Gerspride conference, Sat 14 nov

[Zappa 0]

oh....never mind

Well, even if I did 'need' to answer it, you know fine well that you asked me to quantify something which can't be quantified, or at least not by me!

[Union City Blue 0]

Pretty much what BD has said I think. Once you have something to ask people to fall in in support of and once you reveal the grand plan, then canvas for support.

 

Different strokes for different folks mate.

 

The conference yesterday was - by all accounts - excellent. One of the things it achieved was to open peoples' eyes to the possibilities. Several people I spoke to yesterday, including non-RST members, said that's exactly what happened.

 

Right now is about getting the conversation going while the details are ironed out in the background. Sooner rather than later we intend to be back to you with a proposal for your consideration. We are letting you know that these are our intentions and trying to explain the context as we see it. People are contributing ideas left right and centre as a result of the conversation having started so there's a benefit to that in itself.

 

Telling people to shut up and resign is only one of several suggestions that are coming forward!

[Union City Blue 0]

Well, even if I did 'need' to answer it, you know fine well that you asked me to quantify something which can't be quantified, or at least not by me!

 

Well, that is true ......

 

Although on a serious note, I was also trying to genuinely understand what gave you the confidence to state that "most" Rangers fans wouldn't get behind it, as you described.

[Super_Ally 0]

Different strokes for different folks mate.

 

The conference yesterday was - by all accounts - excellent. One of the things it achieved was to open peoples' eyes to the possibilities. Several people I spoke to yesterday, including non-RST members, said that's exactly what happened.

 

Right now is about getting the conversation going while the details are ironed out in the background. Sooner rather than later we intend to be back to you with a proposal for your consideration. We are letting you know that these are our intentions and trying to explain the context as we see it. People are contributing ideas left right and centre as a result of the conversation having started so there's a benefit to that in itself.

 

Telling people to shut up and resign is only one of several suggestions that are coming forward!

 

I didn't mean to shit on the conference. It sounded very interesting. Most notably the German speaker.

 

FWIW, if the main protagonists ego's allowed, "shutting up and resigning" would most likely be the biggest boost this project could get. I don't know any of them personally (so no axe to grind here) but they do appear to be tainted with a charge of being in it for their own advancement rather than the clubs. To prove that false they could and should step aside. They wont, and if they did who steps into the void and fills it with any credibility to drive the project forward? I dunno what the right answer is there.

[boss 0]

Tannochside, you asked for questions. I've jotted down some that spring to mind, although the list is far from exhaustive. Give me your reply to each one and maybe we can talk.

 

Unity

 

How can the bodies be genuinely united when several Assembly board members are furious with Andy Kerr for issuing a joint statement behind their backs and without their approval?

 

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?

 

Are you not concerned that GN/Frankie's STS report was recently acknowledged and supported by all main websites except one?

 

Why do you think the RST does not give press releases to forums, except one?

 

Are you aware of the close family ties that exist between senior members of the Assembly and the RST?

 

Does this call into question their independence?

 

You state that the RST, Assembly and Association are the only organisations to exist both on and off line. Does the Association have any real web presence?

 

Are you aware of the numerous projects the good people of RM are undertaking this year?

 

Do you accept that this represents far more projects than the RST has ever undertaken in a single year?

 

Do you not accept that RM has, therefore, a very real offline presence?

 

Are you aware that the Association (and indeed the RST) has a fraction of the membership that RM has?

 

GerSave

 

You state: "The gersave scheme you will have heard of is already there, and regulated by the authorities, so would be a feasable (sic.) vehicle for collecting funds". Which authorities regulate GerSave?

 

Is it not the case that GerSave was specifically created to be outside the scope of FSA regulation?

 

Do you agree that GerSave is a sharesave scheme which is constituted to purchase shares in Rangers?

 

You make it clear that: "nobody has stepped forward with a plan. Nobody." Does that include the organisations?

 

And why are you so adamant that we should support a plan that doesn't yet exist?

 

Do you agree that a membership scheme, as long proposed by the RST, would require an entirely different constitution, a different legal structure and be in a different regulatory regime?

 

How many RST board directors have, to date, not participated in GerSave but now seem to think it is the solution to "47 days or else"?

 

Why do you state that GerSave "would be a feasable (sic.) vehicle for collecting funds" when the reality is that you have no idea whether it would be?

 

Do you therefore disagree with poster UCB (an RST board member) who stated: "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."

 

You state: "To do a proper business plan for a fans owned model of Rangers, you need to know your starting position, what funds you have got, what funds you need, and who is with you". Yet you refuse to acknowledge that market research is required before moving forward. Is this not somewhat contradictory?

 

You comment that: "the share price for the existing funds generated by Gersave has still to be determined and should be in line with current market value" and "I cant tell you what they ended up getting the shares at". Should you not be aware that the shares were bought for 59.5p?

 

Should you not also be aware that there is no agreement with the club for any price other than 59.5p even although the current mid market price is 52.5p?

 

Are you aware that the RST approached the club last month and offered to buy �£50k worth of shares?

 

And that the club turned them down, not least because it was a closed period in respect of the accounts and an absurd time to ask the question?

 

Does it concern you that UCB states GerSave is a vehicle for all fans to invest in the club, yet it is a requirement of the rules of GerSave that only RST members can invest?

 

RST

 

Are you aware of the lies that have been told about the RST membership numbers and that continue to be told?

 

Why did the RST spokesperson state yesterday that he did not know how many members the RST had but could guess at 2,000, when it is a requirement of the RST constitution to keep a membership register that tells at any point in time how many members they have?

 

What are your thoughts on RST members being refused information on membership numbers when requested?

 

Does it worry you that UCB stated: "the RST AGM reported the membership in the 1600-1700 range" when that did not agree with the facts?

 

Do you think it is ethical to refund members subscriptions, something which is not provided for in its constitution, rather than release such numbers?

 

Opportunism

 

Firstly you frighten us with: "if we do not have a plan and funds in place with the next 47 days, the alternative is unthinkable". Then you tell us: "I am heartened by his very clear wording that we do not HAVE to sell to meet our banking obligations, and that the bank have agreed our funding projections to the end of the season" and that "from our own accounts recently published we can see that the bank has now accepted our business plan and our funding requirements". Which is it?

 

The RST has spent 5 years ridiculing the Assembly, its constitution and its very existence. Now the RST has made a u-turn and wants to work with the Assembly. Worse, it is using its new found best friend as a positive example of why the RST is now so good. Is this: s) opportunism; or b) exploitation?

 

New purchaser

 

A very senior ex RST board member has stated that DK is out the picture. You posted: "and for the bank to drop their stubborn refusal to accept less than �£1 per �£1 of debt, and do the deal that is still out there to be done". Which is it?

 

Is it true that the RST opened up the GersPride conference to non-members because so few people had paid their �£5 to attend?

 

And why, even once opened up, did only 100 people pay to attend at a time when you tell us we have only 47 days to act?

 

Why have the RST stated that "Bain is not involved in the day-to-day running of the club" when that is not, and never was, true? Scaremongering?

 

Do you accept that, although Muir has hawked players to other clubs, the final decision on whether a player is sold will rest with the directors in performance with their legal obligations under the Companies Act 2006?

 

And finally

 

Are you aware that cynicism is not spelled "cynacism"?

[Zappa 0]

Although on a serious note, I was also trying to genuinely understand what gave you the confidence to state that "most" Rangers fans wouldn't get behind it, as you described.

Well, for a kick off 'most' Rangers fans aren't currently RST members are they? If they were, then nobody could doubt that the 'current' RST were the appropriate 'vehicle'. There's 40,000+ season ticket holders at Ibrox. How many of them are RST members? More importantly, how many of them do the RST hope will become members now that the RST is asking them to get involved in a 'new' fan ownership model?

[Union City Blue 0]

Well, for a kick off 'most' Rangers fans aren't currently RST members are they? If they were, then nobody could doubt that the 'current' RST were the appropriate 'vehicle'. There's 40,000+ season ticket holders at Ibrox. How many of them are RST members? More importantly, how many of them do the RST hope will become members now that the RST is asking them to get involved in a 'new' fan ownership model?

 

I see, I understand where you're coming from.

 

TBH I don't think we'll know the level of support until it becomes real. Any other answer would be dishonest.

 

All I can say is that I'm hopeful that as the club is in difficult waters these days, that more and more people will become involved; enough to make a difference. As the chap in the Sunday Herald said today, sometimes you've got to speculate to accumulate.

[Union City Blue 0]

Tannochside, you asked for questions. I've jotted down some that spring to mind, although the list is far from exhaustive. Give me your reply to each one and maybe we can talk.

 

Unity

 

How can the bodies be genuinely united when several Assembly board members are furious with Andy Kerr for issuing a joint statement behind their backs and without their approval?

 

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?

 

Are you not concerned that GN/Frankie's STS report was recently acknowledged and supported by all main websites except one?

 

Why do you think the RST does not give press releases to forums, except one?

 

Are you aware of the close family ties that exist between senior members of the Assembly and the RST?

 

Does this call into question their independence?

 

You state that the RST, Assembly and Association are the only organisations to exist both on and off line. Does the Association have any real web presence?

 

Are you aware of the numerous projects the good people of RM are undertaking this year?

 

Do you accept that this represents far more projects than the RST has ever undertaken in a single year?

 

Do you not accept that RM has, therefore, a very real offline presence?

 

Are you aware that the Association (and indeed the RST) has a fraction of the membership that RM has?

 

GerSave

 

You state: "The gersave scheme you will have heard of is already there, and regulated by the authorities, so would be a feasable (sic.) vehicle for collecting funds". Which authorities regulate GerSave?

 

Is it not the case that GerSave was specifically created to be outside the scope of FSA regulation?

 

Do you agree that GerSave is a sharesave scheme which is constituted to purchase shares in Rangers?

 

You make it clear that: "nobody has stepped forward with a plan. Nobody." Does that include the organisations?

 

And why are you so adamant that we should support a plan that doesn't yet exist?

 

Do you agree that a membership scheme, as long proposed by the RST, would require an entirely different constitution, a different legal structure and be in a different regulatory regime?

 

How many RST board directors have, to date, not participated in GerSave but now seem to think it is the solution to "47 days or else"?

 

Why do you state that GerSave "would be a feasable (sic.) vehicle for collecting funds" when the reality is that you have no idea whether it would be?

 

Do you therefore disagree with poster UCB (an RST board member) who stated: "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."

 

You state: "To do a proper business plan for a fans owned model of Rangers, you need to know your starting position, what funds you have got, what funds you need, and who is with you". Yet you refuse to acknowledge that market research is required before moving forward. Is this not somewhat contradictory?

 

You comment that: "the share price for the existing funds generated by Gersave has still to be determined and should be in line with current market value" and "I cant tell you what they ended up getting the shares at". Should you not be aware that the shares were bought for 59.5p?

 

Should you not also be aware that there is no agreement with the club for any price other than 59.5p even although the current mid market price is 52.5p?

 

Are you aware that the RST approached the club last month and offered to buy �£50k worth of shares?

 

And that the club turned them down, not least because it was a closed period in respect of the accounts and an absurd time to ask the question?

 

Does it concern you that UCB states GerSave is a vehicle for all fans to invest in the club, yet it is a requirement of the rules of GerSave that only RST members can invest?

 

RST

 

Are you aware of the lies that have been told about the RST membership numbers and that continue to be told?

 

Why did the RST spokesperson state yesterday that he did not know how many members the RST had but could guess at 2,000, when it is a requirement of the RST constitution to keep a membership register that tells at any point in time how many members they have?

 

What are your thoughts on RST members being refused information on membership numbers when requested?

 

Does it worry you that UCB stated: "the RST AGM reported the membership in the 1600-1700 range" when that did not agree with the facts?

 

Do you think it is ethical to refund members subscriptions, something which is not provided for in its constitution, rather than release such numbers?

 

Opportunism

 

Firstly you frighten us with: "if we do not have a plan and funds in place with the next 47 days, the alternative is unthinkable". Then you tell us: "I am heartened by his very clear wording that we do not HAVE to sell to meet our banking obligations, and that the bank have agreed our funding projections to the end of the season" and that "from our own accounts recently published we can see that the bank has now accepted our business plan and our funding requirements". Which is it?

 

The RST has spent 5 years ridiculing the Assembly, its constitution and its very existence. Now the RST has made a u-turn and wants to work with the Assembly. Worse, it is using its new found best friend as a positive example of why the RST is now so good. Is this: s) opportunism; or b) exploitation?

 

New purchaser

 

A very senior ex RST board member has stated that DK is out the picture. You posted: "and for the bank to drop their stubborn refusal to accept less than �£1 per �£1 of debt, and do the deal that is still out there to be done". Which is it?

 

Is it true that the RST opened up the GersPride conference to non-members because so few people had paid their �£5 to attend?

 

And why, even once opened up, did only 100 people pay to attend at a time when you tell us we have only 47 days to act?

 

Why have the RST stated that "Bain is not involved in the day-to-day running of the club" when that is not, and never was, true? Scaremongering?

 

Do you accept that, although Muir has hawked players to other clubs, the final decision on whether a player is sold will rest with the directors in performance with their legal obligations under the Companies Act 2006?

 

And finally

 

Are you aware that cynicism is not spelled "cynacism"?

 

Boss,

 

Your position is 100% clear and it's obvious that, for your own reasons, you will put obstacles in the way of anything the RST is trying to do here. That is understood.

 

Tannochsidebear, as far as I know, is an organisationally-neutral, well-respected Rangers fan who happens to be a member of just about every organisation going and a friend of all. To ask him (or anybody) nearly 40 questions on a thread like this one and the one on RM is, with the greatest of respect, ridiculous.

 

It's close to pointless trying to have a conversation when it's framed in such a way. One suspects that even if you got nearly 40 satisfactory answers, you'd have another 80 questions within the hour. If he (or any other individual) tried to answer your questions it would be an impossible task which would almost inevitibly result in inaccuracies and lead to ridicule. If your questions are avoided it will make those avoiding them look stupid and leave them open to ridicule. So you win, and this particular conversation is probably over.

 

If your aim is to kill the debate and isolate it to places other than Gersnet and RM, this is definitely the way to go.

[Zappa 0]

I see, I understand where you're coming from.

 

TBH I don't think we'll know the level of support until it becomes real. Any other answer would be dishonest.

 

All I can say is that I'm hopeful that as the club is in difficult waters these days, that more and more people will become involved; enough to make a difference. As the chap in the Sunday Herald said today, sometimes you've got to speculate to accumulate.

From what I can see there's going to be a problem for you guys to get the message out to the fans when nobody even had the vision to video or record the audio from the Gerspride conference yesterday. The mics are all pumped through a PA system, so even if nobody was able to video the event, it would have been so simple to record the audio from the event that a schoolkid could have done it. At least the 45 min section of Q&A's would have made very interesting listening to a lot of fans who didn't/couldn't attend & would have been something that would have gathered further interest in the ideas being thrown around. I'm not slagging off here, I'm only pointing out a glaring failure to take advantage of the conference by spreading it to the wider support.

[boss 0]

Your position is 100% clear and it's obvious that, for your own reasons, you will put obstacles in the way of anything the RST is trying to do here. That is understood.

 

You really shouldn't make assumptions in your position. I am a long time member of the RST and therefore, presumably, support its aims.

 

Tannochside asked for questions. I asked some questions. You won't answer any of them, and you suggest to Tannochside that he doesn't answer them either. And you wonder why so many don't trust the RST?