Ralphie Violated Again – This Time by Campus Units

“I truly think Ralphie belongs to academics as much as it does sports.” – quote from a Daily Camera Facebook fan who commented about an article discussing Ralphie’s use and misuse.

On February 12 the headlines of the Daily Camera Local section read, “CU corrals use of the Ralphie logo” – Tightening reins on mascot’s image is a result of branding campaign.

Over the past 9 months the Camera has documented efforts by the athletic department to control use of the Ralphie. Mike Bohn and company have been portrayed in a positive light, as they tried to work with local business leaders to educate and better manage use of the university’s most beloved marketing logo.

Past articles have featured discussions about local businesses which either used or misused Ralphie for promotional purposes. The most recent violators include on-campus units such as food services in the UMC whose employees wore uniform/t-shirts with Ralphie on them. For years, the Leeds School of Business which has had a two-foot Ralphie plastered on the wall in the lobby of the dean’s suites.

Branding is a serious matter. CU fans of all types like Ralphie because the logo is unique and it represents the positive things about CU. It is a feel good logo.

Cynics are quick to point out that the interlocking CU may be elegant, but it represents perceptions of CU that are not necessarily positive. For example, CU stands for Cornhuskerhater U – and obnoxious football fans, Cannabis U – and the infamous 4/21 on-campus celebrations, Churchill U – and Ward Churchill’s contribution to the school’s image, Coors U – for the beerless sporting events held in the Coors Events Center, or Controversy U – for the ongoing challenges that keep the state’s flagship university in the headlines. Branding is important.

Prior to February 12, the athletic department was the designated “Ralphie enforcer.” The article suggests that they aren’t the villains. In fact, nobody in the CU system is the bad guy. Instead, the blame for the crackdown is a much needed $780,000 branding and awareness campaign.

In the article, Regent Stephen Ludwig, D-Lone Tree pointed out that the enforcement has been heightened for financial and communication reasons. He stated, “The enforcement may seem Draconian, but we are a $2.8 billion enterprise that has invested a lot of time and money in getting our branding straight so that we can communicate with one voice.”

And another reason for the crackdown is money.

The article also quoted CU officials who clarified that Ralphie can only be used for sports and competition, such as political campaigns for the regents. One regent indicated that he had used the logo in his campaign because it is a great logo that people recognize. Another regent indicated that she avoided using Ralphie in her campaign because it represents athletics only at the Boulder campus and the regents serve multiple systems.

For many, the branding discussion is contentious and it raises a series of questions.

• Do the CU regents have their priorities straight when their discussions are focused on whether food service employees in Boulder should be wearing Ralphie t-shirts?
• Are the “Ralphie enforcers” being Draconian by enforcing the tactics outlined in their branding campaign?
• Is the $2.8 billion enterprise more focused on $$ generated from Ralphie than they are in making the state’s flagship university stronger and more relevant?
• How can the regents justify using Ralphie in their election campaigns?
• What is the first thing that comes to mind when Colorado residents are asked to think about when you mention CU – Ward Churchill, party school, corn huskers, academics, or Ralphie?

Like it or not, branding is a serious matter – for Google, the Bubba Gump’s restaurant chain, and CU – and that includes Ralphie.

These are YOUR Colorado Buffs, but be careful what you do with Ralphie.

Go Buffs!

 

Academic and Athletic Rankings – We’re #1

About 40 years ago, college and university administrators increased the level of their discussion about the relationship between academics and athletic programs. It became necessary to tie the two together because of the anti-establishment mindset and the general unrest associated with the Viet Nam war era. As well, a backlash developed towards athletes that was initiated in part by Dave Meggyesy’s book, Out of Their League.

Athletics were pitted against academics. Were athletics important to the mission of the school? Did they divert funds that could be spent in academic areas? Did they distract students from their book learning? “Enlightened” professors and anti-jock community members gravitated towards each other and spoke out in unison against college athletic programs.

The phrase “student-athlete” was coined out of these discussions. The expression drew attention to the fact that college athletes were also students.

Over the years, athletic program leaders have strengthened their message about the relationship between athletics and academics in an effort to appease naysayers. In addition, they have included the concept into their strategic planning.

This was particularly evident when the University of Colorado and the University of Utah were added to the PAC-10 to form the PAC-12. Commissioner Larry Scott and local CU officials touted the PAC-12 as a premier academic and athletic conference.

In the 2011 Academic Ranking of World Universities, there are 53 U.S. schools in the top 100, including a total of 26 schools are from the Ivy League, Big 10, and PAC-12. The only schools excluded from the top 100 rankings were: Dartmouth, Iowa, Nebraska, Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington State. (Is it any wonder Scott recently struck an alliance with the Big 10 to expand competition between the two leagues?)

The top 10 global academic universities are:

  • Harvard
  • Stanford
  • MIT
  • Cal – Berkeley
  • Cambridge
  • California Institute of Technology
  • Princeton
  • Columbia
  • Chicago
  • Oxford

The ranking system placed a strong emphasis on science and publications. The top 10 schools were separated by about 44 points; Harvard had 100 points compared to 56.4 for Oxford. The schools ranked between the 11th and 100th positions were assigned point values between 54.8 and 24.2.

The ranking of global MBA programs, by Financial Times, produced similar results. Of the 53 U.S. schools in the top 100, 20 were from the Ivy League, Big 10, and PAC-12. The following schools from these conferences were not included in the top 100: Brown, Princeton, Nebraska, Minnesota, Michigan State, Iowa, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Oregon, Oregon State, and Washington State.

The top 10 global MBA programs are:

  • London Business School
  • University of Pennsylvania: Wharton
  • Harvard Business School
  • Stanford University GSB
  • INSEAD
  • Hong Kong UST Business School
  • Columbia Business School
  • IE Business School
  • IESE Business School
  • MIT Sloan School of Management

Global academic and MBA rankings don’t receive the same level of attention, scrutiny, and debate as the BCS rankings. The people most concerned with the ratings are prospective students and administrators who have to explain subpar ratings.

So, what is the significance of these rankings?

Realistically, academic and athletic rankings highlight the distinctive competencies of colleges and their conferences. In the above example, these rankings provide evidence that supports the Ivy League’s claims of academic prowess. Similarly, they confirm that the PAC-12 and BIG-10 are elite academic and athletic conferences.

Prospective students make decisions about which school to attend based on rankings. The alumni and university communities use them to establish bragging rights. Rankings are a tool used by school administrators to market their institutions, programs, and competitive advantages. Finally, rankings are used for fundraising, recruiting, and to justify the existence of academic and athletic programs.

 

Mobile Apps Hit the Slopes

When I first got my smart phone I couldn’t wait to tell my wife about all of the great applications – the New York Times, NFL Mobile, and Navigation.  She couldn’t wait to tell me about Angry Birds.

Very quickly, I learned that applications were called apps and there is an app for just about everything. To illustrate this point I had a skier friend enthusiastically tell me about the apps for his sport as he drove up to the slopes for the last run of the 2010-2011 season. I am not a frequent skier, but his discussion about the use of apps in his sport was intriguing.

As I quickly learned, Colorado’s ski companies are using social media (Facebook, Twitter, and mobile applications) to let the world know about everything from recent snowfall to special online deals to number of runs skied.

One of my friends favorite apps used the RFID tags on season tickets to track the number of days skied and vertical miles logged. He and his buddies used the app for “bragging rights” and to determine who bought the beers at the end of the day. Another option allows users with smart phones to get alerts when friends are on the mountain. Obviously, users had to opt into these options to allow this type of tracking.

Another app, Realski, allows users to take pictures and geotag them. On the slopes, users can then relocate that special powder or terrain. Off the slopes it may be used to help find the car in the parking lot after a long day on the slopes or a late night in the watering holes.

Ski operators market the mobile apps as a tool for enhancing the skier/boarder experience. As well, they also see it as an opportunity to increase communications with their customers and strengthen brand loyalty. In theory everyone wins.

This brief post is not intended to be a comprehensive review of ski and boarder mobile aps, rather it illustrates how they are being applied to recreation activities to improve a person’s  sporting experience and to strengthen companys’ financial stakes in those sports. Watch for similar apps in your favorite sports and recreational activities.

 

Ralphie Roams Outside Folsom – Bad for Licensing Revenues

The following articles from the Boulder Daily Camera are testimony to the fact that college athletics is big business. In Boulder, the ante has been upped since CU moved to the PAC-12 and since CU has experienced a $50 million shortfall over the past two years.

“Reining in Ralphie – CU Bolsters Brand. University Beefs up Logo Protection”
This article was the front page headline on Sunday June 5, 2011.

The article states, “The Buffs Barber Shop on University Hill is a shrine to CU sports-from the signature charging Ralphie logo dominating the window front to the pennants, signed footballs, clocks and encased Barbie cheerleader doll that decorate the inside of the shop. Now the business relationship between the barbershop and CU has been strained because of a dispute over licensing royalties, and the squabble has broken the partnership beyond repair, say both sides.”

The article continues by stating that CU earns about $750,000 per year from its trademark, well below the average of other PAC-10 schools, about $1.2 million. Officially licensed Buff merchandise includes dog bones, bird houses, Victoria’s Secret underwear and sweatshirts, action figures, tricycles, and cheerleading uniforms for toddlers.

By comparison, the University of Texas brings in $10 million a year in revenue from licensing agreements. Texas has turned down opportunities to use their logo on funeral urns, toilet seats, guns, knives, and the paper that covers patient tables in physicians’ offices.

The Camera stated that the use/misuse of Ralphie is not a light matter. His likeness smoking a joint has graced t-shirts promoting 4/20 that said “Buff. Buff. Pass.” Another hijacked image of Ralphie shows him being humped by Cam the Ram; the t-shirt is popular at the CSU-CU football game. Finally there have been concerns about the CU image being placed on shot glasses.

“Buffs Barber Shop, CU Come to Agreement”
This article appeared at the bottom of the front page on Thursday June 30, 2011.

The article states, “Under the new deal, the school’s trademarked charging Ralphie image will be removed from the store’s window front and replaced with a more generic buffalo logo.

“CU’s Licensing Officials Keeping Eye on New Ralphie’s Restaurant”
This article appeared at the bottom of the front page of the Local section on August 20, 2011.

The article states, “CU spokesman Bronson Hilliard on Friday wouldn’t go so far as to say that the restaurant is in violation of the school’s trademark policies. But, he said athletic director Mike Bohn and licensing director J.T. Galloway will be swinging by the restaurant to talk about the use of the name Ralphie. Hilliard further commented that they’ll talk to them about the use of Ralphie and see what kind of friendly arrangement we can come to. They’ll sit down, on a human level, and see what they’re trying to achieve. We to need to protect our symbols. But it will be in a friendly conversation, not a cease-and desist order.

Art Johnson, co-owner with his wife Lisa, played football during the 1970s. He also owns a real estate company called Golden Buff Realty.

The moral of the story – before you start a business, hold a fundraiser, or plan a public relations campaign that involves a local sports team’s logo or trade name, check with the organization about what can and cannot be used. Licensing agreements and trademarks are part of the revenue stream for these organizations and athletic departments rightfully protect their assets. To quote Hilliard, “Imagine what a liquor store or a marijuana dispensary or a strip club could do if they could get a hold of our brand.”

PAC-10 Royalties About $12 Million per Year

The front page headline of the Sunday June 5, 2011 Boulder Daily Camera read “CU Beefs up Protection of its Brand.” The article brings new meaning to importance of royalties and the popular phrase, “Your Colorado Buffs.”

The article stated that the university generates approximately $750,000 per year from royalty revenues. The top licensees that pay royalties are:
• EA Sport – video game maker $81,524
• Nike $57,676
• Gear $35,863.
Nationwide, the top collegiate apparel licensee is Knights Apparel, the largest supplier of apparel to Walmart.

The article provides the annual royalty revenues for schools currently in the Pac-10.

USC                                            $2.0 million
UCLA                                          $1.7 million
University of Oregon                      $1.5 million
Arizona State University                $1.2 million
University of California (Berkeley)   $1.1 million
University of Washington               $1.1 million
Oregon State University                     $926,000
Washington State University              $864,000
University of Colorado                        $750,000
University of Arizona                          $740,000
Stanford                                            $707,000.

The total for the Pac-10 is about $11.9 million or $1.2 million per school. By comparison the annual total for the University of Texas is $10 million.

While these amounts are small compared to the total athletic budgets of the respective universities, they are large enough to support one or two minor sport teams. Look for protection of the Ralphie logo and the CU brand to be ramped up as CU enters the PAC-12. These are “Your Colorado Buffaloes” just be careful how you use their logo and Ralphie’s likeness.