- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Expect To See Pink For A Long Time (Not Another Rita Thread)
Posted on 10/11/12 at 3:59 pm
Posted on 10/11/12 at 3:59 pm
LINK
It's comforting to know that breast cancer has become such a nice little money maker for Roger and the NFL. Way to play on people's altruistic motives Roger.
quote:
According to Business Insider, the NFL's October Breast Cancer Awareness Month fundraising effort is multi-pronged. There's the on-field onslaught of pink (AWARENESS), the off-field auction of autographed or otherwise noteworthy NFL paraphernalia (MONEY FOR THE CURE!), and the part of the NFL store that entices shoppers to purchase officially licensed NFL breast cancer gear, a portion of which goes to FINDING A CURE. According to the League, 100% of the proceeds from the specialty auction go to the American Cancer Society, but the total percentage of purchases of officially licensed gear that actually goes to FINDING A CURE is actually kind of pathetic — 5%. If you want to look at this cynically, in a way, the on-field wearin' o' the pink serves as an ad to direct consumers to purchase pink fan items.
BUT WAIT, you might say, AT LEAST THEY'RE DOING SOMETHING. And 5% is still something! Well, kind of. As BI pointed out, if NFL products are sold at a 100% markup and only 5% of sale proceeds go to the American Cancer Society, then the NFL is pocketing 90% of sales of Breast Cancer Awareness products, many of which would not be purchased if they didn't come with a promise that consumers were "helping."
It's comforting to know that breast cancer has become such a nice little money maker for Roger and the NFL. Way to play on people's altruistic motives Roger.
6
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:03 pm to kclsufan
How do we know that's true though?
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:09 pm to kclsufan
I wouldn't think the NFL is going a 100% markup. Its possible, but I don't think its likely.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:15 pm to noonan
quote:
How do we know that's true though?
Bc it's on the Internet.
This post was edited on 10/11/12 at 4:39 pm
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:17 pm to Hoodoo Man
quote:
How do we know that's true though?
For what its worth, the rest of the business world does this too. 100% markup seems kinda high though.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:25 pm to Jcorye1
All right, jcorye.
What about when CVS asks me if I want to add a dollar to my bill to support _______ research?
All 100 cents go towards that research, right?
What about when CVS asks me if I want to add a dollar to my bill to support _______ research?
All 100 cents go towards that research, right?
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:25 pm to likeaboss
I've said this all along. You'd be shocked how little money is raised in these campaigns. It's common sense. The NFL will take its healthy share. Both the ACS and NFL have to hire their "marketing wizards" to strategize. The people who run the programs aren't doing it for free either. And it goes on and on and on.
If the NFL is truly philanthropic, they'd allow players to support the cause of their choice: autism, literacy, prostate cancer, etc.. But that's not what this about. This is about selling merchandise and marketing the league to a non-core audience (middle aged women). And that's a fact.
If the NFL is truly philanthropic, they'd allow players to support the cause of their choice: autism, literacy, prostate cancer, etc.. But that's not what this about. This is about selling merchandise and marketing the league to a non-core audience (middle aged women). And that's a fact.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:26 pm to kclsufan
IT IS GOODELL'S FAULT, KILL HIM!
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:33 pm to lsutigers1992
quote:
f the NFL is truly philanthropic, they'd allow players to support the cause of their choice: autism, literacy, prostate cancer, etc.. But that's not what this about. This is about selling merchandise and marketing the league to a non-core audience (middle aged women). And that's a fact.
spot on
I just hate that we have to see random pink accessories for a whole month...but im sure the chicks dig it and they move a ton of merch during this month
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:54 pm to Eighteen
How many of you purchased pink stuff?
That's what I thought. 5% of zero is still zero.
Stupid article.
That's what I thought. 5% of zero is still zero.
Stupid article.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 4:54 pm to kclsufan
quote:
See Pink
quote:
(Not Another Rita Thread)
Posted on 10/11/12 at 5:09 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:well considering just about everyone on this board is a man probably 0. But I've seen hundreds of women wearing pink jerseys
How many of you purchased pink stuff? That's what I thought. 5% of zero is still zero. Stupid article.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 5:10 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
where is that douche mytigger who called me out for saying this exact thing last week.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 5:20 pm to Melvin
quote:
But I've seen hundreds of women wearing pink jerseys
Most (not all) probably bought pink in stead of buying regular....maening the cancer cause got 5% that they would not have otherwise got. Perhaps some bought to support cancer and the Saints. Good. Hats off to them.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 6:13 pm to kclsufan
Posted on 10/11/12 at 6:23 pm to Papa Tigah
I haven't read any posts in this thread but I love the title.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 7:49 pm to kclsufan
Also the Kommen foundation spends millions in litigation suing other people who use the term "for the cure" or the pink ribbon.
That is shameful.
That is shameful.
Posted on 10/11/12 at 10:13 pm to noonan
quote:
I wouldn't think the NFL is going a 100% markup. Its possible, but I don't think its likely.
Say the mark up is 30%. That still a lot of profit. Looking at their prices I'm more likely to believe the mark up is closer to 100%. How much does gear made in china cost them?
This post was edited on 10/11/12 at 10:24 pm
Posted on 10/11/12 at 11:58 pm to Oyster
I honestly think the markup is greater than 100%.
Think about it. A fake stitched jersey costs $40-50. A real stitched jersey costs $150.
So lets say they cost 15-20 to make a fake (probably more like $5) and $25-30 to make a real one (probably less tna ten)
I would say even with marketing and all other factors in the price, the markup of total cost is probably more like 300%, and more like 500% if we are only talking production of the jersey.
100% mark-up is SOP in retail. A good costs me $10, I sell it for $20, costs me a $150 I sell it for $300. Not across the board, but its a good rule of thumb. Clothing markup is usually way over 100%.
Think about it. A fake stitched jersey costs $40-50. A real stitched jersey costs $150.
So lets say they cost 15-20 to make a fake (probably more like $5) and $25-30 to make a real one (probably less tna ten)
I would say even with marketing and all other factors in the price, the markup of total cost is probably more like 300%, and more like 500% if we are only talking production of the jersey.
100% mark-up is SOP in retail. A good costs me $10, I sell it for $20, costs me a $150 I sell it for $300. Not across the board, but its a good rule of thumb. Clothing markup is usually way over 100%.
Posted on 10/12/12 at 6:37 am to Eighteen
quote:
I just hate that we have to see random pink accessories for a whole month...
How will you ever survive this harsh punishment? If it causes eriction problems for you, there are pills for that by the way.
Wearing sunglasses while watching the games may help a little bit also.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News