Rangers held negotiations to rename ground ‘the cinch Ibrox stadium’ before dispute over SPFL sponsors (The Sun)

[Ryzogrumpybear]

It could be reported in a such manner to make it look like cinch walked away from sponsoring us, and we've taken the huff & as a result refused to comply with the league sponsorship

Hate the idea of renaming the stadium unless it's for £100,000,000 bit more palatable as it could really help the club.
it would always be Ibrox to us no matter what they wanted to call it, but to me, it looks like the second-hand car company lowballed or backed out and went for the cheaper option the league so %^*& them.

 

[The Clunge Taster]

Even if that’s true, what relevance does it have to this case?

The relevance is we have no conflict of interest with Cinch and therefore have no reason to not display their brand, if Parks motor group were willing to name the stadium 'cinch Ibrox' with no issues then, why is there an issue now?

I sincerely hope we've not just stood on our own fucking dicks AGAIN!

 

[iaatpies]

This isnt really about the stadium naming rights. Fans would still call it Ibrox. World football would still know it as Ibrox. The club would make some money for a little bit or rebranding that fans would take little notice of.

Bigger picture - if Rangers were in talks with Cinch over stadium naming rights then it really does undermine the club's dispute with the SPFL over sleeve patches and sponsor logos.

 

[Jelle1880]

I don't believe this for a second.

 

[JD1872]

I’m calling bullshit

 

[CoopBlue]

Rylan unfurling the flag next season.

 

[Careca]

Surely not another legal saga when it sounded an open and shut case. Seems to have all the makings of previous wastes of time and money.

What deal do we have with Parks outwith the team bus?

 

[Govan_Guy]

The negotiations probably went something like this:

"How would you fancy having Cinch as a sponsor for Ibrox"

"No thanks.." Hangs up

I doubt it, wouldn't like but if we are offered a crazy sum we have to consider it.

 

[Wilkinsvolley]

Reading between the lines they are trying to establish that the contract between Rangers and Parks does not have a conflict and we are manufacturing a grievance to oust the SPFL of vermin. They are probably right truth be told. Fingers crossed rangers have covered their tracks here and they find in our favour.

We told them we had a conflict and they plowed on regardless. That alone is poor governance. But if it plays out we have overplayed our hand and been economical with the truth it will be forgotten and another absolute pile on kicking for the club will ensue.

As an aside the SFA clearly aren’t shy of cash when their brief is RD.

Remember when they couldn’t afford to defend in court against celtc so had to just give in. The blatant corruption needs ended and if it takes some dirty tricks from us then I’m ok with that.

 

[Govan_Guy]

IF that is true then it doesn't paint the board in a good light.

Why do you say that? Just sounds like the normal discussions that a sensible competent Commercial Director would have. Once you know the price you can ask Douglas Parks if he is willing to waive his exclusivity. SFA/SPFL trying to paint us in a bad light, don't fall for it.

 

[Forfar_Bear]

RS NO TO NAME CHANGE

Get a company to pay to put a third tier on the Sandy Jardine and fill in the corners bringing Ibrox upto a 65k capacity - they can call it whatever they want.

 

[dh1963]

I reckon it’ll be more like post #34.

They know what they are trying to do.

Fuuck them.

agree if this was factual it looks like we didnt get a deal done then got pissed they did one with SFA and then we maybe even made a deal up out of nowhere to block it

but

ITS THE FUCKING SUN

I despise the Sun as much as anyone, but they aren't the story here. A top QC spoke in a court and they've reported what he said.

Sure, The Sun will spin it to look as bad for us as possible, but to be honest this one doesn't need much spin.

We give the court a massively censored document on our agreement with Parks that allows the QC to cast doubt on it being genuine. We are accused by that same QC of being perfectly happy to take the cinch money if it suits us, suggesting no conflict really exists with Parks.

I really hope our lawyer can counter those, as both look potentially damaging to our case.

 

[EndOfDays]

Depends on what you class 'held talks' as, could be as little as an enquiry from cinch and the SFA have used this to muddy the waters between the parties.

 

[Coatbridge Chancellor]

This isnt really about the stadium naming rights. Fans would still call it Ibrox. World football would still know it as Ibrox. The club would make some money for a little bit or rebranding that fans would take little notice of.

Bigger picture - if Rangers were in talks with Cinch over stadium naming rights then it really does undermine the club's dispute with the SPFL over sleeve patches and sponsor logos.

Unless we spoke to cinch, decided against it THEN entered an agreement with Park's, before the SPFL deal was signed.

 

[Bryanmc]

I’d assume theyd be questioning why this deal isn’t a conflict but the spfl one is

Had we accepted the terms and pushed ahead with it then they’d maybe have a point so if anything it’s strengthings our position

 

[Spudgun]

Surelt we've not phucked this up?

With our track record, I'd be surprised f we haven't.

 

[The Lone Sniper]

Bit OT but would people genuinely be upset about us selling naming rights for Ibrox?

It honestly wouldn’t bother me as long as it was financially benefiting the club.

Aye, cause 'Cinch' in bright purple all over Ibrox is just fine.

 

[remembertheepoch]

None. (I think)

We are arguing the rules of the SPFL in relation to contracts which undermine any that are in place with a member club. It's the sponsorship deal on "trail", nothing else.

agree. as for the redacted information, it may personal data or data that was labelled outwith as "without predjudice", ie information that cannot be entered into evidence, so with all due respect to his lordship he can go and take a velocity kick up the jacksy, there may be very good (and legally sound) reason that the content has be redacted.

 

[Spam javelin]

The fact we decided against it re-enforces our argument. Means we couldn't agree terms for our sole benefit and therefore leaves the argument that we are doing this to spite the spfl in tatters.
Lovely.

 

[senefelder]

I suppose it's preferable to the Sports Direct option which we pulled out of at the 11th hour around 2014.

 

[Valley Bluenose]

Why do you say that? Just sounds like the normal discussions that a sensible competent Commercial Director would have. Once you know the price you can ask Douglas Parks if he is willing to waive his exclusivity. SFA/SPFL trying to paint us in a bad light, don't fall for it.

Indeed. Who's to say the Parks deal didn't include for stepping aside if a better - huge - deal was on offer to the Club? The renaming deal may well have fallen into that category (as much as many would be against it) but the paltry sums on offer to the Club via the SPFL did not.

This is very much a case of the SFA and their legal team, aided and abetted by the media of course, putting some 'spin' on things.

 

[CoopBlue]

Who knows what the truth is here, but i'll be honest, i'm not completely dismissing the information provided. I guess we'll find out in due course.

 

[Louch]

Everyone would still call it Ibrox. Probably one of the least impactful sponsor deals going unless it’s a stadium named from when it’s built( emirates/reebok)

 

[iaatpies]

Had we accepted the terms and pushed ahead with it then they’d maybe have a point so if anything it’s strengthings our position

It doesnt strengthen our position.

The SPFL announced Cinch as league sponsor on June 10th. If we were still discussing possible stadium naming rights with them as late as June 7th then it in no way strengthens our case. The exact opposite actually.

 

[ScottXC]

Quite the contradiction from us saying that we don't want to see the cinch name or branding within the stadium while previously have been in negotiations to literally have the name cinch in the same stadium. Not sure if people are being a little daft in ignoring that.

If having cinch advertising is a breach of the Parks of Hamilton deal we have, then surely negotiating to have them rename the stadium is a breach as well?

Board, Bisgrove in particular, don't come out of this smelling too good but worth waiting until the final verdict as always.

It will be a welcome day when we have a board who aren't going through the court for anything. A side show and a bit of a circus at the best of times.

 

[Coisty09]

It means that we were doing our own deal with cinch according to the claim by the SPFL lawyers. That info probably came from cinch,
It looks like we were after an exclusive deal to get a big chunk of money.
Sounds like someone at cinch has been very underhand.
The numpties at the SPFL found out (possibly through the London-based agents) and then desperately offered the cheap deal that they did. (We were probably getting the whole £8m and SPFL Peter would not have been happy)
The interesting part is that apparently we were still negotiating directly until 7June this year.
Irritatingly, it looks like the deal we signed with Park’s is dated May 21. We have to hope that the Park’s one was a renewal otherwise we could end up looking very silly.
It is still probably true that we wrote to donkey caster quite early to say that we could not participate in the cinch deal as we knew that had been put together to screw our deal.

 

[Yorkhill_True_Blues]

Get a company to pay to put a third tier on the Sandy Jardine and fill in the corners bringing Ibrox upto a 65k capacity - they can call it whatever they want.

Even if did that......would still have 35K at a game like tonight

Ibrox Stadium Loyal.

 

[Govan_Guy]

I despise the Sun as much as anyone, but they aren't the story here. A top QC spoke in a court and they've reported what he said.

A top QC representing the SFA/SPFL - by definition it is his job to spin the facts to make us look as bad as possible!

30 seconds thought and you realise this means nothing.

 

[The Canny Man]

Surely not another legal saga when it sounded an open and shut case. Seems to have all the makings of previous wastes of time and money.

What deal do we have with Parks outwith the team bus?

Jimmy Bell’s kit van

 

[Bryanmc]

It doesnt strengthen our position.

The SPFL announced Cinch as league sponsor on June 10th. If we were still discussing possible stadium naming rights with them as late as June 7th then it in no way strengthens our case. The exact opposite actually.

Why as after discussion we clearly never concluded a deal and if that reason is that it conflicts with currrent deals then it strengthens our position

 

[Forfar_Bear]

Even if did that......would still have 35K at a game like tonight

Ibrox Stadium Loyal.

Maybe we wouldn't need to charge obscene amount for tickets...but I'm sure we still would

 

[stonewall Jackson]

It’s a court of law and an attempt to prove a potential business relationship existed between Rangers and Cinch. The bottom line is Doncaster and his gang of incompetents are in breach of their own Fuckin rules and constitution.

 

[iaatpies]

Why as after discussion we clearly never concluded a deal and if that reason is that it conflicts with currrent deals then it strengthens our position

Because if we've allegedly made it clear to the SPFL that the Cinch deal was infringing on our other commercial interests prior to it being signed and announced then why would we still be negotiating with Cinch at the same time?

If true - and if should be in capital letters - it undermines any argument Rangers may have about the SPFL deal infringing on our commercial interests and makes our grievance with the SPFL and refusal to display Cinch SPFL branding to be completely manufactured.

 

[Govan_Guy]

The SPFL announced Cinch as league sponsor on June 10th. If we were still discussing possible stadium naming rights with them as late as June 7th then it in no way strengthens our case. The exact opposite actually.

So you know the exact details of both our deal with Parks and the proposed deal with Cinch?

 

[Bluedell]

The relevance is we have no conflict of interest with Cinch and therefore have no reason to not display their brand, if Parks motor group were willing to name the stadium 'cinch Ibrox' with no issues then, why is there an issue now?

I sincerely hope we've not just stood on our own fucking dicks AGAIN!

Perhaps there still was a conflict of interest but Parks' were willing to waive the conflict clause due to the sums involved?

 

[SS Bear]

Regardless of it all. If just looking at what was said in court they can ram the renaming of the stadium. Fucking shite that wasnt acceptable when it was SD and shouldn't be now.

Correct
I've had a season ticket since 1984 and been going since the 70s but I'd never set foot in Ibrox if it was ever renamed.
Rangers fans have died in our stadium and it's a memorial to those poor souls.

 

[Govan_Guy]

If true - and if should be in capital letters - it undermines any argument Rangers may have about the SPFL deal infringing on our commercial interests and makes our grievance with the SPFL and refusal to display Cinch SPFL branding to be completely manufactured.

Nonsense.

If cinch offered us £25 million a year to rebrand Ibrox we might agree with Parks to waive their exclusivity, but not for the pittance form the league sponsorship deal.

 

[Yorkhill_True_Blues]

Maybe we wouldn't need to charge obscene amount for tickets...but I'm sure we still would

Do you not enjoy paying the prices? I wish they were more. Can pay enough to the club these days.

Cinch cunts won't help us that use the buses

 

[Blue Skies At Night]

I doubt it, wouldn't like but if we are offered a crazy sum we have to consider it.

True, just like anything really, but do you think Cinch are going to be offering crazy sums? Besides, I wasn't being wholly serious.

 

[JD1872]

Interesting to see how the club respond to this. The reality is we are free to talk to anyone about stadium naming rights, if we went ahead with it then obviously it would undermine our case but we didn’t.

We would only accept it if it was a good deal for the club, very different from accepting a few hundred pounds a game to have cinch on our shirts when other sponsors are paying significantly for the same privilege

 

[Govan_Guy]

if we went ahead with it then obviously it would undermine our case but we didn’t

IF we went ahead with it WITHOUT doing anything about Parks exclusivity THEN it would undermine our cause.

 

[dynamo_rosco]

I'll wait until I see what comes of this but if we've fu.cked another one of these up I'll be furious.

 

[Commentator]

Hate lawyers.

 

[Ian1872]

That story has absolutely no relevance to our dispute with the SPFL.

I once considered robbing a bank, it doesn't mean I was ever going to follow through with it.

I would love to know the details though, imagine if we had received an offer from cinch for naming rights to the ground which were more than Doncaster has managed to pull in for the entire set up. That would be delightful.

 

[TerrySilverLoyal]

The most poverty renaming I’d have ever heard

they better not even think about going down this route

 

[Forfar_Bear]

Do you not enjoy paying the prices? I wish they were more. Can pay enough to the club these days.

Cinch cunts won't help us that use the buses

webuyanybus.com!

 

[Loyal72]

Cinch Ibrox Stadium

%^*& off.

Them and their shite deal can bolt.

 

[BlueHaze]

I think the club would consider the right offer,Cinch aren’t a big enough name to afford naming a corner flag after them.

 

[CoopBlue]

Our record on legal cases, disputes etc. doesn't exactly fill me with confidence.

 

[iaatpies]

So you know the exact details of both our deal with Parks and the proposed deal with Cinch?

We can't claim that the Cinch league sponsorship deal undermines our other commercial deals if we're then looking to sign a deal with the same company. The argument that Parks may have agreed a mutual termination of any agreements they had with the club if the Cinch naming rights deal offered more money doesnt really hold any sway. We were willing to sell our stadium naming rights to Cinch. We were negotiating that at the same time as the SPFL were doing their league deal. Our argument against displaying the league/cinch branding really would be massively weakened if we were essentially in discussions about the prospect of playing our home games at The Cinch Ibrox Stadium.