Twitter: GeoffShac
Writing And Videos
  • Playing Through: Modern Golf's Most Iconic Players and Moments
    Playing Through: Modern Golf's Most Iconic Players and Moments
    by Jim Moriarty
  • Tommy's Honor: The Story of Old Tom Morris and Young Tom Morris, Golf's Founding Father and Son
    Tommy's Honor: The Story of Old Tom Morris and Young Tom Morris, Golf's Founding Father and Son
    by Kevin Cook
  • His Ownself: A Semi-Memoir (Anchor Sports)
    His Ownself: A Semi-Memoir (Anchor Sports)
    by Dan Jenkins
  • The Captain Myth: The Ryder Cup and Sport's Great Leadership Delusion
    The Captain Myth: The Ryder Cup and Sport's Great Leadership Delusion
    by Richard Gillis
  • The Ryder Cup: Golf's Grandest Event – A Complete History
    The Ryder Cup: Golf's Grandest Event – A Complete History
    by Martin Davis
  • A Life Well Played: My Stories
    A Life Well Played: My Stories
    by Arnold Palmer
« R&A's Dawson Can Relate To Those Like Himself Who Said The Old Course Is The Mona Lisa Of Golf | Main | Ryder Cup Captaincy Reviews Are In: Watson Is Wonderful & We'll Know How Wonderful In Just 21 Months! »

Oakley Suing Rory And Nike For Breach

Filed Monday but just now getting noticed--in this case it's's Lester Munson--the case involving Rory McIlroy's current sponsor Oakley saying it used a contractual option to match a Nike offer that was not honored.

If the reports in European golf publications of a $200 million deal with Nike are accurate, then Oakley offered about $60 million to continue its deal with McIlroy. No one involved in the dispute will confirm the magnitude of the Nike offer, and it is described in the court papers only as an offer of "$_M."

According to Oakley, the damage that has resulted from McIlroy's refusal to renew with Oakley is "irreparable" and entitles Oakley to an injunction that would stop Nike and McIlroy from concluding or implementing their contract. Oakley is also claiming money damages but does not specify any amount and asserts that it has spent $300,000 on a photo shoot for the products McIlroy would have endorsed in 2013.

Who'd they hire to shoot him, Annie Leibovitz?

Anyway, Munson details the emails that could make Rory's presumed deal with Nike a bit more expensive.

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (11)

Most of that would have gone to Annie's creditors. After financial distress and an unexpected real estate purchase she had to use her archive of work as collateral for a third of oakleys offer

Talented lady

And she made a pretty good image of eldrick and his mom for an Amex ad years ago
12.14.2012 | Unregistered CommenterTim
The article said that Oakley's ROFR was for a one year extension of his contract. 30% of the $200 million, or $60 million, is not a one-year figure...there is no possible way that Oakley was offering Rory $60 million for a one year extension. Some facts need to be checked in that article.
12.14.2012 | Unregistered CommenterKevin part deux
More expenses? That's the last thing poor Nike need after those selfish factory workers in Indonesia won their lawsuit recently and were awarded a whopping one million dollars to split between the thousands of them. How dare they drag Nike through a long and expensive lawsuit, just because they think they deserve to actually be paid for doing overtime?

Can't these people just knuckle down and do their 20-hour shifts with a smile, knowing that Rory and Tiger can now finally afford to pay their electricity bills, send their kids to school and buy medicine for their families?
12.15.2012 | Unregistered CommenterBlackballed Vijay
Hmmmm, this info makes the Oz PGA denials seems so dang FAUX.....!!!
12.15.2012 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
golly gee...never saw this coming.

Just pay em off and get on with the swoosh themed 2013 'Rory Show' already.
12.15.2012 | Unregistered Commenterjohnnnycz
Tim-She's broke.
12.15.2012 | Unregistered Commentersmails
The most interesting part of the article is the comment that apparel is 30% of the value of deal. Is equipment 50% and the hat the remaining 205? I would assume that that is a fairly standard breakdown of where money comes from? Anyways found it interesting
12.15.2012 | Unregistered Commenterelf
Dear Oakley, I would have done it for 200k.
12.15.2012 | Unregistered CommenterRobert Matre
elf, that 30% is an interesting figure. As for the other components I'd flip flop what you have and say hat is 50% (see "front of the hat" quote at end of article), the bag at 19%, and the equipment/clubs at 1%. JMO.

Gonna be interesting to see how this sorts itself out. Front page of yahoo golf site features pic of an Oakley shirt in the holiday gifts section!
12.15.2012 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
elf, upon further reflection...

Hat = 60%

Clothes = 30%

Bag = 9%

Whats actually in the bag = 1%

Personally I wouldn't necessarily ascribe 30% to the clothes but since Oakley said that's their number guess we have to work from there!
12.15.2012 | Unregistered CommenterDTF
How could they possibly spend 300 grand on an ad campaign that involved real people, who do real things, produce real images and marketing materials, and are part of a real industry, when they could have paid that money to a golfer to hit a few shots in front of a few people and fly away in his helicopter.

It's funny that someone would think 300,000 dollars is a lot of money for a firm to spend on a professional photo shoot to highlight their line of products for the next year, but they don't think anything of golfers being paid millions of dollars to show up somewhere and play some golf.
12.16.2012 | Unregistered CommenterAd Man

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
All HTML will be escaped. Hyperlinks will be created for URLs automatically.