Chairman's update

[buster. 5,062]

23rd September

newspaper article Q&A

 

What it the timescale for appointing a new CEO?

 

JG: “We are well on. We have quite a number of people around it who we can pick up with again. We are moving quickly on it.”

 

Do you have plans to bring in more football board members, like a sporting director? Or is the focus fully on the new CEO?

 

JG: "It will be full focus on the chief executive because in turn, if we bring in people, we'd really like to think we [he/she] would be part of that.

 

https://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/24604353.full-q-interim-rangers-chairman-john-gilligan/

 

---------__----------

 

https://youtu.be/30ZdB35fKMg?si=Nd8JtuMe2s1_vYug

 

So when JG came in. he said that the CEO appointment was the most important and that we already had a list of candidates that a recruitment agency would add to.

 

Fast forward over 3 weeks and he tells us "..our recruitment consultants have already produced short lists of very strong and experienced candidates..."

 

Maybe we are already interviewing candidates and he just doesn't want to say anything until we have something over the line.

 

 

 

[stewarty 1,980]

The main focus should be on getting the right person.

 

Recruitment of senior staff frequently takes longer than most other recruitment processes - e.g. its likely that some candidates are already in employment and will have lengthy notice periods.   They'll likely be in very busy roles and carving out time for interviews may be an additional complication, especially if they're not based in the UK.

 

I share the general frustration given it was the end of May when Bisgrove decided to take the Saudi coin, especially since we seemed to be quite far down the road with at least one person... but at this point, I'm not sure our experience is that out of the ordinary.

 

 

[Gonzo79 14,991]

43 minutes ago, stewarty said:

I'm not sure our experience is that out of the ordinary.

You mean it may not be a toxic omnishambles?  😀

[stewarty 1,980]

Just now, Gonzo79 said:

You mean it may not be a toxic omnishambles?  😀

Lol...  if you take the CEO recruitment issue in isolation, then no... but the wider context of leadership at the club is still in question, to the point where Clement has been fronting up and dealing with off the field issues during pressers.   That doesn't really fill us with confidence, no matter the nice words they all say about each other.

[yuddie 1,682]

Wouldn't mind the football board taking turns once a week to answer questions before Clement has his presser.

 

Koppen, CEO etc.

 

They do it in Europe - the last week has been better for Comms but we could do more and more regularly.

Edited 18 hours ago by yuddie

[Chic Sharp 31]

19 hours ago, Frankie said:

https://www.rangers.co.uk/Article/chairmans-update/1Tq8zMGdkolpAAB2CUmZKP

 

I no longer listen to Gilligan.  He slated Dave King and in doing so is a non person to me.  I've no doubt Parks has been bullying directors etc in the background but in the end who cares.  Gilligan is not worth listening to and I don't.

[CammyF 7,755]

4 hours ago, buster. said:

I seem to recall John Gilligan saying that Rangers would be or were revisiting candidates that were in 'a short-list' from which "guy from St.Mirren" was selected.

 

As an aside, why do you think he knocked us back? I presume he'd happily entered a process that included interview(s).

 

 

I don't know.

 

Maybe we just took it for granted that as a Rangers fan, that he'd accept the position and we didn't really sell it to him?

 

Maybe he saw what a mess we are in and decided not to risk his reputation by taking the job?

 

It was good to hear Gilligan honestly saying that we had offered the role and it was knocked  back (considering some refused to believe this had happened) but left us with more questions than answers.

 

The time taken to secure this crucial appointment is an embarrassing episode in a long line of embarrassing episodes for this and previous boards (no matter how toy look at it).

[yuddie 1,682]

1 hour ago, Chic Sharp said:

I no longer listen to Gilligan.  He slated Dave King and in doing so is a non person to me.  I've no doubt Parks has been bullying directors etc in the background but in the end who cares.  Gilligan is not worth listening to and I don't.

Dave Kings time has come and gone mate. He's done great things for the club in the past but he's now just a rent a gob for the press - all he did was unnecessarily call out the board without talking to them in private, throwing grenades on talksport just isn't conducive to anything.

 

I don't know Gilligan but he was right to call out King for airing the clubs dirty laundry on national radio - it's one reason why I wouldn't go back to King, the constant public rows was and is exhausting.

 

Not listening to Gilligan because he's told King to stop launching quotes here there and everywhere isn't the hill to die on.

[CammyF 7,755]

3 minutes ago, yuddie said:

Dave Kings time has come and gone mate. He's done great things for the club in the past but he's now just a rent a gob for the press - all he did was unnecessarily call out the board without talking to them in private, throwing grenades on talksport just isn't conducive to anything.

 

I don't know Gilligan but he was right to call out King for airing the clubs dirty laundry on national radio - it's one reason why I wouldn't go back to King, the constant public rows was and is exhausting.

 

Not listening to Gilligan because he's told King to stop launching quotes here there and everywhere isn't the hill to die on.

Would King be any worse / better than the current incumbents?

 

Does King really have investment and football people lined up?

 

King may be yesterday's man, but on reflection, so are the current board.

 

Neither King NOR the current incumbents are what we need to propel the club forward in the medium / long term.

 

What we need is either, or both to make the correct decisions short-term for the medium / long term stability and growth.

 

For me, King would be who I'd trust more, but it's unlikely to happen.

 

We're at the stage both on and off the pitch that we ate simply hoping things are going to improve but with little or no evidence. 

 

1 league title in 13 years, unless there is dramatic change, this is our future and it appears we are accepting consistent failure, downsizing and lowering of expectations. Hardly the Rangers way.

[RANGERRAB 3,593]

1 hour ago, CammyF said:

I don't know.

 

Maybe we just took it for granted that as a Rangers fan, that he'd accept the position and we didn't really sell it to him?

 

Maybe he saw what a mess we are in and decided not to risk his reputation by taking the job?

 

 

We dodged a bullet with that appointment believe me.