In light of the notes published in the newspaper O Globo, Sports section, on November 08th, Clube de Regatas do Flamengo clarifies:

1- In the year 2000, Flamengo and NIKE DO BRASIL COMÉRCIO E PARTICIPAÇÕES LTDA. signed a Sponsorship and Supply of Sports Materials Contract, which had been successively renewed, with the most recent of these renewals providing for a period of validity of 3 (three) years, between July 1, 2006 and June 30, 2009;

2- During this period, especially in the last two years, NIKE did not fulfill its contractual obligations and caused serious losses to Flamengo.

3- The contract provides that disputes between the parties must be resolved by Arbitration, in accordance with Law No. 9.307/96;

4- In June, Flamengo initiated the arbitration procedure demanding compensation for the damages caused by NIKE and in September the Arbitration Tribunal was fully constituted;

5- During the period in which the Arbitration Court was being installed, NIKE obtained an injunction from the 8th Civil Court of the District of São Paulo to keep the contract in force until the Arbitration Court's decision.

6- In the second instance, the Court decided that, with the establishment of the Arbitration Court, it is competent to decide all issues relating to the dispute between the parties, which includes the confirmation, or not, of the injunction granted by the Court of the 2th Civil Court.

Flamengo took all possible measures to ensure that NIKE corrected its errors and found that the company was unable to fulfill its contractual obligations and was not aligned with the club's objectives. It is worth noting that, in honor of the years of relationship, the club proposed to NIKE the amicable termination of the contract before initiating the arbitration procedure.

Negotiations aimed at concluding a new contract for the supply of sports equipment were only initiated and concluded after the Contract was terminated and the arbitration proceedings were initiated.

This way:

a) The published information that Flamengo lost its case against NIKE "in the third instance" is unfounded. The ordinary courts have not ruled on the said case, and the Arbitration Court has not even begun its review;

b) The published information that the company would have a right of preference, which would extend from 90 to 180 days after the end of the contract, is incorrect, as the same is maintained only by force of a provisional judicial measure and would end next June, and the preference would need to be exercised 15 days before the end of the contract;

c) The published information that there was only a R$500 difference between the proposals is incorrect. Data regarding the contract with Nike, as well as the arbitration proceedings, are protected by confidentiality, which Flamengo intends to respect, unlike Nike and the journalist who erroneously (or knowingly) published the above information. In any case, the information is available to Flamengo's internal bodies, namely the Deliberative Council and the Fiscal Council, for verification of the discrepancy between the amounts.

d) Furthermore, any exercise of the right of preference is subject to compliance with all contractual conditions, and not only to payment of the installment in cash.

Rio de Janeiro, November 10, 2008

Marcio Baroukel de Souza Braga

President