»
Topic: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal
Replies: 22   Last Post: Aug 6, 2018 8:32 AM by: Dugatiger®
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.


[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 22  

TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[3]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 9:49 AM
 

 
Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

Clemson Director of Athletics Dan Radakovich announced that Clemson Athletics and Nike have reached an agreement for a 10-year, $58 million extension to their a Read Update »



Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[5]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 9:55 AM
 

Good to see us catching up but still behind SCar's 71 million from UA. Good news, personally, is Nike is a much better brand.

null


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[3]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:28 AM
 

I wonder how often UA regrets that partnership...


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[5]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 9:55 AM
 

Glad to keep Nike, but we couldn’t get a better deal than $5.8m/year? Seems low given our success and having so many nationally televised games.


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[3]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:27 AM
 

has to do with fan base also. ours is smaller than most. we could have gotten more with ua but we think the kids are into nike more. drad has talked about this many times.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

I think it's low because they are replacing the 2018-2022


Posted: Aug 3, 2018 11:05 AM
 

of the old deal with the new deal, it says it was a 10 year extension and it runs to 2028 so it likely is 10 years starting now. We were in a below market deal under the old one, so Nike bumped us up now in exchange for agreeing to go out to 2028.

Personally I think we should have held out and waited until 2022 to see if we could get teams to bid the price up, but I'm guessing the administration wanted more cash now


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[2]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:01 AM
 

Yeah and in comparison Bama gets $750,000/yr.

UCLA's 15-year deal was $280 million deal with Under Armour,
Ohio State -15 years, $252 million (Nike)
Texas -15 years, $250 million (Nike)
Michigan - 11 years, $169 million (Nike)

This doesn’t look like that good of a deal to me

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-15yr.jpgmilitary_donation.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:10 AM
 

Yea I agree, who is doing these negotiations? And how is UA paying these crazy numbers, thought they were verge of bankruptcy?


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[2]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:21 AM
 

maybe that's why they are on the verge of bankruptcy ?? but I have no clue.


Their stock has been beat up but they are still worth

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:51 AM
 

8.5 billion in market cap


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 11:05 AM
 

They are, and no wonder. If they (UA) don't have better business sense than to offer a deal like that to usuc, they should go bankrupt.

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[1]
Posted: Aug 4, 2018 4:15 PM
 

TU! That made me laugh out loud for real.

I was never a big fan of UA, the few products I purchased for my younger nephew/cousins were not great quality for the prices and didn’t last long.
UA had a lot of hype for a bit a few years ago but died really quickly, I guess that’s when they made the big dollar commitments for 2nd tier programs.


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal


Posted: Aug 6, 2018 8:32 AM
 

"second tier programs" This! Coots definitely fall into that category. +1

2019 orange level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[10]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:52 AM
 

You're comparing Clemson to massive brands in large/very large markets though. One thing we need to understand is that despite the success on the field, we won't ever see our brand have the same economic impact as those others. Let's take a look at some numbers:

Enrollment:
Ohio State 59,837
Texas 51,331
Michigan 46,002
UCLA 44,947
Clemson 23,406

Population:
Ohio 11,658,609
Texas 28,304,596
Michigan 9,962,311
Greater Los Angeles 13,353,907
South Carolina 5,024,369

Median Income:
Ohio $51,610
Texas $56,139
Michigan $51,584
Greater Los Angeles $65,950
South Carolina $47,790

So, comparatively, Clemson has a fraction of the enrollment of those other schools, is located in a state a fraction of the size of the others, and South Carolina has the lowest median income of any of these areas. Furthermore, these other programs have been in the national spotlight for decades.

Here's a list of the top contracts: https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlybenjamin/2016/07/12/the-65-most-valuable-college-sports-apparel-deals/#29ed5d96308f

This new one would put us at #15 in the nation, above LSU and below NC State. At first glance, it seems weird to see NC State, South Carolina & Indiana above Clemson but if you look at the brands on the list, you'll quickly realize that Adidas & Under Armour have massively overpaid for mediocre brands in order to try to get a foothold in the NCAA apparel market. The Clemson brass most likely decided that the benefit of name recognition associated with Nike would outweigh the extra money they may be able to get from Adidas or Under Armour and I tend to agree with them. Nike carries weight with recruits, so I'm fine with the numbers that Clemson got out of this contract.


True but Clemson has been dominating the prime tv slots.


Posted: Aug 3, 2018 11:46 AM
 

While our fan base may not be large Nike can have their brand in front of the prime time slot for TV audiences. Need to make sure we monetize that while we are on top.

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: True but Clemson has been dominating the prime tv slots.

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 12:16 PM
 

And we are! Let's ignore UA & Adidas contracts for now because as I mentioned before, some of those contracts are just terrible decisions on those companies' parts and Nike isn't going to make the same mistake. We're now the #4 Nike contract in the country, behind only Michigan, Texas and Ohio State. We're never going to touch those programs monetarily due to their size & influence, so there's no point in arguing we should be near them.


There has never been a non-Nike playoff team.

[3]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 1:23 PM
 

Nike doesn't need us at all. That's why everyone who signs with Nike gets a 'fair' deal. UA has to overpay to entice teams to give them a spotlight.

2019 orange level member

Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 10:53 AM
 

Clemson fans are passionate and support in big ways, but the size of our national fan base pales in comparison to the four schools you mentioned

5.8 might be a little low, but your comparisons there aren’t really good ones.

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

It's double what we signed 3 years ago.

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 11:08 AM
 

Clemson has a small fan base compared to many of the other elite football schools. We are never going to make anywhere near as much off an apparel contract as schools like Ohio State, Texas, or Michigan.


Re: TNET: Clemson, Nike announce new 10-year deal


Posted: Aug 3, 2018 11:20 AM
 

I think it has to do with fan base size and TV network deals.

Big 10 Network
PAC 12 Network
Longhorn Network

Maybe?

2019 student level memberbadge-donor-10yr.jpg

There's something in these hills.


do the UA's have similar % for purchases? they may just be


Posted: Aug 3, 2018 12:09 PM
 

paying fixed amount and not % on merch sales-- this can significantly change $s. The 14% should not be overlooked- it's significant given the growing popularity of our brand outside the alumni/geographic footprint.

how does the 14% stack against some of the other contracts?


I was hoping for Umbro***

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 1:21 PM
 



2019 orange level member

Re: I was hoping for Umbro***

[1]
Posted: Aug 3, 2018 7:28 PM
 

We all know money matters and bills must be paid .....but personally I don’t care if we came out in converse as long as our Tigers keep putting em up the backside of the UA wearing worm pulling dirtpeckers. Glad we were able to get a better deal and DRad is working hard to keep Dabo inc rolling. Go Tigers


Replies: 22  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Georgia Tech
FOR SALE: 3 lower deck seats for this weeks game $200. Section K Row HH Seats 16,18 & 20. This is a short row ...

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Archives - Tiger Boards Archive ]
Start New Topic
3359 people have read this post