Douglas Park rejects Kings Old Firm friendly fee offer

LJ50 said:
I think you’re missing the point. Any penalty wouldn’t be dependant on a third party. If Rangers have contractually committed to play, and withdraw, then that’s not dependant on a third party...and there would be nothing unenforceable about any specified penalty for doing so.

I would be shocked if the organisers were foolish enough to give either of us a contract with a committed payment, but allowed either one to pull out for any reason without penalty. Such an agreement would be moronic beyond belief when the key commercial selling point of the tournament is our mutual participation.

None of us have seen the agreement, so speculating on the precise contents is all we’re doing. But I genuinely think it’s naive to expect there to be no exit cost, and even more naive to deny the simple logic that, if there is, then it’s indirectly going to end up in Celtic‘s bank account.
Click to expand...

On of us is missing the point but it ain’t me. In fact you have changed the entire discussion. I originally replied to a poster who suggested that any penalty we paid would be given directly to Celtic - quote

‘C’mon, let’s be sensible here. If we cancel our contract to participate any penalty fee is staying with the organisers. It’s not being sent to Celtic. That’s just daft’

Of course there will be a financial penalty. All I’m saying is that it will not be given to Celtic if we withdraw.
 
Blutoe said:
On of us is missing the point but it ain’t me. In fact you have changed the entire discussion. I originally replied to a poster who suggested that any penalty we paid would be given directly to Celtic - quote

‘C’mon, let’s be sensible here. If we cancel our contract to participate any penalty fee is staying with the organisers. It’s not being sent to Celtic. That’s just daft’

Of course there will be a financial penalty. All I’m saying is that it will not be given to Celtic if we withdraw.
Click to expand...
We will have a contract with the organisers that means we pay a fee to break the contract.

The scum will have a contract with the organisers that mean they get a fee if the organisers cannot fulfil their part of the contract.

If we pull out, we will pay the fee to the organisers because we render them unable to fulfil their contractual obligations.

The fee we pay to the organisers will then be, at least in part, paid to the scum because the organisers will not be able to fulfil their contract.

We will pay, at one step removed, the fee the scum are due as payment.
 
Northampton_Loyalist said:
We will have a contract with the organisers that means we pay a fee to break the contract.

The scum will have a contract with the organisers that mean they get a fee if the organisers cannot fulfil their part of the contract.

If we pull out, we will pay the fee to the organisers because we render them unable to fulfil their contractual obligations.

The fee we pay to the organisers will then be, at least in part, paid to the scum because the organisers will not be able to fulfil their contract.

We will pay, at one step removed, the fee the scum are due as payment.
Click to expand...

That’s just rubbish.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
So how come it was 71k back then in 1973 but only 38k this week?

Please spare me the pish about it as a different time.

This week, would have sold out if the club was run responsably.

Suck filth cock and you get this anger.
Click to expand...
Without getting into the debate about the attendance, and as I’m sure you will already know, I think it fair to say the attendance v Arsenal in 1973 was at least partly influenced by the fact that Rangers pegged the price of entry at just 5p. Queues started forming to get in some three and a half hours before kick-off. The match programme cost more than the price of entry!

Bit about the game, and the Rangers- Arsenal history, here for those unaware:

thelowerthirddotnet.wordpress.com

Friends reunited: When Rangers welcomed Arsenal for a centenary celebration.

It is fair to say that Rangers found themselves in an odd situation ahead of the 1972-73 season, the season which would take the club into its centenary year. On the plus side they were the holders…
thelowerthirddotnet.wordpress.com thelowerthirddotnet.wordpress.com
 
I find myself really conflicted on this current board, on one hand, and let’s be honesty it’s the main point, they’ve continually dipped into their pockets to keep the club afloat, they’ve went way above and beyond to do so and we should be eternally grateful, get a bit pissed off when I see phrases like “the fat man” to describe Park, no need for it

On the other hand they simply are not listening to the fans, this “friendly”, castore, safe standing, disabled facilities, the gaffs over away tickets that saw Celtic bitchslap them again, one personal irk, and one most have let slide, this time last year the made a huge song and danced about going after Humza Yousef, Dornan etc over their ridiculous claims over a fake video, we suggested we were taking legal action, again something that’s just disappeared

I said last week, this board only speak when they are personally attacked, I had enough of that from Murray to be honest

Something needs to change, their is an anger building amongst the fans that needs addressed ASAP. They could at lest start by getting out of this so called friendly to at least indicate they are listening
 
Blutoe said:
On of us is missing the point but it ain’t me. In fact you have changed the entire discussion. I originally replied to a poster who suggested that any penalty we paid would be given directly to Celtic - quote

‘C’mon, let’s be sensible here. If we cancel our contract to participate any penalty fee is staying with the organisers. It’s not being sent to Celtic. That’s just daft’

Of course there will be a financial penalty. All I’m saying is that it will not be given to Celtic if we withdraw.
Click to expand...
No, you didn't. You replied to my post, in which I said:
But… now the contracts are signed, would you feel the same about having to sell a player we have in order to, effectively, write a cheque that would be sent onto Celtic by the organisers of the tournament? Because unless there is another way out, that’s highly likely to be the cost of withdrawing.
Click to expand...
Note the words "effectively" and "sent onto...", not "directly".

Others in the thread have pointed out the obvious consequences in the event that we have to pay a penalty to the organisers. The organisers aren't just going to hold onto cash. They're using it to meet their costs, which will include the payments they have committed to the participants. If you either don't understand, or chose to pretend otherwise, then there isn't much point discussing further with you.
 
Last edited:
LJ50 said:
No, you didn't. You replied to my post, in which I said:

Note the words "effectively" and "sent onto...", not "directly".

Others in the thread have pointed out the obvious consequences in the event that we have to pay a penalty to the organisers. The organisers aren't just going to hold onto cash. They're using it to meet their costs, which will include the payments they have committed to the participants. If you either don't understand, or chose to pretend otherwise, then there isn't much point discussing further with you.
Click to expand...

I understand completely. I disagree with your assertion as to how fees and penalties work in event and sponsorship contracts having worked in that arena for many years.
Let’s just leave it there
 
Northampton_Loyalist said:
We will have a contract with the organisers that means we pay a fee to break the contract.

The scum will have a contract with the organisers that mean they get a fee if the organisers cannot fulfil their part of the contract.

If we pull out, we will pay the fee to the organisers because we render them unable to fulfil their contractual obligations.

The fee we pay to the organisers will then be, at least in part, paid to the scum because the organisers will not be able to fulfil their contract.

We will pay, at one step removed, the fee the scum are due as payment.
Click to expand...
Honestly, if we do have penalties to pay then the follow-on steps you outline are self-evident. An organisation has contractual obligations to pay sums to a party... and it uses monies received to pay those sums. The fact some people don't see it is almost comically staggering.

As I have said repeatedly, we should never have gotten ourselves into this position - but if we have signed a deal that commits us to participating need to deal with the real world we're in rather than a no-consequence fantasy land.
 
dereksmallsloyal said:
“If (insert something about the friendly or the league title)… the board have to go.”

Where? Who plugs the financial gap? Who takes over? King? Really?

What a load of entitled juvenile pap from people presumably old enough to know better.
Click to expand...

Pre 55 an element of the fanbase had not fully grabbed onto a level of entitlement akin to a teenager in the Apple store in the lead up to Christmas. Since then - well all bets are off for some.
 
Robert Marshall said:
We didn't have a friendly on Saturday, we had a kick about that an incredible nearly 40000 turned up to see
Comparing it to an Arsenal game with two full teams on display are at it
And all you that are having a go at his Board should be ashamed of yourselves
Click to expand...
They're the ones who have have dealt with the devil and all for a few bucks.
Whatever this board go on to achieve, this Australian debacle will forever be a stain on their legacy.
It's that simple and I have absolutely no shame in saying so.
 
Alex Venters said:
They're the ones who have have dealt with the devil and all for a few bucks.
Whatever this board go on to achieve, this Australian debacle will forever be a stain on their legacy.
It's that simple and I have absolutely no shame in saying so.
Click to expand...

Perhaps you could offer to buy them out of their shares if you don't agree with their running of the club ?
 
Robert Marshall said:
We didn't have a friendly on Saturday, we had a kick about that an incredible nearly 40000 turned up to see
Comparing it to an Arsenal game with two full teams on display are at it
And all you that are having a go at his Board should be ashamed of yourselves
Click to expand...
Exactly the Arsenal game was almost free entry to see two top teams.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
How wide do you want to go?

In 1973, we lost to the filth on the Saturday at Ibrox in front of 63,000. On the Monday there was 71,000 versus Arsenal.

I don't think I'm the one who is wide of the mark on this one.

The attendance on Saturday shows the board is now a busted flush.

Fecking up this league and they are finished.

But hey, the fat guy won the Cinch deal.
Click to expand...
Before my time, but I assume the game vs Arsenal was current first team players and not guys in their 40s and 50s having a laugh.

Your last comment is completely out of order and hugely disrespectful to a guy who has put his hand deep into his pocket to find the club. Yes, Park has made mistakes but he has weighed in financially and his contribution should be acknowledged alongside King, Bennett, etc.
 
LJ50 said:
Honestly, if we do have penalties to pay then the follow-on steps you outline are self-evident. An organisation has contractual obligations to pay sums to a party... and it uses monies received to pay those sums. The fact some people don't see it is almost comically staggering.

As I have said repeatedly, we should never have gotten ourselves into this position - but if we have signed a deal that commits us to participating need to deal with the real world we're in rather than a no-consequence fantasy land.
Click to expand...
Lets be honest here - no one knows what's in this contract.

It's assumed we will be liable for a cancellation payment. That payment realistically would not be a huge amount, based on the fact we are over six months away from the tournament.

As far as celtic being compensated for the cancellation. I'd very much doubt that's in play at all.
 
cambridgeblue said:
I wouldn't go that far. But a trying to keep some perspective about a meaningless B-team match in the off season.
Click to expand...
Hardly meaningless given our club's reputation is at stake.
The support have made their feelings known, shame on any board who wilfully disregard the feelings and opinions of their largest investor.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
So how come it was 71k back then in 1973 but only 38k this week?

Please spare me the pish about it as a different time.

This week, would have sold out if the club was run responsably.

Suck filth cock and you get this anger.
Click to expand...
The tv viewers, there would have been a good number. Zero back in 1973, but a decent chunk for this game. Presumably you were amongst them.
 
Alex Venters said:
Hardly meaningless given our club's reputation is at stake.
The support have made their feelings known, shame on any board who wilfully disregard the feelings and opinions of their largest investor.
Click to expand...

It's meaningless to me. Of less interest than the Glasgow Cup.

If the support are the largest investors then the board would lose a vote at the AGM. If they were the largest investor they could probably call an EGM...
 
cambridgeblue said:
They are the largest customers but they are not investors - a customers money gets them a ticket or a strip, but no say in the club, for that you need shares.
Click to expand...
Semantics.

A cash payment in exchange for a commodity - access to a game, club merchandise, food at Ibrox, a piece of paper called a share - is an investment in Rangers.

If the Whyte/Ticketus fiasco taught us any one thing, it should have been the supreme significance of the irreplaceable upfront fan investment that is season ticket money.
 
Bearwood Bear said:
Semantics.

A cash payment in exchange for a commodity - access to a game, club merchandise, food at Ibrox, a piece of paper called a share - is an investment in Rangers.

If the Whyte/Ticketus fiasco taught us any one thing, it should have been the supreme significance of the irreplaceable upfront fan investment that is season ticket money.
Click to expand...

Its not semantics when it comes to the AGM and elections to the board.
 
Maybe the board if they read this get pissed off and just sell up to the first bidder.
Being Rangers guys I would hope not but be careful what you wish for.
For me I will keep this board who have got us to where we are ready to win a league and in Europe with good manager. Those that dont like at are of course free to stay away which is their choice and it will make no difference as Rangers will still have the support we need to keep us going forward.
If we end up beating septic and getting a few million as well that is a plus even though I am not that keen on the idea.. By then we will have won the league and they will be back where they belong.
IF 10000 dont want to turn up they will be replaced but I understand those who dont like the board then they need to buy a heck of a lot of shares then try to get them out. Easier though just not to buy STs etc.
Some dont like the board and some do its just a matter of choice.
As said all business needs customers but with football the business only exists because of investors. Rangers will always have a support but may not always have a Rangers man as an investor.
 
stillAlwaysblue said:
Maybe the board if they read this get pissed off and just sell up to the first bidder.
Being Rangers guys I would hope not but be careful what you wish for.
For me I will keep this board who have got us to where we are ready to win a league and in Europe with good manager. Those that dont like at are of course free to stay away which is their choice and it will make no difference as Rangers will still have the support we need to keep us going forward.
If we end up beating septic and getting a few million as well that is a plus even though I am not that keen on the idea.. By then we will have won the league and they will be back where they belong.
IF 10000 dont want to turn up they will be replaced but I understand those who dont like the board then they need to buy a heck of a lot of shares then try to get them out. Easier though just not to buy STs etc.
Some dont like the board and some do its just a matter of choice.
As said all business needs customers but with football the business only exists because of investors. Rangers will always have a support but may not always have a Rangers man as an investor.
Click to expand...
I'm not anti board, save for this single issue.
They've fucked up and should have the balls to come clean and admit their mistake.
If they carry on regardless it will inevitably have consequences
 
Northampton_Loyalist said:
We will have a contract with the organisers that means we pay a fee to break the contract.

The scum will have a contract with the organisers that mean they get a fee if the organisers cannot fulfil their part of the contract.

If we pull out, we will pay the fee to the organisers because we render them unable to fulfil their contractual obligations.

The fee we pay to the organisers will then be, at least in part, paid to the scum because the organisers will not be able to fulfil their contract.

We will pay, at one step removed, the fee the scum are due as payment.
Click to expand...
If we pull out, will the organisers no just get another team (dundee) to play the paedos?
So contract fulfilled.
 
If the club said look it will cost us £1 million in fees to escape this Australia trip, every bear I know would pay an extra £20 on the Braga ticket to cover it. What we want is honesty no more BS. Tell us the script and withdraw. Seriously how difficult can it be to pull out? Front up and tell us
 
stillAlwaysblue said:
Maybe the board if they read this get pissed off and just sell up to the first bidder.
Being Rangers guys I would hope not but be careful what you wish for.
For me I will keep this board who have got us to where we are ready to win a league and in Europe with good manager. Those that dont like at are of course free to stay away which is their choice and it will make no difference as Rangers will still have the support we need to keep us going forward.
If we end up beating septic and getting a few million as well that is a plus even though I am not that keen on the idea.. By then we will have won the league and they will be back where they belong.
IF 10000 dont want to turn up they will be replaced but I understand those who dont like the board then they need to buy a heck of a lot of shares then try to get them out. Easier though just not to buy STs etc.
Some dont like the board and some do its just a matter of choice.
As said all business needs customers but with football the business only exists because of investors. Rangers will always have a support but may not always have a Rangers man as an investor.
Click to expand...
While I'm sure they don't pay too much attention to Jonny Bellend on the internet, the board are responsible for ensuring a certain amount of goodwill runs through all the stakeholders at the club.

The Ange friendly majorly affects that goodwill and also ensures smaller issues, potentially issues that there isn't blanket condemnation of, are highlighted more often and louder.

The result is general negativity in what should be one of our best seasons in history.
 
Mustang mad said:
Without our current board, like them or not, continually investing in the club- there is no club.
Where is the que of folk waiting to plough money into rangers, for nothing in return?
Click to expand...

At the stadium every second week or more.

Did you miss the whole 3rd division period where the support literally kept the club alive? Or are you saying that was down to our generous board at the time?

Edit: wrote the same word twice
 
Last edited:
The price structure was completely wrong for the legends game and our ongoing progress in Europe, and the cost that comes with it, were the main reasons it didn't sell out.

It should have been played this summer pre season. Another brain fart.
 
Robert Marshall said:
We didn't have a friendly on Saturday, we had a kick about that an incredible nearly 40000 turned up to see
Comparing it to an Arsenal game with two full teams on display are at it
And all you that are having a go at his Board should be ashamed of yourselves
Click to expand...

The only people that should be ashamed are our board for arranging a friendly against that lot.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Mate, with the squad we have now the ST money doesn't even cover the outlay in salaries.
Click to expand...

Yep, I would imagine so. That much is obvious.

The poster I was replying to suggested that the club would not even be able to run at all. I was just pointing out that was a rather silly comment and that without any support, there is no club.

You would think after all we had been through, it would be obvious that the support is the lifeblood of our great club.
 
Hap Hapablap said:
The price structure was completely wrong for the legends game and our ongoing progress in Europe, and the cost that comes with it, were the main reasons it didn't sell out.

It should have been played this summer pre season. Another brain fart.
Click to expand...

I don’t think this board will survive or forgiven if we fail to win the league this year.

Would be unforgivable not backing the previous and current manager given what’s at stake this season.

They are absolutely clueless and so out of touch with the support and the Australia shambles puts another nail to that.
 
cambridgeblue said:
Its not semantics when it comes to the AGM and elections to the board.
Click to expand...
You miss my point.

It is a cash payment in exchange for a commodity.

The value of the commodity is variable.

My point is that the annual cash injection of ST money is irreplaceable and in my view undervalued. As a long-term shareholder I am well aware of the legal status of shares and what they entail.
 
wee bud's pit boots said:
How wide do you want to go?

In 1973, we lost to the filth on the Saturday at Ibrox in front of 63,000. On the Monday there was 71,000 versus Arsenal.

I don't think I'm the one who is wide of the mark on this one.

The attendance on Saturday shows the board is now a busted flush.

Fecking up this league and they are finished.

But hey, the fat guy won the Cinch deal.
Click to expand...
You're talking absolute shite.

The 2 games are nowhere near comparable. Saturday was a game with 2 teams consisting of past it middle aged men, and it was overpriced.

Correct me if I am wrong, but was the game in 73 not contested by our first team and the first team of Arsenal?
 
Surprised people are criticising a 38k turnout to watch a legends game. Not really one for going to they games but considered taking the kids but the price on top of the semi final and Braga tickets sealed the deal i wasnt going. Im sure there were more in the same boat.

I hate this friendly in Australia as much as anybody but dont think it was a major factor in the attendance on Saturday which i think was pretty good.
 
Mustang mad said:
Could the club run on gate money and merchandise cash alone?
Click to expand...
This is entirely the wrong question.

If we are still relying on director loans in 12 months time from now then the board are failing. The entire point of our rebuild and restructure was to front load the investment needed to get the club back operating at the top and then get it operating at the top while generating enough revenue to be self sufficient.

This tangent the debate keeps taking, talking about how much we need these benevolent directors with their deep pockets is so fucking stupid and frustrating. We have players worth several millions and we should, from the very next window, be selling one ahead of taking further loans. We need to work within our means and we have had the period of front loaded investment, we need to start breaking even and trading effectively.

Also, if the only answer to the criticism they are receiving over several decisions made is 'yeah, but they put money in' then you have no defence of their decisions. End of story.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top