The Vikings yesterday "lost a key business partner" as the Radisson hotel chain "suspended its sponsorship of the team" just hours after the reinstatement of RB Adrian Peterson, according to a front-page piece by Kaszuba & Olson of the Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE. That deal "includes a banner bearing the company name hung at Vikings news conferences." Radisson in a statement said it takes Peterson's alleged child abuse "very seriously, particularly in light of our long-standing commitment to the protection of children." The team said it has "respectfully honored" Radisson's request (Minneapolis STAR TRIBUNE, 9/16). ESPN's Darren Rovell notes Radisson suspending its deal with the team is the "first shoe to drop, even though it didn't completely drop." Radisson's logo was prominently featured on the banner behind Vikings GM Rick Spielman "when he was ... announcing that the team was going to bring Adrian Peterson back." Rovell noted, "Radisson was front and center there. ... It's a little bit easier to have a local deal and to suspend instead of drop than have a national deal and suspend or drop. But it's really the first sign where there's a power move in the business world to go alongside with what's been happening" ("SportsCenter," ESPN, 9/15). MSNBC's Mika Brzezinski said, "Look at that, a sponsor actually ... sending a message" ("Morning Joe," MSNBC, 9/16). Meanwhile, in Dallas, Charles Scudder noted an awareness campaign from the makers of EpiPen featuring Peterson and children selected in a nationwide contest "has been halted in light" of the allegations against Peterson. New Jersey-based Mylan Specialty, which makes EpiPen, yesterday said that it still plans "to make a video with the contest winners, albeit without Peterson." Peterson "has used an EpiPen, an auto-injector that is made to help treat severe allergic reactions." The video "was meant to help educate people about severe allergy attacks" (DALLASNEWS.com, 9/15).
In Minneapolis, Jim Hammerand noted Nike and Castrol, which both sponsor Peterson, yesterday said that they were "monitoring the situation." Hammerand also cited an ESPN report that Wheaties "stopped production of its Peterson cereal boxes earlier this year, but scrubbed its website of the player as the controversy unfolded" (
BIZJOURNALS.com, 9/15). Also in Minneapolis, Nick Halter noted Peterson several years ago "had deals with Verizon Wireless and Vitamin Water, but he hasn't appeared in TV ads since." A spokesperson for Vitamin Water said that the company's contract with Peterson "ended" in '11 (
BIZJOURNALS.com, 9/15).
SHIELD STILL STRONG? AD AGE's E.J. Schultz wrote the NFL "continues to deal with criticism over how it handled the Ray Rice domestic-violence matter," but so far no companies "have dropped their league-wide sponsorships over that issue, and most brands have either declined comment or issued tepid statements." Still, pressure "has started to mount for some brands, including Procter & Gamble's CoverGirl, which is the league's 'official beauty sponsor' and has marketed team-inspired makeup." A photoshopped image being circulated on social media "shows a woman wearing Baltimore Ravens-colored makeup, but also a black eye." A P&G spokesperson last night in a statement said, "As a brand that has always supported women and stood for female empowerment, CoverGirl believes domestic violence is completely unacceptable. We developed our NFL program to celebrate the more than 80 million female football fans. In light of recent events, we have encouraged the NFL to take swift action on their path forward to address the issue of domestic violence" (ADAGE.com, 9/15). USA TODAY's David Leon Moore noted major league-wide sponsors like Anheuser-Busch and PepsiCo "are not yet backing off their support of the league." N.Y.-based Foley & Lardner attorney Irwin Raij, who co-chairs the firm's sports industry practice, said, "I think the sponsors are monitoring this, but I don't think we've seen any negative effect on the league's business to date. The shield, as the NFL likes to say, seems to be as strong as ever from a business standpoint." He added that it is "too risky for companies to cut ties with the NFL." Raij: "These agreements are for long terms. If you leave and then come back at a later time, it might be more expensive. It might be more challenging. It might be a lot of things" (USATODAY.com, 9/15).
