- 7,810
- 6,974
Grey market discussion thread (Let's keep the discussion mature) Rules on pg 1 please read before yo
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by fourloko,
- Start date
- Status
- 27,294
- 15,000
Welp. Now I'm hungry for pizza...
- 9,031
- 5,591
What if Pizza Hut was open 24 hours? 
- 1,969
- 336
I got a "perfect" replica pizza hut pizza ill let go mad cheap. Hit me w a pm
- 935
- 143
Does it come with the same box and everything?
- 1,857
- 456
it was over retail
should pay with unauthorized GM money too lol
if I try hard enough I'm sure I can copy & reproduce their patented pizzas if I wanted to, maybe hire an old or current employee & find similar close enough ingredients... but 99% close at best though. I'll sell it under the same name, with a replica box & everything, but charge $5 more & tell people it came from their store not my mines (psst. when they stop making some of their seasonal pizzas, i will keep making those & still say it came from them, people are so hungry those they won't even ask or find out).
Last edited:
- 70,049
- 24,223
PERFECT articles describing da issue...
- 70,049
- 24,223
read da article.....you are completely out da loop when it comes to this grey market business.
- 70,049
- 24,223
Fighting brand ripoffs
New Balance's case shows how hard it can be to protect your intellectual property when your products are made by subcontractors overseas.
By Roger Parloff, FORTUNE senior writer
April 27, 2006: 11:33 AM EDT
NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - Late last month, a remarkable, seven-year-old dispute between New Balance Athletic Shoe and a former overseas contractor unexpectedly sprang back to life.
The case began in 1999 when the Boston-based shoe company tried to terminate one of its Chinese outsourcers, Horace Chang - and Chang refused to be terminated. The Chinese courts have consistently sided with Chang in the suit - one in which, according to a New Balance attorney, an appeals judge unsuccessfully sought a payoff from the company.
But on March 28, the High Court for Guangdong province unexpectedly granted a hearing to reconsider a decision it had rendered more than a year earlier, resuscitating a case New Balance had assumed to be over. (This is an excerpt from a story that ran in the May 1, 2006 issue of FORTUNE. To read the entire article, click here or go to www.fortune.com.)
The litigation stems from an embarrassing problem that brandowners often encounter but seldom acknowledge: unauthorized production by authorized overseas contractors. Beginning in the early 1990s, Taiwanese contractor Horace Chang was licensed to manufacture New Balance shoes for export at his factory in Guangdong Province in mainland China, near Hong Kong. In 1995 New Balance also licensed Chang to distribute a line of New Balance shoes in mainland China. But in 1999, New Balance decided to phase out that line. It terminated Chang's contracts as of the end of 1999 - or so it thought.
"He continued to sell," says Ed Haddad, New Balance's vice president for intellectual property, "and was actively trying to sell product outside the country: in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Italy, Germany." (Chang declined to be interviewed by Fortune, citing the ongoing litigation.)
To stop Chang, New Balance sued him in the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court for Guangdong Province. But in February 2002, New Balance lost. The court ruled that while New Balance had terminated its licenses with Chang's Hong Kong operating company, it had failed to do so with respect to Chang's Guangdong factory. And though that factory was never licensed to distribute New Balance shoes, the court found that its license to make shoes carried an implied license to distribute - and even a right to do so without paying any royalties.
New Balance appealed to the Guangdong Province High Court, which held oral argument that same summer. Then New Balance heard nothing for many months. Eventually New Balance attorney Harley Lewin, of New York's Greenberg Traurig, hired an investigator to make inquiries. Finally, word came back through two intermediaries, Lewin recounts: "For $300,000, we could have our decision."
"We were on the head of a pin," he recalls. "Clearly, we weren't going to do it. But you're being asked directly by the tribunal hearing your case." As politely as he could, he responded that, no, New Balance really couldn't do anything like that.
More weeks passed. Lewin made more inquiries. Word came back again. "The price was down to a hundred grand," he says. New Balance again refused.
In September 2003, the lead judge on the three-judge panel contacted New Balance through a different intermediary. He asked for $100,000 again, and then came down to $50,000, according to Lewin. This time, New Balance reported the request to the provincial supervisory bureau for courts. In April 2004, after no action had been taken, New Balance petitioned the court to replace the judge. The judge was then removed from the case (without explanation), but not from the bench.
Asked about Lewin's allegations by phone, the replaced judge told FORTUNE, "That's impossible. Are you interviewing me? You cannot interview me like this," and hung up. In response to a letter outlining the accusations, a court public affairs staffer said foreign media had to direct inquiries to the Foreign Ministry.
In January 2005, the High Court finally ruled: It affirmed Chang's victory. In late spring 2005, New Balance petitioned for a rehearing. It heard nothing for almost a year. Then on March 28, 2006, out of the blue, the court granted a hearing on the petition. Lewin, who had previously assumed the case was over, says he has no idea what prompted the court to act. Originally the court set the hearing for April 24, but the court has subsequently postponed it indefinitely, Lewin says.
The case is almost moot at this point, as there are only small quantities of Chang's New Balance shoes still on sale in Shanghai today. Today, New Balance has a more pressing concern, according to Haddad: a competitor that launched in 2005 under the brandname New Barlun.
New Barlun uses packaging, logos, store displays, and slick advertising brochures that are, by Western standards, audacious ripoffs of New Balance's. New Balance has sued New Barlun in the local court for Fujian province, and is awaiting a decision.
Notwithstanding all the challenges, New Balance has never considered withdrawing its factories from China. The economic allure is too compelling and, as Haddad points out, its products would've been counterfeited in China to some degree no matter where the company made them.
Haddad does advise Western companies to monitor their supply chains as closely as they can, however. "If you don't do your up-front due diligence in managing the supply chain," he says, "you're just going to be subject to problems." But after a pause, he adds a weary coda: "Not that you won't be even then."
This is an excerpt from a story that ran in the May 1, 2006 issue of FORTUNE. To read the entire article, click here or go to www.fortune.com.
New Balance's case shows how hard it can be to protect your intellectual property when your products are made by subcontractors overseas.
By Roger Parloff, FORTUNE senior writer
April 27, 2006: 11:33 AM EDT
NEW YORK (FORTUNE) - Late last month, a remarkable, seven-year-old dispute between New Balance Athletic Shoe and a former overseas contractor unexpectedly sprang back to life.
The case began in 1999 when the Boston-based shoe company tried to terminate one of its Chinese outsourcers, Horace Chang - and Chang refused to be terminated. The Chinese courts have consistently sided with Chang in the suit - one in which, according to a New Balance attorney, an appeals judge unsuccessfully sought a payoff from the company.
| |||
| |||
| |||
|
The litigation stems from an embarrassing problem that brandowners often encounter but seldom acknowledge: unauthorized production by authorized overseas contractors. Beginning in the early 1990s, Taiwanese contractor Horace Chang was licensed to manufacture New Balance shoes for export at his factory in Guangdong Province in mainland China, near Hong Kong. In 1995 New Balance also licensed Chang to distribute a line of New Balance shoes in mainland China. But in 1999, New Balance decided to phase out that line. It terminated Chang's contracts as of the end of 1999 - or so it thought.
"He continued to sell," says Ed Haddad, New Balance's vice president for intellectual property, "and was actively trying to sell product outside the country: in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Italy, Germany." (Chang declined to be interviewed by Fortune, citing the ongoing litigation.)
To stop Chang, New Balance sued him in the Shenzhen Intermediate People's Court for Guangdong Province. But in February 2002, New Balance lost. The court ruled that while New Balance had terminated its licenses with Chang's Hong Kong operating company, it had failed to do so with respect to Chang's Guangdong factory. And though that factory was never licensed to distribute New Balance shoes, the court found that its license to make shoes carried an implied license to distribute - and even a right to do so without paying any royalties.
New Balance appealed to the Guangdong Province High Court, which held oral argument that same summer. Then New Balance heard nothing for many months. Eventually New Balance attorney Harley Lewin, of New York's Greenberg Traurig, hired an investigator to make inquiries. Finally, word came back through two intermediaries, Lewin recounts: "For $300,000, we could have our decision."
"We were on the head of a pin," he recalls. "Clearly, we weren't going to do it. But you're being asked directly by the tribunal hearing your case." As politely as he could, he responded that, no, New Balance really couldn't do anything like that.
More weeks passed. Lewin made more inquiries. Word came back again. "The price was down to a hundred grand," he says. New Balance again refused.
In September 2003, the lead judge on the three-judge panel contacted New Balance through a different intermediary. He asked for $100,000 again, and then came down to $50,000, according to Lewin. This time, New Balance reported the request to the provincial supervisory bureau for courts. In April 2004, after no action had been taken, New Balance petitioned the court to replace the judge. The judge was then removed from the case (without explanation), but not from the bench.
Asked about Lewin's allegations by phone, the replaced judge told FORTUNE, "That's impossible. Are you interviewing me? You cannot interview me like this," and hung up. In response to a letter outlining the accusations, a court public affairs staffer said foreign media had to direct inquiries to the Foreign Ministry.
In January 2005, the High Court finally ruled: It affirmed Chang's victory. In late spring 2005, New Balance petitioned for a rehearing. It heard nothing for almost a year. Then on March 28, 2006, out of the blue, the court granted a hearing on the petition. Lewin, who had previously assumed the case was over, says he has no idea what prompted the court to act. Originally the court set the hearing for April 24, but the court has subsequently postponed it indefinitely, Lewin says.
The case is almost moot at this point, as there are only small quantities of Chang's New Balance shoes still on sale in Shanghai today. Today, New Balance has a more pressing concern, according to Haddad: a competitor that launched in 2005 under the brandname New Barlun.
New Barlun uses packaging, logos, store displays, and slick advertising brochures that are, by Western standards, audacious ripoffs of New Balance's. New Balance has sued New Barlun in the local court for Fujian province, and is awaiting a decision.
Notwithstanding all the challenges, New Balance has never considered withdrawing its factories from China. The economic allure is too compelling and, as Haddad points out, its products would've been counterfeited in China to some degree no matter where the company made them.
Haddad does advise Western companies to monitor their supply chains as closely as they can, however. "If you don't do your up-front due diligence in managing the supply chain," he says, "you're just going to be subject to problems." But after a pause, he adds a weary coda: "Not that you won't be even then."
This is an excerpt from a story that ran in the May 1, 2006 issue of FORTUNE. To read the entire article, click here or go to www.fortune.com.
- 14,833
- 20,532
Very informative, but you know we dont listen to facts in this thread!
but seriously that actually describes the entire greymarket system pretty accurately. The illegal distribution of legal (but unauthorized goods).
But I'm waiting for someone to say "That only proves that New Balance's Grey Market Shoes are legit, Nike/JB Greymarket shoes are still fugazzi"
but seriously that actually describes the entire greymarket system pretty accurately. The illegal distribution of legal (but unauthorized goods).
But I'm waiting for someone to say "That only proves that New Balance's Grey Market Shoes are legit, Nike/JB Greymarket shoes are still fugazzi"
- 5,504
- 3,655
Lol, I'm worried about the GM pizza. It didn't come with the right amount of napkins and crushed red peppers. Also don't think the amount of toppings was spread over the pizza up to pizza hunt standards. You can't really tell from looking or taste a diffrence but its bothering me..
- 14,833
- 20,532
Man I'm glad y'all are eating up all these fake pizzas, keep them away from me
- 1,942
- 1,326
Lol. I can't believe people are still arguing about this in here
- 8,095
- 5,352
mine came with an OG pizza hut box, is this GM or just fake? i might return it
- 1,942
- 1,326
Might want to keep the pizza DS just in case
- 8,095
- 5,352
i only tried it on, does the box look DS? View media item 502505
- 14,833
- 20,532
Delivery guys be like "VVVVVVVVVNDS"
- 1,578
- 278
that looks like an OG PH box, probably worth some chedda and mozzarella
- 8,095
- 5,352
it came with the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles cassette tape and a Land before time puppet too, stoked
Last edited:
- 5,504
- 3,655
Delivery guys be like "VVVVVVVVVNDS"
LMAO
Mods please let me know if this is a violation, below is the site where I get all my GM pics from that I uploaded in this thread. Once someone uses them to ship thier shoes, they post a pic of the package. I never used the company before but look at the pics weekly to see what is out there and how the quality is. They even tell you the prices.
http://eagentship.imgur.com/
Last edited:
- 1,304
- 578
Delivery guys be like "VVVVVVVVVNDS"
- 8,095
- 5,352
that was a good one, listed as 9.5 out of 10 probablyDelivery guys be like "VVVVVVVVVNDS"
Last edited:
- 295
- 33
lulz that's perfect manDelivery guys be like "VVVVVVVVVNDS"
- 935
- 143
Licked once?
- 2,524
- 535
Glad everyone is laughing and having a good time instead of fighting for once in here!
- Status
