Dakar sponsor sues Robby Gordon’s team
Quote selected text Published March 26th, 2008 in NASCAR News
Vanguard Integrity Professionals, Inc. announced today that on Jan. 30, 2008 it terminated its sponsorship of Team Gordon, Inc. for the 2008, 2009 and 2010 Dakar Rallies.
On Jan. 4, 2008, the Dakar Rally 2008 was cancelled by the Amaury Sport Organization (ASO) due to threats of terrorist attacks by al Qaeda against the Rally and its participants.
Vanguard is in the business of security, providing security software and services to many government agencies and Fortune 500 companies around the world. The company’s software protects its customers from internal and external threats including cyber-terrorism attacks.
At the time of the cancellation of the 2008 Rally, Vanguard had independently confirmed the terrorist threats and agreed with the ASO’s decision to cancel the Rally; the risk of attacks by al Qaeda was real, and the risk was simply too great. Factory-sponsored teams registered for the Dakar 2008 and others also supported the ASO’s decision to cancel the Rally due to the terrorist threat.
Vanguard continues to believe Robby Gordon is one of the most talented off-road race drivers in the world, and has the highest respect for his driving abilities. However, with the cancellation of the 2008 Dakar Rally due to terrorist threats, along with Team Gordon’s public statements in response to that cancellation, continued sponsorship of Team Gordon no longer provides Vanguard with the appropriate promotional opportunities.
On February 19, 2008, Vanguard took legal action against Team Gordon Inc. seeking an injunction prohibiting Team Gordon from associating itself with Vanguard’s trademarks. Vanguard is also seeking a declaration from the Court confirming Vanguard’s proper termination of the Sponsorship agreement.
- Robby Gordon to test at Daytona
- Jim Beam to continue sponsorship of Gordon’s No 7 in 2008
- Ford statement on Robby Gordon’s departure
- Gaughan to fill in for Gordon at Daytona testing
- Gordon’s team penalized for Daytona infraction
Okay….?
I don’t understand this at all. It makes no sense to me, as written in this article. Why is this even an issue? Has Robby Gordon been associating himself with this company still? Why are they worried about sueing him? I just don’t get it. A little more explanation is needed here. As I said, it makes no sense with the current information.
Didn’t All Robby pretty much say is that he would run over the terrorists if he seen them, and that he mad ticked off at the terrorists for them forcing the ACO to cancel the race?
So if that company has a problem with Robby saying how he felt about Terrorists, I think there should be a background check into this company to see how many of its “Customers” are in the Terrorizing business.
Hold on wait, didn’t Robby say something that even though his team had Bullet Proof Vests, he still wouldn’t have felt safe racing over there? Does this Vanguard company make bullet Proof vests? If they do, I suggest that their CEO puts on one of their vests and see how well it protects them from an IED.
Had he kept his mouth shut, or just expressed his displeasure in a more direct manner (ie. “this sucks; we just lost 2 million dollars”), he’d still have a sponsor for the next two years. Robby is a good driver, most of the time, but he’s a bad PR person.
almost looks like a napcar decision ,no good reason??????????????????
What The Heck are they talking about. What does Robby G have to do with Terror Attacks and being sued. ????????????
Beats me. ……………………….
Doesnt make any sense…………..
Article is not clear at ALL as to what is going on….
“However, with the cancellation of the 2008 Dakar Rally due to terrorist threats, along with Team Gordon’s public statements in response to that cancellation, continued sponsorship of Team Gordon no longer provides Vanguard with the appropriate promotional opportunities”
a) they don’t like that the event was cancelled.
b) they don’t like what Robby said in public.
therefore, they pulled the plug.
It wasn’t like Robby was lying.
You can say a lot of truthful things that would turn off a sponsor.
They don’t like it when people push the boundaries of what is politically correct or not, no matter how true it may be. If an opinion is expressed that makes them uncomfortable, then they’ll pull out.
Some companies, usually ones that like pushing boundaries themselves and target younger demographics, will encourage open and sometimes scandalous behaviour because they know that the added exposure outweighs the potentially negative effects of the actual behaviour.
But other ones, usually more conservative companies that like to target more mature audiences, generally don’t like behaviour that could “rock the boat” so to speak. They like their TV spots, key-note speaking appearances, hand-shakes, and newspaper photos… but they’ll cut and run if someone acts even slightly out of line, in their eyes.
Vanguard is the one that wanted out of the contract, if anything RGM should sue them for not being able to fulfill their contract.