Bluedell 5,624 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 Club 1872 directors recently held a very positive meeting with Rangers Chairman, Dave King to discuss the possibility of Club 1872 taking up a position on the RIFC board. This was a preliminary discussion and various practical considerations were raised and examined. The Club 1872 board wishes to draw members’ attention to two main points arising from the meeting: 1) The current one year term for Club 1872 board members is an issue that has been raised by a number of members over the past year. It is also something that was discussed in the meeting with the Chairman in connection with an RIFC board place. The current one year term creates challenges in progressing long term plans, and the annual election process causes a period of upheaval each year which disrupts crucial work in taking the organisation forward. It also impacts the aim of securing a place on the RIFC board as this position would not be available if it potentially had to be changed annually. The Club 1872 board will shortly put a proposal to members to extend the term for Club 1872 board members and introduce staggered elections. The board believes this proposed change would help maintain stability and ensure the organisation continues to function properly through the election process. It would also solve one of the practical difficulties of securing an RIFC board place. 2) Despite being the second largest shareholder currently, members will be aware that a number of individuals have large loans in place with RIFC. These loans will shortly be converted to equity through share issues. This will mean that in order to maintain our position, Club 1872 will need to invest significant funds into Rangers over a number of share issues - most likely running into millions of pounds. Although we are very pleased with the reaction to our share issue campaign, at the current level of membership and contributions we are unlikely to be able to maintain that shareholding in the medium term. If Club 1872 is to maintain its position we need thousands more Rangers supporters to join the organisation and invest in Rangers. If our shareholding position is not maintained then it becomes less likely that we will secure a place on the RIFC board. The organisation has to show that it can invest in the club on the same basis as the other major shareholders. Club 1872 does not have an automatic right to an RIFC board place. However, following positive discussions we believe that we can secure one on behalf of our members if the organisation continues to grow and develop. We have added over 400 new members in 8 weeks. We have also raised over half a million pounds for the upcoming share issue. However, given the size of our support and the millions of pounds of investment being provided by other investors, the organisation needs to continue to develop if we are to meet our objectives. We would ask for every one of our members to help us in this regard by recruiting friends and family. The opportunity in front of us has never existed for Rangers supporters. We have an RIFC board that is willing to work with us and the opportunity for supporters to become one of the major investors and voices in our club. That opportunity may not come again as the club continues to rebuild and gain strength. We would encourage all Rangers supporters to join us and ensure that collectively we are in a position to take advantage of this and ensure the support retains a big enough shareholding to protect the club for generations to come. We will update our members on our discussions with RIFC as they continue and will shortly put a poll out to members on the subject of the Club 1872 board term. Thank you as always for your ongoing support. Club 1872 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 Just now, Bluedell said: 1) The current one year term for Club 1872 board members is an issue that has been raised by a number of members over the past year. It is also something that was discussed in the meeting with the Chairman in connection with an RIFC board place. The current one year term creates challenges in progressing long term plans, and the annual election process causes a period of upheaval each year which disrupts crucial work in taking the organisation forward. It also impacts the aim of securing a place on the RIFC board as this position would not be available if it potentially had to be changed annually. I'm not sure why the Club 1872 rep to the RIFC board has to be a C1872 board member? Even if he or she is a board member, why do they have to resign their position as the rep if they cease to be a board member? It may well be a board member but the two aren't mutually exclusive. 4 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 4 minutes ago, Bluedell said: If our shareholding position is not maintained then it becomes less likely that we will secure a place on the RIFC board. A disappointing attitude from King, but perhaps not surprising. These guys talk a good game about supporter representation before they get onto the board, but once on it, their attitude suddenly changes. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, Bluedell said: A disappointing attitude from King, but perhaps not surprising. These guys talk a good game about supporter representation before they get onto the board, but once on it, their attitude suddenly changes. I can kinda see DK's point.... C1872 are pushing for a place on the board, due to their current shareholding. However if that shareholding is reduced, then their claim for a Board position is subsequently reduced. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boabie 230 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 " Club 1872 does not have an automatic right to an RIFC board place. " While the rules may say that, given the amounts of money the fans are investing in the club, it should be a given. In fact, imo it should be insisted upon. Even if our shareholding is diluted by a new issue we should still be granted that access. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 minute ago, Darthter said: I can kinda see DK's point.... C1872 are pushing for a place on the board, due to their current shareholding. However if that shareholding is reduced, then their claim for a Board position is subsequently reduced. So what if the shareholding falls from, say 12% to 10% (I don't know what the current %s are)? C1872 are a major shareholder and the club are wanting them to invest heavily in the share issue and it's treating the support with disrespect to imply that we will only allow you a place on the board if you have a specific %. As well as a major shareholder, the support are the club's biggest income source as well. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 18 minutes ago, Bluedell said: I'm not sure why the Club 1872 rep to the RIFC board has to be a C1872 board member? Even if he or she is a board member, why do they have to resign their position as the rep if they cease to be a board member? It may well be a board member but the two aren't mutually exclusive. That was also my first thought on the matter. There's no reason to extend the term of Club1872 board members, except to keep current board members in position for longer ... it should have absolutely no bearing on the completely separate issue of appointing a Rangers board member. Also, is the Club1872 membership being prepared for a change in priorities .... "This will mean that in order to maintain our position, Club 1872 will need to invest significant funds into Rangers over a number of share issues - most likely running into millions of pounds. Although we are very pleased with the reaction to our share issue campaign, at the current level of membership and contributions we are unlikely to be able to maintain that shareholding in the medium term." It seems to me this could be a fork in the road for Club1872. Dont suppose they managed to discuss Rangers fans being injured by smoke bombs or the issue of treating Celtic fans in the same way as fans of any other club? 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 23 minutes ago, Bluedell said: So what if the shareholding falls from, say 12% to 10% (I don't know what the current %s are)? C1872 are a major shareholder and the club are wanting them to invest heavily in the share issue and it's treating the support with disrespect to imply that we will only allow you a place on the board if you have a specific %. As well as a major shareholder, the support are the club's biggest income source as well. I think the concern from DK's side is about C1872 having the ability to maintain their percentage shareholding over a longer period, probably following a couple of share issues. If they fail to maintain their shares, whats stopping someone else (with an increased holding) "demanding" a place on the board in C1872's place. I think using the shareholding as the primary bargaining chip, will possibly prevent it happening. They should be pushing the fans side more prominently, with a gentle reminder of the fans shareholding (if that makes sense) 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluedell 5,624 Posted March 23, 2018 Author Share Posted March 23, 2018 1 minute ago, Darthter said: I think the concern from DK's side is about C1872 having the ability to maintain their percentage shareholding over a longer period, probably following a couple of share issues. If they fail to maintain their shares, whats stopping someone else (with an increased holding) "demanding" a place on the board in C1872's place. I think using the shareholding as the primary bargaining chip, will possibly prevent it happening. They should be pushing the fans side more prominently, with a gentle reminder of the fans shareholding (if that makes sense) 2 points: 1. Just because a place on the board could be awarded now, it doesn't mean that it can't be reassessed in the future. 2. Joe Bloggs who owns a % similar to C1872 can "demand" a place, but doesn't have to (and probably shouldn't) get one. it's not the same as an organisation representing the support (the biggest customer) of the club. I think I partly agree with your last point. The level of shareholding shouldn't be the only rationale for deciding who should or shouldn't be on the board. The support should have a rep, and C1872 is the obvious body for that given their level of shareholding and membership (whatever that is). We do however need to get some (more?) strong non-exec directors on as well. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill 13,717 Posted March 23, 2018 Share Posted March 23, 2018 46 minutes ago, Darthter said: I think using the shareholding as the primary bargaining chip, will possibly prevent it happening. They should be pushing the fans side more prominently, with a gentle reminder of the fans shareholding (if that makes sense) Nail hit squarely on the head. The binary strategy of C1872 may well be its undoing. 1 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.