Any penalty clauses are likely to be unenforceable if disproportionate to the actual loss likely to be suffered.
Well there you go. Let's hope we've not signed anything particularly stupid. Any action brought by Hex would need to be able to quantify a discernible loss. Good luck to them with that one. Especially if we're mid table and never seen on the telly. I'd still like an XXL shirt though please (to grow into), before they disappear. Are they in the club shop?
Just to jump in here (for a change). Those in charge of the club have gobs. They have Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, tiktok, a bloody big website, they have accounts on here (at least some/one of them anyway), they have access to the chronicle, radio Sheffield etc. And yet they haven't even attempted to explain why they are doing this. If people jump to the wrong conclusion then in my opinion it's the fault of the club for yet again displaying appalling communication and a complete lack of transparency or seemingly any disregard for how they are perceived by the fanbase. Also here's a quote from the government website regarding advertising other brands on your social media pages: I take that to mean that the social media posts should be at the very least tagged with the word AD to indicate that the tweet contains advertising of a brand and payment has been received for the tweet. The club have not given any indication to supporters that they have received any payment from hex.com in return for including their brand in social media. The only thing the club have said is that hex are our front of shirt sponsors.
Yeah we’re in no position to start breaching now. We’ve made a balls up, let’s not dig any deeper we’ll need a judge on our side.
Not the case. The name/logo is already on the shirt so there’s no deception that any incentive has been given. This isn’t an example where those rules would, or should, be enforced. Also, it isn’t an advert for anything. It’s just a logo being present on one of our own videos.
But in order to know that we have been paid for anything other than their name on the front of the shirt you would have to click away from the video, navigate to the club website and read a statement or would have to be a fan who has already read the statement which doesn't cover everyone likely to see the video. The government guidelines are clear that you shouldn't have to leave the page you're on to find disclosure that you have been paid for the brand to feature. I'd say the fact that this discussion is happening with several people questioning why their name is on the tweets suggests that it isn't as unambiguous as you'd think. Either way, the club can speak. Why don't they care how they are perceived by fans? They really don't seem to give two hoots about how bad they look and I don't get why.
It really isn’t what you’re suggesting. We see logos on things all the time, every day, without questioning it because the examples fall outside of those guidelines. I refer you to the QPR timeline as the first football club I searched (randomly) and the first examples I found. If we were specifically advertising HEX, or any sponsor, then we’d call it out with #AD or ‘in association with’. Examples of that throughout our timeline, and other football club’s timeline, if you look hard enough. Nobody would have questioned it had it been Investment Room.
HEX.com ARE OUR NEW FRONT OF SHIRT SPONSORS - News - Barnsley Football Club (barnsleyfc.co.uk) To be fair the article says they are the shirt sponsors and "principal partner" and "...........this partnership, which starts immediately will include the branding of the front of the shirt in all domestic competitions, LED advertising around the pitch plus other significant promotional assets." (The mere thought of this 'partnership' and how on earth we could have got into it appals me tbh but it was set out albeit semi-nebulously as more than shirt sponsorship).
BFC Investment Company | The Barnsley FC BBS Fans Forum I can't find anything linking any of the 4 in JAQ's 20% to Hex at all.
Is it possible to nip this thread in the bud now? One thing I’ve learnt In the last 24 hours is the amount of corporate lawyers and legal experts we have on this forum........... How’s about we wait and see what unfolds over the coming days before everyone starts getting there tits in a twist........as per
Your quite right TM....... what I’m struggling with is is why people are taking it so personal, like the board have purposely set out to upset folk or humiliate us......do you honestly think that?? They've dropped a bollock, not be first not be last, we’ll also not be the only club who have failed to get things right either!! However, in my opinion, and I’m fully aware it’s not shared by others, why can’t we see how things pan out instead of everyone making out the club have done this that and the other???
I'm not surprised it's caused a reaction. it just feels like poor judgment after poor judgment. the comms from the club to fans has been really poor, for me. slow to react, eventually issued a backdoor response via BFCST, then waited a further two days to go public, with basically the same statement, but which didn't make it clear it was regarding the sponsors. no official public response to the open letter from rainbow reds either. we then see their branding on videos, which results in twitter feeds being infested by hexicans. I can see how fans might feel they're being ignored. I've personally now lost confidence in the CEO to make effective judgments.
I get that. Everyone makes mistakes. Barnsley make far more than their fair share though you must see that. But what really bugs me is that the club are in an extremely fortunate position of having an almost infinite number of outlets to explain things and justify their decisions as well as generally setting the record straight and yet when fans on twitter, Facebook, Instagram, the BBS, tykesmad and even in person questioned the legality of the obscenely large sponsor the club went mute. When everyone complained about the behaviour and abuse from people associated with the sponsor the club went mute. When the supporters trust asked the club four very clear questions the club completely ignored 3 (I think) of them and instead just gave a brief almost one sentence response that vaguely acknowledged one of the questions. When fans continued to complain the club, days later, got round to putting out the briefest of brief holding statements that was so vague and badly worded that to fans of other clubs, general none football fans and even a large portion of our own fanbase it looked like the club was investigating homophobic tweets made by Barnsley fans when that couldn't be further from the truth. When people complained that they'd done that, guess what? Yep they went mute. You're right everyone makes mistakes. You're right these discussions could be put to bed. But the thing is this could and should be done by the club utilising it's fortunate position to treat it's customers with a modicum of respect and actually explain things. It is genuinely quite frightening how little the club seem to care about how incompetent they appear at times. It's like they don't give a **** if people think they're amateurs who couldn't run a bath.
I've got no faith in the CEO, the director of communications, or any of the people who courted the fans a few short weeks ago with claims of being supporters of the club or of caring either. If they gave a shiny **** they would open their gobs and take some responsibility whilst doing their best to allay the worries of fans. Instead they've stuck two fingers up at fans asking questions and decided that they'd rather alienate fans than show some humility or integrity. I get the feeling that they're remembering the famous quote "It's better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than open it and remove all doubt" and have realised that it applies to them