United Thread - 2022/23

Status
Not open for further replies.
domalino said:
It's just a nonsense idea. You can't sue Thierry Henry if you cut yourself with a gillette razor.

It was a very heavily publicised endorsement deal as well, I don't know where OP got the idea it wasn't disclosed.
Click to expand...
US regs have a special rule for celebrity endorsements of investment schemes, because investors might be persuaded by their fame. Without full disclosure celebs are breaking the law if they endorse investment schemes. So it’s not a nonsense idea to sue under those regs. Gilette razors are not investment schemes!
The fact that there was no disclosure is in the stated cause of action and it is open to Brady to knock this down in court. The plaintiffs would have to show that Brady’s actions amounted to endorsement; that Brady was paid; that there was no disclosure; and that they suffered loss as a result of being persuaded by the endorsement. There are half a dozen celebrity defendants in this class action. Plenty of other cases queuing up
PS Google ”Celebrity Crypto ambassadors sued over FTX”
 
Last edited:
KS55 said:
US regs have a special rule for celebrity endorsements of investment schemes, because investors might be persuaded by their fame. Without full disclosure celebs are breaking the law if they endorse investment schemes. So it’s not a nonsense idea to sue under those regs. Gilette razors are not investment schemes!
The fact that there was no disclosure is in the stated cause of action and it is open to Brady to knock this down in court. The plaintiffs would have to show that Brady’s actions amounted to endorsement; that Brady was paid; that there was no disclosure; and that they suffered loss as a result of being persuaded by the endorsement. There are half a dozen celebrity defendants in this class action. Plenty of other cases queuing up
PS Google ”Celebrity Crypto ambassadors sued over FTX”
Click to expand...

It's a bullshit lawsuit that you will never hear about again.

Reasons it's obviously bullshit - 1) There was complete disclosure that Brady and co were being paid to endorse FTX and paid via shares (that was the whole point, they couldn't have publicised the details of the relationship more). 2) Only the name grabbing celebrity endorsees have been named, not the many businesses and non-american celebrities that partnered with them. 3) FTX was primarily an exchange, not an investment scheme. 4) Actual investment schemes and funds sponsor hundreds of companies and athletes and that ecosystem wouldn't exist if the people getting sponsored were liable for what happened inside those businesses. 5) Anyone who would have invested would have had to sign the normal disclosures about how they could lose all their money.


I guess we'll see what happens.
 
Last edited:
domalino said:
It's a bullshit lawsuit that you will never hear about again.

Reasons it's obviously bullshit - 1) There was complete disclosure that Brady and co were being paid to endorse FTX and paid via shares (that was the whole point, they couldn't have publicised the details of the relationship more). 2) Only the name grabbing celebrity endorsees have been named, not the many businesses and non-american celebrities that partnered with them. 3) FTX was primarily an exchange, not an investment scheme. 4) Actual investment schemes and funds sponsor hundreds of companies and athletes and that ecosystem wouldn't exist if the people getting sponsored were liable for what happened inside those businesses. 5) Anyone who would have invested would have had to sign the normal disclosures about how they could lose all their money.


I guess we'll see what happens.
Click to expand...
Complete nonsense. You appear to be making it up as you go along. You are ignoring the cases that have already been decided which I referenced for you.
Point 1. Non disclosure is alleged in the writ. I suspect you are misremembering something. Even if there was widespread publicity, the non disclosure concerns payment.
Point3.
As well as being an exchange FTX was a proprietory coin.
Point 4:
Not pari passu. Opposite direction of movement of consideration.
I spent too many years wrestling with marketing regs re investments than I care to remember, so I think I probably know more than you do.
Point 5. Even if this were the case, a signature could not overcome the regs.
I await your mea culpa when the case is heard!
 
Fucking unbelievable that in a days time they could be above us and in two days time they could still be above us and having played the same amount of games!
 
richards30 said:
Fucking unbelievable that in a days time they could be above us and in two days time they could still be above us and having played the same amount of games!
Click to expand...
more likely they draw and we beat Spurs then Arsenal batter them and normal service is resumed. It's been a shite weekend but by Sunday things will be back to normal and the green and gold will be out for the 15,634th time. They are fickle scum, let them enjoy their cup final win, we have real fucking trophies to compete for and in the cabinet. They have cheated their way to the Trafford Cup
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.