Category Archives: Sports Business

Should The Military Sponsor Sports Franchises?

By:  Richard Braun, Ruling Sports Intern (Twitter:  @RicBraun)

Last week, Congress voted to continue military sponsorship of professional sports such as NASCAR, UFC, and bass fishing. By a 216-202 vote, Congress rejected a proposal that would have cut $72.3 million from the military budget for sports sponsorships.

The main target of this advertising money is NASCAR driver Dale Earnhardt. Jr., whose primary sponsor is the National Guard. In addition, the Marines sponsor the UFC and bass fishing, while the Army sponsors NHRA dragsters driven by Tony Schumacher and Antron Brown. The idea behind the sports sponsorships is to help with military recruiting, since sports tend to appeal to men aged 18-34.

The theory has not worked as well in practice, however. In fact, the Army has independently already decided that it will end its sponsorship of Ryan Newman’s #39 car after this year. The Army has been a NASCAR sponsor for the past 10 years, but has determined that the benefit they get from this is no longer worth the cost. NASCAR claims that the Army collected 46,000 leads for potential recruits as a result of their car sponsorship. But nonetheless, the Army will no longer be sponsoring Newman’s car, so the amount of enlistments that resulted from those leads must not have been worth it. Additionally, the Marine Corps ended their NASCAR sponsorships in 2006, with the Navy following suit in 2008.

Considering the significant cost of sponsoring a car such as Earnhardt Jr’s or Newman’s, the Government is certainly justified in taking a closer look at the effectiveness. A primary sponsorship of a car ranges from $10-20 million. Congress is taking a look at every aspect of the budget, and it is reasonable for them to examine whether or not that money provides any material benefit.

Looking into the demographics of NASCAR fans gives us a glimpse as to why the Army determined that the sponsorship did not result in higher enlistments. NASCAR has a huge fan base, 77 million strong, but only 5% of that falls within the military’s key demo: men 18-34. Spending in excess of $10 million to reach such a small percentage of potential enlistees would strike many as a misappropriation of funds. If the military aims to reach younger viewers, NASCAR might not be the way to go.

Dale Earnhardt Jr. is one of NASCAR’s most visible drivers, and the National Guard argues that they get great value on their branding opportunities. However, the National Guard should concern itself more with recruitment efforts than branding. Other sports would better allow the military to reach its target audience, and at a more affordable price. For example, at an NHRA event last year, the Army had the opportunity to speak with nearly 13,000 students regarding careers in the military. On top of this, advertising NHRA cars is three times cheaper than NASCAR.

Government sponsorship of sports leagues is not inherently a bad thing. Military enlistment has been declining steadily across the board for some time. Spending a relatively small part of the military budget on advertising could possibly yield positive results. Like any business, however, the advertising dollars have to be spent wisely. As popular as Dale Earnhardt Jr. is, his celebrity does not appear to be aiding National Guard recruitment. Spending the $72.3 million more wisely would not include Dale Earnhardt Jr. in the future.

Leave a Comment

Filed under NASCAR, Sports Business

Denver Bars Benefit From Opening Day

The Colorado Rockies home, Coors Field is nestled in an area of Denver, Colorado surrounded by bars and restaurants.  Within the one-mile radius of Lower Downtown Denver (“LoDo”) between Coors Field and the Pepsi Center (where the Denver Nuggets and Colorado Avalanche play), there are an estimated 90 bars.  With the Rockies playing their 2012 home opener today, how will the business of those surrounding bars be affected?  RulingSports.com reached out to three of the largest sports bars within blocks of Coors Field–Tavern Downtown, Sports Column and Lodo’s–to find out how their business will be affected on Opening Day.

Tavern Downtown

While the spokesman from the Tavern Downtown said that he was unable to provide specific details as to how many beers the bar is expecting to sell on opening day, he did provide insight as to the increase in patrons the Tavern Downtown is expecting for Opening Day.

On a typical Monday, the Tavern Downtown serves 200-300 guests.  However, for opening day, the bar expects to serve 4,000 to 5,000 guests.  Thus, the Tavern Downtown expects to do twenty-times as much business on Opening Day as opposed to what it does on any other Monday.

Sports Column

Sports Column is located one block away from Coors Field and on the block adjacent to the Tavern Downtown.  When asked how Opening Day compares to any other Monday, Sports Column’s spokesman said there is, “No comparison.”  On a typical Monday, Sports Column has eight employees that work throughout the day.  On Opening Day, the bar will have 24 employees scheduled to work.  An increase in employees is necessary, as a line will form to enter the bar two to three hours before game time, and will not cease until three hours after the game.

Sports Column expects to sell 100 kegs of beer on Opening Day.  Its spokesman said that a keg holds 124 beers.    Thus, Sports Column expects to sell 12,400 beers on Opening Day.  Remember, this is only keg beer and does not account for bottled beer sales.

Lodo’s

Lodo’s is located directly across the street from the Tavern Downtown and two blocks away from Coors Field.  A highlight of both Lodo’s and Tavern Downtown is both bar’s large rooftop patio.  The spokesman for Lodo’s indicated that on an ordinary Monday, the bar hosts 150-200 patrons.  However, for Opening Day, Lodo’s is expecting to serve 3,500 to 5,000 patrons.  This amounts to a 23 to 25 percent increase in patronage.

On a typical Monday, Lodo’s staffs two bartenders and three to four servers.  However, on Opening Day, Lodo’s will staff 20 bartenders and 16 servers.

Like Sports Column, Lodo’s expects to sell 100 kegs of beer on Opening Day (meaning just two blocks away from Sports Column, another 12,400 beers will be consumed by patrons).  Additionally, Lodo’s spokesman indicated that the bar will sell at least 100 cases of bottled beer.  As there are 24 bottles of beer in a case, this amounts to an additional 2,400 beers being sold by Lodo’s.

Lodo’s spokesman was also able to provide some estimates related to how much food the bar will sale.  When asked how many chicken wings Lodo’s will serve patrons, its spokesman estimated that 250 orders of chicken wings will be sold.  As there are ten chicken wings per order, this amounts to 2,500 chicken wings.

For anyone keeping tally, between two of the 90 bars within one mile of Coors Field, 27,200 beers will be sold on Opening Day.

For Denver bar owners, only one thing can be said for Opening Day:  It’s great that baseball is back.

Leave a Comment

Filed under MLB, Sports Business

Nike’s Tim Tebow Jets Apparel Lawsuit Against Reebok

On March 27, 2012, Nike filed a lawsuit against Reebok in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

The Basis of the Lawsuit

Nike’s lawsuit against Reebok stems from what Nike alleges is Reebok’s “unauthorized and improper use of Tim Tebow’s name on New York Jets-related apparel. . .”  After Tebow was traded by the Denver Broncos to the New York Jets on March 21, 2012, Reebok introduced into the market Jets apparel with Tebow’s name and the number 15.

Nike asserted that Reebok was not authorized to introduce this merchandise into the market, as it was not licensed to do so.  According to Nike’s complaint, introduction of a product bearing an NFL player’s name on a team-identified product requires that one receive the “. . . right to use the trademarks of the NFL and/or its member clubs. . .” and also obtain the right to use a player’s name and number through either the player or from the NFLPA.  The crux of this case, lies in Nike’s allegation that Tebow did not grant Reebok the right to use his name and number on merchandise, nor did Reebok  have a valid group license with the NFLPA to use Tebow’s name on March 21, 2012.  Rather, Nike alleges that it not only has been granted the right to use Tebow’s name on apparel from Tebow himself, but also that as of March 1, 2012, Nike was granted a group license by the NFLPA.

Filing of the lawsuit was arguably prompted by what Nike saw as a limited opportunity to fully capitalize upon Tebow’s trade to the Jets.  Reference to this is made in several places within the lawsuit.  For instance, the lawsuit alleges, “Mr. Tebow’s high-profile trade to the New York Jets has garnered around-the-clock national news media coverage, and generated an immediate and short-lived intense consumer demand for Tim Tebow-identified New York Jets-branded apparel.  Additionally, the lawsuit references Nike’s scheduled April 3 unveiling of its new NFL uniforms and the company’s new spot as the NFL’s exclusive provider of on-field apparel.  Nike alleged that although the release of the new Nike NFL uniforms would be expected to increase sales of Nike apparel with Tebow’s name on it, Reebok’s distribution of Tebow Jets apparel will limit Nike from optimizing its sales in this regard.

Ultimately, the lawsuit alleges four causes of action:  Violation of the Lanham Act under 15 U.S.C. section 1125 (a) (alleging that the Reebok Tebow Jets apparel is likely to cause confusion, mistake or to deceive as to Tebow’s approval of such goods); misappropriation of Tebow’s rights or publicity (which Nike asserts it has standing to raise as an exclusive license holder of Tebow’s name for apparel); tortious interference with current and prospective business relationships (alleging that Nike’s sales of Tebow Jets apparel was disrupted and diminished by Reebok’s actions) and unjust enrichment.

Nike seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions, compensatory damages, punitive damages and attorney’s fees.  Additionally, if Nike is successful in recovering under the Lanham Act, it is entitled to treble damages (three times the amount of damages).

Movement in the Case

On March 28, a judge in the Southern District of New York issued a temporary restraining order against Reebok.  Temporary restraining orders are granted when a plaintiff faces an immediate and irreparable harm as a result of the alleged actions of the defendant.  Thus, the judge must have determined that if sales of the Reebok Tebow Jets apparel, Nike’s interests would be immediately and irreparably damaged.  From reports, the temporary restraining order prevents Reebok from selling and producing any further Tebow Jets apparel, and Reebok must also recall that Tebow Jets apparel which it entered into commerce.

What Will Happen Next

The lawsuit will proceed through the course of civil litigation.  An answered will be filed by Reebok.  Thereafter, the parties will engage in discovery.  While there is always the chance that the parties will settle out of court, a settlement in this case is unlikely to occur unless Reebok is enjoined from distributing or selling unlicensed Tebow Jets apparel in the future.  Given the unlikelihood that Reebok would voluntarily agree to this, the case will most likely proceed through the court system.  Nike will need to obtain a permanent injunction against Reebok in order to permanently stop Reebok from selling unlicensed Tebow Jets apparel.  Furthermore, as noted above, Nike will seek to obtain monetary damages in the lawsuit.

What to Watch For

Moving forward, there are several things to pay attention to.  First, is the possible addition of plaintiffs to the lawsuit, namely Tebow and the NFLPA.  In its lawsuit, Nike alleges that Tebow’s right to publicity has been violated.  In order to avoid a standing defense raised by Reebok to this allegation (meaning, that Nike doesn’t have the right to raise this claim in Tebow’s place), Tebow should be joined as a plaintiff.  Additionally, the NFLPA may be joined as a plaintiff, as Reebok arguably violated its intellectual property rights by selling apparel with an NFL player’s name on it without a license from the NFLPA.

There are likely several defenses Reebok will raise.  As noted above, expect a standing defense to be raised by Reebok to the right of publicity claim.  Another issue which Reebok will likely raise, is that it is licensed to manufacture NFL apparel through March 31, 2012.  The NFL has licensed Reebok up until that date to manufacture and sale NFL apparel.  Reebok will likely argue that this license granted it the right to manufacture and sale the Tebow Jets apparel.  However, as noted above, Nike will likely counter this defense by asserting that Reebok not only need a license from the NFL, but also a license from Tebow or the NFLPA.  Nike will assert that Reebok lacked this secondary license required to produce the merchandise.

In its lawsuit, Nike notes that Tebow “. . . has attracted unprecedented public interest and attention from the media. . .”  This lawsuit is sure to only add to that public interest and media attention.

1 Comment

Filed under Contracts, NFL, NFLPA, Sports Business, Trademark Law