Long live the King Posted April 4, 2017 Share Posted April 4, 2017 It's not revenue sharing if the NHL can do it's own marketing. Ok, so I'll ask for a third time, how does "use the Rings" in a marketing ad make the NHL $60+ million dollars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Future Posted April 4, 2017 Share Posted April 4, 2017 Ok, so I'll ask for a third time, how does "use the Rings" in a marketing ad make the NHL $60+ million dollars? Again, through sponsorship, ticket sales, merchandising, and TV revenue. Sponsorhip: "Coca-Cola is the official soda of NHL Olympians." "JetBlue is the official air provider of NHL Olympians." "Durex is the official condom of NHL Olympians." Merchandise: Crap with rings on it through NHL stores. Ever seen a Patrick Kane Team USA poster? Ticket sales: By 4 tickets to an Olympic game and get 2 seats to some crappy game nobody is going to go to anyways. TV: "Olympic post game is brought to you by Audi." "Olympic pregame is brought to you by McDonalds." "This 60-minute game replay is brought to you by Verizon." The shit sells itself, but the IOC literally won't let the NHL use the Olympic brand and the NHL isn't compromising in capitalizing on marketing opportunities. For starters, commissioner Gary Bettman and the 31 team owners have made it clear from the beginning that they're not interested in paying the costs of travel, accommodations and insurance for their top players to compete in the Olympics. Those bills, estimated at somewhere around $20 million US for the 2018 Olympics, had been covered by the IOC for previous Games. But, sometime after taking office in the fall of 2013, IOC president Thomas Bach put an end to that arrangement. Enter the International Ice Hockey Federation. Hockey's world governing body offered back in November to cover those costs. Problem solved, right? Not so fast. Reports then surfaced that the IIHF's offer wasn't good enough for the NHL, which was seeking something akin to "top sponsor" status with the IOC. Such a deal would give the league additional marketing considerations and the use of certain Olympic content on its own platforms. http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/nhl-olympics-dispute-1.4054830 And doesn't even touch the fact that NBC is almost certainly driving up the costs for them to do so because, allowing the NHL itself to market would take a huge chunk of what they make off of the games. The owners want to make millions off of sending their players to the Olympics. They aren't worried about losing star players. Is that their right? Sure. Is it greedy? Yes. But the IOC deserves the hefty share of the blame for choosing to not cover player travel and insurance in the first place and then doubling down on alienating the NHL by not allowing it to market it's own players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted April 4, 2017 Share Posted April 4, 2017 Sponsorhip: "Coca-Cola is the official soda of NHL Olympians." "JetBlue is the official air provider of NHL Olympians." "Durex is the official condom of NHL Olympians." ----Coca-Cola can already be a sponsor for the NHL and the Olympics separately. Putting 'NHL' and 'Olympians' in the same ad is somehow more lucrative for the NHL? USA hockey has its own sponsorships. Merchandise: Crap with rings on it through NHL stores. Ever seen a Patrick Kane Team USA poster? ----Team USA merchandise is sold by USA Hockey, not the IOC Ticket sales: By 4 tickets to an Olympic game and get 2 seats to some crappy game nobody is going to go to anyways. ----How is getting money from ticket sales not revenue sharing? TV: "Olympic post game is brought to you by Audi." "Olympic pregame is brought to you by McDonalds." "This 60-minute game replay is brought to you by Verizon." ----NBC already owns the broad casting rights for the Olympics and the NHL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fletch Posted April 6, 2017 Share Posted April 6, 2017 http://www.espn.com/olympics/hockey/story/_/id/19088510/nhl-controversial-outspoken-player-agent-allan-walsh-talks-concussions-olympics-really-thinks-gary-bettman ESPN.com: We've heard Alex Ovechkin's comments. How many guys do you think will be playing in the Olympics no matter what? Walsh: The number of players who will want to go and say, "I'm going no matter what," could be significant. What people are losing sight of is that the NHL is going to impose a rule prohibiting their owners from allowing players to go. But without NHL approval and permission, the individual federations -- no matter how badly they want the players to play for them -- [can't do anything]. It ain't going to happen. I think there's going to be a lot of sincere pronouncements from players saying, "We want to go. We're going to go." ... But there's going to be nowhere to go to. ESPN.com: You think the federations will deny them? Walsh: I do. I think NHL owners who might support their players individually who want to represent their country are going to have the matters taken out of their hands -- a leaguewide rule is coming to address it. I can predict to you that's the way it's going to come down. ESPN.com: Any idea what that punishment might be? What's your guess? Walsh: I think the owners will be prohibited from giving approval and authorization for a player to go. I think there will be heavy fines attached to it. I think it will be so onerous, I don't think I want to go down that rabbit hole. If you're going to lose a first-round pick, how many owners are going to be on board for something like that? ESPN.com: If a player goes on his own volition, that's not on the owner. There would have to be some player punishment as well. Walsh: I'm sure that will be part of it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Long live the King Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 Fuck, it's once every 4 years. If the players want to go let them go. Keep the NHL games going. Its what two/three weeks every four years? That's around maybe 10 games? Make one of the Olympic weeks, everyone's mandatory bye week. So then we're talking maybe 6 games teams have to play without the Olympians, if their Olympians make it far in the tournament? Call up some kids and see what your prospects are about during that time. All this line in the sand is going to do is make it harder to bring over talent from Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunny Posted April 8, 2017 Share Posted April 8, 2017 I get it. Professional Footy is floundering and incredibly unpopular because they have to release players for International Dates, World Cup, Extensive WC Qualifying, Euro, Gold Cup etc etc. It just doesn't work as evidenced by football being the least popular sport in the world, that doesn't generate any revenue and that nobody watches. I can't blame the NHL owners for balking at releasing players for two weeks every 4 years. That just seems a ridiculous request. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.