Are Haas embarrassed about Rich Energy?
Discussion
This whole situation still absolutely boggles my mind. Another poor outcome for RE from the recent declined appeal, yet when questioned by Jalopnik a few days ago they said "the latest hearing “involved the same judge,” and that Rich Energy is “pleased with developments in court and [is] looking forward to the denouement of process which is some way away.” They have also continued posting a lot of media with the logo and posted a comparison of the Whyte logo next to theirs, including an overlay where their logo was then adjusted differently to the one within the same post! Are they really that deluded? Stupid? Having a last hurrah before the 18th? The stuff is still unobtainable through normal retail channels despite the need to offload the cans too.
I am utterly fascinated by this clusterf
k. How does such a person get into this position? Years of blagging?
I am utterly fascinated by this clusterf
k. How does such a person get into this position? Years of blagging?StevieBee said:
TheDeuce said:
Rokit... Apparently the phones do exist but are surprisingly slow for a 2019 smartphone. Enough said.
I think Rokit are a slightly different case in that they are all about future 5G and creating awareness for the brand for the future rather than flog something now, even though they do have product available. I would imagine they are banking on being acquired by one of the bigger companies at some point.If you look deeper into owners/operators there is a pattern there.
However, I don't think things are going as well as hoped for them. The reviews are shocking, they have basically cobbled together very cheap, last gen tech and added some bells and whistles that no one is particularly interested in. Not interested enough to not still want the Samsung/Apple option instead. I think they overestimated how many people want a budget smartphone. In reality, even kids whose parents struggle to put food on the table will volunteer to go hungry to get the a phone from one of the big brands. Just the other week a delivery driver at work was showing me photos of his new (old) car, showing me what he has to make do with on his pay grade. I would have had more sympathy if the photos weren't on his iPhone 10, an £800 phone.. I imagine more than the car!
Andy S15 said:
This whole situation still absolutely boggles my mind. Another poor outcome for RE from the recent declined appeal, yet when questioned by Jalopnik a few days ago they said "the latest hearing “involved the same judge,” and that Rich Energy is “pleased with developments in court and [is] looking forward to the denouement of process which is some way away.” They have also continued posting a lot of media with the logo and posted a comparison of the Whyte logo next to theirs, including an overlay where their logo was then adjusted differently to the one within the same post! Are they really that deluded? Stupid? Having a last hurrah before the 18th? The stuff is still unobtainable through normal retail channels despite the need to offload the cans too.
I am utterly fascinated by this clusterfk. How does such a person get into this position? Years of blagging?
At this stage, even if the battle is lost, it makes sense to talk bI am utterly fascinated by this clusterf
k. How does such a person get into this position? Years of blagging?ks and drag on the media coverage as much as possible. Building a brand for something disposable like an energy drink just requires people to see the name mentioned enough times to consider trying it at some point. It doesn't really matter if the attached story is positive or not.TheDeuce said:
At this stage, even if the battle is lost, it makes sense to talk bks and drag on the media coverage as much as possible. Building a brand for something disposable like an energy drink just requires people to see the name mentioned enough times to consider trying it at some point. It doesn't really matter if the attached story is positive or not.
Whilst I agree with the maxim I do think that RE's public relations are so bad that it will damage the brand. They are doing a Ratner in my opinion.ks and drag on the media coverage as much as possible. Building a brand for something disposable like an energy drink just requires people to see the name mentioned enough times to consider trying it at some point. It doesn't really matter if the attached story is positive or not.C Lee Farquar said:
Whilst I agree with the maxim I do think that RE's public relations are so bad that it will damage the brand. They are doing a Ratner in my opinion.
Pretty much.They're working with the mess they created and now have to work with. It's worth them creating as much noise around the brand as possible as there is a chance it will aid them gain market traction later on - not a good chance, but better than radio silence.
Their biggest issue is that they have used cheap artificial sweeteners to avoid the sugar tax, so the drink tastes like arse.
ukaskew said:
I love that RE have to disclose how many cans they've sold, I really hope Whyte 'leak' that info.
If they place a claim against it they won't have to leak it - it will be referred to in the court order in respect of damages.I'm sure that will happen. It's free money up for grabs by Whyte at this point. There isn't really anything RE can do about it other than argue to what extent the stolen logo added value to each can. The more they argue in court, the more information enters the public domain
ukaskew said:
I love that RE have to disclose how many cans they've sold, I really hope Whyte 'leak' that info.
Its less than 5,000 real and filled cans supplied (probably less if even that and were not sold were freebies).In the real world, zero sales of note.
Zero millions sold,
zero millions of cans made,
zero everything.
Apart from complete tissue of falsehood in beardy wierdo's head.
I'm sure I saw someone post this yesterday, but it's disappeared. They now have to reveal financial details of the Haas deal and backers!
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144537/court-ord...
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144537/court-ord...
Court Order said:
"Figures showing: Any sums of money invested in or made available to the First Defendant [Rich], including for the avoidance of doubt sums invested in or made available to the First Defendant in connection with its sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team;
"Any sums of money invested by third parties in any other company or entity controlled by the Second Defendant [Storey] in connection with and/or pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team;
"Full details of any sums of money paid or payable to the Haas F1 Team pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team, indicating in each case whether such sums were paid or payable by the First Defendant or by any other entity;
"Any sums of money invested by third parties in any other company or entity controlled by the Second Defendant [Storey] in connection with and/or pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team;
"Full details of any sums of money paid or payable to the Haas F1 Team pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team, indicating in each case whether such sums were paid or payable by the First Defendant or by any other entity;
silentbrown said:
I'm sure I saw someone post this yesterday, but it's disappeared. They now have to reveal financial details of the Haas deal and backers!
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144537/court-ord...
This surprised me - "logo designer Staxoweb Limited"https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144537/court-ord...
FourWheelDrift said:
Kraken said:
FourWheelDrift said:
This surprised me - "logo designer Staxoweb Limited"
Why? https://staxoweb.com/our-work/
Not sure I'd still have it on there, were the agency mine!
FourWheelDrift said:
Because I thought someone at Rich Energy had naively copied Whyte's logo thinking they could get away with it, I didn't think they had actually contracted and paid a company to do it.
Almost..."Staxoweb Limited, is a digital marketing company founded by Mr Sean Kelly, who is a childhood friend of Mr Storey."
FourWheelDrift said:
Kraken said:
FourWheelDrift said:
This surprised me - "logo designer Staxoweb Limited"
Why? Apologies if this has been covered already somewhere in this thread.
silentbrown said:
FourWheelDrift said:
Because I thought someone at Rich Energy had naively copied Whyte's logo thinking they could get away with it, I didn't think they had actually contracted and paid a company to do it.
Almost..."Staxoweb Limited, is a digital marketing company founded by Mr Sean Kelly, who is a childhood friend of Mr Storey."
I presume Kelly has evidence Storey was involved with the design/theft of the logo - otherwise you would have expected Storey to chuck Kelly under the bus in court and put all the blame on him, as he was 'paid' to design the logo.
Spumfry said:
silentbrown said:
FourWheelDrift said:
Because I thought someone at Rich Energy had naively copied Whyte's logo thinking they could get away with it, I didn't think they had actually contracted and paid a company to do it.
Almost..."Staxoweb Limited, is a digital marketing company founded by Mr Sean Kelly, who is a childhood friend of Mr Storey."
I presume Kelly has evidence Storey was involved with the design/theft of the logo - otherwise you would have expected Storey to chuck Kelly under the bus in court and put all the blame on him, as he was 'paid' to design the logo.
just what I was thinkingsilentbrown said:
I'm sure I saw someone post this yesterday, but it's disappeared. They now have to reveal financial details of the Haas deal and backers!
https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144537/court-ord...
If that First Defendant didn’t actually sponsor the Haas F1 team then that disclosure falls down. Storey has talked in the past of various offshore companies.https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/144537/court-ord...
Court Order said:
"Figures showing: Any sums of money invested in or made available to the First Defendant [Rich], including for the avoidance of doubt sums invested in or made available to the First Defendant in connection with its sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team;
"Any sums of money invested by third parties in any other company or entity controlled by the Second Defendant [Storey] in connection with and/or pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team;
"Full details of any sums of money paid or payable to the Haas F1 Team pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team, indicating in each case whether such sums were paid or payable by the First Defendant or by any other entity;
"Any sums of money invested by third parties in any other company or entity controlled by the Second Defendant [Storey] in connection with and/or pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team;
"Full details of any sums of money paid or payable to the Haas F1 Team pursuant to the First Defendant's sponsorship of the Haas F1 Team, indicating in each case whether such sums were paid or payable by the First Defendant or by any other entity;
Big Nanas said:
This is all so fascinating
In case I've missed, where has Storey got his money from? Has he inherited it, previously sold company, or he is just blagging it?
Studied maths at St Andrews (not sure when, he claims to have known William and Kate but I don't think the dates would match up as he's older than them), amateur boxer, ran an IT company, was a boxing promoter/boxer's agent, briefly had a fashion brand I believe, various other vague and nebulous businesses mostly based in the Isle of Man, cosy with David Sullivan, picked up Rich Energy from a Czech startup. In case I've missed, where has Storey got his money from? Has he inherited it, previously sold company, or he is just blagging it?
Consensus seems to be he's blagging it or shifting other people's money about.
All allegedly, of course.
Gassing Station | Formula 1 | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff