RANGERS launch an investigation after it emerged Mike Ashley now owns the club badges

[limeburner 0]

Seems to me that to get rid of him with as minimal damage as possible, means having to do business with him. Kind of the epitome of business being heavily rational rather than emotional.

Again, fair enough.

We may have to converse with his minions for a minimal time,IE,heres your five million now fuck off,!!

[forlanssister 3,114]

Use of SD's worldwide network of outlets? You jest surelyIt's an interest-free non time-sensitive loan, if what we hear is correct. What does that mean - we have years to pay it back?

 

It may be interest free but it's certainly not free.

 

We know from the company statement that the crests etc. are perfectly safe, so why bother rushing to pay him back?

 

If the crests etc, were perfectly safe then they would never have been included as part of the deal in the first place anyway as the other securities cover the loan multiple times, Murray Park alone having a book value of £14m.

 

£5M can buy us a couple of good players, and we'll need all of the money we can get.

 

If we're going to spend £5m on a couple of players anytime this decade then me may as well chuck it as we'd just be heading full speed back to where we've just came from.

 

More important is the fact that the conditions of Rangers Retail are not very favourable to us, and they may find more contracts like this, ergo the company may need some leverage.

 

No they're certainly not favourable with Rangers holding 51% but even less so with SD holding 76%.

 

Use of SD's worldwide network of outlets? You jest surely

 

It may not be a lot of money to some but any advantage will have to utilized against these people to return us to a healthy state.

 

Deals like this are Ashley's day job he doesn't leave any leverage or advantage to the other party just ask those suffering from his control of USC.

 

Conversely, it may be to Rangers advantage to make use of SD's worldwide network of outlets.

 

Use of SD's worldwide network of outlets? You jest surely?

 

Patience may turn out to be a virtue.

 

Ashley can afford to be patient Rangers patently cannot.

[trublusince1982 243]

If we're losing income from the conditionals then it could be a priority. I suspect there will be more than one share issue - as the next AGM will allow future ones to be opened up to everyone. I think the first one will be to get us on an even keel, including squaring with Ashley and removing all the securities that go with that, plus a bit left over for the team.

 

With the volunteers for the most pressing building works, perhaps investment in that direction can wait till next year bar immediately urgent work. There will have to be a budget for new players but I expect transfer fee wise, for that to be modest, it's wages that we need to cover as our wage bill seems to be hardly much more than Aberdeen's (7m vs 6m from what I've read).

 

However, IF we're promoted and the board switch from syphoning money off to bringing money into the club, then we should have a dramatic rise in income - although the damage to the value of Scottish football in general, and the old board for us in particular, will likely slow any recovery.

 

You might think we can't afford to pay back Ashley quickly but many will have the opposing view that we can't afford to hang about too long.

cant see the fans understanding lasting. Say they pay off ashley we get the badges etc back the cost of doing that would come from any potential first team budget and from things like scouting , putting them back maybe till next season. A few poor performances and that lack of funding will see the board under pressure. Think its far more likely they will leave the badges with ashley and spend the share issue money if there is one on the deficit and on a larger wage budget.

 

Dont really see any dramatic rise in revenue that will not be offset by higher costs. Maybe an extra £2m to the good

 

dont see there being two share issues within 12 months.Especially when you will still need one the year after the first to cover whats left of the deficit for the following season.

Think the first one will aim for about £10m the vast majority of that will come from the 3 bears and king in my opinion, think the other investors will mostly give it a miss and allow their holding to drop. Cant see the easdales or ashley taking part. Not sure how much will be invested from fans groups but doubt it will be more than £1m all in.Don't see king putting up more than £5-6m in the first year, not sure how much the 3 bears are willing to spend year on year.

 

With investment not happening till after season ticket sales meaning no real movement on issues the fans deem urgent i dont see there being more than a 5000 uptake on last seasons st numbers.Maybe a 20% rise in price at the most will help but will most likely be eaten up in player wage rises if promotion is achieved and in signing fees for all the replacements we need.

[limeburner 0]

Ridding Rangers of ashleys influence is still our No 1 priority,there can be no arguement about that IMO.

[trublusince1982 243]

Ridding Rangers of ashleys influence is still our No 1 priority,there can be no arguement about that IMO.

 

dont see it. Many see the job done and now in the hands of the new board to keep him at bay. Ashley could only cause harm with collusion from within. that should now no longer be possible.

 

We all want to see the merchandise contract being ripped up but i doubt the board are able to. More likely you will see the board meet agreement with ashley, use his loan money and renegotiate his loan parameters culminating in the board publicly backing the merchandise deal as being good for the club.

[der Berliner 3,815]

Ashley knew and knows exactly why he did what he did. I take it that King (and quite a few of his cohorts) are not new to that kind of business style and have dealt with it before. In any case, I do also assume that King, the 3Bs and all others involved with the good guys have quite a bit of business pedigree under their belt and seek the best way forward for club and company. I'm sure not in any position to debate the intrisic details of anything Ashley, Sports Direct and Rangers, and so are most on here too. Not least becaue we hardly have any great insight in the business affairs of Ashley, Sports Direct, and Rangers these days.

[barca72 440]

Use of SD's worldwide network of outlets? You jest surelyIt's an interest-free non time-sensitive loan, if what we hear is correct. What does that mean - we have years to pay it back?

 

It may be interest free but it's certainly not free.

 

 

 

If the crests etc, were perfectly safe then they would never have been included as part of the deal in the first place anyway as the other securities cover the loan multiple times, Murray Park alone having a book value of £14m.

 

 

 

If we're going to spend £5m on a couple of players anytime this decade then me may as well chuck it as we'd just be heading full speed back to where we've just came from.

 

 

 

No they're certainly not favourable with Rangers holding 51% but even less so with SD holding 76%.

 

Use of SD's worldwide network of outlets? You jest surely

 

 

 

Deals like this are Ashley's day job he doesn't leave any leverage or advantage to the other party just ask those suffering from his control of USC.

 

 

 

Use of SD's worldwide network of outlets? You jest surely?

 

 

 

Ashley can afford to be patient Rangers patently cannot.

 

 

1. No it's not free in that it's costing 26% more from the RR profits, but I don't think the club is overly worried about merchandising in the short term.

2. The club in their last statement said that the courts take the view that the Intellectual Property (crests etc.) will revert back to the club on payment of the loan so why would they not be safe? L&L may have been trying to entrench the club in debt which perhaps could have put them (IP) in jeopardy, but the result of the EGM stopped that plan.

3. The inference intended here was that if we need to use borrowed money then it's better to be interest free until the next share issue when we pay MA back. Yes I think we shall buy players but I don't think this board will allow us to run up debt anything like we have in the past. I would expect a clearout in the summer and use those wages to buy new players, sign freebies or whatever, but still have a manageable budget.

4. SD's deal as I understand it is good until 2017. From a business standpoint, a deal has to be a good deal for each side otherwise why would Rangers renew it after 2017. SD are not daft, they know they worked a flanker with CG in charge but now they have to come to the table to keep some of the gravy flowing. Rangers will need a world-wide retail chain to sell their merchandize through, and if SD want to be that chain and maintain their advertising, then they will renegotiate the terms of the deal. That just makes business sense.

5. Why do you say Rangers can patently not be patient? They refused a second £5M loan and went with a small interest-free £1.5M loan from the T3B, that does not suggest that they are under any undue pressure such that they can't be patient in re-structuring what I'm sure must be a barrowload of onerous contracts.

6. Ashley can be as patient as he wants but I'm sure that this board will, after it's enquiries into the conduct of L&L and possibly CG, be in a position if they wish to take legal action be able to prove director misconduct in the making of some of these contracts. In all honesty, and I'm not saying they will turn out to be angels, do you see this board as selling the club out as others before them have done?

[forlanssister 3,114]

 

1. No it's not free in that it's costing 26% more from the RR profits, but I don't think the club is overly worried about merchandising in the short term.

 

If they're not overly worried about every single income stream and how to maximise them then they're not doing their jobs correctly.

 

2. The club in their last statement said that the courts take the view that the Intellectual Property (crests etc.) will revert back to the club on payment of the loan so why would they not be safe? L&L may have been trying to entrench the club in debt which perhaps could have put them (IP) in jeopardy, but the result of the EGM stopped that plan.

 

As I said deals like these are Ashley's day job.

 

3. The inference intended here was that if we need to use borrowed money then it's better to be interest free until the next share issue when we pay MA back. Yes I think we shall buy players but I don't think this board will allow us to run up debt anything like we have in the past. I would expect a clearout in the summer and use those wages to buy new players, sign freebies or whatever, but still have a manageable budget.

 

As you've already acknowledged the "interest free" comes at a cost a cost in all probability far in excess of commercial rates of interest. Of course there will be a clearout as there's 12 players out of contract, however we won't be spunking £5m buying "us a couple of good players."

 

4. SD's deal as I understand it is good until 2017. From a business standpoint, a deal has to be a good deal for each side otherwise why would Rangers renew it after 2017. SD are not daft, they know they worked a flanker with CG in charge but now they have to come to the table to keep some of the gravy flowing. Rangers will need a world-wide retail chain to sell their merchandize through, and if SD want to be that chain and maintain their advertising, then they will renegotiate the terms of the deal. That just makes business sense.

 

That assumes Ashley/SD operate and think in a normal logical manner nothing that has happened so far backs up that assumption.

 

There is no need for a worldwide retail chain to sell our merchandise as there is no worldwide demand for it outside some isolated pockets of ex-pats.

 

5. Why do you say Rangers can patently not be patient? They refused a second £5M loan and went with a small interest-free £1.5M loan from the T3B, that does not suggest that they are under any undue pressure such that they can't be patient in re-structuring what I'm sure must be a barrowload of onerous contracts.

 

I say Rangers cannot be patient because it's clearly a fact that they cannot. They refused the second £5m loan because the terms were too onerous and we would have been beholden to SD for eternity if they had done that and forever in their mercy.

 

The 3B's ponied up £1.5m because that was what was needed to keep the lights on and will in all probability have to do so again.

 

6. Ashley can be as patient as he wants but I'm sure that this board will, after it's enquiries into the conduct of L&L and possibly CG, be in a position if they wish to take legal action be able to prove director misconduct in the making of some of these contracts.

 

They can but that'll take years to bear any fruit and in the meantime there is an inherent structural deficit to be filled in on an ongoing basis. You do realise you're advocating that the Board maintain an onerous contract by not rushing to pay him back?

[limeburner 0]

Mike Ashley, 8th richest man in the world,WE BEAT HIM.

Demonstrastions,meetings,rallies,lobbieing,banners,chanting,articles,statements,unrest,boycotts,official complaints,not mention millions of pounds given freely.

FOR WHAT?

Hey mikey lets talk?

Not from this punter NO WAY,But hey!! you feel free.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Mike Ashley, 8th richest man in the world,WE BEAT HIM.

Demonstrastions,meetings,rallies,lobbieing,banners,chanting,articles,statements,unrest,boycotts,official complaints,not mention millions of pounds given freely.

FOR WHAT?

Hey mikey lets talk?

Not from this punter NO WAY,But hey!! you feel free.

 

I used to labour under the misapprehension that Ashley was a reasonable business man, a man who could be reasoned with. Who understood the art of negotiation, how wrong was I?

 

He's a bully who intimidates his quarry, there's no reasoning with him, i realise this now. Better to fight him and win again.

Edited April 13, 2015 by aweebluesoandso