Jump to content

 

 

The latest Club1872 commotion


Recommended Posts

Personally, I never trusted the underlying assumption that you could deliver security by Club1872 owning shares but, that aside, the evangelical support for Club1872 has always worried me. The belief that any laudable objective could be achieved by an organisation that from the outset was so clearly displaying the same profound flaws as its predecessors was very dubious. Despite all the money donated by fans of goodwill, it seems to me nothing has really changed. Rangers is no more or less secure for all the shares bought and Club1872 is essentially just the latest platform for supporter politics and personal ambitions. Still, at least we all know how it plays out from here.

Edited by Bill
Link to post
Share on other sites

fan ownership of sales is obviously desirable if not vital. It is obviously better if the money goes to rangers. the club are now offering a way to put money in so Club 1872 are no longer the only way to do this. 

 

The thing is this will dry up soon and eventually we will be as well buying Dave kings shares. 

 

What we really need but seem utterly incapable of pulling together is a open, trustworthy and well led group to lead this. 

 

If we had that while it won't be for everyone eventually we can have a good deal of influence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, the gunslinger said:

yeah but you are not rangers.....

This will be obvious to many but I'll add this for your benefit.

 

In the absence of leadership you do it yourself.

 

Stop making excuses and take responsibility. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If Club1872 is a choice between a board with no accountability or transparency and the Louden set, I think it's safe to say it's a dead duck.  

 

I understand people who want supporters to have a collective stake/say in the club, particularly after what we've been through and fail to see the point in making condescending posts about efforts to make this happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, the gunslinger said:

What we really need but seem utterly incapable of pulling together is a open, trustworthy and well led group to lead this. 

Why do we "need" this at all? I'm a Rangers fan. I own shares in Rangers. I'm perfectly able to express my opinion as a shareholder without having my hand held by what I regard as some quite dark and dubious people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Gonzo79 said:

I understand people who want supporters to have a collective stake/say in the club

Any supporter who owns shares has a stake and a say. Where is the benefit in "collective" ownership?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Bill said:

Any supporter who owns shares has a stake and a say. Where is the benefit in "collective" ownership?  

There are benefits and drawbacks to nearly every way a football club is run.  

 

I wouldn't dismiss any and think some can work well together.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, ranger_syntax said:

It's a well worn topic but I might as well throw in my 2 pence worth again.

 

Club 1872 is undeniably better than zero fan ownership.  It is better for Club 1872 to buy Dave King's shares rather than risk the wrong people getting hold of them.  The problem is that if you donate to Club 1872 you need to take an ongoing responsibility for it.  You never own the shareholding but someone does.  That is to say you really need to remain a member and be active.  If you don't then who knows who will end up controlling Club 1872.

 

Actual fan ownership of shares is undeniably better than donating to Club 1872.  When you own shares you don't need to give any thought to any of the bickering that surrounds the Club 1872 board.  You'll never need to worry about who might one day control the share holding that you paid for.  If you do this then you end up with a different problem.  You'll be faced with dilution of your holding one day.  That's an easier problem to deal with.

Actually RS its a bit more complex than that with C1872 being set up as CLC - they have to demonstrate member involvement in the ongoing running of the company. When I did the Annual Report for the CLC Regulator in the 1st year of its inception we had to demonstrate & present 4 examples of member participation in the decions made and such decions being carried through to fruition and inception.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.