More on Ice Advertising

[SirJW 207]

https://frntofficesport.com/why-the-nhl-decided-to-open-up-more-sponsorship-inventory-on-the-ice/

[Hills 713]

One step closer to on jerseys!

[chippa13 1844]

We all know that is just a matter of time.

[CigarScott 132]

As long as they're not as bad as some of the Euro leagues with their NASCAR-like jerseys then I personally have no problem with it.

[Hills 713]

17 hours ago, CigarScott said:

As long as they're not as bad as some of the Euro leagues with their NASCAR-like jerseys then I personally have no problem with it.

NHL already has commercial breaks for advertisers. If they added ads on the jerseys and removed those breaks than I'd be okay with it. But it is the NHL, so they'll add ads on the jerseys, and everywhere else while also taking something away from the fans/players and say it is the only way to go forward with how much money teams are losing!

[CigarScott 132]

1 hour ago, Hills said:

NHL already has commercial breaks for advertisers. If they added ads on the jerseys and removed those breaks than I'd be okay with it. But it is the NHL, so they'll add ads on the jerseys, and everywhere else while also taking something away from the fans/players and say it is the only way to go forward with how much money teams are losing!

There are ads all over the stadiums for Major League Baseball and if you look at the pro level arenas for most hockey teams in Europe, their ice looks like the yellow pages. The TV networks in the US and Canada aren't going to relinquish their commercials otherwise they have zero incentive to televise games. The NHL would have to start paying NBC in the US and Rogers in Canada for the airtime to broadcast games, much like how some of these minor sports have done and what pro wrestling used to do. Whatever revenue the NHL and its teams get from on-ice  and/or on-jersey advertising would not offset the loss of the revenue from Rogers, NBC, and TVA and then be able to pay those networks for the airtime and costs to broadcast the games.

[Hills 713]

2 hours ago, CigarScott said:

There are ads all over the stadiums for Major League Baseball and if you look at the pro level arenas for most hockey teams in Europe, their ice looks like the yellow pages. The TV networks in the US and Canada aren't going to relinquish their commercials otherwise they have zero incentive to televise games. The NHL would have to start paying NBC in the US and Rogers in Canada for the airtime to broadcast games, much like how some of these minor sports have done and what pro wrestling used to do. Whatever revenue the NHL and its teams get from on-ice  and/or on-jersey advertising would not offset the loss of the revenue from Rogers, NBC, and TVA and then be able to pay those networks for the airtime and costs to broadcast the games.

But there isn't ads on the field, or on the jerseys. Ads during sporting events is a North American thing, F1 in Europe doesn't have commercial breaks and neither does the big soccer leagues.

Rogers paid $5.232 billion for the NHL rights, pretty sure losing 9 ad breaks wouldn't make that offer $0 and them demand to be paid to show hockey.

My point is, the NHL doesn't need to do these things, but they will to increase profits. Then lock out the players again once the CBA extension isn't signed and complain the league is losing money.

[chippa13 1844]

F1 cars and drivers are covered in logos, as well as most of the  "blank space" that they can find next to the track. The big soccer league jerseys all have logs on them and the fields is rimmed with the ever changing ad boards. Every league maximizes revenues wherever they can.

 

[adam14 182]

Not to mention if done correctly and with coordination on ice ads dont always looks awful. Look at the ice during Spengler as an example of how the Swiss league does it vs a Swedish or Czech league team where it looks like ads are thrown wherever there is room.