Sports direct not going away!

had a quick drunk look at it and it looks like they arent getting the opportuity to match or better other offers
 
Cuellar said:
had a quick drunk look at it and it looks like they arent getting the opportuity to match or better other offers
Click to expand...
Exactly that. And If they match it we are stuck with these cunts based on the terms of an agreement entered into last June 2017.

In all honesty I fucking detest SD. I hope it fucking dies as a company.
 
Now and forever said:
The fat rat hhas been granted a temporary injunction against us selling our merchandise, strips etc.
Click to expand...

Looks that way. After a quick read, it seems that the expiring contract with SD includes a provision that SD (i) must be allowed to see the new competing bid and then (ii) must be given the chance to submit their own bid. And that didn't happen, so the judge has stopped the sale of new strips etc.
 
Last edited:
They claim when rangers received an offer from a retailer then SD were to be given a detailed breakdown of each element of the deal and were to have the option to match the entire deal or some elements of it at their discretion. Rangers have made them aware of the deal and given them the option but haven't provided a detailed breakdown of each element. They've filed an injunction for the blocking of the deal. Rangers wanted to complete the deal by the 30th June. With JD I believe.
 
LaRabbie said:
They claim when rangers received an offer from a retailer then SD were to be given a detailed breakdown of each element of the deal and were to have the option to match the entire deal or some elements of it at their discretion. Rangers have made them aware of the deal and given them the option but haven't provided a detailed breakdown of each element. They've filed an injunction for the blocking of the deal. Rangers wanted to complete the deal by the 30th June. With JD I believe.
Click to expand...
So this is just yet more pettiness from a company that redefines the term scum.
 
Kaiser said:
Exactly that. And If they match it we are stuck with these cunts based on the terms of an agreement entered into last June 2017.

In all honesty I fucking detest SD. I hope it fucking dies as a company.
Click to expand...

He's a walking fat company of a man.
 
SD had a clause in last year’s contract that they could match any offer for the retail stuff. We say we met that, they say we didn’t. They have been given an injunction to stop us signing a new retail deal with anyone else until Tuesday.

Doesn’t surprise me, but looks like DK was boxed into a corner last year.
 
LaRabbie said:
They claim when rangers received an offer from a retailer then SD were to be given a detailed breakdown of each element of the deal and were to have the option to match the entire deal or some elements of it at their discretion. Rangers have made them aware of the deal and given them the option but haven't provided a detailed breakdown of each element. They've filed an injunction for the blocking of the deal. Rangers wanted to complete the deal by the 30th June. With JD I believe.
Click to expand...

Injunction in place to stop new deal until hearing on Tuesday 10th July. Sports Direct refused the right to any damages.
 
LaRabbie said:
They claim when rangers received an offer from a retailer then SD were to be given a detailed breakdown of each element of the deal and were to have the option to match the entire deal or some elements of it at their discretion. Rangers have made them aware of the deal and given them the option but haven't provided a detailed breakdown of each element. They've filed an injunction for the blocking of the deal. Rangers wanted to complete the deal by the 30th June. With JD I believe.
Click to expand...

This.

Oh and all new strips may need to be bought from Hummel online.

Oh and Ashley is a twisted fat weasel.
 
Honestly just when you think we’ve finally gotten rid of cashley he pops his fat head up out of the water again.
 
Under the revised agreement signed last year is appears should Rangers be offered terms by another provider, Sport Direct have the right to match what is on offer by said new provider before Rangers proceed with the new provider. It appears Sport Direct want to know what is being offered and the chance to match the terms before Rangers proceed with a new provider.

If that is the case then, It's the same deal for Rangers whether it's from the new provider or Sports Direct. It appears it is also up for debate as to what level of matching is required.
 
I would also add even if SD did take option it wouldn't be via RRL and it be under Rangers terms of control. SD would only be retailing. This is one last bit of trouble making to see if it's worth his while matching what the new provider is offering. Will he really go in to it with Rangers calling the shots unlike before?
 
BrownBrogues said:
I would also add even if SD did take option it wouldn't be via RRL and it be under Rangers terms of control. SD would only be retailing. This is one last bit of trouble making to see if it's worth his while matching what the new provider is offering. Will he really go in to it with Rangers calling the shots unlike before?
Click to expand...
Gd point
 
BrownBrogues said:
Under the revised agreement signed last year is appears should Rangers be offered terms by another provider, Sport Direct have the right to match what is on offer by said new provider before Rangers proceed with the new provider. It appears Sport Direct want to know what is being offered and the chance to match the terms before Rangers proceed with a new provider.

If that is the case then, It's the same deal for Rangers whether it's from the new provider or Sports Direct. It appears it is also up for debate as to what level of matching is required.
Click to expand...


So Sports Direct can match the offer or even better the offer but wee can take the offer that suits us best?
 
So if they win this court case SportsDirect could pick and choose which separate parts of the retail detail they want to provide from:

(i) the right to operate and manage the Retail Operations;
(ii) the right to perform the Permitted Activities in relation to the Branded Products and/or the Additional Products; and/or
(iii) the right to perform the Permitted Activities in relation to the Official Kit and/or the Replica Kit."
​
They could just decide to match one part of it which would completely %^*& up the whole thing as JD or any other retailer would probably want the whole deal.
 
yardie said:
We wouldn't be obliged to accept any SD bid even if it was 'better' then any others. We can choose our commercial partners on our own criteria, which can include factors other than money.

Just tell them what they want to know, then tell them to f**k off as our criteria now includes integrity!
Click to expand...

We would be obliged to accept their bid if they matched it.
 
Summary for those not wanting to read it all.

When Rangers signed the new deal last year SD had first option to match what any new provider would offer as retail partner. Rangers were required to notify SD XYZ within 5 days of receiving an offer from a new provider it intended to go with. Rangers did but SD argue it was not compliant, Rangers argue it was. Rangers were about to commence the new agreement with the new supplier from 01/08/2018 but SD have now raised a court action to stop the new deal to have their argument heard that the notice Rangers provided was not compliant and therefore SD should be made privy to more information to consider matching the offer and taking up option. Case to be heard on the 10th of July.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top