Jump to content

 

 

Mike Ashley tells Rangers FC 'we're not a bank' over loan deal


Recommended Posts

What if he threatens administration?

 

How can he do that if the agreement doesn't highlight an option to call the loan in?

 

Like Calgacus says that option isn't available to him so it's arguably in the club's best interests to retain the interest free loan in lieu of better retail contract terms.

Link to post
Share on other sites

How can he do that if the agreement doesn't highlight an option to call the loan in?

 

Like Calgacus says that option isn't available to him so it's arguably in the club's best interests to retain the interest free loan in lieu of better retail contract terms.

 

If the terms of the loan have been broken regarding the 2 directors would that be enough to give him the right to demand repayment? Without seeing the terms of the loan agreement we are speculating.

Edited by RANGERRAB
Link to post
Share on other sites

What is more interesting to me right now is whether the deals done by Llambias and Co. with regard to the SD merchandise deals can be legally challenged, as they are clearly not in the best interest of the company they were legally bound to represent? Given their ties to Ashley, conflict of interest glaring springs into your face.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the terms of the loan have been broken regarding the 2 directors would that be enough to give him the right to demand repayment? Without seeing the terms of the loan agreement we are speculating.

 

Have MASH requested two directors?

 

If the terms of the loan decreed they were entitled to this and/or the recall of it, then I'm surprised we've not seen either demanded instead of the EGM.

 

We can speculate about any subject and I'm content most folk can use the lie of the land to make educated (and moderate) comments on most issues. The EGM resolutions tell us a lot in that sense though not all admittedly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is more interesting to me right now is whether the deals done by Llambias and Co. with regard to the SD merchandise deals can be legally challenged, as they are clearly not in the best interest of the company they were legally bound to represent? Given their ties to Ashley, conflict of interest glaring springs into your face.

 

I'd imagine that the converse is true here - whereby if the club did have a worth legal complaint they'd have stood it up by now.

 

A balanced position would tell us somewhere towards the mid-point of both arguments is true: i.e. the most pragmatic solution is to renegotiate the retail deal and make it work for both parties.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think while the conflict of interest looks obvious from our point of view of things, the lack of legal action suggests it's apparently difficult to prove in court due to the vagaries of what could be considered "good" for the club.

 

However, that seems to me another massive flaw in our business laws where it seems easy to be a thief, a con man, a **** or a charlatan and be completely legal. Criminal masterminds have can easily bend the laws to rip everyone off for their riches without resorting to obvious and risky crimes like bank robberies and jewel heists.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this checkable from the Herald 19/02/2015, claims loan is payable on demand can't get the link to post. /Mr Ashley's control over retail and trademarks comes as a by-product of his £10m emergency loan to Rangers made last month.

 

New documents have come to light that show that a host of Rangers and club-related trademarks and logos including the famous

 

RFC Scroll crest and the Ready logo are being held by Mr Ashley and Sports Direct as security against that loan which is payable on demand/.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this checkable from the Herald 19/02/2015, claims loan is payable on demand can't get the link to post. /Mr Ashley's control over retail and trademarks comes as a by-product of his £10m emergency loan to Rangers made last month.

 

New documents have come to light that show that a host of Rangers and club-related trademarks and logos including the famous

 

RFC Scroll crest and the Ready logo are being held by Mr Ashley and Sports Direct as security against that loan which is payable on demand/.

 

IF it's payable on demand, then all MA has to do is demand it and we'll have to pay. So why hasn't he, why the bleating to the press and the EGM? Without a link, and referencing a newspaper which is always an unreliable source these days, it looks like you're just making mischief.

 

I think DK is one of the few who know exactly what the terms are, and he's pretty comfortable in not paying up for the moment.

 

It seems pretty obvious from the actions of both sides that there appears to be no pressing need to pay.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact fatty is bleating to the press, suggests there is no limit on when the £5m can be paid back.

 

He probably thought before the EGM, that we would owe him £10m and have most of the assets as security.

 

He's been outmaneuvered and he knows it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.