Steve1872 4 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Andy Newport @AndyNewportPA 56s56 seconds ago PA copy on Jim McColl story can be found here: http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/u/mccoll-hands-over-his-rangers-shares-to-fans-group.1420564866 … 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve1872 4 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 [h=1]McColl hands over his Rangers shares to fans group[/h][h=2]Jim McColl has handed over his 10,000-share stake in Rangers to fans group Rangers First.[/h]Tuesday 06/01/2015 Loading Comments Share Print The multi-millionaire Clyde Blowers boss tried to topple the Light Blues board 12 months ago when he backed Paul Murray's "requisitioners". But the 62-year-old has kept a low profile since failing to oust the likes of Football board chairman Sandy Easdale and his PLC counterpart David Somers at the 2013 AGM. The club has stumbled from one crisis to another in the months that have followed but, while the club is still dangerously short of cash, hopes have risen amongst the Gers faithful since Dave King and the Three Bears - wealthy fans Douglas Park, George Letham and George Taylor - grabbed control of around 34 per cent of the club with two surprise share purchases last week. Anti-board campaigners are now trying to pull together a coalition of shareholders who will be able to finally secure power and lead the ailing Glasgow giants to safety. Now McColl has shown his hand by donating his total shareholding to Rangers First, a community-interest company who plan to use a similar scheme to the one which rescued Hearts from administration to save the Ibrox outfit. In a statement, McColl - one of Scotland's richest men - urged his fellow fans to follow his lead, as he said: "I was happy with the aims of Rangers First in uniting the fan shareholders and I have gifted my shares to Rangers First. "I encourage other supporters to look at their aims and decide for themselves." McColl's move is another boost for Rangers First, who have seen a surge in interest since last week. The group has already bought up 600,000 shares - around 0.75 per cent of the club's total equity which has been mostly paid for by donations and monthly subscriptions from its 2,000-plus contributors. Since news of King's 14.57 per cent purchase on New Year's Eve, they have signed up another 424 members including a dozen fans who have splashed out £500 for life-time packages. They now plan to snap up another 40,000 shares in the coming days. A Rangers First spokesperson said: "The Rangers First support are committing to the future of the club. Players and directors come and go, but the fans are the one constant. More and more fans are now stepping up everyday. The fans will always be there." ......................................... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 If you go on facebook or other forums, some of the views expressed are rather worrying and as such I don't want fan ownership. It's never going to happen anyway. To be honest I would like to see King just buy us outright and formulate a long term, strategic plan for our future. I'm just glad though that the good guys have won. And the alternative model manifested by SDM, Whyte & Green have served the club well ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted January 6, 2015 Author Share Posted January 6, 2015 This is not a dig at the RST , but rf , now have nearly as many contributors as the RST have members 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Barristan Selmy 222 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 And the alternative model manifested by SDM' date=' Whyte & Green have served the club well ?[/quote']Green didn't own us outright. Whatever happens, we need someone with vision. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted January 6, 2015 Share Posted January 6, 2015 Green didn't own us outright. Whatever happens, we need someone with vision. I dont disagree with that bud - the problem I have that model is "longevity" At some point even an owner who has been visionary, honest with the support and puts the best interests of the club first is going to move on, sell or depart this mortal coil. Unless he is building a dynasty then we are thrown onto that ownership merry go round once again. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
PRW 0 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Green didn't own us outright. Whatever happens, we need someone with vision. Whether we are fan owned or owned by shysters or even good Rangers men with good business acumen some online supporters of our club couldn't agree on the colour of shite and will be taking petty swipes at one another whatever our fortunes, it's just a sad truth and reality for us a support and always will be when we have such a massive support. We'll always attract a fair share of rockets... I wont allow that to get in my way though or stop me from contributing from a good scheme with great intentions. Thankfully neither will 2600 + (and that number is increasing rapid fold) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinstein 294 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Here's my take on "some online supporters" you talk about Most of them by far are on 1 rogue site that is paid for by the board. their plants on there and places like facebook attack anything that threatens the gravy train. That includes King, 3 bears, fan ownership groups, ex players who have the club at heart there are also hangers on like tims on the wind up and I concede that there may be a few useful idiots but not many 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oleg_Mcnoleg 50 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Sides were picked some time ago. Personality clashes no doubt had some bearing on this in a few, noisy cases. Others were so anti-David Murray that anything involving Paul Murray or Dave King was bad by definition and anything that didn't was good. Then hubris kicks in and they've ended trying to justify the unjustifiable. I certainly wouldn't say they've all been bought: they're mostly committed, die hard bears. However, they're also blindingly obviously wrong. I'd also add that the behaviour of a handful of them has been pretty despicable but that's probably just a reflection of the world of social media which I regularly struggle with. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mountain Bear 0 Posted January 7, 2015 Share Posted January 7, 2015 Sides were picked some time ago. Personality clashes no doubt had some bearing on this in a few, noisy cases. Others were so anti-David Murray that anything involving Paul Murray or Dave King was bad by definition and anything that didn't was good. Then hubris kicks in and they've ended trying to justify the unjustifiable. I certainly wouldn't say they've all been bought: they're mostly committed, die hard bears. However, they're also blindingly obviously wrong. I'd also add that the behaviour of a handful of them has been pretty despicable but that's probably just a reflection of the world of social media which I regularly struggle with. Spot on mate. Absolutely spot on. 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.