Rangers new hummel kits go on sale today

[Big Jaws 570]

1 hour ago, forlanssister said:

It's cost of over 3 1/2 million to get increased terms how long will that take to recoup? Got rid of Puma you jest surely? We've replaced a finite termination date with an infinite one, to paraphrase The Eagles " welcome to the Hotel Sports Direct you can check out any time you like but you can never leave."

 

Do you seriously think SD went to court expecting to get everything they wanted? They're playing a game one at which they're very experienced and adept at. Rangers capitulated I expect Ashley was delighted by yesterday's result.

 

Disclosing the original deal would benefit our current position in what way? The Judge may have his concerns but there is nothing he can do about it as long as what SD are doing is legal. A thousand cuts you say we haven't even drawn blood yet.

 

From Ashley's point of view slowly works perfectly well given to him it has nothing to do with money now.

The current board have got a few things way wrong in my opinion. The appointment of Pedro and the McInnes saga being a couple of them and I'm all for holding them accountable for those mistakes. However you are convinced you have a handle on how the current board have fucked up handled this SD contract.  I guess this would go out to those like Buster who also think like you too. What would your proposal and strategy have been/be? 

[colinstein 294]

Are we tied into dealing with SD sinn Die ?

They can match any deal we make forever !.........surely this can't be !

[Big Jaws 570]

12 minutes ago, colinstein said:

Are we tied into dealing with SD sinn Die ?

They can match any deal we make forever !.........surely this can't be !

I was under the impression that it would only be the case if we hadn't had an offer from the market however on reading his Lordships words it may well be the case that that part of the existing contract carries over.

[Big Jaws 570]

I'm also extremely concerned that the only journalist covering the hearing was from the Press Association. The import being that Murdoch MacLennan is its chairman. We all know the associations/conflicts of interest with regards to Mr MacLennan. Therefore since the press circulation is derived from this one single source, effectively Dermot Desmond and his place men are running the entire propaganda wing with regards to Scottish football authorities and Scottish MSM.

Edited July 31, 2018 by Big Jaws

[forlanssister 3,114]

43 minutes ago, Big Jaws said:

The current board have got a few things way wrong in my opinion. The appointment of Pedro and the McInnes saga being a couple of them and I'm all for holding them accountable for those mistakes. However you are convinced you have a handle on how the current board have fucked up handled this SD contract.  I guess this would go out to those like Buster who also think like you too. What would your proposal and strategy have been/be? 

You think the Board themselves aren't aware this is a monumental f*&k up. To me it appears they relied upon legal advice that to put it mildly was seriously flawed.

[forlanssister 3,114]

29 minutes ago, Big Jaws said:

I'm also extremely concerned that the only journalist covering the hearing was from the Press Association. The import being that Murdoch MacLennan is its chairman. We all know the associations/conflicts of interest with regards to Mr MacLennan. Therefore since the press circulation is derived from this one single source, effectively Dermot Desmond and his place men are running the entire propaganda wing with regards to Scottish football authorities and Scottish MSM.

That's quite a common occurrence and one of the reasons that the Press Association exists, doubt there's anything nefarious in the reporting from the PA. 

[gaspard 562]

32 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

You think the Board themselves aren't aware this is a monumental f*&k up. To me it appears they relied upon legal advice that to put it mildly was seriously flawed.

if anybody thinks that the board haven't made a blunder, then the title of this thread should provide a clue.

[Big Jaws 570]

41 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

You think the Board themselves aren't aware this is a monumental f*&k up. To me it appears they relied upon legal advice that to put it mildly was seriously flawed.

In not so flowery language you think its incompetence. I think you've been very clear about your opinion on the matter.  

 

However thats not what I asked you.

 

So explain to the forums exactly what your strategy would have been going into the Club as a new board with the existing SD contracts and plot the course clearly here for all to see.

 

Thanks in advance.

[Uilleam 5,966]

43 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

You think the Board themselves aren't aware this is a monumental f*&k up. To me it appears they relied upon legal advice that to put it mildly was seriously flawed.

Assuming, FS, that the Board/Chairman did not overrule, or choose to ignore, legal advice. i wonder if there is not an element of "This time it's personal" in the continuing little war between the parties..

[Big Jaws 570]

36 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

That's quite a common occurrence and one of the reasons that the Press Association exists, doubt there's anything nefarious in the reporting from the PA. 

You don't think that omitting many of the findings of the court are relevant or that the courts costs are in actual fact not simply for this one issue but others also?

 

I'm sorry poster when the narrative is controlled in such a fashion there doesn't need to be lies printed its simple enough to just omit detail to draw alternative conclusion.