a_weir
Well-Known Member
That’s the difference
I could have sworn Livi just had the word ‘cinch’ on their sleeve today?
That’s the difference
No mate, everyone has thatI could have sworn Livi just had the word ‘cinch’ on their sleeve today?
I could have sworn Livi just had the word ‘cinch’ on their sleeve today?
"League bosses described the contract as the ‘biggest ever’, with clubs earning £1.6m a year over the next five years."£1.6m a season and they get sponsorship on every teams shirt, they really are unfit for purpose
No mate, everyone has that
The thing is though, the best case scenario is we don’t have to wear the patch, other clubs stop and then the contract is ripped up. We can’t sell that space afterwards as it’s against league rules.
Im not sure that’s worth risking all of the potential headaches that come with taking the league to court
While I'm sure that is right, I'm not sure how legal action/refusal to display it is the form of action we take to achieve that.I could be very well wrong here, but I'm guessing our gripe is the 'measly' fee we receive for the privilege of having the Cinch branded league patches on our sleeves compared to what the likes of Tomket Tires pay us.
It also may be that the Cinch deal is far less than Bank of Scotland or Ladbrokes was worth in years gone by ?
My guess is that we as a club are wanting the SPFL to renegotiate the terms of the current sponsorship since we believe they've undersold it. I'd also imagine that we're wanting a seat at the table (along with other clubs) when future sponsorships are negotiated, since we don't trust the current top brass to do their job properly.
It's more or less what Stewart Robertson was saying in his latest interview.
It’s irrelevant how much we can charge for shirt sponsorship when it’s against league rules to have a sponsor on that sleeve.It’s the start of a push by the club with regards to rights, specifically television.
I would imagine we’ll illustrate how much we can charge for shirt sponsorship independently in comparison to an SPFL collective deal.
Allied to the farcical dealings with SKY and domestic cup sponsorship, we’re again showing an executive unfit for Scottish football.
Mate have you ever had anything positive to say about Rangers?Based on private sponsorship on that sleeve space being against league rules.
We were happy to have the SPFL patch on our arm for free last year, why didn’t we challenge it then?
I’m not taking the leagues side, I just can’t see something like this being viable, it would have been done before if it was.
Lots.Mate have you ever had anything positive to say about Rangers?
It’s irrelevant how much we can charge for shirt sponsorship when it’s against league rules to have a sponsor on that sleeve.
I’m struggling to view this as anything other than picking a fight.
It’s irrelevant how much we can charge for shirt sponsorship when it’s against league rules to have a sponsor on that sleeve.
I’m struggling to view this as anything other than picking a fight.
Funny that, your name stands out as one who is constantly negative.Lots.
Not this particular move though.
Just a proper tinpot leagueEven taking away Parks of Hamilton or the very poor fee. Who at the SFA thought it was a good idea to go with a league name sponsorship of Cinch?
Cinch - Slang. a thing easy to do
I mean, how pub team do they want the league to look?
Glen's vodka was bad enough but this was just taking the piss.
Even taking away Parks of Hamilton or the very poor fee. Who at the SFA thought it was a good idea to go with a league name sponsorship of Cinch?
Cinch - Slang. a thing easy to do
I mean, how pub team do they want the league to look?
Glen's vodka was bad enough but this was just taking the piss.
Not sure - but my 'guess' is that Tomket Tires perhaps gives us about £200k-£300k a year for having their logo on our sleeve.How much do we think our current sleeve sponsorship pays us?
Does anyone know the figure
Funny that, your name stands out as one who is constantly negative.
just put me on ignore lads, saves you the hassle.Helander at it again i see.
Looks like we are not letting murduch McLennan, dhungcaster and liewell out of our sights after the farce last summer. They probably hoping it would all just go away so they could go back to status quo!Rangers take on SPFL over £8m title sponsorship deal with cinch
RANGERS are taking on the SPFL over their £8million title sponsorship deal with car sales company cinch. SunSport can reveal league chiefs are in a legal dispute with the Ibrox club over the £1.6m-…www.thescottishsun.co.uk
Quite noticeable that most of his posts are usually having ago at our club and fans in an overly negative way.Don't take this the wrong way, but you suck the energy out of this forum like a Dementor
HowNot sure I like the sound of this one tbh, sounds needlessly combative
£133,333k p.a. assuming it's split between all 12 clubs evenly. Hoaching deal, Doncaster gets paid about three times that amount.
Even taking away Parks of Hamilton or the very poor fee. Who at the SFA thought it was a good idea to go with a league name sponsorship of Cinch?
Cinch - Slang. a thing easy to do
I mean, how pub team do they want the league to look?
Glen's vodka was bad enough but this was just taking the piss.
It's not there a game being playedThe thing is though, the best case scenario is we don’t have to wear the patch, other clubs stop and then the contract is ripped up. We can’t sell that space afterwards as it’s against league rules.
Im not sure that’s worth risking all of the potential headaches that come with taking the league to court
The real Helander disapproves of your negativity.Not sure I like the sound of this one tbh, sounds needlessly combative
Not sure I like the sound of this one tbh, sounds needlessly combative
Agree. I don’t think this is just picking an argument over theirs one thing but a way to highlight how badly our game is being run and undersold.It’s the start of a push by the club with regards to rights, specifically television.
I would imagine we’ll illustrate how much we can charge for shirt sponsorship independently in comparison to an SPFL collective deal.
Allied to the farcical dealings with SKY and domestic cup sponsorship, we’re again showing an executive unfit for Scottish football.
Audi was there due to it being a Real Madrid sponsor. Some wine company associated with Arsenal was there when we played them.This might have something to do with Audi as we had the Audi logo in the background for media interviews at the Real Madrid game.
I reckon Rangers have done a deal with Audi and they don’t want to have to be associated with cinch as a result.
As much as Id like to see Rangers take any chance to level those clowns I am sure the brass are too smart to be getting involved in silly stuff thatll go nowhere. If its going down this road Id wager Rangers have already though long and hard about what the situation is and the risks of challenging it.Not sure I like the sound of this one tbh, sounds needlessly combative
So do the likes of Dundee FC get the same money as Rangers FC for a piece of their shirt?
Because the bellend that is Doncaster negotiated the deal?
Well it's no wonder Rangers aren't happy.
Get that lot to fk out our game before they drag us further into the abyss.
I would be delighted if the club had found a hole in the agreement that allows us to ignore this deal. It would simply highlight the poverty of business acumen in the SPFL executive.Looks like we are not letting murduch McLennan, dhungcaster and liewell out of our sights after the farce last summer. They probably hoping it would all just go away so they could go back to status quo!
Probably boils down to whether or not the SPFL have the right to sell advertising space on our jerseys, space we could sell ourselves for more.
I would imagine that this would be a simple fact to establish, and would be surprised if we challenged this without doing our homework.
I am sure that the smaller clubs would be delighted by the Cinch money as it is likely more that they could achieve individually, but the larger clubs, I.e. us and maybe them, could earn more individually.
Interesting to see how this works out.