buster. 5,196 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 1 minute ago, Big Jaws said: Ahh OK no problem. In that case the subtext of this discussion is that at the time of that contract negotiation in 2017 we were in a far more difficult and disadvantaged predicament with regards to the existing contract before negotiation. After negotiation, and with a £3m sweetner, we're in a better position in terms of revenue stream available to us as certain aspects of the previous contract have been negotiated out. SDI does either carry over or insert 'roll over' and 'first refusal if an offer from the market materialises' which the board decides is more advantageous to the Club than 7p in the £1 and 7 year termination with a continued boycott. Which brings us up to the current situation where TRFC and SDI have been instructed to negotiating a new contract. After consultation with lawyers, I'd be looking for removal or substantial change in connected terms of the 'carry over' and would be prepared to up sweetner by 500K. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Jaws 570 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, buster. said: After consultation with lawyers, I'd be looking for removal or substantial change in connected terms of the 'carry over' and would be prepared to up sweetner by 500K. Thats the problem here. You cant just tear up existing or amended contracts without compensation you have to at least attempt to negotiate out of them and even then there may be compensation to be paid. I dislike this SDI organisation as much as the next man however getting all emotional about legal issues needs to be tempered and reading between the lines I can see how much of a bag of shite the current board inherited when they took over and thank f&*k the took over when they did too! Edited July 31, 2018 by Big Jaws 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walterbear 557 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 6 minutes ago, Big Jaws said: Thats the problem here. You cant just tear up existing or amended contracts without compensation you have to at least attempt to negotiate out of them and even then there may be compensation to be paid. I dislike this SDI organisation as much as the next man however getting all emotional about legal issues needs to be tempered and reading between the lines I can see how much of a bag of shite the current board inherited when they took over and thank f&*k the took over when they did too! We have a debt to King and Co no doubt. That debt has been matched with tens of millions of pounds of season tickets. We saved the club as well. Let’s just see what the board have to say on this deal. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 24 minutes ago, buster. said: After consultation with lawyers, I'd be looking for removal or substantial change in connected terms of the 'carry over' and would be prepared to up sweetner by 500K. We are where we are because we thought we could do just that and break free for £1m while all along SD knew that we couldn't. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walterbear 557 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 (edited) 50 minutes ago, forlanssister said: We are where we are because we thought we could do just that and break free for £1m while all along SD knew that we couldn't. - 7p in the £ for a shirt in pre 2017 deal - £3m just to terminate 2017 contract equals 43m shirts (@ 0.7p) to just to offset the £3m. We then have to take of tax against shirt revenues. These are the numbers. And we got a potentially perpetual deal. Ths is what needs explained. Edited July 31, 2018 by Walterbear 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete 2,499 Posted July 31, 2018 Author Share Posted July 31, 2018 3 hours ago, forlanssister said: Of course it's incompetence whether that be by the Board or the legal team isn't exactly clear but ultimate responsibility falls to the Board who after all they would have gathered the plaudits had their strategy proved fruitful. My strategy is irrelevant I didn't get us to where we are today that was the Board and it is they who have failed to extradite us from the clutches of Ashley despite intimating to us that they had. I'm about as far as you get from being a critic of the Board but by the same token I don't submit to having blind faith in them either. If you don't think they've erred in this instance so be it carry on with the delusion. I think it is the only thing that is clear is that someone got it wrong somewhere. Another lesson should be is : Don't blow your trumpet in public until you can play it. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 4 minutes ago, Walterbear said: - 7p in the £ for a shirt in pre 2017 deal - £3m just to terminate 2017 contract equals 43m shirts (@ 0.7p) to just to offset the £3m. We then have to take of tax against shirt revenues. These are the numbers. And we got a potentially perpetual deal. Ths is what needs explained. In fairness the return will be greater post the 2017 renegotiation but I doubt it will recoup anything like the £3m and the associated costs which are ongoing. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
buster. 5,196 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 1 hour ago, forlanssister said: We are where we are because we thought we could do just that and break free for £1m while all along SD knew that we couldn't. You wonder if there were any attempts in those negotiations (2017) to get it done up front and not take the 'outside bet' of the High Court further down the line.....and if so, how much SDI wanted for it ? There isn't any mystery to the Ashley M.O., he will use any leverage he can secure to the hilt. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walterbear 557 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 1 minute ago, forlanssister said: In fairness the return will be greater post the 2017 renegotiation but I doubt it will recoup anything like the £3m and the associated costs which are ongoing. Agree. I was just trying to focus folk on thinking about this in numbers. Even if the deal is twice as good it’s 20m shirts just to settle the deal. If it’s 4 times as good it’s 10m shirts. I know this is simplistic as I don’t have details but I have the details that are public and am applying rudimentary sums. Point is it makes no sense from the outside. I get why some want to wear the top or buy it for kids and that will happen. But don’t let anyone think that buying tops is significantly helping the club financially. We really need 1872 to step up to the mark and based on what I’ve seen on the various boards that will be a challenge for them. They are our only unifying fan base I can see (I have no association with them) but they need to step forward even more than previously. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Jaws 570 Posted July 31, 2018 Share Posted July 31, 2018 44 minutes ago, Walterbear said: - 7p in the £ for a shirt in pre 2017 deal - £3m just to terminate 2017 contract equals 43m shirts (@ 0.7p) to just to offset the £3m. We then have to take of tax against shirt revenues. These are the numbers. And we got a potentially perpetual deal. Ths is what needs explained. 20 minutes ago, Walterbear said: Agree. I was just trying to focus folk on thinking about this in numbers. Even if the deal is twice as good it’s 20m shirts just to settle the deal. If it’s 4 times as good it’s 10m shirts. I know this is simplistic as I don’t have details but I have the details that are public and am applying rudimentary sums. Point is it makes no sense from the outside. I get why some want to wear the top or buy it for kids and that will happen. But don’t let anyone think that buying tops is significantly helping the club financially. We really need 1872 to step up to the mark and based on what I’ve seen on the various boards that will be a challenge for them. They are our only unifying fan base I can see (I have no association with them) but they need to step forward even more than previously. I agree with most of what you've posted. I suspect and I'm only reading between the lines here that the answer to your question lies in SDI's estimation of any deal or rather the projections and potential profits for them for any deal. We know that they argued against the £1m cap set by the court. Considering they are the largest sports retailer in the UK with a huge high street presence of somewhere in the region of +/- 500 outlets, in addition to their franchises in other countries it becomes even more apparent how this company operates and where these types of numbers come from. Its also fairly easy, I would suspect, to follow the boards reasoning. This is how Ashleys companies operate. They get a foothold then strangle competitors until they can either take them over or close them down. The current board didn't invite this company in but its had no choice but to deal with it and make the best of what it can in the mean time and to be absolutely honest with you it hasn't been a poor strategy. The trouble for most Rangers fans is that they are already tied up in emotion of it all. At no stage did the board say we are completely free of SD and also indicated that we would be working with them in the future. It was us out here who did that on the basis that the contract between SDI and RRL had been terminated. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.