Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU's Nike Contract - June 30th Expiration

Buffnik

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
Attached is CU's Nike Contract. file:///Users/briley/Downloads/Colorado%20Nike%20contract.pdf

I don't think there has been an extension, but I might have missed something.

The final year of the deal (2015-16) had CU earning $1,565,000 for the year.

UCLA just signed a 15-year / $280 million deal with Under Armour. LINK

ASU entered an 8-year / $33.8 million deal with Adidas at the end of 2014. LINK

Based on where the market is, I'd expect that CU will be adding some significant revenue in a few weeks.
 
Buffnik said:
Attached is CU's Nike Contract. file:///Users/briley/Downloads/Colorado%20Nike%20contract.pdf

I don't think there has been an extension, but I might have missed something.

The final year of the deal (2015-16) had CU earning $1,565,000 for the year.

UCLA just signed a 15-year / $280 million deal with Under Armour. LINK

ASU entered an 8-year / $33.8 million deal with Adidas at the end of 2014. LINK

Based on where the market is, I'd expect that CU will be adding some significant revenue in a few weeks.
Click to expand...
What a terrible time to have these negotiations - I don't envy CU (Rick George) at all! On the one hand, our football performance (and therefore brand) is at an all-time low, and, on the other hand, who is confident enough in our economy to think that we'll be in a much better bargaining position next year? Given the long-term nature of these contracts, I think you roll the dice and try to agree to a short-term extension with Nike unless one of these brands (including Nike) blows you away with an offer you can't refuse.
 
He's a smart guy. He can offer up a short term contract. Also, having the national champion cross country team should be a nice bargaining chip. No, it's not football, but for the folks who actually buy this stuff, outfitting the cross country team might be more important.
 
sackman said:
He's a smart guy. He can offer up a short term contract. Also, having the national champion cross country team should be a nice bargaining chip. No, it's not football, but for the folks who actually buy this stuff, outfitting the cross country team might be more important.
Click to expand...
The CC team will weigh as heavily for Nike as the Ski team will weigh for Under Armor. It will all about FB and the BBs for the contract; CU does not have a sport requiring specialized sport apparel or equipment.
 
Gramburglar said:
The CC team will weigh as heavily for Nike as the Ski team will weigh for Under Armor. It will all about FB and the BBs for the contract; CU does not have a sport requiring specialized sport apparel or equipment.
Click to expand...

Nike dropped its sponsorships for ski & snowboard athletes a year or so ago. I think the ski team may have an opportunity to strike its own apparel deal(s) outside of the AD contract for other sports.
 
Gramburglar said:
The CC team will weigh as heavily for Nike as the Ski team will weigh for Under Armor. It will all about FB and the BBs for the contract; CU does not have a sport requiring specialized sport apparel or equipment.
Click to expand...
Really? I would have thought the CC team would be required to use Nike, based on our contract. You're saying that's not the case? The runners can use whatever brand they prefer?

I'm just thinking about the Olympics coming up, with a bunch of CU runners, how that would be a pretty good marketing opportunity for Nike.
 
sackman said:
Really? I would have thought the CC team would be required to use Nike, based on our contract. You're saying that's not the case? The runners can use whatever brand they prefer?

I'm just thinking about the Olympics coming up, with a bunch of CU runners, how that would be a pretty good marketing opportunity for Nike.
Click to expand...
Distance runners have always had a different relationship with brands and sponsorship, and it's because of the ridiculous importance of having an absolutely perfect fit and structure to your shoe if you're going to be running 100 miles a week.

The runners might have to "cover up" the emblem of another manufacturer when they race, but unless the shoe manufacturer is literally making custom shoes for every individual on the team, I would be really surprised if they couldn't use whatever brand works best for them regardless of the sponsorship deal.
 
sackman said:
Really? I would have thought the CC team would be required to use Nike, based on our contract. You're saying that's not the case? The runners can use whatever brand they prefer?

I'm just thinking about the Olympics coming up, with a bunch of CU runners, how that would be a pretty good marketing opportunity for Nike.
Click to expand...

Oh I have no idea how that works in terms of athlete brand preference. I was just trying to say that the Olympic sports will not influence any apparel negotiations, the fight will be waged over the revenue generating sports lie football and basketball. I just knew that UA did/does USA the Winter Olympic gear and I guess Nike does USA Summer Olympic gear.

Its probably is pretty easy for these corporations to make socks and jerseys for all sports, but equipment could be more tricky. They all make soccer balls, basketballs and general sports equipment but if we had baseball, hockey, or swimming for example I could see how aligning the department with a brand could be more important.
 
Oh yeah, also on the ski team: CU wears Spyder, and has for a long time. So does the US Ski Team. UA may sponsor the "US Olympic Team" winter gear, but the ski team wears Spyder.

Spyder is a Boulder based company, this sponsorship makes sense, and I don't think any of the big players (Nike, UA, Addidas, etc) can or want to compete in this area.
 
Flirt with UA and Adidas, get some nice offers, then go back to Nike, take a little less than what was offered by the other companies, still make more then we ever have.... Profit.
 
I suspect that CU will sign a deal in the ten year range now. This may seem long given the fact that CU's brand recognition accross the country is approaching an all time low. However, thanks to Under Armor and Addidas being more aggressive in their attempts to sign Schools, the market is at an all time high. Add to this the fact that CU is one of the top brands(maybe the top brand?) in the Mountain Time zone (aka the forgotten time zone) and it makes sense to do the ten year deal.
Here is a list of some sample deals that have been completed recently that weren't mentioned above:
U Texas 15 years 252 million
U Michigan 11 years 169 million
An Ohio State University 10 years 90 million
Cal Berkley 10 years 86 million
Maryland 10 years 33 million

CU can't reasonably expect UCLA, Michigan, Cal, Texas or an Ohio State money, but it defintely should expect to be in the range of Maryland and ASU and given the market conditions (vastly improved since ASU signed) and geographic advantages could hope for a deal between that of Maryland, ASU and Cal. CU should be shooting for around 6 million a year and shouldn't sign a long term deal for less than 4.5 million a year.
 
The Olympic sports were the whole reason Kansas dumped Nike and went with Adidas. They outfitted more teams and gave them an offer they couldn't say no to. I think from a sales perspective with apparel though it hurt Kansas because Adidas apparel is not flying off the shelves like the Nike previously was.
 
Id care to guess that the Chevs of the world will be lobbying for Under Armor or (I cant believe Im saying this) the safer bet, Nike.
 
I agree that this is about the size of the check. From a durability standpoint I'd go Adidas, UU, Nike.

For some reason the Nike stuff just isn't made as well.

I guess at the college level they don't really have to consider that.
 
It is interesting to hear everyone's thoughts on the olympic sports affecting sponsor deals. I competed on the track team at Arizona before transferring to CU (both Nike obviously), and the large majority of people on both teams worked with the supplied Nike gear/shoes. In long distance running there are always a few more injury prone athletes who may need a more specialized shoe, but you get a couple pairs a year so why not take the free ones?

That being said, in parallel with the emergence of Under Armour, classic running companies like New Balance and Brooks have been stealing pro athletes away from Nike. Jenny (Barringer) Simpson is a huge example of this, along with Emma Coburn. I'm curious if schools like Cal or UCLA will have a separate mini deal with a shoe company for those sports.

All of that aside, I hope CU sticks with Nike...or we can just go with Under Armour and lock in to competing with Cal for every friggin recruit.

Aside: UA sponsors run n gun now right? Any ramifications for that?
 
TSchekler said:
Would we notice any tangible differences, aside from new uniforms??
Click to expand...

The gear fans could purchase would be different. UA tends to be a bit cheaper than Nike, but quality of materials is also not quite the same.

Also we likely would not get a new design for football uniforms, since that just happened. Different materials for sure, and maybe some color tweaking. I would hope that if we change brands that the same folks in charge of this redesign shut down any stupidity that may come from the design teams at UA or Adidas.
 
The hundreds of millions of dollars thrown around by these show companies is so ridiculous. Is there a stat on how much of our payment for a nice-ish pair of running shoes goes to advertising, sponsorship, etc?
 
fwiw UA has given Cal & UCLA complete design control. Expect to see new uniforms at both, from football, down to club soccer. UCLA will be their lifestyle & streetwear hub, Cal will be the sports tech incubator.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
The gear fans could purchase would be different. UA tends to be a bit cheaper than Nike, but quality of materials is also not quite the same.

Also we likely would not get a new design for football uniforms, since that just happened. Different materials for sure, and maybe some color tweaking. I would hope that if we change brands that the same folks in charge of this redesign shut down any stupidity that may come from the design teams at UA or Adidas.
Click to expand...
Gotcha... I would prefer them to just stick with Nike, unless UA offers them a deal that blows Nike out of the water, which I highly doubt happens, unless they are betting on "THE RISE"!!!!!!!
 
TSchekler said:
Gotcha... I would prefer them to just stick with Nike, unless UA offers them a deal that blows Nike out of the water, which I highly doubt happens, unless they are betting on "THE RISE"!!!!!!!
Click to expand...

I am guessing this will be the case. Nike can't keep losing big name teams to UA. We are also one of Nike's first colleges, I am hoping that loyalty pays off.
 
According to Howell:
1) CU extended the contract 1 year when they added lacrosse, set to expire next spring.
2) CU is in the process of negotiating a longer term extension with Nike.
3) Anticipates news of a contract extension in the next few months.
 
How much weight does this contract negotiation have on your evaluation of RG?

Is there some $ value above which RG "hits it out of the park?"
What about below which "he struck out?"
 
skibum said:
How much weight does this contract negotiation have on your evaluation of RG?

Is there some $ value above which RG "hits it out of the park?"
What about below which "he struck out?"
Click to expand...

We should be getting somewhere around the same money ASU/Maryland got on their contracts. CU doesn't have the same market leverage as some of the other schools that just signed gigantic deals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top