Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing...
Quote | Reply
I seem to occasionally run across a marketing tag line for WTC (World Triathlon Corporation, owners of Ironman) that suggests that the Ironman trademark is "The most licensed sports brand".

Here's my question(s):
  • In terms of gross sales, who collects more revenue for licensing fees for their "brand": NFL or WTC-Ironman? What are the sales numbers?
  • How many spectators are at the Superbowl, live, in the stadium?
  • How do the television ratings for IM Hawaii telecast and Superbowl telecast compare?
  • A 30 second spot furing the Superbowl telecast starts at $2.5 million. How much for the same spot during the IM Hawaii telecast?


Can anyone provide some insight on this?

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]I seem to occasionally run across a marketing tag line for WTC (World Triathlon Corporation, owners of Ironman) that suggests that the Ironman trademark is "The most licensed sports brand".

Here's my question(s): [ul] [li]In terms of gross sales, who collects more revenue for [i]licensing fees[/i] for their "brand": NFL or WTC-Ironman? What are the sales numbers?[/li] [li]How many spectators are at the Superbowl, live, in the stadium?[/li] [li]How do the television ratings for IM Hawaii telecast and Superbowl telecast compare?[/li] [li]A 30 second spot furing the Superbowl telecast starts at $2.5 million. How much for the same spot during the IM Hawaii telecast?[/li][/ul]

Can anyone provide some insight on this?[/reply]

I can't really help there, but I noticed something interesting the other day. While watching Wheel of Fortune, one of the prizes on the wheel was a trip to Hawaii to specifically watch the Ironman. It was an interesting prize but even moreso the fact that is was offered seemed to indicate that you would be getting the VIP treatment for the day. Some interesting marketing.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
I seem to occasionally run across a marketing tag line for WTC (World Triathlon Corporation, owners of Ironman) that suggests that the Ironman trademark is "The most licensed sports brand".
How many MDot watches has Timex sold?

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Another good question.

I Googled the poop out of these topics before coming here and couldn't find any answers.

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom,

As Ken points out, I think that phrase relates to the Timex licensing deal, which I have seen referred to several times as the "most successful" licensing deal of all time. Not sure how they are gauging or quantifying that "success", but it has no doubt been a big one. It's often studied as a succesful modeal of sports product licensing.

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Here's another nugget -

the name "Ironman" is licensed by Marvel Comics to the WTC. I've been told conflicting information here, but someone (who should know) says they get a cut of every watch, treadmill, bike, etc.

It's been successful I guess. They certainly have been super aggresive in marketing and protecting the brand.

Kinda weird how they are in the "branding" business. Same kinda thing with the car manufacturers - They are really lending banks that happen to make products that you need to borrow money to purchase.

Finance is weird.


-----
"I do my best to slay" - Matt Pike
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
Tom,

As Ken points out, I think that phrase relates to the Timex licensing deal, which I have seen referred to several times as the "most successful" licensing deal of all time. Not sure how they are gauging or quantifying that "success", but it has no doubt been a big one. It's often studied as a succesful modeal of sports product licensing.

Fleck


(from somewhere on an MDot page)

"Since 1986, it's estimated that between 500,000 and one million Ironman watches have been sold every year"

That's a lot of watches.

How about IM and Gatorade? Was there a licensing deal there, too? Just guessing on that one.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
No one has answered this question yet:

Live specatators at the Super Bowl varies with the stadium where it is held. For example, at Ford Field, there are about 65,000 seats, and there would be about that many spectators. See here: http://fordfield.tekgroup.com/...mp;top=1&level=3

I doubt that there have been fewer than 60,000 at any recent Super Bowl because most pro football stadiums seat at least that many people. The Rose Bowl probably has the largest seating capacity of any stadium where the Super Bowl is held, and it seats more than 90,000. See here: http://www.rosebowlstadium.com/...owl_general-info.htm

So, there are fewer people attending the Super Bowl at the stadium itself than would attend any home college football game for MICHIGAN, Penn State, Ohio State and Tennessee.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [CTL] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
No one has answered this question yet:

Live specatators at the Super Bowl varies with the stadium where it is held. For example, at Ford Field, there are about 65,000 seats, and there would be about that many spectators. See here: http://fordfield.tekgroup.com/...mp;top=1&level=3

I doubt that there have been fewer than 60,000 at any recent Super Bowl because most pro football stadiums seat at least that many people. The Rose Bowl probably has the largest seating capacity of any stadium where the Super Bowl is held, and it seats more than 90,000. See here: http://www.rosebowlstadium.com/...owl_general-info.htm

So, there are fewer people attending the Super Bowl at the stadium itself than would attend any home college football game for MICHIGAN, Penn State, Ohio State and Tennessee.
Sorry, what's the question?

______________________________________________
Father Kevin

http://www.churchofcycling.org
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
  • In terms of gross sales, who collects more revenue for licensing fees for their "brand": NFL or WTC-Ironman? What are the sales numbers?

    Can anyone provide some insight on this?
I would guess this is not even a close race, yes you have Ironman wathes, the Isuzu Ironman. I'm not sure what your considering liscensing fees, but cost of starting up franchises, tv network deals clothing, you're talking about an organization that brings in billions when you talk about the NFL.



People I've loved, I have no regrets
Some I remember, some I forget
Some of them living, some of them dead
All I want is to be home ".....Foo Fighters, Home

Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [KLinggi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
No one has answered this question yet:

Live specatators at the Super Bowl varies with the stadium where it is held. For example, at Ford Field, there are about 65,000 seats, and there would be about that many spectators. See here: http://fordfield.tekgroup.com/...mp;top=1&level=3

I doubt that there have been fewer than 60,000 at any recent Super Bowl because most pro football stadiums seat at least that many people. The Rose Bowl probably has the largest seating capacity of any stadium where the Super Bowl is held, and it seats more than 90,000. See here: http://www.rosebowlstadium.com/...owl_general-info.htm

So, there are fewer people attending the Super Bowl at the stadium itself than would attend any home college football game for MICHIGAN, Penn State, Ohio State and Tennessee.
Sorry, what's the question?
Here's my question(s):

How many spectators are at the Superbowl, live, in the stadium?
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [CTL] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
In Reply To:
In Reply To:

How many spectators are at the Superbowl, live, in the stadium?
Didn't you answer that?

______________________________________________
Father Kevin

http://www.churchofcycling.org
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tom,

NFL just cancelled their contract with Cialis and Levitra, both drugs for ED. One of those contracts was worth just over $6M per season. The other I forgot but I think 3-4M. The NFL is one of the better marketed brands in the workd.

Brian Stover USAT LII
Accelerate3 Coaching
Insta

Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Maybe I'm totally wrong here, but I always took the claim of being the "most licensed sports brand" as meaning there were so many different "Ironman" products by so many different companies, i.e. watches, treadmills, gloves, god knows what else. I believe far fewer companies actually have the rights to create NFL branded merchandise, for example one company (Reebok?) I believe has exclusive rights to create all NFL apparel. Either way the NFL is far stricter (and more expensive) on what it will let have an NFL brand on it, as opposed to Ironman where just about anything with market appeal can have an Mdot slapped on the side of it.



If I'm off base let me know, that's just how I've always taken the WTC's "most licensed" boast.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If they were even close to the same level then the saddest thing was that even the Ironman winners probably make less per year in paycheck than a third string, bench warming 3rd down and long wide receiver.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [flying wombat] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
[reply]If they were even close to the same level then the saddest thing was that even the Ironman winners probably make less per year in paycheck than a third string, bench warming 3rd down and long wide receiver.[/reply]

Uhmmm I think you mean 3rd down and short. See a 3rd down and long reciever would be very valuable, however a 3rd down a short reciever aint worth much cause he do not have to do much

Just Triing
Triathlete since 9:56:39 AM EST Aug 20, 2006.
Be kind English is my 2nd language. My primary language is Dave it's a unique evolution of English.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [DavHamm] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
[reply]If they were even close to the same level then the saddest thing was that even the Ironman winners probably make less per year in paycheck than a third string, bench warming 3rd down and long wide receiver.[/reply]

Uhmmm I think you mean 3rd down and short. See a 3rd down and long reciever would be very valuable, however a 3rd down a short reciever aint worth much cause he do not have to do much


Maybe, I just remember a former student of mine dating a wide receiver with the Arizona Cardinals and that was the only time he got to play. They were behind (as usual) and he was the fourth or fifth wide receiver who was just there to spread the defense. Of course I am Australian and it aint my game! ;-)

Regardless, long or short he probably makes more in salary than Peter Reid in a year.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Goose] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
>>>>I believe far fewer companies actually have the rights to create NFL branded merchandise, for example one company (Reebok?) I believe has exclusive rights to create all NFL apparel. Either way the NFL is far stricter (and more expensive) on what it will let have an NFL brand on it, as opposed to Ironman where just about anything with market appeal can have an Mdot slapped on the side of it. <<<<

Go to nfl.com and check out the merchandise that's available. There are 1,150 items in the "home/office" category alone. Bar stools, shot glasses, pen&pencil sets, etc. If you can put a logo on it, they've got it.

My SO is currently working with them on licencing for some home products. She's finding them much easier to work with then many universities. The Univ. of Oregon in particular has been very challenging for her. Maybe they know she went to Oregon State. ;)

scott
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I think that's what drives more than a few Ironman licensing deals - that this next one is going to be another Timex. That this funky . . thing . . whatever it is, with the IM logo on it, is going to be the next huge out-of-the-park home-run that the Timex Ironman watch line has obviously been. I am sure their is this hope on either side from WTC and from the supplier/vendor.

Fleck


Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This has little to do with actual licensing in the marketing sense, but another interesting statistic is to compare entrants.

I don't know if WTC calls it licensing when they allow an entrant to participate for the day, but each finisher is branded by becoming an Ironman. So how about comparing the number of entrants in NFL vs. Ironman per season. A couple hundred for NFL, and thousands for Ironman!?
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
IM is a larger "global" brand. The NFL's brand here in the US is huge. Second to none. They have their own tv network and next year will start televising games so the big "4" networks are terrified. The only saving grace for them is the huge contracts / revenue the NFl can command for the networks rights to televise the games. Look at what happened to Monday Night Football - ABC has been losing viewrship year-after-year because of an inferior product and saturation of games on Sunday. ESPN gained viewship with its Sunday Night game and some will argue that ESPN did not become a real player until they landed the rights to the Sunday evening game. Globally the NFL it attempting to grow its brand but will never be as large as IM or even F1 (Formula 1) People in Europe enjoy the NFL but their passion is Soccer (footbal), F1, and Cycling. The Superbowl is usually the most watched television show of the year sans the Oscars. It can draw a 40 share easily. No comparison here as NBC maybe had 2million watch their IM show back in November when it aired. Spots - no comparison. Apples to oranges here.

~~~

- Matt

Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [flying wombat] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
In Reply To:
If they were even close to the same level then the saddest thing was that even the Ironman winners probably make less per year in paycheck than a third string, bench warming 3rd down and long wide receiver.
I haven't checked the numbers, but I think that the minimum NFL salary for a rookie is probably around $200,000 and the minimum for players with significant experience can be twice that. That's not really a sad thing; it's just the market rewarding what people like to see. There are hundreds of NFL games broadcast every year, and all of them get a higher TV share than the IMH show on NBC.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Fleck] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
A few weeks ago I saw a baby jog-stroller thing with a huge MDot logo on it... er... why?

Do they make one out of carbon fiber with an aero baby bottle? Is a mommy-and-me Ironman in the works?

__________
there was no one chasing us... distance is its own reward.
Quote Reply
Re: NFL vs WTC: I have some questions about marketing and licensing... [Tom Demerly] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If there is anything to this "statistic" I suspect it comes from the Ironman branding of Timex watches. How many Ironman brand Timex watches are out there world wide? How many have been sold the last 20 years or so. I suspect it is more than almost anything else.

--------------
Frank,
An original Ironman and the Inventor of PowerCranks
Quote Reply