buster. 5,257 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 What views are you actually alluding to be as being in the "minority" ? And do you know the ST renewal figure that you are making that assertion ? Are you referring to Jackson's tweet on Twitter ? The minority are those who are indifferent/happy with the way the club is being run or are happy to go along with the current board aslong as they have their tummies rubbed and seek more to cause division amongst other supporters rather than honest, constructive and transparent focus on where the problem currently lys. The majority want to see action or committments from the current board regarding the longterm future of the club. The growth in numbers is reflected by ST numbers, which whilst there isn't an exact number.... they are signicantly down. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share Posted June 1, 2014 The minority are those who are indifferent/happy with the way the club is being run or are happy to go along with the current board aslong as they have their tummies rubbed and seek more to cause division amongst other supporters rather than honest, constructive and transparent focus on where the problem currently lys. The majority want to see action or committments from the current board regarding the longterm future of the club. The growth in numbers is reflected by ST numbers, which whilst there isn't an exact number.... they are signicantly down. With the exception of Bill McMurdo and those who follow his blog - Ive yet to meet or encounter any Bears who are happy with the performance of / or support the current board, - whether that equates completely to the slump in ST sales Im not convinced. Id suggest that the failings of the current board in securing cc/debit cards have made the whole logistical process far more difficult. Furthermore there are some Bears not renewing due to the product on offer. It becomes even more difficult to fathom as I know of Bears who are unhappy with the current board but have renewed nonetheless. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Indeed, but I'd still like to know how much the Club gets from shirt sales and why the RST's so-called protest shirts are likely to infringe on the Club's player transfer budget in any way. Well you seem to be asking 2 questions (1) The income the club gets from such sales - I dont know the figure' date=' and it appears from some of the various stabs at it - neither do others on here. Its fine saying "I have read we get 70p" but that all depends on the veracity of the source. (2) We know how essential merchandising is in the finance of our club - are you honestly saying that that you dont see that as impacting on all aspects of our club including transfer budgets ?[/quote'] D'Art, with all due respect, it was two questions which were intrinsically linked/connected, so it was slightly unfair of you to separate them. Nonetheless, regarding what the Club actually receives from shirt sales, I don't think any of us are blinded by rumours. That includes the bizarre notion that a small protest-based fund raising initiative to raise money in order to buy shares is in any way affecting the Club's ability to strengthen the playing squad. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,257 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 With the exception of Bill McMurdo and those who follow his blog - Ive yet to meet or encounter any Bears who are happy with the performance of / or support the current board' date='[/b'] - whether that equates completely to the slump in ST sales Im not convinced. Id suggest that the failings of the current board in securing cc/debit cards have made the whole logistical process far more difficult. Furthermore there are some Bears not renewing due to the product on offer. It becomes even more difficult to fathom as I know of Bears who are unhappy with the current board but have renewed nonetheless. There are all sorts and many different motives but let's retain focus on where our problems ly. The executive board of RIFC, shadow director, mysterious proxy voting blocks and their at times dishonest and often misleading MO, leading Rangers towards eventual obscurity. These are the issues that the majority are concerned with, thank's in large part to efforts by the UoF in recent months. We need to focus on this and not look to subtly divide support for such efforts / pressure. If someone else has a solution then fine, but this is not the time to divide...... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Davison 0 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 In any successful organisation those in leadership are bright/experienced enough to understand that to achieve success that it is essential to provide clarity in their policies and in their relationship with key people. The key people will be those on the payroll and most certainly their customers. The people currently in leadership at our club don't come across as sharing such values and that results in so many questions being asked. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share Posted June 1, 2014 D'Art, with all due respect, it was two questions which were intrinsically linked/connected, so it was slightly unfair of you to separate them. Nonetheless, regarding what the Club actually receives from shirt sales, I don't think any of us are blinded by rumours. That includes the bizarre notion that a small protest-based fund raising initiative to raise money in order to buy shares is in any way affecting the Club's ability to strengthen the playing squad. If they are intrinsically linked or inter-connected how can we dismiss the effect when we cant even ascertain, so far at any rate, the actual value the club receives from such sales ? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 (edited) If they are intrinsically linked or inter-connected how can we dismiss the effect when we cant even ascertain' date=' so far at any rate, the actual value the club receives from such sales ?[/quote'] It has nothing to do with unofficial shirts being sold, it is all to do with who is perceived to be behind the sale of them and which organisation will get the profit. How many articles have you written about the numerous street vendors who stand outside grounds selling unofficial hats, flags and scarves that could affect the takings in the club shops? What about those flogging unofficial fanzines that could reduce the number of matchday programmes sold? What about all those fan groups who are raising money to buy shares in the club when that cash could be handed to a board of proven businessmen to aid them in their pursuit of players, scouts and PR men? Edited June 2, 2014 by Rangersitis 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zappa 0 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 If they are intrinsically linked or inter-connected how can we dismiss the effect when we cant even ascertain' date=' so far at any rate, the actual value the club receives from such sales ?[/quote'] Even (for talking sake) if the Club gets a fiver a shirt, then a thousand shirts is only 50 grand and there is no way on this earth that the fund raising campaign in question is going to cost the club even that much. That's based on logic as well, not bias because I haven't bought a red & black shirt and don't even think the concept was right for the present circumstances. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rangersitis 0 Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 Even (for talking sake) if the Club gets a fiver a shirt, then a thousand shirts is only 50 grand. That also assumes that every purchaser refuses to go for the official offering. That will not be the case. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
D'Artagnan 173 Posted June 2, 2014 Author Share Posted June 2, 2014 It has nothing to do with unofficial shirts being sold, it is all to do with who is perceived to be behind the sale of them and which organisation will get the profit. How many articles have you written about the numerous street vendors who stand outside grounds selling unofficial hats, flags and scarves that could affect the takings in the club shops? What about those flogging unofficial fanzines that could reduce the number of matchday programmes sold? What about all those fan groups who are raising money to buy shares in the club when that cash could be handed to a board of proven businessmen to aid them in their pursuit of players, scouts and PR men? Fanzines as an alternative to match day programmes ? Fans groups raising money to buy shares ? Come on ...thats hardly valid comparisons. 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.