Lidl-Trek (no longer Radioshack-Leopard Trek)

[peloton]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rb-Qao0va4c&feature=related

guess it won't be continued...

 

[thehog]

guess it won't be continued...

What's interesting is the end note... hardly gives the impression that its just the local franchise.... it clearly states "Mercedes Benz" to be continued.... - obviously signed off by corporate.

Can't wait for the Nissan Leaf commercials with the Shlecks' on the same racetrack!

 

[Benotti69]

What's interesting is the end note... hardly gives the impression that its just the local franchise.... it clearly states "Mercedes Benz" to be continued.... - obviously signed off by corporate.

Can't wait for the Nissan Leaf commercials with the Shlecks' on the same racetrack!

nissan leaf commercials with them loading boxes into one from an amgen factory winking to the camera is more likely

 

[Boeing]

OK I have a room temperature PBR for the poster with the best new book title to come from this merger

It's not about the Tour?

It's all about the bike?

 

[thehog]

OK I have a room temperature PBR for the poster with the best new book title to come from this merger

It's not about the Tour?

It's all about the bike?

Interview with a Vampire?

Sleeping with the enemy?

Rich Dad / Poor Dad?

 

[Race Radio]

OK I have a room temperature PBR for the poster with the best new book title to come from this merger

It's not about the Tour?

It's all about the bike?

"Might as well marry a hooker"

 

[Aleajactaest]

All contracts I've dealt with have "out" clauses. It’s fairly standard as often events arise out of ordinary. But every contract I've ever worked on or written has a consultation period and forced negotiation to settle the “out”. No contract would ever state "right to terminate without cause or consultation". Not possible and I don’t think it would even be legal to have such – especially in a highly regulated country like Luxembourg. Most if not al contracts would have a notice period also that is to be sent in writing.

I think Becca has acted foolishly by signing up Nissan because he still hasn't dealt with the Mercedes issue. When they state they're considering their position what they mean is their lawyers are looking over the contracts for financial recourse. It’s coming. It also wouldn’t surprise me if Mercedes have contacted the UCI to understand how the ProTour licences are issued as this will also have bearing on the outcome.

I never said it was without cause. I said there might be an out clause. Lots of contracts have them and they can be exercised by payment of prescribed damages. There is no "right" to negotiation if the damages are paid. The termination of a lease is a clear example of this. And BTW, MOST is not all.

 

[thehog]

I never said it was without cause. I said there might be an out clause. Lots of contracts have them and they can be exercised by payment of prescribed damages. There is no "right" to negotiation if the damages are paid. The termination of a lease is a clear example of this. And BTW, MOST is not all.

I know what you said. But the point we're arguing is that Mercedes hasn't been consulted nor had the opportunity to negotiate the "out". The first they heard that their good money was not wanted is via a press statement welcoming Nissan. As you state the "out clause" is discussed between the two parties who have the contract and until its agreed you don't announce a new sponsor. I'm also sure the contact will have a stipulation on the time period between "out" and an announcement of the new sponsor. 60 to 90 days is standard.

For reason of correctness the “out clause” is generally referred as "termination of convenience" and right you are it generally has a sliding scale of termination payment depending on how far they're into the contract. It diminishes the risk for both parties if one exercises the right to terminate. Mercedes have made an upfront investment and they need to temper that risk if the other party withdraws. The same for Becca if Mercedes withdraw they would be liable for a risk payment. Its standard practice. Those on this forum stating its “just business” don’t understand contract law.

The T-Mobile withdrawal is a good example. They had to pay the management company the remaining years on the contract even thou they’d withdrawn their name from the sponsorship. Highroad was the new name although it was funded with T-Mobile money.

 

[Martin318is]

Just a friendly reminder to people that this is a RadioShack-Leopard Trek thread - not a LA thread....

 

[MacRoadie]

Maybe this will get some of you to move on:

July 1: Daimler-Benz takes out a holding in its oldest general distributor, "Meris & Cie. S.A." and forms "Mercedes-Benz Luxembourg S.A.".

http://et.mercedes-benz-clubs.com/mediawiki/index.php/Chronik_1991_-_1998/en

http://www.alacrastore.com/storecontent/Thomson_M&A/Daimler_Benz_AG_acquires_Meris_Cie_SA-672954040

http://www.mercedes-benz.lu/content/luxembourg/mpc/mpc_luxembourg_website/de/home_mpc/passengercars/home/passengercars_world/legend_and_history/Mercedes_benz_luxembourg.html

Mercedes-Benz Luxembourg is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Daimler AG, just like Mercedes-Benz USA, Mercedes-Benz Spain, Mercedes-Benz South Africa...you get the idea.

 

[ultimobici]

Interview with a Vampire?

Sleeping with the enemy?

Rich Dad / Poor Dad?

Trading Places?

 

[ultimobici]

Maybe this will get some of you to move on:



http://et.mercedes-benz-clubs.com/mediawiki/index.php/Chronik_1991_-_1998/en

http://www.alacrastore.com/storecontent/Thomson_M&A/Daimler_Benz_AG_acquires_Meris_Cie_SA-672954040

http://www.mercedes-benz.lu/content/luxembourg/mpc/mpc_luxembourg_website/de/home_mpc/passengercars/home/passengercars_world/legend_and_history/Mercedes_benz_luxembourg.html

Mercedes-Benz Luxembourg is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Daimler AG, just like Mercedes-Benz USA, Mercedes-Benz Spain, Mercedes-Benz South Africa...you get the idea.

One thing that I think has been overlooked is although Luxembourg is small, its GDP per capita is second only to Qatar. Pretty much every country in the western world is lagging a long long way behind them - It's almost double that of the United States.

So, it does beg the question, why pi$$ off a major local business in favour of a foreign, albeit major, business in the way that Becca & Co have done? Seems shortsighted to say the least.

 

[Aleajactaest]

I know what you said. But the point we're arguing is that Mercedes hasn't been consulted nor had the opportunity to negotiate the "out". The first they heard that their good money was not wanted is via a press statement welcoming Nissan. As you state the "out clause" is discussed between the two parties who have the contract and until its agreed you don't announce a new sponsor. I'm also sure the contact will have a stipulation on the time period between "out" and an announcement of the new sponsor. 60 to 90 days is standard.

For reason of correctness the “out clause” is generally referred as "termination of convenience" and right you are it generally has a sliding scale of termination payment depending on how far they're into the contract. It diminishes the risk for both parties if one exercises the right to terminate. Mercedes have made an upfront investment and they need to temper that risk if the other party withdraws. The same for Becca if Mercedes withdraw they would be liable for a risk payment. Its standard practice. Those on this forum stating its “just business” don’t understand contract law.

The T-Mobile withdrawal is a good example. They had to pay the management company the remaining years on the contract even thou they’d withdrawn their name from the sponsorship. Highroad was the new name although it was funded with T-Mobile money.

To be pedantic, we're not arguing anything. We're all speculating on the terms and conditions on contracts none of us have seen.

Mostly, the JB haters say he MUST have screwed over MB and his other riders. I'm not really a JB lover or hater but I am clear that there are ways in which he may or may not have screwed different parties.

But, if the argument is, instead, did he do a good job of bringing a sponsor and a team together, I'd say he was quite successful. As compared to say, Bob Stapleton, who even with the cushion of the T-Mobile money and the several years while that propped up the team was unable to do the same.

 

[Christian]

Mostly, the JB haters say he MUST have screwed over MB and his other riders. I'm not really a JB lover or hater but I am clear that there are ways in which he may or may not have screwed different parties.

IMO it was mostly Becca who screwed over MB and his riders. JB had nothing to do with MB and it seems most of his riders knew quite early that they didn't get a new contract (Lequatre for example) so they have been able to look for a new team for quite a while. Becca on the other hand said nothing and several riders probably ended up having to look for a new team quite late, even if they still had a valid contract!

 

[Race Radio]

To be pedantic, we're not arguing anything. We're all speculating on the terms and conditions on contracts none of us have seen.

Mostly, the JB haters say he MUST have screwed over MB and his other riders. I'm not really a JB lover or hater but I am clear that there are ways in which he may or may not have screwed different parties.

But, if the argument is, instead, did he do a good job of bringing a sponsor and a team together, I'd say he was quite successful. As compared to say, Bob Stapleton, who even with the cushion of the T-Mobile money and the several years while that propped up the team was unable to do the same.

No exactly

You do not have to "Love" or "Hate" Johan to think it was strange that he was pretending they were going to continue as a team next year when they were not. You do not have to be a fan or a hater to understand Mercedes point that they had a valid 3 year agreement and received no notice that they were getting dropped.

Questioning actions that are questionable is not always driven by "Hate"

 

[thehog]

I think you're suggesting to move on because it’s a small subsidiary? That’s hardly the point. The advertisement shown clearly states Mercedes and doesn't differentiate between corporate. Even if it did just state the local entity why does it make the argument any different? Bigger is better?

Maybe this will get some of you to move on:



http://et.mercedes-benz-clubs.com/mediawiki/index.php/Chronik_1991_-_1998/en

http://www.alacrastore.com/storecontent/Thomson_M&A/Daimler_Benz_AG_acquires_Meris_Cie_SA-672954040

http://www.mercedes-benz.lu/content/luxembourg/mpc/mpc_luxembourg_website/de/home_mpc/passengercars/home/passengercars_world/legend_and_history/Mercedes_benz_luxembourg.html

Mercedes-Benz Luxembourg is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Daimler AG, just like Mercedes-Benz USA, Mercedes-Benz Spain, Mercedes-Benz South Africa...you get the idea.

 

[Race Radio]

Maybe this will get some of you to move on:



http://et.mercedes-benz-clubs.com/mediawiki/index.php/Chronik_1991_-_1998/en

http://www.alacrastore.com/storecontent/Thomson_M&A/Daimler_Benz_AG_acquires_Meris_Cie_SA-672954040

http://www.mercedes-benz.lu/content/luxembourg/mpc/mpc_luxembourg_website/de/home_mpc/passengercars/home/passengercars_world/legend_and_history/Mercedes_benz_luxembourg.html

Mercedes-Benz Luxembourg is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Daimler AG, just like Mercedes-Benz USA, Mercedes-Benz Spain, Mercedes-Benz South Africa...you get the idea.

OK, now I am confused. Can we still screw them?

 

[kurtinsc]

No exactly

You do not have to "Love" or "Hate" Johan to think it was strange that he was pretending they were going to continue as a team next year when they were not. You do not have to be a fan or a hater to understand Mercedes point that they had a valid 3 year agreement and received no notice that they were getting dropped.

Questioning actions that are questionable is not always driven by "Hate"

My assumption has been that there are damages specified in the contract for breaking the deal for all the various circumstances of doing so.

The end result will be a simple dollar payment. I'd be shocked if all of this wasn't put on paper before the deal was signed. I'm sure that failure to notify in less then X days will result in a payment of Y, it's all on paper and there will be no real litigation. Otherwise... seems like a poorly written contract.

I've broken a lease on an apartment and paid a penalty that was specified in the contract because of it. I really don't expect this to be all that much more complicated then that. I'm unsure why there's much concern about it here. Seems like a big to-do about a non issue. Breaking contracts only causes legal problems if damages were not spelled out in the contract, or if there were special circumstances that one side believes would make the spelled out damages not apply.

The contract should spell out what MB gets when the contract is broken in almost any imaginable fashion. I'd be shocked if it didn't.

 

[Race Radio]

My assumption has been that there are damages specified in the contract for breaking the deal for all the various circumstances of doing so.

The end result will be a simple dollar payment. I'd be shocked if all of this wasn't put on paper before the deal was signed. I'm sure that failure to notify in less then X days will result in a payment of Y, it's all on paper and there will be no real litigation. Otherwise... seems like a poorly written contract.

I've broken a lease on an apartment and paid a penalty that was specified in the contract because of it. I really don't expect this to be all that much more complicated then that. I'm unsure why there's much concern about it here. Seems like a big to-do about a non issue. Breaking contracts only causes legal problems if damages were not spelled out in the contract, or if there were special circumstances that one side believes would make the spelled out damages not apply.

The contract should spell out what MB gets when the contract is broken in almost any imaginable fashion. I'd be shocked if it didn't.

This may come as a surprise but there is a high likelihood that the Mercedes contract differed from your apartment lease

Just sayin

 

[thehog]

IMO it was mostly Becca who screwed over MB and his riders. JB had nothing to do with MB and it seems most of his riders knew quite early that they didn't get a new contract (Lequatre for example) so they have been able to look for a new team for quite a while. Becca on the other hand said nothing and several riders probably ended up having to look for a new team quite late, even if they still had a valid contract!

Agreed. I think more to the point Becca was “seduced” by Bruyneel. The promise of Tour and Classics titles and fee paying sponsors probably made him sign contracts without really thinking to deep about the complexities of getting involved with Hog. I think Frank and Andy are much the same. Sure Bruyneel on paper as an almighty record but there is a lot of baggage that it comes with and I’m not sure cycling in the current era can handle it. We’ll see. But I can see Becca saw instant Tour success and signed without really know what “tour success” in the Hog’s book entails. In addition if Bruyneel is strict on Andy what will the difference be between him being strict and Riis? What will Bruyneel do that Riis couldn’t? I know Riis probably could have made Andy a Tour winner eventually but he rebelled and ran to his make up his own team.

 

[just some guy]

Agreed. I think more to the point Becca was “seduced” by Bruyneel. The promise of Tour and Classics titles and fee paying sponsors probably made him sign contracts without really thinking to deep about the complexities of getting involved with Hog. I think Frank and Andy are much the same. Sure Bruyneel on paper as an almighty record but there is a lot of baggage that it comes with and I’m not sure cycling in the current era can handle it. We’ll see. But I can see Becca saw instant Tour success and signed without really know what “tour success” in the Hog’s book entails. In addition if Bruyneel is strict on Andy what will the difference be between him being strict and Riis? What will Bruyneel do that Riis couldn’t? I know Riis probably could have made Andy a Tour winner eventually but he rebelled and ran to his make up his own team.

The only thing I can see is maybe and it a big maybe Andy released this year he needs a strict hand and may listen to JB more than Riis - the problem maybe where the helping hand takes the young boy Andy

 

[DirtyWorks]

Missing the point

My assumption has been that there are damages specified in the contract for breaking the deal for all the various circumstances of doing so.
....
The contract should spell out what MB gets when the contract is broken in almost any imaginable fashion. I'd be shocked if it didn't.

Hello? Is this thing working?

The point is a sports team in a minor sport fired a major sponsor. If I were a global brand looking for a way to advertise, there's no way I'm touching cycling. I can't even be assured at this point whether the deal I make would last.

If a business relationship breaks down to the point that everyone is looking at their contract, that's bad. In this case, doubly bad for cycling.

 

[Christian]

In addition if Bruyneel is strict on Andy what will the difference be between him being strict and Riis? What will Bruyneel do that Riis couldn’t? I know Riis probably could have made Andy a Tour winner eventually but he rebelled and ran to his make up his own team.

Yes I agree Bruyneel probably won't be able to give Andy anything that Riis couldn't (even when it comes to Clinic-related topics), it must be Andy who can make the difference by changing himself and maturing. Sometimes change is a good thing. He has been with Riis/Andersen all his career and maybe now it's time to try something new. That out of all people it must be Bruyneel is unfortunate ...

I don't think he could have stayed with Riis either way though, it is my understanding that their relationship had been tense all of last season, even before Becca and beergate. I don't necessarily think he "rebelled", it just wasn't working anymore and he would have left regardless of whether or not LEOPARD TREK was set up

 

[thehog]

Yes I agree Bruyneel probably won't be able to give Andy anything that Riis couldn't (even when it comes to Clinic-related topics), it must be Andy who can make the difference by changing himself and maturing. Sometimes change is a good thing. He has been with Riis/Andersen all his career and maybe now it's time to try something new. That out of all people it must be Bruyneel is unfortunate ...

I don't think he could have stayed with Riis either way though, it is my understanding that their relationship had been tense all of last season, even before Becca and beergate. I don't necessarily think he "rebelled", it just wasn't working anymore and he would have left regardless of whether or not LEOPARD TREK was set up

Agree on all of the above. My one concern is when he escaped to Leopard it was meant to be a good thing. But he appeared to go backwards. Something wasn’t right at the ToC. I know it wasn’t a major objective but he wasn’t sitting on the bike like a guy who had his most important race of the year coming up. Then the Tour he was almost crossing his fingers that he’d win. When Contador lost all that time you would have thought that was his “in” but it kind of scared him that he was then the outright favourite. He didn’t appear comfortable with the fact that he was then expected to win rather than just take on Contador. Then again as you say this could be the maturity that he might gain from the experience.

 

[kurtinsc]

This may come as a surprise but there is a high likelihood that the Mercedes contract differed from your apartment lease

Just sayin

I agree. I'm assuming it's MUCH more thorough.

Contracts that deal with big dollar amounts tend not to leave anything to chance. Certainly dropping a sponsor for whatever reason would be included in the agreement, along with financial penalties for doing so.