I think as fans, we have a class claim for emotional distress here.GMP said:
Two issues I have:
1. The release does not state how much this deal is for. To my recollection, these deals always announce the amount. That seems like a bad sign for us. Or did Cal sign its rights away to Learfield for even LESS than this deal? Which is even worse.
2. Their logo is a lion. Is that going to be painted on the field? That seems in poor taste.
And then a question:
Assuming this is a deal where they are paying Cal directly, this firm is barely a year old. Obviously, the attorneys have been practicing longer than that. But how long is this deal and will the firm be around that long?
Ok first glance, this is a very odd deal for both sides.
From the press release:GMP said:
Two issues I have:
1. The release does not state how much this deal is for. To my recollection, these deals always announce the amount. That seems like a bad sign for us. Or did Cal sign its rights away to Learfield for even LESS than this deal? Which is even worse.
2. Their logo is a lion. Is that going to be painted on the field? That seems in poor taste.
And then a question:
Assuming this is a deal where they are paying Cal directly, this firm is barely a year old. Obviously, the attorneys have been practicing longer than that. But how long is this deal and will the firm be around that long?
Ok first glance, this is a very odd deal for both sides.
ColoradoBear said:
Wish I could edit the title- upon re-reading the article, it sounds like a 'sponsorship' agreement and not a full field naming rights deal.
GMP said:ColoradoBear said:
Wish I could edit the title- upon re-reading the article, it sounds like a 'sponsorship' agreement and not a full field naming rights deal.
Interesting. Is that a first of its kind?
We've seen field and stadium naming right before, which usually include on field logo placement.
We've seen sponsorships with logo placement.
Have we seen a non naming right sponsorship with on field logo placement?
Clemson Tigers and Pitt Panthers! Welcome to Troutman Amin Field at California Memorial Stadium!harebear said:From the press release:GMP said:
Two issues I have:
1. The release does not state how much this deal is for. To my recollection, these deals always announce the amount. That seems like a bad sign for us. Or did Cal sign its rights away to Learfield for even LESS than this deal? Which is even worse.
2. Their logo is a lion. Is that going to be painted on the field? That seems in poor taste.
And then a question:
Assuming this is a deal where they are paying Cal directly, this firm is barely a year old. Obviously, the attorneys have been practicing longer than that. But how long is this deal and will the firm be around that long?
Ok first glance, this is a very odd deal for both sides.
"Our lion shield logo on the field at California Memorial Stadium sends a powerful message..."
I certainly hope we never have Penn State play here now. Or maybe anyone in the cat family.
Better Call SaulGMP said:
Their instagram page is certainly interesting.
Big C said:
Why are Cal Athletics and Learfield Cal Bears Sports Properties announcing this? Is Learfield the boss of us now? Or an equal partner? I feel infiltrated.
'BearSD said:Big C said:
Why are Cal Athletics and Learfield Cal Bears Sports Properties announcing this? Is Learfield the boss of us now? Or an equal partner? I feel infiltrated.
Learfield brokers sponsorship and advertising deals for dozens of college athletic departments.
MinotStateBeav said:
People aren't going to say that, because people don't use corpo speak. It's just going to be playing at Memorial stadium for us. I think these are incredible wastes of resources for businesses but whatever lol. Good for Cal football I guess or is this money just going to the university for other things?
