Jump to content

 

 

Rangers new hummel kits go on sale today


Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Big Jaws said:

I'd be inclined to agree with that and as Uilliam says in his previous post #204. However with that previous 7 year clause in the previous contract I believe the board chose to accept the new contract and its obvious revenue stream even though there were aspects of it that were not as favourable to us as we the fans would have liked. So here we are again with a new contract to negotiate with even better terms for the Club.

 

What do Commander?

Bottomline,....we are all on the same side and want the same thing.

 

It's a complicated matter with limited facts available but some things are apparent and can't be ignored.

What concerns me is the executive management as a whole. I should write an article on it tbh, put my thoughts together and bore you all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Big Jaws said:

I would suspect that SDI will find it difficult not to insert such clauses given the nature of their business practises. 

Surely that would invalidate its offer, as it wouldn't "match" JD, in terms and conditions?

But.......

Heigh Ho! Heigh Ho!

It's off to court we go!

Edited by Uilleam
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, buster. said:

Bottomline,....we are all on the same side and want the same thing.

 

It's a complicated matter with limited facts available but some things are apparent and can't be ignored.

What concerns me is the executive management as a whole. I should write an article on it tbh, put my thoughts together and bore you all.

The point that was being made was that, as far as we are aware because don't forget nda's injunctions to suppress the detail were in place, parts of the original contract have carried on to any and all subsequent contracts. Thats the context mate and we have to be aware of that by now surely?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

Yes alas all I have are facts sorry if that's inconvenient for you.

 

The inherited SD contract is irrelevant what is relevant is the current contract and it's influence on a new contract. Now I don't for one second doubt the current contract was negotiated (by Rangers) with the very best of intentions however the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

intentions are worthless without integrity.

what are we seeing here? the result of a deal where both sides appear to have lacked this virtue, sd have inserted a punitive clause and rangers have accepted in the misguided hope that they could circumvent in the future.

neither side have shown respect for each other.

 

lack of integrity can be calamitous.

 

look at the emission boffins at VW, very smart, thought they could outwit the testing regulatory authorities, thought they were acting in the best interests of their company.

but zero integrity and we all know how that ended.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

Surely that would invalidate its offer, as it wouldn't "match" JD, in terms and conditions?

But.......

Heigh Ho! Heigh Ho!

It's off to court we go!

Aye... I consulted my crystal balls and thats exactly what I seen in our future.

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, gaspard said:

 

 

look at the emission boffins at VW, very smart, thought they could outwit the testing regulatory authorities, thought they were acting in the best interests of their company.

but zero integrity and we all know how that ended.

Bet it didn't stop you buying one though! :ph34r:

Edited by forlanssister
Link to post
Share on other sites

Until the board advise you that the ‘new’ contract does not include a rolling matching deal no one should buy a kit. 

 

The judge clearly stated that the 2017 contract was valid with the exception of the price being subject to counter offers.  How much time do you have to spend on notice boards to understand that fact?

 

If before the final hearing yesterday Rangers and SD agreed something different then we need to know. The silence from Rangers is deafening and the facts as we know them until our Board state otherwise are that we are in this ridiculous rolling matching deal. 

 

To be clear in 2 years we will not receive any counter offers because no other distributor will compete in this loaded market. 

 

 

Edited by Walterbear
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Big Jaws said:

The point that was being made was that, as far as we are aware because don't forget nda's injunctions to suppress the detail were in place, parts of the original contract have carried on to any and all subsequent contracts. Thats the context mate and we have to be aware of that by now surely?

Not being aware of detail or it's potential implications appears to have played a part in this latest setback.

 

As they say in Spain, with SDI you need siete ojos.

 

 

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.