Should the NHL sell the naming rights for the Stanley Cup

[Fehr Time*]

Since everything is all about generating revenue these days, I say why not. It is done with the Memorial Cup in junior, so why not the NHL? It would be interesting to see how much money could be made off of selling these rights. Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[JackFr]

No.

No.

 

[cbcwpg]

If you are talking about something like " The 2012 Stanley Cup as brought to you by McDonalds " where that company pays the NHL for the right to add the "brought to you by" reference ... fine. No problem.

But if you are talking about calling it the " 2012 McDonald's Stanley Cup ".... that's just wrong on so many ways. I don't like it being called the Mastercard Memorial Cup either. The teams in the NHL play for the Stanley Cup, nothing else.

I'll tell you what, when the NFL starts calling it the Best Buy Vince Lombardi Trophy, maybe I'll change my mind... NOT!

 

[White Pine]

I can't stand commercialization of any kind, even arena naming rights, etc. Some things just shouldn't be touched.

Also, the Stanley Cup has been the Stanley Cupp for so long, it wouldn't make sense to change it now. Though it is concievable to get used to it (ie the Brier)

Only other point is that everyone competes for the Lord Stanely's Cup, nobody cares about the Wal-mart part. big turnoff in my opinion (don't take that the wrong way)

anyway, if you make a new trophy, name it whatever, but leave history alone.

 

[LadyStanley]

I'd like to see corporations step up for the following:

• New "defensive defenseman" award (the Norris always seems to go to a more offensive guy)
• NHL Assists leader
• Coach of the post season

But keep your paws off the Stanley Cup.

 

[kdb209]

I'd like to see corporations step up for the following:

• New "defensive defenseman" award (the Norris always seems to go to a more offensive guy)
• NHL Assists leader
• Coach of the post season

But keep your paws off the Stanley Cup.

You say that now, but how long will it be untill we see

Lady

 

[Fehr Time*]

I'd like to see corporations step up for the following:

• New "defensive defenseman" award (the Norris always seems to go to a more offensive guy)
• NHL Assists leader
• Coach of the post season

But keep your paws off the Stanley Cup.

Why not though? It is all a big business anyways. There are no sacred cows.

 

[White Pine]

Why not though? It is all a big business anyways. There are no sacred cows.

If they wanted to make as much money as humanly possible... I suppose they would think about it, along with the VIA Rail Montreal Canadiens and CanWest Winnipeg Jets, and McDonalds National Hockey League. I would still hate it, though. Thankfully the League currently sits on a modest two billion dollar cushion.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

when the owners shut down the NHL to bring about a "partnership" with the players, they became ethically and morally obligated to grow revenues from every single available source.

if the market would bear an oxygen delivery surcharge on each ticket, they are morally and ethically obligated to charge it

if the market would bear a step access fee on each ticket, they are morally and ethically obligated to charge it

etc ..

hey, they are the ones who shut down the league in an attempt to link revenues to salary and now that they have it, they would be cheating the players if they left money on the table.

 

[Fehr Time*]

when the owners shut down the NHL to bring about a "partnership" with the players, they became ethically and morally obligated to grow revenues from every single available source.

if the market would bear an oxygen delivery surcharge on each ticket, they are morally and ethically obligated to charge it

if the market would bear a step access fee on each ticket, they are morally and ethically obligated to charge it

etc ..

hey, they are the ones who shut down the league in an attempt to link revenues to salary and now that they have it, they would be cheating the players if they left money on the table.

And bingo was his name-o.....

 

[White Pine]

Out before a minor argument starts. I don't see anything ethically wrong with your idea, an I see the sense. It's just that I wouldn't do it, or want it. I suppose it's a question of priorities.

 

[Dave is a killer]

ignore is a great option

 

[Killion]

Lady

Michael Yormark, is that you hiding behind Fehr Time?....

 

[MaskedSonja]

You say that now, but how long will it be untill we see

Lady

That just puts a new spin on things....


They techinically could still call it the "STANLEY(tm) Cup"

 

[No Fun Shogun]

Only if they want to be completely ridiculed.

 

[Noldo]

The loss of prestige (from the League's point of view) would make those naming rights way too expensive for any company. In other words, no entity would be willing to pay such an outrageous price it that would make the deal too good to pass from league's point of view.

 

[hatterson]

I'd like to see corporations step up for the following:

• New "defensive defenseman" award (the Norris always seems to go to a more offensive guy)
• NHL Assists leader
• Coach of the post season

But keep your paws off the Stanley Cup.

I'd rather keep all awards named after something meaningful. Have the Assists trophy be named after a guy like Adam Oates or the best defensive defensemen named after a guy like Harvey.

Why not though? It is all a big business anyways. There are no sacred cows.

Certain things *should* be sacred. The Stanley Cup is one of those.

The closest thing to sponsorship should be a company being able to buy the rights to "The 2012 Stanley Cup Finals brought to you by GEICO" They can bring the finals themselves, but not the cup.

 

[pete goegan]

No.

No.

And...

No!

 

[DaleCooper]

Please no.

 

[Dado]

Sure, why not? There are already a couple of corporate logos on our jerseys, ads are plastered all over the ice and the arena, why should the trophy remain unsullied?

 

[Melrose Munch]

The loss of prestige (from the League's point of view) would make those naming rights way too expensive for any company. In other words, no entity would be willing to pay such an outrageous price it that would make the deal too good to pass from league's point of view.

Yeah right!

That soccer trophy above me is way older and has been sullied with logos.

 

[His Beardliness*]

Hell no. Can't even stand "this powerplay is brought to you by" crap.

 

[saskganesh]

Why not though? It is all a big business anyways. There are no sacred cows.

It's not about fake religions or golden calfs. This is about undermining your own brand, which is bad business, and bad big business.

If you lose customer support, it doesn't matter what your sponsorship packages are. Based on past advertising on jersey threads, I think at least 90% of the market would be against this.

 

[EventHorizon]

Yeah right!

That soccer trophy above me is way older and has been sullied with logos.

That trophy is not even 20 years old. You're probably thinking of the FA Cup which is way older than the Stanley Cup (and has no corporate logos on it).


Back on topic, why the hell would they put a corporate sponsor on the Stanley Cup? There are some things that should not be touched. The uniform is one. The Stanley Cup is another.

 

[rojac]

Yeah right!

That soccer trophy above me is way older and has been sullied with logos.

Okay, maybe I missed something in my research but the Premier League trophy appears to have been created for the league when it started in 1990s.

Perhaps you meant to refer to the FA cup which is all of about 20 years old than the Stanley Cup so I hardly thing that qualifies as "way older".