damien1

What would you do differently? It's a hypothetical question I know but presuming we all as Rangers fans want to see the club back on an even keel then looking to progress further, I'm just wondering what you think might be a better course of action. Ok here is my take on it. We aren't is as bad a situation that the mhedia would have us believe. We are in debt to the tune of an amount we can't repay atm but are assured doesn't need to be paid off in full before January. We know SDM has put the club up for sale. We know he says he wants it to go into the right hands. We know he hates the RST. We know Graham Duffy hasn't the cash to bail out the 'fans takeover' if it goes pearshaped. We know Graham Duffy has dubious qualities when it comes to club ownership. We know Muir has pulled other companies out of the gutter. We know no-one in their right mind is going to come in and buy Rangers outright. We know this because their is very little to be gained by owning Rangers at this present time financially. We know the fanbase is as fragmented now as it ever has. We know feasibility studies haven't even been done to the viability of the 'fans takeover' regardless of any model. We know any other fan based ask for money has been near as farcical. We know that in this current climate there certainly will be very few fans who can afford to shell out £1000 out on top of their other expenses. So where do we go? TBH I think the best course of action for now is for Rangers to be taking stock, taking back charge of its merchandising, selling itself more, stop taking pish from any mhedia source, fighting back, because believe me undefended bad press is costing us merchandise cash be it in this country or others. At first I thought the Muir appointment was a bad thing, but in reality their is no real alternative for now. Rangers now consist of a stadium, a training ground and a piss poor team we couldn't sell for buttons, previous assets have been stripped already so there basically isn't much there for Muir to get rid of. Slashing the wage bill shouldm't be a bad thing cause half the players on the park don't even deserve it, they can't even do the basics yet are paid weekly what most on here probably get paid yearly. I would dearly love for a knight in shining armour to come in and rescue us, but lets face it, it isn't going to happen and the probability of the 'fans takeover' being a success is very limited. It may be we just have to ride out this storm whether we like it or not.

Is this the same 'failed owner' whos arse they licked to try and get a seat at the table? Voting against Muir won't work, they'll just instate someone else. Our voting rights are basically fekked. The words 'clutching at straws' is becoming more apparently every press release they give.

Would I? Yes Will I? No For various reasons, as far as can be assertained from information online, this guy is a no-gooder. It also involves the RST who I wouldn't trust a single penny too. And the very fact that it is pretty much unviable that 45000 fans are going to come up with £1000 regularly to support this, because believe me, once you've dug into your pocket it'd become an ongoing process. As has been said above, our club was built on the fountains of the common man until the corporate hobbyists got involved, where are they now? Where are they in the clubs hour of need? In previous seasons it could be said many fans have invested way more than £1000 following Rangers per season, the difference is we knew how this money was or wasn't used, with this new model I pretty much think we'll be left in the dark. It's a nice idea that needs serious considerations by those involved, no more so than the RST to whom many potential fans will sidestep this because of their involvement. The man himself has to convince the 'ordinary fan' that this is viable, can and will work, and therefore give us the detail we need before we invest a single penny.

Cap doffed Boss, superb article.

With all the tartan trannies boycotting the Scotland games it'll be safe for Rangers supporters to start attending again

Excuse me tihs accusation that Dingwall is profiting from FF, I am a critic, but where is the evidence of this? It is a very serious allegation. At the time when we are thinking about putting money into Rangers, I think we should be told if there is evidence, or we should not put such accusations in this forum. Where does the tee-shirt money go? Where does the fanzine money go? Is he not paid for volume of traffic and hits on his site? Otherwise why have all advertising that a footymad site has? T-shirts and badges all of which are unofficial therefore not only fleecing the fans of cash but also bleeding the club of monies too.

No, it's about using other groups for the purpose of a common goal and reaching out to more.

How what time does it finish? If they are drinking with Andy expect them home on Thursday

It is proof that both are closely linked, so the poll doesn't need voted on. If ever unity is required between the different supporters group is needed, it is now. Otherwise the ownership scheme suggested is dead in the water. If all the groups take part do they get a fair say? IMO it's not about getting the groups say, but to use each groups influence on their members to get as many people involved as possible. But to do that all groups need to be addressed regardless of any squabble, therefore an umbrella group needs to oversee this and ensure that all receive the same information at the same time and any progress or update reports. Someone completely neutral and with the clubs best interest at heart would be required, and that in itself would prove difficult but possible.

Shocking evidence of the ineptitude of the Romanians. Let's hope it is used and not disgarded by UEFA and Rangers.

That brings up an interesting question. Why doesn't someone just start up a new group? We're starting to have groups coming out our ears, that's the problem, we need some sort of group that takes everyone under it's umbrella, a properly democratic one.

I do not think he would be on this forum. :pierre: He will have someone reporting back

It is proof that both are closely linked, so the poll doesn't need voted on.

Non-player, coming from an ex-member, it's totally lost all credibility, has leadership at odds with the support it's supposed to represent and needs dismantled and re-built from scratch with people with nothing but the club's interest at heart.

Boss' questions? Yes, coherent proof that the RST and FF are one and the same.

UCB can you answer just one of boss's questions for me please: You state that the organisations: "have the olive branch out amidst promises of new beginnings" yet RM, GN, VB, No.1 etc. were neither contacted nor invited to GersPride. Does this worry you that only one website is involved?

There's a common name that keeps cropping up here which seems to be holding people back, now if that person gave a damn about Rangers surely you would think that person would take a backseat for the good of the club.

It is a new experience and albeit a better experience. If the RST would be frank in answering quesitons it would go along way to increasing their trustworthiness and indeed maybe get them more members.

I'm assuming you are on the RST board, correct me if I'm wrong? Yes I am. It's interesting that it is presented as a joint venture, but whenever it gets to the nitty gritty it becomes "the Trust ... providing a vehicle to invest funds in the club" and "what the Trust aims to be in a position to do sooner rather than later." Would it be correct to say that this is a Trust initiative, which has the backing of the other associations? Would any money be recieved and handled by the Trust? If so, it's a bit of a stretch to be selling it as a joint venture, don't you think? It couldn't be clearer that this is a joint initiative, but the fact is that the RST already a scheme in place (Gersave) which enables the purchase of shares in Rangers. On that basis, that aspect of supporting fundraising in the short-term would naturally sit on 'that side of the fence', if you will. I think most people would recognise that as being sensible and hopefully not see it as too much of a stretch. By the way, how many members do you have? As you probably know, the RST AGM reported the membership in the 1600-1700 range. With recent activity i.e. people joining and re-joining every day, from what I understand, we are looking at approx. 2000. ^^^^^ As a Rangers Group, why doesn't the RST give press releases to Vanguard Bears as it does to other groups? And is it a decision from the RST board? Feel free to pm me an answer if you don't wish it publicly known. Assuming this is true, I didn't actually know that. Is it possible for you to find out then?

I'm assuming you are on the RST board, correct me if I'm wrong? Yes I am. It's interesting that it is presented as a joint venture, but whenever it gets to the nitty gritty it becomes "the Trust ... providing a vehicle to invest funds in the club" and "what the Trust aims to be in a position to do sooner rather than later." Would it be correct to say that this is a Trust initiative, which has the backing of the other associations? Would any money be recieved and handled by the Trust? If so, it's a bit of a stretch to be selling it as a joint venture, don't you think? It couldn't be clearer that this is a joint initiative, but the fact is that the RST already a scheme in place (Gersave) which enables the purchase of shares in Rangers. On that basis, that aspect of supporting fundraising in the short-term would naturally sit on 'that side of the fence', if you will. I think most people would recognise that as being sensible and hopefully not see it as too much of a stretch. By the way, how many members do you have? As you probably know, the RST AGM reported the membership in the 1600-1700 range. With recent activity i.e. people joining and re-joining every day, from what I understand, we are looking at approx. 2000. ^^^^^ As a Rangers Group, why doesn't the RST give press releases to Vanguard Bears as it does to other groups? And is it a decision from the RST board? Feel free to pm me an answer if you don't wish it publicly known.

I'm assuming you are on the RST board, correct me if I'm wrong? Yes I am. It's interesting that it is presented as a joint venture, but whenever it gets to the nitty gritty it becomes "the Trust ... providing a vehicle to invest funds in the club" and "what the Trust aims to be in a position to do sooner rather than later." Would it be correct to say that this is a Trust initiative, which has the backing of the other associations? Would any money be recieved and handled by the Trust? If so, it's a bit of a stretch to be selling it as a joint venture, don't you think? It couldn't be clearer that this is a joint initiative, but the fact is that the RST already a scheme in place (Gersave) which enables the purchase of shares in Rangers. On that basis, that aspect of supporting fundraising in the short-term would naturally sit on 'that side of the fence', if you will. I think most people would recognise that as being sensible and hopefully not see it as too much of a stretch. By the way, how many members do you have? As you probably know, the RST AGM reported the membership in the 1600-1700 range. With recent activity i.e. people joining and re-joining every day, from what I understand, we are looking at approx. 2000. ^^^^^ As a Rangers Group, why doesn't the RST give press releases to Vanguard Bears as it does to other groups? And is it a decision from the RST board?

Gersave money will be used to buy shares in the club. That's what it's for and that's why people pay into it. That's always been the case. Will the new scheme be easier to get your money/shares back than the original Gersave? You saying waiting 4 months and sending 30 emails isn't easy?

Answers inc. OK mate, your position and level of support is perfectly clear. I hope you can be persuaded to get on board at some point but we'll have to wait and see. If there was a clear cut scheme, run independently from the above groups, with objectives, timescales and targets I would fully endorse it.

PMSL PMSL ? Yes, I thought it was funny

PMSL