Another battle with SPFL

[The Specky Forum Organiser 66,191]

@The Dude desperately hoping we lose this case. Sad.

[The Dude 20,026]

29 minutes ago, Paisley Blue Loyal said:

Might be going down a rabbit hole here but a thought has just occurred to me, Every man and their dog know DP is a Rangers man and most probably puts his hand in his pocket at times to help fund Rangers, Obviously that funding relies on his business being successful so if cinch were to impact his business it could have a knock on effect to Rangers, Doubt if celtic would lose any sleep if they had to change their bus provider.

Celtic might not lose sleep over changing their bus provider but Parks would surely still lose sleep over his business being impacted by cinch having their branding on celtic's shirts etc

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, The Specky Liar said:

@The Dude desperately hoping we lose this case. Sad.

Where have you pulled that one from? Not seeing where we have a case and 'desperately hoping we lose' are two massively different things.

[esquire8 43,625]

If the board do end up fucking this up then we will never be taken seriously in the SPFL ever again. We should be filling that slight void left by Lawwell taking a step back and showing other clubs the way forward, a fuck up here will be handing the reigns over to McKay.

[RFC55 110,176]

15 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That's all their deal with Rangers appears to be too. There's nothing anywehre which suggests otherwise. Parks of Hamilton/Parks Motor Group aren't listed anywhere as a partner, we don't advertise their brand anywhere, there's literally nothing which suggests our contract with Parks is any different to the one they have with Celtic.

How can you suggest that when not one of us know the contract?

 

[Paisley Blue Loyal 11,302]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

celtic might not lose sleep over changing their bus provider but Parks would surely still lose sleep over his business being impacted by cinch having their branding on celtic's shirts etc

Get your point and I genuinely don’t know whether Rangers have a case or not but let’s imagine for one moment that they do and they do win their case then who’s to say that cinch don’t just turn around and say Fuck this if one half of The Big 2 aren’t on board then we’re out, Like I say it’s all hypothetical and time will tell I suppose.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, RFC55 said:

How can you suggest that when not one of us know the contract?

 

I can't say definitively that's what it is but given the absence of any promotion of Parks of Hamilton/Parks Motor Group by the club and the fact they aren't listed among the many partners the club has, that is how it looks.

With parks calling themselves 'sponsors' in their statement you'd think there's be something somewhere promoting or even announcing their sponsorship.

[Blueshoff 11,969]

Maybe Parks sponsorship is funding the EBT's

[TEFTONG 60,467]

When the Dude starts bombarding a thread with multiple replies.... 

[SkylineBlue 24,308]

28 minutes ago, The Specky Liar said:

@The Dude desperately hoping we lose this case. Sad.

whit?

[esquire8 43,625]

3 minutes ago, Blueshoff said:

Maybe Parks sponsorship is funding the EBT's

You survived that post yesterday? 

Admin getting far too lenient.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, TEFTONG said:

When the Dude starts bombarding a thread with multiple replies.... 

When @TEFTONG complains about me posting...

[Blueshoff 11,969]

4 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

You survived that post yesterday? 

Admin getting far too lenient.

Shhhhh! 

I was trying to lighten the mood!

[Blueshoff 11,969]

23 minutes ago, esquire8 said:

You survived that post yesterday? 

Admin getting far too lenient.

If I get banned will still have my other account @Dan Deacon

[Robmc1 4,741]

49 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Where have you pulled that one from? Not seeing where we have a case and 'desperately hoping we lose' are two massively different things.

Tbf mate I know you like playing devils advocate, which in a debating forum  is healthy and what it’s all about. I actually enjoy reading some of your more controversial posts even when members find it very negative, but in this case ‘you’ not seeing where we have a case is neither here nor there as you (nor anyone else on this forum) have no intimate knowledge of any of the clubs sponsorship or partner contracts.
Given the fact the club stated that they went over and above what they were required (in the rule book) to do when informing the SPFL of this conflict of interest plus the fact that they have already taken legal proceedings for the arbitration process I (in my opinion) believe they will have a legal grounding to back this up. Of course we’ll find out in due course and I’m not above an apology if proved to be wrong👍

[Monkey Butler 23,052]

I think it's fairly obvious that this dispute is purely personal rather than professional. DP still licking his wounds after the corruption dossier humiliation. 

[The Specky Forum Organiser 66,191]

1 hour ago, SkylineBlue said:

whit?

@The Dudedesperately hoping we lose this case. Sad.

[SkylineBlue 24,308]

14 minutes ago, The Specky Liar said:

@The Dudedesperately hoping we lose this case. Sad.

I cant tell whether your one of the wee greetin' faced lassies who follows TheDude around this forum screaming over nothing or just doing a very good satirical impression of them.

[born a blue nose 91,042]

19 minutes ago, The Specky Liar said:

@The Dudedesperately hoping we lose this case. Sad.

Rumour has it you n D are going for it today, can you confirm 

Edit: no the dude 😂

[The Specky Forum Organiser 66,191]

15 minutes ago, SkylineBlue said:

I cant tell whether your one of the wee greetin' faced lassies who follows TheDude around this forum screaming over nothing or just doing a very good satirical impression of them.

Thanks pal

12 minutes ago, born a blue nose said:

Rumour has it you n D are going for it today, can you confirm 

Edit: no the dude 😂

[the cry was no 3,044]

14 hours ago, The Dude said:

You missed a step or two in here

SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor.

Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue

SPFL as Rangers for evidence of any issue

Rangers fail to provide evidence of issue

SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway"

Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos

 

So, long day at a family funeral, but let's look at your "missing steps"  scenario....

Dude's assertion.....

You missed a step or two in here

1. SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor.
2. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue
3. SPFL ask Rangers for evidence of any issue
4. Rangers fail to provide evidence of issue
5. SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway"
6. Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos

Possible alternative with Dude's "missing steps"

 

You missed a step or two in here

1. SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor.
2. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue
3. SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway"
4. Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos
5. SPFL ask Rangers for evidence of any issue
6. Rangers say  "too late to start wanting to talk like professional people now Specky, by the way did you tell Cinch and/or the agency that we had an issue before you signed the deal?"

From the public information available we KNOW that Rangers informed the SPFL they had an issue pretty much straight away

We also know that the SPFL claim to have asked Rangers for evidence of the issue. What we don't know is if this was before or after they signed the deal and this is potentially a very critical point, especially for Doncaster and even more so if he signed the deal knowing there was an issue raised by one of the most important parties to the deal without telling Cinch or the agents (evidenced or not) Any sponsorship/commercial deal for the SPFL derives most of it's value from 2 clubs. To hide/ forget to mention/ ignore a potential issue with one of the big two is, at best, incompetent, and potentially much worse, especially for the bespectacled fellows professional integrity and reputation.  

Despite Rangers and Parks stating categorically there is an issue due to existing contractural commitments you seem pretty adamant that there is none, or certainly no evidence that you can see

I'm not exactly sure how these things work but I would be surprised if a judge would grant an interim interdict halting an arbitration process until a party was involved if that party couldn't show they were entitled to be involved

Anyway the timing and context of your "missing steps" may or may not be important but IMO the disclosure (or non-disclosure) of a flagged issue by a crucial party to the deal will be extremely significant 

[RFC55 110,176]

12 hours ago, SkylineBlue said:

I cant tell whether your one of the wee greetin' faced lassies who follows TheDude around this forum screaming over nothing or just doing a very good satirical impression of them.

Mate stick Tae lifting tins a beans in yer garage 

[RFC55 110,176]

35 minutes ago, the cry was no said:

So, long day at a family funeral, but let's look at your "missing steps"  scenario....

Dude's assertion.....

You missed a step or two in here

1. SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor.
2. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue
3. SPFL ask Rangers for evidence of any issue
4. Rangers fail to provide evidence of issue
5. SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway"
6. Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos

Possible alternative with Dude's "missing steps"

 

You missed a step or two in here

1. SPFL notify clubs via written resolution that they have a new sponsor.
2. Rangers tell SPFL there is an issue
3. SPFL say "we don't give a fuck, we're doing it anyway"
4. Rangers (as is their right) don't display the new sponsor's logos
5. SPFL ask Rangers for evidence of any issue
6. Rangers say  "too late to start wanting to talk like professional people now Specky, by the way did you tell Cinch and/or the agency that we had an issue before you signed the deal?"

From the public information available we KNOW that Rangers informed the SPFL they had an issue pretty much straight away

We also know that the SPFL claim to have asked Rangers for evidence of the issue. What we don't know is if this was before or after they signed the deal and this is potentially a very critical point, especially for Doncaster and even more so if he signed the deal knowing there was an issue raised by one of the most important parties to the deal without telling Cinch or the agents (evidenced or not) Any sponsorship/commercial deal for the SPFL derives most of it's value from 2 clubs. To hide/ forget to mention/ ignore a potential issue with one of the big two is, at best, incompetent, and potentially much worse, especially for the bespectacled fellows professional integrity and reputation.  

Despite Rangers and Parks stating categorically there is an issue due to existing contractural commitments you seem pretty adamant that there is none, or certainly no evidence that you can see

I'm not exactly sure how these things work but I would be surprised if a judge would grant an interim interdict halting an arbitration process until a party was involved if that party couldn't show they were entitled to be involved

Anyway the timing and context of your "missing steps" may or may not be important but IMO the disclosure (or non-disclosure) of a flagged issue by a crucial party to the deal will be extremely significant 

Rip the cry was no family member x

[scottyscott1963 18,617]

1 hour ago, the cry was no said:

From the public information available we KNOW that Rangers informed the SPFL they had an issue pretty much straight away

We also know that the SPFL claim to have asked Rangers for evidence of the issue. What we don't know is if this was before or after they signed the deal

Can see another email landed in a spam folder.
"Won't get fooled agin" 
Me personally hope Specky has made an arse of it,and his big ambulance chasing fenian Rangers hating
sidekick.

 

[SkylineBlue 24,308]

6 hours ago, RFC55 said:

Mate stick Tae lifting tins a beans in yer garage 

Good night, mate?