Sevco at it again

[neil7908]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-stance-cinch-sparks-fears-24671856

Now jeopardising a multiple million pound sponsorship deal for the league as it conflicts with their owners business interests.

[matty_f]

They’re weirdos.

[Since90+2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-stance-cinch-sparks-fears-24671856

Now jeopardising a multiple million pound sponsorship deal for the league as it conflicts with their owners business interests.

How is that even allowed? They are aware of the rules of the competition. They should be forced to forfeit matches until they agree to display the leagues sponsors.

[Victor]

Threaten them with a ban from the SPFL, if they do not conform. They should not be allowed to get away with nonsense like this. I wonder how much negotiation there would be if it were Dundee or St.Mirren, who were refusing to comply?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Heisenberg]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They’re weirdos.

They’ve always got to have something that whips their hordes up into a frenzy. Always got to be a battle on with someone or something off the football park. As you say, absolute weirdos.

[hibbysam]

I can see it from both sides to be fair. If the league haven’t made their obligations water tight then Rangers would be well within their rights not to threaten the legality of their own sponsorships. It does seem petty but there will be legal implications all over the place. Beggars can’t be choosers but would’ve thought the SPFL would’ve discussed conflicts of interest prior to signing any deals.

[Since452]

Just exclude Rangers* from any sponsorship or prize money. Job done.

[AugustaHibs]

To be fair the sponsorship deal is absolutely awful anyway. It’s worth about £2000 a week to each club..

[Irish_Steve]

They (and Celtic) fed off sectarianism to appease their fans - the sooner the bugger off, the better

[blaikie]

Does Douglas Park not own a few fairly high end dealerships rather than your run of the mill run around that the sponsor seems to deal in?

Just trying to flex their muscles with the SPFL .. wasn’t that long ago we had the whistleblower evidence debacle from that lot!

Financial penalty, point deduction then expulsion!

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be fair the sponsorship deal is absolutely awful anyway. It’s worth about £2000 a week to each club..

It’s nowhere near that amount is it? Thought it was £8m over 5 years, with 42 clubs to be split between. Can’t see all 42 clubs getting £100k per year from it. Could be wrong though.

[Jim44]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be fair the sponsorship deal is absolutely awful anyway. It’s worth about £2000 a week to each club..

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s nowhere near that amount is it? Thought it was £8m over 5 years, with 42 clubs to be split between. Can’t see all 42 clubs getting £100k per year from it. Could be wrong though.

This is irrelevant and clouds the issue. The issue here is Sevco’s behaviour.

[jacomo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They (and Celtic) fed off sectarianism to appease their fans - the sooner the bugger off, the better

Even if they played in the English leagues we’d never be rid of them.

It would just mean the SPFL would be diminished in stature even more.

[PatHead]

This has just reminded me to never buy a car from Parks of Hamilton.

[Mr. Wonderful]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-stance-cinch-sparks-fears-24671856

Now jeopardising a multiple million pound sponsorship deal for the league as it conflicts with their owners business interests.

This time last year we were led to believe they had the integrity and improvement of the spfl at the forefront of their mind. Now they're jeapordising a sponsorship deal it took us long enough to agree.

Couldn't write it.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

To be fair the sponsorship deal is absolutely awful anyway. It’s worth about £2000 a week to each club..

Not sure that's how it works but even if it does, to clubs in the bottom tier £100k over a year is sizable chunk of the money for them. A

If course its nothing to Sevco, hence why they are happy to play this game.

[neil7908]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This time last year we were led to believe they had the integrity and improvement of the spfl at the forefront of their mind. Now they're jeapordising a sponsorship deal it took us long enough to agree.

Couldn't write it.

I honestly think they are one of the most detestable clubs in the world. What really grates me though is that the rest of Scottish football meekly puts up with it.

As another posters said, does anyone think St Mirren, Ross County etc could get away with this this?

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I honestly think they are one of the most detestable clubs in the world. What really grates me though is that the rest of Scottish football meekly puts up with it.

As another posters said, does anyone think St Mirren, Ross County etc could get away with this this?

And with the temperature rising league chairman Murdoch MacLennan wrote to all clubs to confirm that the dispute is being treated as a matter of urgency.


MacLennan’s letter says: “Dear all. You will all be aware that earlier this summer, the SPFL signed a title sponsorship contract with cinch...

...“It is therefore very disappointing that one of our clubs has not felt able to deliver inventory to cinch.


“Your Board will be discussing this situation later this week. I will of course be in touch thereafter to give you a further update.”

The chairman has written to all the clubs and the board is going to discuss it this week.

I'm not sure what else you expect from "the rest of Scottish football"" in the first instance.

[Hibs Class]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I can see it from both sides to be fair. If the league haven’t made their obligations water tight then Rangers would be well within their rights not to threaten the legality of their own sponsorships. It does seem petty but there will be legal implications all over the place. Beggars can’t be choosers but would’ve thought the SPFL would’ve discussed conflicts of interest prior to signing any deals.

They didn't seem too bothered about sponsorship by Ladbrokes or William Hill despite 32Red being shirt sponsors. You can hardly blame SPFL for not questioning the possibility of individual board members' self-interest.

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I honestly think they are one of the most detestable clubs in the world. What really grates me though is that the rest of Scottish football meekly puts up with it.

As another posters said, does anyone think St Mirren, Ross County etc could get away with this this?

If there’s nothing illegal about it why wouldn’t they get away with it? Would you be happy with Hibs potentially reneging on club sponsorship contracts worth far more than this just to appease the SPFL who have failed to make their contracts with clubs watertight?

[RyeSloan]

Weird story that the SPFL are in discussions with the sponsor!

Urmm the discussions should be with Rangers reminding them of their contractual obligations to the league.

I mean not even the SPFL can have conditions of entry into their league that allow member clubs to pick and choose wether they meet the league sponsorship requirements…surely…

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

They didn't seem to bothered about sponsorship by Ladbrokes or William Hill despite 32Red being shirt sponsors. You can hardly blame SPFL for not questioning the possibility of individual board members' self-interest.

Of course it’s self interest. If there’s nothing compulsory about it though then they’re doing nothing wrong, of course this’ll come out in due course but it’s a massive cock up by the SPFL if that’s the case.

[nonshinyfinish]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If there’s nothing illegal about it why wouldn’t they get away with it? Would you be happy with Hibs potentially reneging on club sponsorship contracts worth far more than this just to appease the SPFL who have failed to make their contracts with clubs watertight?

Is there a club sponsorship involved? From reading the article it sounds like the chairman just doesn't want to promote a competitor to his own business, unrelated to Sevco.

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Weird story that the SPFL are in discussions with the sponsor!

Urmm the discussions should be with Rangers reminding them of their contractual obligations to the league.

I mean not even the SPFL can have conditions of entry into their league that allow member clubs to pick and choose wether they meet the league sponsorship requirements…surely…

The sponsor has a deal with the SPFL so it's the SPFL that has to explain itself to the sponsor.

Obviously they also have to try to bring the huns into line.

[MyJo]

Theres a very easy solution to this.

if any club chooses not to participate with the sponsorship requirements of the league they play in then they don’t play in that league. Simples

but that wont be happening and they will accomodate this farce and bend over backwards to sort something out that keeps the huns face straight

[Bristolhibby]

Pathetic from the Huns as per.

You are in the SPFL. Sponsors of said leagues are entitled to real estate on your shirt (the Gold thing on your arms). Irrelevant what it’s advertising as it’s part of playing in the league.

J

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Of course it’s self interest. If there’s nothing compulsory about it though then they’re doing nothing wrong, of course this’ll come out in due course but it’s a massive cock up by the SPFL if that’s the case.

That's how it reads to me - probably some slack wording that leaves room for interpretation.

[Peevemor]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Theres a very easy solution to this.

if any club chooses not to participate with the sponsorship requirements of the league they play in then they don’t play in that league. Simples

but that wont be happening and they will accomodate this farce and bend over backwards to sort something out that keeps the huns face straight

That'd be nice, but sponsors want a league which includes the huns.

[Since90+2]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

That's how it reads to me - probably some slack wording that leaves room for interpretation.

I'd not be believing a word that comes out the boardroom at Sevco.

[hibbysam]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Is there a club sponsorship involved? From reading the article it sounds like the chairman just doesn't want to promote a competitor to his own business, unrelated to Sevco.

Id expect Parks is a sponsor - I doubt Rangers are paying for their buses.