The CIC Meeting at The Louden - Twitter

[ThatsWhyWeirChamps 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.

 

The HNWI thing is more of an added bonus. The IPS model is currently restricted from taking investment over £20k (although I believe that is increasing to £100k soon), whilst the CIC model does not have those limitations.

 

It provides a good platform for these guys to even loan money to the CIC and allows the CIC to build a shareholding quicker if that is indeed how it decides to work.

 

Important to not take anything too literally as a definite moving forward though; most of yesterday was outlining the possibilities. Just having the option and flexibility is what the real benefit of the scheme is. It can bend and shape with the ever-changing needs of the fans and the Club.

[SteveC 150]

The HNWI thing is more of an added bonus. The IPS model is currently restricted from taking investment over £20k (although I believe that is increasing to £100k soon), whilst the CIC model does not have those limitations.

 

It provides a good platform for these guys to even loan money to the CIC and allows the CIC to build a shareholding quicker if that is indeed how it decides to work.

 

Important to not take anything too literally as a definite moving forward though; most of yesterday was outlining the possibilities. Just having the option and flexibility is what the real benefit of the scheme is. It can bend and shape with the ever-changing needs of the fans and the Club.

 

i'm very hopeful, I also have a "last chance saloon" feeling of desperation mixed in with that. i+It's got to work though as yet again I didn't win the EuroMillions

[plgsarmy 111]

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.

[Zappa 0]

Zappa, 50%+ is more their raison d'être, rather than an unrealistic target. Nothing wrong in my book about setting out the aspiration and then looking for ways to realise it. I do agree that we're talking about the distant future at the current rate of progress, but I've said on here several times before, that anything in the range of 20-25% would bring genuine influence given our Shareholder base.

 

I do think that 10k giving £10 per month is realistic today, whether through Buy Rangers or a CIC vehicle and that would be great progress.

 

I do realise that 50+% is more of a raison d'être then anything, but as an example of the train of thought I'm following, it projects a bad image on the BuyRangers page of the RST website because seeing multiple graphs and charts with the 50+% target then looking at the actual figures achieved so far portrays an impression of failure, when in actual fact the Trust's progress isn't really a failure at all. It may be a little slow, but it's steady and positive progress which is wrongly being made to look poor by daft charts with a 50+% target at the top. I think the Trust should really consider reevaluating the targets and progress charts for the BuyRangers initiative and replace the 50+% target with 5%. That way their progress will look much better as a visual representation on a 0-5% chart or graph. When 5% is reached, then you adjust the target and progress charts accordingly by setting a new target of 10%, at which point it looks as if magnificent progress is being made because the charts and graphs will show that they are half way towards reaching the 10% target.

 

Does this make sense or am I just waffling? Well, it makes sense to me anyway.

 

Regarding your point about 10k giving £10 per month being a realistic target today for BuyRangers or a new CIC scheme, I'd say perhaps between the two of them they could achieve that. Realistically, if the two schemes combined achieve that before we get back to the top flight, then they'll be doing well.

[rea 0]

Lol...i put a lot of thought into that waist coat!

 

As I said at the meeting one of the biggest issues with someone coming in from the outside is always the "what is in it for you" question.....and how you actually go about showing there is no hidden agenda.

 

so happy to make the same pledge as at the meeting that if someone has any reasonable and specific issue thought or concern about any perceived hidden agenda I am happy to contract, sign or pledge publicly with regard to that issue so that it is completely and irrevocably ruled out.

 

Hopefully I cannot say fairer than that.

 

though anything to do with waistcoat wearing is OTT!

[BEARGER 1,830]

Is there anyway this new CIC scheme can be set up that ALL monies must go to buying shares and nothing else ?

[Mountain Bear 0]

I do realise that 50+% is more of a raison d'être then anything, but as an example of the train of thought I'm following, it projects a bad image on the BuyRangers page of the RST website because seeing multiple graphs and charts with the 50+% target then looking at the actual figures achieved so far portrays an impression of failure, when in actual fact the Trust's progress isn't really a failure at all. It may be a little slow, but it's steady and positive progress which is wrongly being made to look poor by daft charts with a 50+% target at the top. I think the Trust should really consider reevaluating the targets and progress charts for the BuyRangers initiative and replace the 50+% target with 5%. That way their progress will look much better as a visual representation on a 0-5% chart or graph. When 5% is reached, then you adjust the target and progress charts accordingly by setting a new target of 10%, at which point it looks as if magnificent progress is being made because the charts and graphs will show that they are half way towards reaching the 10% target.

 

Does this make sense or am I just waffling? Well, it makes sense to me anyway.

 

Regarding your point about 10k giving £10 per month being a realistic target today for BuyRangers or a new CIC scheme, I'd say perhaps between the two of them they could achieve that. Realistically, if the two schemes combined achieve that before we get back to the top flight, then they'll be doing well.

 

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.

[ThatsWhyWeirChamps 0]

Is there anyway this new CIC scheme can be set up that ALL monies must go to buying shares and nothing else ?

 

If that's your major concern, just join Buy Rangers. That's exactly what all money collected for that has to be used for. Everybody will be just as delighted if you do.

 

I don't know if it can be made any clearer than it was though; the CIC is purely a flexible vehicle which can match the needs of the fans and the Clubs at any given time.

 

It's almost certain that the first target will be to attain a decent shareholding before anything else would be considered. Once you reach that 10%, 20% or whatever it may be, surely the ability to keep taking in money and start investing in worthwhile projects which benefit the entire Rangers community - and strenghten the day-to-day relationship with the Club itself in the process - is a massive bonus though?

 

It is about more than just the generic "fan ownership", it's about genuine community involvement with the Club. About everyone being invested in the welfare of the Club, and the Club being invested in the enjoyment and input of its fans.

[bluebear54 0]

Without having taken a poll, my gut instinct is that any such scheme would have most success if trustworthy Rangers figures were overseeing it. And after what we've been through, I don't think there are many figures who would command that level of trust.

[andy steel 0]

I suspect the man we really need to front it up has been (a) burned by his stint as chairman and (b) is politically not in tune with the idea anyway.