Topic: New Kit thread

[CraigDS]

That's disappointing, that's the main issue most of us have, getting the kit back in stock, it's months before they get new stock in when initial stock runs out, that's if NB order new stock.

I'll say it again, NB kits have been nice, but production & distribution have been awful.

I’d be surprised if it’s not mentioned.

Production was mentioned with regards to South America and them receiving a sample from a Brazilian manufacturer and it not being up to standard. Nothing else mentioned so far though. You’d hope it would be as it’s surely pretty instrumental in NB being able to match Nike’s offer.

[dudleyred]

Billy hogan on the stand now and i have to say the first bit makes us look amateurish

NB saying the NIKE contract says if we fail to qualify for the champions league we dont have guaranteed distribution rights

Hogan then declares in court he hasnt read that in the contract

NB lawyer refers him to the email with the long contract attached....Hogan says he hasnt read that long contract but only the shorter version!?!


Apologies if i have misunderstood it 

[CraigDS]

Billy hogan on the stand now and i have to say the first bit makes us look amateurish

NB saying the NIKE contract says if we fail to qualify for the champions league we dont have guaranteed distribution rights

Hogan then declares in court he hasnt read that in the contract

NB lawyer refers him to the email with the long contract attached....Hogan says he hasnt read that long contract but only the shorter version!?!

The email was sent from Nike’s legal team to our legal team. As Hogan said, he’d speak to our legal team and get their advice after they have read it - that is their job after all.

[dudleyred]

The email was sent from Nike’s legal team to our legal team. As Hogan said, he’d speak to our legal team and get their advice after they have read it - that is their job after all.

Seems odd that he declares he doesnt know about it in court mind doesnt it?

Surely he knows damn well thats in there now

[CraigDS]

Seems odd that he declares he doesnt know about it in court mind doesnt it?

Surely he knows damn well thats in there now

Well if he’s not read it then he’s 100% better saying that in court, as then he can deny knowing anything that’s in there and cannot answer questions on the specifics.

He isn’t a lawyer, we have a team of them who will look through contracts like that and give their advice so I really don’t think it’s that strange he hasn’t read it page to page.

[dudleyred]

all too complicated for me haha

interesting following the case though

[dudleyred]

it did make me laugh the NB sales figures though. they have stores that sell a dozen kits a year and included a store in the numbers that hadnt sold any!

[CraigDS]

Hogan says the club value the Nike deal at £75m.

[campioni]

NB sold 2.9m kits last season which generated revenue of £64m.

So according to that, if similar under Nike, that would be a roughly £12.8m cut for us off shirt sales. Although imagine Nike could possibly generate a slightly higher revenue over the same number of shirts.

Did I read right that Nike are projecting to sell the same amount of shirts next season? Surely the whole point of them being able to offer more accessibility is to sell more shirts than we're currently selling?

[CraigDS]

Did I read right that Nike are projecting to sell the same amount of shirts next season? Surely the whole point of them being able to offer more accessibility is to sell more shirts than we're currently selling?

As Hogan put it - that would be the initial reserved production time. This could end up being more.

[Skrtelonparole]

Hogan says the club value the Nike deal at £75m.

He informed Nb that they had to stump up £75m to match it. But since we never showed the offer to them, they couldn’t know if they could match distribution and others. Regardless of whom is right or wrong morally (NB failing to produce etc), i think legally we (LFC) could be in some trouble here...

Someone at the club had missed/forgotten/ignored the matching clause. It became apparent way too late, and NB saw a chance to see a rivals offer. That offer was then not as high/bad as NB initially thought (”Nike lowballing”) - and hence NB thought they could match it on paper... That’s why Morpuss aims at their distribution - not production. It’s hard to show they can’t produce X shirts, and easier to show they can’t scale to the right number of doors...

[dudleyred]

we were also in discussions with Puma - glad thats fallen away!

[CraigDS]

He informed Nb that they had to stump up £75m to match it. But since we never showed the offer to them, they couldn’t know if they could match distribution and others. Regardless of whom is right or wrong morally (NB failing to produce etc), i think legally we (LFC) could be in some trouble here...

NB were told it was worth £75m, not that they had to stump up £75m to match it.

Someone at the club had missed/forgotten/ignored the matching clause. It became apparent way too late, and NB saw a chance to see a rivals offer. That offer was then not as high/bad as NB initially thought (”Nike lowballing”) - and hence NB thought they could match it on paper... That’s why Morpuss aims at their distribution - not production. It’s hard to show they can’t produce X shirts, and easier to show they can’t scale to the right number of doors...

It’s very easy to show they can’t keep up with production - their lack of South American production (poor quality) and constant major production issues are evidence of this.

The doors is the main issue though, and we’ve already shown they have no real grasp on what sort of numbers they can offer at all, and their current ‘estimated’ numbers are made up of stores who have no obligation to take up any stock on NB’s say so.

[Charlie Adams fried egg]

Doors seems to be the key issue here.
If NB cannot credibly demonstrate the number of doors hey can access then, it's difficult to see how they can match the Nike deal. The fact that they appear to be using non owned running shoe outlets as potential numbers shows they are unlikely to match Nike's distribution.

edit : Just seen post above.

[Skrtelonparole]

NB were told it was worth £75m, not that they had to stump up £75m to match it.


It’s very easy to show they can’t keep up with production - their lack of South American production (poor quality) and constant major production issues are evidence of this.

The doors is the main issue though, and we’ve already shown they have no real grasp on what sort of numbers they can offer at all, and their current ‘estimated’ numbers are made up of stores who have no obligation to take up any stock on NB’s say so.

Yeah, you are right on the 75m, though depending on how the matching clause is written, perhaps they could buy their way out of a lower distribution by matching the perceived value - which they would probably be reluctant to do as it’s a lot of cash.

On the number of doors vs production, I think that is a deliberate strategy as we perceive their distribution potential for 20/21 weaker than production 20/21 - at least on what can be proved.

[Irakla]

I reckon the New Balance matching clause was the reason we let our commercial director Olly dale go, it was in July and a very sudden departure, also since then we have not appointed anyone yet, probably management thought this would go to court, and they wanted some one responsible for this cock up to to leave.

[CraigDS]

I reckon the New Balance matching clause was the reason we let our commercial director Olly dale go, it was in July and a very sudden departure, also since then we have not appointed anyone yet, probably management thought this would go to court, and they wanted some one responsible for this cock up to to leave.

Probably not, as don’t think he had anything to do with the original NB deal. It’s also fairly standard so not sure it’s a ‘cock up’.

[TheYashLFC]

Hogan says the club value the Nike deal at £75m.

Really good deal for the club!

[thekitkatshuffler]

Really good deal for the club!

Is it?

Time will tell.

[TheYashLFC]

Is it?

Time will tell.

I think in the sense that it's a deal that's worth more than everyone else and maybe even Man Utd I think at least it's in the right direction.

But you're right.

[CraigDS]

Case has resumed after lunch.

Seems NB’s counter offer was to basically copy Nike’s offer word for word. So does seem the case hangs on if NB can actually match that, or if they knew they could not but tried to wing it (I imagine either in the hope we caved or possibly for a payout).

[Samio]

My question is simple.

Why would NB want to continue to be our suppliers still? You'd think the relationship would be beyond repair...

[dudleyred]

Case has resumed after lunch.

Seems NB’s counter offer was to basically copy Nike’s offer word for word. So does seem the case hangs on if NB can actually match that, or if they knew they could not but tried to wing it (I imagine either in the hope we caved or possibly for a payout).

amazed NB have more wholly owned doors than Nike though although their overall reach seems alot less

[CraigDS]

My question is simple.

Why would NB want to continue to be our suppliers still? You'd think the relationship would be beyond repair...

Because we are the jewel in their crown, and without us they really don’t have any top top bracket club on their books, and none are really coming available for a while either.

[campioni]

My question is simple.

Why would NB want to continue to be our suppliers still? You'd think the relationship would be beyond repair...

Kit manufacturers of the Champions of Europe and one of the biggest clubs in the world? That's massive exposure for their brand. Without us their football portfolio is non-existent.

[CraigDS]

amazed NB have more wholly owned doors than Nike though although their overall reach seems alot less

I’m not sure they have more wholly owned, but they have more including franchises. The numbers were spoken about on Fri so will have to double check that.

The problem is, as NB have confirmed, is most of the NB franchises are shoe based (or running) and likely won’t want to stock Liverpool gear.

[dudleyred]

I’m not sure they have more wholly owned, but they have more including franchises. The numbers were spoken about on Fri so will have to double check that.

The problem is, as NB have confirmed, is most of the NB franchises are shoe based (or running) and likely won’t want to stock Liverpool gear.

sorry yes says more wholly owned or controlled stores in the last update

[CraigDS]

Nike apparently discussed co-branded products with LeBron, and also Converse.

[CraigDS]

NB finish questioning Hogan by suggesting number of doors are not important but rather units sold.

Strange thing to finish on for them imo, as definitely suggests they know they can’t match on doors but have both said 2.9m units. However it’s impossible to prove how many would be sold if our gear was available in more stores - are plenty of suggestions on here that people have not bought shirts as could not find them available.

[CraigDS]

Michael Cox (Director of Merchandising at LFC) is called as the next witness. Just confirms that on field success helps commercial deals then no more questions for him!

[Skrtelonparole]

So if the club was convinced Nike was a better partner, the distribution segment would have been construed by us to contractually shut out NB from matching. Nothing in the contract on Lebron James, so no point bringing that up. I guess it means the whole case hangs on if we can prove NB distribution projection is not credible, and that this was not a prejudicated position by Hogan et al.. I guess that is what NB is arguing: ”Never got a fair chance to match, but look - now we can!”.
Going to be interesting this!

[CraigDS]

So if the club was convinced Nike was a better partner, the distribution segment would have been construed by us to contractually shut out NB from matching. Nothing in the contract on Lebron James, so no point bringing that up. I guess it means the whole case hangs on if we can prove NB distribution projection is not credible, and that this was not a prejudicated position by Hogan et al.. I guess that is what NB is arguing: ”Never got a fair chance to match, but look - now we can!”.
Going to be interesting this!

What I don’t get is that the contract from Nike isn’t a final agreed upon contract. Surely Nike could throw in something like a cast iron co-branded Converse shoe, and name someone (even if not as big as LeBron) and NB wouldn’t be able to match at all.

[classycarra]

So if the club was convinced Nike was a better partner, the distribution segment would have been construed by us to contractually shut out NB from matching. Nothing in the contract on Lebron James, so no point bringing that up. I guess it means the whole case hangs on if we can prove NB distribution projection is not credible, and that this was not a prejudicated position by Hogan et al.. I guess that is what NB is arguing: ”Never got a fair chance to match, but look - now we can!”.
Going to be interesting this!

This point Craig made should surely impact negatively on NBs assertion that they can match the offer, and that they're chancing it a little, since it seems apparent they can't get the shirts distributed on a remotely similar scale.
 
"Seems NB’s counter offer was to basically copy Nike’s offer word for word."

[CraigDS]

That’s it for today.

Final written submissions at 11am tomorrow. That’s mainly what will be used to make a decision on this.

[CraigDS]

This point Craig made should surely impact negatively on NBs assertion that they can match the offer, and that they're chancing it a little, since it seems apparent they can't get the shirts distributed on a remotely similar scale.
 
"Seems NB’s counter offer was to basically copy Nike’s offer word for word."

Their numbers have been ripped to pieces on Friday. They’ve over estimated potential numbers in nearly every territory, have provided very incorrect numbers to the club previously, and have included stores where they have no control over what they stock and/or which are extremely unlikely to even want to stock a football kit given they are shoe/running stores.

[Flaccido Dongingo]

As much as I like the NB kits, the Nike deal is clearly worth more in terms of their global reach and profile.

[Skrtelonparole]

What I don’t get is that the contract from Nike isn’t a final agreed upon contract. Surely Nike could throw in something like a cast iron co-branded Converse shoe, and name someone (even if not as big as LeBron) and NB wouldn’t be able to match at all.

Yeah, I agree on cast iron thing, but maybe not a shoe... A co-branded NB shoe could be seen as a matched offer. Lots of things probably happened before as well - like for example how much they told Nike on having the matching offer clause at all.
One theory (just a theory), is that we saw this too late (olly guy sending his we’re screwed email) - meaning we had to come up w something that was not too inconvenient for Nike and screw up that discussion. Our counsel - if good enough - probably suggested distribution as the ”poison pill” as claimed.

[Skrtelonparole]

Their numbers have been ripped to pieces on Friday. They’ve over estimated potential numbers in nearly every territory, have provided very incorrect numbers to the club previously, and have included stores where they have no control over what they stock and/or which are extremely unlikely to even want to stock a football kit given they are shoe/running stores.

Yeah, this is key for us. Especially as we could also show they have fucked up in the past (which is why we want to go with Nike, and placed the so called ”distribution poison pill” in the Nike-contract).

[number 168]

My question is simple.

Why would NB want to continue to be our suppliers still? You'd think the relationship would be beyond repair...

As Americans say "It's business". I doubt being friends has anything to do with it.

[CraigDS]

Yeah, I agree on cast iron thing, but maybe not a shoe... A co-branded NB shoe could be seen as a matched offer. Lots of things probably happened before as well - like for example how much they told Nike on having the matching offer clause at all.

I’m not sure an NB shoe matches up to a co-branded shoe with another company (i.e. Converse). Could well just add in co-branded with a Nike shoe AND a Converse.

One theory (just a theory), is that we saw this too late (olly guy sending his we’re screwed email) - meaning we had to come up w something that was not too inconvenient for Nike and screw up that discussion. Our counsel - if good enough - probably suggested distribution as the ”poison pill” as claimed.

From what they’ve said the distribution issue has been a MAJOR issue for the entirety of the contract with NB and many discussions have been had with them over the years with no positive fixes being made by them. That’s one of the reasons the club simply did not believe they could match Nike - as they’ve been unable to do so previously.

So I’m not sure it was a sudden idea to use that to be honest, I think it’s always been one of the things they’ve wanted to improve with any new deal.