Rangers fighting ‘multi-million pound alleged merchandise breach damages claim’ with Mike Ashley’s Sports Direct

BlueMeanie

Well-Known Member


Rangers is fighting a multi-million pound damages claim over a "merchandise deal breach" with Mike Ashley's Sports Direct, it's reported.
Details of the claim have come to light in the latest court battle down south.

The Herald reports that lawyers acting for Mr Ashley, who is a former Rangers shareholder, have claimed that the Glasgow club feared a boycott from fans if Sports Direct had won merchandise rights.
In 2014, fans group Rangers Supporters Trust launched an alternative shirt for supporters - with profits ploughed back into shareholding in the club.
Both parties have now appeared at the Commercial Court in London.
They have been arguing over what should be disclosed by both sides in the damages claim.
It's reported that Sa'ad Hossain for SDI Retail - a company in the Sports Direct retail group - told Judge Persey Rangers wanted financial documents that would show the effect of any fan boycott.
He said: "Rangers say there are were some supporters who would not have bought kit in the relevant period from around July, 2018 in the event that SDIR acquired the offered rights because of antipathy to SDIR.
"This disclosure is contested as it is not to do with July, 2018, onwards, it is to do with the historical boycott that took place when the joint venture with [Rangers Retail] was in place, commencing around November, 2014.
"As we understand, Rangers' position is searches should be made of financial information of [Rangers Retail] going back to 2014 so that the impact of the boycott in 2014 can be determined.

"And then in turn [they will] make inferences of a boycott in different circumstances relevant to the damages claim.
"There are several reasons for thinking that this isn't going to be a very informative exercise.
"Firstly, the extent to which supporters boycotted kit in the past period may obviously be very different.
"It is common ground that from 2018 onwards that Mr King and Mr Murray would have complied with their obligations which would have required them not to support a boycott of the goods.

"Also Rangers was in a very different period during most of the boycott period.
"The boycott started in November, 2014, and Rangers only returned to the Scottish Premiership at the end of the 2015/16 season.
"In the period relevant to damages, Rangers is not only in the Scottish Premiership but competing in the Europa League.


"We say it this is a fringe or unimportant issue."
The Herald reports that Akhil Shah QC for Rangers said the issue would be ended if monthly management reports for the retail operation were provided.
And that they were not sent regularly by Sports Direct.
The "trial" at the Commercial Court is expected to take 12 days.
It's reported that both parties have been arguing over the costs to be incurred.
 

KGR98

Well-Known Member
Basically their is a cap on damages of £1 million Cashley can get from the club on the old elite contract and the club are also counter claiming for a similar amount
 

Valley Bluenose

Well-Known Member
Check out Sons of Struth FB page who have broken down the irrelevance and the noise
Thanks for that. For those who don't have it here's a copy and paste from SoS Facebook:

SPORTS DIRECT V Rangers

There’s a further court hearing today regarding SD claim that Rangers broke their agreement to let SD sell Rangers merchandise. I think it’s common knowledge that Rangers did put the agreement in the bin when we went with Hummel/Elite. But don’t believe the hype by those who’ve had their jelly and ice cream on hold for 8 years.

Many are stating that Rangers will owe Ashley millions in damages. Here’s a few reasons that explain why that can’t happen.

1) SD claimed for years that they owed Rangers very little in royalties due to inflated costs of running the contract. These figures would be used to minimise any potential claim they’d therefore have for “losses”.

2) the contract stipulated a max £1m that either side could claim if any claims arose during the contract (some commentators claim this clause had been challenged successfully in court and there’s no ceiling on a claim. It hasn’t, it still stands).

3) Rangers have counter claimed for other loses.

Don’t be fooled by the uneducated ramblings of those who dream of a massive damages victory for Sports Direct, some actually believe a huge victory would bury Rangers. Unfortunately their desire for the demise of our club prevents these people from applying common sense and reality to their hopes and dreams.

You know the type, they’ve been trying to convince everyone that admin 2 was around the corner on an almost monthly basis for years. Some of them even charge their readers for their daily dose of “sevcoism”. Their own personal income is derived from feeding a frenzy of jelly and ice creamers who’ve been praying for nearly 9 years that Rangers would die. To stop writing nonsense about Rangers now would see a demise in their incomes. They’ve plenty of willing customers who’ll buy whatever nonsense they are selling regardless of how many times that their “prophecies” are proven wrong.

Anyway, back to facts. There’s a court hearing today that’ll be no doubt very boring with almost zero effect on Rangers Football Club but it’ll be spun in to a negative by those who need to live off the cottage industry of sevcoism.
 
Last edited:

Bremner27

Active Member
Thanks for that. For those who don't have it here's a copy and paste from SoS Facebook:

SPORTS DIRECT V Rangers

There’s a further court hearing today regarding SD claim that Rangers broke their agreement to let SD sell Rangers merchandise. I think it’s common knowledge that Rangers did put the agreement in the bin when we went with Hummel/Elite. But don’t believe the hype by those who’ve had their jelly and ice cream on hold for 8 years.

Many are stating that Rangers will owe Ashley millions in damages. Here’s a few reasons that explain why that can’t happen.

1) SD claimed for years that they owed Rangers very little in royalties due to inflated costs of running the contract. These figures would be used to minimise any potential claim they’d therefore have for “losses”.

2) the contract stipulated a max £1m that either side could claim if any claims arose during the contract (some commentators claim this clause had been challenged successfully in court and there’s no ceiling on a claim. It hasn’t, it still stands).

3) Rangers have counter claimed for other loses.

Don’t be fooled by the uneducated ramblings of those who dream of a massive damages victory for Sports Direct, some actually believe a huge victory would bury Rangers. Unfortunately their desire for the demise of our club prevents these people from applying common sense and reality to their hopes and dreams.

You know the type, they’ve been trying to convince everyone that admin 2 was around the corner on an almost monthly basis for years. Some of them even charge their readers for their daily dose of “sevcoism”. Their own personal income is derived from feeding a frenzy of jelly and ice creamers who’ve been praying for nearly 9 years that Rangers would die. To stop writing nonsense about Rangers now would see a demise in their incomes. They’ve plenty of willing customers who’ll buy whatever nonsense they are selling regardless of how many times that their “prophecies” are proven wrong.

Anyway, back to facts. There’s a court hearing today that’ll be no doubt very boring with almost zero effect on Rangers Football Club but it’ll be spun in to a negative by those who need to live off the cottage industry of sevcoism.
Cheers for that VB. Makes a little more sense
 

Badger

Well-Known Member
Check out Sons of Struth FB page who have broken down the irrelevance and the noise
"
SPORTS DIRECT V Rangers
There’s a further court hearing today regarding SD claim that Rangers broke their agreement to let SD sell Rangers merchandise. I think it’s common knowledge that Rangers did put the agreement in the bin when we went with Hummel/Elite. But don’t believe the hype by those who’ve had their jelly and ice cream on hold for 8 years.
Many are stating that Rangers will owe Ashley millions in damages. Here’s a few reasons that explain why that can’t happen.
1) SD claimed for years that they owed Rangers very little in royalties due to inflated costs of running the contract. These figures would be used to minimise any potential claim they’d therefore have for “losses”.
2) the contract stipulated a max £1m that either side could claim if any claims arose during the contract (some commentators claim this clause had been challenged successfully in court and there’s no ceiling on a claim. It hasn’t, it still stands).
3) Rangers have counter claimed for other loses.
Don’t be fooled by the uneducated ramblings of those who dream of a massive damages victory for Sports Direct, some actually believe a huge victory would bury Rangers. Unfortunately their desire for the demise of our club prevents these people from applying common sense and reality to their hopes and dreams.
You know the type, they’ve been trying to convince everyone that admin 2 was around the corner on an almost monthly basis for years. Some of them even charge their readers for their daily dose of “sevcoism”. Their own personal income is derived from feeding a frenzy of jelly and ice creamers who’ve been praying for nearly 9 years that Rangers would die. To stop writing nonsense about Rangers now would see a demise in their incomes. They’ve plenty of willing customers who’ll buy whatever nonsense they are selling regardless of how many times that their “prophecies” are proven wrong.
Anyway, back to facts. There’s a court hearing today that’ll be no doubt very boring with almost zero effect on Rangers Football Club but it’ll be spun in to a negative by those who need to live off the cottage industry of sevcoism."
 

albop

Well-Known Member
you have to ask why the fuik castore are still dealing with this fat slimmy b4stard all the while hes still taking us to court
 

Speccy hotdog

Well-Known Member
It seems their argument is we wouldn't have really boycotted SD as we were doing better on the pitch?
Seema that way to me. Also saying had a new deal been put in place that the club wouldn't have encouraged a fan boycott, making a difference to sales.

Regardless, we all know it would have been the fans decision, and we would have continued the boycott to get rid of Ashley
 

Wilkinsvolley

Well-Known Member
Official Ticketer
Ah there had to be a 'negative' story coming along, didn't there?:rolleyes:

Bring it on ya Fat C*nt!

Pretty sure that this is the case we have already 'lost' and its now just about how much damages we are going to have to pay the Fatman.
That’s how I read it. Rangers are arguing it would be boycotted so they need to use boycott numbers to determine damages.
 

Speminalium8

Well-Known Member
Thanks for that. For those who don't have it here's a copy and paste from SoS Facebook:

SPORTS DIRECT V Rangers

There’s a further court hearing today regarding SD claim that Rangers broke their agreement to let SD sell Rangers merchandise. I think it’s common knowledge that Rangers did put the agreement in the bin when we went with Hummel/Elite. But don’t believe the hype by those who’ve had their jelly and ice cream on hold for 8 years.

Many are stating that Rangers will owe Ashley millions in damages. Here’s a few reasons that explain why that can’t happen.

1) SD claimed for years that they owed Rangers very little in royalties due to inflated costs of running the contract. These figures would be used to minimise any potential claim they’d therefore have for “losses”.

2) the contract stipulated a max £1m that either side could claim if any claims arose during the contract (some commentators claim this clause had been challenged successfully in court and there’s no ceiling on a claim. It hasn’t, it still stands).

3) Rangers have counter claimed for other loses.

Don’t be fooled by the uneducated ramblings of those who dream of a massive damages victory for Sports Direct, some actually believe a huge victory would bury Rangers. Unfortunately their desire for the demise of our club prevents these people from applying common sense and reality to their hopes and dreams.

You know the type, they’ve been trying to convince everyone that admin 2 was around the corner on an almost monthly basis for years. Some of them even charge their readers for their daily dose of “sevcoism”. Their own personal income is derived from feeding a frenzy of jelly and ice creamers who’ve been praying for nearly 9 years that Rangers would die. To stop writing nonsense about Rangers now would see a demise in their incomes. They’ve plenty of willing customers who’ll buy whatever nonsense they are selling regardless of how many times that their “prophecies” are proven wrong.

Anyway, back to facts. There’s a court hearing today that’ll be no doubt very boring with almost zero effect on Rangers Football Club but it’ll be spun in to a negative by those who need to live off the cottage industry of sevcoism.
THAT, is a very lucid and brilliant piece of writing.
 
Top