Tech Fans and Players Fed Up With Miserable Agreement With Russell

coit said:
I would imagine that all of these contracts have some sort of language like this, although I do think it is a little strange. I suppose it depends on how narrow the language regarding "material, measureable, and matchable" is. @savbandjacket you reading?

My guess is that this is actually pretty narrow, and that even if Russell were willing to match the financial terms offered by a competitor, GT could argue that some aspect of the competitor's offer was not "matched" by Russell, if we really wanted to end the relationship.
Click to expand...

To me, the argument would be that the value added by the apparel brand being UA, Nike, etc is unmatchable by Russell's brand name. Even if the dollar figures are the same.
Therefore, go away Russell.
Also, where's the ööööin' link on your page?
 
coit said:
I read it down to the part where he linked the contract, and I downloaded and read the contract on my own.

Doesn't really matter, violations of those terms don't mean you can terminate the contract. You have to give notice, and Russell would have to be given time to cure. Which they could easily do by adding a link.
Click to expand...

We know how fast concrete cures, but contracts are a whole different story.
 
T-Bone Burdell said:
To me, the argument would be that the value added by the apparel brand being UA, Nike, etc is unmatchable by Russell's brand name. Even if the dollar figures are the same.
Therefore, go away Russell.
Also, where's the ööööin' link on your page?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure brand recognition isn't material or measurable. Most likely, the competitor would offer some obscure but patented gizmo like "ultra wicking cashmere stretch-fab 9000" for use in the jerseys and pants. Since it is patented and proprietary, Russell wouldn't be able to match it. And GT could say, "hey, we simply have to have this material!"
 
Russell isn't interested in a new contract. They're going to waive the negotiating period and let the contract end.
 
clapper said:
Russell isn't interested in a new contract. They're going to waive the negotiating period and let the contract end.
Click to expand...

Writing on the wall and all that, eh? It's about time someone that has actual knowledge of the situation showed up!
 
coit said:
Writing on the wall and all that, eh? It's about time someone that has actual knowledge of the situation showed up!
Click to expand...
The contract with Russell is available on another Tech site (The Rumble Seat) if you're interested. It ends June 30, 2018. Regardless of the level of frustration on this and other sites, I highly doubt we'll be going to the trouble and expense of trying to exit this early.
 
GSOJacket said:
The contract with Russell is available on another Tech site (The Rumble Seat) if you're interested. It ends June 30, 2018. Regardless of the level of frustration on this and other sites, I highly doubt we'll be going to the trouble and expense of trying to exit this early.
Click to expand...


Well if @clapper's intel is accurate, maybe Russell would like to end the contract now and save themselves $2.5 million or so?
 
Obligatory (can't believe it took this long)

ea8f647d4915bb6d743760caaacc7495.jpg
 
Looks like Adidas and UA have done something in close to our Old Gold before...

09dbfbd98292242c90efd8cd831ff680.jpg


c9616816b5eefca39dcfee807411bba6.jpg
 
coit said:
I would imagine that all of these contracts have some sort of language like this, although I do think it is a little strange. I suppose it depends on how narrow the language regarding "material, measureable, and matchable" is. @savbandjacket you reading?

My guess is that this is actually pretty narrow, and that even if Russell were willing to match the financial terms offered by a competitor, GT could argue that some aspect of the competitor's offer was not "matched" by Russell, if we really wanted to end the relationship.
Click to expand...

If Tech wants me to, I'll find them a way out.
 
Random thought: The issues with Russell are well known. While a new provider will be a solid step in the right direction, isn't much of this on the GTAA anyway in terms of marketing/merchandise? I know Russell has been around a long time, but it seems GTAA can't seem to get out its own way sometimes.
 
AugustaJacket said:
Random thought: The issues with Russell are well known. While a new provider will be a solid step in the right direction, isn't much of this on the GTAA anyway in terms of marketing/merchandise? I know Russell has been around a long time, but it seems GTAA can't seem to get out its own way sometimes.
Click to expand...

This is why it's important for our apparel provider to also serve as a marketing advisor. It would correct a lot of the BS of which we complain. AA people are numbers people. They are not marketing people or style people. Nike is very good at this. So is UA.

As a for instance- Nike does stuff like standardized the numerical font across sports teams as a marketing issue. We can't even get the fonts on the floor of McCamish to make sense.

Russell does not provide this for us. Russell can't even detach itself from its Walmart reputation.
 
JRJacket said:
I decided to do some research on Russell Athletic to see what other sposorships they have. So I looked them up.
Then I LOL'd.
Then I cried.

Colleges
Click to expand...
My parents always told me that I would be known by the company you keep. One of them is a GT grad and pretty darn bright.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top