Rangers chiefs lose latest round of court battle with Sports Direct and Mike Ashley over merchandise

[Crimson Dynamo 128]

3 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

The board's hands are tied with regards to transparency.  It's an ongoing court case, so they can only say so much.

 

I'm in the, "It doesn't look good but let's not panic yet.", camp.

As am i. But (and tinfoil hat time) i'm concerned that some of the statements from fan groups are coming via the board adding to the confusion.

 

[JFK-1 1,693]

44 minutes ago, Gonzo79 said:

I'm in the, "It doesn't look good but let's not panic yet.", camp.

Me too more or less. I'm trusting there are people at board level who have sufficient business acumen and who armed with the best legal advice have made an informed decision that this is the best route to take for a favourable end result. 

[Rick Roberts 246]

Stupid question, the new deal doesn't have the 7 year tie-in, just the matching clause? 

Edited August 1, 2019 by Rick Roberts

[Frankie 8,562]

Ultimately, we don't know what's going to happen until it happens.

 

Ergo, be wary of one-sided coverage in the media and comment from those who will have stuff filtered stuff to them by the club.

 

Most of all, remember we were never going to win this challenge so it was always a case of minimising the costs to exit the deal to maximise our income going forward.  It was always going to cost us serious dough (several million) so we can make serious dough going forward (let's say £2m a year at least).

[Bluedell 5,627]

38 minutes ago, Rick Roberts said:

Stupid question, the new deal doesn't have the 7 year tie-in, just the matching clause? 

I think the new deal is open-ended. ?

[Bluedell 5,627]

15 hours ago, ian1964 said:

Sons of Struth

Yesterday at 12:18 ·

THE CALM AFTER THE STORM
THE KIT DEAL SAGA

 

So far Rangers have paid £3m to normalise the 7 year deal, we received a £1.6m dividend shortly after normalising this deal and today we can see a legal bill for £444k. That means we are roughly £1.9m down plus a figure to be assessed by the judge for damages to SD for us doing a deal with Elite. The wise money is guessing this will be £1m. If this does turn out to be the figure then it will have cost Rangers just under £3m to bin a 7 year deal that was returning us zero profit.

 

Why do SoS think that the agreement will be binned after we pay the £3m? Surely it will still be in place and we are just £3m down?

[DMAA 3,658]

How was it even legal for Charles Green to give 93% of the profits to Sports Direct? Isn't that obviously some type of fraud because he made no attempt to negotiate a deal which benefited us?

Edited August 1, 2019 by DMAA

[DMAA 3,658]

Apparently there are links between Ashley and Desmond. He's apparently played golf with him in Barbados, he appointed one of his closest long term associates to the Sports Direct board. It seems every deal/contract Ashley tied Rangers into with the help of fraudsters like Green were designed to cause the ultimate harm to the club. £1 for the Ibrox naming rights, 7 year notice period, almost all profit for shirt sales going to SD. How isn't this a police matter? This isn't just a clever businessman this looks like a coordinated attempt to sabotauge Rangers' recovery.

Edited August 1, 2019 by DMAA

[Rick Roberts 246]

42 minutes ago, Bluedell said:

I think the new deal is open-ended. ?

Thanks. Hopefully we get to an end long before the that 7 years would've been up anyway. 

[Bill 13,717]

26 minutes ago, DMAA said:

Apparently there are links between Ashley and Desmond. He's apparently played golf with him in Barbados, he appointed one of his closest long term associates to the Newcastle board. It seems every deal/contract Ashley tied Rangers into with the help of fraudsters like Green were designed to cause the ultimate harm to the club. £1 for the Ibrox naming rights, 7 year notice period, almost all profit for shirt sales going to SD. How isn't this a police matter? This isn't just a clever businessman this looks like a coordinated attempt to sabotauge Rangers' recovery.

I'm not sure it's in the best interests of this website to be calling people "fraudsters".