WATP_Greg 0 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Without commenting on whatever BH has done or not done, as I don't really get the hooha, I find the apparent representatives of RF and RST on here have behaved incredibly poorly. I don't think BH is the only one to be interested in transparency of the numbers - and to have a go at him about numbers he took from the official site, and then go on to snidely defend that site, is astonishing. Then to refuse to give the numbers just because it "pisses someone off" sounds about as petty as you can get. Maybe it's all about a bunch of people who don't get on in person, and have a bit of history, but when you don't know anyone, it all just looks a bit bitchy on here. That still wouldn't be that important on a forum, if it wasn't for the fact that some of the people appear to be involved in leading the fan investment groups... Who is the RF representative on here that you have issue with? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Surely it's not PLGsarmy's place to answer queries on an organisation that she's not involved in? What he was asking about was the BuyRangers figures mate , not the RF ones 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BEARGER 1,829 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Without commenting on whatever BH has done or not done, as I don't really get the hooha, I find the apparent representatives of RF and RST on here have behaved incredibly poorly. I don't think BH is the only one to be interested in transparency of the numbers - and to have a go at him about numbers he took from the official site, and then go on to snidely defend that site, is astonishing. Then to refuse to give the numbers just because it "pisses someone off" sounds about as petty as you can get. Maybe it's all about a bunch of people who don't get on in person, and have a bit of history, but when you don't know anyone, it all just looks a bit bitchy on here. That still wouldn't be that important on a forum, if it wasn't for the fact that some of the people appear to be involved in leading the fan investment groups... BH is not a member of the RST therefore is not entitled to them or requires them in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,329 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 What he was asking about was the BuyRangers figures mate , not the RF ones In which case it's none of his business, as Bearger points out. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juancornetto 1 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies. Groucho Marx 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 4,808 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.Groucho Marx Enough of ** The more relevant is moving forward and hopefully the RF have a constructive meeting this evening. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Just one concern, well it's no really a concern as such, more an observation. Say Gough, Blair and another are picked to represent RF on a joint merger board, who then subsequently have to negotiate with the club, that then results in a vote of the Joint Group (JG) that could conceivable go against the club's wishes Do the Gersnetters panel think Gough and Blair will take the club line or argue the case for the Joint Group in any vote they must take? Or do they call conflict of interest and relieve themselves from said vote, therefore possible weakening the JG's position in the vote or argument? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,247 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 RF is covered by certain governance and as directors all have a responsibility to RF first and foremost 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,195 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Just one concern, well it's no really a concern as such, more an observation. Say Gough, Blair and another are picked to represent RF on a joint merger board, who then subsequently have to negotiate with the club, that then results in a vote of the Joint Group (JG) that could conceivable go against the club's wishes Do the Gersnetters panel think Gough and Blair will take the club line or argue the case for the Joint Group in any vote they must take? Or do they call conflict of interest and relieve themselves from said vote, therefore possible weakening the JG's position in the vote or argument? They should take the latter, citing conflict of interest. I disagree that it would weaken the JG's position - conflicts of interest are dealt with continually without weakening the position of either party. The vote, either negative or affirmative, holds every bit as much power even when members have to recuse themselves due to conflict of interest. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trublusince1982 243 Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Any group using the rangers name or courting it's support should show transparency to all it's fans not just members. It's that kind of petty reasoning that kills all these things off eventually. Edited February 18, 2016 by trublusince1982 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.