I have just received a letter from Laithwaite’s solicitors, threatening legal action, over some “false and malicious” wording in a press release we put out.
The dispute itself is pretty trivial (see box) – what is not trivial is being on the end of a legal action from a company 100x our size
Who are Laithwaites?
Tony Laithwaite and his family own a company called Direct Wines, which in turn owns virtually the whole of the wine mail order market in the UK – Laithwaites, Sunday Times Wine Club, Telegraph Wine Service, Natwest Wine Club, British Airways Wine Club, Warehouse Wines, Avery’s, and Virgin Wines. It is a huge business with sales of over £250m.
So if the arguments are so trivial, why are they in such a tizzy?
My guess is that they don’t like competition. Especially when the competition seems be doing very well, at a time when they aren’t (they lost £5.5m last year). And even more so when the competition is coming from a a group of people who used to work for them! (17 of us left Virgin Wines to set up www.nakedwines.com last year)
They have tried threatening some of our suppliers – and with one dishonourable exception, the suppliers have told them where to go.
So my guess is that they are using their size as a last resort. I think that their threatened legal action has very little chance of success because our press release is accurate. But they have the money to fight it and we don’t. And that feels to me like being bullied.
I need to decide what to do – and I would appreciate your help.
I have 3 choices
1. Do as they say – withdraw the press release, apologise to them and pay their legal costs
2. Play them at their own game by hiring a lawyer to write a similar letter back again (perhaps pointing out that if I wanted to be malicious, I have MUCH juicier material (like them threatening our winemakers to try to cut our suppliers off)
3. Ignore them and get on with finding delicious wines
What would you do? Please vote, and if you have the time, use the comments section to tell me how you would reply to their letter. A case of naked wines for the best reply!
What is all the fuss about?
Here is their letter in full, together with the offending press release.
However if you have better things to do with your time, the long and short of it is… 
What would you do? My lawyers advice was that we can’t afford to take them on, so avoid a fight. I hate the thought of giving into a bully, just because they are bigger than you. What do you think?
Your votes please – and a case of wine for the best reply to their letter.
Rowan
Hi Rowan.
As an Archangel I would be most unhappy if you were to conceed to “The Man”.
With my legal head on, and someone who has experienced a similar letter from Hammonds, the bedroom company, the only word could be deemed as malicious is “Bollocks”. Oddly enough the same word I used on some mailings a few years ago! It appears big business doesn’t take to kindly to the use of the word. I understand it to be because they lost theirrs some years ago now!
I would fight, having met two of the wine producers Naked Wines works with, I am sure they will back any response with letters indicating Direct Wines underhand tactics. Personally I’d be tempted to go one further and go to the press with your findings, reveal the details of the recent Laithwaites campaign against you, whilst also getting some publicity for yourselves.
Dirty tricks maybe, but if they intend to be schoolyard bullies, the response should be “They started it”!
Good luck
I may be missing something here, but it seems to me that the aforementioned solicitors have missed the point somewhat.
They don’t seem to realise how NakedWines works, how they put you in contact with the winemakers! So, they’re suggesting that Laithwaites do the same by discovering new winemakers, fine, but they don’t put you the buyer in touch with the winemakers. Possibly a shocking oversight by the solicitors!
They also seem to have missed the point about the montly payments. Item 2; in their letter explicitely defines this as the “montly commitment”, and looking at Laithwaites’ website this appears to be the case: A £49.99 case every 3 months. So, how can solicitors reconcile this discrapency? Simply, but infuriatingly, like this:
They rebuttal paragraph 2, states “our client … will usually only charge consumers if and when they purchase a case of wine”. This is true, despite the fact that their method of getting consumers to purchase wine is an opt-out process rather than an act to purchase.
They are correct about there being no monthly ‘fees’, a term they have substituted for NakedWines’ advert relating to ‘monthly commitment’. Here they haven’t missed the point, they’re simply reading something into a meaning that was not obviously there to begin with.
I can’t see this standing up in court and suspect they’ll realise this if you do nothing.
Good luck!
Andrew (a very happy Naked Wines customer)
Hi Rowan
Another Archangel here giving you his support.
I’d echo Andrew’s views. Having used Laithwaites before moving to Naked Wines, I have found to my cost that their ‘wine clubs’ are ‘opt out’ and not ‘opt in’ like Naked Wines. This tends to be very expensive if they send you a case every three months.
I would be tempted to fire off a letter back to them saying that you are aware that they are talking to your suppliers and threatening them. However, the problem is that if you send a letter back, you may simply get letters flying back and forth.
If you do nothing, this may all die down, but then again, they may just issue proceedings anyway.
That is why I voted for sending a letter back to them outlining what you have discovered from your suppliers, and telling them that if they do issue proceedings, you will go public with the information that you have discovered!
It seems to me to be a case of the big boys trying to bully the small guy because they have a better idea than them!
Good luck!
Craig (another very happy NW customer)
Being an owner of a small business I know what it’s like to be bullied and it’s not nice, bu it’s certainly not something you ever take lying down. You’ve done the right thing bringing this into the open because I’m sure people would not want give a business money who use it for this sort of nonsense. More wine buying less lawayers should be the new motto for Laithwaites.
I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t have bothered looking at the release twice if they had no existing relationship with you. And all that says to me is someone is indeed acting with malice here but it’s certainly not Naked Wines.
Get all French with them and setup the blockades!
Don’t be bullied Rowan. As a Wine Angel (and Archangel) myself, there is no doubt you are doing something different, and doing it very successfully.
Your numbers in the press release are accurate and you quite clearly offer a more personal and direct form of ‘support’ to individual winemakers.
I’d ignore it, make it known publicly that you or your winemakers won’t be bullied and carry on finding great wines for your customers!
Hi Rowan,
I run a marketing firm, and although its not a Law Firm I have quite a bit of experience in this area as we represent Lawyers from a marketing perspective.
In my opinion their 3 points are flawed and incredibly weak. The comment about the money in the account is untrue, because you just hold that like a bank until we choose to spend it, or cancel the subscription – then we get it back anyway. That bit wouldn’t even make court Rowan. Neither would the main point of theirs, which seems to be the fact that their back is up about supporting individual winemakers.
Now, if you look through their website you cant see anything about supporting individual winemakers – I couldn’t anyway. Which means that you were quite within your rights to ‘assume’ that you were the only one as you had been ‘open’ and ‘up front’ about your advertising on this matter, whereas they hadn’t. It would be like me trying to take you to court because we had a hidden area on our website that sold wine from independent winemakers. It doesn’t state it (or at least strongly enough) whereas it is the main USP of NW.
So, his assumptions are incorrect anyway, and even if there was some truth in it – which there isn’t – it wouldn’t stand up in court. Also the bit where he is annoyed about the costs and using their name in print is fine. If you look at the main supermarkets you get them advertising direct against each other, for example Morrison’s advertise that you can get 2 trolley loads worth of food against Tesco. Its all fair in advertising as long as you are telling the truth. A press release is advertising and your piece was well structured and no court in the UK would agree with the letter from their solicitors.
The letter, although it needed a response before now, did not actually need a response. If you read it, it just states if you agree to these then respond by x. Take the moral high ground, DONT get caught up in long letter tennis and DONT use your dirt on them to the last possible moment (court if it gets there). That is your Ace card Rowan. They have played all of their cards.
If anything requires response, keep it short, accurate and UNEMOTIONAL.
They are scared Rowan, take the moral high ground, you have done nothing wrong. One last bit of important advice, take dated screen grabs of their website pages – he is bound to change it now talking about independents. If he beats you to it, there is a website called ‘waybackwhen’ that shows cached pages of old versions of websites.
Regards
Dean Spencer
Dear Rowan,
The three rules of life are “never go to law”, “never go to law” and most importantly “never go to law” in precisely the same way as houses must be bought on the basis of Location, Location and Location. Given that I am so strongly of that opinion I would certainly fold – but not necessarily in a nice way. I see they specify the 18th May but presumably they have given some stay of execution but I would send them a letter something along these lines and see if they can really be bothered to carry on for something so trivial. Perhaps this is too rude?
With reference to your letter regarding my press release about the Naked Wine Company I do of course apologise for any offense I may have unwittingly caused. I realise that Laithwaite’s was unfortunate enough to make a loss last year but I had not realised that the situation was so bad that a small company like my own starting up could be any sort of threat and that you would therefore by upset by my comments. I will of course take the press release off the site and as your finances are so tenuous I would propose offering you a without prejudice payment of £500 towards your legal costs.
Rowan, I am having exactly the same problem with my ex employer, they are speaking to suppliers and customers warning them not to deal with us, nothing in writing I am afraid otherwise we would take action under the competition act. Their case is nonexistent so they haven’t sent any solicitors letters.
My view? Review the press release, if it is dodgy, change it, slightly but don’t tell them you have done this. Now ignore them, clearly they will have seen your on-line poll and this will get up their noses. As long as the press release changes, any solicitor worth his salt will advise no further action.
All the best
Derek
It is very difficult to argue with your legal people, you are going to get a bloody nose if you take them on and as an angel and lover of your wines, I do not want to see your/my money going into fighting a very expensive and spiteful battle. Let us focus on the war not the individual battle here. The arguments that they put forward are valid in general and they will win if you take them on. The fact is that what you are saying is also right and you need to have faith in your convictions with regards to the quality and strength of Naked Wines. Agree to their points, but carry on with even more determination and vigour to promote the ‘Naked Way’ of doing things. You will win in the end.
There is nothing they can do about you growing your company, if they try any more nasty tactics it will be they that fall foul of competition regulations and when they do, pick your time wisely and kick them solidly in the bollocks. They have had first hit. It hardly will leave a mark. Then make sure when you are ready to hit them back that it is of Nuclear proportions. Revenge is a dish best served cold, a bit like that Pinot I had the other night.
Take this one on the chin Rowan. Run every promotional add via your legal team, so as to reduce your liability to bullies like these.
Remain focused on what is important here. You and your colleagues have moved away from this lot for all the right reasons, remember what they were and stick to them. Do not put all your hard work, effort and faith by those who have followed and subscribed to your way of doing things at risk, by having a macho battle. For what? As a Scot I know all about having to run away to fight another day. Your freedom matters more than this petty battle.
Let us win the war, carry on what we are doing, legally and to the benefit of those who love good wine and superb prices.
Whatever you decide, you have my absolute backing and understanding.
I have not read the whole letter, but thought I’d add a cautionary note.
Many/most of those who read this blog will be your “friends” and of course we support what you are doing, so we probably see the world in the same light.
The truth is that once lawyers get involved NOBODY wins (and I say that as someone with close connections to litigation specialists). It might make you feel morally superior should a judge or jury agree with your view of the world, but either way you will have lost a substantial sum of money and time, even after settlement.
If I were an advisor to the business, I must admit I’d be more cautious and suggest that you do go some way to appeasing them without involving lawyers letters. You should definitely get some professional legal advice, but they’re unlikely to take any proceedings for the same reasons above (and you certainly at least have a case).
On the one hand, if the issue doesn’t arise again, it will probably settle down, but you will have to consider what is already “in the public realm” such as this blog post. Conversely, you may also need to decide whether in fact it is actually something that needs to be clarified so that you can run your business without fear of regular threats.
Hope it works out.
Well it’s clearly nonsense, but it’s an expensive fight to start.
Personally I wouldn’t withdraw the release or make any admission of guilt, that could be costly too. I would suggest that you ask your lawyers to send 1 letter of response indicating that should they insist on proceeding with their threatened action then you shall defend your statements vigorously and publicly. But don’t bring in any of the threats about their bullying of your suppliers, don’t escalate.
You could always go the full Branson and make it trial by PR. Its a quite news week, so get Max Clifford to start a fire. Big guy bullies little guy, threatening your livelihood etc etc. Its classic Virgin, you should be right at home with that one.
As for your producers, if Laithwaites can turn their heads then you are dealing with the wrong people. Your business model is supposed to pay the little producers more and get them to the UK market. Laithwaites shouldn’t be able to pay them as much, and the volumes should be too big for your producers. If they can produce Laithwaite volumes then perhaps you shouldn’t be dealing with them anyhow.
Who was the producer that they managed to get to leave?
Cheers
Gordon
I would second Sophie’s suggestion. That letter looked about perfect to me. However, I’d be tempted to only agree to the cave-in if they in turn agree to get back that ‘dishonourable’ supplier for you. You never have to use them again, it’s the principle that they are using such underhand methods.
I’d also be concerned that your solicitor isn’t willing to give it a go – or at least give you some advice.
Rowan,
This is just my own initial thoughts, but hope they give both you and Laithwaites some slightly different perspectives and, I hope, sensible options to consider (I assume they will read this). It is generally accepted that going to Court about defamation is suicidal or an expensive lottery at best. Avoid at all costs (!). That goes for everyone except the lawyers.
Having said that, a swinging admission that NW are doing something underhand at this point, when you have been saying the same things since launch, is probably hard to justify, but there must at least be some genuine confusion to clarify – unless you are actually out to get them (for the purposes of this let’s assume you are not). To get technical for a second, the standard of “malice” and “deceit” their lawyers are talking about is a high one which they will have to prove (but in my experience most lawyers will have no qualms charging whoever ends up footing their preposterous bill – they will ‘win’ either way).
There are two main issues to be clear about: justification (Is it true? Can they prove otherwise?), and fair comment (are these your own personal views and beliefs made innocently and that you personally belive correct – or published innocently on your behalf by someone having no reason to believe they were other than true?). The first bit you may never find out until gazillions have been spent on behalf of both parties. The second bit needs to be approached equally carefully, and if you feel there is any confusion perhaps offer to make amends (important phrase) by making clear the personal nature of those views and that you bear them no malice. Those amends might take the form of some kind of clarification.
The sensible and businesslike thing to do is to talk. If this is difficult for some reason or not accepted, then Mediate. Now you are on my ground. Mediators are Neutral Third Parties who can talk to both sides independently and confidentially privately and in joint sessions to clear the air, explain where the parties are and why. They help identify mutually-agreeable ways to move on and put it behind them. The outcome is binding in contract (and Court, if proceedings have been issued) and stops the risks inherent in litigation. Ask any lawyer if they can give you a guaranteed, 100%, copper-bottomed assurance of the outcome, and guess whether you will get it. This is known as “Litigation Risk” and might vaguely be conceded (eventually) as 50:50 75:25 or whatever (it tends to diminish after starting by telling you what a strong case everyone has got). Never 100%, so don’t go there.
There is one more thing: The Rules of Court actually require parties to genuinely explore alternatives to Court before going here (Alternative eDispute Resolution – ADR). Crucially, any party who cannot justify refusal of an offer to Mediate (a form af ADR) puts themselves at risk on recovering their legal costs. So suggest it – it’s good to talk, and I’m sure both companys would prefer to do what they do best rather than choosing to spend the next 2 years trying to avoid a pointless, mutually-damaging and, for at least one, a fatal lottery.
Kind regards,
John
Rowan
I left Laithwaites as a regular wine buyer for precisely the reason that others have laid down, namely that I resented having to opt out when I didn’t want any wine on a quarterly basis – the same reason i would never join a book club or Britannia Music years ago, and I explained that to Laithwaites at the time.
The last straw was when I was e-mailed to inform me that they were sending an extra case (i.e. outside of the normal 3 month cycle) and that I should contact them immediately if I do not wish to receive it.
The thing that is so great about Naked Wines (well, there are many!) is the flexibility that if one chooses not to buy, one can allow Angel monies to build up for a couple of months, then buy something really nice from “my” winemakers Bruwer and Jock.
When I review their wines the winemakers are likely to respond to my comments on the site, and that it’s fairly likely I’ll get to meet them, or other winemakers at one of the regular events. That has never been the case to best of my knowledge with any of the big boys.
I’m delighted to be an Angel and an Archangel – I love what NW are doing – it’s totally unique in the marketplace, whatever Big Brother over at Direct Wines appears to think. They just don’t like their imperious position as #1 in the direct wines market to be chipped away at by people with innovative ideas.
My immediate thought is to simply ignore them, and get on with doing what you do best. You have an extremely loyal customer base, and it seems the vast majority of the winemakers are also loyal and respect what you are helping them to achieve.
It’s Virgin Atlantic vs BA, Apple vs Microsoft and so many other battles – hold your head up high and ignore the “noise” rumbling from below.
Cheers
David
I think the problem here Rowan is that these big companies think they own everything and they are obviously feeling threatened by your increase in the market which is great as we value you more than Laithwaites as they out price themselves and are not customer focused.
I personally would just leave it and not even bother with them as sometimes I have found in the past that silence is more powerful than anything, it proves then that Naked Wines can rise above such cut throat people.
Hope this is helpful and good luck,
Kind regards
Susan
It seems to me that they are worried by Naked Wines competition. I have bought from some of the mentioned companies and no longer do so. If they were to continue with their attack on NW the resultant publicity for you would be a boost at their expense. Write back and point out that you have only told the truth and have never used the privileged information in your possession, because you do not do business in that manner.
The letter should be from your solicitor with his approval. If he does not approve ignore them, and as the press say “Publish and be damned.”
Good luck you have my support.
Malcolm Brook
Laithwaites are behaving like spoilt children because they are not getting all the attention anymore. The best way to deal with spoilt children is to ignore their attention seeking behaviour and lavish more attention on the children who are playing nicely. Would you like a lollipop Rowan ; )
Well well well. How funny is that! I really did chuckle.
I think it is hilarious that a firm the size of Laitwaites is even bothering to go to a solicitor and then bothering to write to you.
Laithwaites – Get over it!
Firstly- publish a copy of your press release, their letter and then ask people to do the survey on Naked Wines site – ie is Laitwaites “wine-ing” about Naked wines?
I would send them a first class stamp (reimbursing them the postage for their letter to you) and a case made up of one of each of the “individual” wine producers finest wines that you buy from and send it to the board of directors with your compliments.
I would then purchase another case from Virgin wines (so that you get your 3000 bonus airmiles for signing up!) and send that to the board too!
Go on mate – I dare you!
Steve
Hi Rowan
I voted for you to curl up your toes and apologise, only as others have pointed out, I think it would be an expensive and pointless battle with Laithwaites.
They won’t go away, so just change your press release so as not to blatantly offend them. As many others have said, customers are leaving Laithwaites and turning to Naked – let your success speak for itself, you don’t need an arguement with a failing company, and maybe one day you’ll be in a position to offer them jobs.
Oh, but if it was me, I’d scream and scream until I was sick.
Rowan,
You need to take this seriously.All they need to do is to prove that they support individual winemakers , and that , potentially , a subscriber to one of their clubs could get a cheaper deal , and you could be in for a very expensive ride. Keep everything out of the hands of lawyers is my advice. As an Oxford law graduate , I agree that they could have a good case against you.
I would reply along these lines…….
” Thank you for your letter . I agree to withdraw the press release and confirm that the statements to which you have referred will not be repeated. As your clients’ business and ours are based on very different principles , it is probably the case that we will appeal to entirely different groups of customers. Consequently the successful launch and development of Naked Wines is unlikely to pose a threat to the continued success of Laithwaites . It is our intention to operate side by side with other providers and we wish your clients every success in their future endeavours.”
PS It is a massive compliment to you and your team that Laithwaites feel sufficiently threatened to instruct their solicitors to write to you in these terms. My advice is not to make negative comments about other providers when promoting your product . It is good enough not to need that !!
Kindest Regards
Michael Cohen
Devoted Archangel
Rowan,
I think you need to stand up to Laithwaites.
Once you reach a certain size it is too easy to bully your way through situations rather than show your respect to others around you.
Laithwaites should be applauding you, let’s face it…that’s probably too much to ask. However I am sure Tony Laithwaite and his family would happily talk about their success and the struggles that they faced in their early days.
Naked Wines is genius and don’t ever forget it. I know you won’t. Hold onto the dream but also fight your corner. Don’t allow this to become all encompassing but give it the respect the debate is due and put Laithwaites in their place. Remember Richard Branson and BA? Now that was extreme of course but the passion he displayed said it all – and won the respect he was due.
You will of course know your adversaries and I am sure be able to use a strategy that is appropriate. Don’t roll over – they’ll come back for more or use your silence as another weapon.
I believe in good old honest passion and respect – no one can beat the strength it provides.
Tell them what you think! Then keep going forward doing what you do best.
Regards,
Richard B. Adams
Archangel
Well, Rowan, if you ever needed something to prove how successful Naked Wines has already become, this is it!
I can’t think of a higher compliment than the ‘big boy’ being so scared that he has to run to teacher to get you told off.
I am no lawyer but I see it like this:
Their response to the first point seems totally invalid. Naked Wines claim that customers are offered the chance to support individual winemakers whereas Laithwaite’s legal team state that “our client” regularly promotes these winemakers. To me, this merely supports Naked Wines position as it is confirmation that Laithwaite’s customers do not do the supporting. (Also,though far less relevant, it is obvious by deduction that a vintner is supporting a winemaker by selling their product so why hire a lawyer to say so to you?)
The second point may have some merit, I suppose, but I do not know how Laithwaite’s operates. However, I do believe that it is possible to but from Naked Wines without recourse to the ‘account’ system, isn’t it? In which case it is free to obtain wines from Naked Wines, other than the cost of the wine itself. Nobody forced me to join and start an account. I could have walked away after case 1 or bought occasional cases at full price had I desired. (Do tell me if I am wrong!)
Point three is baby talk with toys out of the pram! I know that I can get a case from Naked Wines without spending £60.00 but that has nothing to do with being an Angel or a member of any payment scheme. And referring back to point 2, I can do so without having to pay in.
I would probably ignore their legal attack and possibly use a more gentlemanly approach, perhaps calling an old contact (I am sure you have many) to see how serious they really are or whether this is a standard approach to ensure that competition remains low. (By the way, would the Monopolies Commission be interested in them? Seems they are behind nearly all online wine companies.)
Any ammunition you have against them should be kept close to your chest until it is really needed. Solicitor’s letters are usually for frightening people into action. Keep your good stuff for the possibility of the fear tactics becoming more concrete. But, above all, make sure everything you have is documented and as verified as possible. Provenance is all!
It may please you to know that, following the tasting on 22nd May at my house, all the non-Naked people present joined or will be soon. They included a couple who go to France to buy wine at least three times a year and were won over to Naked Wines thanks to the Cristia range. One of the other couples has told me that they have just CANCELLED their Laithwaite’s account to join Naked Wines thanks to the obvious superiority and flexibility of Naked Wines! Ha!
There you go. If I have said everything that you already know, I apologise. Also if it all sounds silly! You have created a fantastic company in Naked Wines and I, for one, have become a champion for NW. It is my sole source of wine and almost my sole point of conversation. I have just been in Scarborough for the weekend attending the Yorkshire Federation of Amateur Wine and Beer Makers Annual Show and had to endure an appalling wine tasting from Oddbins. I have challenged the committee to let me do a Naked Wines tasting next year and, as a result, I am doing at least 4 tastings in the area (Lincoln, Bolton, Scarborough and Huddersfield) to show the committee that I am right! I am also doing a tasting for the owner of the hotel in which we stayed! Keep the faith and retain the ethos. Long live Naked Wines!
Ben Drury
Rowan,
I like the way that their solicitor’s letter is marked ‘strickly confidential’ and you invite us all to read it! Laithwaites need to get a life. Suggest a wine tasting challenge -identify a few wines and their price and whoever gets the most right, wins the arguement, shake hands then have a bbq. I’m sure Tony Laithwaite would be up for it.
Avoid solicitors, go direct to Laithwaites. Solicitors want to drag things out as long as possible so as to line their pockets.
Andy
(reds only please)
Hi Rowan,
Just read with great interest the threat from Laithwaites, clearly a bunch of lilly livered tossers who have been hit by resession. If I were you, I would write back in person with an apology, but outlining the fact that you are a start up business and were not intending to be maliscious. As for paying their legal fees…….fuck em……you did not ask for them to sue you and if your facts are correct…….which I’m sure they are……why should you pay??
Why not withdraw the statement……NW seems to have lift off now and I’m sure that word of mouth will send you soaring to the next level. ( I hope so )……
One of my life mentors once said……..( and if I were you, I’d train your staff with this one….)
“Don’t tell me how you can’t……….tell me how you can!! ”
All the very best, and I look forward to meeting you sometime.
Jon G. Dawson.
Rowan,
Clearly by posting this on the open web you know exactly what your response is and what you want to do about it. Laithwaites action is petty and a big plus for you – you’ve clearly got up their collective nasal passages.
As Direct Wines exiles, we both know that their business model is crumbling and that they lack wit and will to turn things around.
This letter would be a joke if it wasn’t so ridiculous. If they want to go legal why don’t you publicly ask them the following questions about their own business –
1 – How do they price their wines and how legitimate are their “was £9.99 now £4.99″ claims? As the majority of their top sellers are exclusive, could it be the case they are artificially assigning a RRP? It seems to me that they operate the same supermarket practices that they so rail against in their communications.
2 – Who exactly makes their “hero”wines such as Il Papavero? Could they clarify that this wine is supplied by the same supplier every year as their carefully constructed branding suggests. Could they confirm that these wines aren’t just a creation of clever marketeers in Theale?
Laithwaites are ill equipped to deal with the modern wine consumer. Their base is ageing and is yielding diminishing returns.
By sending you a legal letter, they also have no comprehension of the media environment we live in – it’s David vs Goliath again and we’ll root for David every time in the current economic climate.
As with El Bombero, I’d rather drink unrefined petrol as it has less of a kick.
Gavino
Dear Rowan,
You have now sent an E-Mail to Tony Laithwaite on June
2nd.
My guess is that this will not stop further letters from their Solicitors who will currently trying to get an instruction to extend their involvement.This will probably be obtained,not on the strength of the initial letter but because of the rage that will be being felt by the whole Board and senior management of Laithwaites following the publication of the various comments on your Blog.
If further “legal “demands are made ,I recommend
1.)Do not get carried away by the friendly tide of mainly “wine fuelled” comments you have received to date.
2.)Re-read comments of June 1st from John Gummer,Michael Cohen, Robert and Graig Mackay.
3.) Quietly remove potentially damaging phrases fom all your advertising media outputs and if you are unsure what these are, pay a specialist Barrister to tell you (and only you.)
4.) Keep daily authenticated copies of all your advertising and all Laithwaites.
5.)Introduce some administrative method of being able to (at least administratively ) identify people who turn up at [address deleted] the company BBQ.
6.) Have watchfull professional security at the BBQ and ensure everyone is photographed and named on entry.
7.)Initiate a complete “security “review of the whole of your business activities .
8.) Get a specialist to expain to you what “diry tricks” are possible against a business such as yours.
9) Put your staff on a war footing now against the possibility of dirty tricks.Remember that Monty withdrew some sections of his army for training during the battle of El Alamein.
Peter
Although I am more than happy that you have my name /address numbers ect. I would prefer only my Christian name to appear on your blog and draw your attention to Item 7 above which should (inter-alia) ensure that no C.D.s of all your customers’ details are made freely available in the future.
What did Virgin do when being bullied by BA? Fight back. Otherwise they’ll continue to bully you for being a maverick who is challenging their business principles and business model. Fight ‘em Rowan. Soph x
Being Italian, I can only suggest something devious.
Issue a new press release that takes the **** out of them.
Even better, an open letter.
Dear T.,
I am sorry to have upset you.
And yes, you do support lots of winemakers – and we could never compete with you, because we actually support individual ones. Etc.
(of course, if you wrote it, it would sound 100 times better)
Maybe it’s naive, but I think it would put you in the clear (you have officially apologised) but you’d be making your points.
Rowan
I’ve come to this blog rather late and imagine you will have made your decision and responded appropriately.
I was wondering how many of us have previously purchased wines from Laithwaites, and have now moved over to Naked. Perhaps our opinions would then be of note. I feel the personal link with the winemakers is a massive plus point for Naked Wines. I’m sure many others feel the same. Consequently, if things do start to get nasty, maybe hearing what us customers have to say will work well for you.
But as I say, I don’t know how these things work!
Good luck with it all!!
Hannah
And the winner is…Greg Baker, for his constructive but calm advice. Thank you Greg
I realise I’ve come into this a bit late, but I know a
couple of guys who are a bit useful with short lengths of scaffold
tubing who usually sort out any small ‘disputes’ I may have,
solicitors involved or not. Let me know…..
Hi Stephen
They dropped it. I think that they read the comments on this page and decided that bullying small companies was not a popular thing to do!
Rowan
Good to see you stood your ground!
Change “bollocks” to “round objects a la Yes Minister style
Seriously though, you do need to avoid a fight, especially if it’s going to cost a fortune. It could just be hot air so string it long as possible until it really looks like a fight could happen and then reconsider your options.
Best of luck with it.
Steve
Can I just have some wine please?