MLB Giants Payroll To Top $200M For First Time Mitt Romney In Talks With Yankees For Small Stake Manfred: Talking To Players About Rules "Difficult" Orioles Exec VP Wouldn't Want A Trump First Pitch Baseball HOF Tour Returning For Second Season First Data Lands Rights To Mets' Fla. Complex Clark Calls MLB Rule Change Discussions "Ongoing" Four Brands Sign Up As WBC Global Sponsors Cubs Using "That's Cub" As '17 Marketing Slogan Red Sox To Implement New Personnel Database
SBD/2/Sponsorships Advertising Marketing
MLB DEBATES WHETHER TO ENLARGE OR REMOVE UNIFORM LOGOS
Published December 2, 1997
MLBP President Bob Gamgort, putting together an apparel program that he hopes will generate as much as $20M-a-year, "has conceived one scenario in which all non-MLB logos would be eliminated from uniforms, in the hope that sneaker marketers would pay more for ad rights and have no reservations about using MLB players in creative, since they would not be wearing the logo of a competitor," according to Terry Lefton of BRANDWEEK. Another possible scenario would see even larger logos on uniforms. Lefton adds that MLB "needs to line up a new uniform deal by early next year to meet manufacturing lead times" for the '99 season. In related news, Gamgort said he has received funding to hire senior execs to run MLB's licensing program and bring corporate sponsorship sales in-house, leaving himself "free to focus solely on marketing" (BRANDWEEK, 12/1 issue). NIKE PLAYS HARDBALL: AD AGE's Bradley Johnson reports that Nike "won't use" MLB endorsers in their uniforms in '98 ads because it "doesn't want to indirectly promote exclusive MLB uniform licensee Russell Athletic, especially after MLB owners last year shot down a proposed marketing alliance with Nike" (Bradley Johnson, AD AGE, 12/1 issue).