Club 1872 statement

Earl of Leven

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I personally want in and think it's a great idea, but...

1. We have to debate and reason with fans who don't like the idea - no abuse
2. We have to understand their position: £13m NOT going to players, Auchenhowie, scouting etc
3. King was clearly selling these shares to someone, and it is immature to assume that if it wasn't the fans he'd have simply kept them...

This is crucial as for years (way before 2012) the club was badly run, and sailing close to the wind, and we cannot let it happen again. I'd be happy for Club 1872 to be very conservative, and vote with the board, just so long as we cam never, ever, be bought for £1 by a shyster with no money.
 

Porto Loyal

Well-Known Member
Couple of things

1) The money's not going to the Club - it already has - other than his initial share purchase, the rest of New Oasis's shares have been purchased which meant the club got that money

2) DK was hafted by Murray, he clearly doesn't want to lose a huge amount of money again,but as he says the shares are being sold for 30p less than market value

3) Club1872 is a members organisation. It doesn't have some nebulous identity, it's mad eup of each and everyone of us who is a subscribing member - don't like the board? then call them to account (There are provisions for EGMs) Stand for the board your self. get active.

I do think some would be happier if King sold to someone else.
 

BWO

Well-Known Member
Couple of things

1) The money's not going to the Club - it already has - other than his initial share purchase, the rest of New Oasis's shares have been purchased which meant the club got that money

2) DK was hafted by Murray, he clearly doesn't want to lose a huge amount of money again,but as he says the shares are being sold for 30p less than market value

3) Club1872 is a members organisation. It doesn't have some nebulous identity, it's mad eup of each and everyone of us who is a subscribing member - don't like the board? then call them to account (There are provisions for EGMs) Stand for the board your self. get active.

I do think some would be happier if King sold to someone else.

I’d be delighted if he just didn’t sell them!
 

Porto Loyal

Well-Known Member
Further to my last post, a question that needs to be answered is who exactly decided that buying King's shares was the way forward instead of solely looking to buy new shares and invest direct in the club? C1872 is a members group and this decision was taken without any consultation of the membership. That means that someone, somewhere, took a unilateral decision for the membership involving millions of £ of members money and millions of shares in the club.

That, no matter the intentions or integrity of the people involved, is HUGELY concerning and wide open to corruption.
Did they ask when they bought Ashley's shares?

One of the objectives is "Maintain/grow our shareholding in Rangers International Football Club Plc."

So nothing they are doing is outwith that objective.
 

Northampton_Loyalist

Well-Known Member
Couple of things

1) The money's not going to the Club - it already has - other than his initial share purchase, the rest of New Oasis's shares have been purchased which meant the club got that money

2) DK was hafted by Murray, he clearly doesn't want to lose a huge amount of money again,but as he says the shares are being sold for 30p less than market value

3) Club1872 is a members organisation. It doesn't have some nebulous identity, it's mad eup of each and everyone of us who is a subscribing member - don't like the board? then call them to account (There are provisions for EGMs) Stand for the board your self. get active.

I do think some would be happier if King sold to someone else.
Point 3. If this is possible, how was the decision to immediately seek funds for this made without a single word of input from the wider membership? Why is the membership only finding out the direction of travel AFTER the decision has been made to buy existing shares rather than trying to leverage new shares an benefiting the club? Surely as a members organisation, this move should at the very least have been opened for discussion instead of being unilaterally foisted on people?
 

Northampton_Loyalist

Well-Known Member
Did they ask when they bought Ashley's shares?

One of the objectives is "Maintain/grow our shareholding in Rangers International Football Club Plc."

So nothing they are doing is outwith that objective.
If no, they absolutely should have asked before buying Ashley's shares. C1872 is a members organisation and as such, material decisions regarding direction of travel and the use of MEMBER funds not given specific mandate (they are not) should be put to the membership.
 
Last edited:

sheabo

Well-Known Member
One of the things that stood out to me was King's thoughts re: when he is gone. His kids may keep the shares for sentimental reasons, but will their kids? Eventually it may just become an accounting function and they are sold on the open market to anyone. Do we want that to happen?

I think this is the best thing for the long-term well-being of the club. Club 1872 is a democracy, debate is healthy but once the members vote that is it. That will be policy until the next opportunity to vote. If Club 1872 members vote a moron to be the rep on the board for us then it will be the members fault. More likely that it will be a sound, qualified individual that has been vetted by the members.

even then, that rep would still need to be approved by shareholders at the club AGM. Plenty of checks and balances in my opinion.
 

Earl of Leven

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
I would echo N_L's call for openness. At this stage C1872 need to open their books to audit, and their board structure and personnel to inspection and question. It is a HUGE shareholding for a group that as of Dec 2020 is described (rightly or wrongly) by most fans as shadowy, opaque and not in touch with their own membership.
 

Callum3657

Active Member
The club have so far refused to have a share issue to enable supporters to buy shares. I umderstand that they wish to control who has access to club shares.
I am simply suggesting that the club could facilitate the sale of DKs shares to ST holders. This would ensure that they are not going to enemies of the club.
There would then not be any control on who the supporters sell their shares too, leading to not one collective having 25% and a deciding say in the operation of the club.
 

boracay ranger

Well-Known Member
The club have so far refused to have a share issue to enable supporters to buy shares. I umderstand that they wish to control who has access to club shares.
I am simply suggesting that the club could facilitate the sale of DKs shares to ST holders. This would ensure that they are not going to enemies of the club.
In order to offer shares to supporters, the club would need to issue a detailed prospectus with financial projections.
I would imagine that would have been extremely difficult whilst we were in the recovery phase and all our income streams were not repaired.
I fully expect the club to have a share issue in the next year or so when we are sustainable in order to fund exciting projects like increase of ground capacity and improving the facilities and Infrastructure around Ibrox.
I will be keeping my money for that.
 

Northampton_Loyalist

Well-Known Member
In order to offer shares to supporters, the club would need to issue a detailed prospectus with financial projections.
I would imagine that would have been extremely difficult whilst we were in the recovery phase and all our income streams were not repaired.
I fully expect the club to have a share issue in the next year or so when we are sustainable in order to fund exciting projects like increase of ground capacity and improving the facilities and Infrastructure around Ibrox.
I will be keeping my money for that.
C1872's plans in the event of this happening are vital too. Allow a dilution of the holding? Campaign for funds to maintain it?


The more I think about it, the less I can believe that they have actually started to take folk's cash for this. There is not a single scrap of meat on the bones here. People are already paying into this going by this thread, which is craziness.
 

sneddon38

Well-Known Member
Absolutely, @Roscoblue

Is it too much of a stretch to suggest it’s a bit of a kick in the teeth to these wealthy investors who are all supporters?

If I’d invested the sums of money these shareholders had, I’d be concerned that a fans’ group could soon have a majority say in the club I’ve invested in.

The not inconsiderable sum of £13 million would do a lot more good going to the club than any individual. And I say that as a big King fan.

That this fans’ group seems to be poorly run would only add to my concern.

As someone who has contributed each month to Club 1872 for a long time, tonight’s news just doesn’t sit right with me.
I would hazard a guess that Chris Graham will be proposed for this role.
This would not go down well with Douglas Park as he can’t stand Chris Graham.
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
Did they ask when they bought Ashley's shares?

One of the objectives is "Maintain/grow our shareholding in Rangers International Football Club Plc."

So nothing they are doing is outwith that objective.
I'm sure they did bud and I'm sure I voted for the motion, to buy Ashley's shares. Same as now with DK shares. They are asking members to transfer their donation to the DK share legacy fund, if members don't want to they won't, seems open and fair to me.
 

roffey

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Point 3. If this is possible, how was the decision to immediately seek funds for this made without a single word of input from the wider membership? Why is the membership only finding out the direction of travel AFTER the decision has been made to buy existing shares rather than trying to leverage new shares an benefiting the club? Surely as a members organisation, this move should at the very least have been opened for discussion instead of being unilaterally foisted on people?
Correct. There have been many votes before and then up pops this. Like I have said before, it feels rushed.
 

DylanGer

Well-Known Member
This thread and this morning's one about Club 1872 and the Daily Record make for depressing reading. The strength of opposition to fan ownership based on half truths, prejudices and out right misconceptions is staggering. The Rangers Supporters Trust was one of the first in Scotland. It was one of the biggest. It was a great idea let down by poor communication and a fanbase that simply didnt get the concept. From what I've read so far? This is going to be RST mark 2.

It's staggering that a model of football club ownership and governance that works throughout the world is viewed with so much open hostility in Scotland. There is a significant danger that if we miss this opportunity to transform the club then we're sowing the seeds for the next Charles Green.

This needs proper scrutiny and proper debate. Fans need to approach the issue with genuinely open minds. Looking in from the outside? C1872 have a ton of work to do in order to address some very genuine and important concerns and to try and make the case for a fan ownership model that could work at Rangers. That doesnt mean that there isnt a strong case for supporting fan ownership. Given the events at the end of the Murray regime and what happened in it's aftermath, the very least that we need is a proper, informed debate and a decision based on evidence and understanding.

You could post a lot on this but this pretty much nails it.
 

delboi

Well-Known Member
I’d be delighted if he just didn’t sell them!
He always said he wasn't in this for the long haul & when the time was right or if someone else could takeover his shares / position then he'd gladly step aside. The longer it went on the more he'd come to feel that the club was a burden to him. As much as he's a hero, it's best for Rangers that he steps aside rather than overstay, which I think he probably already thinks he has done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BWO

Tormusk1872

Well-Known Member
Point 3. If this is possible, how was the decision to immediately seek funds for this made without a single word of input from the wider membership? Why is the membership only finding out the direction of travel AFTER the decision has been made to buy existing shares rather than trying to leverage new shares an benefiting the club? Surely as a members organisation, this move should at the very least have been opened for discussion instead of being unilaterally foisted on people?
One thing is clear, if Club1872 think they will get 20000 investors they will need to up their game substantially in both communications and transparency........and thereafter maintain a constant dialogue with members.
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
I’d be delighted if he just didn’t sell them!
He - or probably more realistically his family - wants the money. For me, it really is that simple. These shares will be sold in the next 3 years. If they don't get taken up by Club 1972 - and its a mighty ask - then he/they will sell to someone else. We will be left to ponder over who will get them and what their motives will be. He/they may simply instruct a broker to sell for whatever they can get, either as a block or in chunks, and they could end up with anyone. I think that unlikely but the possibility, maybe even the likelihood, cannot be dismissed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BWO

mart22

Well-Known Member
No, and they absolutely should have asked before buying Ashley's shares. C1872 is a members organisation and as such, material decisions regarding direction of travel and the use of MEMBER funds not given specific mandate (they are not) should be put to the membership.
When you sign up as a member it's made clear your subscription is divided between an admin fee, share purchases and projects. Members can decide how much of their money is used for shares, and for projects.
 

Haining84

Well-Known Member
Chris Graham is/ was an advisor to Club 1872 who was getting a salary from the org and King authorised him to get a company car. When Park became chairman one of the first things he done was take that car off Graham. The relationship from what I’ve heard is non existent.
Cheers mate.
 

Teddyjohn

Well-Known Member
Chris Graham is/ was an advisor to Club 1872 who was getting a salary from the org and King authorised him to get a company car. When Park became chairman one of the first things he done was take that car off Graham. The relationship from what I’ve heard is non existent.
That doesn’t explain why he can’t stand Chris Graham.
 

Northampton_Loyalist

Well-Known Member
When you sign up as a member it's made clear your subscription is divided between an admin fee, share purchases and projects. Members can decide how much of their money is used for shares, and for projects.
Was there a direct mandate for purchasing shares from an individual? Is there an audited set of accounts detailing how much money was pre-agreed by the membership for that purchase?

The answer to those questions is, sadly, 'No'.

This all illustrates what pretty much everyone on here agrees with; C1872 have a huge amount of work to do BEFORE asking folk to pony up £13 million.
 

Aww Skew

Well-Known Member
Chris Graham is/ was an advisor to Club 1872 who was getting a salary from the org and King authorised him to get a company car. When Park became chairman one of the first things he done was take that car off Graham. The relationship from what I’ve heard is non existent.

One of the issues with C1872, and all supporters groups in general, is there’s always divisive people involved that polarise the support

This is another example. The problem is, with a support as big as ours, we’ll never reach agreement and the idea a small group of people will represent the full support is complete fantasy
 

Grant K

Well-Known Member
Your Dave Kings and Douglas Parks while not old are not spring chickens either. If anything were to happen to them or they decide they wanted out we could be in trouble. That’s the problem with a rich businessman model. The influence can change over time and not always for the better.

I’m cautiously optimistic about this. C1872 have got a lot to do to convince people they can actually act like a group that has a huge shareholding in a “business” like this. Investors will get the opportunity to elect a representative into the board to represent the members as best they can. Not everyone will always agree (which is the sticking point) but understanding that if you don’t like the elected board members representation. You will get a chance to vote someone else on at the next election.

I think we need to see this as an opportunity to never be shafted by a Whyte/Green/Ashley type character ever again. To have some representation at board level. A quiet (not silent) partner.
It’s not an expectation that we somehow fund each transfer window. Vote who the manager is, and demand Greggs and McDonalds in the concourses.

I’m afraid I have a degree of difficulty with this for a number of reasons not least at the moment the club is still very much in need of investment and this would be a flow of funds to an individual.

I received the email from C1872 this morning and it was surprisingly light on detail in terms of how they envisage C1872 evolving from being a large shareholding group to being the largest individual shareholder. How will C1872 function and interact with the board. Will it seek a Board place, how will this work, who would assume this position and for how long. What impact would this have on the continuity of the Board and how would collective responsibility sit with C1872 members. What contingencies are in place for retaining the percentage holding should there be further share issues. Would C1872 need to become involved immediately in further share issues or will King take up the slack over the purchase period.

I’m afraid I need a much greater understanding of how this will fit together and work before I can support with my cash.
 

sneddon38

Well-Known Member
Cheers mate.
Chris Graham will be heavily involved with any negotiations that club1872 has had with King on this deal. For me this transparency from the org is one of the reasons it will fail. Why does Chris Graham not put his name forward to be added to the board of club1872 if he wants to be heavily involved in it.
 

ibroxbound

Well-Known Member
Reading the posts on this thread it would appear that many, maybe even the majority, don’t want fan involvement at Board level, or even a Club that is run on a sustainable basis. What they want is somebody else to keep throwing money at it. :rolleyes: That cannot, and will not, go on forever.
There is also a limit you can ask fans to stump up.
 

Rodney55

Well-Known Member
Chris Graham is/ was an advisor to Club 1872 who was getting a salary from the org and King authorised him to get a company car. When Park became chairman one of the first things he done was take that car off Graham. The relationship from what I’ve heard is non existent.
Did you hear it was a lada in a Watts app group?
 

ibroxbound

Well-Known Member
Chris Graham is/ was an advisor to Club 1872 who was getting a salary from the org and King authorised him to get a company car. When Park became chairman one of the first things he done was take that car off Graham. The relationship from what I’ve heard is non existent.
What I've heard is that Chris is no longer welcome at Ibrox. I'm sure someone will put me right if the info I have is wrong.
 

sneddon38

Well-Known Member
Did you hear it was a lada in a Watts app group?
Ask the question when the next board meeting with club1872 happens. It will never be a success if you have charlatans running it in the background that members don’t know about.
 

laptoployal

Active Member
Been a shareholder, brick buyer and contributor to Club 1872. I signed up today for the Legacy subscription. I am happily in the position to give a little back to the club that has given me so much since the 1950s
 

Northampton_Loyalist

Well-Known Member
Been a shareholder, brick buyer and contributor to Club 1872. I signed up today for the Legacy subscription. I am happily in the position to give a little back to the club that has given me so much since the 1950s
Unfortunately, Legacy members/contributors will not be giving a penny back to the club.
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
There have been a few new investors in Rangers shares, in recent months, a few from the far East for example. Good Bears by the sounds of it, we take them at face value simply for the fact they are Bears. Yet here we are arguing ordinary good honest Bears, C1872 made up of supporters couldn't run a raffle, it's baffling tbh.
 

Carlton The Bear

Well-Known Member
Interesting that several of the last few posts refer to Leanne Dempster. Reading this thread it seems clear that there is a degree of concern about how Club 1872 has been run over a number of years. Now I don’t know any of the current directors but I haven’t ever heard anyone doubt the fact that they are lifelong Rangers supporters whose hearts are in the right place. Maybe they are doing a great job, maybe they aren’t. Maybe the concerns some have expressed are justified, maybe they aren’t. But in a way it doesn’t really matter. Even if they are doing a great job, there is a perception that there are, or at least have been, issues. It seems to me that of itself probably means that, for significant new funds to be raised and for the buyout of King’s shares proposal to (even in meaningful part) be a success, there needs to be a re-set of Club 1872. Maybe a Leanne Dempster, or similar, would be the sort of person to provide that re-set and enhance the whole credibility of Club 1872.
The section of the Club1872 FAQ below makes interesting reading from the likes of a Leanne Dempster perspective


How would Club 1872 be represented on the Rangers board?

As we build our shareholding and grow our membership through legacy donations, Club 1872 will re-enter discussions with Rangers about representation on the RIFC Board. It is important to stress that it will not be Club 1872 Directors who take up an RIFC Board position. The Directors will identify candidates who can not only represent Club 1872 but also make an important contribution to the RIFC board through their expertise and experience. The chosen candidate will then represent the organisation’s shareholding on the board and ensure that the views of Club 1872 members are represented at all times. This will not change the way Rangers Football Club is run on a day to day basis. Club 1872 would not be involved in day to day decision making at Rangers, but rather would retain oversight of that process through regular interaction with the Rangers Board and Executive Team.
 

cambridgeblue

Well-Known Member
Club 1872 will have to upgrade their operation significantly to achieve this - I would recommend they publish further details if they want take up to meet the targets.
 

_DON_

Well-Known Member
The more I look into this, the more I feel this has to do with SARS and his own businesses.

I'm sure he was asked by SARS, which he complied with, to move all his assets back to SA, but was able to do a deal to fund Rangers. He has probably received a bit of pressure from the SA Government in regards to that deal, so I assume that he has decided finally sell off his shareholding in Rangers in order to be in full compliance with SARS.

Then there is his own businesses which has gone through a transformation period. I'm pretty sure his own shareholders and board members, have been pressuring him for a long time about cutting any emotional ties with ourselves, so that they can focus on regrowing his whole group of businesses.

When you take in those two factors, as well as the current global situation, which is greatly affecting SA, you can see why he has chosen to sell his shares at this point in time.

Having said that, this does not take away from the gesture by King to attempt to sell his shareholding to the fans, he could have easily sold his shares to the other investors or sold it off in chunks to outside investors. Club 1972 now have a hard road ahead, they not only needs to be able to raise the funds to complete the purchase, but they will need to look addressing the corporate governance of their organisation.
 

mart22

Well-Known Member
Was there a direct mandate for purchasing shares from an individual? Is there an audited set of accounts detailing how much money was pre-agreed by the membership for that purchase?

The answer to those questions is, sadly, 'No'.

This all illustrates what pretty much everyone on here agrees with; C1872 have a huge amount of work to do BEFORE asking folk to pony up £13 million.
I'm not sure what you are driving at. Are you suggesting Club 1872 behaved improperly buying fat man's shares? Or are you just saying how you think C1872 should have gone about buying his shares?
Club 1872 will have a strategy to raise money for buying DK's shares. Part of that will be selling the idea to the support. Some will be keen to buy in, and some might take persuading. Nobody is being forced. If you want to buy in, great, if you don't, don't.
 

Still Staunch

Well-Known Member
Further to my last post, a question that needs to be answered is who exactly decided that buying King's shares was the way forward instead of solely looking to buy new shares and invest direct in the club
To buy shares we need a willing seller. The present board, correctly, have only held closed share issues, and club 1872 were part of that, but that’s a dilution, not adding percentage ownership.

King, who should go down in history as being a great for Rangers, is willing to sell. The other shareholders are not. I personally have no issue with Club 1872 trying to fund raise to buy them off King because this type of opportunity might never happen again, therefore we need to grasp it. It is, objectively, the right decision and did not require a consensus vote.

However, I share all your reservations about the current make up of club 1872. For this to work they either need to drastically change their PR or step aside and get get fresh, untainted, persons in. I fear the latter will not happen.

That being said, this is too great an opportunity to squander with politics. We should be backing this completely and try and force the change we want with club 1872 concurrently. To dither on this will kill it, and to kill it will be a tragedy.
 

Gazrfc

Well-Known Member
This is genuinely how I feel right now with this
6elx4uhsb9u01.jpg
 

sheabo

Well-Known Member
I fail to see why there is such an anti Chris Graham faction on here and what is has to do with possibly getting to a point that the supporters, through Club 1872, own a solid block of shares that will ensure the safety of the club going forward.

It wasn't that long ago that folk lauded Chris Graham for taking the piss out of Spiers on STV. As a support we love nothing more than taking a swipe and knocking down our own.
 

sammy1872

Well-Known Member
I take it club 1872 would never wish to go over the 30% shareholding and would remain somewhere between 25-30% because does going over 30% not require you to try and buy all shares? See king and takeover board as an example
 

Haining84

Well-Known Member
I fail to see why there is such an anti Chris Graham faction on here and what is has to do with possibly getting to a point that the supporters, through Club 1872, own a solid block of shares that will ensure the safety of the club going forward.

It wasn't that long ago that folk lauded Chris Graham for taking the piss out of Spiers on STV. As a support we love nothing more than taking a swipe and knocking down our own.
Chris Graham has my fully respect for his work over the years.I was just wondering what the alleged ‘riff’ between him & Douglas Park was mate.
 
Top