Club1872 members report

[forlanssister 3,114]

2 hours ago, aweebluesoandso said:

I like the idea of a vehicle to pick up disabled supporters, simple but effective.With the new parking restrictions coming in next season it definitely could alleviate some problems for our disabled brethren.

I know this may sound perverse but the proposed parking restrictions would assist not hinder disabled parking issues around Ibrox as Blue Badges are valid in those event areas that require residents permits.

[forlanssister 3,114]

36 minutes ago, Bill said:

It's a no-brainer really, perhaps more than one vehicle, but it needs to be matched with a vast improvement in facilities and support once disabled fans arrive at the stadium. 

You'll get little traction from Club 1872 on that score as unlike safe standing it simply isn't sexy enough for them.

[forlanssister 3,114]

8 minutes ago, rbr said:

Though I can see where your coming from , I don't think they could have passed on those shares especially given who owned them .

What they did take a  pass on was any hope they'd ever get a seat on the Board as they gave away their leverage for a short term gain and long term pain.

[rbr 1,256]

6 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

What they did take a  pass on was any hope they'd ever get a seat on the Board as they gave away their leverage for a short term gain and long term pain.

I still think they needed to buy those shares , at the end of the day this is yet another example of Rangers fans apathy , if this fails and club1872 s shareholding is diluted then it's down to us the fans and no one else , we are world champions in wanting someone else to do things for us , we talk a good game but don't follow it up with actions . 

Look at the foundation of hearts supporters , over 8000 and putting over £115,000 a month working capital into their club , but our supporters prefer to snipe from the shadows , it's truly pathetic .

 

 

one last point on this , IMHO  there should never have been an option for projects , club1872 should only ever have been a vehicle for share purchases.

Edited April 27, 2018 by rbr

[ranger_syntax 4,330]

4 minutes ago, rbr said:

I still think they needed to buy those shares , at the end of the day this is yet another example of Rangers fans apathy , if this fails and club1872 s shareholding is diluted then it's down to us the fans and no one else , we are world champions in wanting someone else to do things for us , we talk a good game but don't follow it up with actions . 

Look at the foundation of hearts supporters , over 8000 and putting over £115,000 a month working capital into their club , but our supporters prefer to snipe from the shadows , it's truly pathetic .

 

 

one last point on this , IMHO  there should never have been an option for projects , club1872 should only ever have been a vehicle for share purchases.

Is this an attempt to persuade critics to join in with Club1872?

[buster. 5,201]

1 minute ago, ranger_syntax said:

Is this an attempt to persuade critics to join in with Club1872?

No need for the polarised angle, sounds much more like frustration.

[forlanssister 3,114]

31 minutes ago, rbr said:

I still think they needed to buy those shares , at the end of the day this is yet another example of Rangers fans apathy , if this fails and club1872 s shareholding is diluted then it's down to us the fans and no one else , we are world champions in wanting someone else to do things for us , we talk a good game but don't follow it up with actions . 

Look at the foundation of hearts supporters , over 8000 and putting over £115,000 a month working capital into their club , but our supporters prefer to snipe from the shadows , it's truly pathetic .

 

 

one last point on this , IMHO  there should never have been an option for projects , club1872 should only ever have been a vehicle for share purchases.

I don't disagree with the notion that the shares needed to change hands but it I don't believe the implications of the said purchase by Club 1872 were fully thought through. It's been apparent even since before the inception of Club 1872 that there would be a major dilution (personally I think it'll happen more than once), but I'm not telling you anything you didn't already know.

[Bill 13,717]

45 minutes ago, rbr said:

I still think they needed to buy those shares , at the end of the day this is yet another example of Rangers fans apathy , if this fails and club1872 s shareholding is diluted then it's down to us the fans and no one else , we are world champions in wanting someone else to do things for us , we talk a good game but don't follow it up with actions . 

Look at the foundation of hearts supporters , over 8000 and putting over £115,000 a month working capital into their club , but our supporters prefer to snipe from the shadows , it's truly pathetic .

 

one last point on this , IMHO  there should never have been an option for projects , club1872 should only ever have been a vehicle for share purchases.

There's much in the point you make but you also need to take into account the historical context. Just as fans are leery of our directors after years of inept boardroom antics and false prophets, so the same fans are equally wary of supporter groups after just as many years of squabbling and petty politicking. We've had so many acronyms speaking for support over the years that most of us are dizzy with it.

 

The onus is on the current board to regain the trust of the fans and the same goes for Club1872. Calling fans "pathetic" for harbouring understandable doubts is largely unfair and in any case is the opposite of what's required to remove that doubt.

 

What hinders Club1872 (IMHO) is a distinct lack of clarity over its objectives. There may be an inner circle who have clarity (there usually is) but I'd suggest it's probably a pretty small circle. You say it should only ever have been a vehicle for share purchases, which only confirms a degree of confusion and disagreement about its current mission. However, even if you got your way, you still cannot buy shares with a view to gaining board representation without first having a clear idea how that representation would function and what its objectives would be, especially when you're funding the exercise with other people's money. 

[aweebluesoandso 290]

1 hour ago, rbr said:

I still think they needed to buy those shares , at the end of the day this is yet another example of Rangdecsisionsers fans apathy , if this fails and club1872 s shareholding is diluted then it's down to us the fans and no one else , we are world champions in wanting someone else to do things for us , we talk a good game but don't follow it up with actions . 

Look at the foundation of hearts supporters , over 8000 and putting over £115,000 a month working capital into their club , but our supporters prefer to snipe from the shadows , it's truly pathetic .

 

 

one last point on this , IMHO  there should never have been an option for projects , club1872 should only ever have been a vehicle for share purchases.

Buying shares is very important, especially if we want some real participation in some of decisions at board level with a C1872 representative.

 

However i think once we reach a target that gives C1872 what they need in voting rights and representation in the boardroom, we should be looking at asset purchases on behalf of the support. Land around Ibrox is going to be at a premium in the coming years, C1872 should be looking to purchase a parcel if available, have our own Car Parking like the Albion car park. We need to develop a broader outlook to use the supporters money.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

2 hours ago, Bill said:

I'd say it was more of a probability than a possibility. I question long ago the wisdom of a strategy that couldn't be funded to a conclusion. The shareholding board members are never going to relinquish any control to a supporters group and I fear a seat on the board is a pipe dream. 

 

I only throw this out for debate but, rather than see the value of it's current investment go down the toilet, either at this share issue or the next, perhaps Club1872 would be better liquidising all or part of its shareholding and using the funds to pursue more appropriate and realistic agendas.

I can agree with this to an extent, the support though need to be share owners in the club, we can always debate the amount of that shareholding. But i agree 100% as i have said already, there are more ways to make our voices heard at board level.  Land, property, assets, sounds a pipe dream but if you have £50k a month coming into the pot, it doesn't sound so much like a pipe dream for the support to be said asset/property owners.

Edited April 27, 2018 by aweebluesoandso