The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
$8m is what they estimated the value was for the NHL.
For $8M, it's not really worth it. That's about $260K per team - not even enough to cover a minimum 1-way contract. I hate advertising on sports jerseys, but I may be willing to sell out for a small, unobtrusive patch on a jersey, but not for such a paltry sum.
... you mean like the EPL, where they have freaking advertisements in big print right across the center of their chests?
that was my point... there's one ad. Nobody would ever propose that the EPL allow their kits to look like a NASCAR jacket, so I seriously question the slippery slope logic in this regard when we can see this system working with no negative implications in England and Germany. The leagues with the ads all over their jerseys are in small, poor countries or niche sports where they lack other revenue streams. That's not an issue in North America, just like it's not for the top soccer leagues in Europe.
I didnt see anyone oppose equipment ads based on its perceived 'Americaness'. Furthermore, it does not seem to be solely opposed by US posters (view, the many Canadian posters against the advertising possibility). In fact, there seems to be contingencies from both countries who are for and against and indifferent to the proposal. Let's not turn a civil conversation towards unproductive argument through the use of vague, emotionally charged, and not particularly relevant pejorative terms such as 'unamerican'.
the nba may be the first na league to have ads on the jersey, but the nhl has long-since been the only na league to have ads on the playing surface. Depending on how they do it, i'd trade on-ice ads for jersey ads.
To illustrate the potential of advertising on jerseys, Manchester United just signed a 7-year $559m deal to have Chevrolet emblazoned on their jersey. Thats $80m a year. The example is an outlier sure, but mega clubs in the majors can make major money with jersey sponsorship.
NBA is a global league, and global leagues do well with jersey sponsorships. I could see some of their teams really raking in cash with advertising. If you can make $10-20m a year at least, you're doing well. Then there are examples of sponsors buying both stadiums rights and jersey rights, which over a 5-10 year period can result well in excess of $100m dollars.
Quote:
Originally Posted by La Vieille Garde
The main issue I have with it, if I'm understanding how it's done in Europe correctly, is, in Europe the sponsors foot the bill for the clubs in exchange for their ad on the kits: they do NOT take tax payer's money for the sports club.
Here in the US they want to put ads on the uniforms and still take tax payers money. If that really is how Europe is setup, I am 100% opposed to it in North America unless the tax money ceases.
Tax money for what? Stadiums? If thats what you mean, then nah. Because there is no market control in place like in North America, every city in Europe has their own pro team or multiple pro teams, so holding a city to ransom is impossible. There are plenty of tax payer funded stadiums, but the control of the stadium stays in the hands of the council.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IU Hawks fan
I don't buy $8M is all these 30 teams COMBINED get for a second.
I think the Leafs, Habs, and Rangers would pull close to that on their own.
I think you're right. Leafs could get $10m plus easy. To use soccer as an example again, Los Angeles Galaxy of MLS have a 10-year jersey sponsorship for $44m. If MLS of all leagues have a team earning $4.4m a year for jersey sponsorship, then its absolutely farcical to say that NHL would fetch $8m collectively. NHL collectively wouldn't be too far off NBA I think. At least $60-70m a year.
Imagine if NFL did it! Some mouth watering sums would be involved
In the CFL you honestly don't even notice the patches when you attend the games, even when you're in the good seats. It doesn't bother me watching TV either.
So long as the jersey isn't cluttered or even worse, the corporate logo is larger than the team logo, it's not the end of the world. For the Canucks part, their logo has been a corporate logo for years!
Not ideal but inevitable. There are already digital ads on the glass for Rangers broadcasts, which I find much more distracting. I wonder what its going to look like 10-20 years from now.
Seeing all those ads on Joe Thornton and Rick Nash is ridiculous. You can't even tell who the players are with all that junk everywhere. When I watch a game I wanna be able to easily recognize the players, not be distracted by a bunch of ads. And damn straight I would not pay one cent for a jersey that had a bunch of ads on it.
I just don't get this issue at all. The NHL is nothing like European football in terms of advertising. Football doesn't have ten commercial breaks during every game and they don't have ads ON the field. It's an entirely different model. You wouldn't even be able to make out 90% of the advertisement patches on a jersey in game anyway so whats the point? Is it just people that don't watch the NHL that suggest advertising on jerseys? It's a really stupid idea.
Some mouth watering sums would be involved
