Wisconsin and Under Armour

GBP4EVER said:
“Under Armour has recently made the difficult decision to discontinue our partnership with UCLA, as we have been paying for marketing benefits that we have not received for an extended time period,” the company said in a statement supplied to The Times. “The agreement allows us to terminate in such an event and we are exercising that right.”
Click to expand...
This is a pretty weak statement. On field/court performance maybe a “marketing benefit” but then why not terminate Navy or Texas Tech? Would love to see the Force Majeure language in these deals and clauses
 
Packinatl said:
This is a pretty weak statement. On field/court performance maybe a “marketing benefit” but then why not terminate Navy or Texas Tech? Would love to see the Force Majeure language in these deals and clauses
Click to expand...
I think it's some of both UA overpaid for UCLA Brand and are not getting results off on the field and probably selling UA/UCLA branded stuff and also UA being in bad shape money wise. Now if they demand to drop most or all their teams they support then that will be a different tune to sing
 
GBP4EVER said:
I think it's some of both UA overpaid for UCLA Brand and are not getting results off on the field and probably selling UA/UCLA branded stuff and also UA being in bad shape money wise. Now if they demand to drop most or all their teams they support then that will be a different tune to sing
Click to expand...
Did they overpay? Sure but that’s not a reason to terminate a contract. UCLA cannot demand UA to drop anyone but if UA keeps Texas Tech, Cincinnati, Hawaii and others it’s not just bad optics it can’t make the argument about not receiving marketing benefits. And I would highly doubt sales of apparel are in any agreement

The only hope UA has is there is an opt out and it better be pretty specific language. And look at it this way also. UA backed out of MLB deal, negotiated delayed payments, this is all about cash flow and staying alive
 
Packinatl said:
Did they overpay? Sure but that’s not a reason to terminate a contract. UCLA cannot demand UA to drop anyone but if UA keeps Texas Tech, Cincinnati, Hawaii and others it’s not just bad optics it can’t make the argument about not receiving marketing benefits. And I would highly doubt sales of apparel are in any agreement

The only hope UA has is there is an opt out and it better be pretty specific language. And look at it this way also. UA backed out of MLB deal, negotiated delayed payments, this is all about cash flow and staying alive
Click to expand...
My guess if UA says the agreement allows them to terminate per contract that they must make bowl games and/or NCAA BB tourney so many times and if they fail to do so UA has right to opt out of deal.
 
GBP4EVER said:
My guess if UA says the agreement allows them to terminate per contract that they must make bowl games and/or NCAA BB tourney so many times and if they fail to do so UA has right to opt out of deal.
Click to expand...
I highly doubt there is that language in the contract. My guess is that they are interpreting some Force Majeure language (no NCAA hoops tournament?). Marketing benefit they have not received is at best dubious.
 
GBP4EVER said:
My guess if UA says the agreement allows them to terminate per contract that they must make bowl games and/or NCAA BB tourney so many times and if they fail to do so UA has right to opt out of deal.
Click to expand...
In a material breach any performance shortfalls would be next to impossible to prove in court. UCLA could go 0-32 in hoops and UA would still get benefits.
 
It appears that UA may cease to exist if they don't stop hemmoraging cash. I think their problem is worse than just a couple of contracts.
 
TW said:
It appears that UA may cease to exist if they don't stop hemmoraging cash. I think their problem is worse than just a couple of contracts.
Click to expand...
It’s been an issue for a few months. Acquisition is possible, who is an interesting discussion
 
GBP4EVER said:
My guess if UA says the agreement allows them to terminate per contract that they must make bowl games and/or NCAA BB tourney so many times and if they fail to do so UA has right to opt out of deal.
Click to expand...
Got my hands on the agreement....in the 37 pages there are no performance clauses in the agreement
 
Packinatl said:
Got my hands on the agreement....in the 37 pages there are no performance clauses in the agreement
Click to expand...
So must be like you said must have a clause in it with something with the team not playing games that lets them out of deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top