Cinch deal

Surely this is a sackable offence for anyone who was part of this deal? I mean they have cost the SPFL x amount in legal fee's for their error. For a really small deal, which they are trying to say is much bigger by saying £27m but forgetting to say over 5 seasons Also forgetting to mention how much this has cost in legal expenses and time wasted by SPFL and SFA employee's.

This happens in any other business the person responsible is let go.
 
linthousebear1981 said:
Surely this is a sackable offence for anyone who was part of this deal? I mean they have cost the SPFL x amount in legal fee's for their error. For a really small deal, which they are trying to say is much bigger by saying £27m but forgetting to say over 5 seasons Also forgetting to mention how much this has cost in legal expenses and time wasted by SPFL and SFA employee's.

This happens in any other business the person responsible is let go.
Click to expand...
It's not £27m - that figure is the total prize money for one season including all other sponsorship deals and TV money.

The cinch deal is £8m over 5 years - £1.6m per year. If you deduct the agent fee it's only £1.5m per year allocated between 42 clubs - an absolute pittance. Trying to portray it as anything else is ludicrous. For the team at the bottom, who get 0.18%, it is less than £3k for the season - great deal.
 
paddingtonbear said:
without turning the thread into business model debate incredible to see the valuation cazoo was at when they when to the equity markets - something like $6bn and now valued at c$700m....ridiculous. the founder has just came out a few weeks ago and said likely would never be profitable.
Click to expand...
Almost a 'Dotcom' bubble type initial valuation.
I think the 700m will fall massively again this year and they will be going for a restructuring of their finances before the summer is out. They will then default on loans and banks or large investors will force them into admin.
Lets see how dung-caster spins that....if it happens.
 
1288Bear said:
It's not £27m - that figure is the total prize money for one season including all other sponsorship deals and TV money.

The cinch deal is £8m over 5 years - £1.6m per year. If you deduct the agent fee it's only £1.5m per year allocated between 42 clubs - an absolute pittance. Trying to portray it as anything else is ludicrous. For the team at the bottom, who get 0.18%, it is less than £3k for the season - great deal.
Click to expand...

Is it prize money or total income for this season past for the SPFL?
 
Last edited:
Riccles said:
Is it prize money or total income for this season past for the SPFL?
Click to expand...
The wording in the article is that they will "deliver fees to Clubs of more than £27.5 million for Season 2021/22.”.

That, if its accurate, means £27.5m prize money to be distributed between the clubs for last season.

Given that the SPFL costs are normally £5m or thereabouts that would mean a total income from TV, sponsorship and commercial deal of circa £32.5m
 
Be illuminating to watch the Press continue the narrative of “Petulant and nasty Rangers” rather than laying bare the incompetence (or worse) of the SPFL executive, and the SFA officials who failed to properly arbitrate.

Either the SPFL Executive didn’t know their own rules when making this deal or they sought to give a “get it up you” to Rangers and the Park group.
 
stillAlwaysblue said:
Can we not just have a deal now with 'We buy Any Car . com' for millions over five years.

Is it necessary for any club to get approval from Donky before taking on a sponsor.
Click to expand...
We can't do that for two reasons:-

1) We already have the Park deal in place which prevents other car sales companies from being advertised, that was the whole point of our argument!

2) Now that the Cinch deal is in place we can't sign any NEW agreements that would prevent us from fulfilling the SPFL's deal with Cinch.
 
I believe this £27.5m they are going on about could have been a lot less if our countries biggest club didn’t do so well in Europe. I seem to recall that the country’s govern body gets monetary rewards dependent on how well member clubs do in Europe.
 
If it wasn’t for Park forcing them to include him in this sham of an arbitration the cunts would have forced us to have to abide with this shite sponsorship. They gifted their team a title, changed fixture list and substitution rules for their team and will continue to interfere in our football for this bastardised club. Winning the league isn’t just an on field matter we need to beat them off field also.
 
cinch have done well out of this, lots of free publicity, as well as underpaying for it... The SPFL need to up their game...
 
I know a couple of people have mentioned it, but I genuinely cannot shake the feeling that they won't let us win the league while this deal runs.

Imagine the embarrassment to them? Not only would we have a trophy parade without any Cinch branding at all, we'd be hoovering up the prize money too.
 
SBC72 said:
Cinch and webuyanycar are owned by the same people.
Click to expand...
Well well. I am supposed to be a financial expert and I had no idea they were the same.
Just as well I retired 20 years ago and no longer have a stock exchange license.
Owning both does make sense as I always wondered why Cinch appeared to have enough cash to sponsor both football and cricket.
Good info SBC72.
 
Badger said:
They did ask and were told of the conflict in advance of signing the deal as they were required to do in by the SFA's rules.
Click to expand...
Hmm. Not sure what your point is with that comment regarding my original post.

The very fact they still went ahead after being told by the club of the conflict just shows how inept they are and only really proves, yet again, that they are not fit for purpose. And based on what I heard on H&H this morning a spokesperson for the club would appear to agree with me.
 
Bluenose88 said:
Hmm. Not sure what your point is with that comment regarding my original post.

The very fact they still went ahead after being told by the club of the conflict just shows how inept they are and only really proves, yet again, that they are not fit for purpose. And based on what I heard on H&H this morning a spokesperson for the club would appear to agree with me.
Click to expand...
Me either mate lol. I must have meant to reply to another post.
 
Bluenose88 said:
Hmm. Not sure what your point is with that comment regarding my original post.

The very fact they still went ahead after being told by the club of the conflict just shows how inept they are and only really proves, yet again, that they are not fit for purpose. And based on what I heard on H&H this morning a spokesperson for the club would appear to agree with me.
Click to expand...
There is nothing in the rules that prevents the SPFL going ahead with the cinch sponsorship deal despite being aware of the Rangers issue. The rules allow them to do so but also allow member clubs who have a pre existing commercial contract not to participate if doing so would put them in breach of that existing contract.

Cinch would, or should, have been aware of that clause in the SPFL rules and, as such, it should not have been an issue. Where the SPFL appear to have fallen down is in not making cinch aware of the fact that the biggest club in the league had such a pre-existing contract. This non disclosure is undoubtedly what has allowed cinch to renegotiate the deal.

So yes - totally inept, unprofessional management which again, as you say, further demonstrates that they are not fit for purpose.
 
Now and forever said:
Do we recieve any money from that deal if we are not participating in it is now the big question.
Click to expand...
But we are involved and big time. Anything that bigs up the SPL works for Cinch. Our EL performances for one. Also, the teams we play will advertise Cinch. Our involvement attracts bigger crowds and more TV. Now away backboards will be OK and so on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top