What is the value of 10% of Kelia Moniz's prior contract?

maybe

Michael Peterson status
Jul 23, 2011
2,409
1,241
113
As a casual observer, it's an interesting compare and contrast with how classy the Gudauskas brothers were with exiting long-term sponsor Vans, as opposed to the less than elegant kick out that Kelia performed with Roxy. Being born into surf royalty apparently lends itself to a false sense of entitlement.
 

teeroi

Miki Dora status
Oct 21, 2007
5,137
9,375
113
eastside oahu
As a casual observer, it's an interesting compare and contrast with how classy the Gudauskas brothers were with exiting long-term sponsor Vans, as opposed to the less than elegant kick out that Kelia performed with Roxy. Being born into surf royalty apparently lends itself to a false sense of entitlement.
Apples and oranges.

Vans parting with the Gudangs was a long term relationship coming to an end. Even though the Vans fam don’t own Vans anymore the Van Dorens are still involved.

The Roxy thing is new owners restructuring a deal that was already in place with a 17 year brand ambassador. Then offering a 90% pay cut. Downright insulting.

Side note the Gudangs and Moniz family go way back. Tom G used to be a sales rep for Local Motion and Tammy and Tony Moniz worked for LoMo at the same time.
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,677
9,929
113
Apples and oranges.

Vans parting with the Gudangs was a long term relationship coming to an end. Even though the Vans fam don’t own Vans anymore the Van Dorens are still involved.

The Roxy thing is new owners restructuring a deal that was already in place with a 17 year brand ambassador. Then offering a 90% pay cut. Downright insulting.

Side note the Gudangs and Moniz family go way back. Tom G used to be a sales rep for Local Motion and Tammy and Tony Moniz worked for LoMo at the same time.
They were only able to renegotiate the deal early because she Signed a bad contract with the prior owners. The 10% wasn’t an insult, just a number so low they knew she’d say no. At 50% she might have taken it, and they didn’t want that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ReForest and Havoc

youcantbeserious

Billy Hamilton status
Oct 29, 2020
1,533
4,647
113
Location location
Getting paid to go surfing is an ultimate privilege, nobody "deserves" to get paid for that.

If your run comes to an end time to face the music.
Very true, but a contract is a contract. Unless you have a bad lawyer - then your contract is subject to said restructuring and it's them you should be mad at.
 

teeroi

Miki Dora status
Oct 21, 2007
5,137
9,375
113
eastside oahu
Like the rest of youse I don’t really know what the details are.

But if the new owners or the licensee of the Roxy brand wanted to get rid of Sis offer her a buyout and a NDA. That would be the “classy” thing to do. That’s what the new owners of Hurley did to unload John’s contract. And his was way more, per various articles and clips the biggest in surf industry history.

Hard for me to take sides with corporate non surfers buying up core businesses and nickle and diming long term employees.

As far as Sis’s people not reading the fine print on her contract in the same article it did say she had just signed the biggest one of her career and they most likely took it for granted she was the face of the brand and didn’t need to ask for that 30 day notice to terminate to be axed. Bad on them.

Similar to when John was “unsponsored” I wasn’t worried about him and I’m not worried about Sis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Havoc

freeride76

Michael Peterson status
Dec 31, 2009
3,454
4,321
113
Lennox Head.
Very true, but a contract is a contract. Unless you have a bad lawyer - then your contract is subject to said restructuring and it's them you should be mad at.

I remember as a young man, with a contract clearly broken, going to my Aunty who was/is a major corporate lawyer and explaining the situation to her.

She said: how much do you want to spend enforcing the breach.
I said, what?

She said, A contract is only worth what you are prepared to spend to defend it, if it comes to a breach.

Otherwise, try and renegotiate something you can live with and move on.

Sounds like she didn't even have a breach of contract- the new owners optioned an already existing clause.

Every contract has get out clauses.

Contracts are "broken" even day using these clauses.
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,677
9,929
113
Like the rest of youse I don’t really know what the details are.

But if the new owners or the licensee of the Roxy brand wanted to get rid of Sis offer her a buyout and a NDA. That would be the “classy” thing to do. That’s what the new owners of Hurley did to unload John’s contract. And his was way more, per various articles and clips the biggest in surf industry history.

Hard for me to take sides with corporate non surfers buying up core businesses and nickle and diming long term employees.

As far as Sis’s people not reading the fine print on her contract in the same article it did say she had just signed the biggest one of her career and they most likely took it for granted she was the face of the brand and didn’t need to ask for that 30 day notice to terminate to be axed. Bad on them.

Similar to when John was “unsponsored” I wasn’t worried about him and I’m not worried about Sis.
JJF probably had a contract that didn’t contain a 30-day termination clause. Big contract or small - that’s a material term, not fine print. And even if tiny print, that’s a representative’s job.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pescado713

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,677
9,929
113
I remember as a young man, with a contract clearly broken, going to my Aunty who was/is a major corporate lawyer and explaining the situation to her.

She said: how much do you want to spend enforcing the breach.
I said, what?

She said, A contract is only worth what you are prepared to spend to defend it, if it comes to a breach.

Otherwise, try and renegotiate something you can live with and move on.

Sounds like she didn't even have a breach of contract- the new owners optioned an already existing clause.

Every contract has get out clauses.

Contracts are "broken" even day using these clauses.
All largely true.

The difference between an actual breach and using a term that allows you to terminate w notice is that a settlement will only occur in the first instance.
 

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,677
9,929
113
Schadenfreude.

Any rec surfer with a brain hates every sponnoed surfer.

Thats a reasonable IQ test.
I think sponsoring groms is smart marketing. In exchange for gear they’ll pump your stuff all over the place. Vissla flooded the grom market early on and built a brand up from there.

It’s only when you have to pay them that it becomes a problem
 
  • Like
Reactions: sozzle and Havoc

StuAzole

Duke status
Jan 22, 2016
28,677
9,929
113
There's a strange reversal of that happening here- all the old guys are being sponsored (or maintaining sponsorships).

Maybe that reflects the demographics and spending patterns of the market?
I get the legends - mick, Parko etc. Could be demographics of consumers or perhaps the demographics of the guys making the sponsorship decisions. In any event, are they making real money or is it just back to early days of free gear and photo trips?

I rarely see old guys in SoCal w major stickers
 

freeride76

Michael Peterson status
Dec 31, 2009
3,454
4,321
113
Lennox Head.
Not sure- Ozzie Wright, Dion Agius, Asher Pacy- all on the wrong side of 40 and all still seem able to surf for a living.

Brendan Margieson, over 50, just signed with Florence Marine x.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Havoc