RF resignation letters

[craig 5,195]

Pete , I will say again , there was no mention of an unelected wp getting set up, it was the board of the Rst and RF that was to sort this out , why your struggling to understand this is don't get

 

Before we argue about the "unelected WP" we need to know how many were unelected and why they were co-opted onto the WP. Nothing wrong with having an unelected individual on a WP if they have an area of relevant expertise that the elected individuals don't possess. Very strange to have a majority of unelected individuals on the WP though.

 

Pete is also right too in that they don't, or shouldn't, wield power - they have to make recommendation to the Board who then decide to accept or reject their proposals. But I still would expect the majority on the WP to be elected individuals.

[pete 2,494]

Aye ok pete.

 

1. You clearly are missing the point in the reference to Whyte & Green. To say "feck off quietly" is the same, in essence, as saying "let Whyte/Green get on with their job, nothing to see here". Had everyone "fecked off quietly" we very well may have no club to call our own. The POINT of that is to say that we should be VERY careful about the "just go quietly" mentality, especially if by doing so you potentially hurt the club.

2. The director resignation letters were not released generally or publicly until after the C1872 statement about them looking for self interest was made. The resignation letters didn't hit the public domain, at least to my knowledge, until after the C1872 statement was made. Am I wrong ?

3. The members list IS a major issue as, from what I have read, it could be a breach of the Companies Act. And yes it was RF's members list. So yes it is their problem. But when you have a merged entity the merged entity then take responsibility for it. If you read at least one of the resignation letters they stated that they wanted to sort this out but it seemed that few cared about it. That is called poor governance. You don't simply continue with bad information and say "yeah but they were the ones that brought that bad information to us" - certainly not when the whole premise is fan unity.

4. So now you are accusing people of not wishing to accept change and losing control - what do you know of ANY of those people ? Looks to me as if you have taken a stance against them simply for the sake of taking a stance. And yet you talk about ME saying "reading between the lines" and you then retorting that this means you "only read what you want to read". Seems you are believing only what you want to believe.

5. There may have been some out to scuttle this from the beginning - however, I highly doubt it is ANY of those who just resigned. Why would they bother with going through the election process and sticking their head above the parapet only to try to be integral in dismantling the very organization that they were elected to the Board of. That would be a serious lack of fiduciary duty.

6. RBR was NOT against it from the start. That simply isn't true. RBR was against the whole process being rushed. So, again, it appears you are putting words in people's mouths that simply aren't there.

 

And you say my post was crap

 

Shit I thought I was finished with this argument.

 

I didn't read between the lines therefore I didn't get your explosion about the Whyte and Green that you have now explained but did not in your original post. Yes we should be careful on what is happening.

 

Did the board of RF have a duty to publish resignation letters? I doubt that but that is my opinion.

 

3 I would only be guessing to go to deep into that argument and have no idea if it is breaking company rules or not. My opinion is if I asked for a members list and received one I would expect it to be up to date or at least within a couple of months as people are paying monthly. If the director knew that it was wrong when on the board of RF and nothing was done to bring it up to date then maybe it is better he resigned.

 

4 Your opinion and my opinion and there are always people who don't like change. I don't know anything about these people the same as you probably don't. I got my opinion from reading the letters. You obviously see them in another light.

 

5 Again it is your opinion and my opinion without inside knowledge, and there is a core of people who are against RF being amalgamated. If the directors are amongst that group I have no idea but it would not be the first time people went onto a board to try and stop change or just to get their meaning across. People also leave a board because they are outvoted and can't accept the majority vote. There are many reasons they could have left for. One thing is certain life will go on without them.

 

6 RBR stated himself he did not want it to go through at the time it did that he wanted to wait so take that point up with him.

[boabie 230]

Aye ok pete.

 

1. You clearly are missing the point in the reference to Whyte & Green. To say "feck off quietly" is the same, in essence, as saying "let Whyte/Green get on with their job, nothing to see here". Had everyone "fecked off quietly" we very well may have no club to call our own. The POINT of that is to say that we should be VERY careful about the "just go quietly" mentality, especially if by doing so you potentially hurt the club.

2. The director resignation letters were not released generally or publicly until after the C1872 statement about them looking for self interest was made. The resignation letters didn't hit the public domain, at least to my knowledge, until after the C1872 statement was made. Am I wrong ?

3. The members list IS a major issue as, from what I have read, it could be a breach of the Companies Act. And yes it was RF's members list. So yes it is their problem. But when you have a merged entity the merged entity then take responsibility for it. If you read at least one of the resignation letters they stated that they wanted to sort this out but it seemed that few cared about it. That is called poor governance. You don't simply continue with bad information and say "yeah but they were the ones that brought that bad information to us" - certainly not when the whole premise is fan unity.

4. So now you are accusing people of not wishing to accept change and losing control - what do you know of ANY of those people ? Looks to me as if you have taken a stance against them simply for the sake of taking a stance. And yet you talk about ME saying "reading between the lines" and you then retorting that this means you "only read what you want to read". Seems you are believing only what you want to believe.

5. There may have been some out to scuttle this from the beginning - however, I highly doubt it is ANY of those who just resigned. Why would they bother with going through the election process and sticking their head above the parapet only to try to be integral in dismantling the very organization that they were elected to the Board of. That would be a serious lack of fiduciary duty.

6. RBR was NOT against it from the start. That simply isn't true. RBR was against the whole process being rushed. So, again, it appears you are putting words in people's mouths that simply aren't there.

 

And you say my post was crap

 

Craig, you are calling out the wrong person if you are going to use Whyte and Green as examples.

I was shouting the loudest about those two when all around were jumping for joy at their arrival and received lifetime bans from two forums for my troubles.

If you think I was wrong in what I posted then fair enough, we'll agree to disagree.

Although I said I knew little about the 3 who left, Donohue is one I do know about and he is absolutely no loss to anything connected with Rangers.

[BEARGER 1,829]

Default Club 1872 Member Update

5 July, 2016

 

Club 1872 notes both the story in the Sunday Mail and the letters which have appeared on the internet regarding the resignations of Kelly Johnstone, Brian Donohoe and Peter Ewart from the Rangers First board. We would like to make it very clear that contrary to what is said in the blog accompanying the letters it was not Club 1872 that placed the story with the Sunday Mail. It was Brian Donohoe. We would also make it clear that Peter Ewart did not participate in this. It is unfortunate and unfair on him that he has become tangled up in a situation not of his making.

 

It is difficult to respond to much of the content of Brian and Kelly’s letters as they do not deal in substantive issues. However, if they had any genuine issues it would have been better to have raised and sought to resolve them through the Club 1872 working group.

 

It has been clear from the start however that the prime motivation for both Brian and Kelly, which was partially articulated both in their resignation letters and in working group meetings, was to stall or stop the formation of Club 1872. Having that view was fine and there were a very small number of members of RF who shared that opinion, however, after RF’s members voted overwhelmingly to form Club 1872, the directors of RF had a duty to implement that decision. Brian and Kelly have chosen not to do so and instead to spread meritless accusations publicly. Having resigned as directors of RF they no longer owe a duty to its members but this remains disappointing. Neither Brian nor Kelly resigned from the working group or communicated with it before going to the Sunday Mail which is doubly disappointing.

 

One of the reasons for the formation of Club 1872, as articulated in the proposal document, was the need to share resources to grow and encourage fan ownership and representation.

 

Club 1872 now has a robust IT system which will allow us to communicate with members and deal with queries in a much quicker and more efficient manner. That system is being further improved and enhanced on a regular basis ahead of a major recruitment push. Members will be able to vote through the website and will be regularly polled on all aspects of Club 1872 and Rangers. We ask existing members of RF and RST to help us in this regard by ensuring they create a profile on the new website. We will be emailing them all again in the near future with a reminder of how to do so.

 

Already our dedicated admin staff have answered over 1000 emails in just a month since launch. We have had a large number of positive comments from members about how good the response rate and service has been.

 

We have a marketing consultant who has put together a plan to grow the organisation over the next several months and we have the resource to carry it out. The most visible parts of this plan will kick in around the start of the new season but supporters will start to see some progress over the next week or so.

 

We have already invested in the IT infrastructure, office premises, marketing materials, relevant database licences and full time administrative staff which we believe are required to provide better service to members and a better opportunity for the organisation to grow.

 

We have started the process of direct engagement with RSCs and will continue and extend that over the coming months. This will include visits to individual clubs throughout Scotland and organised events in Northern Ireland and elsewhere.

 

The task of the Club 1872 working group is to put in place the building blocks of the organisation that the members of RF and the RST voted over 90% in favour of on three separate occasions. Our job is to learn from the issues faced by both RF and the RST and present Club 1872 to its members and the new Board they will elect in the best shape possible given the available resource. A huge amount of hard work is being done to allow the newly elected board to hit the ground running and grow the organisation into a single, strong, representative voice for Rangers supporters with a positive working relationship with our football club and a significant and growing shareholding in the company that owns it.

 

We hope it is useful to members to clarify a couple of matters which have been highlighted as concerns:

 

1. All monies received by RF and RST to acquire shares in Rangers International Football Club PLC is ring fenced for that purpose. It will not be used for Projects. Going forward members can decide whether they want their donations to be reserved for Shares or Projects when they create a profile. If no choice is made it will (after deduction of the 5% for admin) be split evenly between the two.

 

2. Club 1872 will not gift money to Rangers Football Club. Monies contributed for Projects will be designed to benefit supporters and the footballing success of our Club. Members will decide at all times which Projects to pursue.

 

Club 1872 is not about two individuals. Members will vote for a new Club 1872 board in August/September and it will not be about the individuals elected in that process either. It is important that those standing for election understand that they are there to enact the will of the members of Club 1872 and that every key decision about Club 1872 will be taken by its members.

 

We will not be sidetracked further from the very important background work required to establish Club 1872 and ensure its strong foundations. We take this opportunity to thank the 10k + current members of Club 1872 and the members of RF and the RST for helping Club 1872 reach this point. Club 1872 will continue to reach out and engage with thousands of other Rangers supporters over the coming season.

 

http://club1872.co.uk/news/club-1872-member-update/

[craig 5,195]

Craig, you are calling out the wrong person if you are going to use Whyte and Green as examples.

I was shouting the loudest about those two when all around were jumping for joy at their arrival and received lifetime bans from two forums for my troubles.

If you think I was wrong in what I posted then fair enough, we'll agree to disagree.

Although I said I knew little about the 3 who left, Donohue is one I do know about and he is absolutely no loss to anything connected with Rangers.

 

Maybe I wasn't clear enough when mentioning Whyte & Green boabie. I'm not calling you out. What I am saying is that we need to be very careful of having the "piss off quietly" mentality. I used them as examples of how that mentality can ultimately self-harm. I could have used SDM too in fairness.... Very few were holding him accountable, we were "pissing off quietly" for lack of better words. Again, if you can ignore the people I mentioned and see the POINT of people not raising concerns about how things have developed then you will see how that could lead to issues for the Club.

 

I do disagree that sloping off quietly is the right way to go about things - although will caveat that with the suggestion that there are two ways to be public about resignations - you can either be public because you still have a desire to see the project succeed - or you can resign looking to bring down the house of cards.

 

I know none of the 3 mentioned so have no idea which tact they were taking - but they DID raise concerns and those concerns SHOULD be dealt with by C1872 - even if just a denial. I bow to your greater knowledge of Donohoe, but although you believe he is no great loss, the mere fact he makes a statement on potentially serious matters mean they should be addressed.

[boabie 230]

Maybe I wasn't clear enough when mentioning Whyte & Green boabie. I'm not calling you out. What I am saying is that we need to be very careful of having the "piss off quietly" mentality. I used them as examples of how that mentality can ultimately self-harm. I could have used SDM too in fairness.... Very few were holding him accountable, we were "pissing off quietly" for lack of better words. Again, if you can ignore the people I mentioned and see the POINT of people not raising concerns about how things have developed then you will see how that could lead to issues for the Club.

 

I do disagree that sloping off quietly is the right way to go about things - although will caveat that with the suggestion that there are two ways to be public about resignations - you can either be public because you still have a desire to see the project succeed - or you can resign looking to bring down the house of cards.

 

I know none of the 3 mentioned so have no idea which tact they were taking - but they DID raise concerns and those concerns SHOULD be dealt with by C1872 - even if just a denial. I bow to your greater knowledge of Donohoe, but although you believe he is no great loss, the mere fact he makes a statement on potentially serious matters mean they should be addressed.

 

I can take that Craig.

Being honest, when I posted last night I had just returned home from a social evening and probably wasn't fully compos mentis and able to rationalise what was actually being said in the resignation letters so should maybe have kept my peace.

I'm actually saddened and heartily sick of those connected to our club continually feeding the liars and scum who earn a living attacking us. There are ways of doing things. Two of the three responsible did neither us, the club, C1872 or themselves any favours and should have known that.

Stamping their feet and wailing is not what I expect from someone elected to represent us.

Donohoe has acted exactly as I expected him to do. He's been doing it for years and only gained any small amount of credibility he had by not being scared to admit he is a Rangers supporter. His own tummy-tickling session with Whyte should have seen our support chase him.