IBJNews

IndyCar seeks presenting sponsor, bigger schedule

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

IndyCar Series officials have approached two existing sponsors, Verizon Wireless and Firestone, about becoming the open-wheel race series’ presenting sponsor in a deal motorsports business experts said could be worth $3 million annually.

Sources familiar with discussions said series officials are pitching a multiyear deal valued in the high seven-figure range, plus an advertising commitment to the series’ television partners, ABC-TV and NBC Sports Network.

A racing industry source said Sunoco Inc., the official fuel partner of IndyCar, and another company not currently involved in IndyCar sponsorship are also possibilities. 

“I’d like to see us have a presenting sponsor by next year,” said IndyCar Series CEO Randy Bernard. “This is where our focus is, and I don’t think it’s out of the cards to get this deal done for next year.”

Part of the pitch to potential sponsors involves an agreement that would let the presenting sponsor replace Izod as the series’ title sponsor at some point in the future if Izod chooses to leave, said sources familiar with IndyCar’s pitch. Bernard declined to speculate on that possibility.

Bernard on Monday told IBJ the series’ relationship with Izod is “great” and that he “is confident” the clothier will continue as the series’ title sponsor through the 2015 season.

The series is in the third year of a six-year title sponsorship deal with Izod. The deal includes two two-year extension options.

Before it signed its pact with Izod in 2009, IndyCar had been without a title sponsor since Internet search engine Northern Lights left the series in 2001.

With many of Izod’s IndyCar-centric television ads and in-store promotions disappearing this year, there’s been speculation that Izod wants out of its IndyCar sponsorship. The speculation follows a management change at Izod’s parent company, New York-based Phillips-Van Heusen Corp., including the retirement of Chief Operating Officer Allen Sirkin, who championed the IndyCar deal.

Phillips-Van Heusen Corp. officials did not return calls seeking comment about the company's future with IndyCar.

Bernard maintains that Izod is doing as much advertising and series promotions this year as it was a year ago.

“They’re spreading their spending around more this year, but the thought that they’re spending less on advertising and promotion this year is completely wrong,” he said.
 
The series’ cancellation last month of its new race in China—a market Izod encouraged the series to enter—fueled speculation that the relationship between IndyCar and Izod was on the rocks.

The China cancellation also reduced the schedule to 15 races, running afoul of Izod’s title sponsorship contract that called for a minimum of 16 races.
But, Bernard said, IndyCar and Izod officials mutually agreed to remove the contract stipulation mandating 16 races in a season.

The number of races on the series schedule won’t be a problem next year, Bernard said.

“We want 19 races on the schedule next year, and I think that’s realistic,” Bernard said. “Sixteen races is too short. The ideal number in two years is 22 races. We think it’s easier to carry and create momentum when you have 22 races.”

The search for a presenting sponsor has more to do with increasing revenue and enhancing the series’ long-term stability by securing solid sponsorship deals in important categories such as technology and tire manufacturers than in finding a possible replacement for Izod, Bernard said.

If Firestone signs a bigger sponsorship deal with IndyCar, it will mark quite a change in heart from its relationship with the series 15 months ago.

In March, 2011, Firestone announced it was leaving as series’ tire supplier and sponsor after the 2011 season. Bernard and his lieutenants, however, stepped in to broker an 11th-hour deal to keep Firestone at a critical time when IndyCar was about to unveil its new chassis and engine package. In addition to supplying tires this year, Firestone is one of the series’ biggest sponsors and promoters, including a title sponsorship deal with the Firestone Indy Lights feeder series.

Verizon entered the IndyCar Series as a sponsor in 2010, and has increased its sponsorship commitment with the series and Penske Racing each of the last three years.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Dallara building
    Dallara got the land from the town for free, not long after the town paid almost a million dollars for it when they bought it from a redevelopment commissioner's brother, who had been asking about $750,000 just 2 years before. By the end of this year there are supposed to be 1200 full time employees working in businesses on Main street according to a study the town commissioned.
  • RMS Titanic
    Well the real question is...how long do you keep rearranging the deck chairs while the ship is sinking?
  • Where are those 80 employees
    at the Dallara plant building those DW12's the Indiana taxpayers are paying for?
  • Questions
    [quote] Bernard maintains that Izod is doing as much advertising and series promotions this year as it was a year ago. “They’re spreading their spending around more this year, but the thought that they’re spending less on advertising and promotion this year is completely wrong,” he said. [/quote] Where is the money being spread to, and does the way they are "spreading the money around" help the series, the way the series would like? [quote] The China cancellation also reduced the schedule to 15 races, running afoul of Izod’s title sponsorship contract that called for a minimum of 16 races. But, Bernard said, IndyCar and Izod officials mutually agreed to remove the contract stipulation mandating 16 races in a season. [/quote] Did the "mutual agreement" involve the league having to take a hit on their payment from izod? If so, how big of a hit did they take? [quote] “We want 19 races on the schedule next year, and I think that’s realistic,” Bernard said. “Sixteen races is too short. The ideal number in two years is 22 races. We think it’s easier to carry and create momentum when you have 22 races.” [/quote] How many track rentals can the league afford? Edmonton, Milwaukee and Baltimore getting freebee deals would make the other tracks wonder why they are paying for their money losing events, don't you think? So, who are the 7 tracks/cities that Randy thinks will step up and PAY the league for what the league's been forced to give away? BTW Anthony, when can we expect the article on how much money the league lost in 2012? Last year IIRC, you reported a $15,000,000 shortfall, and that was BEFORE the Firestone fiasco, the Edmonton fiasoc, and Death Race 2011 was held. Inquiring minds want to know how bad they're doing this year.
  • Maybe Some Day
    they will get around to building a fanbase
  • Still Around
    They still race those things more than once a year? Who knew?

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. liek the rest of America

  2. These quaint,obsessed musings by the stalkers are certainly entertaining, but I'm trying to figure out what, if anything, all the yelping below has to do with Zak Brown.

  3. It's evident that Moffett was pushing the right buttons and corporate America is now trying to squash him. He just wanted to withdraw the free pilot services provided to the company by the pilots to try and put some pressure on a company that has not been interested in negotiating a contract in over 5 years. The company does not provide a contract because not having one has saved them a bundle of money. Shame on any Republic pilots not standing behind their union leader just because things are getting tough, can you not see such strategic moves by the company as putting the last union president in a corporate position and into THEIR pocket. Do you really believe the last union president is so appalled at the attempts by Moffett, do you not remember his oppositions to the company? We stood behind him. It has been proven over and over again for thousands of years without fail, a man cannot serve two masters. Anyone that believes people vote contrary to their paycheck and livelihood deserve to be taken advantage of, the recent statements by the former union president are laughable as he denounces the current union president from his new corporate position. Have you ever seen a drafted sports player score points for his previous team, it cannot be done, he is not on the pilots side anymore, he gets his money a different way now than you and I do, and he should not be allowed to remain on the seniority list. A drafted player brings strength, credibility, tactical knowledge, and a strategic advantage to his NEW team, he would not be drafted or paid were it otherwise. We are all forced to choose only one side to play for and support, not doing so has many references in life such as insider trading and shaving points, all illegal for good reason. This basic fact is why corporate moguls, scientist, and engineers all sign non-discloser agreements and non-compete clauses, as protection in case they are lured into switching sides as our former union president has done. No NFL coach ever drafted a player so that both teams could benefit and better understand each other, they are recruited to win the game against that former team, period. Likewise the company does not recruit the former union president by accident or mutual understanding, its strategy. Don't confuse playing the game with good sportsman-like conduct in support of common business and prosperity goals, with the requirement to only play for one side. Good men we all love and favor fall subject to this manipulation, often without their knowledge, and it is not a betrayal of their friendship to oppose them when they switch sides. If we did not love and trust them, they would not have been chosen and lured to the other side in the first place. The deception by the drafted player is not made at a conscious level, it's just human nature and it's all about money and power which corrupts our ability to be objective and loyal to two masters. This is why our court system created the defense attorney, and why our military created counter intelligence. Its strategy and its propaganda, and it works, and that's why the "powers to be" manipulate the chess pieces by sometimes changing their colors. Some players know they are being manipulated when their color is changed, but it brings them more money and power so they do not care. The rest have good intentions but do not even realize they are being manipulated. This tactic is also known by another name, Divide and Conquer. In battle sending an imperfect message with an imperfect team is obviously not ideal, but it's still being sent by YOUR team, your union leader, a leader that has common goals and common rewards with you, they are the best, because we have elected them to do a job for us. If you are not backing Moffett but believing the spin by those that have recently switched sides, you are taking food out of your own mouth. Showing unity and backing an imperfect situation still results in taking just as much ground, it's about unity and bargaining power. It's not necessary to wait around for that perfect attack because it will never come, the company will spin and attempt to destroy anyone that gets in their way. Ultimately it's not about any specific attack anyway, ASAP or whatever it makes no difference, it is and always has been only about power. If this company cared about safety it would not build pairings with 8 hour overnights, come on, are you that naive? Besides, do you really think Hoffa cares, no, he got a call from corporate America and was squeezed into denouncing Moffett. If he didn't they would spin the safety card against him and the Teamsters National with implication for truckers, future contracts, insurance rates etc...saying something like the Teamsters use safety as a bargaining chip, blah blah blah... Do you really think any pilot is going to do something unsafe for the contract, absolutely not, the only ones threatening safety here is the company with reduced rest, fatigue, and poverty. Do you not find it odd that Hoffa and the Teamsters are opposing a Teamster president publicly? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and work with one of their own? Why did they not sit down and help him strategize, correct any mistakes, and charge ahead? Would the Teamsters National not normally support and leverage a contract for all those pilots that have been paying Teamster dues, isn't that why we have all been paying Teamster dues in the first place? I sure haven't been paying dues so that the Teamsters National could come along and write this kind of an article undercutting our union leader and our unity. Whose side is the Teamsters National really on, it's obviously not the Republic pilots side.

  4. No matter what Moffatt does the company is going to spin it like he is the terrorist and brainwash people like you into believing it, wake up, back your players that are trying to change things for you and your livelihood. Where has Hoffa been for the last 6 years, except collecting our dues. Seriously, do you really think an FO going for upgrade, signed off by a checkairman ready for the upgrade, who then fails, is not even capable of returning as a First Officer.

  5. whoa!

ADVERTISEMENT