Rangersfirst memberships

[WATP_Greg 0]

Greg , the ticker and also the progress bar are excellent and allows anyone to see where we are in our current quest .

 

I defy any fan who loves his club , enjoys a few beers and the odd bet , not to be able to find £10 a month to put towars getting their club back or at least getting heard by the board of that club .

 

Plus the rangersfirst retail section is superb and its amazing the number of companies they now have signed up to it .

 

I agree mate, we all wanted the ticker from the start so happy to see it there now. That's the kind of transparency that I want to see and surely it will hold RF in good stead.

 

Personally, I believe now is the time that something has to be done - I think most fans are at their wits end with it all.

 

The retail section is really good - I have been consistently using the Amazon link (http://www.amazon.co.uk/?_encoding=UTF8&camp=1634&creative=6738&linkCode=ur2&tag=rangfirs-21) for the last month or so. Every little helps and I would wager RF have received at least the equivalent of another membership from myself. Its really easy

[WATP_Greg 0]

I suppose that's true Greg, if you call 12 more investors or 1% "significant"?

 

However, I feel sure you'd agree that 1,184 investors (I know that strictly speaking they are not "members") is desperately disappointing after 6 months when the number 20,000 was bandied about at the outset (and repeated on the video) and most people thought that at least 5,000 was not unrealistic.

 

I don't want to keep you away from your favourite forum for too long but as someone who was appointed to the Steering Group can I ask you why you think the uptake since the end of March has been so poor and what the SG have been doing about it?

 

I was extremely enthusiastic at the outset but must admit I am having my doubts about whether it will ever make a real impact.

 

I'll have to get back to you - not because i'm on another forum but I start work in 15 minutes with Mark Walters and Graham Roberts in the pub tonight.

 

However, as someone who is on record as wanting a position on the board it surprises me that you doubt it will ever make an impact - makes me question why you want a position on such board? I know you want there to be expenses but I fully expect the membership to ratify what was discussed at the initial meeting of their being no financial reward for RF work so hopefully you are just being a pessimist.

 

Now is the time. Lets do something for the club and the support.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I'll have to get back to you - not because i'm on another forum but I start work in 15 minutes with Mark Walters and Graham Roberts in the pub tonight.

 

However, as someone who is on record as wanting a position on the board it surprises me that you doubt it will ever make an impact - makes me question why you want a position on such board? I know you want there to be expenses but I fully expect the membership to ratify what was discussed at the initial meeting of their being no financial reward for RF work so hopefully you are just being a pessimist.

 

Now is the time. Lets do something for the club and the support.

 

Hopefully you can sign up Messrs Walters and Roberts.

 

I offered to help the Steering Group in an Administrative or Secretarial capacity but did not receive any response. I also offered to assist with drafting a Constitution but that wasn't taken up either. Which is perfectly fine by me, provided the job gets done. But how there can be elections without a constitution is beyond me.

 

I don't recall making a public statement to the effect that I wanted a position on the Board but I may well have done as I certainly was thinking that way at one point. However, if the procedure goes through as currently proposed, then I will not stand in the election because I do not agree with an election for specific positions. In my opinion there should be an open election and then the Board should appoint it's own Executive Officers and co-opt for skills, qualifications or experience it does not have.

 

Expenses are not a financial reward, as an accountant you should know that. If I was on the Board, I would not take expenses but I think there may be some people who would be put off from applying if they have heavy travelling expenses which they cannot reclaim. However, given that you can only stand in the election if you have a professional qualification or the like, then that shouldn't be an issue.

 

I am a member of RF and sincerely hope it is successful but the current numbers vis-a-vis the original projections do not look very encouraging. Perhaps I am being a realist rather than a pessimist.

[Hildy 0]

Hopefully you can sign up Messrs Walters and Roberts.

 

I offered to help the Steering Group in an Administrative or Secretarial capacity but did not receive any response. I also offered to assist with drafting a Constitution but that wasn't taken up either. Which is perfectly fine by me, provided the job gets done. But how there can be elections without a constitution is beyond me.

 

I don't recall making a public statement to the effect that I wanted a position on the Board but I may well have done as I certainly was thinking that way at one point. However, if the procedure goes through as currently proposed, then I will not stand in the election because I do not agree with an election for specific positions. In my opinion there should be an open election and then the Board should appoint it's own Executive Officers and co-opt for skills, qualifications or experience it does not have.

 

Expenses are not a financial reward, as an accountant you should know that. If I was on the Board, I would not take expenses but I think there may be some people who would be put off from applying if they have heavy travelling expenses which they cannot reclaim. However, given that you can only stand in the election if you have a professional qualification or the like, then that shouldn't be an issue.

 

I am a member of RF and sincerely hope it is successful but the current numbers vis-a-vis the original projections do not look very encouraging. Perhaps I am being a realist rather than a pessimist.

You need a professional qualification to stand for election to the RF board?

[BrahimHemdani 1]

You need a professional qualification to stand for election to the RF board?

 

I did say "or the like".

 

You have to have a professional qualification for two of the positions and very specific criteria have been set out for the other three which are in two cases tantamount to the same thing. One place is being reserved for a member of the current unelected Steering Group which is otherwise to be perpetuated in its current state.

 

In summary the process which is being written up into a resolution for the members to vote on is as follows:

 

There will be up to 5 elected positions (dependent on number of people standing so that all positions are contested) **

 

There is a list of 4 specific roles that must be fulfilled by members of the board, if these roles are not fulfilled by suitably qualified people from the open elections then these positions will be co-opted **

 

Additionally the Board will co-opt a member of the Steering Group who will have responsibility for coordinating as noted in the additional job description

 

Members will cast a vote on first past the post basis for each candidate, with those polling the most votes being elected for the positions available to be filled

 

SDS and Enabling Sport CIC will interview all prospective candidates with a view to making sure they fully grasp the legal responsibilities that becoming a Director of a CIC involves. ES will also act as returning officer and scrutiniser and will help with an induction programme for successful candidates.

 

No expenses or payment will be made to any Elected Member, there will be at least 4 meetings per year.

 

All prospective candidates will be asked to self-assess on the following basis.

 

It is vital that those initially elected to the Board of Rangers First bring as much focus to the organisation as possible and not themselves.

 

It is therefore the desire of the organisation that in this first election we will ask all prospective members of the Board to confirm that they accept that in being entrusted by the members of RF to become members of its Board they accept that this role comes with responsibilities to put RF and the Club first and to ensure that nothing that they do or say could adversely affect it – this applies to the past actions as to the future.

 

The Rangers First Board needs to be open and participative and able to work with any and all Rangers supporters in the agreed interests of our Club, and focus the attention of members non-members and the media should remain on Rangers First and not board members personal history and conduct.

 

All elected members will be asked to declare any social media accounts they have in their own name and any Pseudonyms

 

Further Rules of Directors conduct will be developed, based on the statement of values and principles.

 

The Board will consist of the following key roles, either elected or co-opted

 

Chairman - Candidate is required to have a proven track record in business with previous experience in a CEO or Chairman role. Ideally candidate will have an excellent list of contacts across a wide range of commerce, politics and the wider society in general.

 

Legal and Company Structure expert – Candidate must be a fully qualified legal representative ideally with previous knowledge and experience of Community Interest Companies or similar organisation type.

 

Chartered Accountant - Candidate must be fully qualified and member of professional accountancy body (ICAS, CIMA, ACCA ). Ideally candidate will have several years’ experience working in an accountancy firm preferably at partner level.

 

Media/Marketing/PR individual - Candidate will be responsible for overseeing the media related activities of Rangers First. Ideally they will have an extensive list of Public Relations and Media contacts throughout the UK and be prepared to establish and co-ordinate a media and marketing strategy for Rangers First. They should also be prepared to act as spokesperson for the organisation when required.

 

A Operations Director Co-opted from the Steering Group, A Steering Group representative who will act as the main source of communication between the Rangers First board and working parties. They will also be responsible for managing and co-ordinating steering group meetings and ensuring that all activities and projects are delivered on schedule. This is a very hands-on position and ideally candidate will have previous experience of project management or similar.

 

** I don't understand these statements because if say there is only one accountant in the membership there will be no election, so who would be co-opted, the same person? Also you have to be suitably qualified to stand in the election so how could people who are not suitably qualified be elected? Anyway, the elections aren't "open" if they're restricted to people who are "suitably qualified".

 

I have been involved in a lot of boards and committees in my time but never one where you were specifically electing a Chair, Treasurer (presumably the CA), Company Secretary (presumably the lawyer) etc.

 

There is no provision for "ordinary" members of the Board. In effect what is being elected is an Executive not a Board.

 

But who am I to question Archie Bethel CBE.

 

I would also like you to bear in mind, Hildy, that I had to fight tooth and nail to get RST to adopt the SD Model Rules on Election process back in 2010 and even then I was not entirely successful. The Chair and other parties made life extremely difficult for me. An election Notice was pulled from the RST web site because a certain party didn't want there to be a nominations procedure. Hitherto there was no proper procedure for nominations etc and there was the highly unusual practice of voting "for and against" candidates in an open ballot. I hope its better now.

 

So this is not point scoring for or against either organisation.

 

I have been consistent in wanting both these bodies to adopt proper election procedures.

Edited September 5, 2014 by BrahimHemdani

[Hildy 0]

It's probably easier to become an MP.

 

I can understand people wanting candidates to bring something exceptional to organisations, but in doing so, they begin to sound elitist and aloof.

 

They want the ordinary punter's money, but the ordinary or regular punter is never likely to be entertained as an office-bearer.

 

I'm reminded of Communist Parties across the world where people are required to become cogs in unsympathetic political machines: 'The Party must come first'.

 

It all sounds a bit centrally controlled, and while I'm sure the Trust has its flaws too, and while personal animosities will always exist, I'd be disappointed if it was as strict-sounding as this.

 

The House of Commons was a far more able and wise place when it attracted people from all walks of life. When political researchers started to multiply and miners and factory workers started to disappear, it became a much poorer place.

 

Football fan groups, even when they have serious business to do, should remember that they represent lads more than they do lords.

[Mountain Bear 0]

As you mentioned, RF had 1,000 members after six weeks; now after 6 months they have 1,172 paying monthly. At this rate of progress it will take 55 years to get 20,000 fans signed up.

 

We've put on 50 in 24 hours. At this rate of progress we'll get 20,000 signed up in just over a year!

[BrahimHemdani 1]

We've put on 50 in 24 hours. At this rate of progress we'll get 20,000 signed up in just over a year!

 

Half that would be fantastic.

[Mountain Bear 0]

Indeed. The total is up by >100 since post #23, less than a day ago.

 

Obviously that's not going to happen every day (a combination of the Imran arrestment, the share offer, a great video from RF and payday probably make yesterday exceptional), but there's momentum which we can build on.

 

A few stands outside Ibrox on match days with a couple of high profile ex players like Albertz there to draw attention and I really think we'd get to 5k pretty quickly.

 

The only problem is that RF really need the £500 life memberships right now, rather than the S/Os (which obviously are great for the long term).

[rbr 1,247]

we are now 3 short of 200 new members since yesterday , a fantastic effort from our fellow bears , hope we can continue to grow even at a reasonably decent rate

Edited September 6, 2014 by rbr