Didn't we get more from Kabaam?

Speaking of Kabam, I'm happy to not see any Kabam branding on the field this year. I know they're helping pay the bills, but it just looks nicer without. Not sure why it's not there.

SRBear said:

---

Didn't we get more from Kabaam?

---

Yes, but the Rose Bowl is giving up a lot less:

Quote:

---

Representatives for the Rose Bowl are wary about treading too deeply into the naming rights world and prefer to refer to field's name as a donor recognition. There will be no mention of Spieker painted onto the field or outside the stadium -- only in select places inside, including on the hedges adjacent to both sides of the field.

---

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Speaking of Kabam, I'm happy to not see any Kabam branding on the field this year. I know they're helping pay the bills, but it just looks nicer without. Not sure why it's not there.

---

Because Kabam was acquired and exercised a clause in the deal to pay us to end the deal.

http://www.dailycal.org/2017/06/08/memorial-kabam-pulls-name-football-field/

It's an interesting deal since UCLA doesn't even own the Rose Bowl.

I believe Tod Spieker is the brother of Cal major donor/alum Ned Spieker. Maybe Ned can one up his brother and build us another something cool (I know he donated million towards building Haas Pavilion and also to build the Spieker Aquatics center). Or help retain or football coach when needed...

B.A. Bearacus said:

---

Speaking of Kabam, I'm happy to not see any Kabam branding on the field this year. I know they're helping pay the bills, but it just looks nicer without. Not sure why it's not there.

---

It could have been changed to Netmarble Stadium. Pleased with getting all that money for a short period of providing naming rights, with the former owners having also used a chunk of the buy out proceeds to donate to the school.

At least it wasn't O.co Stadium.

I hated Kabam Field. This is not meant to disparage the Kabam owners / Cal alums who purchased the sponsorship rights.

I wish Cal would pursue a field naming rights sponsorship to UCLA's, where the amount per year is low but the application of the name would be low key. Those large orange Kabams on the field grated on my eyes every game.

They couldn't have at least made them gold? Speaking of which, we can't have Toyota put up a BLUE colored logo ad on the East side field wall instead of that RED piece of garbage? It's bad enough that status quo is now whoring to corporate interests, but they can't use aesthetics that are compatible with CAL?

ColoradoBear said:

---

It's an interesting deal since UCLA doesn't even own the Rose Bowl.

I believe Tod Spieker is the brother of Cal major donor/alum Ned Spieker. Maybe Ned can one up his brother and build us another something cool (I know he donated million towards building Haas Pavilion and also to build the Spieker Aquatics center). Or help retain or football coach when needed...

---

I think at least 3 (maybe 4) of Ned's kids went to Cal so there could be some nice donations down the road.