As most of our members know, two Admin representatives met with the full Rangers and Rangers International Board recently.

Following that meeting, we e-mailed the questions our members felt the most pressing and most important to David Somers for him to circulate and respond. Mr Somers replied very speedily, although, after discussion between Admin, we felt there could have been more substance to the Board's response, as much of what was sent to us was general and in the public domain already.

We sent back those responses with our criticisms and comments and asked for more detailed, more meaningful answers. Mr Somers has responded and sadly, we are not satisfied with what has been said.

Here are the questions, the answers and the VB return of serve:

23 May: Rangers to VB: It was very good to meet you both and to have a very constructive meeting. Thank you for the list of questions. Being a PLC, we will have to be careful about divulging any price sensitive information, but within that constraint we will try to provide as much information as we can. Thank you for taking the time to come to meet with us. Best regards, David Somers, Chairman

26 May: Rangers to VB: Thank you once again for sending us your questions. Our answers are in the below attachment. Despite the restriction of being a stock exchange listed company, with legal constraints over what we are allowed to say, we have worked hard to give you full and clear answers to your questions. I hope that you and your members will feel we have been successful in clarifying matters for you. Best regards, David Somers, Chairman

3 June: VB to Rangers: David, on behalf of Admin at Vanguard Bears, may I thank you and the Board members for the courtesy of a reply to our questions.

We have deliberated over these and have posted them on our forum, but not on the front page, so the answers you provided are strictly for our members thus far. We have instructed them that nothing should be taken from what you provided and shared on Twitter or Facebook.

Our members feel, sadly, that some of the answers were readily available via the press and leaks from the club and we have added our comments after each one on the attachment. We would be pleased if you would read these and respond accordingly. We would ask you to note that the VB way, we feel the correct way, is to talk directly to you, not to run to an eager tabloid press to air our disappointment. I repeat the remarks we made at our meeting. If this Board prove themselves to the support, you will be heralded by that support as heroes. We have, as a fan-base, been battered from pillar to post over the last two years and many feel "enough is enough". We at Vanguard Bears only want the best for our beloved Club and hope that you can drive our great Club back to the very summit of Scottish football. A strong Board will unify the fans if you prove the detractors wrong.

With every good wish for your continuing efforts, Sincerely VB

3 June: VB to Rangers: Vanguard Bears Response to the Board's answers.

Q. Why isn't Ally McCoist in the newspapers, on TV and radio and on every other outlet available encouraging Rangers fans to buy season tickets?

A. Ally is entirely supportive of the Club and our campaign. He is currently taking a well-earned break and we are sure he will have plenty to say when he returns.

VB response: We won the title in mid March against Airdrie. Would that not have been the ideal time to start the campaign, with the fans on a high? Ally was not on holiday when the campaign did begin. As a paid employee, how hard was it for Ally to have a photo taken once the renewals were out holding a sign and issuing a prepared statement?

Q. The Scottish Rugby Union this week announced financial details of the re-naming of Murrayfield. How much are the following sponsorships worth to Rangers annually: 32Red, Puma, Sports Direct and Rangers Retail and how long do the sponsorship deals run?

A. The terms of each sponsorship deal concluded by the Club are commercially sensitive and subject to confidentiality clauses. To disclose any individual deal terms may prejudice the values of potential future sponsorship deals and also be in breach of existing contractual arrangements.

We can confirm that the 32Red sponsorship contract runs for three seasons effective Season 2014/15 and our Puma agreement lasts for five years. The Club has also formed a joint venture with Sports Direct to manage the Club's retail business, with the club owning 51% of the venture and where profits are shared between the Club and Sports Direct.

VB response: This answer does not tell us any information not already in the public domain, and we would like to see these clauses. We would suggest that this type of gesture could build much needed confidence within the support about the immediate future of the club.

Q. Are any club Directors due a bonus at any stage prior to Rangers competing in European competition, and if so can this be renegotiated to only apply from that point forward?

A. No Non-Executive Directors are due a bonus. Only the Chief Executive has a contractual discretionary bonus entitlement as part of his contract of employment, consistent with the terms that would be expected at this level of executive appointment.

The Club's Remuneration Committee will decide on any bonus award after the June 2014 year-end based on Company and his individual performance.

VB response: The answer above is very specific about a specific grouping of Directors. We would like you confirm in plain English that no Rangers Director, whether Executive or Non- Executive will receive a bonus before the club is in European competition, and that any such bonuses will not be backdated.

Q. How many Season Tickets have been sold as of today 22 May 2014?

A. Sales figures are likely to be considered commercially sensitive information and we would need to release any information relating to this first to the Stock Exchange. We have been encouraged by the number of renewals and support for the Club as it prepares for a competitive and exciting season in the SPFL Championship.

VB response: Last season, and the season before, the figures were made public. Indeed, and perhaps because we were doing so well, Charles Green was shouting the figures from the rooftops. This year, we have an odd circumstance whereby it is being reported that the loan value due to be returned to George Letham upon the equivalent value of revenue being raised through Season Ticket Sales has not been paid. Given that the club are believed to owe Mr Letham £1.045 million, which would suggest that less than 2000 Season Tickets have been sold. Whether that is the case or not, that will be the public perception until Mr Letham is paid. We would suggest that it is most certainly in the club's interests to clarify this position immediately.

Q. Will the club reassure the fans there is no intention of handing over security of any club assets (namely Ibrox Stadium, Murray Park) to any external body or funding source?

A. Since the Board was formed last December, we have repeatedly sought to reassure fans over Ibrox and are happy to once again state that the stadium is sacrosanct and we have absolutely no intention of handing security of it to anybody.

No board is in a position legally to say that it will never do something – as it must act in the best interests of the Company at all times. We recognise our legal and corporate duties and as such for this reason have been unable to say more than we already have on this subject.

However, the board feels very strongly that it has provided a clear indication on its views and would hope that this provides the reassurance that fans are looking for. We all share a common position on this subject.

VB response: It is the perception of supporters that the refusal of the board to specifically mention Murray Park, or to suggest other fundraising initiatives, is to confirm supporters' fears that this club asset is subject to a sale and leaseback agreement that would infuriate most supporters. We would suggest that the previously mooted suggestion of stadium sponsorship, sale of un-issued shares, or full share issue would be preferable.

Q. In the event of reduced season ticket sales, what are your back up plans, dependent on various scenarios around the volume of season tickets sold, e.g. what do you do if 10k STs sold, 20k STs sold etc?

A. We would provide clarification of our plans as a part of any announcement regarding season tickets to the stock exchange. It should be remembered that the Business Review published last month made it clear that there are other options available to us to obtain funding

VB response: Our question was designed to give supporters confidence that the club had specific plans depending on a number of scenarios. The answer above does not provide that confidence.

Q. How will the club fund the additional positions of CFOO and Chief Commercial Officer?

A. Through the normal revenue generation and operations of the football club. Both positions are key to the long term success and development of the Club.

VB response: Given that the club is currently operating at a loss, and is in effect will have at least £1.545 million less revenue this season due to the loan repayments due to George Letham and Sandy Easdale, or two less club assets, the answer above does not add up. As these are additional posts that we would guess would both command significant six figure salaries, we would like clarification on how the club will fund the posts. Our view is that elements of that 120 day review are uncosted.

Q. How will the club create a scouting network and how will the Academy Development Fund be funded?

A. The lead on establishing a scouting network will come from the Chief Football Operations Officer. He will have responsibility for developing player talent identification, scouting and recruitment capability and will lead our efforts to identify future talent for the Club. He will work in partnership with the Chief Executive and the Manager to identify playing talent responsive to the squad needs and development opportunities, to ensure the Club accesses the required level of playing talent at all levels.

Academy development will be funded through a combination of income from normal operations and income generated from future fund raising as part of the Club's investment plans.

VB response: As per the previous answer, our view is that this activity is uncosted, and we would like further clarification on this, please. Is the academy development not funded through the Rising Stars tickets & Rangers Lotto?

Q. The figure of 20-30 Million Pounds investment has been suggested via an Autumn Share Issue - Are there investors already secured, or is this an estimate?

A. We have consulted with our major shareholders and based on these discussions are continuing with our plans for a share issue. The size and timing of such an issue is under discussion but it should be remembered the Board has determined that over a three year period it expects to raise that amount of money to be invested in the Club.

VB response: As you mention that these funds are to be raised over a 3 year period, can you therefore confirm that there will be three separate Share Issues, and that you have circa £10M secured for the first Share issue?

Q. Will you consider an EGM in order to bring forward a share issue?

A. Consideration has been given to all options outlined in the Business Review which are available to the Board and we will continue to evaluate what is the most appropriate time to offer a share issue.

VB response: As with some of the above answers, we will state clearly that answer is vague and on the whole, unsatisfactory.

Q. Two recent articles on The Copland Road Organization website have claimed that there is a split in the Rangers International boardroom, implying that Charles Green was recently on a recruitment drive on behalf of Rangers International for a CEO, and that Sandy Easdale has more power in the boardroom of the PLC than Graham Wallace. Could you please clarify your position on these articles?

A. There is absolutely no truth in these ludicrous rumours. The members of the plc board have an excellent working relationship with each other and with the Chairman of the football board. The board are fully committed and working together to continue the rebuilding of the Club – in particular, the Chief Executive is doing a tremendous job.

VB response: Why did you wait until VB raised these issues? We would suggest that the statement issued to us be the start of legal proceedings against said website. Our view is that without such a gesture, many fans will feel that the statement is without substance.

Q. What footballing plan is there to revitalise the football team in preparation for the Premiership and European football, how will it be funded, and has Ally McCoist accepted the need for a Chief Football Operations Officer?

A. Ally has accepted the need for a CFOO as part of us rebuilding our football operation capability. This role will play a key part in upgrading our football operations support and in identifying future players to meet the squad needs as assessed by the Manager.

The Business Review highlighted the missed opportunity of recent times but also pinpointed where the Chief Executive and the Board believe the club needs strengthening in order to have a successful, self sustaining, football operation which nurtures and identifies young talent as well as maximising value from player trading.

Funding for this will come from the usual sources available to the Club.

VB response: This is good news, providing the funding questions can be answered.

Lastly, we need to add a new question. In conversation with you, we expressed our concerns at the signing policy of older players with no sell on value who would earn ten or twenty times what a "young gun" would. We asked you if Kris Boyd or Kenny Miller had, as was rumoured, signed for Rangers. You categorically told us they had not. We now read in the media that Kenny Miller's signing will be announced tomorrow. Is this true and why was this sanctioned when it appears to go against what every single Board member agreed was the wrong policy for getting new players to the Club?

23 June: VB to Rangers: David, while we understand how busy you are, we are politely reminding you that we returned your answers three weeks ago with requests for more in depth answers. As we explained, we are loathe to put what we have from you on the forum as the Admin team here feel there is more to be covered.

May I ask you to reply as a matter of priority in order that we can let our members know the Board's position.

As ever, yours in Rangers, VB

23 June: Rangers to VB: My sincere apologies that you have not received a reply before now. I had mistakenly believed that others were in contact with you on my behalf. However, your questions, whilst interesting and astute, are now in areas that are either commercially sensitive or have regulatory implications. So it becomes difficult or impossible for any board to answer them.

One question I am prepared to answer is that neither myself nor the non executive directors is entitled to any kind of bonus. In fact James and Sandy Easdale have also waived their salary entitlement.

Also, I made it clear at the AGM that this Board would not be involved in a sale and leaseback of Ibrox.

Rather than more email correspondence though, it might be helpful to have another friendly conversation at Ibrox in the near future. Regards, David Somers, Chairman

24 June: VB to Rangers: David, thank you for the prompt response.

As we said when we met, Vanguard Bears regard ourselves as that bit different to some Rangers forums. We have worked since our inception for the good of the Club; without fear, compromise or any form of self-aggrandisement.

I will pass your comments to the Admin team and I am sure another meeting would be fruitful.

Sincerely, VB

...

VB has been ready to give the new Board a chance and, unlike many – some with agendas of their own – realise that having been a mere few months in place, much of the work they have to do is undoing what previous incumbents have created. However, we said to the Boards faces and repeat here, a "grand gesture" is urgently required.

Our Club is still constantly vilified by the media, facts twisted and the usual sensationalist headlines written by professional newspapermen, many of whom include spells working at the Celtic View in the CVs. See where we are going here? More worryingly, the Club is vilified and the Board members subject to personal abuse by men who purport to be Rangers supporters. While the fans have a right to be concerned over any misdeeds or mismanagement, would these people not be better doing what VB did? OK, they met with members of the Board as VB did, but instead of expressing any doubts or raising any issues in private correspondence between themselves and the Board, they ran to the same media that attack the Club, took the thirty pieces of silver and spilled non existent beans to the eager journos.

VB have again been informed that we have been invited to meet with the Board and the dialogue continue. Perhaps this is because VB, whilst making the Board aware that we will not accept second best for the Club we love but that we will continue to support their best efforts but criticise their failings.

On the subject of criticism, we are aware that our forum has been under severe attack on another forum. The reason for that attack is that we have not shared the dialogue with the broad fan-base. Our stance since our inception has not changed. If any Rangers fan wishes to read what is on VB, let him or her apply for membership. It's free. Other than that, wait for our very popular front page articles.