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

[scott12003 0]

It's clearly unethical but I doubt it is fraud or illegal

 

Its theft from the company and its shareholders.

[Ser Barristan Selmy 222]

Maybe I am mistaken, but this was part of the 10m loan (as published by club and company to the stock market), of which 5m were drawn? Thus it was common knowledge that it would be the case up until the loan is repaid.

 

Murray just said that he's willing to (and will) speak to Ashley, saying that this is still a win win situation for both, should Rangers be successful.

You're mistaken.

[pete 2,499]

I hope Broxi bear shites in his coffee.

[compo 6,129]

The scary thing is what other little surprises lie ahead

[der Berliner 3,245]

Its theft from the company and its shareholders.

 

... and direct conflict of interest from Ashley's men.

[colinstein 294]

I'm seeing reports that the badges will be returned after the £5 million is paid back. Apparently on SSN

[colinstein 294]

Rangers should reclaim ownership of their badges and trademarks from Mike Ashley if they pay him back a £5m loan.

 

The club signed over the rights to 31 UK registered trademarks to his Sports Direct firm on a temporary basis when they took out the credit facility in January.

 

STV can reveal the "assignation" of the trademarks is not irrevocable and ownership should automatically be returned to the club upon repayment.

 

The terms and conditions of Sports Direct's ownership of the badges are clearly stated in documents lodged with Companies House when Ashley provided the club with its credit facility in January.

 

It can also be revealed that Sports Direct have no rights to produce Rangers-branded merchandise from which the club would not receive a slice of the profits.

 

The club were granted an "exclusive royalty-free licence" to use the badge by the sportswear firm for the duration of the security.

 

Sports Direct can still produce and sell Rangers merchandise through Rangers Retail Limited, from which it receives 75% of any profit through a dividend. The club currently receives 25%.

 

Rangers announced on Thursday night they were launching a probe as "a matter of urgency" after documents filed at the Intellectual Property Office detailed the transfer in ownership of their trademarks to the sportswear firm.

 

A Rangers "source" has also been widely quoted describing the transfer as "odd", questioning the timing of the ownership switch.

 

Intellectual Property Office records document the transfer as being lodged on March 12, six days after Ashley's associates Barry Leach and Derek Llambias were removed from the club's board.

 

However the agreement was struck more than six weeks previously, a point noted by the Intellectual Property Office in the finer detail of the transfer.

 

STV understands Rangers are continuing to examine the documentation to ensure there is no get-out clause which would prevent the badges being returned in the event of the loan being repaid.

 

Ashley's trademark ownership

 

The assignation of ownership over Rangers' trademarks is detailed a document outlining the "registration of a charge", entered into by the club when it accepted a £5m loan from Sports Direct on January 27.

 

The document has been publicly available since February 12, three weeks before Dave King, Paul Murray and John Gilligan were voted on to the board at Ibrox, with Leach and Llambias removed.

 

On the first page of the assignation document, compiled by Brodies LLP, it is stated that "it is a condition precedent to the making available of loan facilities by Sports Direct to Rangers that Rangers grants this assignation to Sports Direct."

 

It continues: "This assignation is being granted by way of security".

 

On page three of the document, it is again made clear that Ashley's ownership of the trademarks is for purposes of security and outlines the terms and conditions of a return.

 

It states: "On irrevocable payment or discharge in full of the security liabilities, Sports Direct will promptly at the request and cost of Rangers re-assign the assigned rights to Rangers (or as Rangers shall direct)."

 

In addition to the 31 trademarks transferred, Sports Direct also hold security over a further 31 registered by Rangers abroad.

 

Three are registered in Canada, two in South Africa, seven in Australia, two in Japan, four in New Zealand, two in Spain, two in Morocco, four in the United States, two in Thailand and two in Turkey, as well as sole trademarks in China, Norway and Switzerland.

 

Why does Ashley need ownership?

 

In the transfer of intellectual property rights, such as trademarks, for security on a loan, it is not uncommon for an outright assignment to be granted to the lender.

 

A right of redemption is typically inserted in any agreement, which gives the company handing over its trademark the right to have them returned once a loan has been repaid in full.

 

Rangers have such right of redemption included in their agreement with Sports Direct but the board are continuing to examine that it is watertight and has no additional conditions attached.

 

Rangers' rights over their badges

 

Concerns raised that Sports Direct would produce Rangers-branded goods which the club would receive no revenue from are also set aside in the paperwork, as are any fears that Rangers are having to pay the company for the use of its badge.

 

"Sports Direct hereby grants Rangers an exclusive royalty-free licence" it states, before outlining that that licence does not permit the club to use the badge on goods which will typically be sold through their joint Rangers Retail Limited venture.

 

It continues: "While the licence subsists, Sports Direct undertakes not to use the trademarks in the territory, or to grant others the right to do so."

 

http://m.stv.tv/news/west-central/316649-rangers-badges-transferred-to-mike-ashley-as-security-for-5m-loan-deal/

[Tannochsidebear 2,306]

So the story is a lot of nonsense and strangely comes out on a matchday to disrupt proceedings just as we were finding some momentum, only to be revoked by some basic investigation as a complete non-story and nothing new to the situation that has been ongoing for a couple of months.

 

We really need to stop falling for this type of trash.

 

Memo to our current board - Why havent you paid that Ashley c**t his money back already to get him the f**k away from influencing our club or its assets? I'm thinking that would have been number one on a lot of fans agendas post-EGM.

[SteveC 150]

So the story is a lot of nonsense and strangely comes out on a matchday to disrupt proceedings just as we were finding some momentum, only to be revoked by some basic investigation as a complete non-story and nothing new to the situation that has been ongoing for a couple of months.

 

We really need to stop falling for this type of trash.

 

Memo to our current board - Why havent you paid that Ashley c**t his money back already to get him the f**k away from influencing our club or its assets? I'm thinking that would have been number one on a lot of fans agendas post-EGM.

 

Seems that way though "STV understands Rangers are continuing to examine the documentation to ensure there is no get-out clause which would prevent the badges being returned in the event of the loan being repaid." suggests we should be cautious until it is so confirmed

[barca72 440]

So the story is a lot of nonsense and strangely comes out on a matchday to disrupt proceedings just as we were finding some momentum, only to be revoked by some basic investigation as a complete non-story and nothing new to the situation that has been ongoing for a couple of months.

 

We really need to stop falling for this type of trash.

 

Memo to our current board - Why havent you paid that Ashley c**t his money back already to get him the f**k away from influencing our club or its assets? I'm thinking that would have been number one on a lot of fans agendas post-EGM.

 

If the story is correct and the badges and crests will be returned when the loan is re-paid, then what's the hurry to pay Ashley back?

We know that in the next little while we are going to have to use any investment we have to improve the quality of the squad and probably other important areas. Ashley's loan is interest free, the crests aren't going anywhere, and King knows that using Ashley stores to sell the brand worldwide makes sense - just that we need a better percentage - then why use money right now, that is needed to get us what we want, when it's not costing us anything to keep Ashley waiting?