Jump to content

Follow Following to Title 56. The Rangers Season 2021/22


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, DMCs said:

Who?

This is one of these moments where I’m truly hoping it’s sarcasm yet I’m still a little unsure 😐 

Edited by Jinky67
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

RANGERS are taking on the SPFL over their £8million title sponsorship deal with car sales company cinch.

SunSport can reveal league chiefs are in a legal dispute with the Ibrox club over the £1.6m-a-year contract.

As part of the five-year agreement, clubs must prominently display the company’s logo at games.

That includes the Cinch branding on the shirt sleeves of jerseys and on interview backdrops.

However, Rangers faced Livingston at Ibrox without Cinch appearing on their shirts or around the stadium.

There was also no player named the ‘cinch Man of the Match’, as agreed by every other club in the country.

It’s believed Gers and the SPFL have been in talks over the issue for weeks regarding “the fulfilment of rights obligations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

 

RANGERS are taking on the SPFL over their £8million title sponsorship deal with car sales company cinch.

SunSport can reveal league chiefs are in a legal dispute with the Ibrox club over the £1.6m-a-year contract.

As part of the five-year agreement, clubs must prominently display the company’s logo at games.

That includes the Cinch branding on the shirt sleeves of jerseys and on interview backdrops.

However, Rangers faced Livingston at Ibrox without Cinch appearing on their shirts or around the stadium.

There was also no player named the ‘cinch Man of the Match’, as agreed by every other club in the country.

It’s believed Gers and the SPFL have been in talks over the issue for weeks regarding “the fulfilment of rights obligations.

I'm guessing Douglas Park isn't a happy man with this and, in his position, I'd feel the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, The_Kincardine said:

I'm guessing Douglas Park isn't a happy man with this and, in his position, I'd feel the same.

It's the SPFL's contracts and their terms, not the business interests of the clubs' directors, that matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Theres been plenty times that a league sponsor has been in direct competition  with a clubs sponsor. Be quite interesting to see how this plays out, both organisations are more than capable of making a rip roaring c**t of this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure if I'm missing something but Park wants to renege on contractual obligations to the league sponsor because said sponsor is a rival of his personal business (and the money is peanuts)?

I'm sure that will go well for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought all Parks had was a bus company, never knew he sold cars too.

On a side note, Robertson’s outburst at the weekend about the level of sponsorship is bang on the money. Doncaster has proven time and time again he completely undersells the league. I am get it, I am biased against him and it may be that these are the best deals he can get but it feels we are worth much much more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, steelmen said:

I thought all Parks had was a bus company, never knew he sold cars too.

On a side note, Robertson’s outburst at the weekend about the level of sponsorship is bang on the money. Doncaster has proven time and time again he completely undersells the league. I am get it, I am biased against him and it may be that these are the best deals he can get but it feels we are worth much much more.

It is probably the best deals HE can get. Someone competent would surely be able to get Scottish football a better deal than the Norwegian and Danish leagues (source: List of domestic football league broadcast deals by country - Wikipedia).

The sponsorship thing is a joke though. When Ladbrooks sponsored the league it was in direct competition to Rangers' main shirt sponsor and that wasnt an issue. But now it is because it goes against a director's personal business? Strikes me as the club just being difficult for being difficult sake and flaming the us v them hymn sheet that Rangers seem to adore so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do we know that the issue with the sponsorship is definitely to do with Park's other business interests? I'm not saying it's not, just that most articles I've seen on it haven't made it clear.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...