The CIC Meeting at The Louden - Twitter

[bluebear54 0]

Agreed Andy. I didn't mention him because the whole thread may have diverted and that's not what it is about.

Problem is I can't think of many others, and none have his kudos.

[Hildy 0]

I wasn't going to invest anyway because a financial commitment to one scheme is enough, but this latest idea wouldn't have enticed me to join it.

 

I want fan ownership and I want every penny of my money to be used to buy shares to make this happen.

 

The idea that some of it could have been used for other purposes is extremely off-putting.

 

BuyRangers is the best scheme available right now, but who knows, maybe there will be other options in the next few years.

 

Fan ownership won't easily happen at Rangers, but it must still be our goal.

[Stimpy 0]

I'm not going to bad mouth this as it was the route that the RST was going to take. I did, however, with all the talk of openness and transparency, find it odd that there was no mention made of the fact that a group within the room had been working on this with SDS since last June - a couple of them even asked questions.

 

Even though I support the principle, I just can't see anything like 20,000 signing up for this no matter who tells them it's good. Even in a time of crisis, and with Walter and Ally behind it, the RFFF only raised just over £500,000, and £100,000 of that was from the Red and Black scarves.

 

If we were in a situation like Hearts then we may be able to do something but we aren't. Getting fans to stump up money isn't easy. Will they buy into what, at the moment is a concept, I'm not convinced. This is from someone who is totally committed to fan ownership.

 

Over £200k was from the scarves and £40k from NI. Agree with the rest.

[Zappa 0]

This is a real issue, I agree.

 

Due to the length of the meeting, I refrained from raising a few negative issues I had; some are 'devil's advocate' but they should be examined, just the same. But we were there for nigh on 3 and a half hours and time was up!

 

There's a two sided coin in terms of what SDS consider negativity, their response is to ignore it and plough on. That's a little difficult for us, since the people who are likely to be most hostile wield an unfortunate amount of influence. Ignoring them might allow the ball to start rolling and build momentum, or it might burst said ba' before we even get to the park. It's a hard circle to square.

 

I did ask Richard from SDS to provide something concrete which we could present as proving, indisputably, that SDS were clean, on the level, etc. but didn't get much beyond a personal assurance and the legal guarantees on their website which, sadly, won't be enough for some as we all know. Richard did look a little like a cross between Craig Whyte and Kessler from Secret Army so perhaps a glance at his forbidding visage, and equally forbidding waistcoat, may be enough. I'm afraid there is going to have to be a level of trust for this to work which is not just lacking but completely absent in our fanbase.

 

Also, I wonder whether this will be practical in getting the club to the level we want it at, ie competing in Europe. The mechanism whereby HNWI can contribute helps on that front, but I am still slightly doubtful that it would accrue the cash we would need, and I wonder whether fan ownership might not forever peg the club at the level of say a Dundee Utd or a Kilmarnock. Not good enough, we'd all agree.

 

In the end the first thing we need is a level of maturity no-one has seen for as long. If it doesn't work after that (and you can see I have my doubts) at least we tried and we will have a single body without faction to show for it. That alone makes me throw my ample poundage behind the plan.

 

If someone has a personal issue with someone else, too bad. If someone is holding things back, they either need to acknowledge it or be politely but firmly told. The time for adolescent squabbling between grown ups is not only past now it was past about five years ago - easier said than done? Only if we make it so. I've no doubt at all that most everyone has stuff in their personal life going on which makes fighting about the football look like small beer indeed: despite how important Rangers is to us all it shouldn't be beyond us to take informed decisions in an adult fashion.

 

Those who don't will be seen for what they are, and hopefully accorded about as much attention as my 15 year old stomping his way back up the stairs to his PC Kingdom in the bedroom.

 

Ultimately Andy, I think for this CIC concept to be a success, it's going to require a situation where all of the fans interested in fan ownership unite behind it. If not all, then certainly a massive percentage and I'm extremely doubtful if that will happen without the blessing and backing of FF and the Trust.

 

It's easy to say let's all put our differences aside, but for that unity to happen in reality, then any new scheme almost certainly requires the new venture's groups and committees to be free of any individuals who are deemed by any of the interested parties as problematic or carrying any sort of baggage.

 

That's not a dig at any particular individual either because there's a whole bunch of people who would probably rule themselves out immediately, without a second thought and for the better good because they know that for such a scheme to get the maximum number of participants and as much support as possible, then it would most likely be better if they didn't even involve themselves.

[Zappa 0]

I'd agree with that Zappa. I'm reminded of the approach that top athletes take when looking at a seemingly unattainable goal. They break it down into a series of milestones and aim for them. That way you're not daunted by the magnitude of the ultimate goal. 5% is certainly a realistic goal for the Trust to aim for over the next couple of years.

 

You see where I'm coming from then Crawford. Being "daunted by the magnitude of the ultimate goal" is something that probably leads to some people being inadvertently dissuaded from participation because of a feeling of "what's the point if it isn't achievable?".

 

Painting rosy pictures (as Andy put it) and best case scenarios aren't what we need. Since the Club went into administration 2 years ago we've had a plethora of lies, alternative reality and ultimately disappointment. What we really need now is grounded reality and not only sensible, but achievable targets.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

I'm not going to bad mouth this as it was the route that the RST was going to take. I did, however, with all the talk of openness and transparency, find it odd that there was no mention made of the fact that a group within the room had been working on this with SDS since last June - a couple of them even asked questions.

 

Even though I support the principle, I just can't see anything like 20,000 signing up for this no matter who tells them it's good. Even in a time of crisis, and with Walter and Ally behind it, the RFFF only raised just over £500,000, and £100,000 of that was from the Red and Black scarves.

 

If we were in a situation like Hearts then we may be able to do something but we aren't. Getting fans to stump up money isn't easy. Will they buy into what, at the moment is a concept, I'm not convinced. This is from someone who is totally committed to fan ownership.

 

Christine, you may recall back in 2010; 20,000 was precisely the number we hit on as being realistic after looking at a lot of variables including number of shareholders, season ticket holders, worldwide fan base etc and also looking back at the Celtic example. I agree that it will not be easy by any manner of means but I also do not think it is an impossibe dream; otherwise I would not be prepared to commit my time to it.

 

Also I can understand why you might well feel aggrieved about SDS's stance but it is a fact in Scotland that they now have a much wider remit than just being the umbrella for Trusts; indeed it is arguable that Trusts are now a minor part of their work.

[BrahimHemdani 1]

Apologies but by the time I got home and thawed out from Ayr and had something to eat I didn't get the report finished tonight; although I think most of it has been said here or on Twitter etc.

 

I'll get it done tomorrow.

[3909 04 0]

Apologies but by the time I got home and thawed out from Ayr and had something to eat I didn't get the report finished tonight; although I think most of it has been said here or on Twitter etc.

 

I'll get it done tomorrow.

 

If this is indicative of the slacker attitude which you bring to this initiative, I call on you to stand down forthwith. Begone!

[andy steel 0]

@Zappa:

 

I do agree with and share your concerns about making this fly without the backing of the biggest online board. SoS showed, however, that a campaign which goes about its business in a slightly old fashioned way - and specifically, by engaging with fans in and around actual matches - can achieve results. Although it's an electronic age it is possible - if very very difficult - to get up to about 5k names behind this purely from leafleting, addressing Supporters' Clubs and media coverage. And what seems to be the absolute necessity for these kind of campaigns is to get some initial momentum behind them. 20k might be hopelessly optimistic, but I can't believe that we couldn't organise 5k fans.

 

Don't forget too, that even the haters at BBC Scotland will be obliged to choke back their distaste and cover this positively, lest they look even more hypocritical than usual.

 

A big ask certainly, and one made harder if there is negative coverage from FF, but not impossible even then.

[3909 04 0]

Ultimately Andy, I think for this CIC concept to be a success, it's going to require a situation where all of the fans interested in fan ownership unite behind it. If not all, then certainly a massive percentage and I'm extremely doubtful if that will happen without the blessing and backing of FF and the Trust.

 

It's easy to say let's all put our differences aside, but for that unity to happen in reality, then any new scheme almost certainly requires the new venture's groups and committees to be free of any individuals who are deemed by any of the interested parties as problematic or carrying any sort of baggage.

 

That's not a dig at any particular individual either because there's a whole bunch of people who would probably rule themselves out immediately, without a second thought and for the better good because they know that for such a scheme to get the maximum number of participants and as much support as possible, then it would most likely be better if they didn't even involve themselves.

 

With all due respect, this scheme can be hugely successful with or without the backing not only of the RST board but of every RST member.

 

As for FF, a cursory glance would tell you that many posters on the site back this scheme despite the stubborn opposition of the site owner and his loyal henchmen.