Marlin May Lose Coors

kat2220

kat2220

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Jun 11, 2002
Messages
16,886
Points
0
Location
Marietta, GA
Marlin may lose Coors sponsorship.

Escalating costs and the economic crunch continue to grind on Cup sponsorships. Even Coors, a car sponsor in NASCAR for more than 20 years, has begun to "mull its sponsorship" of 46-year-old Sterling Marlin.

The brewer's primary sponsorship is about average for top Cup cars -- "up in the $15 million range," Coors events marketing director Steve Saunders told the paper, "and that's just to put your name on the car. . . . It gets tougher and tougher to justify."

Coors Light is contemplating following a trend by "splitting" a car with other sponsors -- taking Marlin's car for only a portion of the races, while other sponsors take other blocks of events.

The $15 million a year is about 30 times what it cost Coors to sponsor Bill Elliott in 1982.
 
This is a sad trend to watch, but NASCAR is quickly pricing itself out of the motorsports sponsorship game...for the $15 million you can run an entire two car IRL team for a full season including the Indy 500. It has been reported that Marlboro Team Penske's entire budget to run his two car operation is at $15 million including both drivers salaries.
 
Is there any way to know how much sponsors are paying to put their names on the cars?

Id love to know how much Budweiser is paying in contrast to GM Goodwrench to Cingular to DeWalt, etc.
 
didn't BUD pay out somewhere around 100,000,000.00 to be on an F1 car for 5 or 6 years? i would bet with the bud shootout, all the airtime, the Bud pole award and jr's car its between 25 and 30 mil a year, those guys are loaded !!
 
I don't follow F1 but I don't remember a bud sponsorship in F1 and 100,000,000 sounds kind of high.
 
sure hope this doesn't happen...but can't say I really blame them.

I know there is enough $$ out there to make the sponsor's investment worth it...ticket sales, tv time, merchandise...

It might take a couple 'big dogs' dropping sponsors to send a clear message about where the money needs to go...

:cheers:
 
The sponsors put out the money for advertising and promotion of their products. They don't get any of the gate money. NASCAR having the second largest fan base in the country (and factoring in the length of the season, it could be the largest), they are willing to spend those bucks. Especially if the car they sponsor is in the spotlight often..........that's why Budweiser forks over more than Coors. That is one of the biggest reasons why teams are so willing to push the envelope to win. It means they can demand more dollars from their sponsors.
 
DE, are you saying that basicly the teams who have or will lose sponsorship are 2nd rate, or that Corporate America is fickle....or something else.
I understand your point, but why are sponsors fleeing the sport?
 
I don't think they are fleeing in the sense that they are rejecting the sport or the sanctioning body. I think they are assessing return for their investments. Advertising is a quirky business..........and sponsorship is advertising. Some companies are more conservative than others too. They do have a budget for marketing..........and if they see they could juggle some of that money around and realize more return, they'll do it. I'm not sure Coors can compete with Budweiser head to head in marketing..........but Chip Ganassi is still asking the for the same money to run the Coors logo on the 40 car. It's business. Coors pulls out, then Chip has to hustle to get someone else..........or take a cut in money. It's been going on since NASCAR got in the spotlight about 20 years ago.
 
I understand the principles and all the money angle, but I would think that the advertising dollars generated by sponsoring a popular figure in the sport would be worth it.
Granted, Coors is not at large as Bud and Busch in sales and they dont have the "Most Popular Driver" on their team, but IMHO, Coors will lose out on exposure if they do leave. You don't hear about Miller leaving Rusty or the sport rumors.
 
But it's not up to you or me.........it's the bean counters! Write Coors with your concerns.......see what they have to say. Look what Penzoil did. Sure they didn't get mention in the winner's circle but they sure got a lot of press with Steve Park anyway. But, the bottom line is that it has nothing to do with NASCAR not paying them their fair share...........they had no share to begin with. And, sorry to tell you this but Steling Marlin never was a big crowd pleasure.........my bet is that Coors would be contempting this same move no matter who was driving (even Jr).
 
They stuck with Bill Elliott for a long time, and won a lot of races. Sterling hasn't enjoyed the same success Bill had...few people ever have.

Coors may very well do what other sponsors have done. Take a hiatus for a few years, see what impact it has on sales, and if they decide to come back, then come back strong with the latest young marketable phenom. Hate to see them go if they do, though...the 40 is one of the best looking cars on the track IMO.

Coors is getting more and more involved in the NFL. I'm sure that's paying dividends. Maybe when that becomes too expensive, they'll be back (if they go at all). With Bud and Miller on the track, I can't see how they can realistically afford not to be there too. Guess we'll find out soon enough.
 
I think they are starting to realize a diminishing return from sponsoring the same driver for years. Sterling isn't attracting a lot of newer fans.

Jeff Gordon has a lot of fans, I am one of the biggest. But I have never knowingly supported Dupont automotive finishes. Or anything Dupont for that matter. Granted I do own quite a bit of apparel with their logo on it, but that has never factored into any purchasing decisions I have ever made. If I was Dupont I would seriously wonder how much my $20+ million was actually buying me. Don't get me wrong, I hope Dupont doesn't go anywhere. But, I would not be terribly surprised if they did. I also realize that with Jeff's fan base, sponsors would likely be lining up to give Hendrick truckloads of cash to put their name on that car. But, that is not true of many teams.

If you look at what kind of exposure a Lowe's gets to a whole new group of fans of a Jimmie Johnson, they would seem to be doing a much better job investing than a Coors is with sponsoring a car that few care about or really pay attention to anymore. Sterling has a large group of devoted fans, but I'm sure Coors pulling the plug on sponsorship wouldn't exactly bring them to their corporate knees.
 
There are many different sides to this equation on the topic of sponsorship.

When a sponsor signs with a team, such as Coors with Ganassi and Marlin, they pay in the area of $15,000,000 per year. In return they get the name on the car and anything that walks, talks, stands still, is immobile or chews tobacco is painted silver with the #40 on it. The sponsor also gets a percentage of sales of team apparel such as a jacket with the Coors logo in silver with the #40 on the sleeve (an example) but anything with the name Sterling Marlin gives a cut to the driver. The pie is split many ways and part of any sponsorship package will include a portion of the souvenir sales. Think of Winston and Nextel as they get a cut of anything with the logo on it and as the series sponsor, these monies are estimated in the original estimates BEFORE making the initial offer to NASCAR.

And if a sponsor is lucky, they get a few shots of the driver or race car during the internation television broadcasts showing thier name to the world. The best thing extra is an interview wherein the car, team owner or driver are shown in full regalia.

As already pointed out by others, there are several factors, driver and/or team popularity, point finish at the end of the year, corporate events at each venue bringing in new business, and on and on.

IF.......................Coors, or any other sponsor for that matter, does not get a large enough return on the investment, they will fade away altogether or find a venue less costly and offering greater return, or remain in the NASCAR Nextel series and share a sponsorship.

Sterling can win but his popularity and fan base are not the size needed to maintain the exposure Coors needs to continue at the cost of the sponsorship. Should Coors stay as a single sponsor, they need to consider controversial or a totally political correct driver who can win.

This scenario presents a good look at the fact, it ain't NASAR that is making the cost of racing, rise. It is the teams.
It is the "greed" of the team owners making the cost high and the sponsors spending upwards of $15,000,000 annually, looking to get a return on that expense.
If the corporations as sponsors do not get a return on the investment, they leave. Simple economics. No one will pay the price of sponsorship requested for a top team without realizing more than the original investment in return. That is not good business and these major corporations must answer to stockholders, people like you and me. When one part of an advertising program is not working yet negatively affecting the bottom line, there are thousands of people asking "why"?

Just some thoughts from Wake Forest, North Carolina. :D
 
Ah...leave it to the laws of economics to put it all in persepective.

We've definitly started to breach the line of diminishing returns...I don't think sponsors will completely drop out, but I do see them starting to draw lines as far as how much they'll shell out for a team.
 
Ah man, I like Sterling as a driver and hopefully Coors will stay on board with The Silver Bullet.
 
Originally posted by Whizzer@Apr 16 2004, 09:40 AM
This scenario presents a good look at the fact, it ain't NASAR that is making the cost of racing, rise. It is the teams.
It is the "greed" of the team owners making the cost high and the sponsors spending upwards of $15,000,000 annually, looking to get a return on that expense.
If the corporations as sponsors do not get a return on the investment, they leave. Simple economics. ...
Click to expand...
Little counter argument here. Not to make out anyone as angels, mind you, just more perspective.

Some things nascar/nextel have done recently to raise the cost of racing:

1. Add more races/and or re-arrange the schedule to add significant significant travel.
2. Implemented the "Standard Body Templete".
3. Changed the "Standard Body Template" in the offsesaon.
4. "Softened" the tires (or whatever it is that Hunter thinks they did to the tires).

Some things nascar/nextel/networks have done to endanger on-going sponsorship agreements:

1. Blackmailing car sponsors for air time, resulting in absolutely no net return for many sponsorships.
2. Imposing the non-playoff playoff, which will further reduce air time for "non championship" non-playoff playoff contenders.
3. Focused on a very narrow set of teams.

Some things nascar/nextel are planning to further raise racing costs:

1. Bring in the new "bigger nascar".
2. Add more races with significant travel.
3. Continual "I wonder what would happen if we did this to the cars?" type changes.

One thing I'm not sure about:

1. How is the Sunoco fuel contract structured? Do the teams no pay or is it provided?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom