Club 1872 Blog – What We’ve Got Here Is, Failure To Communicate

Rio Loyal

Well-Known Member

Rangers – What we’ve got here is, failure to communicate​

Contributor Blog

It would be fair to say that Rangers supporters have been clamouring to hear something from the custodians of our club following an underwhelming start to the season and major question marks over their ambition to build on the success of ’55’ and a Europa League Final. So it was with some interest that I noticed what appeared to be an in depth interview with Vice Chairman, John Bennett appear on Facebook.

I have enjoyed hearing from Mr Bennett on previous occasions. He has spoken fairly well at AGMs and it is apparent that he is one of the few individuals at Rangers who can sound coherent on camera.

Things did not start well, presumably through no fault of Mr Bennett. In his wisdom, Communications ‘Chief’ David Graham decided to release the interview behind a paywall. This was instantly irritating to supporters who feel they are already being squeezed for every penny by the club they love. It took two hours to remedy this ridiculous gaffe and release the interview on YouTube. Unfortunately, things did not improve once the interview got under way.

Bennett’s delivery, which previously has seemed precise and confident took on a patronising tone almost immediately. His nods to social media jokes about Edmiston House and finances betrayed a board which is clearly very sensitive to even the most mild criticism but has absolutely no idea how to deal with it. Perhaps this is symptomatic of custodians who have grown more and more out of touch with the supporters of the club. Perhaps it is just that not even Bennett was convinced by his 33 minute monologue which said virtually nothing.

I have seldom heard someone talk for so long without a single, pertinent piece of information being imparted to the listener. If I had to sum it up, the overall message seemed to be “pipe down, you just don’t understand, we’ve got this”.

It is arguable whether an organisation has ever shot itself in the foot in terms of public relations quite like Rangers over the past two years. In the process of winning a historic 55th title and with a huge name in the management hot-seat we managed to somehow withdraw into ourselves to the point that supporters are sceptical of almost every utterance from the club – with good reason.

RTV interviewers are never going to ask good questions of a Vice Chairman – particularly one under pressure. The puff piece nature of the interview did not serve Mr Bennett well. He is clearly a very capable man and should be able to submit himself to proper questioning. Perhaps if he had then we would have learned something worthwhile. Fan media outlets, who themselves have had issues adjusting to their open access to Ibrox and regularly have to defend themselves against allegations of being too soft on the club, have apparently been asking for some time to sit down with the Rangers hierarchy. The choice of RTV was cowardly and smacked of a lack of confidence in the message – perhaps with some justification as there didn’t seem to be one.

The Stewart Robertson interview which followed, with Jonny McFarlane, the ex Daily Record videographer and now ‘Rangers Review’ Editor, also betrayed both the schizophrenic nature of the club’s communications policy and the refusal to submit to any kind of competent questioning. McFarlane, just a couple of days previously on his own podcast had declared himself completely unable to properly scrutinise Rangers’ finances. Who better then for Rangers Communications Director, David Graham to choose to sit down for an exclusive interview with the Rangers MD on…the club’s finances?

The Rangers Review is owned by The Herald. It is not fan media but rather a mainstream media outlet which passes itself off as fan media. On the one hand therefore we have official fan media partners of the club telling us the MSM can’t be trusted whilst on the other, David Graham hands a plum interview to the Herald newspaper. Without dwelling on McFarlane’s admission of financial and business illiteracy, that is an odd choice. They are clearly seen by Graham as an unstintingly friendly outlet who refuse to challenge the club when even official fan media partners are raising concerns.

In any case, the interviews with Robertson were so badly received that they appear to have been aborted half way through a two day release. On Wednesday, McFarlane announced that the 3 part interview with Robertson that day would be followed on Thursday with more from him on “recruitment, signings and why Rangers did their business the way they did in the transfer market.” As of today, Friday, none of that content has appeared and the tweets referencing it have been deleted by the ever accommodating McFarlane.

Support Club 1872

All in all it builds a picture of a Rangers Board who are either unwilling or unable to submit themselves to real scrutiny. As a Club 1872 member I was extremely disquieted by the Club 1872 Board’s statement earlier in the year which was so scathing of the Rangers Executive Team but it seems they have been proven to be correct. There is a clear level of contempt for supporters.

I have some sympathy with Mr Bennett. A Vice Chairman should not have to take on the responsibilities of Chairman simply because the man holding that position shirks them on such a regular basis. Douglas Park is conspicuous in his absence not only from these type of set piece interviews but also at AGMs where he has scarcely been heard from.

I also have some sympathy with Mr Bennett that the Managing Director of Rangers, who last year received a handsome sum of over £450k for his contribution, is unable to sit in front of a camera and appear in any way convincing. In Mr Bennett’s position, you would also expect your Communications Director to have the knowledge and awareness to spike a 33 minute interview which says nothing and from which the main takeaway is that the Vice Chairman of Rangers thinks being beaten 3-0 at home to the third seed in your Champions League group is a “real Rangers performance”.

However, then I remember that Mr Bennett sits as Vice Chair of the Rangers Board that employed David Graham, who as far as anyone can tell had no prior experience of either PR or business in general. He sits as Vice Chair of a board which appears happy to have a Chairman who won’t communicate with supporters. A Chairman who appears determined to ignore not only Club 1872, a major shareholder representing thousands of Rangers fans, but also the Rangers Supporters Association which represents over 100 Rangers Supporters Clubs. He also sits as Vice Chair of a board who wants supporters to believe they are striving for “best in class” but employ a Managing Director who can’t even deliver a tame interview without it having to be pulled halfway through.

So perhaps I shouldn’t feel sorry for John Bennett and should instead feel sorry for myself and my fellow supporters who have had to put up with two years and counting of this failure to communicate.

Yogi Bear

Absolutely bang on the money for me.
 
Couldn't agree more. Our biggest issue has been the failure to communicate what we're doing, what we aim to do moving forwards, how we plan to get there and at the moment, why those plans haven't materialised.

I get that there was a clamour to change our relationship with the media and there did have to be a stronger line take with some outlets and journalists. However, we've not really done anything to make up for the absence. As the OP says, you're never going to get anything meaningful from an in-house interview. It's set up to only give the bare minimum of information and for that reason is mostly dull, filler material. Fan media has been a good development and if given the access they can put forward the kind of questions that fans want asked, but they're too easy to bat away and it appears that the level of required access is being refused.

As much as the media landscape is changing and fewer people are buying papers, many refuse to click links to certain publications, the reality is that traditional media still forms a large part of the online, newer methods of debate and discussion. It might not be a group of people arguing over an article that's in front of them in the work canteen, but there are threads endless threads on here based on newspaper and other MSM output, whilst Twitter is exactly the same. In those arenas we have no voice or power because we can't get a coherent message out there.
 
Unfortunately we’re at a point now where it doesn’t matter if the board communicate or not, the majority have made up their mind and are desperate to have a go at the board whenever they can.

In the past two and a bit years, under the current board, we have:

Won a league title
Made a EL final
Qualified for the CL group stages
Broke our transfer record (sales) twice

That’s not even mentioning the £80million loss the board have covered with their own money over the past 4/5 years.

The current board definitely do make mistakes but I think a lot of people need to take a step back at time and realise how lucky we are to have them.
 
Couldn't agree more. Our biggest issue has been the failure to communicate what we're doing, what we aim to do moving forwards, how we plan to get there and at the moment, why those plans haven't materialised.

I get that there was a clamour to change our relationship with the media and there did have to be a stronger line take with some outlets and journalists. However, we've not really done anything to make up for the absence. As the OP says, you're never going to get anything meaningful from an in-house interview. It's set up to only give the bare minimum of information and for that reason is mostly dull, filler material. Fan media has been a good development and if given the access they can put forward the kind of questions that fans want asked, but they're too easy to bat away and it appears that the level of required access is being refused.

As much as the media landscape is changing and fewer people are buying papers, many refuse to click links to certain publications, the reality is that traditional media still forms a large part of the online, newer methods of debate and discussion. It might not be a group of people arguing over an article that's in front of them in the work canteen, but there are threads endless threads on here based on newspaper and other MSM output, whilst Twitter is exactly the same. In those arenas we have no voice or power because we can't get a coherent message out there.
Our communication is horrendous and these articles show how out of touch they are with the fans.

I am also astonished to see that (Robertson not Bennet my mistake)is taking nearly 500,000 half a million a season.
 
Last edited:
Unfortunately we’re at a point now where it doesn’t matter if the board communicate or not, the majority have made up their mind and are desperate to have a go at the board whenever they can.

In the past two and a bit years, under the current board, we have:

Won a league title
Made a EL final
Qualified for the CL group stages
Broke our transfer record (sales) twice

That’s not even mentioning the £80million loss the board have covered with their own money over the past 4/5 years.

The current board definitely do make mistakes but I think a lot of people need to take a step back at time and realise how lucky we are to have them.
So what exactly do you disagree with in that article it’s plain and simple facts?

Also the loans have been paid back or turned in to Equity don’t you think the Club would sell for a good amount and these board members would get their money back if they wanted it?
 
This is not an attack on David Graham - but what is his actual remit? I see him sitting cueing questions at Press Conferences and in RTV videos when we unveil signings. Is he being afforded the latitude to perform his role as he would wish to, or is he working under tighter constraints than he expected? It seems like Rangers Coms is constantly lurching from one PR clusterf**k to the next.
 
This is not an attack on David Graham - but what is his actual remit? I see him sitting cueing questions at Press Conferences and in RTV videos when we unveil signings. Is he being afforded the latitude to perform his role as he would wish to, or is he working under tighter constraints than he expected? It seems like Rangers Coms is constantly lurching from one PR clusterf**k to the next.
To make the directors and the manager look good to gloss over the bad stuff with apparent good stuff.

He will have had a massive amount of input in Bennet’s interview if he didn’t infact write it.
 
Our communication is horrendous and these articles show how out of touch they are with the fans.

I am also astonished to see that Bennet is taking nearly 500,000 a million a season as a wage I thought these “Massive Ranger’s Fans” weren’t taking a wage as they certainly don’t need it,
That's Robertsons wage, don't think the vice-chair takes a penny.
 
To make the directors and the manager look good to gloss over the bad stuff with apparent good stuff.

He will have had a massive amount of input in Bennet’s interview if he didn’t infact write it.
Think you are being naive. I'm pretty sure that all questions asked would have been brought to the attention of DP and possibly Stewart Robertson. Do you not remember last years penmanship of the "rump". Whilst David Graham is in charge of media output there's no chance he's going alone without running that passed either the Chairman or indeed the board imo.
 
So what exactly do you disagree with in that article it’s plain and simple facts?

Also the loans have been paid back or turned in to Equity don’t you think the Club would sell for a good amount and these board members would get their money back if they wanted it?

There are very few facts in the article in the OP, the majority of it is just conjecture. There are more facts in my post than in the OP.

No, there is not a hope in hell that the board members would get their money back if they were to sell the club right now.
 
There are very few facts in the article in the OP, the majority of it is just conjecture. There are more facts in my post than in the OP.

No, there is not a hope in hell that the board members would get their money back if they were to sell the club right now.
You don’t think Rangers could be sold for around 100million with no debts ??

As far as I see there’s plenty facts In the article.
 

Rangers – What we’ve got here is, failure to communicate​

Contributor Blog

It would be fair to say that Rangers supporters have been clamouring to hear something from the custodians of our club following an underwhelming start to the season and major question marks over their ambition to build on the success of ’55’ and a Europa League Final. So it was with some interest that I noticed what appeared to be an in depth interview with Vice Chairman, John Bennett appear on Facebook.

I have enjoyed hearing from Mr Bennett on previous occasions. He has spoken fairly well at AGMs and it is apparent that he is one of the few individuals at Rangers who can sound coherent on camera.

Things did not start well, presumably through no fault of Mr Bennett. In his wisdom, Communications ‘Chief’ David Graham decided to release the interview behind a paywall. This was instantly irritating to supporters who feel they are already being squeezed for every penny by the club they love. It took two hours to remedy this ridiculous gaffe and release the interview on YouTube. Unfortunately, things did not improve once the interview got under way.

Bennett’s delivery, which previously has seemed precise and confident took on a patronising tone almost immediately. His nods to social media jokes about Edmiston House and finances betrayed a board which is clearly very sensitive to even the most mild criticism but has absolutely no idea how to deal with it. Perhaps this is symptomatic of custodians who have grown more and more out of touch with the supporters of the club. Perhaps it is just that not even Bennett was convinced by his 33 minute monologue which said virtually nothing.

I have seldom heard someone talk for so long without a single, pertinent piece of information being imparted to the listener. If I had to sum it up, the overall message seemed to be “pipe down, you just don’t understand, we’ve got this”.

It is arguable whether an organisation has ever shot itself in the foot in terms of public relations quite like Rangers over the past two years. In the process of winning a historic 55th title and with a huge name in the management hot-seat we managed to somehow withdraw into ourselves to the point that supporters are sceptical of almost every utterance from the club – with good reason.

RTV interviewers are never going to ask good questions of a Vice Chairman – particularly one under pressure. The puff piece nature of the interview did not serve Mr Bennett well. He is clearly a very capable man and should be able to submit himself to proper questioning. Perhaps if he had then we would have learned something worthwhile. Fan media outlets, who themselves have had issues adjusting to their open access to Ibrox and regularly have to defend themselves against allegations of being too soft on the club, have apparently been asking for some time to sit down with the Rangers hierarchy. The choice of RTV was cowardly and smacked of a lack of confidence in the message – perhaps with some justification as there didn’t seem to be one.

The Stewart Robertson interview which followed, with Jonny McFarlane, the ex Daily Record videographer and now ‘Rangers Review’ Editor, also betrayed both the schizophrenic nature of the club’s communications policy and the refusal to submit to any kind of competent questioning. McFarlane, just a couple of days previously on his own podcast had declared himself completely unable to properly scrutinise Rangers’ finances. Who better then for Rangers Communications Director, David Graham to choose to sit down for an exclusive interview with the Rangers MD on…the club’s finances?

The Rangers Review is owned by The Herald. It is not fan media but rather a mainstream media outlet which passes itself off as fan media. On the one hand therefore we have official fan media partners of the club telling us the MSM can’t be trusted whilst on the other, David Graham hands a plum interview to the Herald newspaper. Without dwelling on McFarlane’s admission of financial and business illiteracy, that is an odd choice. They are clearly seen by Graham as an unstintingly friendly outlet who refuse to challenge the club when even official fan media partners are raising concerns.

In any case, the interviews with Robertson were so badly received that they appear to have been aborted half way through a two day release. On Wednesday, McFarlane announced that the 3 part interview with Robertson that day would be followed on Thursday with more from him on “recruitment, signings and why Rangers did their business the way they did in the transfer market.” As of today, Friday, none of that content has appeared and the tweets referencing it have been deleted by the ever accommodating McFarlane.

Support Club 1872

All in all it builds a picture of a Rangers Board who are either unwilling or unable to submit themselves to real scrutiny. As a Club 1872 member I was extremely disquieted by the Club 1872 Board’s statement earlier in the year which was so scathing of the Rangers Executive Team but it seems they have been proven to be correct. There is a clear level of contempt for supporters.

I have some sympathy with Mr Bennett. A Vice Chairman should not have to take on the responsibilities of Chairman simply because the man holding that position shirks them on such a regular basis. Douglas Park is conspicuous in his absence not only from these type of set piece interviews but also at AGMs where he has scarcely been heard from.

I also have some sympathy with Mr Bennett that the Managing Director of Rangers, who last year received a handsome sum of over £450k for his contribution, is unable to sit in front of a camera and appear in any way convincing. In Mr Bennett’s position, you would also expect your Communications Director to have the knowledge and awareness to spike a 33 minute interview which says nothing and from which the main takeaway is that the Vice Chairman of Rangers thinks being beaten 3-0 at home to the third seed in your Champions League group is a “real Rangers performance”.

However, then I remember that Mr Bennett sits as Vice Chair of the Rangers Board that employed David Graham, who as far as anyone can tell had no prior experience of either PR or business in general. He sits as Vice Chair of a board which appears happy to have a Chairman who won’t communicate with supporters. A Chairman who appears determined to ignore not only Club 1872, a major shareholder representing thousands of Rangers fans, but also the Rangers Supporters Association which represents over 100 Rangers Supporters Clubs. He also sits as Vice Chair of a board who wants supporters to believe they are striving for “best in class” but employ a Managing Director who can’t even deliver a tame interview without it having to be pulled halfway through.

So perhaps I shouldn’t feel sorry for John Bennett and should instead feel sorry for myself and my fellow supporters who have had to put up with two years and counting of this failure to communicate.

Yogi Bear

Absolutely bang on the money for me.
Great article.
Thanks for taking the time to write it. Got all your points across without the need for hysterics and it would be hard to argue against any of your points.
Said a lot of what I've been thinking but put way more eloquently than I could.
 
Think you are being naive. I'm pretty sure that all questions asked would have been brought to the attention of DP and possibly Stewart Robertson. Do you not remember last years penmanship of the "rump". Whilst David Graham is in charge of media output there's no chance he's going alone without running that passed either the Chairman or indeed the board imo.
I meant he probably wrote it but I am sure Douglas will have know what was in it before it was put out 100%.
 
The whole article is basically an opinion piece.

No, I don’t think the club could be sold for £100million.
It’s an opinion piece if you didn’t listen to the interviews, My views are a lot of it is factual.

So a club with no debt and quite possibly a turn over of 70-80 million that got to a Europa League final isn’t worth 100 million :)
 
There's a lot to agree with in the article.

The fact it came from C1872 is a tad hypocritical especially re communication and the chasm between them and the club grows ever wider.

The club has its faults as they openly admit. They don't admit certain people in certain roles are bloody awful, certainly at face value.

C1872 I don't trust at all.
 
Last edited:
There's a lot to agree with in the article.

The fact it came from C1872 us a tad hypocritical especially re communication and the chasm between them and the club grows ever wider.

The club has its faults as they openly admit. They don't admit certain people in certain roles are bloody awful, certainly at face value.

C1872 I don't trust at all.
I agree they are also full of self interest but it was from a blogger instead of them actually writing it.
 
Great piece and cant fault any of whats been said.

I wasnt aware the remaining parts of the interview had been pulled or not released, any ideas why?
Yet another long winded post that repeats lots of things others have said. Some of which is accurate but eventually we get to the real point of this post, join C1872 the heroes of the poster.

Yes I agree, we’ve had poor Comms from the club but C1872 isn’t exactly a bastion of great communication or openness so spare me another wee sneaky attempt to use the current problems as an opportunity for agendas.
 
I agree they are also full of self interest but it was from a blogger instead of them actually writing it.
Indeed but they sent it out.

Most of the opinions were already aired on here and social media reflecting the writers opinions more or less instantly after the interviews aired.

The club made a rod for their own back by not communicating and now they did and its solved nothing.

The article doesn't bother me but tells us stuff we already know and previously discussed.

It doesn't make c1872 any more relevant. In fact their performance is worse than the clubs in terms of communicating and the club still has its paying customers where as c1872 numbers have dwindled.
 
It’s an opinion piece if you didn’t listen to the interviews, My views are a lot of it is factual.

So a club with no debt and quite possibly a turn over of 70-80 million that got to a Europa League final isn’t worth 100 million :)

You can think it’s factual all you want but it’s an opinion piece.

If the club is worth £100million then you best tell someone to buy Dave Kings 20% for £13million because they’ll be getting themself a bargain.
 
Is the stuff about Rangers pulling the final part of Robertson's interview with McFarlane because of the backlash(as well as McFarlane deleting all hints to a final part) actually true ?

Surely they're not that thin skinned ?
 
Our communication is horrendous and these articles show how out of touch they are with the fans.

I am also astonished to see that Bennet is taking nearly 500,000 a million a season as a wage I thought these “Massive Ranger’s Fans” weren’t taking a wage as they certainly don’t need it,
Your second paragraph is wrong and doesn’t even make sense. What wage? As for the amount????
 
You can think it’s factual all you want but it’s an opinion piece.

If the club is worth £100million then you best tell someone to buy Dave Kings 20% for £13million because they’ll be getting themself a bargain.
Most of it is factual to the way I perceived the interviews as a lot of others did but it’s a forum and about opinions.

20% is no good if no one else is willing to sell up is it ?

The club put up for sale full shooting match would bring the investors money back and more I don’t think that’s even a valid argument.
 
Agree with most of the salient points although a good degree of gibberish yogi.
 
Couldn't agree more. Our biggest issue has been the failure to communicate what we're doing, what we aim to do moving forwards, how we plan to get there and at the moment, why those plans haven't materialised.

I get that there was a clamour to change our relationship with the media and there did have to be a stronger line take with some outlets and journalists. However, we've not really done anything to make up for the absence. As the OP says, you're never going to get anything meaningful from an in-house interview. It's set up to only give the bare minimum of information and for that reason is mostly dull, filler material. Fan media has been a good development and if given the access they can put forward the kind of questions that fans want asked, but they're too easy to bat away and it appears that the level of required access is being refused.

As much as the media landscape is changing and fewer people are buying papers, many refuse to click links to certain publications, the reality is that traditional media still forms a large part of the online, newer methods of debate and discussion. It might not be a group of people arguing over an article that's in front of them in the work canteen, but there are threads endless threads on here based on newspaper and other MSM output, whilst Twitter is exactly the same. In those arenas we have no voice or power because we can't get a coherent message out there.
Partly true, but if we did use "traditional media" would you trust them to convey our message truthfully, without bias?
I wouldn't.

Our communications are pitiful, but we can sort that without feeding the haters in this country and beyond.
 
Most of it is factual to the way I perceived the interviews as a lot of others did but it’s a forum and about opinions.

20% is no good if no one else is willing to sell up is it ?

The club put up for sale full shooting match would bring the investors money back and more I don’t think that’s even a valid argument.
What on earth are you talking about John Bennet earning ?

who do you think will pay £100m for us?

why do you think DK can’t even sell his shares at 20P

dear oh dear what absolute tosh!
 
Most of it is factual to the way I perceived the interviews as a lot of others did but it’s a forum and about opinions.

20% is no good if no one else is willing to sell up is it ?

The club put up for sale full shooting match would bring the investors money back and more I don’t think that’s even a valid argument.

You can agree with the opinion piece (I’ve no issue with that) but I just disagree that there are lots of facts in it.

I never argued that 20% was good or bad. I was just saying that you could buy it from Dave King for £13million.

The investors/board may get their money back in the future if they sell but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be commended for ploughing the money in in the first place.
 
What on earth are you talking about John Bennet earning ?

who do you think will pay £100m for us?

why do you think DK can’t even sell his shares at 20P

dear oh dear what absolute tosh!
Not surprised to hear that from you are as pro board as it gets.

If you read the thread properly I’ve picked it up wrong and I’ve also answered the question.

We will have a turn over of at least 70 million this year potentially higher what’s the advantage to buying 20% if no one else wants to sell its dead money the full lot would go for more than enough for investors to get their money back absolutely no problem.
 
You can agree with the opinion piece (I’ve no issue with that) but I just disagree that there are lots of facts in it.

I never argued that 20% was good or bad. I was just saying that you could buy it from Dave King for £13million.

The investors/board may get their money back in the future if they sell but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be commended for ploughing the money in in the first place.
I am not saying they shouldn’t I am very grateful to them as we all are.

This doesn’t put them above reproach though and with some of Bennet’s comments and Robertsons it looks like they are delighted with the way things are going which for me is far from good enough.

1 League and 1 Scottish Cup isn’t good enough to rest on your laurels.
 
Oh club1872 are back with another hit piece on the board, consider me shocked!

The hypocrisy of them is staggering. Clambering to attack the lack of communication is funny when they themselves are worse and again the communication post that is being attacked, it wouldn’t be a grudge that their resident ghost figure has sour grapes over?!

The board I will admit is not great at certain things but some people seem to forget what they’ve done and should show some respect.
 
It’s an opinion piece if you didn’t listen to the interviews, My views are a lot of it is factual.

So a club with no debt and quite possibly a turn over of 70-80 million that got to a Europa League final isn’t worth 100 million :)
I'm no financial expert, so what is the correlation between projected turnover and the value of the club?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top