Colts run two-minute sales drill

July 14, 2009
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
farmbureauThe Indianapolis Colts continue to be leaders in innovation—and I’m not talking about Peyton Manning’s on-field audibles or Bill Polian’s scouting and drafting system.

The Colts sales and marketing staff has done its fair share of excelling during crunch time. The franchise lost Chevrolet as a major sponsor and a handful of smaller sponsors after last season. Last month, Tom Zupancic, the team’s sponsorship and marketing chief, wasn’t optimistic the Colts could reach last season’s sponsorship revenue level. That money is key to the team’s health because it goes straight into its bank account and not subject to league revenue-sharing.

This month, however, Zupancic is feeling much better. Today, he told IBJ that the Colts finalized a deal with Indiana Farm Bureau to become one of the first NFL teams to have a practice jersey sponsor. The league only told teams they could pursue such a sponsorship four months ago.

And to maximize the deal’s value—and the team’s take this year—the agreement needed to be signed before the start of training camp Aug. 2.

When it comes to sponsorship sales, signing a mid six-figure deal in less than four months, that’s a two-minute drill that would make Manning smile.

To read more about the Colts-Farm Bureau deal, click here.

To follow The Score on Twitter:
  • More reason why the City should have partnered with the Colts on the naming rights and advertising instead of just giving them away as Bart did. Shows his lack of foresight on the issue. Imagine if Indy got 10% of the naming rights. That would be $12 million which would help the CIB. Add to it the rest of the advertising that went up in the stadium and we would be looking much better. Bart gave away the farm because he was scared of losing the Colts. Glad to be rid of him.
  • There are lots of reasons why Indyman's notion is pie in the sky. Lots and lots of reasons.
  • Mainly because it is too late. At the time, very doable.

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. The $104K to CRC would go toward debts service on $486M of existing debt they already have from other things outside this project. Keystone buys the bonds for 3.8M from CRC, and CRC in turn pays for the parking and site work, and some time later CRC buys them back (with interest) from the projected annual property tax revenue from the entire TIF district (est. $415K / yr. from just this property, plus more from all the other property in the TIF district), which in theory would be about a 10-year term, give-or-take. CRC is basically betting on the future, that property values will increase, driving up the tax revenue to the limit of the annual increase cap on commercial property (I think that's 3%). It should be noted that Keystone can't print money (unlike the Federal Treasury) so commercial property tax can only come from consumers, in this case the apartment renters and consumers of the goods and services offered by the ground floor retailers, and employees in the form of lower non-mandatory compensation items, such as bonuses, benefits, 401K match, etc.

  2. $3B would hurt Lilly's bottom line if there were no insurance or Indemnity Agreement, but there is no way that large an award will be upheld on appeal. What's surprising is that the trial judge refused to reduce it. She must have thought there was evidence of a flagrant, unconscionable coverup and wanted to send a message.

  3. As a self-employed individual, I always saw outrageous price increases every year in a health insurance plan with preexisting condition costs -- something most employed groups never had to worry about. With spouse, I saw ALL Indiana "free market answer" plans' premiums raise 25%-45% each year.

  4. It's not who you chose to build it's how they build it. Architects and engineers decide how and what to use to build. builders just do the work. Architects & engineers still think the tarp over the escalators out at airport will hold for third time when it snows, ice storms.