[TheWorthinGer]

Well, at the least we want Rangers supporting spivs.

[supercooper]

Only if they like irn bru and pineapple danish.

[TheWorthinGer]

Oooh, pineapple Danish. I want.

[supercooper]

https://soundcloud.com/casper-wilson-1/s...on-at-home

This just sums the whole sorry mess up!
Rangers Nomad pretty much not doing his job....

[El Car]

Sorry mate, but no matter the shambles it doesn't excuse that guy hounding him at his home when he had an upset child to worry about. Why not talk to him at work during business hours? It's also pretty unlikely there were as many as 2000 at the AGM. Ignoring the clams of the agitating groups that were there, more independent counts I saw put it around half that many. And considering most of them were shiftless dedicated dole scroungers I wouldn't think (though I may be wrong) too many of them would bother with the journey to London when they know exactly what they intend to vote for and how they expect it to turn out anyway. So from that perspective I think the capacity is reasonable. The point of having it in London is to avoid a near-riot like at the AGM, and while I agree that disadvantages fans in Glasgow with shares, I again don't see that it will have any bearing on the only thing of significance - the voting. The major players in this vote will have no problem getting there.

Too many 'Rangers men' trying to take on the mantle of activist these days. Attacking the NOMAD seems pointless when they're likely to be replaced after the EGM. Right now there's no dignity among the management, no dignity among the fans and no dignity among those trying to take over. The press and the BBC are having to work incredibly hard these days to try to remain even more undignified than Rangers (though they're still edging it) which says it all. Time for everyone to just shut up, take care of business and move on.

[TheWorthinGer]

Go any evidence for the "shiftless dedicated dole scroungers" comment, EC? Sure you're on the right site - reads like a line from Frankie, edgie et al.

"Shareholders" might be a more accurate description, don't you think?

As for them not "bother[ing] with the journey to London", is that not the whole point - that the venue has been chosen to exclude as many small shareholders as possible? You may not agree with what any of them have to say, but does the holding of shares not give you the right to have your say?

I think the voting will be close with regard to the majority - a percentage point or three - and that small amount will be the ordinary fans who bough shares. And we all know that the vast majority of them live within travelling distance of Glasgow. In fact with the purchases of the 3Bs and King, and the Easdales carrying a sizeable proxy, the majority of votes probably reside within the vicinity of Glasgow. Its a strategy of exclusion and no more and might just affect the voting - although I do hope the "shiftless" hordes you describe are capable of exercising a proxy vote, if not travelling.

I don't agree with calling the NOMAD at his home - if it had been me I would have hung up, informing the individual that a second call would result in me contacting the police.

"Dignity" seems to have been less than helpful over the last few years, a bloody hindrance even. And I'm not the type to stand on the steps of Ibrox shouting the odds. The club's a mess - as a representation of the collective dignity of tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of people its be sorely abused. Rangers fans have stood by, supported and enriched a conveyor belt of "strangers" these past few years and have had little refurn for it. Certainly their dignity has been as little considered as their trust has been abused.

Sometimes I wish I could just switch off tonight all, but I can't. I've spent too much of my life standing or sitting watching a team, irresistibly attached to a blue jersey, inexplicably caring about a scoreline, and now worrying about cashflow etc. The emotional investment of a lifetime that the fans have placed in the club will engender the whole gamut of human response to a threat.

The vote will be over soon. And maybe next year some will say "I told you so" about King and Co., but if they aren't given the chance, if they don't win the vote, I think the game will be up. Ticket sales won't cover the costs of the stadium never mind a team.

---

Mobile version of this site is pish.

[El Car]

Having spoken to people who knew directly or by a couple of degrees of separation who a lot of them were, my description was as I found them to be. I'm not going to shy away from it just because it doesn't sound pretty. It doesn't apply to everyone, but a lot of people were there as rabble to be roused at will by the likes of SoS and RST and their intentions showed in their behaviour.

The point the guy was trying to make was about how only a maximum of 500 people could be in attendance, and his insinuation was that this was a dereliction of duty because more people were at the AGM and there might be more than that in London, and that it could have been held with bigger capacity in Glasgow. My counter to the first point was that I think it's less likely there will be as many in London so it's not necessarily an unreasonable limit (and having spent a lot of time there in recent years at town halls etc. I can vouch for it being a hard place to find venues with much bigger capacities that wouldn't cost an onerous amount). To the second point, holding it in London will probably have the desired effect in terms of attendance, but as far as I know there's no reason they can't have it there legally, particularly as it most likely suits the majority %age shareholdings if not the majority of shareholders. It'll be more expensive than having it in Glasgow I imagine (although whether any venue would be willing to host it is another matter altogether) but I don't think that's any concern of the NOMAD as long as the requirements of the meeting are met. But none of this should make any difference to how things turn out, at least not in a favourable way to the Board, so it's not worth getting up in arms about purely for the sake of getting up in arms about something.

The shareholders can still vote on the resolutions without going to the EGM, and the polarisation is such that practically everyone knows how they will vote, especially those who went to the AGM. Shouting out the failings of a board they're about to try to vote out would be pointless. If anything it would have been more beneficial to the existing Board if they could put forward some sort of argument to defend themselves. They actually drew some relatively positive reactions at times at the AGM, but they have chosen to give themselves a smaller audience to appeal to this time. And anyone who might have been on the fence but is upset about this meeting being in London will then go against the Board. So be it. It's certainly not an ideal way to conduct it but when we've got groups of protesters breaking into Ibrox it wouldn't exactly be risk free to have it up here either.

Anyway, xxxx it. Lets do it and see where things fall.

[TheWorthinGer]

Well I think your comment that "most of them were shiftless dedicated dole scroungers" is a pile of shit. Particularly since it appears to be based on 2nd, 3rd or further hand knowledge. Ridiculous sweeping generalisation that I thought maybe you were above.

Where these "dole scroungers" got the funds to buy shares is beyond me, but the individuals I know that attended are all hard working men who earned the cash to buy their shares and the shares gave them the right to attend and speak their mind. Several of them will travel to London - no doubt about it.

This meeting is being held in London to lock out the majority of shareholders. No other reason for it. I think its a mistake and there will be a huge turnout organised by various fan groups, with the fairly regional and parochial news coverage of the event turned into a UK wide airing.

Ffs, it'll be treated like an away game and I expect far more than 500 on the day. And the more that are locked out, the more potential for negative behaviour.

[Larry-AV]

As Rangers' operating companies operate under UK Law, there is no reason why the EGM should not be held in the UK capital, London.
However, this choice of venue is another example of the Board shooting itself in the foot, the main other one being the (proposed) naming rights to Ibrox ... there are probably others too, which folks might mention.

I have posted before saying that I regard the two factions as the devil and deep blue sea, although frying pan and fire could also apply.

I do not want to see Rangers go through more turmoil just to give Dave King and Paul Murray a blazer apiece. Better the devil(s) you know.

What I want to know is this : If the requisitioners win at the EGM, but Dave King and Paul Murray are then deemed to be 'not fit and proper persons' to become directors, what do those supporting the requisitioners expect Rangers (probably Gilligan, on his own on the Board) to do ?

[supercooper]

There will be a few thousand turning up for the Egm if anything to make a point now.
The point in case was never has a meeting been held outside Scotland, cynical at best. Hopefully as a club we can move onwards and upwards.

---

Larry there will be Rangers men at heart more than happy to step up if required. This to me is the last throes of a desperate board, clinging on for dear life.