We Are The People - This Is Our Time

[buster. 4,808]

As I said Steve Im under no illusions and much of that piece was directed at those who still view FO as an alien concept' date=' and to start the ball rolling on a debate where our support examines who can be best trusted to safeguard our club and to serve the interests of the club, rather than others.

 

[b']I understand what you are saying re the problems of unity and note what you have said regarding this thread and the comments themselves[/b]. Can we really achieve some measure of FO without some measure of compromise on all sides ? Isnt that a better advert for FO - that the groups can work together constructively to safeguard our club from further exploitation ? Wouldnt that remove some of the scepticism out there that FO is a workable solution for our club ?

 

Thats doesnt mean to say any of them need to abandon their original aims and objectives - those can still be pursued and those signing up to same can choose the particular model which best suits their own beliefs.

 

 

We can argue the toss and go round in circles.

 

We can float in a thread of well written 'hope' proclaiming how we agree.

 

Or perhaps we could appreciate a well written article, have the debate on this fundamantal and complicated issue, accept that it won't be easy, accept we won't all agree on every detail and wait/hope for those involved to actually move towards step 1.

 

And not forget the immediate which in turn has direct influence on future ambitions of fan ownership.

 

 

Don't interpret this or my other posts in this thread as a negative, for me it's about trying to be direct and realistic about the situation. To a point where something actually starts to move. A follow-up from yourself or other regards the possible practical mechanics of what you touch on would be welcome.

 

For me, fan ownership is the answer but as we are, it's not happening.

[SteveC 150]

During the last few years, there was one moment when there was cause for optimism. The RST's SaveRangers campaign hit around £13m in pledges, and then what happened?

 

The club came out with the RFFF - amongst the biggest pieces of garbage ever to come from the club - and suddenly all was lost when fans were conned into believing they had hope.

 

That was the moment when things, potentially, could have been utterly transformed, but instead we almost burst the net with the spectacular own goal that was the RFFF.

 

A moment like that may never come around again.

 

I invested what for me was a lot of money in RFFF, my mum, desperate to help but with far more pressing monetary needs and yet felt she had to , asked me how she could..and so she doubled my input there. I still don't know what or why...but there was a feeling of we had to do something. But, really, you are just confirming my point above - none of what we say or do ever works. It's just pub hot air in the forums (and often disgustingly, bear upon bear fighting) and RST, RFF, RF , BR = NOT WORKING, not close to working.

 

This is Rangers, ffs, all those fans we have worldwide (supposedly) and we have nothing like the presence of fans from clubs with much smaller fanbases, nothing even remotely like them. At least St Mirren fans would all have said "booooooooooo" at the same time

[buster. 4,808]

I invested what for me was a lot of money in RFFF, my mum, desperate to help but with far more pressing monetary needs and yet felt she had to , asked me how she could..and so she doubled my input there. I still don't know what or why...but there was a feeling of we had to do something. But, really, you are just confirming my point above - none of what we say or do ever works. It's just pub hot air in the forums (and often disgustingly, bear upon bear fighting) and RST, RFF, RF , BR = NOT WORKING, not close to working.

 

This is Rangers, ffs, all those fans we have worldwide (supposedly) and we have nothing like the presence of fans from clubs with much smaller fanbases, nothing even remotely like them. At least St Mirren fans would all have said "booooooooooo" at the same time

 

That's why I think (previous post) you'd probably need 'radical change' to alter the dynamic.

Obviously this wouldn't go down well with many but......what's the more important, the groups or Rangers ?

 

- Disband all groups

 

- Form One new group with 'new blood' with no 'history'. (New = Change = Hope)

 

- Try to move RFFF money towards buying shares for new group.

 

- Encourage individual supporters to proxy their share voting rights to new group..

 

- Lobby for seat on the board

[SteveC 150]

As I said Steve Im under no illusions and much of that piece was directed at those who still view FO as an alien concept' date=' and to start the ball rolling on a debate where our support examines who can be best trusted to safeguard our club and to serve the interests of the club, rather than others.

 

I understand what you are saying re the problems of unity and note what you have said regarding this thread and the comments themselves. Can we really achieve some measure of FO without some measure of compromise on all sides ? Isnt that a better advert for FO - that the groups can work together constructively to safeguard our club from further exploitation ? Wouldnt that remove some of the scepticism out there that FO is a workable solution for our club ?

 

That doesn't mean to say any of them need to abandon their original aims and objectives - those can still be pursued and those signing up to same can choose the particular model which best suits their own beliefs.[/quote']

 

Thanks for your response. Just to clarify I am totally for FO, always have been. I'm just at a loss as to why anyone would still hold out hope for us attaining it given the last few years. I am deeply grateful for all who strive to achieve it - I just think you are on a loser. I either do or have backed all the schemes...with monthly donations (and there have been bigger inputs when asked for) but I also play the EuroMillions (which I don't agree with on any level at all: morally, sensible gambling, anything = but I do so so - simply for RFC's sake, so if I win big I could help, sadly I don't see how I otherwise can help - all the other schemes are not working.)

[Hildy 0]

I invested what for me was a lot of money in RFFF, my mum, desperate to help but with far more pressing monetary needs and yet felt she had to , asked me how she could..and so she doubled my input there. I still don't know what or why...but there was a feeling of we had to do something. But, really, you are just confirming my point above - none of what we say or do ever works. It's just pub hot air in the forums (and often disgustingly, bear upon bear fighting) and RST, RFF, RF , BR = NOT WORKING, not close to working.

 

This is Rangers, ffs, all those fans we have worldwide (supposedly) and we have nothing like the presence of fans from clubs with much smaller fanbases, nothing even remotely like them. At least St Mirren fans would all have said "booooooooooo" at the same time

The idea of people giving money they can't afford to a hastily cobbled together scheme is quite sickening. I understand why you and many like you did so - the club put out an appeal for financial help - and I applaud your motivation, but your money, and that of your mother, is now lying in a bank account while the club wanders around with a begging bowl asking for a few dollars here and a few dollars there.

 

I don't blame you for doing what you thought was the right thing, but I cannot excuse those who launched this scheme when it had no hope of saving Rangers. The club was trying to cash in on the apparent success of the RST scheme and the RFFF effectively destroyed any last hope we had.

 

I am aware of people who were going to put in generous sums to SaveRangers if it got off the ground, but when the Fighting Fund came along instead, they didn't give it a cent. They knew that it was a waste of time, energy and money. I just wish there was a way that people could get their money back, but the Fighting Fund was effectively a scheme where cash was just piled up, mostly anonymously.

[Hildy 0]

That's why I think (previous post) you'd probably need 'radical change' to alter the dynamic.

Obviously this wouldn't go down well with many but......what's the more important, the groups or Rangers ?

 

- Disband all groups

 

- Form One new group with 'new blood' with no 'history'. (New = Change = Hope)

 

- Try to move RFFF money towards buying shares for new group.

 

- Encourage individual supporters to proxy their share voting rights to new group..

 

- Lobby for seat on the board

As previously stated, if we started over with one group, within a short time there would be more. It's how we operate. There would be the Church of Rangers, the Free Church of Rangers, the Wee Free Church of Rangers, the Wee Wee Free Church of Rangers, the Wee Wee Free Free Church of Rangers and so on.

 

Splintering into factions is our speciality. Nobody does it better.

[Hildy 0]

That's why I think (previous post) you'd probably need 'radical change' to alter the dynamic.

Obviously this wouldn't go down well with many but......what's the more important, the groups or Rangers ?

 

- Disband all groups

 

- Form One new group with 'new blood' with no 'history'. (New = Change = Hope)

 

- Try to move RFFF money towards buying shares for new group.

 

- Encourage individual supporters to proxy their share voting rights to new group..

 

- Lobby for seat on the board

That seat on the board: many would have thought that it was a good thing having Walter Smith on the board of directors, and he even became chairman.

 

What good did it do?

 

None at all - and the reason?

 

He was out of his depth. In the ultimate irony, he was asked to perform in a role that was not his best position.

 

Having one person on the board, even when that person is chairman, is massively over-rated.

 

Settling for being a minority when the majority is poison is an exercise in futility.

[forlanssister 3,050]

One of the problems on the road to fan ownership is finding a suitable vehicle, those that exist at present have fatal flaws the RST Buy Rangers having the inconvenience of those investing via it not directly owning shares in Rangers but another company. Rangers First being flawed that no matter how much you invest in it you have no title to the shares you purchased and whether you invested £100 or £100k you have the same say. For both the RST and RF to succeed in any meaningful way they will have to attract HNWI and frankly I cannot see such individuals making meaningful investment in either as they currently stand.

[Hildy 0]

One of the problems on the road to fan ownership is finding a suitable vehicle, those that exist at present have fatal flaws the RST Buy Rangers having the inconvenience of those investing via it not directly owning shares in Rangers but another company. Rangers First being flawed that no matter how much you invest in it you have no title to the shares you purchased and whether you invested £100 or £100k you have the same say. For both the RST and RF to succeed in any meaningful way they will have to attract HNWI and frankly I cannot see such individuals making meaningful investment in either as they currently stand.

To invest mob-handed, it is desirable to set up a vehicle to do so. The RST has done that and each person involved is the holder of a community share. It's a bit like being a part of a consortium, but having lots of partners instead of just a few.

 

I could have a single share in Rangers if I wanted, but I choose not to. I go in with the collective now. One day, I'll hopefully be a member of Rangers in my own name, but until that time comes, I'm delighted to be investing in partnership with other fans.

[buster. 4,808]

That seat on the board: many would have thought that it was a good thing having Walter Smith on the board of directors, and he even became chairman.

 

What good did it do?

 

None at all - and the reason?

 

He was out of his depth. In the ultimate irony, he was asked to perform in a role that was not his best position.

 

Having one person on the board, even when that person is chairman, is massively over-rated.

 

Settling for being a minority when the majority is poison is an exercise in futility.

 

I'm coming at this from an angle that is trying to look for possible ways forward regards FO.

The fundamental problem regards the divided fanbase is one that needs to be solved (to a reasonable degree) otherwise we're lost treading water in everything, not just FO.

 

Hildy, I understand your angle and could debate some of the finer points of it but generally agree that until the spi.vs leave the building, they are going to have executive control and the voting rights largely tied-up and stay ahead of the 'game'. And that at some stage further down the road when value had been fully extracted, we'd probably be able to reclaim what was left.

 

I won't go further than that because I don't want to go OT.