beermonkey Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 So.......The good guys still winning then ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adundeemonkey Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The Sports Direct situation with merchandise is interesting, in that it shows the route of the current Orc mentality. The reason the deal is so in favor of SD is because The Rangers are a new company who had no ability to sell merchandise at a level SD could. If anything, the retail deal is favorable to The Rangers because left to their own efforts, they would have struggled to sell many shirts at anything close to a decent margin. The Sports Direct statement makes this clear. Put it this way. Imagine you made candles that many people want but you can only buy so much wax and make so many candles, so much so that it would be impossible to meet demand and buy enough wax in one go to take advantage of economies of scale. You can then accept that you can only sell 1000 candles in your wee shop. But John Lewis come along and say, 'hey we'll sell your candles, buy your materials and then give you a cut of the profits. While your cut of the profits goes from 100% to 25%, you are now able to double the profit margin which means it is a real hit of 50%, and then John Lewis can sell far more than 1000 candles. So all you need is John Lewis to sell over 2000 candle for you to be better off. Add into the bargain that you don't even need to make the candles yourself and it is a no brainer. Now the only way the SD deal is bad for The Rangers is if you think of the club/company as being the machine it was in the past at their peak. If that was the case then they would be right to feel agrieved. But they are not. They are a new company, with no track record of doing this. This is what deep down annoys the Orcs, the whole SD situation is a reminder that they died and are not the same club!! -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Yup You must be seething. Who is going to stump up the legal costs for today? Will it come from Sevco or is King going to finally put his hand in his pocket? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The current SD contract is dated January 15, this was confirmed in court today, so his own employees were definitely complicit, now what were you saying earlier about facts? Is that not likely to be the agreement with MASH that altered the %'s for the duration of the loan rather than the initial rangers retail agreement? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The Sports Direct situation with merchandise is interesting, in that it shows the route of the current Orc mentality. The reason the deal is so in favor of SD is because The Rangers are a new company who had no ability to sell merchandise at a level SD could. If anything, the retail deal is favorable to The Rangers because left to their own efforts, they would have struggled to sell many shirts at anything close to a decent margin. The Sports Direct statement makes this clear. Put it this way. Imagine you made candles that many people want but you can only buy so much wax and make so many candles, so much so that it would be impossible to meet demand and buy enough wax in one go to take advantage of economies of scale. You can then accept that you can only sell 1000 candles in your wee shop. But John Lewis come along and say, 'hey we'll sell your candles, buy your materials and then give you a cut of the profits. While your cut of the profits goes from 100% to 25%, you are now able to double the profit margin which means it is a real hit of 50%, and then John Lewis can sell far more than 1000 candles. So all you need is John Lewis to sell over 2000 candle for you to be better off. Add into the bargain that you don't even need to make the candles yourself and it is a no brainer. Now the only way the SD deal is bad for The Rangers is if you think of the club/company as being the machine it was in the past at their peak. If that was the case then they would be right to feel agrieved. But they are not. They are a new company, with no track record of doing this. This is what deep down annoys the Orcs, the whole SD situation is a reminder that they died and are not the same club!! (Chapeau) Top post, Sir! Picturing DK as Ronnie Corbett trying to purchase four candles... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~ Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Next you will be pretending fat mike was not found guilty of influencing the club under dual ownership rules. Was he found guilty in a court of law similar to Davey King? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 His employees agreed the contract ^^^^ No harm in stating the facts now. Did I miss Somers being an employee of Ashley's? -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Any news of the new manager's Warchest? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Podlie Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 His employees agreed the contract ^^^^ No harm in stating the facts now. Be a hard one to prove, did they sign the contract as employees of Mike Ashley? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The Sports Direct situation with merchandise is interesting, in that it shows the route of the current Orc mentality. The reason the deal is so in favor of SD is because The Rangers are a new company who had no ability to sell merchandise at a level SD could. If anything, the retail deal is favorable to The Rangers because left to their own efforts, they would have struggled to sell many shirts at anything close to a decent margin. The Sports Direct statement makes this clear. Put it this way. Imagine you made candles that many people want but you can only buy so much wax and make so many candles, so much so that it would be impossible to meet demand and buy enough wax in one go to take advantage of economies of scale. You can then accept that you can only sell 1000 candles in your wee shop. But John Lewis come along and say, 'hey we'll sell your candles, buy your materials and then give you a cut of the profits. While your cut of the profits goes from 100% to 25%, you are now able to double the profit margin which means it is a real hit of 50%, and then John Lewis can sell far more than 1000 candles. So all you need is John Lewis to sell over 2000 candle for you to be better off. Add into the bargain that you don't even need to make the candles yourself and it is a no brainer. Now the only way the SD deal is bad for The Rangers is if you think of the club/company as being the machine it was in the past at their peak. If that was the case then they would be right to feel agrieved. But they are not. They are a new company, with no track record of doing this. This is what deep down annoys the Orcs, the whole SD situation is a reminder that they died and are not the same club!! That is absolutely fucking beautiful in both it's content and execution. You, sir, are a wordsmith. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Tedi squirming 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 what? Somers agreed to the deal in January. You keep going on about Ashley's employees agreeing to it. I didn't know Somers worked for Ashley. That's all. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I do not think Fat Mike was found guilty of influencing events at Rangers for nothing, the club were also found guilty and the rules are specific about directly or using representatives. Derek was CEO at the time, he would therefore struggle to say he was not aware. Aren't you confuddling football rules with Real World Corporate regulations? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Ooops there seems to be a post missing ^^ Tedi running to the mods Hha! Hha! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
accietilleyedye Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 His employees agreed the contract ^^^^ No harm in stating the facts now. erm they were paid by The Rangers not SD ( and definitely never by Mike Ashley )and wasn't the contract renegotiated so that The Rangers could get a loan from SD that was to keep them solvent 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djchapsticks Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I find it astonishing that Rangers, their shareholders and fans genuinely believe they can take on Mike Ashley and win. MA is one of the most notoriously ruthless businessmen in this country, I genuinely don't see where Rangers think they will either catch him out or appeal to his completely non-existent 'good side'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottxs Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 You must be seething. Who is going to stump up the legal costs for today? Will it come from Sevco or is King going to finally put his hand in his pocket? is thre RFFF fund not used for these kind of court cases. ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crùbag Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 I find it astonishing that Rangers, their shareholders and fans genuinely believe they can take on Mike Ashley and win. MA is one of the most notoriously ruthless businessmen in this country, I genuinely don't see where Rangers think they will either catch him out or appeal to his completely non-existent 'good side'. The Rangers are but a pube on Ashley's toilet rim... Dave King's reign at Ibrokes going swimmingly it seems. And they have to pay him another £20k... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 The CEO of Rangers would not agree to a new retail deal? Why not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted June 11, 2015 Share Posted June 11, 2015 Picture a situation where DD would allow celtic to only make £3.50 per shirt sold, in fact picture a situation where DD would sign celtic up to a deal where they would make not one penny from retail in the first 6 months of this financial year. Un-picturable really.. A situation where the only way Celtic could continue to trade would be to obtain a £5m loan and no financial institution interested in lending it? Sound familiar? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.