Adidas Contract Expiring

BuzzThePlumber

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,265
The whole discussion is around revenue to the school.

Revenue = Cash + Product + Royalties.

Tennessee's royalties, for example, are 12-14% of sales, so a large fanbase, with good designs, generates sales and in turn, royalties. The smaller fanbases will get some cash, maybe in bonuses, and mostly product.

As I recall, Adidas did not give Tech any cash, but did provide product. I have some of the athlete's gear and it's a step up from what is available retail wise. According to CLC, the top licensing programs (which generate the most royalties) are (2018) below. I would not expect to see any major change to the availability of GT gear, regardless of who is the sponsor. We just don't have the fanbase size that drives royalty revenue.
  1. Texas
  2. Alabama
  3. Michigan
  4. Notre Dame
  5. Georgia
  6. Florida
  7. LSU
  8. Florida State
  9. Texas A&M
  10. North Carolina
  11. Auburn
  12. Oklahoma
  13. Nebraska
  14. Arkansas
  15. Wisconsin
  16. Tennessee
  17. South Carolina
  18. Penn State
  19. Missouri
  20. West Virginia
  21. Kansas
  22. Clemson
  23. Oklahoma State
  24. Louisville
  25. Texas Tech
Ohio State missing from this list makes no sense
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
The whole discussion is around revenue to the school.

Revenue = Cash + Product + Royalties.

Tennessee's royalties, for example, are 12-14% of sales, so a large fanbase, with good designs, generates sales and in turn, royalties. The smaller fanbases will get some cash, maybe in bonuses, and mostly product.

As I recall, Adidas did not give Tech any cash, but did provide product. I have some of the athlete's gear and it's a step up from what is available retail wise. According to CLC, the top licensing programs (which generate the most royalties) are (2018) below. I would not expect to see any major change to the availability of GT gear, regardless of who is the sponsor. We just don't have the fanbase size that drives royalty revenue.
  1. Texas
  2. Alabama
  3. Michigan
  4. Notre Dame
  5. Georgia
  6. Florida
  7. LSU
  8. Florida State
  9. Texas A&M
  10. North Carolina
  11. Auburn
  12. Oklahoma
  13. Nebraska
  14. Arkansas
  15. Wisconsin
  16. Tennessee
  17. South Carolina
  18. Penn State
  19. Missouri
  20. West Virginia
  21. Kansas
  22. Clemson
  23. Oklahoma State
  24. Louisville
  25. Texas Tech
GT's Adidas contract was reported here: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...agreement-with-adidas/hebjv2I3PIBh8K6b2QwVdJ/

GT initially was receiving only $200k annually, although there was a look-in clause to allow either party to reevaluate the market and make changes after the third year. The article did state that the ~$3M in product allowed was higher than many peer schools, while the $200k payout was at the low end. We were getting considerably more cash from Russell, although probably less product allowance. The Adidas deal was also structured with significant incentive payouts for team success. Obviously we have not benefited much from that.

Interestingly, at the time the deal was made, it was touted as a strategic partnership that would assist GT in "branding, innovation, and develop[ing the Atlanta market." Not sure that has happened.
 

Vespidae

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,326
Location
Auburn, AL
GT's Adidas contract was reported here: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...agreement-with-adidas/hebjv2I3PIBh8K6b2QwVdJ/

GT initially was receiving only $200k annually, although there was a look-in clause to allow either party to reevaluate the market and make changes after the third year. The article did state that the ~$3M in product allowed was higher than many peer schools, while the $200k payout was at the low end. We were getting considerably more cash from Russell, although probably less product allowance. The Adidas deal was also structured with significant incentive payouts for team success. Obviously we have not benefited much from that.

Interestingly, at the time the deal was made, it was touted as a strategic partnership that would assist GT in "branding, innovation, and develop[ing the Atlanta market." Not sure that has happened.
That's pretty much how it goes. The larger the fan base, the more you rely on royalties; the smaller the fanbase, the more you rely on cash and/or product. Product is better for the brand because the value is the dollar value not the material cost ... so if it's $3M in product allowance, that's about $750K in actual expense.

When I looked at this a few years ago, the Top Ten schools drive 80% of the total college SWAG. Tech is at the lower end but about right considering the size of its base. That's what I meant by not expecting huge changes if Nike or UA become the new supplier ... GT will derive about the same value, maybe a little more for switching. Personally, I prefer Nike as a consumer but others like who they like.
 

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,308
GT's Adidas contract was reported here: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...agreement-with-adidas/hebjv2I3PIBh8K6b2QwVdJ/

GT initially was receiving only $200k annually, although there was a look-in clause to allow either party to reevaluate the market and make changes after the third year. The article did state that the ~$3M in product allowed was higher than many peer schools, while the $200k payout was at the low end. We were getting considerably more cash from Russell, although probably less product allowance. The Adidas deal was also structured with significant incentive payouts for team success. Obviously we have not benefited much from that.

Interestingly, at the time the deal was made, it was touted as a strategic partnership that would assist GT in "branding, innovation, and develop[ing the Atlanta market." Not sure that has happened.
I thought part of it was the robotic shoe research Adidas wanted to do in conjunction with Tech. Did that fall flat?
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
I thought part of it was the robotic shoe research Adidas wanted to do in conjunction with Tech. Did that fall flat?
Not familiar with any "robotic shoe research", but there was mention of a "robot-powered shoe factory" in this article linked from the other one: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/how-georgia-tech-and-adidas-came-together/TzFmbOPrvlb0RhoAeTCr3J/. Maybe that's what you were remembering.

Subsequent googling indicated Adidas plans to close the factory in 2019.
 

Jacket05

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
686
Not familiar with any "robotic shoe research", but there was mention of a "robot-powered shoe factory" in this article linked from the other one: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/how-georgia-tech-and-adidas-came-together/TzFmbOPrvlb0RhoAeTCr3J/. Maybe that's what you were remembering.

Subsequent googling indicated Adidas plans to close the factory in 2019.
As mentioned in the article, it was the P3 sports science center coming to Atlanta that was one of the major selling points in the decision to go with adidas. There was supposed to be a lot of collaboration opportunities between Tech and adidas with that center. Then once the contract was set adidas closed the center shortly after opening it, which nullified that factor. It always bothered me that they didn't uphold that part of the agreement even though it wasn't specifically in the contract.
 

stinger78

Helluva Engineer
Messages
4,308
GA Tech is one of the top research universities in the US. They will always look for collaborative opportunities in these things. I kind of felt like Adidas baited and switched Tech, but I don’t know that an athletic contract would be worth that.
 

CEB

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,596
Not familiar with any "robotic shoe research", but there was mention of a "robot-powered shoe factory" in this article linked from the other one: https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/how-georgia-tech-and-adidas-came-together/TzFmbOPrvlb0RhoAeTCr3J/. Maybe that's what you were remembering.

Subsequent googling indicated Adidas plans to close the factory in 2019.
Wait a minute… were the researchers robotic or the shoes robotic? Please tell me the it’s the shoes! Finally some shoes that actually do make me run faster and jump higher!
 

roadkill

Helluva Engineer
Messages
1,826
As mentioned in the article, it was the P3 sports science center coming to Atlanta that was one of the major selling points in the decision to go with adidas. There was supposed to be a lot of collaboration opportunities between Tech and adidas with that center. Then once the contract was set adidas closed the center shortly after opening it, which nullified that factor. It always bothered me that they didn't uphold that part of the agreement even though it wasn't specifically in the contract.
I suspect there was a lot of "over-selling" done on both ides of that contract.
 

BeeRBee

Jolly Good Fellow
Messages
236
As mentioned in the article, it was the P3 sports science center coming to Atlanta that was one of the major selling points in the decision to go with adidas. There was supposed to be a lot of collaboration opportunities between Tech and adidas with that center. Then once the contract was set adidas closed the center shortly after opening it, which nullified that factor. It always bothered me that they didn't uphold that part of the agreement even though it wasn't specifically in the contract.
The P3 center is still open. It had a relationship with Adidas but is not owned by them. It was the Cherokee County factory they closed.
 

Jacket05

Ramblin' Wreck
Messages
686
The P3 center is still open. It had a relationship with Adidas but is not owned by them. It was the Cherokee County factory they closed.
Thanks for the correction on the P3 center. IIRC the article discussing them closing the factory mentioned that adidas moving out of Atlanta put an end to the collaboration opportunities discussed when making the deal. I guess I just assumed the P3 center closed too.
 

g0lftime

Helluva Engineer
Messages
5,916
Truthfully i think we might want to bite the bullet and just pay for Nike.

Its all about perception and Nike/Jumpman is the Gold standard. Nike even has seperations within their groups while they provide for a lot of schools, jumpman branding is restricted. We should attempt to position for that.
Do you really want an image of a former UNC player on our uniforms even though he was one of the greatest. Nike OK without MJ.
 

jgtengineer

Helluva Engineer
Messages
2,969
Do you really want an image of a former UNC player on our uniforms even though he was one of the greatest. Nike OK without MJ.

No, but its not about what i want its about what the top players want. We are playing Pro football now any little thing to land the free agent deal counts
 

iceeater1969

Helluva Engineer
Messages
9,657
We entered a 6 year contract with Adidas in July 2018. Any word/thoughts on a new agreement?
There has to be a story about the handle.
Welcome aboard.Jan 2024!

What a great first post for spring and summer.


Too bad you missed the 2 years of - Russell loyal, russell no pop, we deserve Nike, Addias!!, only Gold , that wrong color gold, i hate blue , etc!
 
Top