Anyone Attending the Club AGM?

[compo 6,980]

Some of it sounds like a Monty python sketch questions about rubber ducks and the SNP if you have nothing sensible to say best keep quiet. 

[stewarty 2,007]

Much as I'm frustrated at the lack of questions on some areas (legal issues, etc), I think the Board played a blinder yesterday.  They did a good job at outlining the overall progress made in the last 5 years in terms of investments and decisions.  They stuck to their promise on improving disabled facilities and made a strong case for trying to calm some of the concerns over our financials that we have (where has the money gone, etc).   For me its now down to Bennett et all following through on their promises of improved communication, though the AGM was a start.  Whilst appreciating they have to be conscious of the market rules and price sensitive information, I still believe they can and should do more to explain some of the challenges and priorities they are trying to balance.  I recall stating in the summer several times that the support is hyper sensitive to financial matters, but in setting out where we are and where money is being spent on a more regular basis, we could have cut down that noise considerably.  Park also seemed to offer an olive branch to C1872 on engagement, albeit it seemed to me that they may now get into a public war of words around the NDA issue, though I hope they don't.

 

C8172 to me seem short-sighted on this as they surely have to realise that being a shareholder can gain considerable access but they have to understand where the line is in terms of price-sensitivity and commercially sensitive information.   They could easily navigate an NDA and publish minutes via an agreed protocol with the club, should they so choose.  This does not need to compromise their role in representing member interests - it would take someone with gravitas and integrity to perform such a role, but perhaps thats the real issue with C1872.  

 

Further, whether it was designed to be this way I don't know, but in revealing the detailed plans to revamp the stadium, and the fact that increasing the capacity will require additional funding, they've outlined a strong case for the share issue resolutions which I think the majority of supporters and shareholders will be in favour of (and indeed are based on the voting results).  In turn this has pulled the rug from under King and C1872 who I think now look rather silly.  Imagine going into your first meeting with the club as a C1872 rep and trying to reset relations... and thats the position you have to defend.  Bonkers.

 

Some of the questions left a lot to be desired but you're always going to get that at AGMs.  Even at my own company's AGM we prep for all sorts of off-the-wall questions that may arise so that the Board are ready to answer, but we regularly get something utterly innocuous or mad being asked that we couldn't possibly have predicted.  Thats the chance you take and by extending the time available I think they showed a willingness to engage.   

 

A platform to build on, strong financials, improving (but plenty to work on) communication and cleverly flanking C8172... pretty sure the Board will have enjoyed yesterday all things considered.

[CammyF 7,950]

8 minutes ago, stewarty said:

Much as I'm frustrated at the lack of questions on some areas (legal issues, etc), I think the Board played a blinder yesterday.  They did a good job at outlining the overall progress made in the last 5 years in terms of investments and decisions.  They stuck to their promise on improving disabled facilities and made a strong case for trying to calm some of the concerns over our financials that we have (where has the money gone, etc).   For me its now down to Bennett et all following through on their promises of improved communication, though the AGM was a start.  Whilst appreciating they have to be conscious of the market rules and price sensitive information, I still believe they can and should do more to explain some of the challenges and priorities they are trying to balance.  I recall stating in the summer several times that the support is hyper sensitive to financial matters, but in setting out where we are and where money is being spent on a more regular basis, we could have cut down that noise considerably.  Park also seemed to offer an olive branch to C1872 on engagement, albeit it seemed to me that they may now get into a public war of words around the NDA issue, though I hope they don't.

 

C8172 to me seem short-sighted on this as they surely have to realise that being a shareholder can gain considerable access but they have to understand where the line is in terms of price-sensitivity and commercially sensitive information.   They could easily navigate an NDA and publish minutes via an agreed protocol with the club, should they so choose.  This does not need to compromise their role in representing member interests - it would take someone with gravitas and integrity to perform such a role, but perhaps thats the real issue with C1872.  

 

Further, whether it was designed to be this way I don't know, but in revealing the detailed plans to revamp the stadium, and the fact that increasing the capacity will require additional funding, they've outlined a strong case for the share issue resolutions which I think the majority of supporters and shareholders will be in favour of (and indeed are based on the voting results).  In turn this has pulled the rug from under King and C1872 who I think now look rather silly.  Imagine going into your first meeting with the club as a C1872 rep and trying to reset relations... and thats the position you have to defend.  Bonkers.

 

Some of the questions left a lot to be desired but you're always going to get that at AGMs.  Even at my own company's AGM we prep for all sorts of off-the-wall questions that may arise so that the Board are ready to answer, but we regularly get something utterly innocuous or mad being asked that we couldn't possibly have predicted.  Thats the chance you take and by extending the time available I think they showed a willingness to engage.   

 

A platform to build on, strong financials, improving (but plenty to work on) communication and cleverly flanking C8172... pretty sure the Board will have enjoyed yesterday all things considered.

I believe the issue Club1872 have (and always have had) with the NDA is that it stops them communicating information gained from 3rd parties with their members.

 

If I'm honest, I'd have an issue with this if I was Club1872 and do have as a fan and investor. 

[stewarty 2,007]

4 minutes ago, CammyF said:

I believe the issue Club1872 have (and always have had) with the NDA is that it stops them communicating information gained from 3rd parties with their members.

 

If I'm honest, I'd have an issue with this if I was Club1872 and do have as a fan and investor. 

That does sound odd. Though I seem to recall this all stemmed from C1872 approaching Castore and trying to find out or check sensitive information behind the club's back, or something along those lines.  That would annoy me much as it seems to have done for the club and Castore.    

[BEARGER 1,830]

Latest from Club1872
 

 

RIFC AGM 2022 Questions

Dear Contributor,

Club 1872 Directors were able to ask 2 questions on behalf of Contributors at yesterday’s RIFC AGM. We have another 15 questions covering the Sydney Cup, Elite, Memorial Walls and Sports Direct litigation, New Edmiston House and other topics which we were not able to ask at the meeting. We will follow up on these with the RIFC Board.

We asked Douglas Park to lay out his detailed vision for the club over the next 5 years. You can view the question and Mr Park's answer here. We welcome Mr Park’s public commitment to the RIFC board engaging with Club 1872.

Mr Park touched on the issue of Rangers asking Club 1872 to sign a Non Disclosure Agreement. We addressed this topic at a high level in a statement released in March 2022, which you can view here

https://club1872.co.uk/news/club-1872-concerns-over-rangers-executive-management/

We will address this issue again in more detail over the coming days so that the position is very clear to our Contributors and supporters.

Club 1872 also asked about the repayment of loans to John Bennett and Julian Wolhardt since June 2022. You can view the question and Mr Bennett's answer here. Again, we will follow up on this with the RIFC Board to try to get a clearer answer on the loans repaid and the interest paid in that period.

Club 1872

 

Club 1872 concerns over Rangers’ Executive Management

In recent weeks, following the announcement of Rangers’ participation in the Sydney Cup in Australia, supporters have begun to publicly and vocally question the judgement, competence and honesty of the Rangers’ Executive Team. It is the opinion of the Club 1872 Board that not only are they correct to do so, but that it is crucial for the future health of the club that they do so.

Unfortunately, the contempt shown to supporters over this issue is only the tip of the iceberg and has been ongoing, albeit less visibly to the majority of supporters, for almost two years. It is a source of great regret that we are having to raise these matters publicly – having always attempted to engage privately and constructively with the club – but the current custodians of Rangers Football Club have refused to speak with us privately despite repeated attempts to do so.

The experience of Club 1872 Directors, both past and present, is that Rangers’ Executive Team, led by Stewart Robertson, James Bisgrove and David Graham, has developed an extremely unhealthy disdain for the Rangers support and that inaccurate information has regularly been disseminated through the club’s own public statements, briefings to fan media and highly selective leaks to a small group of individuals within the Rangers support. This conduct has not, in our opinion, been intended to advance the aims of the club, but instead to serve the interests of a handful of members of the Plc Board and Executive team and to protect them from healthy scrutiny and justified criticism.

When Club 1872 attempted to represent the interests and concerns of supporters on a variety of topics such as ticketing, safe standing, disabled facilities, season ticket renewals, Scottish football governance and merchandise issues, the reaction of the Executive team over a number of months between March and July 2020 was dismissive, patronising and at times openly hostile.

Rangers’ MyGers scheme, rather than being presented honestly as a commercial levy on away and European tickets, has been marketed around a false concept of loyalty that is based purely on fans’ ability to spend and from which the vast majority of supporters have not seen a single benefit. MyGers has falsely been positioned by the club as a form of meaningful fan engagement when the reality is that it has simply been a vehicle to try to find more and more ways to monetise the support. It has also had the effect of marginalising Rangers Supporters Clubs who, despite facilitating the attendance of thousands of supporters at games, have seen their allocations cut.

We have also been extremely concerned to see Rangers, under Commercial Director, James Bisgrove, sign up to dubious commercial partnerships with cryptocurrency and NFT providers despite the obvious pitfalls of promoting these types of high risk, unregulated, third party ‘investments’ to supporters. The ‘Fan Token’ which Bitci launched in partnership with Rangers has, in common with many similar schemes, dropped in value by around 90% since its high shortly after launch in August 2021 – leaving supporters who purchased them out of pocket.

Club 1872 also has documentary and other evidence that over the past two years, since the appointment of new Communications Director, David Graham, supporters have been regularly fed inaccurate information on issues ranging from player transfers, commercial activities and merchandise to shareholder relations. Stewart Robertson even went as far as to fabricate a grievance with Club 1872 and falsely accuse Club 1872 Directors of breaching confidentiality. It is the Club 1872 Board’s opinion that this was simply an excuse to cut off all dialogue with us as it became apparent to Mr Robertson that we would not accept supporters being misled on important issues. Mr Robertson then attempted to force Club 1872 into signing a blanket Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) which would have had the effect of preventing us from making any public comment about Rangers and required us to report any information we received from third parties to Rangers’ Executives. When Club 1872 took legal advice, and on the basis of that advice declined to sign this agreement, Mr Robertson refused our offer to sign amended NDAs for specific, commercially sensitive matters. This was a clear and obvious attempt to silence Club 1872 and restrict our ability to effectively represent our Contributors and the wider support.

There then followed a concerted campaign by individuals very close to the club to forcefully remove Club 1872 Directors. Although this attempt ultimately failed thanks to our Contributors, the smears and lies which were regularly broadcast created a false, negative perception of both Club 1872 and our attempts to reach a 25% shareholding for supporters through the purchase of Dave King’s shares. This was nothing more than a dishonest attack on Club 1872 and fan representation which started immediately after it became clear to Rangers’ Executives that we would not collaborate with the way in which they were conducting themselves. Indeed, on more than one occasion we had to refuse David Graham’s urging to disseminate information to supporters that was simply not true.

We have today written to Rangers’ Vice Chairman, John Bennett, Plc Board members Barry Scott, Alastair Johnston and Julian Wolhardt and major shareholders Stuart Gibson, George Letham and George Taylor, asking them to enter into dialogue with us as a matter of urgency so that we can present the information we have gathered on the issues raised above. The financial contribution that these individuals have made to the club is considerable and to be commended and we hope they will work with us to improve the way the club is being run. We have also extended an offer to a number of fan media outlets to meet them and outline the information in our possession which shows the way in which they have been manipulated by Rangers’ Executives.

Rangers supporters did not go through the events of 2012 to find ourselves back in a situation where individuals at the club put their own interests ahead of Rangers. April is a huge month for the club and the ongoing behaviour of the Rangers hierarchy and their refusal to engage properly with supporters is threatening to distract from important matters on the pitch. As supporters, we unconditionally support the team, the players and the club but the days of blindly following the club’s custodians when they are not, in our opinion, acting in Rangers’ best interests are long gone. We sincerely hope that the required changes can be made sooner rather than later, that the club’s hierarchy can reconnect with supporters and we can move forward together. In the meantime, we would urge supporters to continue to critically examine all information released by Rangers’ Executives or their proxies.

[forlanssister 3,110]

2 hours ago, Bluedell said:

Is there still a shortage of disabled spaces? There were a lot added a few years ago. I'm not sure how well monitored some of these spaces are.

Yes there's still a long waiting list of over a decade.

 

Don't think there's ever been an effective monitoring system per se and undoubtedly if one were in place better use could be made of existing spaces. This has been raised numerous times over the years but for 6 or 7 years we didn't even have a ticket scanner at the entrance. 

 

I assume when the ticketing system is finally replaced our tickets will be fully integrated into the system so better use can be made of the spaces.

 

I'm confident the proposals will adequately cater for the need/demand of wheelchair fans and will allow a lot more people access to see Rangers play at Ibrox.

 

It's worth pointing out too that the propsals will create an equal amount of ambulant disabled easy access seating.

 

 

[Bill 13,717]

14 hours ago, CammyF said:

I'm unconvinced by Parks and have been for a while. Bennet might even be a better option. 

I could understand where you're coming from on this if I knew exactly what it is you expect from him that you don't think he is delivering.

[BEARGER 1,830]

THE Board of Rangers International Football Club PLC is pleased to confirm that all resolutions presented at today’s Annual General Meeting were approved by shareholder vote.

This successful outcome will assist the club with its ambitious investment plans, on and off the field of play.

[Bill 13,717]

18 minutes ago, BEARGER said:

Latest from Club1872
 

 

RIFC AGM 2022 Questions

Dear Contributor,

Club 1872 Directors were able to ask 2 questions on behalf of Contributors at yesterday’s RIFC AGM. We have another 15 questions covering the Sydney Cup, Elite, Memorial Walls and Sports Direct litigation, New Edmiston House and other topics which we were not able to ask at the meeting. We will follow up on these with the RIFC Board.

We asked Douglas Park to lay out his detailed vision for the club over the next 5 years. You can view the question and Mr Park's answer here. We welcome Mr Park’s public commitment to the RIFC board engaging with Club 1872.

Mr Park touched on the issue of Rangers asking Club 1872 to sign a Non Disclosure Agreement. We addressed this topic at a high level in a statement released in March 2022, which you can view here

https://club1872.co.uk/news/club-1872-concerns-over-rangers-executive-management/

We will address this issue again in more detail over the coming days so that the position is very clear to our Contributors and supporters.

Club 1872 also asked about the repayment of loans to John Bennett and Julian Wolhardt since June 2022. You can view the question and Mr Bennett's answer here. Again, we will follow up on this with the RIFC Board to try to get a clearer answer on the loans repaid and the interest paid in that period.

Club 1872

 

Club 1872 concerns over Rangers’ Executive Management

In recent weeks, following the announcement of Rangers’ participation in the Sydney Cup in Australia, supporters have begun to publicly and vocally question the judgement, competence and honesty of the Rangers’ Executive Team. It is the opinion of the Club 1872 Board that not only are they correct to do so, but that it is crucial for the future health of the club that they do so.

Unfortunately, the contempt shown to supporters over this issue is only the tip of the iceberg and has been ongoing, albeit less visibly to the majority of supporters, for almost two years. It is a source of great regret that we are having to raise these matters publicly – having always attempted to engage privately and constructively with the club – but the current custodians of Rangers Football Club have refused to speak with us privately despite repeated attempts to do so.

The experience of Club 1872 Directors, both past and present, is that Rangers’ Executive Team, led by Stewart Robertson, James Bisgrove and David Graham, has developed an extremely unhealthy disdain for the Rangers support and that inaccurate information has regularly been disseminated through the club’s own public statements, briefings to fan media and highly selective leaks to a small group of individuals within the Rangers support. This conduct has not, in our opinion, been intended to advance the aims of the club, but instead to serve the interests of a handful of members of the Plc Board and Executive team and to protect them from healthy scrutiny and justified criticism.

When Club 1872 attempted to represent the interests and concerns of supporters on a variety of topics such as ticketing, safe standing, disabled facilities, season ticket renewals, Scottish football governance and merchandise issues, the reaction of the Executive team over a number of months between March and July 2020 was dismissive, patronising and at times openly hostile.

Rangers’ MyGers scheme, rather than being presented honestly as a commercial levy on away and European tickets, has been marketed around a false concept of loyalty that is based purely on fans’ ability to spend and from which the vast majority of supporters have not seen a single benefit. MyGers has falsely been positioned by the club as a form of meaningful fan engagement when the reality is that it has simply been a vehicle to try to find more and more ways to monetise the support. It has also had the effect of marginalising Rangers Supporters Clubs who, despite facilitating the attendance of thousands of supporters at games, have seen their allocations cut.

We have also been extremely concerned to see Rangers, under Commercial Director, James Bisgrove, sign up to dubious commercial partnerships with cryptocurrency and NFT providers despite the obvious pitfalls of promoting these types of high risk, unregulated, third party ‘investments’ to supporters. The ‘Fan Token’ which Bitci launched in partnership with Rangers has, in common with many similar schemes, dropped in value by around 90% since its high shortly after launch in August 2021 – leaving supporters who purchased them out of pocket.

Club 1872 also has documentary and other evidence that over the past two years, since the appointment of new Communications Director, David Graham, supporters have been regularly fed inaccurate information on issues ranging from player transfers, commercial activities and merchandise to shareholder relations. Stewart Robertson even went as far as to fabricate a grievance with Club 1872 and falsely accuse Club 1872 Directors of breaching confidentiality. It is the Club 1872 Board’s opinion that this was simply an excuse to cut off all dialogue with us as it became apparent to Mr Robertson that we would not accept supporters being misled on important issues. Mr Robertson then attempted to force Club 1872 into signing a blanket Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) which would have had the effect of preventing us from making any public comment about Rangers and required us to report any information we received from third parties to Rangers’ Executives. When Club 1872 took legal advice, and on the basis of that advice declined to sign this agreement, Mr Robertson refused our offer to sign amended NDAs for specific, commercially sensitive matters. This was a clear and obvious attempt to silence Club 1872 and restrict our ability to effectively represent our Contributors and the wider support.

There then followed a concerted campaign by individuals very close to the club to forcefully remove Club 1872 Directors. Although this attempt ultimately failed thanks to our Contributors, the smears and lies which were regularly broadcast created a false, negative perception of both Club 1872 and our attempts to reach a 25% shareholding for supporters through the purchase of Dave King’s shares. This was nothing more than a dishonest attack on Club 1872 and fan representation which started immediately after it became clear to Rangers’ Executives that we would not collaborate with the way in which they were conducting themselves. Indeed, on more than one occasion we had to refuse David Graham’s urging to disseminate information to supporters that was simply not true.

We have today written to Rangers’ Vice Chairman, John Bennett, Plc Board members Barry Scott, Alastair Johnston and Julian Wolhardt and major shareholders Stuart Gibson, George Letham and George Taylor, asking them to enter into dialogue with us as a matter of urgency so that we can present the information we have gathered on the issues raised above. The financial contribution that these individuals have made to the club is considerable and to be commended and we hope they will work with us to improve the way the club is being run. We have also extended an offer to a number of fan media outlets to meet them and outline the information in our possession which shows the way in which they have been manipulated by Rangers’ Executives.

Rangers supporters did not go through the events of 2012 to find ourselves back in a situation where individuals at the club put their own interests ahead of Rangers. April is a huge month for the club and the ongoing behaviour of the Rangers hierarchy and their refusal to engage properly with supporters is threatening to distract from important matters on the pitch. As supporters, we unconditionally support the team, the players and the club but the days of blindly following the club’s custodians when they are not, in our opinion, acting in Rangers’ best interests are long gone. We sincerely hope that the required changes can be made sooner rather than later, that the club’s hierarchy can reconnect with supporters and we can move forward together. In the meantime, we would urge supporters to continue to critically examine all information released by Rangers’ Executives or their proxies.

[stewarty 2,007]

1 hour ago, stewarty said:

That does sound odd. Though I seem to recall this all stemmed from C1872 approaching Castore and trying to find out or check sensitive information behind the club's back, or something along those lines.  That would annoy me much as it seems to have done for the club and Castore.    

I checked and it all stemmed from the Rev McQuarrie's revelation when he was expelled from the C1872 Board in relation to an email sent to the Board of Castore asking for details of the contract with Rangers.  The email was allegedly sent by Laura Fawkes and Euan Mcfarlane behind the back of McQuarrie and Alan Fraser who were also on the C1872 board.    The club took this as a breach of confidence, which seems a perfectly reasonable stance to take.  Whilst the current office bearers at C1872 continue to be involved, or are unwilling to make amends in relation to this, I'm not sure whether this is actually going to be resolved any time soon.