Shopping Cart Button

Swisher Sweets Loses 44 Million

Swisher Sweets vs Trendsettah
It does not pay to breach a contract

By BillieBLVD


Message to the little guys (Trendsettah), once you sign up with the big boys you better have a contract that clearly outlines the deal (and they did it) and a message to the big boys (Swisher Sweets), if they have a solid contract then chances are they are not stupid and are more than willing to back it up in court.  


Swisher Sweets decided to breach their contract with Trendsettah by not producing the units they needed to meet demand.  They were contracted to produce a product and once said product started to eat away at their own core line (an unexpected event) Swisher Sweets decided to cut off the supply leaving Trendsettah out to dry when it came to fulfilling orders (to the tune of 200 million).


The breach will cost them a cool 44 million and from the looks of the Instagram pictures of the Trendsettah organization I can see why they thought they could.  On the face of it the Trendsettah folks check the box on being outspokenly urban and the suits at Swisher Sweet probably thought they could treat them like the help but even in the world of 1 percent privilege a contract is a contract. 


Read the original article


JACKSONVILE, Fla. (CBSMiami/AP) — A jury ordered a Florida cigar maker to pay up to the tune of $44.4 million for unfair business practices.

The Florida Times-Union reports that Jacksonville-based Swisher International was found to have violated a contract with another cigar company, Trendsettah USA.


Swisher, maker of the “Swisher Sweet” cigarillos, or small cigars, entered into a contract to make the same product for Trendsettah, which sold it under a different name called “Splitarillos.”


Sale of Splitarillos increased quickly, taking market share from Swisher Sweets.


In response, Trendsettah said Swisher capped the number of cigarillos it provided, leaving Trendsettah 200 million short of demand even though the contract had no maximum.


Read more

Write a comment

Comments: 0