Lifting lessons from Gymshark’s influencer fallout
When a 22-year-old powerlifter lands in a legal tussle with a £500 million sportswear giant, it’s easy to dismiss the case as yet another skirmish in the ever-expanding influencer economy. But beneath the headlines of Gymshark’s battle with former brand ambassador Nathaniel Massiah lies a broader lesson in managing the financial risks of marketing partnerships—a challenge even the most seasoned brands can’t afford to ignore.
At its heart, this dispute highlights the complexities of working with influencers, particularly in an era where these partnerships are often as vital as ad campaigns were to brands in the 1990s. Gymshark’s reliance on influencer marketing helped catapult it from a garage startup to a global player, but with great reliance comes significant risk.
The crux of the conflict is a clause in Massiah’s contract that barred him from endorsing competing brands for three months after their agreement ended.
Massiah had been a Gymshark ambassador since he was 17, signing a series of short-term contracts, but when his final contract expired in November, he began promoting YoungLA, a rival sportswear company, just weeks later. Gymshark claims this breached the non-compete clause, and after failing to get a response from Massiah, the company sought a High Court injunction to block him from endorsing competitors further.
Massiah, on the other hand, has argued that the contracts were far from equitable. His legal team has highlighted the significant power imbalance between a global brand like Gymshark and a young athlete reliant on such deals for income. They’ve also questioned the fairness of the timeline given for responding to legal action, suggesting that such constraints leave influencers financially and legally vulnerable.
The case has raised concerns about how brands structure these agreements and what safeguards influencers have in an industry where power dynamics can often skew one-sided.
Contracts with influencers may appear straightforward: deliver a few social media posts, wear the brand at key events, and avoid promoting competitors. However, these arrangements can harbor hidden financial and reputational risks if not managed properly.
The Gymshark-Massiah case underscores three critical areas where companies can stumble:
What lessons can brands take away? Gymshark’s experience offers a few cautionary tales:
The Gymshark saga isn’t an isolated case; it’s a snapshot of a maturing influencer marketing industry grappling with its growing pains.
For high-growth brands, influencer partnerships will continue to play a pivotal role in scaling operations, but managing the associated risks requires more than a flashy Instagram reel or trending hashtag. It demands strategic foresight, robust contracts, and a clear understanding of how the financial stakes extend far beyond the influencer’s follower count.
The bottom line? If a brand’s marketing strategy relies on influencers, the risks can’t be left to the legal team alone.