tannerall 25,935 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Would you ask the chairmen of Waitrose, Asda, Sainsbury's and Tesco to decide if they should be pushed in to bankruptcy ? You know where I'm going here. In 2012 the chairmen of our business competitors voted us down from the Premier league to the lowest position. Why were no issues raised by our club about neutrality, conflict of interest, exploitation, financial integrity even considered before the vote was authorised by our business competitors ? Basically being judged by peers can be seen as fair and just. Being judged and punished by business competitors with vested interests is morally, ethically and I suspect legally unacceptable. So why was it allowed ? Why was it not contested. If there was a secret deal, such as a five way agreement, would this be contrary to legal working practise by businesses ? Even more so as it enabled the biggest competitor to establish a sporting, business and financial monopoly. So though it was 8 years ago could our club still argue these points in a law court today as unfair and prejudicial business practise ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
muldoon1690 151 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 As much as it pains me to say, we weren’t voted out or down, we just weren’t voted back in. Shite as it is that’s what happened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMB 14,167 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, tannerall said: Would you ask the chairmen of Waitrose, Asda, Sainsbury's and Tesco to decide if they should be pushed in to bankruptcy ? I’d expect creditors to decide the fate of the company. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwhiteandblue 3,330 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, tannerall said: Would you ask the chairmen of Waitrose, Asda, Sainsbury's and Tesco to decide if they should be pushed in to bankruptcy ? You know where I'm going here. In 2012 the chairmen of our business competitors voted us down from the Premier league to the lowest position. Why were no issues raised by our club about neutrality, conflict of interest, exploitation, financial integrity even considered before the vote was authorised by our business competitors ? Basically being judged by peers can be seen as fair and just. Being judged and punished by business competitors with vested interests is morally, ethically and I suspect legally unacceptable. So why was it allowed ? Why was it not contested. If there was a secret deal, such as a five way agreement, would this be contrary to legal working practise by businesses ? Even more so as it enabled the biggest competitor to establish a sporting, business and financial monopoly. So though it was 8 years ago could our club still argue these points in a law court today as unfair and prejudicial business practise ? This was about sporting integrity remember. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sweetheart 8,458 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, muldoon1690 said: As much as it pains me to say, we weren’t voted out or down, we just weren’t voted back in. Shite as it is that’s what happened. I was under the impression Rangers were booted out of the SPL for taking them to court over the unlawful embargo. The SPL/SFA then wouldn't let Rangers into the 3 div until the club signed the 5 way agreement and excepted the embargo. What they did to Rangers was criminal and all under the disguise of sporting integrity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Pretty sure retail businesses cant vote on the status of their competitors mate. Your analogy makes lidl sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElBufalo20 7,890 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 8 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said: Pretty sure retail businesses cant vote on the status of their competitors mate. Your analogy makes lidl sense. Aldi the jokes thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Some extremely sad OPs coming from you of late As if we want to go down all this road once again . 8 years of pain and this is never going to make us feel better, with no football going on . FFS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 30 minutes ago, ElBufalo20 said: Aldi the jokes thanks Pish comeback. Was expecting something amazon. Next!!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SheriffHood 536 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Flogging a dead horse Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WATP-FOREVER 5,231 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 If I recall the vast majority of Rangers supporters did not expect or want any treatment other than demotion to the bottom division. At the same time there many that wanted to join the English league. Not sure of that possibility, but there were definitely a significant amount wanting to get away from the sfa. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannerall 25,935 Posted March 19, 2020 Author Share Posted March 19, 2020 22 minutes ago, eejay the dj said: Some extremely sad OPs coming from you of late As if we want to go down all this road once again . 8 years of pain and this is never going to make us feel better, with no football going on . FFS Hindsight is a great thing,, and as the info on the 5 way agreement has been suppressed all that time the debate is still relevant. Those events have had a massive effect on our potential achievement and reputation. It's a good time to look back, as many clubs will be facing similar financial restrictions in the present time, albeit due to different circumstance, and it will be interesting to see whether any precedents were set in our punishments, and if they are punished in similar ways, or aided instead. Even after a almost a decade, the full facts are not known, and the ongoing effect created still affects our standing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 7 hours ago, tannerall said: Would you ask the chairmen of Waitrose, Asda, Sainsbury's and Tesco to decide if they should be pushed in to bankruptcy ? You know where I'm going here. In 2012 the chairmen of our business competitors voted us down from the Premier league to the lowest position. Why were no issues raised by our club about neutrality, conflict of interest, exploitation, financial integrity even considered before the vote was authorised by our business competitors ? Basically being judged by peers can be seen as fair and just. Being judged and punished by business competitors with vested interests is morally, ethically and I suspect legally unacceptable. So why was it allowed ? Why was it not contested. If there was a secret deal, such as a five way agreement, would this be contrary to legal working practise by businesses ? Even more so as it enabled the biggest competitor to establish a sporting, business and financial monopoly. So though it was 8 years ago could our club still argue these points in a law court today as unfair and prejudicial business practise ? You're comparing two wildly different situations. The creditors vote on bankruptcy. The clubs voted in our membership of the league. If the Supermarkets all have a wee gang, they can quite easily vote one out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannerall 25,935 Posted March 19, 2020 Author Share Posted March 19, 2020 3 minutes ago, The Dude said: You're comparing two wildly different situations. The creditors vote on bankruptcy. The clubs voted in our membership of the league. If the Supermarkets all have a wee gang, they can quite easily vote one out. Course they can, they have the power and financial capability., maybe Supermarkets have a 5 way agreement too ? Not as far fetched as it seems, that kind of thing was rife from the sixties through the eightiies, the biggest scandal at the time being the pricing agreement amongst the three big cement and concrete companies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Just now, tannerall said: Course they can, they have the power and financial capability., maybe Supermarkets have a 5 way agreement too ? Not as far fetched as it seems, that kind of thing was rife from the sixties through the eightiies, the biggest scandal at the time being the pricing agreement amongst the three big cement and concrete companies. They can vote on a outcome decided by creditors if they aren't a creditor? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tannerall 25,935 Posted March 19, 2020 Author Share Posted March 19, 2020 6 minutes ago, The Dude said: They can vote on a outcome decided by creditors if they aren't a creditor? Never said that, suggested quite blatantly they can control their market by agreement rather than competition. Just like our competitor's agreement in 2012, which ended up with the taigs controlling the market. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude 20,026 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 30 minutes ago, tannerall said: Never said that, suggested quite blatantly they can control their market by agreement rather than competition. Just like our competitor's agreement in 2012, which ended up with the taigs controlling the market. But none of that is what sent the company into bankruptcy. That was the creditors' vote. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 2 hours ago, tannerall said: Hindsight is a great thing,, and as the info on the 5 way agreement has been suppressed all that time the debate is still relevant. Those events have had a massive effect on our potential achievement and reputation. It's a good time to look back, as many clubs will be facing similar financial restrictions in the present time, albeit due to different circumstance, and it will be interesting to see whether any precedents were set in our punishments, and if they are punished in similar ways, or aided instead. Even after a almost a decade, the full facts are not known, and the ongoing effect created still affects our standing. Fair reply mate 👍 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eejay the dj 31,964 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 1 hour ago, tannerall said: Never said that, suggested quite blatantly they can control their market by agreement rather than competition. Just like our competitor's agreement in 2012, which ended up with the taigs controlling the market. See what you did 😞 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malvern 11,329 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Marks and Spencers would be voted down to be the 50p shop and have to work their way back up. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dread 69 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 Hard to resist the allure of blaming other clubs, the SFA, referees, etc for things that happen to us. They're all shitebags who have it coming, no doubt. But in each case it was our own failures that left the door open for others to pile in. And the danger is that we internalise this victim mindset to the extent that we become unable to sort our own problems out. If a ship gets holed below the waterline, buy all means resent the sea flowing in. Just not to the exclusion of booting the cunt that drove it onto the rocks in the first place. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMB 14,167 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 3 hours ago, tannerall said: Never said that, suggested quite blatantly they can control their market by agreement rather than competition. Just like our competitor's agreement in 2012, which ended up with the taigs controlling the market. The “market” is consumers. Waitrose, Asda, Sainsbury's and Tesco can’t dictate who shops where. If people want to shop are M&S then they will do regardless off Tesco’s opinion. Rangers did run in to financial difficulties that resulted in the company going under. You can argue that the club, which is separate from the company, was held back because of it. However, M&S is just a business it has no team or club. Sorry, but I don’t see how this comparison works at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeparateEntityMyArse 53,715 Posted March 19, 2020 Share Posted March 19, 2020 4 hours ago, tannerall said: Never said that, suggested quite blatantly they can control their market by agreement rather than competition. Just like our competitor's agreement in 2012, which ended up with the taigs controlling the market. Kinda illegal under competition law. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.