The letter from Rev Stuart MacQuarrie which prompted me to stand for Club 1872

[sneddon38]

Blazer chasing at its finest. I know from experience that the 2 ladies in question haven’t the foggiest idea in terms of what they are meant to be doing with this thing, as well as having absolutely zero skills in dealing with the wider support in their roles as a supporters body.

Chris graham, to me was always a blazer chaser. Yes he ripped Spiers a new arse on live tv, but that only helped catapult him into a now I’ll fated position within the club, and now he’s chasing the blazer via this body.

Disband it and set up a one vehicle, one voice for supporters that has the best interest of the supporters at its core, rather than looking after the few who fire in a few shackles every month. The whole things a sham, and looks far worse now than it’s ever looked.

I totally agree with this. The org needs an overhaul and I really hope something changes soon. It’s been embarrassing for the last 3 years.

 

[RFC_Champions]

It's not really about 'the going gets tough' when you are on a board though. Sometimes if the conduct of other members of a board is so egregious in relation to its duties and responsibilities and your dissenting view on that conduct is not being taken seriously you have no real option but to resign.

Let’s move away from the infighting - the same attributes are required.

.....what if when the “going gets tough” and our fans are getting battered for pillar to post - our c1872 representatives try to fight our corner but when they are not taken seriously, just give up the “fight” against the press or authorities.

We need directors with integrity, transparency, assertiveness and stomach/fight (for all the awkward situations that will come internally, externally, politically etc). We can’t have people who tick one or two boxes. That’s proven to what we have now and is proven to what we’ve had previously.

Sadly and what always happens with these positions in organisations is that there’s usually something “in it” for the individual and more often than not becomes a conflict of interest. c1872, key influencers, fan media etc. It’s everywhere although some worse than others.

 

[Blaew]

Let’s move away from the infighting - the same attributes are required.

.....what if when the “going gets tough” and our fans are getting battered for pillar to post - our c1872 representatives try to fight our corner but when they are not taken seriously, just give up the “fight” against the press or authorities.

We need directors with integrity, transparency, assertiveness and stomach/fight (for all the awkward situations that will come internally, externally, politically etc). We can’t have people who tick one or two boxes. That’s proven to what we have now and is proven to what we’ve had previously.

Sadly and what always happens with these positions in organisations is that there’s usually something “in it” for the individual and more often than not becomes a conflict of interest. c1872, key influencers, fan media etc. It’s everywhere although some worse than others.

You had specifically cast aspersions on previous board members resigning 'when the going got tough.'

I was merely pointing out that when we are talking about disagreements about serious governance matters that could have very real professional and reputational consequences then resigning may be the only option.

This is an entirely different situation than fighting against the press and authorities and the two shouldn't be conflated.

 

[Krissie]

In my experience gained in the likes of Community Council's and Development Trusts, when things get bad and begin to fall apart and where 'personalities' become the story....the only fix is for completely fresh members/leaders arriving on the scene with a fresh perspective. Usually involves some blood letting as the incumbents are set aside and sometimes the formation of a new entity altogether.....but certainly sounds like radical surgery needed here before things improve.

 

[Buzz07]

I became concerned about the governance of Club 1872 at the time of the board resignations particularly as no public response to these came from those who remained on the board. Also the various stories about the shadow director’s involvement, again with no response or clarification from Club 1872. It was then that I decided to cancel my subscription.

From the various posts on here I have seen since it has seemed to me to be only negativity, with several posters indicating either they have cancelled or that their decision not to join in the first place has been vindicated. I cannot recall any post where someone has said that they now intend to sign up or that they are glad they did and are happy to continue making payments.

With the above in mind I had a look at the Club 1872 website to see if their was any indication of the number of members/subscribers. There wasn’t for ordinary members but there was a figure for those who had signed up as legacy members to purchase Dave King’s shares.

They have a target of 20,000 legacy members. Last night they had signed up 1,571 members. This morning that figure had dropped to 1,568, I’m guessing 3 people have pulled out on the back of the issues we have been discussing here since yesterday. It certainly appears as it stands that their target of 20,000 is unlikely to be achieved.

Spoke to a couple of mates on a Group chat, and more will be pulling out today mate.

 

[mdingwall]

When were accounts last filed?

Edit. Just checked unaudited micro submitted twelve days ago.

Think that's for a largely un-used holding company.

 

[bigy]

It takes a lot of guts, determination and sacrifice to put yourself forward for these positions as you are basically putting yourself in the firing line. I doubt any of the current (or past) Board Members went on with any ill intent, and i'm sure all believe that they can do good.

It takes more than that though to hold your hand up and accept you're no longer capable of taking things forward. Hopefully those still involved are big enough to come to that realisation.

 

[Arminius]

Basically, the three of them have taken control of Club !872 and do not need to ask any member permission to do what they want.
That's how it reads to me

The final OP posts in this thread, showing the powers that the three of them are delegating to themselves, without any membership vote, seems astonishing. I’ve run a successful business as director for over quarter of a century and I’d really have concerns about what I’ve read here if I was a member and contributor of and to C1872

How can any member based organisation have allowed a situation to develop where three of the board Members are now apparently working in concert and delegating themselves (without membership approval) powers that seem to me to make it impossible for anybody to scrutinise and examine their works and actions and question them.

I’ve held back from joining C1872 since it’s inception, as I always worried that something like this would develop over time. I’d prefer to own and control my own shares. I’m even more convinced that that is the correct course of action after reading this account from a board member of some considerable intellect and integrity (clearly apparent from what I’ve read here today) who has actually tried to serve on the board.

Very disturbing reading. All of it.

 

[Ciro]

Organisations like this should only have elected officials for a specific term before they are mandated to step down. You may lose good people along the way but you’ll also stop those running it based on their own monopoly.

Moreover what is the current member base of C1872 ? Surely a main KPI of directors is also how they have grown the numbers (or not). I’d be interested to see what the numbers were 2 years ago to what they are now.

 

[Timardim]

The Club 1872 trio should heed the writing on the wall and step down to make way for the people who have Rangers and the club at heart.

 

[Big D]

The Club 1872 trio should heed the writing on the wall and step down to make way for the people who have Rangers and the club at heart.

I'm sure this trio have the club at heart, but what appears to be a completely inflexible and dogmatic approach on how to deliver what is best for the club is far from healthy. There needs to be much more transparency, accountability and a substantial increase in board numbers, to ensure the thousands who have bought into C1872 are both informed and represented by those in positions of influence. It can't be the personal plaything of a handful of people (or less!) who think they know best.

 

[TCWNS1872]

Think that's for a largely un-used holding company.

Fair enough Mark. I didn’t read the attached pdf etc. as I was on the phone when posting the edit.

You know how it is - men can’t multi task. But women like Laura Fawkes can. Allegedly.

Anyway, where all this is concerned, trust is hard earned, but it is easily frittered away. The current officers of the CIC (and in the shadows) have a massive credibility problem which could, and probably will, have far reaching effects on fan ownership investment vehicles where Rangers are concerned for the foreseeable future.

I hope I’m wrong though and that self serving misdeeds haven’t scuppered this indefinitely.

Thanks for sharing as it obviously couldn’t have been easy to do so.

 

[Robert Marshall]

Let’s move away from the infighting - the same attributes are required.

.....what if when the “going gets tough” and our fans are getting battered for pillar to post - our c1872 representatives try to fight our corner but when they are not taken seriously, just give up the “fight” against the press or authorities.

We need directors with integrity, transparency, assertiveness and stomach/fight (for all the awkward situations that will come internally, externally, politically etc). We can’t have people who tick one or two boxes. That’s proven to what we have now and is proven to what we’ve had previously.

Sadly and what always happens with these positions in organisations is that there’s usually something “in it” for the individual and more often than not becomes a conflict of interest. c1872, key influencers, fan media etc. It’s everywhere although some worse than others.

Your reply makes it obvious the current Directors do not have the attributes you believe is necessary for the job in hand

 

[Robert Marshall]

I'm sure this trio have the club at heart, but what appears to be a completely inflexible and dogmatic approach on how to deliver what is best for the club is far from healthy. There needs to be much more transparency, accountability and a substantial increase in board numbers, to ensure the thousands who have bought into C1872 are both informed and represented by those in positions of influence. It can't be the personal plaything of a handful of people (or less!) who think they know best.

I think this trio have themselves at heart

 

[Robert Marshall]

Blazer chasing at its finest. I know from experience that the 2 ladies in question haven’t the foggiest idea in terms of what they are meant to be doing with this thing, as well as having absolutely zero skills in dealing with the wider support in their roles as a supporters body.

Chris graham, to me was always a blazer chaser. Yes he ripped Spiers a new arse on live tv, but that only helped catapult him into a now I’ll fated position within the club, and now he’s chasing the blazer via this body.

Disband it and set up a one vehicle, one voice for supporters that has the best interest of the supporters at its core, rather than looking after the few who fire in a few shackles every month. The whole things a sham, and looks far worse now than it’s ever looked.

There is nothing wrong with Club1872 as an organisation if run properly
The problem appears to be the 3 people running it
Get the right people in and do what is right for the fans and The Club
I think it is so easy to do, sure you will be criticised but that is par for the course

 

[RFC_Champions]

Your reply makes it obvious the current Directors do not have the attributes you believe is necessary for the job in hand

100% agreed.

I’d go a slight step further and also say that it remains to be seen whether previous directors who’ve recently resigned have what it takes either.

c1872 is a great tool but it was and is an organisational mess.

Full board change required. Unfortunately that’s easier said than done.

 

[Hillheadbear]

The final OP posts in this thread, showing the powers that the three of them are delegating to themselves, without any membership vote, seems astonishing. I’ve run a successful business as director for over quarter of a century and I’d really have concerns about what I’ve read here if I was a member and contributor of and to C1872

How can any member based organisation have allowed a situation to develop where three of the board Members are now apparently working in concert and delegating themselves (without membership approval) powers that seem to me to make it impossible for anybody to scrutinise and examine their works and actions and question them.

I’ve held back from joining C1872 since it’s inception, as I always worried that something like this would develop over time. I’d prefer to own and control my own shares. I’m even more convinced that that is the correct course of action after reading this account from a board member of some considerable intellect and integrity (clearly apparent from what I’ve read here today) who has actually tried to serve on the board.

Very disturbing reading. All of it.

Good comment.

Before retirement, I was a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers. I worked with the CIOs, CFOs and audit committees of some of the largest companies in the world. After retirement, I was the Treasurer of our Home Owners Association for two years and the President for four years. I have been invited to join several company boards but declined because I don't want to work any more. I have also been an active investor for many years and I know how capital raises, of the kind C1872 need to buy King's shares, work.

I'm not saying the above to be boastful. However, when I say it is amateur hour over at C1872, trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, what we are seeing with the governance of C1872 is all too common in member driven organisations. They tend to get taken over by a small clique of activists who think that they, and they alone, have all the answers and it is their way or the highway. They get away with it because the vast majority of members are passive. You need robust corporate government processes to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

The only way to fix the problem is to either vote on new board members and change the majority or have an EGM and clean out the old board completely. Probably the second option is the most realistic.

 

[mully10]

100% agreed.

I’d go a slight step further and also say that it remains to be seen whether previous directors who’ve recently resigned have what it takes either.

c1872 is a great tool but it was and is an organisational mess.

Full board change required. Unfortunately that’s easier said than done.

respectfully you seem to be happy to fire bullets at previous directors without knowing anything about them, do you know me or my C.V, wouldnt thinks so.
Dont know why you are wilfully firing bullets with little or no thought.

 

[mdingwall]

It's got about £4million in shares and cash.

So, I wouldn't be for throwing the towel in.

The problem is that they will almost certainly have two hand-picked candidates - whom they will have advised on weeding their social media and double-checked all their proposers.

Those two will then be in a context where The Three are always in a majority and because they have been in place for some time have all the contacts and knowledge to run the organisation. The incumbents are in a very strong position.

It's effectively run as a self-perpetuating clique and will be for at least another year until a fresh set of elections.

I can understand why people are pulling out but I think it would be daft to abandon all those assets.

Stick in and vote them out this year or next.

 

[CoplandKeklord]

Unfortunately, what we are seeing with the governance of C1872 is all too common in member driven organisations. They tend to get taken over by a small clique of activists who think that they, and they alone, have all the answers and it is their way or the highway. They get away with it because the vast majority of members are passive. You need robust corporate government processes to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

Excellent post, in particular the passage highlighted. This is exactly what tends to happen in community orgs, political parties at the branch level, and so on.

 

[Robert Marshall]

Good comment.

Before retirement, I was a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers. I worked with the CIOs, CFOs and audit committees of some of the largest companies in the world. After retirement, I was the Treasurer of our Home Owners Association for two years and the President for four years. I have been invited to join several company boards but declined because I don't want to work any more. I have also been an active investor for many years and I know how capital raises, of the kind C1872 need to buy King's shares, work.

I'm not saying the above to be boastful. However, when I say it is amateur hour over at C1872, trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, what we are seeing with the governance of C1872 is all too common in member driven organisations. They tend to get taken over by a small clique of activists who think that they, and they alone, have all the answers and it is their way or the highway. They get away with it because the vast majority of members are passive. You need robust corporate government processes to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

The only way to fix the problem is to either vote on new board members and change the majority or have an EGM and clean out the old board completely. Probably the second option is the most realistic.

I am hoping that the 3 of them will see sense and resign
As I have said we should have 9 Directors with everyone having different responsibilities.
You really need a skillset to serve on the board other than being a fan Secretary and Treasurer needs to be people who have a wealth of experience
Get self-employed and business people to take up positions
for the benefit of the fans and indeed the Club
Leave your egos at the door and bring your talents in
Ask people like yourself if you would join or at least ' pick your brains'
Being on the other side of the world should be no barrier to joining the Board of 1872

 

[RFC_Champions]

respectfully you seem to be happy to fire bullets at previous directors without knowing anything about them, do you know me or my C.V, wouldnt thinks so.
Dont know why you are wilfully firing bullets with little or no thought.

I don’t know anything about anyone mate.

I’m basing my opinion on c1872 has stumbled from negative issue (not always infighting) to the next. From the start until today. Everyone has been a part of that. Perhaps some more than others and I apologise to anyone for any offence caused if it appears that I’m “will-fully firing bullets”. That’s not my intent. My hope is to have one transparent fans group who will invest in the club, protect the club, call out the club when appropriate and protect the fans. We are flattering to deceive on all counts imo.

We need to rid ourselves of infighting and he said/she said hysteria. That doesn’t change if the current directors are out and the previous directors are back in. The he said/she said “rumours” will just come from the other side and continue to drive division between the members.

Hence a top down refresh.

 

[Big D]

I think this trio have themselves at heart

I don't know enough about the individuals involved to make it personal. I'm more concerned about the governance of C1872 as a whole and on the face of it, this trio need reigned in. An organisation with so many shares, members and subscribers should not be treated as a personal fiefdom by this, or any other, trio.

 

[mully10]

I don’t know anything about anyone mate.

I’m basing my opinion on c1872 has stumbled from negative issue (not always infighting) to the next. From the start until today. Everyone has been a part of that. Perhaps some more than others and I apologise to anyone for any offence caused if it appears that I’m “will-fully firing bullets”. That’s not my intent. My hope is to have one transparent fans group who will invest in the club, protect the club, call out the club when appropriate and protect the fans. We are flattering to deceive on all counts imo.

We need to rid ourselves of infighting and he said/she said hysteria. That doesn’t change if the current directors are out and the previous directors are back in. The he said/she said “rumours” will just come from the other side and continue to drive division between the members.

Hence a top down refresh.

Fair enough, maybe I am over sensitive.
I have years of experience in organisational governance and engagement work, but was never really allowed to do anything with it and effectively was undermined by the triumvirate, there comes a point with the best will in the world you just have to give up and look after yourself.
Regardless, I am but a small part of this, the fact that Stuart Mcquarrie felt so strongly about it with his credibility is enough to perhaps show that it is concerning.

 

[Bluefrew2]

Good comment.

Before retirement, I was a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers. I worked with the CIOs, CFOs and audit committees of some of the largest companies in the world. After retirement, I was the Treasurer of our Home Owners Association for two years and the President for four years. I have been invited to join several company boards but declined because I don't want to work any more. I have also been an active investor for many years and I know how capital raises, of the kind C1872 need to buy King's shares, work.

I'm not saying the above to be boastful. However, when I say it is amateur hour over at C1872, trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, what we are seeing with the governance of C1872 is all too common in member driven organisations. They tend to get taken over by a small clique of activists who think that they, and they alone, have all the answers and it is their way or the highway. They get away with it because the vast majority of members are passive. You need robust corporate government processes to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

The only way to fix the problem is to either vote on new board members and change the majority or have an EGM and clean out the old board completely. Probably the second option is the most realistic.

An EGM is required urgently

 

[Sticky Fingers]

Good comment.

Before retirement, I was a partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers. I worked with the CIOs, CFOs and audit committees of some of the largest companies in the world. After retirement, I was the Treasurer of our Home Owners Association for two years and the President for four years. I have been invited to join several company boards but declined because I don't want to work any more. I have also been an active investor for many years and I know how capital raises, of the kind C1872 need to buy King's shares, work.

I'm not saying the above to be boastful. However, when I say it is amateur hour over at C1872, trust me, I know what I'm talking about.

Unfortunately, what we are seeing with the governance of C1872 is all too common in member driven organisations. They tend to get taken over by a small clique of activists who think that they, and they alone, have all the answers and it is their way or the highway. They get away with it because the vast majority of members are passive. You need robust corporate government processes to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

The only way to fix the problem is to either vote on new board members and change the majority or have an EGM and clean out the old board completely. Probably the second option is the most realistic.

Would the role of Chairperson for club 1872 tempt you out of retirement? You clearly have the credentials and the knowledge for the role.

It’s an organisation that is clearly in desperate need of some clear and strong leadership as well as some sound business acumen.

 

[Northampton_Loyalist]

Sounds to me like you need an independent auditor / consultant to revise and implement a constitution that reflects the aims and values of the organisation as a first step - after holding current directors to account.

It looks out of control if it’s supposed to represent a broad fan base. The type of person who could/should get involved would be a Paul Murray. You need a well known unifying figure.

I think an EGM with a special resolution to demand the board increases in size, one to demand an external audit of past behavior is carried out unless all current directors resign (therefore removing the need for an audit, not to be confused with blackmailing them) and a vote of no confidence is required immediately.

As said, I have made the request for information on how to call an EGM from them directly, however it may take a while for the info to come back if they are particularly busy.

If no answers are forthcoming pretty quickly, I would guess the next point of call would be supporters direct asking for their input as a matter of urgency.

Beyond that, it may even take legal challenges over the corporate governance of the cic to gain some clarity.

None of those options is currently off the table and as Mark said, there is far too much supporter money involved now for things to be allowed to muddle on as they are.

 

[Elvis]

I am hoping that the 3 of them will see sense and resign
As I have said we should have 9 Directors with everyone having different responsibilities.
You really need a skillset to serve on the board other than being a fan Secretary and Treasurer needs to be people who have a wealth of experience
Get self-employed and business people to take up positions
for the benefit of the fans and indeed the Club
Leave your egos at the door and bring your talents in
Ask people like yourself if you would join or at least ' pick your brains'
Being on the other side of the world should be no barrier to joining the Board of 1872

I completely agree Robert. There seems to be a huge lack of corporate governance and control that most of the members don't seem to be aware of. From my own position as someone who works for local government on a voluntary basis, the governance is far more robust and that's for a body with an annual budget of around £350k per year. The whole Club 1872 model needs to be looked at with a larger number of directors and a quorum making a decision, especially for the sums involved. As you say, the talent in the wider Rangers support is hardly being tapped into with the current set up.

 

[Porto Loyal]

It's got about £4million in shares and cash.

So, I wouldn't be for throwing the towel in.

The problem is that they will almost certainly have two hand-picked candidates - whom they will have advised on weeding their social media and double-checked all their proposers.

Those two will then be in a context where The Three are always in a majority and because they have been in place for some time have all the contacts and knowledge to run the organisation. The incumbents are in a very strong position.

It's effectively run as a self-perpetuating clique and will be for at least another year until a fresh set of elections.

I can understand why people are pulling out but I think it would be daft to abandon all those assets.

Stick in and vote them out this year or next.

This - leaving only reduces the chances of getting a stronger more effective board in place.

 

[FDH21]

Is there a maximum term that can be served?

 

[Hillheadbear]

Would the role of Chairperson for club 1872 tempt you out of retirement? You clearly have the credentials and the knowledge for the role.

It’s an organisation that is clearly in desperate need of some clear and strong leadership as well as some sound business acumen.

If I was in Glasgow or even Scotland then I might be interested. However, being 5000 miles away, I don't think it is practical or reasonable. However, I'm more than happy to be a resource for whoever is running the show.

 

[Sticky Fingers]

If I was in Glasgow or even Scotland then I might be interested. However, being 5000 miles away, I don't think it is practical or reasonable. However, I'm more than happy to be a resource for whoever is running the show.

Ach, you can do it by Zoom every day, it’s fine!

 

[Yoniboy]

I'm still coming to terms with them using his factual description of Corbyn as a reason to blackball Mark.

 

[mdingwall]

Is there a maximum term that can be served?

I can't see a mention during a brief skim of the Articles that there is a maximum duration (under the old RST it was 12 years) - but each elected term is 3 years before you have to seek re-election.

 

[mdingwall]

I'm still coming to terms with them using his factual description of Corbyn as a reason to blackball Mark.

This thread is not for the discussion of tweets.

 

[Parma]

I was going to post something similar to @Krissie above. I've seen it in charities / volunteer run organisations where there is zero governance. Good intentions are not enough to be effective.

If people don't understand their role / purpose and the things they shouldn't be involved in things can go wrong quickly.

I've no idea about the ins & outs of Club 1872 or the individuals involved, but it seems to me there is a role for a supporter owned organisation to increase our collective ownership of the club.

It would be healthy to have term limits for directors, and there needs to be a separation between non-exec & executive directors who runs day to day operations supported by volunteers. Mixing these roles always risks poor governance.

There are a lot of well qualified people in the support who could volunteer on specific issues: PR, legal, governance, financial management etc. We should be taking advantage of it.

 

[Plantation pioneer]

There is nothing wrong with Club1872 as an organisation if run properly
The problem appears to be the 3 people running it
Get the right people in and do what is right for the fans and The Club
I think it is so easy to do, sure you will be criticised but that is par for the course

Who are the right people Robert ? Sadly we have seen this movie before. Folk get wee bit of power and it goes to their heads. Only 1 of them I know or had heard of was Joanne as she used to go on our RSC.

 

[Let’s Gio]

There is nothing wrong with Club1872 as an organisation if run properly
The problem appears to be the 3 people running it
Get the right people in and do what is right for the fans and The Club
I think it is so easy to do, sure you will be criticised but that is par for the course

I think the first problem is only 3 people running it, open to so much abuse and must be at risk of regulators?
then consider their efficacy

 

[LOL 133]

Blazer chasing at its finest. I know from experience that the 2 ladies in question haven’t the foggiest idea in terms of what they are meant to be doing with this thing, as well as having absolutely zero skills in dealing with the wider support in their roles as a supporters body.

Chris graham, to me was always a blazer chaser. Yes he ripped Spiers a new arse on live tv, but that only helped catapult him into a now I’ll fated position within the club, and now he’s chasing the blazer via this body.

Disband it and set up a one vehicle, one voice for supporters that has the best interest of the supporters at its core, rather than looking after the few who fire in a few shackles every month. The whole things a sham, and looks far worse now than it’s ever looked.

I understand the desire to raise funds to buy shares but surely the focus should have been on recruiting tens of thousands of members rather than a much smaller number with the resources and motivation to pay monthly subscriptions?

I said at the time of the launch Club 1872 could and should have become one of the biggest organisations in the UK with 200,000 plus members. On a personal level I could easily have recruited a dozen people if memberships were available as one off, life time purchases.

An organisation of that size would have incredible political leverage and influence.

 

[Gazzabear v2.0]

If I was in Glasgow or even Scotland then I might be interested. However, being 5000 miles away, I don't think it is practical or reasonable. However, I'm more than happy to be a resource for whoever is running the show.

Excuses, excuses...

 

[Kilsyth Unionist]

Club1872 s membership will have peaked a long time ago, slowly the income and membership will dwindle.
The 3 are trying to hold onto power .

 

[Hap Hapablap]

Lol at the idea of fan ownershiop

 

[Alex Venters]

Blazer chasing at its finest. I know from experience that the 2 ladies in question haven’t the foggiest idea in terms of what they are meant to be doing with this thing, as well as having absolutely zero skills in dealing with the wider support in their roles as a supporters body.

Chris graham, to me was always a blazer chaser. Yes he ripped Spiers a new arse on live tv, but that only helped catapult him into a now I’ll fated position within the club, and now he’s chasing the blazer via this body.

Disband it and set up a one vehicle, one voice for supporters that has the best interest of the supporters at its core, rather than looking after the few who fire in a few shackles every month. The whole things a sham, and looks far worse now than it’s ever looked.

Disband it and don't bother setting anything else up.
Any future body will go down the same road.

 

[forlanssister]

In my time with the Rangers Fans Board Stuart was of great assistance and guidance to us, I found him to be a man of utmost honesty and integrity. It was clear there was something seriously amiss at the time of his resignation from Club 1872.

It is clear the current leadership is unfit for purpose.

I should also have stated that Alan Fraser also sat on the Rangers Fans Board and the above applies equally to him as it does Stuart.

 

[Steven D]

There is nothing wrong with Club1872 as an organisation if run properly
The problem appears to be the 3 people running it
Get the right people in and do what is right for the fans and The Club
I think it is so easy to do, sure you will be criticised but that is par for the course

Would agree with this... Its not feasible to just keep disbanding organisations and setting up new ones under a new name. Weve had a conveyor belt of those over the years.

C1872 needs overhauled, as you say if run properly its perfectly fine.

 

[stonewall Jackson]

Blazer chasing at its finest. I know from experience that the 2 ladies in question haven’t the foggiest idea in terms of what they are meant to be doing with this thing, as well as having absolutely zero skills in dealing with the wider support in their roles as a supporters body.

Chris graham, to me was always a blazer chaser. Yes he ripped Spiers a new arse on live tv, but that only helped catapult him into a now I’ll fated position within the club, and now he’s chasing the blazer via this body.

Disband it and set up a one vehicle, one voice for supporters that has the best interest of the supporters at its core, rather than looking after the few who fire in a few shackles every month. The whole things a sham, and looks far worse now than it’s ever looked.

Thats how it appears to be at this moment in time. How anybody could join or remain members of this sham is baffling, especially as the members apparently are not consulted over the direction. A gang of oversized Ego's and arrogance is never a good idea for leadership.

 

[Buzz07]

Disband it and don't bother setting anything else up.
Any future body will go down the same road.

I agree with this.

Any shares or monies currently held, donate to Rangers for stadium improvements.

Every Fans group ends up with squabbles, personality clashes and finally implodes.

 

[Haining84]

As a member of Club1872 who transferred over from the RST,this is very disappointing to hear.It sounds like we need a complete overhaul of board members tbh.

The idea however that it should be abandoned is ridiculous.Myself and thousands of other supporters have contributed hard earned cash to collectively hold a stake in the club.Personally I’ve contributed the thick end of a grand since 2012 via ‘BuyRangers’ then merging into monthly Club1872 payments and others have contributed even greater sums so excuse me for not accepting being told by non-members what should or shouldn’t happen to my modest contribution.

 

[Blutoe]

100% agreed.

I’d go a slight step further and also say that it remains to be seen whether previous directors who’ve recently resigned have what it takes either.

c1872 is a great tool but it was and is an organisational mess.

Full board change required. Unfortunately that’s easier said than done.

I have to say that your condemnation of Alan Fraser is pretty poor. I have known him for a long time, and although we haven’t had any direct dealings for a number of years, I can tell you right now that he is a massive Rangers man and a very decent human being. Whatever his reasons for resigning should be a warning flag that all is not well on that board.

 

[Porto Loyal]

I've seen this happen in other volunteer organisations - people get so involved over a long period of time that an element of possession develops, they see the organisation as theirs and resent anyone who tries to interfere with that.