I guess it could happen. There’s no specific plan in place or anything, but the idea was out there. Some people expect that it’s coming in the next few years, and David Stern isn’t denying it.
Surprise, surprise, Mark Cuban is all for it. “Anything that creates new revenue sources is good for both the teams and the players,” he said.
And the argument that it cheapens things?
“I never understood the concept of ‘it cheapens the game,’ ” he said. “What does that really mean? That it helps minimize ticket price increases? The NBA is a business, and the only mistake is not to seriously consider revenue forms that make it financially stable.”
I’d be with him, if he hadn’t mention the thing about ticket prices. Ticket prices don’t ever do anything but go up, and if team owners find a way to take in more money somewhere else, I have yet to see them pass that savings on to ticket-buyers. New TV deals are signed. Prices still get jacked. New advertisers are found. Prices still get jacked. The next time a sports team owner uses a new revenue stream to help out ticket-buyers will be the first time.
I’m not really fundamentally opposed to it. I mean, if it gives my team a few extra bucks to spend on a free agent, I’m with that. And it’s going to happen, there’s no point in bitching about it. What is key, however, is to integrate the company logo seamlessly into the uniform. You can’t just sew a logo onto the uniform any damn place you feel like.
Soccer teams do a good job. I could live with something like that. Example, example, example.
Bob Knight does not.
Arena Football does not.
Lacrosse does not.
telly Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 9:19 am
Just so the sponsors know that some consumers don’t like it. For instance- the “swish” appeared on Penn State’s holiest of holy uniforms about 14 years ago. I haven’t bought a nike product since.
Toku Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 11:04 am
I just had an argument with a friend of mine about this last night. I knew it was okay to put the logos on the unis when he couldn’t make an argument that wasn’t fundamentally flawed in its logic.
What people forget sometimes is that sports teams are entertainment franchises. And every year it costs more money than most of us make in a lifetime to put that product out for us to enjoy.
Obviously some fans aren’t going to life it…some fans also still haven’t gotten over the DH, instant replay and the neutral zone trap. There are always going to be complaints, particularly in sports like basketball and baseball, about how the game has changed for the worse since the glory days.
So if that’ll happen regardless of what you do, there’s no reason not to do it.
re: ticket prices; the key isn’t to look at actual ticket price. That will always go up because the buying power of the dollar is always on the rise. The key is to look at the annual %age increase in ticket price and compare it versus the %age of inflation and the %age increase in the dollar’s buying power.
-T
telly Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 12:45 pm
I still don’t like it. It’s not going to change my allegiance to what teams I like, and there’s nothing I can do about it besides complain, b/c advertising works… other than to stop buying the products when they appear on my favorite team’s uniforms. Especially traditional uniforms. Getting back to the NBA- does anyone want to see a fucking big gold mcdonald’s arch plastered across the front of the Boston Celtic’s uniforms? (Besides mcdonalds and possibly the owners of the celtics.)
On the other hand- the Pittsburgh Steelers have a traditional uniform, and a corporate logo… have for many years- that symbol for US Steel corporation on their helmets.
~snip~
re: ticket prices; the key isn’t to look at actual ticket price. That will always go up because the buying power of the dollar is always on the rise.
~snip~
point taken, but correct me if i’m wrong, but i think you have the logic backwards. the dollar’s value has decreased over time, while the price of a ticket has risen… thus the dollar’s buying value has stayed static over time given inflation and the corresponding price increase. basically you’re paying the same for a ticket after adjusting for inflation, over time. the problem, of course, is when the rate of inflation is higher than the rate that wages increase. meaning, you’re making the same amount of money per hour/week/year but shit costs more. This is why some people bitch- they’re still making jack-shit but ticket prices increase every year for inflationary or other reasons, making attending their favorite sporting event prohibitively expensive. Which, in some cases, leaves the stands full of upper class douchebags who talk on their cell phones for the entire fucking game.
Melvin Jones Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 1:48 pm
Toku, you compared it to the DH, instant replay, and neutral zone trap rule that people are just going to have to get used to…well, at least they affected the game. These logos are not going to change anything at all towards the outcome of the game. So I definitely agree with you, this is entertainment, and people over time stop treating sports as entertainment and begin thinking of them as something more and always talk about tradition, etc. The bottom line is that they are still based on entertainment, and to present their product they need money to come in, and as businessmen they have to take every chance to get revenue. That is why I cannot argue against the logos.
And the inflation thing is insane, it’s just like college. Tuition increases much faster than incomes increase, as with professional sports. It’s going to get impossible very soon for 95% of the population to attend college and sporting events.
the mighty mjd Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 2:33 pm
I’m resigned to the idea of logos, but it isn’t because “sports are entertainment and they need money coming in to support it.” I mean, that’s true… but I think there’s enough money coming in. Ticket prices, TV contracts, merchandise sales, licensing, and other advertising takes care of it. I just don’t buy that sports owners need more money. Some are struggling to make ends meet, like most baseball teams, and all hockey teams but one or two, however… I think those are more competitive imbalance issues as opposed to there just not being enough money to go around.
thez0rk Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 2:48 pm
hate to sound cliche…but it’s all about Greed and the Almighty Bottom Line…
telly Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 3:14 pm
I’m not arguing that there’s something that can be done about it. All I’m saying is that, given the alternative, I’d rather not see advertisements on my favorite teams’ jerseys. It adds nothing to the sport, or look of the uniform- it looks budget in fact. Like I stated before: advertising works, otherwise companies wouldn’t be trying to plaster every square inch of the planet with some sort of marketing logo.
That being said, I don’t have to like it, and I don’t have to buy the product. In certain cases, I’ll chose not to buy a product because of where they advertise (i.e. nike on Penn State’s uniforms or a billboard ad in some pristine natural setting) or how they advertise (i.e. coors’ brewing offensive ads.) Furthermore, whenever possible, I prefer to not make my own body a walking advertiesement for some mega-company- therefore, when it comes to sportswear, I’d just as soon don a replica…
Melvin Jones Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 4:18 pm
They may not ‘need’ it…but they have to take advantage of any money they can get as business owners. You have to take advantage of opportunities…right now I am on food stamps because I qualify, so why can’t they take advantage of something they don’t truly ‘need’?
the mighty mjd Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 4:20 pm
They can. I was just saying that I don’t buy that they need it.
telly Says:
May 27th, 2005 at 4:32 pm
just b/c they “can” do something doesn’t mean they necessarily “should” do something.
not that there’s a huge amount of disagreement here in the 1st place, but can we all agree that placing advertisements on uniforms, a) looks budget, b) isn’t going to make more people watch basketball (in fact, it could be argued that the opposite is potentially true), c) isn’t going to make the games more competative or fun to watch?
can we all agree on that?
There’s plusses and minuses here for the owners, hope they realize that. Even though the NBA puts out a pretty good product, viewership is down. This move, while boosting revenues for sure, will not boost viewership, and looks like a desperate grasp for more money… which is pretty much what it is.
Sean Says:
May 28th, 2005 at 1:18 am
i guess im ok with this, as long as there arent cialis ads on the jerseys.