does this deal overrule local team deals? I know TFC has a deal (well, MLSE) with Bud, though I don't remember how long the sponsorship is
MLSE's deal with AB-InBev was for stadium pouring rights and was established in 2013, so that won't change, assuming the deal is for more than 1 year. However, for marketing purposes, Heineken will be the name you'll see in media outlets and I imagine they'll also have some sort of operational deal cut out with stadiums/MLS, where they'll be able to get some of their products placed alongside what you already see. That being said, don't expect to see Amstel, Fosters and Sagres at your stadium. Well, maybe Amstel, but probably not. AB-InBev (Bud) is actually in the middle of a potential hostile takeover of SABMiller after Miller and Heineken failed to merge. There may be implications down the road based on that. Anyway, this new deal is for 5 years, $50 million.
seems like Heineken is making a bigger US push, this fits with that. from the MLS standpoint Heineken might be a better fit with their idealized demo than Bud is. plus it sounds like Heineken is going to be more actively involved.
If 'more actively involved' means non-Heineken products (read: local beers) disappearing from stadiums, there will be problems in Portland and Seattle.
I believe the stadium pouring deals are separate from "official beer" deals like these. You should still see plenty of regional products in your stadiums.
I don't see why that would happen. There's an official beer right now, but you can buy non-Bud products at stadiums, Boulevard sponsors the club at Sporting Park, etc. They specifically say that there will be individual club deals but it sounds like that will be market-by-market. I was referring to this:
Look at it like their CL sponsorship. They are the beer sponsor of the tournament but other teams have their own "Official Team Beer" etc
With the "visibility" thing, I'm imagining short-intro commercials of ~10 seconds ala UCL advertising that they do, mixed with a couple commercials during breaks.
Another effect of the Orlando expansion? I don't know about other MLS teams, but Heineken has been our official beer since at least 2012.
When did MLS lose the Bud sponsership? I didn't realize they were no longer league sponsor. Well I like this deal since Heineken is pretty decent beer.
worth reading--- Heineken's push for Latinos, imagine this is a part http://www.multichannel.com/news/marketing/heineken-hooks-hispanics-fox-focused-uefa-campaign/375188
Impressive from MLS. This shows that there is still a lot of income growth available to MLS during the next 8 years. Remember, there are 26 MLS sponsors.
This is excellent because I think Heineken is a strong brand to be attached with, especially with our core supporters. Even better because Heineken is, imo, the best mass-produced beer available in every MLS market. Of course every market has it's regional beers which are superior but obviously can't sponsor the whole league. Assuming this does not muscle out those local beers from MLS stadiums, which I think is a safe assumption, this deal definitely makes me happy because I don't mind drinking a Heineken. Bud did not have any products I could tolerate (and i'm not a beer snob, I actually like miller lite) so I don't mind if Heineken muscles out Bud products!
It's trading one brewer of substandard "beer" for a producer of slightly less substandard "beer". I'll take it as an upgrade.
I remeber back in 07-08 when they came up with their draught keg. I was so pumped, it was a huge disappointent. Damn Champions League Advertising.