Premium Essay

Distribution Agreement

In: Business and Management

Submitted By 4245381
Words 630
Pages 3
INBM 102
Assignment #2

Case Study: Distribution Agreement

Shed some light

Raynonplus is a small, family-owned eyewear business located in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Started by Pierre Dupuis in 1952 under the name of Visionplus, the company has been exclusively owned and operated by the Dupuis family for over 50 years. Currently, the business—a sole proprietorship—is owned and managed by Gerald Dupuis, grandson of the original entrepreneur. The Dupuis’ changed the business name in 1957 to capitalize on a trend in polarized sunglasses that swept the neighbouring French speaking province of Quebec.

Traditionally, Raynonplus sold a wide range of generic and brand name eyewear including prescription lenses, contact lenses, frames and sunglasses; but no proprietary goods. After Gerard took over the business in 2004, he and his fashion designer wife Dominique introduced their own brand of sunglasses under the trademarked name of
Ray à Porter. Initially, the brand was marketed as an alternative to lower end or generic prescription sunglasses. The demand for these sunglasses, fueled by the bold and unconventional styles and materials used by Dominique in her original designs, soon elevated the Ray à Porter brand into designer label market status. Customers from Quebec made up a large part of the target audience, accounting for 35 percent of sales.

I wear my sunglasses… in France

One of Ray à Porter’s biggest customers is Quebec pop sensation Zoé, an international superstar in the French speaking world. In addition to wearing them in her everyday life, Zoé incorporated custom designed Ray à Porter sunglasses as part of the wardrobe for her European concert tour. The unsolicited celebrity endorsement sparked a frenzy of demand for the sunglasses in France.

Keep your vision in focus

Having been a relatively small family owned business selling goods…...

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Distribution Agreement

...Case Study #3: Distribution Agreement Shed some light Raynonplus is a small, family-owned eyewear business located in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Started by Pierre Dupuis in 1952 under the name of Visionplus, the company has been exclusively owned and operated by the Dupuis family for over 50 years. Currently, the business—a sole proprietorship—is owned and managed by Gerald Dupuis, grandson of the original entrepreneur. The Dupuis’ changed the business name in 1957 to capitalize on a trend in polarized sunglasses that swept the neighbouring French speaking province of Quebec. Traditionally, Raynonplus sold a wide range of generic and brand name eyewear including prescription lenses, contact lenses, frames and sunglasses; but no proprietary goods. After Gerard took over the business in 2004, he and his fashion designer wife Dominique introduced their own brand of sunglasses under the trademarked name of Ray à Porter. Initially, the brand was marketed as an alternative to lower end or generic prescription sunglasses. The demand for these sunglasses, fueled by the bold and unconventional styles and materials used by Dominique in her original designs, soon elevated the Ray à Porter brand into designer label market status. Customers from Quebec made up a large part of the target audience, accounting for 35 percent of sales. I wear my sunglasses… in France One of Ray à Porter’s biggest customers is Quebec pop sensation Zoé, an international superstar in the French......

Words: 1038 - Pages: 5

Free Essay

Solvgen Inc

...entered into a five-year research and development agreement with Careway Pharma Inc. In connection with executing the research and development arrangement, SolvGen and Careway also entered into a five-year license and distribution agreement. Under the terms of the research and development agreement, SolvGen retains all intellectual rights to the results and is entitled to the following five nonrefundable milestone payments from Careway: 1. Exclusive negotiation payment — $1 million (paid December 1, 2005). 2. Contract signing payment — $2 million (paid January 1, 2006). 3. Commercial launch of instrument system Version 1 — $5 million (paid March 31, 2006, upon commercial launch of the instrument system). 4. Commercial launch of instrument system Version 2 — $5 million (not yet paid). 5. Commercial launch of instrument system Version 3 — $5 million (not yet paid). Under the license and distribution agreement, Careway will have the right to market and distribute the proprietary instrument systems. Careway is required to pay SolvGen for each proprietary instrument system as it is purchased by Careway. SolvGen recognizes the nonrefundable milestone payments when the payments are received over the remaining estimated contractual life of the agreements. Based on an evaluation of the circumstances, there are two deliverables in this arrangement that should be considered for separation: a. A license and distribution deliverable b. A research and......

Words: 493 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Mine

...DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS: This sample agreement assumes a certain fact scenario and is not meant to be representative of, or intended to create standards for, every possible agreement whereby the owner of an interactive new media property grants the distribution rights to a distributor. Indeed there are very few precedents or industry standards for the distribution of new media projects like the interactive new media property described below, which is an interactive adaptation based on a television program that is designed to enhance and add value to the program. In fact, many producers who apply to the Bell Broadcast and New Media Fund don’t enter into a separate distribution agreement with a distributor, but rather sometimes add provisions dealing with the distribution of the new media project directly into their Co-Production Agreements. Sometimes the distributor is added as a third co-production partner in exchange for a distribution cash advance to assist with the production budget. Where the owner and producer of the new media project is also the television producer of the program, it may be sufficient to merely add clauses dealing with the distribution of the interactive project in an agreement with the distributor who is distributing the television program. Additionally, some new media production companies and television production companies operate distribution companies that are used to distribute their own new media and......

Words: 4802 - Pages: 20

Premium Essay

Big Time Toymaker

...Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? Big Time Toymaker (BTT) granted Chou an agreement to a option contract. BTT pays Chou $25K to keep exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. Therefore, BTT purchased the rights to negotiate a distribution agreement for Chou’s invention (a board game). The agreement stipulated that at the end of the 90-day period, if the parties could not come to terms on a distribution deal. Chou would be free to enter into a contract with another distribution company and keeps the $25K. This is a valid enforceable oral contract between BTT and Chou. Upon close study, I do not believe that the parties concerned ever had a distribution agreement contract. The negotiation agreement specified that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. The two came to an oral agreement three days before the 90-day deadline. Immediately, following the meeting the BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail with “Strat Deal” in the subject line, reiterating the key terms of the oral distribution agreement in regard to price, time frames, and obligations of both parties (Melvin, 2011). However, there was no evidence to show that Chou ever accepted the offer via e-mail in accordance with the governing common law mailbox rule. Only an oral agreement was reached; with no legally binding draft and the signature of both parties present, no contract exists. 2. What facts may weigh in favor or against Chou......

Words: 588 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Sales and Distribution

...Sales and Distribution (SD) Release 4.6C MYSAP.ROLES_S_SD Sales and Distribution (SD) SAP AG Copyright © Copyright 2001 SAP AG. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or for any purpose without the express permission of SAP AG. The information contained herein may be changed without prior notice. Some software products marketed by SAP AG and its distributors contain proprietary software components of other software vendors. Microsoft , WINDOWS , NT , EXCEL , Word , PowerPoint and SQL Server are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation. IBM , DB2 , OS/2 , DB2/6000 , Parallel Sysplex , MVS/ESA , RS/6000 , AIX , S/390 , ® ® ® AS/400 , OS/390 , and OS/400 are registered trademarks of IBM Corporation. ORACLE is a registered trademark of ORACLE Corporation. INFORMIX -OnLine for SAP and Informix Dynamic Server Informix Software Incorporated. ® ® ® ® ® ® TM ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® ® are registered trademarks of UNIX , X/Open , OSF/1 , and Motif are registered trademarks of the Open Group. HTML, DHTML, XML, XHTML are trademarks or registered trademarks of W3C , World Wide Web Consortium, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. JAVA is a registered trademark of Sun Microsystems, Inc. JAVASCRIPT is a registered trademark of Sun Microsystems, Inc., used under license for technology invented and implemented by Netscape. SAP, SAP Logo, R/2, RIVA, R/3, ABAP, SAP ArchiveLink, SAP Business Workflow,......

Words: 3188 - Pages: 13

Premium Essay

Law/421 Week 4 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker

...negotiate a distribution agreement for Chou’s invention (a board game). The agreement stipulated that at the end of the 90-day period, if the parties could not come to terms on a distribution deal. Chou would be free to enter into a contract with another distribution company and keeps the $25K. This is a valid enforceable oral contract between BTT and Chou. Upon close study, I do not believe that the parties concerned ever had a distribution agreement contract. The negotiation agreement specified that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. The two came to an oral agreement three days before the 90-day deadline. Immediately, following the meeting the BTT manager sent Chou an e-mail with “Strat Deal” in the subject line, reiterating the key terms of the oral distribution agreement in regard to price, time frames, and obligations of both parties (Melvin, 2011). However, there was no evidence to show that Chou ever accepted the offer via e-mail in accordance with the governing common law mailbox rule. Only an oral agreement was reached; with no legally binding draft and the signature of both parties present, no contract exists. 2. What facts may weigh in favor or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Facts that weight in favor of Chou: • BTT had paid out $25K for the exclusive negotiation rights for his board game; this would cause Chou to believe that the company had intent in arriving at a distribution......

Words: 602 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Case Scenario Big Time Toymaker

...Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker LAW/421 Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker Big Time Toymaker (BTT) develops, manufactures, and distributes board games and other toys in North America, Chou is the inventor of a new strategy game he calls Strat. BTT had an interest in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou, offering him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. This agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. On day 87 of the agreement, the parties held a negotiation meeting and came to an oral agreement on the terms of the distribution agreement. Chou offered to draft the written distribution agreement and send to BTT. Before Chou could draft the contract, BTT’s manager sent Chou an e-mail with the subject line “Strat Deal” that outlined the key terms of the distribution agreement, including price, time frames, and responsibilities of both parties and their acceptance of the agreement. Chou, believing that this e-mail was the final written agreement, let one-month pass before BTT sent a fax requesting he fax over the draft distribution agreement contract. Chou immediately faxed the draft contract to BTT; however several months passed without a response from BTT. After a change in management at BTT, Chou was advised that BTT was not interested in distributing his game. This paper will review the case scenario and highlight why Chou has a case against BTT for breach of......

Words: 2098 - Pages: 9

Premium Essay

Case 10-1

...diligence procedures, with an emphasis on the review of two separate material agreements: (1) a research and development agreement and (2) a license and distribution agreement, both executed by SolvGen during the first quarter of fiscal year 2010. Direct’s management provided the engagement team with the following memo describing the Company’s revenue recognition policy: MEMO To: Audit Engagement Team From: CFO, SolvGen Inc. Subject: Revenue Recognition for Research and Development and License and Distribution Agreements Date: November 30, 2010 SolvGen Inc. (the Company), an SEC registrant, is a pharmaceutical development company. SolvGen entered into a five-year research and development agreement with Careway Pharma Inc. (Careway) on January 1, 2010. The research and development agreement calls for SolvGen to use its best efforts to further develop proprietary instrument systems that have been under development for nearly 18 months and are expected to be ready for commercial launch in the near future. In connection with executing the research and development arrangement, SolvGen and Careway also entered into a five-year license and distribution agreement dated January 1, 2010. Under the terms of the research and development agreement, SolvGen retains all intellectual rights to the results of the research and development agreement (even in the event of default by the Company). In connection with this agreement, SolvGen is entitled to the following nonrefundable milestone......

Words: 492 - Pages: 2

Free Essay

Living a Life

...Global Antitrust Review 2014 163 The Assessment of Selective Distribution Systems Post-Pierre Fabre CRISTIANA DE FAVERI This article develops an analysis of selective distribution systems, which considers their main characteristics, the traditional principles governing their discipline and the recent evolution of the jurisprudence of the European Courts. In the Pierre Fabre case, the Court seems to have changed its approach to the subject, as, analysing a ‘de facto’ ban on online sales, it passed from the traditional ‘effects’ analysis of these systems to their qualification as restrictions ‘by object unless objectively justified’. The legal result is unaltered as the usual criteria of competition analysis are still adopted, but new perspectives could have been potentially opened in their interpretation. Furthermore, the article also takes into account the Court’s assertion that ‘the aim of maintaining a prestigious image is not a legitimate aim for restricting competition’, which represents another aspect of the judgment in apparent contrast with the settled case law. In both instances, it presents possible explanations consistent with the tradition. Finally, it underlines the significance of the ruling in relation to the controversial topic of internet selling. I. Introduction The topic of selective distribution systems has been explored in many authoritative academic works.1 Yet, it is still important and highly debated, not only......

Words: 15217 - Pages: 61

Premium Essay

Solvgen

...the review of two separate material agreements: (1) a research and development agreement and (2) a license and distribution agreement, both executed by SolvGen during the first quarter of fiscal year 2006. Direct’s management provided the engagement team with the following memo describing the Company’s revenue recognition policy: MEMO To: Audit Engagement Team From: CFO, SolvGen Inc. Subject: Revenue Recognition for Research and Development and License and Distribution Agreements Date: November 30, 2006 SolvGen Inc. (the Company), an SEC registrant, is a pharmaceutical development company. SolvGen entered into a five-year research and development agreement with Careway Pharma Inc. (Careway) on January 1, 2006. The research and development agreement calls for SolvGen to use its best efforts to further develop proprietary instrument systems that have been under development for nearly 18 months and are expected to be ready for commercial launch in the near future. In connection with executing the research and development arrangement, SolvGen and Careway also entered into a five-year license and distribution agreement dated January 1, 2006. Under the terms of the research and development agreement, SolvGen retains all intellectual rights to the results of the research and development agreement (even in the event of default by the Company). In connection with this agreement, SolvGen is entitled to the......

Words: 500 - Pages: 2

Premium Essay

Law/421 Case Study

...contract and offered the inventor $25 thousand to keep an offer open in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights during a period of time not to exceed 90 days. Essentially this option means that Big Time Toymaker purchased the rights to negotiate a distribution agreement for Chou’s invention. In this option contract prior to the end of the 90 day period if BTT and Chou could not reach an agreement on distribution then Chou would be free to enter into a contract with other business distributors while keeping the $25 thousand. This option contract is in fact a valid and enforceable contract between the two parties. Facts that weight in favor of or against Chou There are several factors that if considered weigh in favor of Chou. When Big Time Toymaker paid Chou $25 thousand for exclusive negotiation rights for his invention, Chou had a reasonable expectation that the toy company had the intent of reaching a distribution agreement. The meeting held between BTT and Chou concluded with an oral agreement and was followed up with an e-mail from the company’s manager solidifying the expectation of intent as well as specifying key terms within the agreement. Big Time Toymakers also sent Chou a fax requesting a draft for a distribution agreement contract, to which Chou immediately responded. Lastly, there was a significant amount of time spent by both parties acting under a contract. When considering the factors that weigh in favor of Chou, one must also take into......

Words: 982 - Pages: 4

Premium Essay

Big Time Toy Maker

...parties involved ever established a binding distribution contract. It is true an oral distribution agreement was achieved just three days prior to the 90-day deadline, which was a condition established in the original negotiating contract. However, as clearly stated in the original negotiating contract, there is not to be a distribution agreement, or contract, unless it is in writing. After the meeting, Chou volunteered to draft the distribution contract that would formalize their agreement. However, before Chou could finish the draft, he received an e-mail from the BTT manager. The e-mail with the subject line “Strat Deal,” focused on the key points of the distribution agreement between both parties, including the price, time frames, and obligations of both parties. After receiving this e-mail, Chou incorrectly assumed that BTT wanted to draft the contract. Thus Chou stopped working on the draft and a month passed by. This passage of time voided any previous agreement because of the 90-day clause to finalize the contract. What BTT and Chou had was not a binding or enforceable contract. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? The facts that prove there was no binding distribution contract are: (1) There was no written distribution agreement as stated as a requirement in the original terms of the negotiating contract, (2) No signatures were used to bind the agreement and the word “contract” was never used......

Words: 734 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Big Time Toy

...The problem for Chou is it stated (The exclusive negotiation agreement Stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing.) There was an email sent and Chou looked at the email as a form of a contract but in the legal terms nothing was signed or agrees too. Chou may have had a contract by legal terms because of the nature of the deal and dealing with a merchant. Imagine renting an apartment and the lease is not signed. Then you don’t have a lease agreement. I think Chou may be able to receive money for the verbal agreement in a private legal matter but nothing was ever signed. UCC Article 2 could apply because of the verbal agreement ( contract could be enforce in the court of law). I do think the emails help Chou in the court of law. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? I think the fact that both parties did reach a verbal agreement would help Chou. BTT was interested in distributing Strat and entered into an agreement with Chou whereby BTT paid him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. The exclusive negotiation agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. Just three days before the expiration of the 90-day period, the parties reached an oral distribution agreement at a meeting. Because the parties reached an oral distribution agreement at a meeting three days before the expiration of the 90......

Words: 1016 - Pages: 5

Premium Essay

Case Scenario - Big Time Toymaker

...Sherrett LAW/421 June 10, 2013 Faculty: Mark Rorem Case Scenario: Big Time Toymaker 1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? The contract was established at the in-person meeting where the distribution agreement details were agreed upon. The fact that Chou was going to reiterate the details in writing is not required. The manager emailing the same agreed upon details confirms BTT's agreement of the terms. 2. What facts may weigh in favor of or against Chou in terms of the parties’ objective intent to contract? Some facts that may weigh in favor of Chou would be that all parties came to an agreement in person and also that a member of BTT management sent the email re-stating the details of the agreement. A fact that may weigh against Chou, however, is that no agreement was made in writing and if entirely new management is in place at BTT, there may not be any witnesses to that original in-person agreement left other than Chou himself. 3. Does the fact that the parties were communicating by e-mail have any impact on your analysis in Questions 1 and 2 (above)? It does not directly impact the analysis, but is a factor in the process only so much as it replaces a written agreement. There was an agreement that an agreement would be written up for everyone, but no indication that anyone needed to actually sign anything so the email would sufficiently satisfy the requirement. 4. What role does the statute of frauds play in this......

Words: 571 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Case Scenario

...into an agreement with Chou, offering him $25,000 in exchange for exclusive negotiation rights for a 90-day period. This agreement stipulated that no distribution contract existed unless it was in writing. On day 87 of the agreement, the parties held a negotiation meeting and came to an oral agreement on the terms of the distribution agreement. Chou offered to draft the written distribution agreement and send to BTT. Before Chou could draft the contract, BTT’s manager sent Chou an e-mail with the subject line “Strat Deal” that outlined the key terms of the distribution agreement, including price, time frames, and responsibilities of both parties and their acceptance of the agreement. Chou, believing that this e-mail was the final written agreement, let one-month pass before BTT sent a fax requesting he fax over the draft distribution agreement contract. Chou immediately faxed the draft contract to BTT; however several months passed without a response from BTT. After a change in management at BTT, Chou was advised that BTT was not interested in distributing his game. This paper will review the case scenario and highlight why Chou has a case against BTT for breach of contract by answering the following questions posted within this case scenario and course syllabus.  1. At what point, if ever, did the parties have a contract? Chou and BTT had a contract at the point they agreed to all the terms.  By including the obligations of the parties and the terms of the agreement,......

Words: 1172 - Pages: 5