Union City Blue 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Maybe you were thinking of comments on this thread - Gers fans seek clout for buy-out Sherlock. no shit........ 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 It previously didn't want Gersave money so close to the Results for example. One of my colleagues is dealing with this but I dont know what the feedback is yet. UCB, without going over old ground I guess you may have indirectly answered two of my questions: 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? My sources of information have been ridiculed elsewhere by RST board members. Posters here might wish to consider the validity of the questions in light of what you have just confirmed. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union City Blue 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 UCB, without going over old ground I guess you may have indirectly answered two of my questions: 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? My sources of information have been ridiculed elsewhere by RST board members. Posters here might wish to consider the validity of the questions in light of what you have just confirmed. Sorry but you are barking up the wrong tree. The Trust informed the club it had Gersave money and asked to discuss how and when the share purchase arrangements would take place. The club asked the Trust to hang on. The Trust said no problem. None of this was last month. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 When wondering about the size of the on-line community earlier I was asking about what peoples' own thoughts on this are, but it must have gotten lost in the fog too ..... Regardless of how many people sites claim to have registered, the active number of unique, regular participants across the best-known Rangers sites must be about 1000 - 1500 - 2000 at absolute TOPS (although I personally don't believe it's anywhere near that high). Friendly lurkers are there too, but they're impossible to guage. Any thoughts bears? I think the reason few people have jumped on answering this is that it's impossible to get anywhere near accurate figures. The Admin of the various message-boards/forums would be able to provide approximate figures from their site's stats, but they wouldn't paint an accurate picture for many reasons. Apart from the obvious problems, there's the question of what qualification as a 'regular participant' (as you put it) actually IS. Personally, I'd say that someone who participates on a forum even just once or twice a month is actually a regular participant & that people don't need to be posting every week never mind every day to qualify into that category. That's why I think that your statement - "2000 at absolute TOPS (although I personally don't believe it's anywhere near that high)" is absolute nonsense. It's a far far higher number than that across the various Rangers sites IMO. Off the top of my head I'd say that it's 100% definitely over the 5000 mark, possibly WELL over it!! Even just looking at FF and RM, I think you're looking at over 5000 regular participants & I'm talking about Rangers fans, not lurkers or tims in disguise. Something which is very relevant though, is that these are fans from all over Britain & all over the world & a far smaller number of them are ST holders at Ibrox. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't be interested or indeed participate in fan ownership of the club though, since many of them will already be supporting the club in their own ways. I definitely think your figure of 2000 tops is extremely light. I'd say 5000 minimum, but anything up to 30000+ if you count people only checking in & contributing once a week or once a month. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 no shit........ You, myself & some others might have known exactly what MF was talking about, but not everyone will have known, so I only clarified it for the sake of clarification. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andy steel 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 I reckon you're underestimating bots in your figure, there, Zappa. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boss 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Sorry but you are barking up the wrong tree. The Trust informed the club it had Gersave money and asked to discuss how and when the share purchase arrangements would take place. The club asked the Trust to hang on. The Trust said no problem. None of this was last month. Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. Lol - think that's fundamentally what I said. Woof, woof. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 It's worth checking out but from what I understand the club can't even speak about most things at this stage so not sure if it would be free to promote it's own sale in such a way. It previously didn't want Gersave money so close to the Results for example. One of my colleagues is dealing with this but I dont know what the feedback is yet. I could be completely wrong but the club not accepting Gersave money is a completely different thing UCB. Because the club was in the process of releasing its annual financial statements there would have been a black-out period for trading shares (to prevent any accusations of insider trading). This is a requirement of the stock markets. There is nothing, as far as I can see, to prevent the club from stating that it would be willing to analyse and research the idea of fan ownership - it is really no different to saying they are looking for a buyer, which they have done publicly already. As I say, could be wrong. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union City Blue 0 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 I think the reason few people have jumped on answering this is that it's impossible to get anywhere near accurate figures. The Admin of the various message-boards/forums would be able to provide approximate figures from their site's stats, but they wouldn't paint an accurate picture for many reasons. Apart from the obvious problems, there's the question of what qualification as a 'regular participant' (as you put it) actually IS. Personally, I'd say that someone who participates on a forum even just once or twice a month is actually a regular participant & that people don't need to be posting every week never mind every day to qualify into that category. That's why I think that your statement - "2000 at absolute TOPS (although I personally don't believe it's anywhere near that high)" is absolute nonsense. It's a far far higher number than that across the various Rangers sites IMO. Off the top of my head I'd say that it's 100% definitely over the 5000 mark, possibly WELL over it!! Even just looking at FF and RM, I think you're looking at over 5000 regular participants & I'm talking about Rangers fans, not lurkers or tims in disguise. Something which is very relevant though, is that these are fans from all over Britain & all over the world & a far smaller number of them are ST holders at Ibrox. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't be interested or indeed participate in fan ownership of the club though, since many of them will already be supporting the club in their own ways. I definitely think your figure of 2000 tops is extremely light. I'd say 5000 minimum, but anything up to 30000+ if you count people only checking in & contributing once a week or once a month. Zappa, To be fair, just because you chose to define "regular" in your own terms which are different to mine, doesn't make my guess of up to 2000 "absolute nonsense". 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted November 17, 2009 Share Posted November 17, 2009 Zappa, To be fair, just because you chose to define "regular" in your own terms which are different to mine, doesn't make my guess of up to 2000 "absolute nonsense". Very fair point UCB. One person's perception of "regular" is another's perception of "irregular". Both your number AND Zappa's (and anyone else for that matter) number are subjective, and therefore NEITHER is absolute nonsense. The main point though is that none of us have ANY idea how many regular contributors there are. But I bet that if we could organise a flyer on the seats on matchday or even a tannoy announcement pre-game regarding some of this (if allowed) would reach out to far more than those we have online. And the trickle effect to other bears would likely be far greater in that regard too. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.