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

[Bill 13,717]

1 minute ago, alexscottislegend said:

Inasmuch as you still get a bourgeoisie. Why, what would you call them?

I wouldn't put people in outdated and essentially contrived pigeonholes at all.

[cooponthewing 1,139]

22 minutes ago, Bill said:

Do you still get a proletariat? Outside of marxist nostalgia comics I mean.

What would you call the millions on zero phours contract if not part of the proletariat?? Millions in call centres and offices with little or very few tangible rights for fear of losing their jobs?

Then there are those who must work for the ghost of Jabba the hut! They are like the slaves from the dark empire.

[Bill 13,717]

1 hour ago, cooponthewing said:

What would you call the millions on zero phours contract if not part of the proletariat?? Millions in call centres and offices with little or very few tangible rights for fear of losing their jobs?

Then there are those who must work for the ghost of Jabba the hut! They are like the slaves from the dark empire.

I’d call them people who should look for a better job if they’re able. If not I’d call them unfortunate but in gainful employment. But “proletariat” is an anachronism from the CP manifesto, a bullshit word used purely for effect by people whose only aim is to create an effect. 

[BEARGER 1,829]

Club 1872 Statement on Sports Direct Litigation

29 July, 2019

Club 1872 was, in common with all Rangers supporters, concerned to see reports of the outcome of the latest court case involving the club and Sports Direct. Clearly it is not a positive situation to be on the wrong end of such decisions and of particular concern were tabloid headlines regarding the possibility of Rangers having to pay “millions” in damages following the latest ruling.

It is always our wish to be able to communicate in detail with supporters but on this topic we must be mindful of the club’s position which is restricted by confidentiality provisions, court decisions and the ongoing nature of these proceedings. This means that they simply cannot discuss this issue in detail with Club 1872 or indeed anyone else.

We have asked Rangers to give Club 1872 and the supporters what reassurance they can and they have reiterated their statement on the club website. It is the club’s position that the judgement is not as reported and that the damages cap of £1m has not been removed. As supporters will see from the release of the new away kit, there is no restriction on supporters buying this season’s kit and the purchase of those kits continues to benefit the club.

This is a complex and far reaching legal dispute and there are a number of aspects of it still be to decided by the court. We feel the same frustration as all supporters when there are setbacks in that fight but the goal remains the same.

We would remind supporters that Mike Ashley and Sports Direct were and remain a malign influence on Rangers Football Club. Club 1872 purchased a large portion of Mr Ashley’s shares in 2017, partly to remove one aspect of that toxic influence. We look forward to the day when he and Sports Direct no longer have any dealings with our club.

We are fully supportive of the Rangers board’s efforts to stand up to Mr Ashley’s attempt to bully the club into submission. Mr Ashley’s approach on this matter continues to make no commercial sense – given the position of the vast majority of the Rangers support towards Sports Direct – and appears to be purely vindictive. We would urge individual supporters who are frustrated with these ongoing court battles to consider what action they can take to remove support for any and all parts of Mr Ashley’s business empire, and encourage others to do the same.

We would also take this opportunity to express our sympathy with Newcastle fans who find their own club suffering under Mr Ashley’s ownership. We have made approaches to a number of their supporters’ groups to discuss ways in which we can work together to challenge Mr Ashley and Sports Direct in what we believe is a matter of shared interest.

We appreciate that supporters want more detail and more reassurance regarding this ongoing fight with Mr Ashley and we are sorry not to be in a position to provide it, but we remain up for the fight and hope that supporters will continue to show the same determination which saw Mr Ashley and his lieutenants kicked out of our club in 2015.

Issued by Supporters Voice Limited, a Club 1872 company

[Bluedell 5,329]

On 27/07/2019 at 08:49, Gaffer said:

That's why I said in an earlier post that it was a breach of the board members' fiduciary duties to accept that, and there would be zero defence for it.  However these criminal cases take a long time and I can understand the current board's desire to move on.

I believe that it's due to an agreement reached with the previous directors to get them to resign rather than a desire to move on.

 

In my opinion, there's no question that they breached their fiduciary duties but, as you say it would have been time consuming and also difficult to prove in court.

[Bluedell 5,329]

The C1872 statement doesn't add anything to what everyone already knew.

[Scott7 5,139]

1 hour ago, Bluedell said:

In my opinion, there's no question that they breached their fiduciary duties but, as you say it would have been time consuming and also difficult to prove in court.

Was Ashley majority/largest shareholder at the time the contract was entered into? 

 

If so perhaps minorities have a remedy against the company officers but that doesn’t help with getting shot of Ashley. 

[compo 6,116]

the fat man's just to good for us we need a plan Z

[Bill 13,717]

Other than being seen to make a statement, it’s difficult to draw anything useful from Club1872’s words. Bland and directionless waffle.

Edited July 29, 2019 by Bill

[Bluedell 5,329]

1 hour ago, Scott7 said:

Was Ashley majority/largest shareholder at the time the contract was entered into? 

 

If so perhaps minorities have a remedy against the company officers but that doesn’t help with getting shot of Ashley. 

I don't think Ashley was ever the majority/largest shareholder.