QUOTE (SFGuy @ Apr 6 2009, 09:11 AM)
Our track actually has an insurance sponsor, and in the agreement it says specifically that no other insurance company can have signage or any other sponsorship at the track.
Ultimately it is up to the track (or in the case of a national the sanctioning body) who can post a sign or hand out product. I assure you that if someone attemped to do so at our track without prior permission they would be asked to leave. And that, Captain Spell Check, is how you run a business.
"And that, Captain Spell Check, is how you run a business."
What a contract does is to limit opportunities. See economic impact: If single sponsor with lock out clause is enough revenue VS new participants, marginal buyer at 10-1 leverage, the sponsor dollars translate into over all economic impact greater then new participant, take it...but you need to justify it/share or you'll have dissent. The numbers become huge very quick.
BMX teams work on shoe string budgets and the love of team owners..So from the data I have seen quick back of the envelope, sponsor dollars with team workouts go to the 15-1 range. Of course that comes from elbow grease or out of pocket funding..
There fore the "outrage" at giving free garb away with the justification of anti profiteering laws are laughable here.
Some team owners have been known to NOT require all team members run co sponsor parts to earn a better team deal. They had to renegotiate the contract for a different deal. The result of those requirement/mandates are lower ranked team members subsidized the top riders. That is eco system of business and there is nothing wrong with that. However after quick calculations it became obvious Gresham's law would take over and team size would be limited. A big team is more fun....so are big locals and big races.. Get the Joke. All mandates lower participation and increase costs.
J- (Todd's brother caught up in worst since 1932) Lack