Ruling On Latest Fat Mike Court Case – Still Waiting...

tazzabear

Well-Known Member
contract is more devious than that I'm afraid.

SDI match only the material terms, which have a specific meaning under the contract. As long as they do that they get the renewal, and the other terms stay the same (including the matching clause going forward.)
If we got a ridiculous offer that they wouldn't match though, that would break the chain, and we would be rid of them.
What if Elite offer £100m+ and SD don’t match it.
They’re out?
So, they get the second contract for a £1.
Third contract “normalises” the business.
 

Eddie Doc

Well-Known Member
contract is more devious than that I'm afraid.

SDI match only the material terms, which have a specific meaning under the contract. As long as they do that they get the renewal, and the other terms stay the same (including the matching clause going forward.)

If we got a ridiculous offer that they wouldn't match though, that would break the chain, and we would be rid of them.
He'll match it to fuk with us.
 

Harrogate Bluenose

Well-Known Member
contract is more devious than that I'm afraid.

SDI match only the material terms, which have a specific meaning under the contract. As long as they do that they get the renewal, and the other terms stay the same (including the matching clause going forward.)

If we got a ridiculous offer that they wouldn't match though, that would break the chain, and we would be rid of them.
And if they matched it we would get more profits. Somehow you would think people who are in high places would have the mentality to organise such a deal. Instead of spending millions at court.
 

Subway Bear

Well-Known Member
The flip side is he can match all he likes, but unless we swap kit supplier, one that will supply SD there is %^*& all he can do about it. All the other stuff not made by Hummell, polo shirts, teddies, cups etc will be sold by SD as well, we still dont need to buy it from there though.
 

Plantation pioneer

Well-Known Member
Let’s hope the lawyers who looked over this are nowhere near the club now , or the person who signed it off. Again it’s the fans who will suffer
 

Plantation pioneer

Well-Known Member
The flip side is he can match all he likes, but unless we swap kit supplier, one that will supply SD there is %^*& all he can do about it. All the other stuff not made by Hummell, polo shirts, teddies, cups etc will be sold by SD as well, we still dont need to buy it from there though.
Surely it’s not as easy as that? Would be great if true
 

Copeland road

Well-Known Member
So how many years can he match contract offers for

I understand this new 1 with elite an Hummel

Once that runs out

Is he allowed to match the next 1
An so on

When does his own contract to match new contracts run out
 

ald

Well-Known Member
The legal fees are now sensibly capped. The damages are capped at £1m.

The £3m was to get out of the 7 year deal early. If we hadn’t paid the £3m we would be doing all of this in a few years, during which we would be making no money and selling no strips.

It’s inaccurate to report the £3m was for nothing, as some are.
I confess that I am a long way from convinced that the “£1m damages cap” will in fact stand up to scrutiny. The courts don’t like liquidated damages provisions / other provisions that aren’t a genuine pre-estimate of losses. And here I suspect that the heads of loss for damages purposes probably go beyond the losses which are purported to be within the “cap”. Maybe the cap will stand up to scrutiny but intuitively I have serious misgivings that it will.
 

jweebear

Well-Known Member
This has got personal between king and ashley.

And its affecting the thinking of normal fans. That will cripple our club.

Why the %^*& would you buy a fake top? To spite Ashley!!!!

Ashley has agreed to give us the same profit as any other that decide they are interested.

We need to stop costing the club millions in court fees unless we have a chance of winning.

Someone's ego is now costing us.

We need to just go with the flow and ensure we have another company who will bid with ashley. That way he only wins if the other company submits a low price.
Ashley doesn't want to sell our merchandise, he wants a watertight contract sure enough, however he will sell little of our merchdise, and our clubs share of little will be very little. We need other outlets for our merchandise we have it in the Humnel/Elite deal, let' s hope can can keep that going.
 

Dotty_84

Active Member
In deals where if a party matches it, it has to be taken is insane and opens up cans of worms surely matching but the offer but its allowed to be chosen or not should be the most a deal should go?

This opens up to monopolising.
 

MSF

Well-Known Member
So how many years can he match contract offers for

I understand this new 1 with elite an Hummel

Once that runs out

Is he allowed to match the next 1
An so on

When does his own contract to match new contracts run out
SD can match contracts in perpetuity. Its part of the contract we signed in 2017.
 

GREGRFC

Well-Known Member
I confess that I am a long way from convinced that the “£1m damages cap” will in fact stand up to scrutiny. The courts don’t like liquidated damages provisions / other provisions that aren’t a genuine pre-estimate of losses. And here I suspect that the heads of loss for damages purposes probably go beyond the losses which are purported to be within the “cap”. Maybe the cap will stand up to scrutiny but intuitively I have serious misgivings that it will.
I know what you mean but they are judging that the contracts will be upheld to the absolute letter despite almost accepting part are unorthodox. Even saying something along the lines of “the contract won’t be rewritten at court, it will be honoured.”
 

Harrogate Bluenose

Well-Known Member
I remember reading that the judge previously ruled that Hummel weren’t obligated to provide Sports Direct with any kit.

Surely everything remains the same. We boycott SD and the megastore and continue to buy our merch from Elite.
But Elite dont have the rights to sell the shirts! SD won today so the deal we signed with Elite is void.
 

MSF

Well-Known Member
I remember reading that the judge previously ruled that Hummel weren’t obligated to provide Sports Direct with any kit.

Surely everything remains the same. We boycott SD and the megastore and continue to buy our merch from Elite.
And if Ashley wins case to have an injunction on Elite?
 

The Ranger

Well-Known Member
It’s ok kicking it down the road until after 55 but at some point we have to find a way out of this contract otherwise every year the tims will be making x amount of millions more
Who gives a f..k about the tim's, they will be paying plenty out in compensation
 

ronadamus_prime

Well-Known Member
So essentially we are stuck in a predicament of being unable to sign a retail deal with someone else because of the matching clause in the contract that we signed a few summers ago. So the last 2 years worth of court appearances have been for sod all. Other than to further ruin the working relationship between the club and SD/Ashley. Which let's face it was never on a good footing to begin with.

Seeing a lot of people calling for contradictory stances. The only way we rid ourselves of him, is for the fans to suck it up and continue buying merch in spite of Ashley and without further damaging the club itself. The only way we get a potential better deal from another company is if we can show that it's worth their effort to give us one. Here is the kicker, they still need to understand that with any potential deal agreed, that the new potential retail partner could be sniped on exactly the same set of contractual terms by SD and Mike Ashley. So we are stuck in a loop? Unless someone offers a deal that either goes way above what SD are willing to go or isn't financially viable for the new retail partner either.

Calls for another boycott are pointless. As most of us already do boycott Ashley and his business' in some way or another already. This is grimmer than I thought it could be. We are stuck basically. Other than us trying to renegotiate terms and paying to remove the infinite renewal clause. I don't see a way forward on this in the short term. Long term, unless King leaves and some else comes in, might remove the petty side of things. Sadly all of this is conjecture.
 

tazzabear

Well-Known Member
So essentially we are stuck in a predicament of being unable to sign a retail deal with someone else because of the matching clause in the contract that we signed a few summers ago. So the last 2 years worth of court appearances have been for sod all. Other than to further ruin the working relationship between the club and SD/Ashley. Which let's face it was never on a good footing to begin with.

Seeing a lot of people calling for contradictory stances. The only way we rid ourselves of him, is for the fans to suck it up and continue buying merch in spite of Ashley and without further damaging the club itself. The only way we get a potential better deal from another company is if we can show that it's worth their effort to give us one. Here is the kicker, they still need to understand that with any potential deal agreed, that the new potential retail partner could be sniped on exactly the same set of contractual terms by SD and Mike Ashley. So we are stuck in a loop? Unless someone offers a deal that either goes way above what SD are willing to go or isn't financially viable for the new retail partner either.

Calls for another boycott are pointless. As most of us already do boycott Ashley and his business' in some way or another already. This is grimmer than I thought it could be. We are stuck basically. Other than us trying to renegotiate terms and paying to remove the infinite renewal clause. I don't see a way forward on this in the short term. Long term, unless King leaves and some else comes in, might remove the petty side of things. Sadly all of this is conjecture.
One thing I’d be hoping for here is better lawyers!
 

Marty101

Well-Known Member
I know what you mean but they are judging that the contracts will be upheld to the absolute letter despite almost accepting part are unorthodox. Even saying something along the lines of “the contract won’t be rewritten at court, it will be honoured.”
This is what tends to give me hope that the cap will be upheld too. Really difficult to see that the Court can hold us to terms that are pretty awful for us on the basis "well, that's what you signed," and not do the same to SDI re the cap.

It's true courts don't like exclusion or limitation clauses, but this would have been entered into between 2 corporate bodies with the benefit of legal advice.
 

Harrogate Bluenose

Well-Known Member
And SD will have claims on their share. Elite won’t be paying back theirs. Total feck up unless anyone wants to put me right. We pay two companies to sell the same shirt.
I am hoping the 1m damages cap that is being branded about is true. If not heads have to roll in the directors office for putting the club in this position due to a personal vendetta
 

Mufasa

Well-Known Member
"The petty side of things" WTF you on about?


So essentially we are stuck in a predicament of being unable to sign a retail deal with someone else because of the matching clause in the contract that we signed a few summers ago. So the last 2 years worth of court appearances have been for sod all. Other than to further ruin the working relationship between the club and SD/Ashley. Which let's face it was never on a good footing to begin with.

Seeing a lot of people calling for contradictory stances. The only way we rid ourselves of him, is for the fans to suck it up and continue buying merch in spite of Ashley and without further damaging the club itself. The only way we get a potential better deal from another company is if we can show that it's worth their effort to give us one. Here is the kicker, they still need to understand that with any potential deal agreed, that the new potential retail partner could be sniped on exactly the same set of contractual terms by SD and Mike Ashley. So we are stuck in a loop? Unless someone offers a deal that either goes way above what SD are willing to go or isn't financially viable for the new retail partner either.

Calls for another boycott are pointless. As most of us already do boycott Ashley and his business' in some way or another already. This is grimmer than I thought it could be. We are stuck basically. Other than us trying to renegotiate terms and paying to remove the infinite renewal clause. I don't see a way forward on this in the short term. Long term, unless King leaves and some else comes in, might remove the petty side of things. Sadly all of this is conjecture.
 
Top