Reply With Quote
With 2 million, you can buy four 30 seconds ads daily in national TV for a month. A single superbowl ad costs twice of that.
WTF? Kobe did commit a crime. Rape shatters the image of the athlete. A broken air conditioner? It would be embarrassing if the Spurs sponsor was a air conditioner maker.
Le Bron should be afraid of losing some of his endorsement if the buzz about steroids causing his cramps gets longer. The Armstrong case is still in the air. Brands like Nike wouldn't be pleased about another sponsored athlete gets in a bad buzz.
With 2 million, you can buy four 30 seconds ads daily in national TV for a month. A single superbowl ad costs twice of that.
According to the records no crime was committed because she dropped the charges.
Champion AC is a Spurs Sponsor. AT&T pays no more for that building name than American Airlines pays for the Heat's arena.
Worse than anything it puts a damper on our win. Everyone is second guessing the result since the greatest player in the universe couldn't play the 4th quarter.
Pisses me off actually.
Never saw the AT&T building host a Superbowl.
UVerse, Wireless, or Customer Sevice?
As a Spurs fan living in Dallas it reminded me of the ice storm for the Superbowl at Jerryworld.
So that you don't embarrass yourself by implying I'm making this up.
.... More like to have their name on the roof of the building, on various signs throughout the building, in big bold print on the basketball court (twice), and as a reference to the facility said by the announcers many times throughout the game (and before and after). At $2.05M per year, that works out to about $5,600 per day. On a day like today, to reach about 15,000,000 people for almost 3 hours... it was almost free advertisement... chump change and amazingly value for AT&T.
What matters to a sponsor is the buzz, what people talk around, not if the victim dropped the charges or not. This is a lawyer's matter.
For the sponsor, the image of the athlete is that matters. Naming rigths of NBA are relatively cheap for the media exposure they get. Not every team gets in the conference finals for three years in a row and NBA finals for two years in a row. For AT&T it's a bargain. If they drop the contract, imediately there will be dozens of companies offering Money to get the naming rights.
Also, wanna bet they don't take their name off the building?
Take your pick, tbh.
till monday??
Well, the price of the naming rights for a superbowl level stadium is hundreds of millions. Football has biggger audience, the values go far higher.
Next game -- snakes in the Heat's locker room.
When you make a claim, it's on you to provide evidence. It's not on me to go looking for it. You should provide it so you don't look like an idiot.
Same deal American Airlines has gotten and they've been in the last 4 Finals (including this one). Having a contract for 20 years that you signed in 2006 and won't expire until 2026 means you'll be hosting a ton of lottery bound team games because the big 3 will be long gone well before then. So double your investment money on relevant press and don't pretend 2021 is going to be a banner year for sponsorship in San Antonio. George Strait retiring, Spurs getting old and soon to be done... no football team, just a few ty concerts now and then..... More like to have their name on the roof of the building, on various signs throughout the building, in big bold print on the basketball court (twice), and as a reference to the facility said by the announcers many times throughout the game (and before and after). At $2.05M per year, that works out to about $5,600 per day. On a day like today, to reach about 15,000,000 people for almost 3 hours... it was almost free advertisement... chump change and amazingly value for AT&T.
I see.
An assertion, but no support? Not even a link? That's ok, I know how to use Google -- not that this subtracts from my point.
In fact, here's an interesting article from a past Finals that talks about the value of naming rights. It applies similarly to AT&T and the Spurs.
http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/e...48484/29600286
Actually, they signed it in 2003. SBC signed the contract and merged with AT&T a few years later, then they changed the company name to AT&T.
So basically, the deal has about 9 years left. The Big 3 will play next year, so that's 8 years left... we don't know how good or bad they will be in those last 8 years, but they will have recouped their money long before then. Great investment.
I'm curious when AT&T will be taking their name off the building? Today, tomorrow? Maybe they will call an emergency meeting to discuss the possibility of it by Sunday.
Odd thread.
As a Ravens fan I remember this very specifically.
this thread sucks! btw you gave up on the spurs a long time ago so please give up on ST too!
Touche'.
^Odd poster.
Answer to the OP is no.
wtf is going on in this thread, a pissing match for who knows the most about naming rights contracts?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
