Wilson Class Action Lawsuit

[sureshs]

The issue is what will come out in the discovery process. That is what the company will be afraid of. If they are asked to report how many frames of what kind were sent to Federer and whether their cosmetics were changed en-route, they will be in trouble.

Wilson may argue that they provided both old and new frames, and Fed was encouraged to use the new frames, but insisted on using the old.

Question is: how are you going to prove that Fed used an older frame? Did she obtain one of them? She must have some proof.

And yes, if Fed is called to testify, it will be fun.

I wonder if a lawsuit can be filed against him.

Ultimately, it will be determined that this is standard practice in the industry, Wilson will pay a nominal fine and agree to send 1 new frame to a bunch of people, and will be more guarded in its advertising from now on.

[sureshs]

On the other hand, judge may determine that plaintiff has not been materially harmed and the spirit of advertising was to indicate that the frame was merely similar to what Fed used, since consumers will be confused if the entire history of frames is provided. Suit may be dismissed outright. Fed was encouraged to use the new frames, but did not, so Wilson had to supply older models with PJs. Now, who does the PJs? I understand that it is the manufacturer who pays people to do it, not P1 or RPNY. That will certainly look bad though. I have heard that the cost of making a PJ can be more than 100 bucks a frame. If this has been systematically done by the company, they cannot claim that it was all up to Fed.

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by movdqa

There are a bunch of frames that Wilson sells that have Federer's picture on them. Same thing with Serena. I don't recall whether or not they have their signatures or not but it's pretty clear that Federer doesn't play with all of those frames.

Really? I bought a 26 inch junior frame yesterday because Federer's pic was on the cardboard.

[AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND]

Originally Posted by sureshs

It is a question of false advertising.

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think Wilson has ever explicitly stated something like "Roger Federer won Wimbledon in 2012 using the current Wilson BLX Pro Staff 90". If you go to their website:
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/p...roger-federer/, you'll notice that it states he only endorses the BLX Pro Staff 90, not that he uses it. This lawsuit is frivolous and I don't think paint jobs are a big deal at all.

[Bobby Jr]

Originally Posted by OnyxZ28

Fascinating. If anyone is curious, I uploaded the complaint to Scribd

Thanks.

You only have to get to the second page (item 3. "To trick....") to find something that would be very hard to prove.

It says "To trick consumers into purchasing the new, more expensive Federer tennis racquet, Wilson has entered into an endorsement deal with Roger Federer...."

On two counts this could be challenged - the obvious one being the new frames are not more expensive. They were the same price at the pro shop I regularly went to. Secondly, they claim Wilson entered into an endorsement deal with Federer "to trick consumers" - an intent that is completely unprovable.

Notwithstanding, I don't think the "pay more" aspect of this is the core issue - the issue (for them) should be that Federer doesn't use the racquet they claim he does. If they convolute it with too much price comparison they'll only make it harder to get a win.

(fwiw, I don't see it happening).

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think Wilson has ever explicitly stated something like "Roger Federer won Wimbledon in 2012 using the current Wilson BLX Pro Staff 90". If you go to their website:
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/p...roger-federer/
You'll notice that it states he only endorses the BLX Pro Staff 90, not that he uses it. This lawsuit is frivolous and I don't think paint jobs are a big deal at all.

That is the crux of the matter. Did they ever claim he was using it in a specific situation?

For example, George Foreman may be using some other grill most of the time and his own grill only once a year. But one time use is still use.

What will be looked at is if there was sufficiently deceptive advertising that a reasonable customer would conclude that Fed was using the new frame as his primary tool.

I have say yes, because most of the people I know, from juniors to veteran club players, have not heard about PJs and believe that pros use the frames they read about, maybe with some lead added.

[OnyxZ28]

I wonder if the lead plaintiff is a TTW user? Show yourself!

[topspinlob]

Originally Posted by slowfox

Paintjobs are like push-up bras. I'm filing a class action lawsuit against my exes...

this post made my day.. best post ever!..hahaha

[Bobby Jr]

Page 6, item 24. Plaintiff first purchased Wilson's K Factor Six.One Tour racquet.When? They haven't made them for about 4 years

Page 7, item 25. In deciding to purchase Wilson's K Factor Six.One Tour racquet, Plaintiff saw and relied on the express and implied statements made by Wilson, believing Wilson's claims that Roger Federer actually used these tennis rackets....(yes, he did)

Page 7, item 26. ~~ because she paid for a racket that was not used in competition by the number one player in the world.. (yes, it was)

Ummmm - Federer was using the K Factor Six.One Tour. That part we do know and the evidence we've seen from people who own actual Federer frames supports this for the most part. These sort of errors in fact trip up the class action in its current form in my estimation.

I'm no lawyer but know enough that when you front up in court and the defendant can debate so many factual details so easily you're going to have a hard time scoring many goals

[vsbabolat]

Originally Posted by AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND

I understand what you're saying, but I don't think Wilson has ever explicitly stated something like "Roger Federer won Wimbledon in 2012 using the current Wilson BLX Pro Staff 90". If you go to their website:
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/p...roger-federer/, you'll notice that it states he only endorses the BLX Pro Staff 90, not that he uses it. This lawsuit is frivolous and I don't think paint jobs are a big deal at all.

You should have looked closer.
"Roger’s choice and Wilson legendary Pro Staff updated with new Amplifeel handle system providing an even cleaner feel."
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/r.../pro-staff-90/
"Playing with his Wilson Pro Staff 90 racket, Federer reclaimed the world no. 1 ranking last July, after his historic 17th Grand Slam title win, defeating Murray in the Wimbledon Gentlemen's final. Federer has won six ATP titles this year."
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/n...er-number-one/
Wilson career player and all-time Grand Slam record holder Roger Federer, continued his record-setting run with his 17th Grand Slam victory at the 2012 Wimbledon Championships, defeating Andy Murray in four sets (4-6, 7-5, 6-3, 6-4) for the gentlemen’s singles title. Playing with the Wilson Pro Staff Six.One 90 racket, Federer marched his way to today’s victory reclaiming the world No. 1 ranking and adding a record 32nd Grand Slam semifinal berth to his respected place in tennis history.
http://www.wilson.com/en-us/tennis/news/1218792/

Paint Jobs are a big deal in the industry. It's how the the companies sell racquets. It's a bad practice that should stop immediately!

[AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND]

Touché! I concede my points on the matter. I still personally don't think paint jobs are that big of a deal.

[vsbabolat]

Originally Posted by AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND

Touché! I concede my points on the matter. I still personally don't think paint jobs are that big of a deal.

It is a big deal. It's how the companies go about marketing their racquets.

[vsbabolat]

Originally Posted by Bobby Jr

Page 6, item 24. Plaintiff first purchased Wilson's K Factor Six.One Tour racquet.When? They haven't made them for about 4 years

Page 7, item 25. In deciding to purchase Wilson's K Factor Six.One Tour racquet, Plaintiff saw and relied on the express and implied statements made by Wilson, believing Wilson's claims that Roger Federer actually used these tennis rackets....(yes, he did)

Page 7, item 26. ~~ because she paid for a racket that was not used in competition by the number one player in the world.. (yes, it was)

Ummmm - Federer was using the K Factor Six.One Tour. That part we do know and the evidence we've seen from people who own actual Federer frames supports this for the most part. These sort of errors in fact trip up the class action in its current form in my estimation.

I'm no lawyer but know enough that when you front up in court and the defendant can debate so many factual details so easily you're going to have a hard time scoring many goals

This plaintiff does not have a good grasp of what is going on and the lawyer representing her does not understand the industry. So I dont see this going anywhere. Wilson's lawyers will get this thrown out of court. It wont reach a full trial.

[AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND]

Originally Posted by vsbabolat

It is a big deal. It's how the companies go about marketing their racquets.

I understand that, however, I just don't see how it negatively affects anyone. It's not like they're advertising that these racquets will allow you to play like Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. I really see paintjobs as a way for kids to further their idolism in their favourite player.

However, I do feel racquet companies should stop with their "new technologies" every year. I'm quite sick of BLX, d3o, YouTek, and so called Cortex technologies. Ideally, they should only update the paint scheme of the racquets and release the actual frames pros use. That way, people can buy the actual racquet of their favourite player but the companies can still release "new" racquets every year to maximize annual revenues - just like how Nike or Adidas can release the same Barricades or Vapors every season but in a different colourway.

[vsbabolat]

Originally Posted by AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND

I understand that, however, I just don't see how it negatively affects anyone. It's not like they're advertising that these racquets will allow you to play like Roger Federer or Rafael Nadal. I really see paintjobs as a way for kids to further their idolism in their favourite player.

However, I do feel racquet companies should stop with their "new technologies" every year. I'm quite sick of BLX, d3o, YouTek, and so called Cortex technologies. Ideally, they should only update the paint scheme of the racquets and release the actual frames pros use. That way, people can buy the actual racquet of their favourite player but the companies can still release "new" racquets every year to maximize annual revenues.

The racquet industry has taken on the model of the electronic industry. Where you have new products with advancements and better features every year. Racquet companies have adopted a 2 year cycle coming out with new racquets with supposed new technologies. The reality is there has not been any real advancement in about 25 years. There are over 10,000 different ways to put a racquet a together. So you have a new layup every 2 years with magic fairy dust sprinkled in promising you improvements in your game that are not true.
Also the graphite racquets while is a superior material in every way over wood including being more durable. If you were a regular player in the wood era you had to buy a new wood racquet every year because they wood wear out. they wood wear out from string and from court rash pretty quickly. So the companies are trying to have those sales numbers by coming out with new racquets every year. You have to buy the new latest and greatest!

[yonexRx32]

Originally Posted by sureshs

The issue is what will come out in the discovery process. That is what the company will be afraid of. If they are asked to report how many frames of what kind were sent to Federer and whether their cosmetics were changed en-route, they will be in trouble.

Wilson may argue that they provided both old and new frames, and Fed was encouraged to use the new frames, but insisted on using the old.

Question is: how are you going to prove that Fed used an older frame? Did she obtain one of them? She must have some proof.

And yes, if Fed is called to testify, it will be fun.

I wonder if a lawsuit can be filed against him.

Ultimately, it will be determined that this is standard practice in the industry, Wilson will pay a nominal fine and agree to send 1 new frame to a bunch of people, and will be more guarded in its advertising from now on.

They only have to subpoena P1Tennis and ask them the questions.

[yonexRx32]

Originally Posted by AREYOUOUTOFYOURVULCANMIND

I understand that, however, I just don't see how it negatively affects anyone.

It affects negatively in that it tells the consumer that in order to have what Roger/Rafael/Andy play with, the consumer has to pay a big premium. The consumer pays the premium yet doesn't get what he/she was promised. Many people who bought the latest Wilson PS were led to think that this is the very same model Roger was using. They paid extra for that.

[movdqa]

They're paying a premium? Roger, Rafa, Novak and Andy don't play with the IG Prestige MP but they cost about the same thing.

[jimbo333]

Originally Posted by vsbabolat

The article was very badly written. I can only hope the complaint that was filed is better. It's going to be a tough case against Wilson. It would have been a easier case against Babolat with the Cortex being painted on Nadal's original AeroPro Drive or Djokovic's racquet that is a completely different mold, head size, and head shape that is sold. Those things are very easy to show, prove, and visually has a impact.

I agree completely, I am against paint jobbing, it is definitely conning the consumer, which I think is wrong.

However, picking on Wilson and Federer is a bad example as it's the same mold. I'm sure a case could be won against Head or Babolat as you say, although it does to some degree depend on exactly what they say in their marketing info, and I havn't looked carefully enough at that!

[Timbo's hopeless slice]

go to the HEAD part of TW and have a look at the 'Speed' section..

now, THAT'S how you leverage a brand!

universal graphics, massive diversity of product.

this is silly, frankly, but should be entertaining

I look forward to a lawsuit against Toyota because somebody bought a 2008 Camry and it wasn't the same as Kyle Busch's