is it time for ads on uniforms?

[Brent Burns Beard]

It's still unnecessary. ....NHL received revenue well above expectations?...

yes it is neccesary. the NHL is not a charity. it is obligated to maximize every single bit of revenue they can. if they can charge you $5.00 for "stair access" to get to your seat, they should. if you dont like it, you wont go and they wont be able to charge it. if enough people pay it, they should, will and are obligated to charge it.

there is no such thing as too much revenue, whether its over and above expecations or not. the business is there to make money.

whether the average fan can afford it, is of no concern. i havent been able to afford a ticket since i had kids, but thats not the Flames problem. if they can sell out their arena, then good on em. if they can charge $10,000,000 per period, then they are obligated to do so.

hey, they wanted the partnership, their partners are counting on them to do their err "part".

 

[kurt]

well, i guess we are both entitled to our opinions. i know my position isnt the popular one and I accept it.

i think the fans suffer because owners like Wirtz and Jacobs have legislated their rights to put more green in their pockets at the expense of teams like OTT.

in exchange for the cap, players can now get UFA as young as 25. fans will suffer when their favourite young player has to be dealt or leaves as UFA. in the old system, Havlat not only would not have demanded or comanded 6m, he would have had no leverage to get much more than 2.5, but under this new system, OTT had to trade him or lose him for nothing and because of liberal UFA rules, he has the leverage to get 6m per year. What did CHI do to earn the right to a player like Havlat? Nothing, no investment in scouting or development, just wait for a team like OTT who has a great scouting and development program to not be ALLOWED to keep Havlat.

ok ramble mode off ... i dont like the new system, its not a popular opinion, but so be it.

MemberSHIP, I agree with everything you've said in these posts, and I completely share your perspective regarding the new CBA. I tried to convince people on the boards that the new system would be negative from a fan standpoint, but have fun selling that argument in these parts. It's especially an issue because, for some unknown reason, people associate the new on-ice hockey product ("new nhl" officiating) with the salary cap.

However, I have faith that the idea of selling advertising HAS been explored. Probably on several occasions. Keep in mind the fact that you have to weigh the increased advertising revenue against any potential losses in merchandise revenue (possible dip in sales if fans oppose the idea), as well as other losses in revenue related to general hockey interest (as some may be turned off of hockey altogether because of a perceived "corporate" look of the game).

Let the market forces do their thing, everyone involved wants to get paid, and will do what they can to do so.

 

[JRod1887]

yes it is neccesary. the NHL is not a charity. it is obligated to maximize every single bit of revenue they can. if they can charge you $5.00 for "stair access" to get to your seat, they should. if you dont like it, you wont go and they wont be able to charge it. if enough people pay it, they should, will and are obligated to charge it.

there is no such thing as too much revenue, whether its over and above expecations or not. the business is there to make money.

whether the average fan can afford it, is of no concern. i havent been able to afford a ticket since i had kids, but thats not the Flames problem. if they can sell out their arena, then good on em. if they can charge $10,000,000 per period, then they are obligated to do so.

hey, they wanted the partnership, their partners are counting on them to do their err "part".

Well of course the NHL is a business, and they will make as much revenue as they can, but my point is that there is a lot that can be done before putting ads on unis, and, thus far, they've taken a lot of action other than that. If organizations haven't found it necessary to put ads on unis in the past half a century, why would they think about doing it now? It certainly isn't a new phenomenon.

 

[KRM]

Please, from a swedish hockey fan. We have too see our favourite teams here in the SEL with thousands of ads on the jersey. The ice isn't white, it's pink, yellow, black and red and you may see some white between the ads. Let us see the comercial free jersey in the NHL because I'm telling you, it sucks too see hockey with some many ads.

 

[Cawz]

well, i guess we are both entitled to our opinions. i know my position isnt the popular one and I accept it.

i think the fans suffer because owners like Wirtz and Jacobs have legislated their rights to put more green in their pockets at the expense of teams like OTT.

in exchange for the cap, players can now get UFA as young as 25. fans will suffer when their favourite young player has to be dealt or leaves as UFA. in the old system, Havlat not only would not have demanded or comanded 6m, he would have had no leverage to get much more than 2.5, but under this new system, OTT had to trade him or lose him for nothing and because of liberal UFA rules, he has the leverage to get 6m per year. What did CHI do to earn the right to a player like Havlat? Nothing, no investment in scouting or development, just wait for a team like OTT who has a great scouting and development program to not be ALLOWED to keep Havlat.

ok ramble mode off ... i dont like the new system, its not a popular opinion, but so be it.

The UFA age and the cap are not the same thing. You cant blame the UFA age on the cap. Blame the PA for needing something in exchange for the cap if you need to blame someone.

In the old system, what did St Louis do to earn the right to a player like Doug Weight? Nothing, no investment in scouting or development, just wait for a team like Edmonton who has a great development program to not be ABLE to keep Weight (since they could “only offer six million a yearâ€). Its pretty tough to compete with irresponsible ownership that can throw around money. Funny how that ownership doesn’t own them anymore, huh?

You can have your opinion. I just think the new system is way better than the old one. Who cares that some corrupt owners are making money? Corrupt players are making money, corrupt agents are making money, corrupt beer vendors are making money and giving me half a glass of foam…

Back on topic, I think theres too many people making decisions to see gaudy uniforms in the NHL. Like the Rona CFL patch picture that was attached to the thread, that’s what I expect to see, and don’t have a problem with it.

Arent there CCM, Nike and Reebok logos on uniforms already? Isnt that advertising?

 

[dekem]

Actually, the team crests take up way too much space, why don't they just remove them but leave the little shoulder crests, that would open up more room.
Then they could alternate the jersey colours to match the sponsors, maybe change them only every week so it doesn't get to confusing for the fans trying to remember if their team is Home Depot tonight or Coke.

But if more revenue streams are needed, there are still a few areas where branding hasn't been implemented. The inside the net ice is still all white, think of the possibilities on replays of close ups of a sponsor's logo while they try to figure out if the puck is in or not. That has got to be huge $$$s

Or refs jerseys, bald heads of goal judges, each goal and assist brought to you by a different sponsor when announced on the PA, how about when trades are announced (This Eric LIndros trade is brought to you by Excedrin).

The untapped possibilities are endless. It isn't about the game or the fans, it is about squeezing every last nickel out of the product!

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

... It isn't about the game or the fans, it is about squeezing every last nickel out of the product!

someone gets it ...

 

[norrisnick]

Isn't there a Wall Street's Future forum somewhere?

 

[Butch 19]

someone gets it ...

uh... I'm 99.9% certain that dekem is kidding.

(God, I hope he's kidding!)

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

uh... I'm 99.9% certain that dekem is kidding.

(God, I hope he's kidding!)

of course he was kidding ... but in his attempt to make a joke, he stumbled upon the truth.

 

[dekem]

Just showing you a glimpse of the future

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Just showing you a glimpse of the future

thanks ... nothing wrong with it either.

 

[Davey Duck]

lol, well i guess you fell for it hook line and sinker like the rest of the sheep.

HAHA, I just had to quote that because it is one funny mixed metaphor. Imagine trying to reel in a sheep...they have got to be really heavy with all the water their wool would soak up.

 

[StevenintheATL]

For the most part, ads on uniforms in the US has been confined to the minor sports tier (notable exception, auto racing, which has been hand and hand with sponsors pretty much from the beginning), sports like soccer, lacrosse, arena football, and in the minor leagues of many sports (baseball, hockey, basketball). There are already ads on uniforms when you think about it. That Nike, Reebok, Adidas, etc. logo on that piece of uniform is an ad for that company.

Perhaps if the ads are done tastefully perhaps no bigger than the typical patch teams use for their "anniversary" patches, maybe an ad for one of the local sponsors (perhaps whatever company has the arena naming rights) and one for one of the major NHL sponsors. For example, the Thrashers might have a Philips Electronics patch and an XM Satellite Radio patch on their uniforms. The Flyers, Wachovia and Southwest Airlines.

 

[vbet*]

Maybe if we covered players with advertising and made the players skate around the outside of the rink it will get more popular in the south?

 

[Spydey629]

For the most part, ads on uniforms in the US has been confined to the minor sports tier (notable exception, auto racing, which has been hand and hand with sponsors pretty much from the beginning), sports like soccer, lacrosse, arena football, and in the minor leagues of many sports (baseball, hockey, basketball). There are already ads on uniforms when you think about it. That Nike, Reebok, Adidas, etc. logo on that piece of uniform is an ad for that company.

Perhaps if the ads are done tastefully perhaps no bigger than the typical patch teams use for their "anniversary" patches, maybe an ad for one of the local sponsors (perhaps whatever company has the arena naming rights) and one for one of the major NHL sponsors. For example, the Thrashers might have a Philips Electronics patch and an XM Satellite Radio patch on their uniforms. The Flyers, Wachovia and Southwest Airlines.

Beat me to it.

 

[J-D]

But if more revenue streams are needed, there are still a few areas where branding hasn't been implemented. The inside the net ice is still all white, think of the possibilities on replays of close ups of a sponsor's logo while they try to figure out if the puck is in or not. That has got to be huge $$$s

I actually like this idea.

 

[blamebettman*]

no but it's time for people who suggest ads on unforms to shoot themselves in the face.

 

[Jaysfanatic*]

Only if it's time for foots in asses.

 

[futurcorerock]

Americans and Canadians are too far up their own asses to let it happen.

We like smelling our own farts is all

 

[miser]

Well of course the NHL is a business, and they will make as much revenue as they can, but my point is that there is a lot that can be done before putting ads on unis, and, thus far, they've taken a lot of action other than that. If organizations haven't found it necessary to put ads on unis in the past half a century, why would they think about doing it now? It certainly isn't a new phenomenon.

I believe that the NHL can defer on such uniform ads until the cap is actually reduced.

 

[loadie]

I certainly hope not. Nothing wrong with teams making as much money as they can, but Tradition goes out the door. I have a hard time imagining the Leafs jersey with a Tampon emblem on it, the Sens jersey with a Trojans condom symbol on it...hmmm...nevermind that one......or the Bruins with some Prep H tag on it... damn, it could get ugly.

 

[Millions Livio]

Actually, the team crests take up way too much space, why don't they just remove them but leave the little shoulder crests, that would open up more room.

Actually, several years back, before I got injured and was still playing. This team I was "trying out" for (I only went to it for the ice time, just wanted to skate a little more during the summer) had their logo about the 1/4 the size of the sponsers logo, and the teams logo was way on the top right hand corner of the jersey. Their sponser was Tim Horton's, and at first I though they were called the Tim Horton's (I thought they were named after their sponser). Was really funny, not only this but the teams logo wasn't even viewable most of the time because the arm would cover it up when playing.

The people there sucked besides a few anyway, only reason the few that were good were there was for the same reason I was, free ice time. There shouldn't be anymore advertising at all on the jerseys, the little Nike or Rebook ones are annoying enough.

 

[South Florida Canuck]

ads on hockey jerseys would look awful. Most modern day hockey jerseys are so busy anyway, and putting ads on them would only make them even more busy. Have you ever seen the jerseys in Russia? yuck! I dont ever want NHL uniforms to look like that. Its bad enough we were/are graced with such monstrocities such as the Predators colostomy bag colored unis, the mooterus, the buffaslug, etc.. we certainly dont need this