Canadiens announce RBC as first official game jersey partner

[jellybeans]

I officially won't buy anything that's nhl related their greed is too much i'm done.

 

[417]

I've been in the brand management business a while ago. Sharing your identity and leasing it to lesser brands will usually weaken your brand long term (unless its for a good cause - e.g. kids, breast cancer...). Not a good way to manage your brand capital.

Plus, it's eye-bleeding ugly.

Whose who in this scenario?

 

[JianYang]

I officially won't buy anything that's nhl related their greed is too much i'm done.

If viewership, and merchandise sales decline because of this move, and the money from RBC does not offset that loss, then they will be scrapped.

I doubt that will be the case, though.

 

[smirob]

I hate this......

I really had my hope up that MTL might make a statement that the jersey is worth more than some money grab.....

 

[Treb]

... for themselves? I'm finding more than a few people who seem unwilling to understand what an ad is today.

"HeY, My FAce iS an aD FoR MYselF, RIte? WHo CarES?"

Unless the person wearing it is part of the team, no not for themselves.

A sport jersey is an ad for said team. By wearing it (especially outside the sport setting), you bring brand awareness.

 

[Kimota]

Habs sold out. What a great way to disgrace the jersey of the most storied franchise in sport.

 

[JoelWarlord]

It is permissible for fans to say that the uniform of their favourite team is not something they want covered with a hideous colour clashing banking logo without being sneered at like children who believe Santa Claus is real.

Everyone is aware that life will go on and that this is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but it sucks, it is ugly, it is garish, it is specifically designed to draw your eye to the advertisement, it will never go back to the way it was before, and it will only get worse in the future. This f***ing sucks, there is zero positive to it as a fan, and I don't understand why it is somehow wrong for fans to react negatively and/or emotionally.

The entire reason pro sports survives as a business is because fans connect emotionally with the product.

 

[Frankenheimer]

If the Habs jersey was really sacred, they wouldn't have mass produced them for us to buy and wear.

The flag is also mass produced. So is artwork. So is the cross. A lot of cultural and religious artifacts are not branded. Mass production isn’t a relevant metric for deciding what should be branded or not.

Besides that, there is an incredible dissonance between what the Habs have been selling fans as idea for decades (that the jersey is sacred, that tradition is the glue that keeps the Habs together across generations) and then just taking this crass decision, that goes against everything they’ve preached, without thinking twice.

Although one could be cynical of the tradition idea, and it probably deserved some mocking with all our pre-game theatre, I prefer that idea than the one where corporations can just stick their dumb irrelevant brand, they’ve already managed to stick on every other empty space, on our jersey and just say “screw your tradition”. It’s not only ugly, but also stands in contrast to everything the Habs have been selling.

In short, I hope both businesses suffer and that Molson is forced to retract this decision.

 

[willzyix]

CF Montreal has BMO as a sponsor, and they actually changed the BMO logo to match the teams colors on the jersey. Not sure why they didn't try to do the same with RBC.

I'm whatever on the ads. It's ugly and dumb but it won't affect my enjoyment of the game. That said, at least make it look good if you're going to try and do this lol.

 

[Frankenheimer]

It is permissible for fans to say that the uniform of their favourite team is not something they want covered with a hideous colour clashing banking logo without being sneered at like children who believe Santa Claus is real.

Everyone is aware that life will go on and that this is not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but it sucks, it is ugly, it is garish, it is specifically designed to draw your eye to the advertisement, it will never go back to the way it was before, and it will only get worse in the future. This f***ing sucks, there is zero positive to it as a fan, and I don't understand why it is somehow wrong for fans to react negatively and/or emotionally.

The entire reason pro sports survives as a business is because fans connect emotionally with the product.

It is not wrong. Some people just love brands on their jerseys and we need to respect their point of view as well.

 

[417]

Geoff Molson & David McKay (CEO of RBC) last night

 

[haseoke39]

Again, are you actually arguing that higher revenues isn't good for the league and fans?

Alright, my "remixing" is just trying to make you coherent. You've argued that more revenues equals more profits, so therefore it's good for the league and fans.

Ad my counterargument is that it's not in any way good for fans. Fans would be just as well served if not better in a league that had half the revenue. Or a quarter.

 

[BigDaddyLurch]

It is not wrong. Some people just love brands on their jerseys and we need to respect their point of view as well.

 

[Kimota]

We should not be shocked anymore. Molson has always been about the $$$. Who cares about legacy.

Was watching Lalonde on RDS. Of course the f***tard would be for it.

 

[Surfer72]

It's only a matter of time for even more advertisements...the pants and socks will be next

 

[417]

Alright, my "remixing" is just trying to make you coherent. You've argued that more revenues equals more profits, so therefore it's good for the league and fans.

It's an emotional day...I get it.

Ad my counterargument is that it's not in any way good for fans. Fans would be just as well served if not better in a league that had half the revenue. Or a quarter.

How do you expect the NHL to exist with half or a quarter of its revenues in today's eco...

You know what, never mind.

Like I said, I get it's been an emotional day for you.

 

[Toene]

I care about the Montreal Canadiens not sure how any of this changes that for me personally, and I don't think that's trying to be above things.

I think I understand why some folks are against this, I don't share those sentiments but to each his own.

I've never been the one to complain about ads, I understand the business aspect of the sport, without the incentive of making profits, none of this would exist. Throw it on the boards, commercial breaks, powerplay presented by x, hell, put it on the short or the helmet. But this particular move, for me, is the one that feels very, very wrong.

It's a brand, of course, so it's already capitalistic and materialistic by nature (even though we know there is more to sports like leadership, fraternity, competition, collaboration, confidence, health, etc.). But even then, what's the long-term benefit in terms of the power of your brand? It's as if McDonalds would change their classic yellow M logo to a green one because Monster paid them a few billions. They lose the iconic logo everyone knows and likes and consumes and cheapen it for what is for them essentially pocket change? Big doubt it's that beneficial. Just makes your brand more bland in the end.

 

[1909]

Great. Habs are privately owned and they can do whatever they want to make money.

 

[Andy]

I officially won't buy anything that's nhl related their greed is too much i'm done.

So it wasn’t the greed that covered up concussion effects and sexual assault scandals didn’t do it for you, but the addition of a corporate logo on a jersey?

 

[the]

Molson’s Montreal Canadiens removed Guy Lafleur’s #10 patch to replace it with the logo of a bank. Talk about selling your soul.

 

[Kimota]

I don't get it, why would a bank need to sponsor stuff? It's one thing if it's freakin KFC but a bank's goal should be protecting people's money and make people money. But them using the same concept as other businesses feels off to me.

 

[Frankenheimer]

So it wasn’t the greed that covered up concussion effects and sexual assault scandals didn’t do it for you, but the addition of a corporate logo on a jersey?

 

[417]

I've never been the one to complain about ads, I understand the business aspect of the sport, without the incentive of making profits, none of this would exist, throw it on the boards, commercial breaks, powerplay presented by x, hell, put it on the short or the helmet. But this particular move, for me, is the one that feels very, very wrong.

It's a brand, of course, so it's already capitalistic and materialistic by nature (even though we know there is more to sports like leadership, fraternity, competition, collaboration, confidence, health, etc.). But even then, what's the long-term benefit in terms of the power of your brand? It's as if McDonalds would change their classic yellow M logo to a green one because Monster paid them a few billions. They lose the iconic logo everyone knows and likes and consumes and cheapen it for what is for them essentially pocket change? Big doubt it's that beneficial. Just makes your brand more bland in the end.

Fair take but I see this more as the times we're in rather than an attack on the sanctity of La Sainte-Flannelle.

Edit - i should add that the iconic logo you refer too, remains intact. They didn't change their logo, they added an ad sponsor to their uniform. To be fair.

 

[Andy]

View attachment 583988

Yah, it’s not really the same.

 

[Hacketts]

Fair take but I see this more as the times we're in rather than an attack on the sanctity of La Sainte-Flannelle.

A western world that is soulless, and is corrupt from its most inner workings.