Gymshark in trademark battle that threatens future of small fitness business

Exclusive: British sportswear firm is seeking to obtain rights to The Conditioning Club, which is also the name of a Gloucestershire gym

Gymshark, the £1bn British sportswear firm started in a family garage, is locked in a trademark battle that threatens the future of a small fitness business.

Ben Francis, the university dropout who started sewing his own gym clothes in his parents’ garage and is now estimated to be worth £800m, is trying to add The Conditioning Club to his Gymshark stable of trademarks.

However, The Conditioning Club is also the name of a gym and fitness business based on an industrial estate in the Gloucestershire town of Fairford.

Founded by John Watson, who is the same age as 34-year-old Francis, the company registered its name at the UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) for gym and fitness services five years ago.

Watson, who has nine staff and three self-employed personal trainers serving about 500 members, is now awaiting the outcome of proceedings by the UKIPO.

“When I registered our name, I thought I had done what I needed to do to protect us,” says Watson. “Five years later, we have members, employees, premises, relationships with schools and sports clubs and a genuine local community built around The Conditioning Club name.

“I never imagined that I would find myself having to defend our name, particularly against a business like Gymshark, which like us started from humble beginnings. I had previously looked to Ben and Gymshark as an example of what a small UK fitness-related business can achieve.”

Francis founded Gymshark in 2012 and US private equity firm General Atlantic took a stake in 2020, making the company a “unicorn” with a £1.25bn valuation and Francis a multimillionaire while still in his 20s. He was the recipient of an MBE for services to the commerce and the economy at 30.

Last March, Gymshark applied to register Conditioning Club and The Conditioning Club as trademarks to offer services in classes including clothing, retail and entertainment services.

While Gymshark did not apply for a trademark covering fitness and training services, one of its applications is in the same class as Watson’s, as he had been selling branded gear for a number of years.

Watson moved to oppose the trademark application in the class he has registered to protect his brand. He also applied to extend his trademark to cover the classes, such as retail, that Gymshark had applied for that he had not thought to register when he set up his business.

Gymshark opposed him and also applied to the UKIPO to invalidate his original trademark ownership on the grounds that The Conditioning Club name is descriptive, essentially too generic and not distinct enough to be allowed to be trademarked.

However, Gymshark has multiple trademark registrations for the equally generic “Lifting Club” brand.

Watson’s legal costs are climbing towards £30,000. He recently launched a crowdfunding campaign via CrowdJustice. It has raised just over £5,000 to help.

“It feels deeply intimidating, the financial imbalance between us is enormous,” he said. “They can afford a prolonged trademark battle. It is a very David and Goliath situation. I’m happy to agree a sensible arrangement with them. This is about something much simpler: protecting the name of the business I created and have spent the last five years building.”

A legal battle stretching to almost 18 months with a small player in the fitness industry is at odds with the ethos and brand image on which Gymshark has built its name.

Earlier this week, the company donated £10,000 to the owner of a gym and Redditch that burned down.

Other acts of generosity include donating almost £9,000 to help a British athlete raise funds to achieve his dream of getting to the Olympics, after the long jumper had been forced to get a job as a delivery driver to continue training.

Gymshark declined to comment on the trademark battle.