Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Linny
Money talks. The Derby at Epsom has a far more storied history than our Derby and for years it has been the "Vodaphone Derby" or the "Something Else Derby" because the sponsor is paying for the right to attach it's name to the race.
I do think that there is double standard re: sponsors. If the sponsor is an "upmarket" brand like deBeers or Mercedes Benz (they sponsor alot of equestrian events) or Darley or Shadwell it's fine but when it's a fast food conglomerate with a downmarket name like Yum! is not so hot.
The game needs the infusion of cash from sponsorship. Partnering with food providers 9who sell at the track) or other brands associated with both racing AND the mainstream (John Deere) makes sense. I'm not crazy about the name "KY Derby presented by Yum! Brands but their money is just as green as Rolls Royce or BMW.
|
For the most part, the sponsor naming doesn't really bother me. I understand why it's being done. They can call their races whatever they want. But, IMO, there is a problem when the media is told/forced to use the name exactly the way the dictated to them.
Example: The NHL held it's Winter Classic presented by Amp'd in Buffalo this past winter. They insisted it be called the "Winter Classic presented by Amp's." Know what most of the media outlets called it?? The Ice Bowl. Better ring to it, eh? The NHL didn't like it, but you know what, there wasn't much they could do about it. I suppose the relationship between the media and horse racing industry is a little different than other sports.. but, ideally, that still shouldn't influence what and how things are written/reported.