Shell
06-25-2003, 09:36 AM
Oh good lord. The arenas were bad enough, don't start doing it to the teams!
What's next? 'Rams football presented by Edward Jones'?
By Larry Eichel Knight-Ridder Newspapers
updated: 06/24/2003 07:02 AM
The politicians persuaded the Chicago Bears not to sell the naming rights to the team's newly rebuilt stadium. But the Bears figured out how to get the big bucks anyway.
On Monday, they sold the name of the team, or came pretty close.
No longer will the old franchise, which was there at the NFL's creation, refer to itself exclusively as the Chicago Bears. From now on, whenever possible, it will be ``Bears football presented by Bank One.''
The bank, which is based in Chicago, paid an undisclosed amount to be the team's ``presenting partner'' for the next 12 years, the first such arrangement in NFL history.
Although one media report placed the number at $50 million, sources familiar with the deal said the actual figure was somewhat less.
Ted Phillips, the Bears' president and chief executive officer, said the deal would bring ``a new level of corporate partnership to the city of Chicago and the NFL.''
For its money, the bank will get signs all over the stadium, advertisements on the Bears' radio broadcasts and nongame television programs, the franchise's banking business, a presence at training camp, and a sponsorship role in the team's community outreach efforts.
In addition, the team will make frequent use of the signature phrase that includes the bank's name on the air and in print. Whether anyone else uses it remains to be seen.
Having a presenting partner or sponsor is old hat for golf and tennis tournaments, for college football bowl games and conference championships in football and basketball.
It's not even a first for major-league pro sports in this country. In 2000 and 2001, baseball's San Diego Padres were sponsored by a band of American Indians, the Sycuans, who paid $1.5 million for the honor.
Until now, though, it's never happened in the nation's premier sports league or to a team whose very name is synonymous with its sport.
``It allows us to associate ourselves very closely with the team,'' Bank One spokesman Tom Kelly said. ``It's really about visibility. We're reaffirming to the people of Chicago that we're Chicago's bank, that Chicago is important to us.''
Will Chicagoans or football fans across the country be even the slightest bit annoyed by this latest twist in the ever-closer relationship between sports and business? Experts aren't sure.
``This strikes me as a dangerous precedent, maybe one step too far,'' said Paul Swangard, managing director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon. ``We've reached the point where to generate more revenue, everyone's diving into what seems to me be a gray area.''
Said David Carter, a sports marketing consultant based in Los Angeles: ``It doesn't strike me as being all that offensive, but my threshold for this stuff is pretty high. Isn't everything (like naming rights) really selling the name of the team? Instead of connecting three dots to get there, this time you only have to connect two.''
For the Bears, pursuing the naming-rights option turned out to be a nonstarter. With U.S. forces engaged overseas, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley was adamant that Soldier Field, renovated largely with public dollars, retain its historic name; the place was built in the 1920s in homage to the veterans of World War I. The Bears acquiesced.
So the team had to be creative and pursue an option that, in the end, produced less money than a conventional naming deal might have. Consider that in a smaller market, Philadelphia, the Lincoln Financial Group paid $139.6 million over 21 years to put its name on the Eagles' new stadium.
Richard Sherwood, president of Front Row Marketing Services, said the approach struck him as promising.
``I wouldn't be surprised if other teams, even ones that have naming-rights deals already, try to do something similar,'' he said.
What's next? 'Rams football presented by Edward Jones'?
By Larry Eichel Knight-Ridder Newspapers
updated: 06/24/2003 07:02 AM
The politicians persuaded the Chicago Bears not to sell the naming rights to the team's newly rebuilt stadium. But the Bears figured out how to get the big bucks anyway.
On Monday, they sold the name of the team, or came pretty close.
No longer will the old franchise, which was there at the NFL's creation, refer to itself exclusively as the Chicago Bears. From now on, whenever possible, it will be ``Bears football presented by Bank One.''
The bank, which is based in Chicago, paid an undisclosed amount to be the team's ``presenting partner'' for the next 12 years, the first such arrangement in NFL history.
Although one media report placed the number at $50 million, sources familiar with the deal said the actual figure was somewhat less.
Ted Phillips, the Bears' president and chief executive officer, said the deal would bring ``a new level of corporate partnership to the city of Chicago and the NFL.''
For its money, the bank will get signs all over the stadium, advertisements on the Bears' radio broadcasts and nongame television programs, the franchise's banking business, a presence at training camp, and a sponsorship role in the team's community outreach efforts.
In addition, the team will make frequent use of the signature phrase that includes the bank's name on the air and in print. Whether anyone else uses it remains to be seen.
Having a presenting partner or sponsor is old hat for golf and tennis tournaments, for college football bowl games and conference championships in football and basketball.
It's not even a first for major-league pro sports in this country. In 2000 and 2001, baseball's San Diego Padres were sponsored by a band of American Indians, the Sycuans, who paid $1.5 million for the honor.
Until now, though, it's never happened in the nation's premier sports league or to a team whose very name is synonymous with its sport.
``It allows us to associate ourselves very closely with the team,'' Bank One spokesman Tom Kelly said. ``It's really about visibility. We're reaffirming to the people of Chicago that we're Chicago's bank, that Chicago is important to us.''
Will Chicagoans or football fans across the country be even the slightest bit annoyed by this latest twist in the ever-closer relationship between sports and business? Experts aren't sure.
``This strikes me as a dangerous precedent, maybe one step too far,'' said Paul Swangard, managing director of the Warsaw Sports Marketing Center at the University of Oregon. ``We've reached the point where to generate more revenue, everyone's diving into what seems to me be a gray area.''
Said David Carter, a sports marketing consultant based in Los Angeles: ``It doesn't strike me as being all that offensive, but my threshold for this stuff is pretty high. Isn't everything (like naming rights) really selling the name of the team? Instead of connecting three dots to get there, this time you only have to connect two.''
For the Bears, pursuing the naming-rights option turned out to be a nonstarter. With U.S. forces engaged overseas, Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley was adamant that Soldier Field, renovated largely with public dollars, retain its historic name; the place was built in the 1920s in homage to the veterans of World War I. The Bears acquiesced.
So the team had to be creative and pursue an option that, in the end, produced less money than a conventional naming deal might have. Consider that in a smaller market, Philadelphia, the Lincoln Financial Group paid $139.6 million over 21 years to put its name on the Eagles' new stadium.
Richard Sherwood, president of Front Row Marketing Services, said the approach struck him as promising.
``I wouldn't be surprised if other teams, even ones that have naming-rights deals already, try to do something similar,'' he said.