The business model of the SPFL’s new sponsor, cinch, is to sell cars directly to the public, cutting out the dealer network. Newco’s chairman owns a large car dealership which sponsors Newco (although it is not a shirt sponsor).
Newco have refused to comply with the SPFL contract by adding the cinch logo to players’ sleeves and elsewhere. They claim compliance would break an existing commercial deal, presumably with their own chairman, but have refused to provide evidence of any existing deal to the league.
League and club sponsors often conflict. While the SPFL was sponsored by Ladbrokes, Celtic had Dafabet blazoned across their chest and Newco had their own gambling partner. Newco’s position appears to be that any club with a pre-existing agreement with any one of its partners can veto a league sponsorship deal. Quite a thing, with 42 clubs, some of which have 20 commercial sponsorship partners.
It is always possible that the SPFL’s rules are poorly drafted on such matters, the SFA were able to exploit what appeared to be a clear rule before, but the League have examined their position and have escalated the issue. Yesterday, chairman Murdoch MacLennan wrote to all 42 clubs, stated the league’s position and informed clubs he had referred the matter to the SFA’s arbitration process.
If you think this all seems a bit contrived, you are not alone. Why stand and fight on such a puny hill? Newco are not the private fiefdom of their chairman, he is not Cnut (be careful), able to turn the tide against cinch, so why antagonise every non-compliant club in the league?
Newco want rid of MacLennan and especially SPFL chief exect Neil Doncaster. Neither will do their bidding. If the club can find a contractual oversight, it gives them grounds to call for their resignations, again.
There are other mattes at play; step forward Malmo manager, Jon Dahl Tomasson, who yesterday alluded to the matter we discussed in our State of the Club blog 10 days ago. Newco need Champions League money more acutely than oxygen itself. Should the wheels come off the white charger tonight, you can expect conflicts on every corner.
I never get what is it about people who think they are too special to follow rules. There is a want about them. Are we going to see pyros from the Newco directors’ box next? Seems logical. Fight The Man, even if The Man is just a salaried someone, responsible for converting advice or strategy onto structure.
796 Comments- Pages:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 21
- »
young port
Park is a clown
The main man they are after is Dungcaster.
Solution is straightforward, Huns will be found against , they’ll appeal , lose the appeal , won’t comply with sponsorship requirements = withhold prize money and redistribute the monies around the clubs , The toad Robertson needs to be resigned from the SPL board once this process has gone through as getting regular business done with that moron in the room will be too difficult .
Lawyers fees to sort out this shitfest should also be deducted from Hun prize money
C’mon the Malmo !!!
‘Fight the Man’ Nearly every club and supporter in Scotland gives the Cnut money by hiring his buses and buying his cars. How about we start a ‘No to Parks’ campaign ?
Park is a clown and his whole klub are twats.
Don’t let them play another game until they accept and display the sponsors logo etc.
There I have done the SFHELL job for them. Regarding Doncaster and the authorities “you reap what you sow”.
D :)
Paul alludes to an Ibrox vendetta against McLennan & Doncaster, t is more than that in my opinion. It is the thin end of a substantial & well thought out wedge to wrest all their commercial and broadcasting rights out of the hands of the SPFL/SFA.
The commercial onslaught has started with Cinch, the TV rights stealth attack with Roberston, after his recent appointment, labelling the SKY TV contract as Scottish football being sold for a “pittance”.
There is new found confidence at Ibrox on the back of their title win last season. They are emboldened and are looking to throw their weight around. Be in no doubt, progress to the CL groups stage will only add grist to their mill.
Newco want a compliant league executive to do their bidding in the event of another newco ?
Am I reading this article wrong ?
Always good to hear about It’s-definitely-not-Rangers. So relevant to Celtic………
Penalty ……………….to the Rainjurz
If Park says he’ll chin you, then you better watch out. I see those chins in my most terrifying nightmares.
JHB on 10TH AUGUST 2021 12:36 PM
You reckon they’ll roll out the plans for the floating pitch and Super Casinos?
Custom House Quay, looking east along north bank of the Clyde, 1921.
Archive ref: T-CN19/10/Q10-6
https://twitter.com/GC_Archives/status/1421580817566949384/photo/1
long and boring but hey ho – ps sack the parks busses,
————-
Aberdeen players celebrate
All teams are expected to have the SPFL sponsor on their shirt sleeves as well as branding inside stadiums
The SPFL have asked the Scottish FA to facilitate arbitration in their sponsorship row with Rangers, warning that the dispute could prevent them paying out prize money.
The Ibrox club insist their refusal to promote car company cinch is covered by a rule concerning the breach of a prior contractual obligation.
The five-year deal is worth £8m.
The SPFL have written to clubs, describing the stand-off as a “real and substantial commercial risk”.
Scottish Premiership champions Rangers would need to agree to the arbitration process.
Listen: Monday’s BBC Scottish Football Podcast
SPFL signs new title sponsor deal
The letter says the SPFL board, on which Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson sits, has been trying to settle “this very serious impasse” to no avail.
It also states that Rangers have not provided the SPFL board with “sight of any pre-existing third-party contract” that would represent a conflict of commercial interest.
The letter, signed by chairman Murdoch MacLennan, continues: “The refusal by one of our clubs to provide inventory for cinch presents a real and substantial commercial risk to the SPFL – and one which materially threatens the SPFL’s fee payments to all 42 SPFL clubs.
“This is the first time in the history of the SPFL, or the SPL before that, where a club has not provided agreed inventory to the league for use in fulfilling a commercial contract.
“Your board considers it has been left with no realistic option, in compliance with Scottish FA articles, other than to refer this dispute to Scottish FA arbitration.”
Scotland’s leagues had been without a title sponsor last season after the previous deal with bookmaker Ladbrokes ended.
SPFL take action with ‘great reluctance’
Letter sent to clubs on behalf of SPFL board
The one SPFL club that has failed to deliver club inventory for cinch is also hampering the SPFL from promoting the SPFL’s relationship with cinch by, for example, refusing to permit cinch-branded interview backboards to be delivered to, or used at, its home ground and to be used for broadcast partner interviews with club representatives at away matches.
At their opening league match, none of that club’s players wore the cinch branded sleeve patch; there were no LED advertising or static advertising boards with cinch branding allowed in the stadium; and the club concerned also refused to allow the use of the standard SPFL broadcast partner interview backdrop board displaying cinch branding.
Over several weeks now, your board has sought to engage with the club concerned to find a way through this very serious impasse.
However, we have been met with a refusal to give the board sight of any pre-existing third-party contract that would prevent the club from providing inventory for cinch.
The refusal by one of our clubs to provide inventory for cinch presents a real and substantial commercial risk to the SPFL – and one which materially threatens the SPFL’s fee payments to all 42 SPFL clubs.
This is the first time in the history of the SPFL, or the SPL before that, where a club has not provided agreed inventory to the League for use in fulfilling a commercial Contract.
Your board considers it has been left with no realistic option, in compliance with Scottish FA articles, other than to refer this dispute to Scottish FA arbitration. Your Board has reached this conclusion with great reluctance.
However, your board believes that it has a clear obligation to embark upon this course of action to protect and advance the interests of the SPFL and all of its member clubs.
Rangers ‘continue to comply’ with SPFL rules
Letter sent to clubs last week by Rangers managing director Stewart Robertson last week
For the avoidance of doubt, Rangers continues to comply with the rules of the SPFL.
One of the key rules that protects the commercial interests of all members is Rule I7.
When the SPFL Executive put forward the written resolution with regards to the new sponsorship contract, Rangers immediately notified Neil Doncaster that, in line with Rule I7, we would be unable to provide the new sponsor with many of their rights due to a pre-existing contractual obligation. We cannot breach an existing contract.
This is a legal principle which is founded in Scots Law and is the reason that the SPFL has Rule I7 within its rules.
Rangers has complied with and will continue to comply with the SPFL rules and fulfil all sponsorship obligations which do not conflict with our pre-existing contractual obligations.
Charles Green has accepted £6m for malicious prosecution. Anyone know how much that is now?
Taking no lectures in morality regarding Hun behaviour when Celtic supporters have for years objected to filling the coffers of Hun directors.
Come back and criticise Huns when we’re no longer financially supporting them.
Charles Green joins the list of people receiving multi-million pounds payouts from the Scottish purse.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-58159210
My daughter has been trying to contact ticket office for tickets for Sunday v Hearts and cannot get through.
Any tips/thoughts. I thought I read on here guys passing on advice, any help given would be appreciated.
Thanks in advance
D :)
Streisand Effect will be kicking in shortly, if it hasn’t started already.
Maybe the huns are looking for a scapegoat for a forthcoming insolvency event.
Can’t see why else they would be doing this, unless it’s just their innate self entitlement getting the better of them.
PTS- It’s over £30 million now
Expel Sevco. Lance the boil. Reject the O.F.. Stand on your own two feet Celtic.
IMO it seems the huns (v2) are trying to force the lesser SPL clubs into an administrative/liquidation scenario to see how the governing body reacts and deals with it. Would allow them to play up their own demise and what they had to go through (victim card). If the SPL/SFA didnt make them en masse start in Div 3 they would be screaming from the rooftops (and a courtroom somewhere no doubt)
Here’s hoping history repeats itself and malmo consign the newco to the same financial death as they did to the original club
Remind me, what punishment did Robertson and Sevco get,for accusing Doncaster, McLennan and the lawyers, of corruption, collusion, fraud, etc etc? ……oh that’s right, nothing……and Robertson is not voted onto the Board, only in this country, to accommodate The Gang.
Re the Charles green payout . The Huns in my work believe that the Scottish government should have paid or ignored all of Rangers debts in 2012 because it has cost the Public purse near to £100 million and them’s lots of pain !
I will try the same with my Council tax bill ! Oh the pain !
DAVID66 @ 12.34pm
Regarding Doncaster and the authorities “you reap what you sow”.
Spot on my mhan. I have a wry smile to myself every/any time I see or hear about Dunchucker being embroiled with the Hordes, thinking “Hell mend you, that’s what happens when you sup with the devil” He did as much as Raygun to save them at the time, even publicly stating (ludicrously) that liquidation was similar to going in to administration (LIE!) and therefore no big deal. Secret meetings, secret deals, lies and obfuscation – all to no avail and now that he cannot help the Hun they turn on him. T’was ever thus with the Hun.
Sevco covering their bases.
Do us all a favour Malmo and resign these frauds to liquidation 2.
DAVID66
Is your daughter a ST holder? Is she trying to buy her ST seat?
Guys any advice about Hearts tickets.
We are ST holders but saying we are not and tickets only available to ST holders.
Got Jablonec ones no bother.
D :)
Tom – Yes preferably.
D :)
Tom yes 2 a parent and child one on these 2.
D )
The siege mentality is a useful tool in the Ibrokes armory. No one likes us we don’t care, It’s a deliberate campaign of smoke and mirrors to stop the hoardes thoughts turning inwards, particularly relevant in light of the expected crisis that will engulf them should they be eliminated tonight.
Thier Orange order PR manager has lots of experience in this tactic.
DAVID66
I know it sounds cheeky but are you definitely logging into the account before trying to buy Hearts tickets? The same account/password used to buy Jablonec tickets?
Tom – Yes and not cheeky at all Pal.
D :)
Tom when we logged in for Jablonec they were in our box to purchase.
D :)
Notthebus @ 1.48pm.
Spot on my man, nailed it.
Where do I sign the “No to chiny” petition?
I know the first response will be “ah, but what about the wages” but that aside, PSG have signed Messi, Ramos and Donnaruma in this window for a combined fee of £0.
Not a bad window….
Oh and Wijnaldum.