Jump to content
  • Join us — it's free!

    We are the premiere internet community for New York Rangers news and fan discussion. Don't wait — join the forum today!

IGNORED

NHL Will Allow Sale of Ads on Players' Helmets This Season


Phil

Recommended Posts

Because that advertising vertical is limited. It exists only during a broadcast. A sponsor logo baked into the corner of a jersey is infinitely more valuable because it's always there ?*in every video, every photograph, etc. In the same way it is when you build a sponsor bug into a logo.

 

Why doesn't Home Depot just run more commercials during College GameDay? Because they're far more likely to penetrate the markets they're after with their logo built into the GameDay logo, which is adorned to the set, and also has a naming rights association.

 

If you're looking to maximize advertising revenue, you don't look at the smallest stream available to you and just hope it's enough to fill your coffers. You look at what will actually produce real revenue, especially in a Covid environment in which gate sales, if they will exist at all, are going to be extremely mitigated.

 

Im not saying Im against ads on jerseys, but at this point in time, with no fans in attendance and everyone watching strictly on TV, what better way to sell more ads than what I said as well. I mean if you keep flashing Home Depot on the glass, why not sell that as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They will. But that revenue will pale in comparison to the dollars to be made by selling a sponsored/ad on the jersey. Even the lower-end NBA teams are estimated to be earning $2.5 – 6 million annually for one, with the league's most watched teams like Golden State making upwards or greater than $20 million. Chase already has a significant sponsorship package with the Rangers that includes naming rights — I'm pretty sure they'd be on board with a double digit multi-million dollar deal to add their logo to the front of the jersey, too. And that's just one team. Toronto, Montreal, Chicago, etc. will probably also approach $10 million~ ranges.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are you seeing that number? That probably makes sense. Like the NBA, it'll be scaled by market. Rangers/Leafs/Habs will garner the most —*maybe $2 million each? Everyone else would be fractional relative to that scale. This is helmet placement, not jersey, so the advertising dollars they can expect are also fractional.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NBA appears to have gotten this right! A small ad on every jersey sold is way bigger than a helmet ad and if it's done like the NBA example above, would be a win-win for the NHL and fans. From afar the ad is not effective, but so often, the player is shown in close-up mode that the ad gets prime screen time and intimate viewing. Yeah, advertisers will pay a lot for that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where are you seeing that number? That probably makes sense. Like the NBA, it'll be scaled by market. Rangers/Leafs/Habs will garner the most ?*maybe $2 million each? Everyone else would be fractional relative to that scale. This is helmet placement, not jersey, so the advertising dollars they can expect are also fractional.

 

https://www.tsn.ca/nhl-hopes-to-raise-15m-from-helmet-ads-1.1567030

 

NHL hopes to raise $15M from helmet ads

 

According to Westhead, the Montreal Canadiens and Toronto Maple Leafs are targeting as much as $1 million deals for their sponsorships, while other clubs could be commanding less.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That preference will come at a significant cost -- likely a flat cap for the duration of the CBA.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Blueshirts Brotherhood mobile app powered by Tapatalk

See my thought on this is that while I agree, I think the players will just have to take less money. It is what it is. If the entire league is cash strapped we arent going to see any teams long term just buying up all the talent or anything. There just will be a newer norm in my opinion about what are acceptable contracts for ufa or rfa players and the like. You’re already sort of seeing it now. I don’t want less revenue per say, but i don’t want the integrity ruined either. I’m more worried about what happens when this is over. Are they going to remove ads saying they don’t need that extra revenue? No way. What happens when next offseason they are offered more money for advert 2 or 3 and they still are in flat cap land? I just don’t like opening up Pandora’s box so to speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...