SBD/8/Sponsorships Advertising Marketing


          The Orioles have contested a PepsiCo campaign featuring
     players Rafael Palmeiro, Brady Anderson and Jeffrey Hammonds
     citing a section of all players' contracts which gives teams
     the right to approve endorsements made during the season,
     according to Jerry Crasnick of BLOOMBERG BUSINESS NEWS. 
     While Pepsi spent $50M to become MLB's official soft drink
     from '97-2001, the Orioles have a partnership with Coca-Cola
     that could be worth as much as $2M a year.  The O's have
     cited Paragraph 3C of the players' contracts which states
     that teams' consent in marketing matters "shall not be
     withheld except in the reasonable interests of the club or
     professional baseball."  MLBPA officials said the clause has
     "never been used to prevent a player from doing an
     endorsement."  PepsiCo spokesperson Jon Harris said that the
     enforcement of Paragraph 3C doesn't hurt "either of the cola
     companies, but the players and the sport."  Coca-Cola
     spokesperson Scott Jacobson said that in filing their
     grievance, the Orioles are protecting a relationship with a
     corporate partner: "It's difficult to be a sponsor like Coke
     and invest in a property, then have players go off and do
     what they want."  Crasnick adds that some agents believe the
     Baltimore dispute "could eventually lead to more verbiage in
     player contracts."  Walt Disney, owners of the Angels, has
     already inserted specific language in contracts that forbid
     players from endorsing a product in an Angels uniform without
     the club's consent (BLOOMBERG/STAR-TELEGRAM, 5/7).
          COLA WARS: PepsciCo filed an antitrust complaint against
     Coca-Cola yesterday, charging it with using "illegal strong-
     arm tactics to keep restaurants and other retail customers
     from pouring Pepsi" (ATLANTA CONSTITUTION, 5/8).

Return to top
Video Powered By - Castfire CMS Powered By - Sitecore

Report a Bug