Supporters Direct chief calls on Rangers fans to unite...

[chilledbear 16]

You having a dig at me? If so why? Have I said anything that is untrue?

 

Personally no.

 

I don't know you or anybody else, I am just fed up reading about children falling out.

[BEARGER 1,829]

Yes. Lots.

 

Please inform me and others what I have said that is untrue. I did say that the CIC company registration was before you joined the RST board. Where you not aware of this? Have you asked your colleagues about it?

[ThatsWhyWeirChamps 0]

Please inform me and others what I have said that is untrue. I did say that the CIC company registration was before you joined the RST board. Where you not aware of this? Have you asked your colleagues about it?

 

I was part of the CIC "group" before I joined the RST board, so I'm perfectly aware of and have a personal record of the Secretary and Chair receiving constant updates on progress and next steps. (another question worth asking yourself is why would I bother joining the RST board if the intention was to "deceive" and go behind the RST's back? Wouldn't I simply avoid those circumstances by not joining in the first place?)

 

I don't want to pre-empt the upcoming meeting by revealing lots of information which is now outdated and superseded, because it will present a confusing message, but some time after everyone in the support is perfectly aware of the model suggested by SD, I will reveal the information provided.

 

The formation of a CIC is all part of the exploratory process, finding out the hows and whys. But even still;, here's the process to form a CIC:

 

You first have to form a company. You then have to write to the CIC regulator with a Community Interest Statement - outlining the Community you wish to serve and the purpose/goals of the company.

 

 

The CIC certification was received at the beginning of October and the Chair and Secretary were briefed on it by email (and, I'd guess, probably by phone even before that) on the 7th of September.

 

The idea there was some active level of deceit is pure fantasy being peddled by one individual. As I've been saying all along, there is nobody on the CIC group with any axe to grind with the RST. The reasons for leaving had absolutely nothing to do with the pursuit of the CIC either.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I was part of the CIC "group" before I joined the RST board, so I'm perfectly aware of and have a personal record of the Secretary and Chair receiving constant updates on progress and next steps. (another question worth asking yourself is why would I bother joining the RST board if the intention was to "deceive" and go behind the RST's back? Wouldn't I simply avoid those circumstances by not joining in the first place?)

 

I don't want to pre-empt the upcoming meeting by revealing lots of information which is now outdated and superseded, because it will present a confusing message, but some time after everyone in the support is perfectly aware of the model suggested by SD, I will reveal the information provided.

 

The formation of a CIC is all part of the exploratory process, finding out the hows and whys. But even still;, here's the process to form a CIC:

 

You first have to form a company. You then have to write to the CIC regulator with a Community Interest Statement - outlining the Community you wish to serve and the purpose/goals of the company.

 

 

The CIC certification was received at the beginning of October and the Chair and Secretary were briefed on it by email (and, I'd guess, probably by phone even before that) on the 7th of September.

 

The idea there was some active level of deceit is pure fantasy being peddled by one individual. As I've been saying all along, there is nobody on the CIC group with any axe to grind with the RST. The reasons for leaving had absolutely nothing to do with the pursuit of the CIC either.

 

As someone who has been there with: new rules for Gersave, agendas/minutes, election and financial management procedures, not to mention uncovering the bouncy cheques fiasco and subsequently been the victim of character assasination and vilification in a bid to deflect from those issues; you have my greatest sympathy mate.

 

I see many parallels inasmuch as you appear to have tried to move the RST forward; but have fallen victim to the reactionary forces.

 

It is good to see that you have the records and dates of emails and conversations to prove your version of events.

[BEARGER 1,829]

I was part of the CIC "group" before I joined the RST board, so I'm perfectly aware of and have a personal record of the Secretary and Chair receiving constant updates on progress and next steps. (another question worth asking yourself is why would I bother joining the RST board if the intention was to "deceive" and go behind the RST's back? Wouldn't I simply avoid those circumstances by not joining in the first place?)

 

I don't want to pre-empt the upcoming meeting by revealing lots of information which is now outdated and superseded, because it will present a confusing message, but some time after everyone in the support is perfectly aware of the model suggested by SD, I will reveal the information provided.

 

The formation of a CIC is all part of the exploratory process, finding out the hows and whys. But even still;, here's the process to form a CIC:

 

You first have to form a company. You then have to write to the CIC regulator with a Community Interest Statement - outlining the Community you wish to serve and the purpose/goals of the company.

 

 

The CIC certification was received at the beginning of October and the Chair and Secretary were briefed on it by email (and, I'd guess, probably by phone even before that) on the 7th of September.

The idea there was some active level of deceit is pure fantasy being peddled by one individual. As I've been saying all along, there is nobody on the CIC group with any axe to grind with the RST. The reasons for leaving had absolutely nothing to do with the pursuit of the CIC either.

 

You don't have to explain how a CIC is set up, I am well aware of the procedure.

I repeat my question to you. Did the RST board discuss and agree that the setting up of a CIC was the way forward? Or did your group set it up without discussion with the other RST board members? Surely the answers will be in the RST board minutes?

 

Not sure who this one person is so therefore cant say if I've spoken to that person or not. I can say that I have spoken to more than one person involved and trust their version of events.

 

if at the end of the day we end up with fans representation/ownership I will be very happy but I like to know the calibre of the people involved.

[ThatsWhyWeirChamps 0]

You don't have to explain how a CIC is set up, I am well aware of the procedure.

I repeat my question to you. Did the RST board discuss and agree that the setting up of a CIC was the way forward? Or did your group set it up without discussion with the other RST board members? Surely the answers will be in the RST board minutes?

 

Not sure who this one person is so therefore cant say if I've spoken to that person or not. I can say that I have spoken to more than one person involved and trust their version of events.

 

if at the end of the day we end up with fans representation/ownership I will be very happy but I like to know the calibre of the people involved.

 

I just told you that the Chair and the Secretary were briefed. Seems like the worst cover-up of all time if you ask me.

 

You seem to be making the same mistake as the person in question and overstating the siginificance of a now superseded CIC. It was formed as part of the exploratory process, the Chair and Secretary were briefed - as was the process for the group - the Chair and Secretary were sent all relevant documentation along with a letter of comfort. Again, if the object was to deceive and go behind the RST's back, why bother keeping the Chair and Secretary up to date? Why list the ultimate benficiary as the RST?

 

If it was determined that the CIC wasn't the way forward (and the CIC which was formed WON'T be under any circumstances - because it is limited by shares and not by guarantee), then the company could quite simply be wound-up, as will now probably be the case. It was vital to the process which the group was tasked with that they fully understood what a CIC could do. I'd say corresponding with the CIC regulator on the process is probably the most vital part of that - but what do I know?

 

If you're going to continue to look for conspiracy, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed. The process and model being suggested by SD would be EXACTLY the same regardless of whether the CIC group were still RST board members or not - that we aren't is a complete red-herring.

[BEARGER 1,829]

I just told you that the Chair and the Secretary were briefed. Seems like the worst cover-up of all time if you ask me.

 

You seem to be making the same mistake as the person in question and overstating the siginificance of a now superseded CIC. It was formed as part of the exploratory process, the Chair and Secretary were briefed - as was the process for the group - the Chair and Secretary were sent all relevant documentation along with a letter of comfort. Again, if the object was to deceive and go behind the RST's back, why bother keeping the Chair and Secretary up to date? Why list the ultimate benficiary as the RST?

 

If it was determined that the CIC wasn't the way forward (and the CIC which was formed WON'T be under any circumstances - because it is limited by shares and not by guarantee), then the company could quite simply be wound-up, as will now probably be the case. It was vital to the process which the group was tasked with that they fully understood what a CIC could do. I'd say corresponding with the CIC regulator on the process is probably the most vital part of that - but what do I know?

 

If you're going to continue to look for conspiracy, I'm afraid you'll be disappointed. The process and model being suggested by SD would be EXACTLY the same regardless of whether the CIC group were still RST board members or not - that we aren't is a complete red-herring.

 

You keep answering questions that I did not ask. A straight yes or no would have sufficed. No point me asking again, you seem intent on playing with words.

As I said I hope we end up with fan representation/ownership.

[ThatsWhyWeirChamps 0]

You keep answering questions that I did not ask. A straight yes or no would have sufficed. No point me asking again, you seem intent on playing with words.

As I said I hope we end up with fan representation/ownership.

 

I'm giving you the relevant facts.

 

But here's what you're being asked to believe;

 

An exploratory committee was instigated by the RST board. And the 4 board members tasked's only intention was to ditch the RST.

That exploratory committee of 4 people got another 5 or so individuals involved to hep with this process (all RST members).

Their strategy for doing that, incredibly, was to get the 5 individuals to join the RST board (this is the one I find particularly baffling). Some rather reluctantly.

Being fully informed, the Chair and Secretary played an active part in this "conspiracy".

They set up a CIC with the RST listed as the ultimate benficiary, but intended to go away and do things for themselves all along.

 

The argument is disjointed, and makes absolutely no sense.

 

I'm not trying to make people decide based on personalities, I want people to be informed and make a decision based on whether they think it's achieveable and whether they think it's best for the Club.

 

If you're interested in fan ownership, then all that's asked is you listen to what SDS are suggesting. That's all. There's no complicated deceit and back-stabbing.

Edited February 9, 2014 by ThatsWhyWeirChamps

[Stimpy 0]

Not calling conspiracy or getting into this, but I know that the chair didn't know of any CIC company until September, after it was registered, and NDA. The contacting of folk like AJ and PM were all done without the knowledge of the board and chairman. No progress updates either were forthcoming. Even when documents were forwarded in October there was still no official presentation.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Not calling conspiracy or getting into this, but I know that the chair didn't know of any CIC company until September, after it was registered, and NDA. The contacting of folk like AJ and PM were all done without the knowledge of the board and chairman. No progress updates either were forthcoming. Even when documents were forwarded in October there was still no official presentation.

 

Why does it not suprise me that the RST is still seemingly frought with in-fighting?