ShedTA Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Is that not Eddard's old handle ? Oh is it? I had no idea Bewlay wasnt it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tartan_McCole Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 What does taking control of the badge mean? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
At U Peter Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 What does taking control of the badge mean? Meaning that he owns the rights to it being used. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 How did the trademarks get fully assigned three weeks after they got rid of the old board. I guess the rangers fans will be hoping this was done before they old board were removed and that it took some time to process, because if it was done by the new board... What this means is that RFC will have to pay Ashley to use their own Mike Ashley's badge. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 says also if Rangers get promoted they owe 500 grand as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 says also if Rangers get promoted they owe 500 grand as well. That part is old news, it's for the 5 loanees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 says also if Rangers get promoted they owe 500 grand as well. Maybe change the word on the badge to Readies, ka-ching! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 That part is old news, it's for the 5 loanees. pigs in a poke. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Rangers say they are investigating claims that Newcastle United owner Mike Ashley has taken control of the Scottish Championship club's badges. The IPO site confirms the transfer from Rangers Football Club Ltd to Sports Direct was fully assigned on 25 March. That was less than three weeks after former chief executive and Ashley ally Derek Llambias and finance director Barry Leach, a former Sports Direct executive, were removed at a general meeting called by King. Interim chairman Paul Murray announced two days later that the new board had held "no discussions with Mike Ashley or Sports Direct". http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/football/32244625 Remember the clowns on here saying how Ashley would be good for rangers? Think they were the same people slagging off the new board before they got in and accusing directors on the new board of questionable business conduct. Strangely silent when it comes to stuff like this though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShedTA Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Remember the clowns on here saying how Ashley would be good for rangers? Think they were the same people slagging off the new board before they got in and accusing directors on the new board of questionable business conduct. Strangely silent when it comes to stuff like this though... I think most of us are still at the wait and see stage Brucie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dipped flake Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Remember the clowns on here saying how Ashley would be good for rangers? Think they were the same people slagging off the new board before they got in and accusing directors on the new board of questionable business conduct. Strangely silent when it comes to stuff like this though... A billionaire businessman in charge, who has a track record at another club, or a convicted felon who was on the board of a club that went into admin - I really can't see how anyone would have a problem choosing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I think most of us are still at the wait and see stage Brucie.People on here were saying "why wouldn't you want Ashley in charge? He runs a football club well ". Since then it has emerged rangers have a virtual penalty for promotion in relation to the loan deals with Newcastle and sports direct have acquired ownership of ip in return for, well, prima facie, nothing. And those are just the outlandish deals his board appointments entered into. Clearly Ashley has exerted influence that is not in rangers best interests. People are quick to criticise king, for example (and rightly so), but the same people are oddly silent when it comes to Ashley's unacceptable business conduct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maq Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Since then it has emerged rangers have a virtual penalty for promotion in relation to the loan deals with Newcastle IF rangers manage to get promoted, the boy Vuckic could have played a large part in that - what's he scored for you? 5? Promotion would be worth more than £500k to your lot i'm sure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parklife Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 People on here were saying "why wouldn't you want Ashley in charge? He runs a football club well ". Since then it has emerged rangers have a virtual penalty for promotion in relation to the loan deals with Newcastle and sports direct have acquired ownership of ip in return for, well, prima facie, nothing. And those are just the outlandish deals his board appointments entered into. Clearly Ashley has exerted influence that is not in rangers best interests. People are quick to criticise king, for example (and rightly so), but the same people are oddly silent when it comes to Ashley's unacceptable business conduct. It's been made clear to Ashley that: 1. He wont be able to increase his shareholding in Rangers 2. The Rangers fans loathe him and want him gone In those circumstances, why would you expect Ashley to do anything other than fvk you over? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sbcmfc Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I'm not sure anyone claimed Ashley would be good for Rangers? Several, myself included speculated that he could be good for Rangers. It may prove we were wrong? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Dear oh dear... Has it been confirmed it was actually the old board and not the new? It has happened 3 weeks after they were removed. Assuming it was the old board there could be an innocent explanation for this transfer. But I am enjoying the rage so I'll not tell you now. As for Ashley v King. I would have had Ashley as owner every damn time. So relieved the fans hate him. No idea how he planned on getting around the two clubs ownership ban but. Could well be he is just raiding RFC for fun but I honestly doubt that. RFC is small potatoes for him, really small. King on the other hand I would have nothing to do with financially as an investor. Time will tell with King but as starts go it is either incompetent and / or dishonest already. This period reminds of when Whyte first took over. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce778 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I'm not sure anyone claimed Ashley would be good for Rangers? Several, myself included speculated that he could be good for Rangers. It may prove we were wrong? You're a reasonable poster, but there were several others advocating Ashley. It seems that corporate morals only relate to tax issues. If anything, this is a classic instance where an SFA member has been victim of questionable dealings (presumably by club directors). Quite amusing when you contrast the faux outrage from others as to kings history. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark frae Crieff Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Langtonian Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Ashley would have been good for rangers for comical value Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RenfrewBlue Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 (edited) This made me chuckle. Whoever thought this up is a comedy genius. Oh and a bit of a too. ? Edited April 10, 2015 by RenfrewBlue Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fringo Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobydoo Posted April 11, 2015 Share Posted April 11, 2015 People on here were saying "why wouldn't you want Ashley in charge? He runs a football club well ". Since then it has emerged rangers have a virtual penalty for promotion in relation to the loan deals with Newcastle and sports direct have acquired ownership of ip in return for, well, prima facie, nothing. And those are just the outlandish deals his board appointments entered into. Clearly Ashley has exerted influence that is not in rangers best interests. People are quick to criticise king, for example (and rightly so), but the same people are oddly silent when it comes to Ashley's unacceptable business conduct. Unacceptable to who? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 (edited) Ha. Anyone see this. Billionaire Mike Ashley's Sports Direct International has been challenged in Parliament about how the firm is run. Now his firm's handling of the collapse of one of its businesses, fashion chain USC, is also under scrutiny, being described at the Scottish Affairs Committee as "well dodgy". Well dodgyPerhaps even more controversially USC hasn't shut up shop. Almost immediately after it went into administration the fashion retailer was bought by another part of Mr Ashley's business empire, through a so-called pre-pack administration, and is trading again. But with less debt, according to MPs. (ooooohhh that is shocking! ) Conservative Simon Reevell told the Scottish affairs committee: "Sports Direct had a company that was losing money, they now have the same company where the debt liability that had been incurred has gone." (whaaaaaat?!) "At one level, to use a technical phrase, this all looks well dodgy," he added. The committee chairman, Labour's Ian Davidson, lamented how the process left the taxpayer "done over" in having to meet redundancy costs and unpaid taxes. (this sounds familiar) Dr Hellawell countered that by saying the company had paid more than £1.3bn in tax to date. Just the 1.3 bn then.... Fatter marginsTo be sure, Mr Ashley has built a very clever business model. As well as owning stores, Sports Direct owns rights to popular brands such as Slazenger, Dunlop and Lonsdale. Good margins on these products mean he can afford to sell big brand products from the likes of Nike and Adidas at a greater discount than competitors, luring in shoppers. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-32144206 Guess that last bit could explain the recent RFC trademark transfers. He sells your branded merchandise in his stores takes all the margin and does not owe you any royalty even. Hostile article but funny all the same. edit: RFC 1899 went under for all the reasons it did we do not need to rake over them again but IMHO RFC 2012 will go under because it has been contractually gutted like a fish. I think who ever 'owns' it will sooner or later have to collapse it to escape all the contracts that make it a perpetual financial basket case or pay a very heavy price to get out from under them. Edited April 13, 2015 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tartandon Posted April 13, 2015 Share Posted April 13, 2015 Mr Ashley has played a very shrewd game here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flure Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Chris McLaughlin @BBCchrismclaug 2m2 minutes ago Stewart Regan confirms discussions ongoing with Dave King re fit and proper. Admits tax convictions mean it will be a 'challenge' for him. Edited April 16, 2015 by Flure Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.5eeaf0fbe501ba3c868c32fd77caef1f.jpg)
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.