear in order to gain support. How transparent are they going to make things??? Are they going to alert the fan base to EVERY single deal or contract that is agreed??? Are they going to reveal exactly how much various players/staff are earning & what bonuses they get etc. Are they going to release monthly budget & bank statements so that everyone can clearly see where the money is being spend - I think not. come the annual accounts, will they contain the usual accounting cross-charging etc mumbo jumbo - definately Will they want to completely remove the financial availability of the clubs biggest asset??? They will want to keep some option for raising capital against Ibrox/MP etc. Non-Exec directors fee's waived - what about expenses??? Non-Exec could still receive handsome remuneration for their services.... All shareholders to be treated equally - should happen anyway. What happens if a shareholder (with 1000 shares for example) travels fro overseas for a match - will they be invited into the Directors box?? What if it's Mr Kingsnorth from Laxey? In principle it will not happen - major shareholders will always be treated differently. No long term debt - as others have said, not always a good thing. You just need to compare a Wonga loan to a bank loan - what get folk into the most problems??? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 3,774 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 True. May rule out some beneficial deals though. That's true, but given our recent history I'm happy to take a chance with the other options available. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted December 3, 2013 Share Posted December 3, 2013 Seems quite simple. This proposal for the future is the opposite of what we suffer under at the present. Now, which of these two scenarios would any supporter of Rangers want? Not exactly a poser. However it isn't an either/or situation. The issues that they have raised can be addressed but not necessarily in the ways that they have suggested. They can be improved upon. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannochsidebear 2,315 Posted December 4, 2013 Share Posted December 4, 2013 Can anyone post a link or copy/paste this constitution thingy please. Cant seem to find it anywhere! 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.