tazzabear
Well-Known Member
Agreed but our legal team don’t exactly have a history that’d give you confidence.Surely wait for the outcome of the case before filling your nappy ?
Agreed but our legal team don’t exactly have a history that’d give you confidence.Surely wait for the outcome of the case before filling your nappy ?
This has all been building since the day 55 was clinched job done pat on the backs sit back ... and that's where it's went wrong.I’m actually glad Bennet came out with that.
It sums up the absolute chasm that exists between our board and reality.
Nearly as embarrassing as Parks gushing praise of our football department in the annual accounts, written about 3 weeks before he sacked the manager.
This and the last board. Take your pickThis board?
Which means our summer rebuild potentially will be done heavily on the cheap.Basically the Europa league run money and transfers out have been used to pay these cnuts off.
Annoyed as fcuk about this latest %^*& up.
Yes, this board unless we’re forgetting the Oz friendly fiasco which we’re still to find out how much that’s going to cost us.This board?
Park was a board member so equally as culpable.So not the current Chairman in charge - but Dave King.
Basically the Europa league run money and transfers out have been used to pay these cnuts off.
Annoyed as fcuk about this latest %^*& up.
As opposed to chaps who manage to get maliciously arrested and then grab 70odd million from the taxpayer ...Agreed but our legal team don’t exactly have a history that’d give you confidence.
This is getting beyond a joke. I sincerely hope we go after every single idiot that helped lay out these deals.
Exactly, I thought this was all over months ago, am I being naive here? Cause I don’t see how they could try sue us..As I understood it the contract we had with Elite/Hummel was dissolved by the judge during our court battle with Sports Direct.
How can we be accused of not performing a contract that was dissolved by a judge?
Then they need to be chased.Like our current board members? The Hummel/elite thing started and “ended” under their watch.
There’s no “legacy” issues related to that. This one is 100% on them.
I really don’t like the guy.Starting to think, and correct me if I'm wrong here, that James Blair guy is a bit of an idiot.
That’s a bonus!That means the ring fenced money for Tillman and Sands is away then.
Which means our summer rebuild potentially will be done heavily on the cheap.
I don’t think that’s entirely true The Hummel/ Elite deal had to be framed in a way to try to get us out of the Sports Direct dealLike our current board members? The Hummel/elite thing started and “ended” under their watch.
There’s no “legacy” issues related to that. This one is 100% on them.
Sydney is in the post.Who exactly gives legal advice to the Rangers board The three stooges?
Guaranteed the minute we hand out yet another pile of cash to this mob something else will come along and we'll be back here again inside two years.
This is exactly why this board needs to stand down they are utterly out of their depth trying to run a football club.
F*ck knows mate.Exactly, I thought this was all over months ago, am I being naive here? Cause I don’t see how they could try sue us..
It's 100% true.Batter in cuntos.
The Sun?
Ffs. Must be true.
Because we were at fault in entering into it in the first place (probably).As I understood it the contract we had with Elite/Hummel was dissolved by the judge during our court battle with Sports Direct.
How can we be accused of not performing a contract that was dissolved by a judge?
Just paid over 8 million plus to Ashley according to our accountsThey had to find a way out of the constraints of Ashley. This is maybe just what it costs. Hopefully this is the last of the legacy issues.
It's 100% true.
This was always in thre pipeline - today was just the day when the shit hit the fan.
We were under contract to SD and some geniuses thought we could simply walk away from those contractural obligations without any form of recourse from SD - we couldn't and it cost us millions in damages / compensation.
At the same time, we entered into a second contract with Elite / Hummel and were unable to fulfill those obligations (due to still being under contract to SD). This in turn, led to us being sued by Elite / Hummel for breach of contract and we now face having to pay them tens of millions in compensation / damages.
It's quite stunning, that someone somewhere, believed we could renege on TWO merchandising contracts and could simply walk away from both without serious ramifications, recompense or negative impact.
Sterling work Rangers - gross mismanagement on a gargantuan scale.
Anyone else think we made a big mistake when we changed our whole retail operation in 2006 when we signed it over to JJB Sports?
So we didn't have the capacity to contract with Elite. It was on those grounds a judge ordered us to stop performing the Elite contract. This should mean a legally binding contract never existed between Elite and Rangers. I f*cking hope so anyway.It's 100% true.
This was always in thre pipeline - today was just the day when the shit hit the fan.
We were under contract to SD and some geniuses thought we could simply walk away from those contractural obligations without any form of recourse from SD - we couldn't and it cost us millions in damages / compensation.
At the same time, we entered into a second contract with Elite / Hummel and were unable to fulfill those obligations (due to still being under contract to SD). This in turn, led to us being sued by Elite / Hummel for breach of contract and we now face having to pay them tens of millions in compensation / damages.
It's quite stunning, that someone somewhere, believed we could renege on TWO merchandising contracts and could simply walk away from both without serious ramifications, recompense or negative impact.
Sterling work Rangers - gross mismanagement on a gargantuan scale.
So it is the profit on 10m of potential sales which might be 1 or 2 million, am i reading that correctly?The Sun…pinch of salt reading!
The sub-headline says “sued for £9.5m” whilst the quoted text at the end of the article states that they are suing us for lost profit on earnings. There’s a very fūcking big difference between the two and it’s yet again lazy reporting from that toilet paper.
I thought they owed us money, so hopefully it’ll get settled ‘neutrally!’
And despite what some think, Dave King is the only astute businessman I’d trust to wangle us out of this mess in court, as I certainly don’t trust any of the current clowns on the Board.
We need change.It's 100% true.
This was always in thre pipeline - today was just the day when the shit hit the fan.
We were under contract to SD and some geniuses thought we could simply walk away from those contractural obligations without any form of recourse from SD - we couldn't and it cost us millions in damages / compensation.
At the same time, we entered into a second contract with Elite / Hummel and were unable to fulfill those obligations (due to still being under contract to SD). This in turn, led to us being sued by Elite / Hummel for breach of contract and we now face having to pay them tens of millions in compensation / damages.
It's quite stunning, that someone somewhere, believed we could renege on TWO merchandising contracts and could simply walk away from both without serious ramifications, recompense or negative impact.
Sterling work Rangers - gross mismanagement on a gargantuan scale.
If judge ordered us to tear contract up surely the ruling today has made a mistake ?A judge ordered the contract torn up because we had no right entering into it. Now they want it honoured money wise.
That should have read 'many millions'.Tens of millions?
Had a few excitement pills have we.
Would still likely lead to a damages claim for losses incurred due to entering into the contract.So we didn't have the capacity to contract with Elite. It was on those grounds a judge ordered us to stop performing the Elite contract. This should mean a legally binding contract never existed between Elite and Rangers. I f*cking hope so anyway.
No. We shouldn't have entered into it in the first place, they have a case.If judge ordered us to tear contract up surely the ruling today has made a mistake ?
No. We shouldn't have entered into in the first place, they have a case.
I can definitely see something being awarded given that the judge has ordered us to release the Castore numbers. Hopefully not too bad.Correct, all stems from that matching clause that someone chose to ignore. Not sure if we'll realistically be liable for full 9.5m but will be a fair chunk of that.