UOF Statement (10/9/14

[WATP_Greg 0]

I would hope for the sake of our club they could identify common goals and where appropriate' date=' work together to achieve them. I honestly think if fans can see change being effected, even if it requires them working together to achieve the 5% then all will benefit as a consequence.[/quote']

 

I think in the main the supporters will vote the same way - and assuming all vehicles are OMOV then working together shouldn't be an issue. Formal unification I think is not needed but we are all Rangers Supporters at the end of the day

[Zappa 0]

The usual 'my way, or the highway' pish. That is the main reason why the uptake has been so poor. Folk are sick of the division.

 

EDIT: I should add that this isn't only a failing of the RST.

 

I can't agree with that at all because each of the 3 groups mentioned (RST, RF & VB) would be highly unlikely to give away the proxy voting rights of the block of shares their members have contributed to. All 3 would probably be happy to receive proxy voting rights to increase the size of their voting block, but there's virtually no chance any of the 3 groups will hand over their voting rights to another fan group or voting block.

[WATP_Greg 0]

I can't agree with that at all because each of the 3 groups mentioned (RST, RF & VB) would be highly unlikely to give away the proxy voting rights of the block of shares their members have contributed to. All 3 would probably be happy to receive proxy voting rights to increase the size of their voting block, but there's virtually no chance any of the 3 groups will hand over their voting rights to another fan group or voting block.

 

I agree - Being a member of the each of the organisations is what grants you voting rights over the shares contained within them (Though RST membership as a whole votes for BR's shares I believe).

 

I think all the FO vehicles should be on good terms but I actual formal unification is complicated and potentially unworkable imo

[Zappa 0]

Rangersitis, apologies as I thought you had written "I should add that this is only a failing of the RST" when you had actually written "isn't".

[Rangersitis 0]

I can't agree with that at all because each of the 3 groups mentioned (RST, RF & VB) would be highly unlikely to give away the proxy voting rights of the block of shares their members have contributed to. All 3 would probably be happy to receive proxy voting rights to increase the size of their voting block, but there's virtually no chance any of the 3 groups will hand over their voting rights to another fan group or voting block.

 

I thought that was what I said. If it wasn't, it was what I meant.

[Rangersitis 0]

Rangersitis, apologies as I thought you had written "I should add that this is only a failing of the RST" when you had actually written "isn't".

 

No worries. You could have got away with it as you had me doubting myself.

[Zappa 0]

I agree - Being a member of the each of the organisations is what grants you voting rights over the shares contained within them (Though RST membership as a whole votes for BR's shares I believe).

 

I think all the FO vehicles should be on good terms but I actual formal unification is complicated and potentially unworkable imo

 

Almost certainly unworkable Greg. Each of the 3 groups mentioned will have members who would be willing to allow it for the pursuit of the greater good, but there would be WAY too many objections from members completely against the idea for it to ever be possible. Chances = Zero.

[Stimpy 0]

There will never be the perfect fan group which can represent the whole support. We're too diverse in nature and view Rangers differently. Example being, some see it as an extension of protestantism, some don't. Same argument for unionism.

 

Having experience with the RST I know the selfless work that goes into getting things off the ground and maintaining it. I don't doubt it is any different with the RSAs, VB, RF and whoever claims to be a group nowadays. However, like Barca72, I do not trust the other groups for the simple fact I have first hand experience of people's behaviour which still leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

 

The only way these differences will ever be overcome is a credible board bringing all them in and offering the groups an opportunity to work together alongside the club. Administration drove a deeper wedge IMO and RF's appearance hasn't helped. This argument will go on forever until the club steps in with credible plans of being 'better together'.

[Ruff 0]

I am a member of RF, it suits me. But I would be very happy to agree to any temporary union between the groups that would have us heard and be noticed. Whoever held the proxy, don't know how it works but I would be in favour. After that the groups go back to achieving their individual goals (which all benefit the club). At the very least I would hope the 3 groups could get together, find one thing they all agree on and start from there. After all, we want the same thing. I don't know what's gone on before or what tensions remain so I might be a naive dreamer.

[WATP_Greg 0]

There will never be the perfect fan group which can represent the whole support. We're too diverse in nature and view Rangers differently. Example being, some see it as an extension of protestantism, some don't. Same argument for unionism.

 

Having experience with the RST I know the selfless work that goes into getting things off the ground and maintaining it. I don't doubt it is any different with the RSAs, VB, RF and whoever claims to be a group nowadays. However, like Barca72, I do not trust the other groups for the simple fact I have first hand experience of people's behaviour which still leaves a bad taste in the mouth.

 

The only way these differences will ever be overcome is a credible board bringing all them in and offering the groups an opportunity to work together alongside the club. Administration drove a deeper wedge IMO and RF's appearance hasn't helped. This argument will go on forever until the club steps in with credible plans of being 'better together'.

 

On twitter there RF has commented that with the donations that have came in over the last week and assuming the capability of getting those shares at the coming issue then they will have over 0.5%. I think that's a good start and I believe the majority of that would not have been put into FO without RF. That to me is a very good thing.

 

With regards to trust - it is up to each of the organisations to ensure they have the correct procedures and processes in place to ensure a level of transparency so that trust comes naturally.