New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool

Posted by: Dunk

New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 07:22 AM



NEW BALANCE ATTEMPT TO BLOCK LIVERPOOL’S NIKE DEAL

Liverpool were planning to announce Nike as their new kit supplier from the start of next season but High Court action could prevent the deal from going ahead.

http://www.koptalk.com/liverpool-fc-news/new-balance-attempt-to-block-liverpools-nike-deal/

Any thoughts, guys?
Posted by: Oli

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 07:48 AM

Must be something to do with the NB contract. Maybe it´s an advertising stunt by NB but maybe they are in their rights. Hope our people read the NB contract before making the Nike deal. Or did they say "Just do it"...:)
Posted by: wilkij1975

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 08:41 AM

It’s a good way to cement a good relationship.
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 12:54 PM

Originally Posted By Dunk


NEW BALANCE ATTEMPT TO BLOCK LIVERPOOL’S NIKE DEAL

Liverpool were planning to announce Nike as their new kit supplier from the start of next season but High Court action could prevent the deal from going ahead.

http://www.koptalk.com/liverpool-fc-news/new-balance-attempt-to-block-liverpools-nike-deal/

Any thoughts, guys?


I hope the club read and understood the contract otherwise another FU to have quick money, not going to be the first time, like not agreeing to pay for VVD after tapping him, then pay the exact amount a few months later.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 03:27 PM

I hope New Balance win their court action and remain our shirt sponsor. I despise everything about Nike...their products are inferior to New Balance especially when it comes to shirt or training shoe designs. There's also the fact that Nike have been shoving their political opinion down our throats by backing the disgusting behaviour of the likes of Kaepernick and Rapinoe.
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:23 PM

Originally Posted By Pickles
I hope New Balance win their court action and remain our shirt sponsor. I despise everything about Nike...their products are inferior to New Balance especially when it comes to shirt or training shoe designs. There's also the fact that Nike have been shoving their political opinion down our throats by backing the disgusting behaviour of the likes of Kaepernick and Rapinoe.





???
Posted by: lumba

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:27 PM

Been really impressed with the NB kits over the years,can't stand Nike.
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:40 PM

Originally Posted By lumba
Been really impressed with the NB kits over the years,can't stand Nike.


I prefer Nike or Adidas because at least I will be able to buy LFC shirts as there are no NB shops in Mauritius, even in France or Dubai or India where I travel more regularly there are very few shops.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:42 PM

Originally Posted By EnergisedReds
Originally Posted By lumba
Been really impressed with the NB kits over the years,can't stand Nike.


I prefer Nike ok Adidas because at least I will be able to buy LFC shirts as there are no NB shops in Mauritius, even in France or Dubai there are very few shops.


Do they not allow internet shopping in Mauritius?
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:43 PM

Originally Posted By Pickles
Originally Posted By EnergisedReds
Originally Posted By lumba
Been really impressed with the NB kits over the years,can't stand Nike.


I prefer Nike ok Adidas because at least I will be able to buy LFC shirts as there are no NB shops in Mauritius, even in France or Dubai there are very few shops.


Do they not allow internet shopping in Mauritius?


They do, but delivery is as expensive as the shirt almost
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:44 PM

What about Amazon Prime and free shipping?
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:48 PM

Originally Posted By Pickles
What about Amazon Prime and free shipping?


Shipping is not free I would imagine, in fact even Asos don't do free shipping to Mauritius anymore. Anyway, as I travel more or less regularly, i buy once a year on my trip, just that with Nike or Adidas it's much more convenient.
Posted by: ghostgoal

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:51 PM

From what I understand, there is a clause in the NB contract which states they have first refusal on all deals and have the opportunity to match any deal offered to Liverpool. Inferring that, NB must have matched Nike's offer but liverpool have still went with Nike. Liverpool are arguing that NB havent, or rather, cannot match Nike as not only have Nike offered between 70-75 million but are also offering their vast vast distribution network. Something which is on another level to what New Balance has currently. The general feeling is that over the course of Liverpools deal with NB, NB havent quite been able to consistently meet the demand of consumers looking to buy merchandise with Kits often being sold out over the course of the season. There has also been questions arising to NB's ability to cater to further afield consumer bases such as in Asia and India. This has directly led to these said consumers looking to counterfeit and unofficial sources for their LFC merchandise which has subsequently fuelled the ongoing trademark/licensing issue of LFC regarding the name and brand.

Put simply. NB have matched the money but cannot match the distribution. LFC see the distribution as an integral factor in future business and global brand awareness and availability to potential customers. NB believe they have lawful first right of refusal if they match any offer. LFC argue the offer hasnt been matched as they cannot provide the same distribution.
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 04:58 PM

Originally Posted By ghostgoal
From what I understand, there is a clause in the NB contract which states they have first refusal on all deals and have the opportunity to match any deal offered to Liverpool. Inferring that, NB must have matched Nike's offer but liverpool have still went with Nike. Liverpool are arguing that NB havent, or rather, cannot match Nike as not only have Nike offered between 70-75 million but are also offering their vast vast distribution network. Something which is on another level to what New Balance has currently. The general feeling is that over the course of Liverpools deal with NB, NB havent quite been able to consistently meet the demand of consumers looking to buy merchandise with Kits often being sold out over the course of the season. There has also been questions arising to NB's ability to cater to further afield consumer bases such as in Asia and India. This has directly led to these said consumers looking to counterfeit and unofficial sources for their LFC merchandise which has subsequently fuelled the ongoing trademark/licensing issue of LFC regarding the name and brand.

Put simply. NB have matched the money but cannot match the distribution. LFC see the distribution as an integral factor in future business and global brand awareness and availability to potential customers. NB believe they have lawful first right of refusal if they match any offer. LFC argue the offer hasnt been matched as they cannot provide the same distribution.


Yep good point, but it all depends on how it is written in the contract, ie, is it matching the money or something else. That said, as I have personally experienced it in France, Dubai, India and Mauritius, the distribution network of NB is nowhere near Nike and Adidas
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 05:24 PM

Depends on the legal jargon of the original NB contract. Sounds to me that NB have a strong case "if" they have a clause which states they can match any other offer for future contracts. It'll be extremely hard for FSG's legal team to argue against a signed contract. It would also explain why FSG have been trying to trademark anything remotely connected to the club.
Posted by: ghostgoal

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 05:44 PM

Not hard at all. All FSG's legal team would have to do is highlight the terms of the offer from Nike where it specifies what they could offer in terms of distribution that has not been matched by NB. Terms of a contract isnt just monetary, otherwise the business relationship would just be a string of invoices and there wouldnt really be a need to enter into a contract. Correct, it does depend on the Jargon, but NB having a strong case...not really. Offered terms is ambiguous and extensive enough that it would very very easily cover way beyond simply what the club is paid.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 06:18 PM

Again it depends of the legal jargon in the original contract, something we are not privy to. A court of law acts on facts not on any ambiguity.
Posted by: ghostgoal

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 06:26 PM

Yes it does, but if a contract is deemed ambiguous then it cannot rule in either favour on the basis of what is written. A decision is then made. In which case liverpool wins. That being said. I dont think "terms of offer extending beyond annual payment" is at all ambiguous and will almost certainly be the case with regards to Liverpools Kit contract. The terms will not be purely about what NB pay. Distribution will almost certainly be an integral factor in the terms.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 06:40 PM

Pity FSG didn't see all possible outcomes for the add ons of the Coutinho contract, to covering if he's loaned out?

We won't know until the verdict is made what has been written in the contract and what the Court deems fact to rule on.
Posted by: ghostgoal

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 06:49 PM

What has Coutinho's contract have to do with this? A players employment contract is completely different to a Kit sponsorship. I'm sure you mean the negotiation of his transfer? In which case then that is also irrelevant and completely different to what we're talking about. Kit Sponsorship contracts are primarily concerned with manufacture and distribution.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 06:55 PM

Again we don't know what's in the contract...I was highlighting so called ambiguity you eluded to regarding FSG and contracts because they sure as hell mucked up the Coutinho add ons, so who is to say they haven't mucked up their shirt sponsorship deal?
Posted by: ghostgoal

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 07:05 PM

How did they muck up the coutinho add ons? Were they to foresee that a player who has played so well for us, that barca were willing to pay such a high amount for, was going to get loaned out after his first season?

Also, its a pretty big jump in assumption that because you didnt like how we dealt with a transfer that you're suddenly not going to like how we deal with a kit sponsorship. Two completely different things, likely overseen by completely different people from different divisions within the club.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 07:22 PM

I guess it's wait and see what happens. If there is so much ambiguity on shirt sponsorship contracts, then this could drag on to the point FSG may have no option but to accept NB's proposal for fear of losing money. Having it drag on past the date of the contract start. We are after all only 3 and a bit months away from the new deal starting.
Posted by: van Gogh

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 24/09/19 10:00 PM

Another interesting point is that Klopp apparently has a personal contract deal with NB, regarding trainers.

Would be interesting to see him in Nike clothes and NB trainers on the touch line.

How would LFC/NB/Nike be able to solve that issue?
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 25/09/19 02:32 AM

Originally Posted By van Gogh
Another interesting point is that Klopp apparently has a personal contract deal with NB, regarding trainers.

Would be interesting to see him in Nike clothes and NB trainers on the touch line.

How would LFC/NB/Nike be able to solve that issue?


Don't think that would be an issue, players wear different branded boots all the time.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 25/09/19 06:20 AM

I think Nike would be p*ssed if everytime Klopp bounces onto the pitch or strolls up to a camera in New Balance trainers!

If you were New Balance and Nike get preference for the shirt deal then you'd be making bright fluorescent, flashing trainers for Klopp...lol
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 25/09/19 06:44 AM

Originally Posted By Pickles
I think Nike would be p*ssed if everytime Klopp bounces onto the pitch or strolls up to a camera in New Balance trainers!

If you were New Balance and Nike get preference for the shirt deal then you'd be making bright fluorescent, flashing trainers for Klopp...lol



As I said, nothing new, players choose the brand of their boots, same with managers.
Posted by: ghostgoal

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 25/10/19 07:35 PM

And as predicted by myself, the case was dismissed in favour of LFC on the grounds that New Balance could not meet the distribution that Nike offers, therefore did not match the Deal. Unlucky Pickles. Looks like you were talking absolute shyte....again. Better luck next time.
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 26/10/19 10:11 AM

Originally Posted By ghostgoal
And as predicted by myself, the case was dismissed in favour of LFC on the grounds that New Balance could not meet the distribution that Nike offers, therefore did not match the Deal. Unlucky Pickles. Looks like you were talking absolute shyte....again. Better luck next time.


NB apparently low balled it though, I understand they were paying 45m a year but decided to match Nike's 30m bid. Nike also have a clause regarding CL that the lawyer didn't seem to know, weird if true.
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 26/10/19 10:43 AM

Originally Posted By ghostgoal
And as predicted by myself, the case was dismissed in favour of LFC on the grounds that New Balance could not meet the distribution that Nike offers, therefore did not match the Deal. Unlucky Pickles. Looks like you were talking absolute shyte....again. Better luck next time.


Well done ghostgoal you win a trophy!


Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 26/10/19 11:39 AM

Originally Posted By Pickles
Originally Posted By ghostgoal
And as predicted by myself, the case was dismissed in favour of LFC on the grounds that New Balance could not meet the distribution that Nike offers, therefore did not match the Deal. Unlucky Pickles. Looks like you were talking absolute shyte....again. Better luck next time.


Well done ghostgoal you win a trophy!






You shouldn't give away your toy like that
Posted by: Pickles

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 26/10/19 11:43 AM

Originally Posted By EnergisedReds
Originally Posted By Pickles
Originally Posted By ghostgoal
And as predicted by myself, the case was dismissed in favour of LFC on the grounds that New Balance could not meet the distribution that Nike offers, therefore did not match the Deal. Unlucky Pickles. Looks like you were talking absolute shyte....again. Better luck next time.


Well done ghostgoal you win a trophy!






You shouldn't give away your toy like that


I stole your pacifier to award it to ghostgoal...
Posted by: EnergisedReds

Re: New Balance's High Court action against Liverpool - 26/10/19 12:29 PM

Originally Posted By Pickles
Originally Posted By EnergisedReds
Originally Posted By Pickles
Originally Posted By ghostgoal
And as predicted by myself, the case was dismissed in favour of LFC on the grounds that New Balance could not meet the distribution that Nike offers, therefore did not match the Deal. Unlucky Pickles. Looks like you were talking absolute shyte....again. Better luck next time.


Well done ghostgoal you win a trophy!






You shouldn't give away your toy like that


I stole your pacifier to award it to ghostgoal...



No, we all know it's yours