Club 1872 Director's Resignation

jweebear

Well-Known Member
Someone should either be a director, with all of the roles and responsibilities, or they should not be a director at all.

The work you are describing is surely appropriate to the Supporters Liaison Officer.
Greg works for the club bud, i'm talking of an independent Supporters Director or whatever you wish to call him or her.
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
Aslo why couldn't Greg work with an independent supporters representative from C1872? i'm not talking about a daily working relationship, merely when the two roles come together in some matters relating.
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
Greg works for the club bud, i'm talking of an independent Supporters Director or whatever you wish to call him or her.
I take your point re the SLO, but I still think he fulfills at least some of the role you describe.

I agree that Club1872 (as a shareholder not a fan's group) should be able to nominate a director to sit on the board. However as a full board member, not some light version.
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
I take your point re the SLO, but I still think he fulfills at least some of the role you describe.

I agree that Club1872 (as a shareholder not a fan's group) should be able to nominate a director to sit on the board. However as a full board member, not some light version.
We have to learn to crawl before we can learn to walk in boardroom matters. It's a first step, who knows what then can happen down the line.
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
We have to learn to crawl before we can learn to walk in boardroom matters. It's a first step, who knows what then happen down the line.
Do you not think there is anyone within the Rangers support, who is also a member of Club1872, who is capable of sitting on the board.

I would imagine there are plenty of professions, lawyers and accountants, plenty of people who run their own businesses, plenty of people who are directors of other companies.

Don't underestimate the talent available.
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
Do you not think there is anyone within the Rangers support, who is also a member of Club1872, who is capable of sitting on the board.

I would imagine there are plenty of professions, lawyers and accountants, plenty of people who run their own businesses, plenty of people who are directors of other companies.

Don't underestimate the talent available.
I don't and i do think there are some very capable Bears, But we need to get the foot in the door, this is one way of doing that. If we can get a full board representative all fine and well, but that full board appointed looks, at this moment, unlikely. But we'll keep knocking on the door.
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
I don't and i do think there are some very capable Bears, But we need to get the foot in the door, this is one way of doing that. If we can get a full board representative all fine and well, but that full board appointed looks, at this moment, unlikely. But we'll keep knocking on the door.
Fair enough, I really do understand what you are saying and take your points.

However for me there is no reason why a suitably qualified supporter with the backing of Club1872 should not get a place on the board. Either by being elected at a General Meeting or by being employed as a non-exec.
 

Govanx

Cool Story Bro
Y
Do you have a son? would you defend him against Lies ?
Yes, if it seemed he was overwhelmed. Greg, who I don’t know, does a great job (from what I’ve seen) defending and laying out his remit dispassionately and without rancor, making the people who attack him look like tools. You jumping in to defend him overshadows that (in my opinion) making it look like “daddy” has to defend him because he’s “overwhelmed”, which of course he’s not.
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
here we go again... :( you've been told about 100 times but still you persist with this.
you were taught to be cautious with your words, but still persist, we have quite a lot of Q and A on a Friday, why don't you pop in to see me one night on your way to a meeting across the road
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
Y

Yes, if it seemed he was overwhelmed. Greg, who I don’t know, does a great job (from what I’ve seen) defending and laying out his remit dispassionately and without rancor, making the people who attack him look like tools. You jumping in to defend him overshadows that (in my opinion) making it look like “daddy” has to defend him because he’s “overwhelmed”, which of course he’s not.
Difference is he is educated to a very high standard where i'm just a working class guy from the east end.
I don't think I have ever commented on his Job, I'm not clever enough for that
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
They probably have, that's why we need an independent board member, working for the fans interests in matters that concern the support. It happens in Europe where fans are allowed, by law, on the football club's board. It can and should be done at Rangers especially if the support are a major shareholder, or what's the point of all this?
I agree in principle with what you are saying.
my take on it and always has been that our boards should be left to run the club. Club 1872 should go through the Clubs Representative, in this case our SLO for anything to do with fans concerns regarding , Safe Standing,moving away fans,disabled fans, behaviour of opposition fans/managers, away allocations/RSC etc.
It is the his job to pass them on to the relevant person ? department to deal with.
Club 1872 should be able to put their point about shares or the Corporate running of the Club at the AGM and demand written answers.
If Club 1872 put a member on the Board,he or she would need to sign a NDA and in truth be able to tell us very little, would then be accused of Blazer chasing, which I think it is, be better to have an agreement that 2 of 1872 coud have an hour of the Boards time, say every second board meetings, where they could give them a list of question, have a discussion with them about the questions and the board could get back to them and put the answaers in writing
Then all the members could judge how the Club's board and indeed Club 1872's board are performing.
That is transparency
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
I agree in principle with what you are saying.
my take on it and always has been that our boards should be left to run the club. Club 1872 should go through the Clubs Representative, in this case our SLO for anything to do with fans concerns regarding , Safe Standing,moving away fans,disabled fans, behaviour of opposition fans/managers, away allocations/RSC etc.
It is the his job to pass them on to the relevant person ? department to deal with.
Club 1872 should be able to put their point about shares or the Corporate running of the Club at the AGM and demand written answers.
If Club 1872 put a member on the Board,he or she would need to sign a NDA and in truth be able to tell us very little, would then be accused of Blazer chasing, which I think it is, be better to have an agreement that 2 of 1872 coud have an hour of the Boards time, say every second board meetings, where they could give them a list of question, have a discussion with them about the questions and the board could get back to them and put the answaers in writing
Then all the members could judge how the Club's board and indeed Club 1872's board are performing.
That is transparency
Thanks for your reply Robert, I understand what you are saying and can see where you are coming from on this.

However C1872 mandate is for a shareholding of 25%+1, also for a seat on the board, if we ever get to that level of Shareholding. C1872 will have or should have a seat in the boardroom, direct access to the all board members and with face to face discussions with the CEO. With all the sensitive commercial and financial information that goes along with having that level of shareholding.

If that is not the case anymore then C1872 should then inform it's members in a change of mandate and ethos. I joined C1872 exactly for that reason, because i believe in supporters participation in the running of our club.

If we don't have a independant C872 at this time, or their board members are not convinced of that original mission statement. Then i can see the membership dropping off significantly in the coming months. I have been into the dream of supporters ownership for a few years now, originally joining the RST, then RF and finally C1872, if we are not trying for a supporters ownership or a board appointment, even i can't see a reason for continuing with my membership.

Owning vast amount of shares is all fine and well, but without the influence that goes along with a large shareholding, to change things for the supporters benefit, then in all honesty it's a waste of supporters resources.
 

The Shadow

Well-Known Member
Random question but what would happen if Club 1872 bought a controlling share in club and then had to do what King has - ie offer to buy all other shares?
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
Random question but what would happen if Club 1872 bought a controlling share in club and then had to do what King has - ie offer to buy all other shares?
Once we get to 25%plus one, there would be no advantage in going higher.I believe with the right people behind it we can, as I always believed could reach our goal, as stated originally by RF, of 25% plus one
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
I agree in principle with what you are saying.
my take on it and always has been that our boards should be left to run the club. Club 1872 should go through the Clubs Representative, in this case our SLO for anything to do with fans concerns regarding , Safe Standing,moving away fans,disabled fans, behaviour of opposition fans/managers, away allocations/RSC etc.
It is the his job to pass them on to the relevant person ? department to deal with.
Club 1872 should be able to put their point about shares or the Corporate running of the Club at the AGM and demand written answers.
If Club 1872 put a member on the Board,he or she would need to sign a NDA and in truth be able to tell us very little, would then be accused of Blazer chasing, which I think it is, be better to have an agreement that 2 of 1872 coud have an hour of the Boards time, say every second board meetings, where they could give them a list of question, have a discussion with them about the questions and the board could get back to them and put the answaers in writing
Then all the members could judge how the Club's board and indeed Club 1872's board are performing.
That is transparency
If Club1872 was simply a supporters group I would take your point.

However it is not. It is the second biggest shareholder in the PLC.

New Oasis Asset Limited 14.57%
Club 1872 Shares CIC 10.71%

You say

"... be better to have an agreement that 2 of 1872 coud have an hour of the Boards time, say every second board meetings, where they could give them a list of question, have a discussion with them about the questions and the board could get back to them and put the answaers in writing"

That is what a supporters group would be trying to get. Not actual representation on the board.

And

"Club 1872 should be able to put their point about shares or the Corporate running of the Club at the AGM and demand written answers."

Club1872 can already do that, in fact with the level of shareholding it can call EGMs and put forward resolutions to be voted on by the shareholders.

There is the risk of Club1872 being a major shareholder with a fan's group mentality. I do not believe that is what people are putting hundreds of thousands of pounds in for. Particularly when it already owns about £2m in shares.
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
If Club1872 was simply a supporters group I would take your point.

However it is not. It is the second biggest shareholder in the PLC.

New Oasis Asset Limited 14.57%
Club 1872 Shares CIC 10.71%

You say

"... be better to have an agreement that 2 of 1872 coud have an hour of the Boards time, say every second board meetings, where they could give them a list of question, have a discussion with them about the questions and the board could get back to them and put the answaers in writing"

That is what a supporters group would be trying to get. Not actual representation on the board.

And

"Club 1872 should be able to put their point about shares or the Corporate running of the Club at the AGM and demand written answers."

Club1872 can already do that, in fact with the level of shareholding it can call EGMs and put forward resolutions to be voted on by the shareholders.

There is the risk of Club1872 being a major shareholder with a fan's group mentality. I do not believe that is what people are putting hundreds of thousands of pounds in for. Particularly when it already owns about £2m in shares.
Thanks for pointing that out as I'm obviously too stupid to get that.
Club 1872 own £2m in shares, which is not bad and you compare it to King's trust, but King makes the dcision or his reps do, because they put the money in.
Thousands of different people put 1872's money in. so who decides what the members put forward.
We should not ask a yes or no question, we should have a choice.
ie Six different candidates for the board, not one or two and they should declare that is their goal, when they are up for election
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
Thanks for pointing that out as I'm obviously too stupid to get that.
Club 1872 own £2m in shares, which is not bad and you compare it to King's trust, but King makes the dcision or his reps do, because they put the money in.
Thousands of different people put 1872's money in. so who decides what the members put forward.
We should not ask a yes or no question, we should have a choice.
ie Six different candidates for the board, not one or two and they should declare that is their goal, when they are up for election
No-one said you were too stupid to get anything. No need to start by being confrontational, it's only a discussion.

I believe the second biggest shareholder on the PLC should have a seat on the board. You don't, we can agree to disagree.

Dave King is Chairman because the shareholders supported his election to the board. Why should Club1872 not put someone forward for election at the next General Meeting and try to get enough shareholders to support that election.
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
No-one said you were too stupid to get anything. No need to start by being confrontational, it's only a discussion.

I believe the second biggest shareholder on the PLC should have a seat on the board. You don't, we can agree to disagree.

Dave King is Chairman because the shareholders supported his election to the board. Why should Club1872 not put someone forward for election at the next General Meeting and try to get enough shareholders to support that election.
I'm like that when anyone points out the bleeding obvious, take a wee second and ask yourself if the rest of the shareholders would vote 1872 on ?
If I was the board , I would vote against them. Now you have no decent relationship with the board and have thrown the baby out with the water. The biggest majority of our fans would vote with the board and that would be the end of fan participation.
I think some fans need to come into the real world.
If you were one of the Board and had invested millions, would you want 1872 listening to commercial sensitive information ?
The fore runner of 1872 was RF and we wanted transparency not confrontation, is which the road we are heading if we continue this imo ill informed route
 

Greebo

Well-Known Member
I'm like that when anyone points out the bleeding obvious, take a wee second and ask yourself if the rest of the shareholders would vote 1872 on ?
If I was the board , I would vote against them. Now you have no decent relationship with the board and have thrown the baby out with the water. The biggest majority of our fans would vote with the board and that would be the end of fan participation.
I think some fans need to come into the real world.
If you were one of the Board and had invested millions, would you want 1872 listening to commercial sensitive information ?
The fore runner of 1872 was RF and we wanted transparency not confrontation, is which the road we are heading if we continue this imo ill informed route
Again you have to start with a confrontational comment, there really isn't any need for it.

Why would Club1872 putting someone forward for election to the board at a general meeting, one of it's aims, lead to having no decent relationship. That would be a ridiculous position for either side to take.

Anyone can stand, they are elected if they get enough votes from the shareholders. Whoever stood on the Club1872 ticket would start with 11%, there would then be other shareholder who would support them, particularly if they were suitably qualified.

"If you were one of the Board and had invested millions, would you want 1872 listening to commercial sensitive information ?"

It wouldn't be "1872" listening to commercial sensitive information. It would be a director elected by the shareholders. I would expect them to be as professional as any other director. Do you think they would leave every meeting and copy the minutes onto the Club1872 website for everyone to read.

Again no-one as far as I can see is advocating a fan group getting one of their members onto the board. There are plenty of talented people who are part of Club1872 who are qualified to sit on the board of a PLC and contribute to the running of the PLC and club. You are painting it in an entirely different way.

Again, you don't think it should happen, I do. We can agree to disagree.
 

Robert Marshall

Well-Known Member
Again you have to start with a confrontational comment, there really isn't any need for it.

Why would Club1872 putting someone forward for election to the board at a general meeting, one of it's aims, lead to having no decent relationship. That would be a ridiculous position for either side to take.

Anyone can stand, they are elected if they get enough votes from the shareholders. Whoever stood on the Club1872 ticket would start with 11%, there would then be other shareholder who would support them, particularly if they were suitably qualified.

"If you were one of the Board and had invested millions, would you want 1872 listening to commercial sensitive information ?"

It wouldn't be "1872" listening to commercial sensitive information. It would be a director elected by the shareholders. I would expect them to be as professional as any other director. Do you think they would leave every meeting and copy the minutes onto the Club1872 website for everyone to read.

Again no-one as far as I can see is advocating a fan group getting one of their members onto the board. There are plenty of talented people who are part of Club1872 who are qualified to sit on the board of a PLC and contribute to the running of the PLC and club. You are painting it in an entirely different way.

Again, you don't think it should happen, I do. We can agree to disagree.
Your right I do disagree, so let's be honest this debate has run it's course.
We can all agree on one thing, let's get behind SG and the team and go for 55
 

HillsBill

Well-Known Member
Recent statements have indicated they're happy to be kept in check by the board.

They let King swat them away concerning a board place with some wishy washy bullshit. As the second biggest shareholder at the club they should be demanding a board place as that makes the organisation more deserving of a place than a few current board members.

The organisation is sadly failing the fans who have invested in it.
They’re not the second biggest shareholder. They are 5th with 6.22%.
 

HillsBill

Well-Known Member
Unless and until there is some stability on the Club1872 board, and the resignations and internal fighting stop, Rangers won’t offer a board seat and they are right not to do so. If, as rumoured, they fight with each other what will happen if they get set loose on the RFCL board? Their shareholding has dropped from over 10% to 6% and will probably drop further if more shareholder loans are converted to shares. I’m a long term member, I believe in supporter investors but I think C1872 have missed a big opportunity because of the infighting and generally poor PR.
 

HillsBill

Well-Known Member
You might want to check the date of the post you're quoting.

They were at the time.
I should have added .....any longer. But my point remains. They were 2nd, they had more than 10% and now they’ve only got 6%. Regrettably, their time has come and gone. I see absolutely no chance of them getting a board seat. And I won’t get upset because I’m not sure what they would add. If the C1872 board can’t speak with one voice how can it properly represent the supporters.
 

EndOfDays

Well-Known Member
I should have added .....any longer. But my point remains. They were 2nd, they had more than 10% and now they’ve only got 6%. Regrettably, their time has come and gone. I see absolutely no chance of them getting a board seat. And I won’t get upset because I’m not sure what they would add. If the C1872 board can’t speak with one voice how can it properly represent the supporters.
TBF they have more shares than some current directors.
 

CoplandKeklord

Active Member
Unless and until there is some stability on the Club1872 board, and the resignations and internal fighting stop, Rangers won’t offer a board seat and they are right not to do so. If, as rumoured, they fight with each other what will happen if they get set loose on the RFCL board? Their shareholding has dropped from over 10% to 6% and will probably drop further if more shareholder loans are converted to shares. I’m a long term member, I believe in supporter investors but I think C1872 have missed a big opportunity because of the infighting and generally poor PR.

Was previously contributing to c1872 on a monthly basis but after a while it began to seem pointless. I don't have any kind of insight as to the internal workings of c1872, however I do know that a pattern of resignations has now been established for a couple of years now. If people want to guess at a cause then maybe it's time to start looking at the common denominators.
 

Northampton_Loyalist

Well-Known Member
Was previously contributing to c1872 on a monthly basis but after a while it began to seem pointless. I don't have any kind of insight as to the internal workings of c1872, however I do know that a pattern of resignations has now been established for a couple of years now. If people want to guess at a cause then maybe it's time to start looking at the common denominators.
Perhaps you could name them, instead of insinuating?
 

HillsBill

Well-Known Member
TBF they have more shares than some current directors.
You are quite correct, they do. But the difference is that the directors are investing their own money whilst Club1872 is investing ours. That being the case, aren’t we entitled to know what is going on and why there are so many resignations? Otherwise, membership will continue to leak away, the shareholding will decline as a percentage, Club 1872 will decline in influence and eventually became fairly irrelevant.
 
change consent
Top