Sports direct not going away!

[LJ50]

Retail is an exclusive contract. You can't buy off Hummel. If you could we'd all be buying merch off them now. Hummel will manufacture our merch and supply it to the retail partner so it can be sold to supporters.

You’re right on many things, but I don’t think you’re right on this.

It doesn’t need to be, and probably won’t be, entirely exclusive. If retail deals were always exclusive then the like of Greaves Sports would never have football tops.

The retail deal will likely give the retailer the right to be the official outlet when we buy “direct” from the club, it will give it first rights on the strips (so before anyone else) and it will have the complete range of merchandise. But it doesn’t necessarily need to have exclusivity. Clearly exclusivity would attract a higher premium, so it’s a matter of the club balancing the extra revenue it might earn through other outlets and the quantum of the premium.

 

[LJ50]

the judge will see the jd offer broken down,
he will see what info we gave sd,
then he will rule,
if we indeed gave sd the correct info, then we are ok,
if there are differences though, the judge will rule in sd's favour and they can match the deal and continue as retailer.
hummel aren't involved really
we make same money whether its sd or jd.

The clubs argument at the first hearing was that the JD Sports offer cannot be broken down because it was an offer for “the whole” of the deal, not a bid for each of the three component parts.

SDI are asking for a breakdown of the total value against the parts, yet also made the statement that the separation of those three parts would be a “practical absurdity”.

There is no breakdown to see. It’s like asking for a breakdown of the bricks on a house from the land they sit on. You’ve bid for the whole, if you’ve asked to break down the bit into the component parts it becomes a nonsense because splitting it all apart isn’t possible.

 

[MearnsUnionist]

I know I do but do others?. The Turkey fakes will be everywhere if SD win out or if the Hummel direct buy is ok that will be our saving grace

Our club get fu*k all out of a Turkish fake strip.

Worst case scenario just now is SD win the case and they match JD's offer and the club benefits from every strip sold.

Far from ideal, but we must put the love of our club ahead of our hatred for the fat cu*t.

Best case scenario is judge rules in our favour and we are rid of him.

That is a definite possibility.

Either way bears, we should buy the strip in shed loads.

 

[Rangersnumberfour]

Our club get fu*k all out of a Turkey fake strip.

Worst case scenario just now is SD win the case and they match JD's offer and the club benefits from every strip sold.

Far from ideal, but we must put the love of our club ahead of our hatred for the fat cu*t.

Best case scenario is judge rules in our favour and we are rid of him.

That is a definite possibility.

Either way bears, we should buy the strip in shed loads.

You are naivie if you think what that fat bastard has done to the club won't effect sales if we are forced to go with him

 

[MearnsUnionist]

You are naivie if you think what that fat bastard has done to the club won't effect sales if we are forced to go with him

Nothing naive about me mate.

I know some folk won't buy from him.

I despise him, but if we buy a strip from him our club make as much from the strip as they would from JD.

Our club needs the revenue.

I'll bite the bullet for the benefit of my club.

Unfortunately there is still people out there thinking we'll still be on the same pishy deal with SD if they win the case.

That's my main concern.

 

[Barca Bear]

The clubs argument at the first hearing was that the JD Sports offer cannot be broken down because it was an offer for “the whole” of the deal, not a bid for each of the three component parts.

SDI are asking for a breakdown of the total value against the parts, yet also made the statement that the separation of those three parts would be a “practical absurdity”.

There is no breakdown to see. It’s like asking for a breakdown of the bricks on a house from the land they sit on. You’ve bid for the whole, if you’ve asked to break down the bit into the component parts it becomes a nonsense because splitting it all apart isn’t possible.

thanks LJ.

 

[Graeme's dad]

What astonishes me, is that the club has not gone after Charles Green (and Co) for breach of his fiduciary duties. They must have had a Directors and Officers insurance policy in place, so would not be attempting to recover losses against those individuals (who will no doubt have squirrelled away their ill begotten gains) but rather against the insurance company. To sign the SD contract in the first instance (no doubt agreed as a quid pro quo for buying a small equity stake), was always going to be financial suicide for Rangers. King and the board are now left with attempting to salvage the pieces from the shipwreck that had been inherited, and yet there are still fans pining for MA to take over the club and 'sink his billions' into reviving our fortunes.

 

[Laudrup1]

Nothing naive about me mate.

I know some folk won't buy from him.

I despise him, but if we buy a strip from him our club make as much from the strip as they would from JD.

Our club needs the revenue.

I'll bite the bullet for the benefit of my club.

Unfortunately there is still people out there thinking we'll still be on the same pishy deal with SD if they win the case.

That's my main concern.

I'll never buy another thing from his shop again.

If our club can only sell strips through that medium, I'm afraid I'll just not be buying them at all and I'm well aware of the implications of the deal and it matching anything JD would / did offer.

There comes a point where you take a moral stance on things. It's not cutting my nose off to spite my face either. It's simply a realisation that you can't keep funding cvnts like Ashley as it has a bigger implication than "just" Rangers.

 

[BrownBrogues]

What astonishes me, is that the club has not gone after Charles Green (and Co) for breach of his fiduciary duties. They must have had a Directors and Officers insurance policy in place, so would not be attempting to recover losses against those individuals (who will no doubt have squirrelled away their ill begotten gains) but rather against the insurance company. To sign the SD contract in the first instance (no doubt agreed as a quid pro quo for buying a small equity stake), was always going to be financial suicide for Rangers. King and the board are now left with attempting to salvage the pieces from the shipwreck that had been inherited, and yet there are still fans pining for MA to take over the club and 'sink his billions' into reviving our fortunes.

" What astonishes me, is that the club has not gone after Charles Green (and Co) for breach of his fiduciary duties".

We did, and Ahmed, we were spending more than anything we would ever see back on legal Costs. Ahmed went hiding making it even more difficult. Even if we had been successful, best we could have hoped for was both being banned from holding a Directorship. Which is of no benefit to Rangers now.

 

[Deleted member 3807]

You’re right on many things, but I don’t think you’re right on this.

It doesn’t need to be, and probably won’t be, entirely exclusive. If retail deals were always exclusive then the like of Greaves Sports would never have football tops.

The retail deal will likely give the retailer the right to be the official outlet when we buy “direct” from the club, it will give it first rights on the strips (so before anyone else) and it will have the complete range of merchandise. But it doesn’t necessarily need to have exclusivity. Clearly exclusivity would attract a higher premium, so it’s a matter of the club balancing the extra revenue it might earn through other outlets and the quantum of the premium.

You make a lot of sense.
However, even if the retail deal isn't exclusive, merch won't be available anywhere until the retail partner is decided. If worse comes to the worse and it's SD could other non official outlets cope with demand, and what share of profit will Rangers get from sales. If non official sales are going well, and SD are boycotted, SD will likely get litigious. Have an official retailer nobody wants to buy from, especially if it's SD, has pitfalls and traps. I'm just hoping the judge rules in our favour and we can sever ties with the most damaging, controversial business partner Rangers ever had.

 

[BrownBrogues]

The clubs argument at the first hearing was that the JD Sports offer cannot be broken down because it was an offer for “the whole” of the deal, not a bid for each of the three component parts.

SDI are asking for a breakdown of the total value against the parts, yet also made the statement that the separation of those three parts would be a “practical absurdity”.

There is no breakdown to see. It’s like asking for a breakdown of the bricks on a house from the land they sit on. You’ve bid for the whole, if you’ve asked to break down the bit into the component parts it becomes a nonsense because splitting it all apart isn’t possible.

Yup Our QC argued, because there are so many sub parts to it, it be impossible to know what parts would be required to be broken down to meet each point, so SD could simply keep saying, not broken down enough, not broken down enough. So we could never satisfy such a request, as SD could always argue it was not enough.

 

[Graeme's dad]

" What astonishes me, is that the club has not gone after Charles Green (and Co) for breach of his fiduciary duties".

We did, and Ahmed, we were spending more than anything we would ever see back on legal Costs. Ahmed went hiding making it even more difficult. Even if we had been successful, best we could have hoped for was both being banned from holding a Directorship. Which is of no benefit to Rangers now.

Thanks for that remindeer, however, I feel that we have gone after the wrong target. There was never any real possibility of recovering from Green/Ahmed (has he ever resurfaced from Pakistan?) but if there was a Directors and Officers insurance policy covering the actions of those directors, it would not be hard to prove the financial hardships that those decisions have created for the club? Obviously, it is possible that there was no cover in place, but generally, for listed companies, it would be a pre-requisite.

 

[BrownBrogues]

Thanks for that remindeer, however, I feel that we have gone after the wrong target. There was never any real possibility of recovering from Green/Ahmed (has he ever resurfaced from Pakistan?) but if there was a Directors and Officers insurance policy covering the actions of those directors, it would not be hard to prove the financial hardships that those decisions have created for the club? Obviously, it is possible that there was no cover in place, but generally, for listed companies, it would be a pre-requisite.

The insurance Companies for Rangers would have insured Rangers Directors as Employees, the Claimant would be Rangers, therefore not a Third Party and not a Claimant, and you cannot sui yourself.

 

[Graeme's dad]

The insurance Companies for Rangers would have insured Rangers Directors as Employees, the Claimant would be Rangers, therefore not a Third Party and not a Claimant, and you cannot sui yourself.

Not sure if that is right? Under a D&O policy any shareholder/stakeholder would be able to sue those board directors for the decisions that they took, if it caused financial harm (which it clearly has). Not arguing with anyone, and would imagine that Kingco would have looked at all avenues for compensation, but is just burns my arse that we are still beholden to decisions taken by Green and cronies, which were clearly delinquent.

 

[omegaman]

I'll never buy another thing from his shop again.

If our club can only sell strips through that medium, I'm afraid I'll just not be buying them at all and I'm well aware of the implications of the deal and it matching anything JD would / did offer.

There comes a point where you take a moral stance on things. It's not cutting my nose off to spite my face either. It's simply a realisation that you can't keep funding cvnts like Ashley as it has a bigger implication than "just" Rangers.

I get the moral stance on this, but the bottom line is that not buying a strip will deprive the club of 50% of your hard earned, and 50% has to be better than nothing at all.

 

[Rangersnumberfour]

Nothing naive about me mate.

I know some folk won't buy from him.

I despise him, but if we buy a strip from him our club make as much from the strip as they would from JD.

Our club needs the revenue.

I'll bite the bullet for the benefit of my club.

Unfortunately there is still people out there thinking we'll still be on the same pishy deal with SD if they win the case.

That's my main concern.

Or people could think we paid him £3 million to %^*& off yet he is still here getting money from us

 

[Greebo]

Or people could think we paid him £3 million to %^*& off yet he is still here getting money from us

I don't think this "paid him £3m to %^*& off" is fair.

Did the club ever say that. What was said as I remember it was that the old deal was scrapped and that a new deal had been put in place until the end of the season. A new deal which gave the club a far higher percentage of the income.

Scrapping the old deal where Rangers got 9p in the £1 and had a 7 year rolling term was absolutely essential. Replacing it with something better for the rest of the season was also essential, to bring much needed money in.

The club never said what the new deal, once the existing term ended, was going to be. People just assumed it would not under any circumsytances involve sports direct. I said at the time that was just an assumption and no-one knew what was going to happen next. To the usual reasonable debate on here.

The board did what they had to do at the time. They are now trying to deal with the potential consequences. It is all very much still fire fighting unfortunately.

 

[BrownBrogues]

Not sure if that is right? Under a D&O policy any shareholder/stakeholder would be able to sue those board directors for the decisions that they took, if it caused financial harm (which it clearly has). Not arguing with anyone, and would imagine that Kingco would have looked at all avenues for compensation, but is just burns my arse that we are still beholden to decisions taken by Green and cronies, which were clearly delinquent.

Yeah, but you are forgetting, King, Park etc had no shares at the time of the misbehaving's, so that would have to be Shareholders at the time brining such and action for Compensation. I agree with the second part, sickening that we are still living with the consequences of their actions.

 

[jf1960]

I'll never buy another thing from his shop again.

If our club can only sell strips through that medium, I'm afraid I'll just not be buying them at all and I'm well aware of the implications of the deal and it matching anything JD would / did offer.

There comes a point where you take a moral stance on things. It's not cutting my nose off to spite my face either. It's simply a realisation that you can't keep funding cvnts like Ashley as it has a bigger implication than "just" Rangers.

I get where your coming from mate I really do I've never been in SD since he tried to f#ck us over and i thought me or any of my family will ever be again buy anything from his stores. But and it's a very big but if he is the only and I mean only place I can get a strip/s from and Rangers say they are making the same cash if it was JD then I would get them to help my club. I hate that fat b#stard but I don't hate him as much as I love my team. It would only be until the deal is over then we are rid of the cvnt for good. Also I would gladly pay extra for PandP to Hummel for buying online if it meant I didn't need to go near him but I'm sorry if he is the only option I've got then I would really need to consider it only if Rangers gave their blessing. Anyway what a lovely day for a walk Happy 12th July to one and all.

 

[MearnsUnionist]

Or people could think we paid him £3 million to %^*& off yet he is still here getting money from us

As we both know, the £3 mill got us out of the ridiculous 7 year meagre pennies in the pound deal.

Unfortunately I'm not convinced all our fans realise that mate.

 

[Coza]

I'll never buy another thing from his shop again.

If our club can only sell strips through that medium, I'm afraid I'll just not be buying them at all and I'm well aware of the implications of the deal and it matching anything JD would / did offer.

There comes a point where you take a moral stance on things. It's not cutting my nose off to spite my face either. It's simply a realisation that you can't keep funding cvnts like Ashley as it has a bigger implication than "just" Rangers.

I was slagged on this forum for admitting I pay £10-15 more online for a pair of boots SD sold cheaper than other places like subside sports.

Or for saying I walked from my office in George street to Lothian road football nation instead of go near SD and get a football for my Thursday game of 7s.

When THIS place slags off someone for taking such an open anti Ashley stance that costs the individual money you know most of the rank and file support aren’t militant enough to ever win this war with Ashley if King doesn’t do it for us.

 

[nemessis]

I won't buy fuckall that gives that greasy fingered @unt anything if it means I don't buy the new shirts thats ok with me, I'd gladly wear a Thai or Turkish rip off as I won't give a brass razoo to him.
I've bought all the Fernando stuff red and black, tops and scarves,blue ones, white ones you name it I've bought it to give money to the club and the true organisations that support the club, but I despise that mhanky prick he's in bed with the people who tried to kill us off thats for sure, he won't get any of my money, EVER.

 

[Calio]

Our club get fu*k all out of a Turkey fake strip.

Worst case scenario just now is SD win the case and they match JD's offer and the club benefits from every strip sold.

Far from ideal, but we must put the love of our club ahead of our hatred for the fat cu*t.

Best case scenario is judge rules in our favour and we are rid of him.

That is a definite possibility.

Either way bears, we should buy the strip in shed loads.

And what if he just selects the one component part of the retail deal that is most profitable?
I'd say that's the worst case scenario as it leaves us scrambling about when really we should have had the merchandise on sale already.
I personally will never buy from SD, not in this lifetime & as mentioned by another poster, I'd rather donate the strip money directly to the club and do without again.
We need to break the rolling aspect immediately or it'll do us untold damage in the long term.

 

[MearnsUnionist]

I was slagged on this forum for admitting I pay £10-15 more online for a pair of boots SD sold cheaper than other places like subside sports.

Or for saying I walked from my office in George street to Lothian road football nation instead of go near SD and get a football for my Thursday game of 7s.

When THIS place slags off someone for taking such an open anti Ashley stance that costs the individual money you know most of the rank and file support aren’t militant enough to ever win this war with Ashley if King doesn’t do it for us.

That's not true mate.

I'd rather run my athletic races in bare feet than buy anything from SD.

However, if it's the only way our club can get their fair share of strip revenue I'll bite the bullet.

Not because of Ashley, but because of Rangers.

 

[Coza]

That's not true mate.

I'd rather run my athletic races in bare feet than buy anything from SD.

However, if it's the only way our club can get their fair share of strip revenue I'll bite the bullet.

Not because of Ashley, but because of Rangers.

Sorry should have added that if they are given the deal on matched terms to JD I would also bite the bullet to get money into the club.

What I mean is when there was a post about using other outlets on here I was 50% laughed at for causing myself to openly pay substantially more for the same item just to avoid paying Ashley. And 50% given a thumbs up. That thread alone told me we aren’t militant enough as a fan base to beat Ashley.

 

[Cumbernauld gers]

Not really anything left to discuss until after the judgement.

 

[MearnsUnionist]

And what if he just selects the one component part of the retail deal that is most profitable?
I'd say that's the worst case scenario as it leaves us scrambling about when really we should have had the merchandise on sale already.
I personally will never buy from SD, not in this lifetime & as mentioned by another poster, I'd rather donate the strip money directly to the club and do without again.
We need to break the rolling aspect immediately or it'll do us untold damage in the long term.

If that scenario does arrive, then I'll be guided by what our club advises.

If they ask us to buy, then I will.

If they don't, then I won't.

Let's hope and pray the judgement goes in our favour.

The fact that the judge is taking time to analyse the contract in detail has given me some hope.

 

[jdm1873]

Can rangers still sell the strip direct from the club online or does this judgement mean we can't do that either.

 

[ald]

Ref the comments above re suing for breach of fiduciary duties, I would just note that it is an incredibly difficult thing to successfully sue for. The courts have a long history of not second guessing the actions of directors.

Ref D&O cover, that would I think cover (1) the defence costs of the directors who are sued and (2) any pay outs to genuine third parties (not, in this case, Rangers).

Whilst it sticks in the craw a bit, I can absolutely see why the decision was taken not to continue with a breach of fiduciary duties claim.

 

[MearnsUnionist]

Sorry should have added that if they are given the deal on matched terms to JD I would also bite the bullet to get money into the club.

What I mean is when there was a post about using other outlets on here I was 50% laughed at for causing myself to openly pay substantially more for the same item just to avoid paying Ashley. And 50% given a thumbs up. That thread alone told me we aren’t militant enough as a fan base to beat Ashley.

I'm with you there mate.

 

[Dado's Bandage]

Can rangers still sell the strip direct from the club online or does this judgement mean we can't do that either.

We’ve not done that for years. Whoever is the retail partner is responsible for that. When we went to JJB the notion of buying direct vanished.

 

[TheMilster]

I was slagged on this forum for admitting I pay £10-15 more online for a pair of boots SD sold cheaper than other places like subside sports.

Or for saying I walked from my office in George street to Lothian road football nation instead of go near SD and get a football for my Thursday game of 7s.

When THIS place slags off someone for taking such an open anti Ashley stance that costs the individual money you know most of the rank and file support aren’t militant enough to ever win this war with Ashley if King doesn’t do it for us.

I’m with you mate, feck Ashley and all who sail in the fat rat.

 

[Brant Hurley]

I'm not sure you can buy direct from hummel mate they don't have any other kits on their site could be wrong tho

Mart22 confirms you are correct, Wessy33. Sadly.

 

[BrownBrogues]

Can rangers still sell the strip direct from the club online or does this judgement mean we can't do that either.

Neither, as that is Part 1 of 3 of the rights up for debate.

 

[Bluenose1979]

I get the moral stance on this, but the bottom line is that not buying a strip will deprive the club of 50% of your hard earned, and 50% has to be better than nothing at all.

I think it's a pretty tricky dilemma to be honest.

The approach that 50% is better than nothing may in essence be true, but it's also the means by which leeches like MA thrive and survive. They have us captive as long as we are prepared to swallow the shit and pay up on that principle.

Much like the ST boycott a few years ago, it's hard to bring yourself as a fan to do, but ultimately the only true power any supporter has over those who profiteer from the club is to withhold our cash.

With as much respect as I have for protests, petitions, etc, they achieve very little in tangible result when those you are up against literally couldn't give a fck about the public perception of them, as long as they make a buck.

The only time real change happens is when they can no longer drain the well.

For me, I'd be loathe to purchase anything that meant SD/MA getting a penny of my hard-earned. Ultimately I'd prefer to find another means of getting revenue into the club outwith retail items. If it's £100-200 for a season (considering me buying a home top and a couple of kits for my kids) then there has to be other ways of investing that into the club's coffers without him getting his share?

 

[Mark Walters]

I'll never buy another thing from his shop again.

If our club can only sell strips through that medium, I'm afraid I'll just not be buying them at all and I'm well aware of the implications of the deal and it matching anything JD would / did offer.

There comes a point where you take a moral stance on things. It's not cutting my nose off to spite my face either. It's simply a realisation that you can't keep funding cvnts like Ashley as it has a bigger implication than "just" Rangers.

I'm in the same boat but I'll make sure I get the money into the club via other means, I simply refuse to line that fat, parasitical cunts pockets. Not happening!

 

[Laudrup1]

I'm in the same boat but I'll make sure I get the money into the club via other means, I simply refuse to line that fat, parasitical cunts pockets. Not happening!

That's it exactly. I'll put £50 in to RYD, RTV, buy programmes I'd stopped buying years back, Rangers Lotto / Rising Stars or even buy tickets that I give away but will I fcuk give that man another penny.

 

[joseph]

The current Sdi 1 year deal if I’m correct was renegotiated for the £3m payment to ensure 50% of sales through fattys shop go to rangers and 70% of sales through megastore go to rangers and the 7 year rolling contract was terminated.

Surely the deal struck with JD is on more favourable terms than the current Sdi deal - until the details of the matched contract are fully known the % of money rangers will actually receive from sales under the new contract is only guesswork, given this people are automatically linking the current deal with fatty to the new deal with JD on the exact same terms.

 

[cooperno.7]

Once the final decision is made, Dave King needs to give guidance to the support as to how we purchase the merchandise; who from, or whether we boycott SD, if they win the case.

It's the only solution I see from this.

 

[Gibbonbear]

Without going into all the legalities it would seem that the least favourable outcome for most Rangers fans would be a decision favouring SD whether this be on an exclusive basis or sharing with JD . However what little I can glean from all of this is that even if SD were to be successful the strips would still have to be sold on the same terms as the agreement reached with JD sports therefore Rangers would still receive the same amount from each sale regardless of who sells it .
I can understand peoples feelings against SD and people saying that they would rather not buy a strip than give any money to SD but by doing so this would cut off a source of revenue for Rangers which begs the question would these same people boycott all of the clubs in Scotland who put the boot into Rangers or would they continue to go to their grounds and give them their money ,money which will go to the host club and Rangers would not receive a penny

 

[omegaman]

I think it's a pretty tricky dilemma to be honest.

The approach that 50% is better than nothing may in essence be true, but it's also the means by which leeches like MA thrive and survive. They have us captive as long as we are prepared to swallow the shit and pay up on that principle.

Much like the ST boycott a few years ago, it's hard to bring yourself as a fan to do, but ultimately the only true power any supporter has over those who profiteer from the club is to withhold our cash.

With as much respect as I have for protests, petitions, etc, they achieve very little in tangible result when those you are up against literally couldn't give a fck about the public perception of them, as long as they make a buck.

The only time real change happens is when they can no longer drain the well.

For me, I'd be loathe to purchase anything that meant SD/MA getting a penny of my hard-earned. Ultimately I'd prefer to find another means of getting revenue into the club outwith retail items. If it's £100-200 for a season (considering me buying a home top and a couple of kits for my kids) then there has to be other ways of investing that into the club's coffers without him getting his share?

Individually that’s a commendable stance, but the majority won’t be as proactive.
They just want their strips and their mugs and their scarves all of which will still generate considerable revenue for the club.

If it was still the previous onerous split, it’s much easier to abstain, but when we’re talking about depriving the club of what is still likely to be millions, even if that means Ashley’s wallet is fattened by a similar amount, that’s not such an easy decision to make, IMO.

 

[Boydscores]

That's it exactly. I'll put £50 in to RYD, RTV, buy programmes I'd stopped buying years back, Rangers Lotto / Rising Stars or even buy tickets that I give away but will I fcuk give that man another penny.

This will make so so much sense.

 

[Bearsuk]

So I've read most of the pages, was it not yesterday for a ruling?
Do we know it yet?

 

[Est1872]

So I've read most of the pages, was it not yesterday for a ruling?
Do we know it yet?

Postponed until the end of the month whilst judge considers evidence

 

[Bluenose1979]

Individually that’s a commendable stance, but the majority won’t be as proactive.
They just want their strips and their mugs and their scarves all of which will still generate considerable revenue for the club.

If it was still the previous onerous split, it’s much easier to abstain, but when we’re talking about depriving the club of what is still likely to be millions, even if that means Ashley’s wallet is fattened by a similar amount, that’s not such an easy decision to make, IMO.

I'd agree. That's very much my point. It's not an easy decision to make and it will come down to individual choice, which I have no problem with.

Some will happily (or begrudgingly) buy the kit from SD, some will refuse. Those who refuse have other means of getting the club that money (and probably a better % of it) if they so choose.

Ultimately, Rangers appear to have attempted to put a point forward that staying with SD should result in damages to the club. I would hazard a guess their point is that fans would likely boycott and revenues would be impacted. It seems they were dismissed on this point at the original injunction hearing, but I guess it's a path they've at least explored.

It's a fine line and one that could swing either way.

 

[JD1872]

It sounds like it will come down whether SD decide in the end to match the bid, regardless of whether the court decides they are allowed to see a more detailed breakdown of the offer that is going to be the key thing.

Are they just trying to be awkward by dragging this through court or will they go a stage further and actually match the bid when they know fine well a lot of the fans will buy anything from them?

The difference in sales if they are involved will be enormous, I doubt I could bring myself to buy a strip knowing they will get anything

 

[Gaz030191]

That's it exactly. I'll put £50 in to RYD, RTV, buy programmes I'd stopped buying years back, Rangers Lotto / Rising Stars or even buy tickets that I give away but will I fcuk give that man another penny.

If Ashley gets his way with this case, then this would be an excellent position to take to show him up. He deserves nothing from us as long as the club doesn't lose out.

My question would be is how long would this go on for though? I'm genuinely not sure how long we'd be stuck with Ashley should he win this.

 

[Arminius]

Our club get fu*k all out of a Turkish fake strip.

Worst case scenario just now is SD win the case and they match JD's offer and the club benefits from every strip sold.

Far from ideal, but we must put the love of our club ahead of our hatred for the fat cu*t.

Best case scenario is judge rules in our favour and we are rid of him.

That is a definite possibility.

Either way bears, we should buy the strip in shed loads.

As the "are you wearing your Turkish fake to the game tonight" thread is showing, this issue needs resolved quickly.

That is why the delay until the end of the month was hugely disappointing

 

[Ali Baba]

Will strips be available directly from Hummel?

 

[Valley Bluenose]

Will strips be available directly from Hummel?

Hummel don't sell strips direct.

I'm not having a go at you personally mate but the same questions are coming around time after time, on every page. If folk took the time to read even a couple of pages back they would, in all likelihood, find the answer to their question.