Press release

RRP rip-off - Sports Direct potentially breaking the law with dodgy pricing practices, Which? says

Sports Direct’s use of RRPs could be breaking the law by misleading shoppers into thinking they are getting a better deal than they really are, according to a new Which? investigation
5 min read
Press Team

The consumer champion has reported Sports Direct to the competition regulator after it found products being sold with Recommended Retail Prices (RRPs) that appear to be misleading as Which? researchers could not find the products sold at that RRP price anywhere else online.

After being tipped off about suspicious RRPs by Which? readers, Which? looked at the pricing of 160 popular products on SportsDirect.com. As well as using Recommended Retail Prices as reference prices to indicate how good an offer is, the chain also uses more obscure terms such as Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) or Suggested Retail Price (SRP). Which? believes these can be interpreted as being the same as RRP. 

Sports Direct’s owner, Mike Ashley’s Frasers Group, has a large portfolio of brands under its umbrella including Jack Wills, Slazenger, Everlast and Lonsdale. Frasers Group also owns various retailers such as USC, Studio, and Get the Label, which sometimes appear to be the only sellers of these particular brands. 

According to the Advertising Standards Authority, shoppers understand RRPs to be the price the item is generally sold at – meaning shoppers may think the Sports Direct price is a great deal compared to the ‘normal’ price across the market. Which? found examples of products where researchers could not find any other online retailer selling them at or above the Sports Direct reference price – leading researchers to question if these were in fact genuine.

Which? found a Jack Wills Hunston graphic logo hoodie in green (£24) which had a Manufacturer Suggested Retail Price (MSRP) of £54.99. But Jack Wills is owned by Sports Direct’s parent firm, Frasers Group, and Which? researchers could not find it sold or supplied by anyone other than Frasers Group retailers. It was £40 on Amazon (supplied by Sports Direct), but all the other retailers sold it at £24.

Another example Which? found was a pair of Slazengers men’s drive tennis shoes selling at SportsDirect for £32.99 (nearly half the MSRP of £64.99). Slazenger is owned by SportsDirect’s parent firm, Frasers Group. Which? found the trainers sold on eight other websites, but the owner or seller was always part of the parent company. Seven retailers sold them for £32.99 (or in one case £33). Only one retailer, Slazenger itself, sold them at the MSRP.

The Whitaker Somerfield long sleeve baselayer for equestrian sports was also selling at Sports Direct at £8. Which? found the RRP was listed at £35. Unlike the other examples, this is not a brand owned by Sports Direct or Frasers Group but nonetheless, Which? researchers could not find it sold or supplied by anyone else online other than Frasers Group retailers. The highest price found was £18 – still a long way short of the supposed £35 reference price.

Overall, for 58 of the 160 products investigated, Which? found no retailer selling them online at or above the Sports Direct reference price – leading the consumer champion to question if those reference prices were genuine. For a further 53, Which? did find the product at or above the reference price at another retailer, but in each case that retailer was also part of the Frasers Group. All of these items were Frasers Group own-brand products. 

Which? believes some of Sports Direct’s uses of RRPs and MSRPs could be ‘misleading actions’ under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, as they could mislead people about the value of a product and savings they could make. If the product is available across the market at significantly less than these reference prices, the discount the comparison suggests is not genuine. This is why Which? has presented its findings to the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA).

Lisa Webb, Which? Legal Expert said: 

“If Sports Direct is misleading customers by inappropriate use of RRPs to dupe them into thinking they are getting a good deal, then the competition regulator needs to step in and take strong action to stop this from happening.

“In the meantime, shoppers should take any big discounts at SportsDirect.com with a pinch of salt and make sure they compare prices with other retailers before parting with any hard earned cash”.

-ENDS-

Notes to editors:

Which?’s investigation has uncovered some questionable and dodgy pricing tactics at SportsDirect.com that it believes may be breaking the law. 

In particular, it found it using RRPs and MSRPs that appear to be misleading. 

The Advertising Standards Authority says shoppers would understand RRPs to be the price the item is generally sold at – meaning shoppers may think the Sports Direct price is a great deal compared to the ‘normal’ price across the market. 

But Which? found examples where no other online retailers were selling at the RRP or MSRP price used by Sports Direct. Often, their prices were the same as Sports Direct’s or lower. 

Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) says: ‘If a marketer is the only seller of a product, and so has set the price themselves, it’s unlikely to be acceptable to refer to the price as an RRP.’ Whether that applies where the only sellers are members of the same group is unclear. 

Which? looked at 160 products at SportsDirect.com on various days in February, March and April 2025, both those from Frasers Group own brands (73) as well as other branded products (87). 

‘Misleading actions’ under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 was in force when this research was undertaken but has now been replaced by the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.

Right of reply

Sports Direct did not provide a comment for publication.

About Which?

Which? is the UK’s consumer champion, here to make life simpler, fairer and safer for everyone. Our research gets to the heart of consumer issues, our advice is impartial, and our rigorous product tests lead to expert recommendations. We’re the independent consumer voice that influences politicians and lawmakers, investigates, holds businesses to account and makes change happen. As an organisation we’re not for profit and all for making consumers more powerful.

The information in this press release is for editorial use by journalists and media outlets only. Any business seeking to reproduce information in this release should contact the Which? Endorsement Scheme team at endorsementscheme@which.co.uk.