Looks like JJB has had it

[reddrock 107]

JG - Halfers on the house mate

Rangers accounts ending 30th June 2006

http://www.rangers.premiumtv.co.uk/staticF...,5~31966,00.pdf

David Murray

"In March we announced a ten-year licence agreement with JJB Sports plc worth a minimum of £48.0m to the Club. This figure will increase by way of additional royalty payments if certain sales thresholds are exceeded. Early indications in this respect are positive. This deal, coupled with the extended run in Europe helped us achieve an operating profit of £4.4m. The JJB deal had an impact on our retail staff, some of whom had been at the Club for

many seasons. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who are no longer at the Club for their hard work and efforts over the years."

"A major addition to our suite of sponsors is our Retail Partnership with JJB Sports plc. This innovative ten-year licensing agreement, worth a minimum of £48.0m to the Club, comprised an initial payment of £18.0m and a guaranteed minimum annual royalty of £3.0m in each year of the licence. The structure of the agreement will allow the Club to safeguard lucrative retail revenue in a challenging market whilst offering the fanbase greater choice and opportunity to purchase through increased availability in the UK and internationally."

I posted a similar article earlier on (post #55), but it says nothing about JJB buying a license, which I think is the crux of dukestreetsoup's claim:

If you can show me anything which proves they bought a license then I will stand corrected. In fact I will give you my HOUSE!!

Not that I'm jumping to dss's defense, it's his house on the line!

All that statement is saying is that JJB are paying for the privilege of using our license - or at least that's how I read it.

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[bluepeter 5,627]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

That's constructive

Have you any comment to make?

[reddrock 107]

JG - Halfers on the house mate

Rangers accounts ending 30th June 2006

http://www.rangers.premiumtv.co.uk/staticF...,5~31966,00.pdf

David Murray

"In March we announced a ten-year licence agreement with JJB Sports plc worth a minimum of £48.0m to the Club. This figure will increase by way of additional royalty payments if certain sales thresholds are exceeded. Early indications in this respect are positive. This deal, coupled with the extended run in Europe helped us achieve an operating profit of £4.4m. The JJB deal had an impact on our retail staff, some of whom had been at the Club for

many seasons. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who are no longer at the Club for their hard work and efforts over the years."

"A major addition to our suite of sponsors is our Retail Partnership with JJB Sports plc. This innovative ten-year licensing agreement, worth a minimum of £48.0m to the Club, comprised an initial payment of £18.0m and a guaranteed minimum annual royalty of £3.0m in each year of the licence. The structure of the agreement will allow the Club to safeguard lucrative retail revenue in a challenging market whilst offering the fanbase greater choice and opportunity to purchase through increased availability in the UK and internationally."

I posted a similar article earlier on (post #55), but it says nothing about JJB buying a license, which I think is the crux of dukestreetsoup's claim:

If you can show me anything which proves they bought a license then I will stand corrected. In fact I will give you my HOUSE!!

Not that I'm jumping to dss's defense, it's his house on the line!

All that statement is saying is that JJB are paying for the privilege of using our license - or at least that's how I read it.

Stores back revenue in end of

[Youllneverwinaway 0]

I posted a similar article earlier on (post #55), but it says nothing about JJB buying a license, which I think is the crux of dukestreetsoup's claim:

Not that I'm jumping to dss's defense, it's his house on the line!

All that statement is saying is that JJB are paying for the privilege of using our license - or at least that's how I read it.

So whats the point of his claim then. No matter what way you look at this, JJB BOUGHT(cash exchanged hand) the 10 year licence which gave them exclusive rights to control and retail all merchandising and associated products through their store network.

Its a valiant effort to block JG and I from getting a box at Ibrox, but lets say you skimmed the bar and went over

[bluepeter 5,627]

I posted a similar article earlier on (post #55), but it says nothing about JJB buying a license, which I think is the crux of dukestreetsoup's claim:

Not that I'm jumping to dss's defense, it's his house on the line!

All that statement is saying is that JJB are paying for the privilege of using our license - or at least that's how I read it.

So whats the point of his claim then. No matter what way you look at this, JJB BOUGHT(cash exchanged hand) the 10 year licence which gave them exclusive rights to control and retail all merchandising and associated products through their store network.

Its a valiant effort to block JG and I from getting a box at Ibrox, but lets say you skimmed the bar and went over

Yeah, fuck it, it's his house. You're on your own dukestreet!

[reddrock 107]

better range better control and avaiability if in our hands

[reddrock 107]

better range better control and avaiability if in our hands

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Im afraid Mr Galbraith, there is NO license. JJB do not own the license to our merchandise. They are contracted to sell it and they pay for that privilege. They did not buy any license and cannot sell anything. IF (and its still if) JJB go bust and are not taken over by Sport Direct (who bought 72 of the 400 JJB stores back in April) then all rights to the distribution of the Rangers Brand will revert straight back to the Rangers Football Club.

Most of what is being discussed is fairy tale stuff.

Im afraid Mr Dukestreetsoup there IS a license.

Is there indeed. What is this license? They are not licensed to sell out merch, merely contracted. They never ever bought a license. If you can show me anything which proves they bought a license then I will stand corrected. In fact I will give you my HOUSE!!

JG - Halfers on the house mate

Rangers accounts ending 30th June 2006

http://www.rangers.premiumtv.co.uk/staticF...,5~31966,00.pdf

David Murray

"In March we announced a ten-year licence agreement with JJB Sports plc worth a minimum of £48.0m to the Club. This figure will increase by way of additional royalty payments if certain sales thresholds are exceeded. Early indications in this respect are positive. This deal, coupled with the extended run in Europe helped us achieve an operating profit of £4.4m. The JJB deal had an impact on our retail staff, some of whom had been at the Club for

many seasons. I would like to take this opportunity to thank those who are no longer at the Club for their hard work and efforts over the years."

"A major addition to our suite of sponsors is our Retail Partnership with JJB Sports plc. This innovative ten-year licensing agreement, worth a minimum of £48.0m to the Club, comprised an initial payment of £18.0m and a guaranteed minimum annual royalty of £3.0m in each year of the licence. The structure of the agreement will allow the Club to safeguard lucrative retail revenue in a challenging market whilst offering the fanbase greater choice and opportunity to purchase through increased availability in the UK and internationally."

haha thank you mate.

Im on the biggest bedroom.

I'd still say that ten year "licencing agreement" does not equate to ownership of the licence. I'd consider it relevantly similar to a rental agreement. You have access to the other party's asset, but only for the period of, and by virtue of, the actual agreement. If you breach the terms by defaulting on payments, for example, then you have broken the deal and the asset reverts to the owner.

Considering that Murray always said that the expected downturn in the sports merchandising retail market was the main reason for the deal, as well as getting cash up front, I'd consider it highly unlikely that an experienced business man would enter such a contract without appropriae clauses and guarantees. Despite some caricatures, he's not Arthur Daley.

[reddrock 107]

?

[Youllneverwinaway 0]

I'd still say that ten year "licencing agreement" does not equate to ownership of the licence. I'd consider it relevantly similar to a rental agreement. You have access to the other party's asset, but only for the period of, and by virtue of, the actual agreement. If you breach the terms by defaulting on payments, for example, then you have broken the deal and the asset reverts to the owner.

Considering that Murray always said that the expected downturn in the sports merchandising retail market was the main reason for the deal, as well as getting cash up front, I'd consider it highly unlikely that an experienced business man would enter such a contract without appropriae clauses and guarantees. Despite some caricatures, he's not Arthur Daley.

Wouldnt disagree with that Oleg. I was only posting the link to prove JJB bought the licence for the exclusive rights.

If JJB go bust or default on the contract terms, the licence 100% comes back to Rangers FC.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

I posted a similar article earlier on (post #55), but it says nothing about JJB buying a license, which I think is the crux of dukestreetsoup's claim:

Not that I'm jumping to dss's defense, it's his house on the line!

All that statement is saying is that JJB are paying for the privilege of using our license - or at least that's how I read it.

So whats the point of his claim then. No matter what way you look at this, JJB BOUGHT(cash exchanged hand) the 10 year licence which gave them exclusive rights to control and retail all merchandising and associated products through their store network.

Its a valiant effort to block JG and I from getting a box at Ibrox, but lets say you skimmed the bar and went over

I think the difference is "owning the licence" compared to "signed a licence agreement".

The former gives you carte banche to do what you will. The latter allows you certain rights, dependent upon the terms and conditions of the agreement, such as the duration and payments.

[Youllneverwinaway 0]

Had a read back and what JG said a few pages back is spot on. Although highly unlikely, if JJB are going down the shitter and Celtic decided for whatever reason to buy them then Celtic would have the exclusive rites to merchandise our strips.

JG said all along it was unlikely but what he has said is FACT.

JJB bought a licence and anyone buying JJB, would have the licence for the remaining 7 or 8 years as long as they continue to pay the £3 million annual payment

Dukestreet owes us a house

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Had a read back and what JG said a few pages back is spot on. Although highly unlikely, if JJB are going down the shitter and Celtic decided for whatever reason to buy them then Celtic would have the exclusive rites to merchandise our strips.

JG said all along it was unlikely but what he has said is FACT.

JJB bought a licence and anyone buying JJB, would have the licence for the remaining 7 or 8 years as long as they continue to pay the £3 million annual payment

Dukestreet owes us a house

Aha! It's JJB and not the licence that they'd be buying.

In the current climate, that's unlikely. Celtic have their own retail service and will be looking to cut costs, rather than take more on. Dermott Desmond may go for it, but I don't think it fits into his portfolio or would make sense.

Also, any future owner of JJB or its assets would have to honour the terms of the contract.

Hypothetically, Celtic could act maliciously and make the stipulated payments whilst consciously selling no Rangers tops, but that wouldn't be profitable for them. They'd have to pay us £3m per year, in order to do us out of £1-2m, thus costing themselves. We may also be able to sell via our own shop and site, which would defeat their aims.

For me, panic in this area is misinformed, paranoid and sensationalist. There are no major fears here.

P.S. I still think dss keeps his house due to the difference between own in a licence and having a fixed term licencing agreement, so I'm wanting free digs.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Had a read back and what JG said a few pages back is spot on. Although highly unlikely, if JJB are going down the shitter and Celtic decided for whatever reason to buy them then Celtic would have the exclusive rites to merchandise our strips.

JG said all along it was unlikely but what he has said is FACT.

JJB bought a licence and anyone buying JJB, would have the licence for the remaining 7 or 8 years as long as they continue to pay the £3 million annual payment

Dukestreet owes us a house

Plus bonus dependent on the sales targets.

[bluepeter 5,627]

Had a read back and what JG said a few pages back is spot on. Although highly unlikely, if JJB are going down the shitter and Celtic decided for whatever reason to buy them then Celtic would have the exclusive rites to merchandise our strips.

JG said all along it was unlikely but what he has said is FACT.

JJB bought a licence and anyone buying JJB, would have the licence for the remaining 7 or 8 years as long as they continue to pay the £3 million annual payment

Dukestreet owes us a house

Aha! It's JJB and not the licence that they'd be buying.

In the current climate, that's unlikely. Celtic have their own retail service and will be looking to cut costs, rather than take more on. Dermott Desmond may go for it, but I don't think it fits into his portfolio or would make sense.

Also, any future owner of JJB or its assets would have to honour the terms of the contract.

Hypothetically, Celtic could act maliciously and make the stipulated payments whilst consciously selling no Rangers tops, but that wouldn't be profitable for them. They'd have to pay us £3m per year, in order to do us out of £1-2m, thus costing themselves. We may also be able to sell via our own shop and site, which would defeat their aims.

For me, panic in this area is misinformed, paranoid and sensationalist. There are no major fears here.

P.S. I still think dss keeps his house due to the difference between owning a licence and having a fixed term licencing agreement, so I'm wanting free digs.

I'm with you on this one Oleg. That's twice in a day!

[JohnGalbraith 0]

But they own the license for 10 years.

That's the bottom line.

The house is mine

[bluepeter 5,627]

But they own the license for 10 years.

That's the bottom line.

The house is mine

I have a passport. It is mine to use for 10 years. I don't own it, though, the government do.

[JohnGalbraith 0]

But they own the license for 10 years.

That's the bottom line.

The house is mine

I have a passport. It is mine to use for 10 years. I don't own it, though, the government do.

But it's yours to do what you like with in those 10 years.

[bluepeter 5,627]

But they own the license for 10 years.

That's the bottom line.

The house is mine

I have a passport. It is mine to use for 10 years. I don't own it, though, the government do.

But it's yours to do what you like with in those 10 years.

I think that's the point. So long as I don't abuse it, it's mine to do with what I want, but I don't own it. Same goes for JJB. I haven't bought my passport, in the same way that JJB haven't bought a license from Rangers.

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

But they own the license for 10 years.

That's the bottom line.

The house is mine

No.

They have a fixed term licencing agreement.

Should they breach the terms, they lose their rights. If we breach the terms, say by revoking on the agreement and using another distributor/vendor, they'd be entitled to compensation, but the rights would still be ours.

If you own something it's yours. JJB are leasing (or renting) the licence, subject to terms and conditions for a fixed term.

[Youllneverwinaway 0]

P.S. I still think dss keeps his house due to the difference between own in a licence and having a fixed term licencing agreement, so I'm wanting free digs.

Technically, Dukestreet hasnt got a leg to stand on Oleg.

Im afraid Mr Dukestreetsoup there IS a license.

Is there indeed. What is this license? They are not licensed to sell out merch, merely contracted. They never ever bought a license. If you can show me anything which proves they bought a license then I will stand corrected. In fact I will give you my HOUSE!!

No matter what way he meant it, that is what he actually said. JJB 100% bought a license from Rangers. dukeSt 100% owes JG a house :bouncy:

[OlegKuznetsov 10,816]

Had a read back and what JG said a few pages back is spot on. Although highly unlikely, if JJB are going down the shitter and Celtic decided for whatever reason to buy them then Celtic would have the exclusive rites to merchandise our strips.

JG said all along it was unlikely but what he has said is FACT.

JJB bought a licence and anyone buying JJB, would have the licence for the remaining 7 or 8 years as long as they continue to pay the £3 million annual payment

Dukestreet owes us a house

Aha! It's JJB and not the licence that they'd be buying.

In the current climate, that's unlikely. Celtic have their own retail service and will be looking to cut costs, rather than take more on. Dermott Desmond may go for it, but I don't think it fits into his portfolio or would make sense.

Also, any future owner of JJB or its assets would have to honour the terms of the contract.

Hypothetically, Celtic could act maliciously and make the stipulated payments whilst consciously selling no Rangers tops, but that wouldn't be profitable for them. They'd have to pay us £3m per year, in order to do us out of £1-2m, thus costing themselves. We may also be able to sell via our own shop and site, which would defeat their aims.

For me, panic in this area is misinformed, paranoid and sensationalist. There are no major fears here.

P.S. I still think dss keeps his house due to the difference between owning a licence and having a fixed term licencing agreement, so I'm wanting free digs.

I'm with you on this one Oleg. That's twice in a day!

We must stop this nonsense.

I'm considering adopting JG's position, however wrong it may be.

[bluepeter 5,627]

No matter what way he meant it, that is what he actually said. JJB 100% bought a license from Rangers. dukeSt 100% owes JG a house :bouncy:

You've yet to show that they've bought anything, in my opinion. We're all agreed that they are in control of the license for a 10 year period, assuming they keep paying, but that's a different thing, is it not?

[JohnGalbraith 0]

Bottom line is JJB currently own the LICENSE to Rangers merchandise regardless of any semantics attached to it. I was right.

End of story.

[bluepeter 5,627]

Had a read back and what JG said a few pages back is spot on. Although highly unlikely, if JJB are going down the shitter and Celtic decided for whatever reason to buy them then Celtic would have the exclusive rites to merchandise our strips.

JG said all along it was unlikely but what he has said is FACT.

JJB bought a licence and anyone buying JJB, would have the licence for the remaining 7 or 8 years as long as they continue to pay the £3 million annual payment

Dukestreet owes us a house

Aha! It's JJB and not the licence that they'd be buying.

In the current climate, that's unlikely. Celtic have their own retail service and will be looking to cut costs, rather than take more on. Dermott Desmond may go for it, but I don't think it fits into his portfolio or would make sense.

Also, any future owner of JJB or its assets would have to honour the terms of the contract.

Hypothetically, Celtic could act maliciously and make the stipulated payments whilst consciously selling no Rangers tops, but that wouldn't be profitable for them. They'd have to pay us £3m per year, in order to do us out of £1-2m, thus costing themselves. We may also be able to sell via our own shop and site, which would defeat their aims.

For me, panic in this area is misinformed, paranoid and sensationalist. There are no major fears here.

P.S. I still think dss keeps his house due to the difference between owning a licence and having a fixed term licencing agreement, so I'm wanting free digs.

I'm with you on this one Oleg. That's twice in a day!

We must stop this nonsense.

I'm considering adopting JG's position, however wrong it may be.

I was going to suggest we toss for it, but I think this is probably the wrong forum for such comments. ^_^