<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>BloggingStocks</title>
<link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com</link>
<description>BloggingStocks</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[Raising Estimates on CBS on Better Ad Environment]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/cbs/" rel="tag">CBS Corp 'B' (CBS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/stocks-to-buy/" rel="tag">Stocks to Buy</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2010/01/cbs-logo-240.jpg" />CBS (<a injectedlink="" class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/cbs-corporation/cbs/nys">CBS</a>) competes with other media conglomerates like Disney (<a injectedlink="" class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/the-walt-disney-company/dis/nys">DIS</a>), News Corp. (<a injectedlink="" class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/news-corporation/nwsa/nas">NWSA</a>), Time Warner (<a injectedlink="" class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/time-warner-inc/twx/nys">TWX</a>) and Viacom (<a injectedlink="" class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/quotes/viacom-inc-new/via/nys">VIA</a>) in the media and entertainment business. <br />
<br />
The company recently released its fourth quarter 2010 <a injectedlink="" class="inlinked" href="http://www.dailyfinance.com/category/earnings/">earnings</a>. Based on observed improvements in margins across all categories, an improving advertising environment and continued growth in the local broadcasting segment, we have updated our <a href="https://www.trefis.com/company?hm=CBS.trefis&amp;">price estimate for CBS stock to $26.34</a>. Our price estimate for CBS stands at 18% premium to the market price.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Raising Estimates on CBS on Better Ad Environment</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/">Raising Estimates on CBS on Better Ad Environment</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19863192/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2011/03/01/upping-estimates-on-cbs-on-better-ad-environment/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>advertising</category><category>cbs</category><category>dis</category><category>grammy</category><category>inthenews</category><category>ncis</category><category>nfl</category><category>nwsa</category><category>tv</category><category>twx</category><category>via</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Trefis]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 Mar 2011 10:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: What Supreme Court's Antitrust Decision Means for the NFL]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ua/" rel="tag">Under Armour'A' (UA)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2010/01/superbowl.jpg" />Earlier this week, the Supreme Court rejected the NFL's request for "broad antitrust law protection," deciding that each team <a href="http://www.nfl.com/news/story?id=09000d5d8184a051&amp;template=with-video-with-comments&amp;confirm=true" target="_blank">must be considered separate</a> when selling NFL branded items. This means that each team must be considered its own entity when it sells branded items like jerseys and caps.</p>
<p>The court's decision was unanimous, and it reversed a lower court's ruling that threw out an antitrust suit filed against the NFL by American Needle, which lost its contract for making official NFL hats to Reebok International.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: What Supreme Court's Antitrust Decision Means for the NFL</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/">JockStocks: What Supreme Court's Antitrust Decision Means for the NFL</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 28 May 2010 15:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19495233/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/05/28/jockstocks-supreme-courts-antitrust-decision/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>American Needle</category><category>inthenews</category><category>NFL</category><category>NFLPA</category><category>Supreme Court</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 28 May 2010 15:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: The Big Winner in Tonight's NFL Draft? ESPN and the NFL Network]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2006/08/nfl_network1.gif"  alt="" />Tonight is the night that NFL fans the world over treat as Christmas: the NFL Draft. Year after year, hopeful NFL fans tune in to the draft to see which player their chosen team will draft. When the pick is made, network talking heads, sports radio hosts, bloggers, and casual sports fans will issue their opinions on the team's new pick, with some teams declared winners and some declared losers. <br />
<br />
One thing is certain: the two big winners will be the NFL Network and ESPN. These two networks are the sole television broadcast outlets for the Draft (aside from NFL.com, where you will be able to watch the NFL Network's coverage), and there are some major changes to the broadcast this year. <p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: The Big Winner in Tonight's NFL Draft? ESPN and the NFL Network</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/">JockStocks: The Big Winner in Tonight's NFL Draft? ESPN and the NFL Network</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19449961/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/04/22/jockstocks-the-big-winner-in-tonights-nfl-draft-espn-and-the/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>advertising</category><category>ESPN</category><category>NFL</category><category>NFL Draft</category><category>NFL Draft coverage</category><category>NFL Network</category><category>television coverage</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 22 Apr 2010 17:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: Should the NFL Receive Antitrust Exemption?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/industry/" rel="tag">Industry</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/law/" rel="tag">Law</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/01/giants-patriots.jpg" alt="" />I was checking out one of my favorite blogs yesterday (<a target="_blank" href="http://uniwatchblog.com">UniWatchBlog.com</a> - operated by the obsessive Paul Lukas) and I found myself with a subject for this week's JockStocks. <a target="_blank" href="http://www.uniwatchblog.com/2010/01/14/nfls-latest-idea-psls-for-supreme-court-hearings/">Is the NFL a monopoly</a>? Should the league be exempt from the Sherman Antitrust Act? </p>
<p>This all stems from a suit by a company known as American Needle, <a target="_blank" href="http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/07/antitrust-case-has-implications-far-beyond-nfl/?scp=2&amp;sq=american%20needle&amp;st=cse">which sued the NFL in 2000</a> when the league selected Reebok to be the exclusive provider of licensed NFL apparel. American Needle sued the NFL, stating that the Reebok deal violated antitrust statutes becasue the league and Reebok "conspired to stifle competition and inflate prices." </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: Should the NFL Receive Antitrust Exemption?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/">JockStocks: Should the NFL Receive Antitrust Exemption?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19318336/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2010/01/15/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-receive-antitrust-exemption/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>American Needle</category><category>antitrust</category><category>antitrust exemption</category><category>antitrust law</category><category>antitrust lawsuit</category><category>featured</category><category>monopoly</category><category>NFL</category><category>Reebok</category><category>Sherman Anti-Trust Act</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: Tailgating policies won't affect 'real' fans]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img width="200" vspace="4" hspace="4" height="183" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/11/budweiser_drrt_240.jpg" alt="" />You know, it figures that this would be the year that I give up my Bengals season tickets. I suffered   <span style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-top: 7px;"><script> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/football/NFL_tailgating_policies_won_t_affect_real_fans'; </script> <script src=" http://digg.com/api/diggthis.js"></script></span>  through three years of horrid football and decided that I was not going to renew my tickets for financial reasons or as a protest against the team's (mis)management in the past 19 years.</p>
<p>That said, one reason that did not attribute to my giving up the tickets was the NFL's new tailgating rules. In an article Darren Rovell put on Twitter this morning (featured in <a href="http://www.usatoday.com/sports/football/nfl/2009-11-18-1a-cover-nfl-fans_N.htm"><em>USAToday</em></a>), a New York Jets fan says that the tailgating rules (that limit tailgating to 3.5 hours before kickoff) may be the "final nail" that forces him to give up his season tickets. The new tailgating rules are supposed to help "crack down on drunken and disruptive fans" by limiting the time fans can tailgate. </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: Tailgating policies won't affect 'real' fans</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/">JockStocks: Tailgating policies won't affect 'real' fans</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19246056/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/19/jockstocks-tailgating-policies-wont-affect-real-fans/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>beer</category><category>Budweiser</category><category>ESPN</category><category>Miller Lite</category><category>New York Jets</category><category>NFL</category><category>Philadelphia Eagles</category><category>tailgate parties</category><category>tailgate party</category><category>tailgating</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: Could something fishy be happening in Cleveland? ]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.dailyfinance.com/media/2009/11/escalator200.jpg" />You all know that I love to cover the business of sports, so I was particularly interested when stories about <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/11/11/mangini-claims-he-didnt-know-about-quinns-escalators/">Mangini</a> and <a href="http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/11/11/mangini-knew-about-quinns-incentives/">Quinn</a> crossed my Twitter feed. </p>
<p>Here is the situation: the Cleveland Browns have benched quarterback Derek Anderson in favor of Brady Quinn for the Browns' upcoming Monday Night tilt against the Baltimore Ravens. Thing is, this is the second quarterback benching new head coach Eric Mangini has made -- he benched Quinn in week three in favor of Anderson. I am not going to discuss the merit of either of the starting quarterbacks (as neither has done well), but I want to take a look at the idea that Brady Quinn may have been benched in week three so the Browns wouldn't have to pay the escalators built in to Quinn's contract.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: Could something fishy be happening in Cleveland? </em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/">JockStocks: Could something fishy be happening in Cleveland? </a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19232550/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/11/11/jockstocks-could-something-fishy-be-happening-in-cleveland/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Brady Quinn</category><category>Cleveland Browns</category><category>Drew Rosenhaus</category><category>Eric Mangini</category><category>football contracts</category><category>inthenews</category><category>NFL</category><category>Randy Lerner</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 13:20:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Indians ask court to revoke Washington Redskins trademark]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img width="212" vspace="4" hspace="4" height="229" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/09/redskins-logo.jpg" />The Washington Redskins football team is hearing it from all sides lately.<br /><br />Last week they were criticized -- <a href="http://www.walletpop.com/blog/2009/09/05/redskins-sue-fans-over-season-ticket-payment-whos-wrong/">unfairly in my opinion</a> -- for suing season ticket holders who had lost their jobs and could no longer afford their seats.<br /><br />Now a coalition of tribes -- Cheyenne and Arapaho, Oneida of Wisconsin, Cochiti Pueblo, Ysleta del Sur Pueblo, Navajo, Oglala Sioux and Standing Rock Sioux -- is <span style="text-decoration: underline;">as</span><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&amp;sid=aMypF0S9juLU">king the United States Supreme Court </a>to revive a challenge to the team's trademark.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Indians ask court to revoke Washington Redskins trademark</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/">Indians ask court to revoke Washington Redskins trademark</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601110&amp;sid=aMypF0S9juLU>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19163891/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/16/indians-ask-court-to-revoke-washington-redskins-trademark/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Football</category><category>NFL</category><category>Redskins</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 17:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: Is the NFL lifting its blackout rule? Not quite]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/09/palmer_220.jpg" alt="" />So, a week ago, I decided to tackle the NFL's <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/">blackout policy</a>, basically arguing that the current economic situation warrants the lifting of this archaic rule. That said, the topic has been <a href="http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1921401,00.html">in the collective conscience</a> this week, what with the NFL kicking off on Thursday.</p>
<p>What is interesting is that several teams (including the Arizona Cardinals, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, and my Cincinnati Bengals) have been granted a 24-hour extension to get these games sold out. Typically, a team needs to be a couple of thousand tickets away from a sell out in order to get such an extension. I wonder first if this extension may have been made to placate the teams more than to allow the fans another day to get the games sold out. </p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: Is the NFL lifting its blackout rule? Not quite</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/">JockStocks: Is the NFL lifting its blackout rule? Not quite</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19157792/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/11/jockstocks-is-the-nfl-lifting-its-blackout-rule-not-quite/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>blackout rule</category><category>Cincinnati Bengals</category><category>Dallas Cowboys</category><category>NFL</category><category>NFL blackout</category><category>value</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks:  Should the NFL lift its blackout rule?  ]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img hspace="4" vspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/01/giants-patriots.jpg" alt="" />Living in Cincinnati, I have become well acquainted with the National Football League's (NFL) "blackout rule." This rule states that if a game is not sold out by the Thursday before a home game (actually, 72 hours before a game for Monday and    <span style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-top: 7px;"><script> digg_url = 'http://digg.com/football/Should_the_NFL_lift_its_TV_blackout_rule'; </script> <script src=" http://digg.com/api/diggthis.js"></script></span>   Saturday games), the game will not be shown on local television. I don't think the policy is necessarily fair, but I understand the thinking behind the rule --- why show a game on local television if the home team can not sell out the stadium? However, I think there are some extenuating circumstances this year that Commissioner Roger Goodell needs to consider. <br /><br />First things first. At a meeting on Thursday with NFL writers, Goodell said as much as 20% of the NFL's games could be <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/03/AR2009090303529.html">blacked out this season</a>. Goodell noted that as few as 80% of this season's games will be carried in the home team's market --- a far cry from the 95% of the games that have been carried in the local markets in the past four years. In fact, last year just nine of the 256 regular season NFL games were blacked out for the home team.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks:  Should the NFL lift its blackout rule?  </em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/">JockStocks:  Should the NFL lift its blackout rule?  </a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19151165/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/09/04/jockstocks-should-the-nfl-lift-its-blackout-rule/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>blackouts</category><category>Cincinnati Bengals</category><category>CincinnatiBengals</category><category>NFL</category><category>NFL blackout rule</category><category>NflBlackoutRule</category><category>Pittsburgh Steelers</category><category>PittsburghSteelers</category><category>Roger Goodell</category><category>RogerGoodell</category><category>Washington Redskins</category><category>WashingtonRedskins</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2009 16:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: Is the United Football League destined for failure?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/columns/" rel="tag">Columns</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img width="160" vspace="4" hspace="4" height="156" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/08/ufllogo.jpg" />Way back when there was this idea called the United States Football League. It had a few good years and a few big names (Jim Kelly, Herschel Walker, and Reggie White) before it failed. Then there was the World League of American Football, featuring teams across the U.S., but no true big-name players. Eventually the World League became just that, with expansion into Europe and the moniker NFL Europe;then that league failed. </p>
<p>Then there was the once-popular Arena League, which boasted Kurt Warner and owners like Jon Bon Jovi. The Arena League lasted nearly 20 years before it took last season off and appears ready to fade into oblivion. Oh, and let's not forget the Extreme Football League (XFL), run by Vince McMahon (of WWE fame). I mean who can forget "He Hate Me?" This terrible business decision lasted one season (and I was suckered into an XFL fantasy league).</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: Is the United Football League destined for failure?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/">JockStocks: Is the United Football League destined for failure?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:40:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19129459/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/14/jockstocks-is-the-united-football-league-destined-for-failure/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Dennis Green</category><category>football</category><category>football league</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Jim Fassel</category><category>Jim Haslett</category><category>new football league</category><category>NFL</category><category>NFL Europe</category><category>NHL</category><category>professional football</category><category>UFL</category><category>USFL</category><category>XFL</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:40:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Procter &amp; Gamble tops profit estimates, announces NFL tie-in]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/earnings-reports/" rel="tag">Earnings Reports</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/pg/" rel="tag">Procter and Gamble (PG)</a></p><p><img border="1" hspace="4" vspace="4" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/10/procter-and-gamble-pg-logo.gif" alt="" />Cincinnati-based consumer products giant <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-procter-and-gamble-company/pg/nys">Procter &amp; Gamble</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/the-procter-and-gamble-company/pg/nys">PG</a>) reported <a href="http://money.aol.com/rtn/pr/pandg-fiscal-year-and-fourth-quarter-eps-exceed-expectations/rfid238719017?channel=pf">fourth-quarter earnings this morning</a>, topping the Street's expectations on earnings but missing on revenue. </p>
<p>As for earnings, P&amp;G pulled in 80 cents per share in the fourth quarter, topping the consensus estimate by a penny. On the revenue front, PG made $18.66 billion in the fourth quarter, well short of the Street's expected $19.32 billion.</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Procter &amp; Gamble tops profit estimates, announces NFL tie-in</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/">Procter &amp; Gamble tops profit estimates, announces NFL tie-in</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19119748/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/08/05/procter-and-gamble-tops-profit-estimates-announces-nfl-tie-in/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>featured</category><category>Febreeze</category><category>Gillette</category><category>Head Shoulders</category><category>inthenews</category><category>NFL</category><category>Old Spice</category><category>PG</category><category>Procter Gamble</category><category>sponsorship</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks:  Jersey sponsors, a necessary evil or the work of the devil?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketing-and-advertising/" rel="tag">Marketing and Advertising</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/aig/" rel="tag">Amer Intl Group (AIG)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2006/09/soccerball_crop.jpg" />It has been a busy week in the world of sports business, with several stories vying for the spot as the big story of the week. That said, let's take a look at the news that surfaced.<br /><br />First, Manchester United Football Club (that's soccer ladies and gents) announced that it will <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d4ba0b74-5048-11de-9530-00144feabdc0.html">replace American International Group on its shirts with Aon in 2010</a>. The agreement is called a basic 20-million-pound-a-year rights fee. Supposedly, the soccer team received bids from three or four different companies, but settled on Aon. Supposedly the deal includes Aon paying commissions to the club from the sale of insurance policies to the club's fan base along with match-related bonuses. It appears that Manchester United will make an extra five million pounds a year from this deal.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks:  Jersey sponsors, a necessary evil or the work of the devil?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/">JockStocks:  Jersey sponsors, a necessary evil or the work of the devil?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:50:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/19058734/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/06/05/jockstocks-jersey-sponsors-a-necessary-evil-or-the-work-of-th/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Manchester United</category><category>ManchesterUnited</category><category>NASCAR</category><category>NFL</category><category>NFL advertising</category><category>NflAdvertising</category><category>sponsorship patches</category><category>SponsorshipPatches</category><category>sports sponsorships</category><category>SportsSponsorships</category><category>WNBA</category><category>WNBA advertising</category><category>WnbaAdvertising</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 05 Jun 2009 13:50:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: The upside-down economics of the NFL draft]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/04/nfl.jpg" />Something interesting is happening in the world of the NFL as this weekend's draft approaches. With so much talent in the pool, it appears that every team with one of the top 10 picks is trying to trade out of their current draft position. </p>
<p>In the past, teams used <a href="http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/Value-Chart.php">this chart</a> to determine the value of draft picks when trying to trade up or down in the draft. Basically, if you wanted to trade into the top spot from the 16th spot with just draft picks, you would have to find a way to get the team in the top spot as much value as possible. The difference between the 16th and the top pick is 2,000 points, so equaling this value could be rather difficult (just ask the New Orleans Saints who traded an entire draft to pick Ricky Williams).</p><p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: The upside-down economics of the NFL draft</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/">JockStocks: The upside-down economics of the NFL draft</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1527049/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/24/jockstocks-the-upside-down-economics-of-the-nfl-draft/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>business of sports</category><category>BusinessOfSports</category><category>economy</category><category>economy of sports</category><category>EconomyOfSports</category><category>featured</category><category>nfl</category><category>nfl draft</category><category>NflDraft</category><category>sports business</category><category>SportsBusiness</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2009 17:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks:  Farewell John Madden]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/marketing-and-advertising/" rel="tag">Marketing and Advertising</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/erts/" rel="tag">Electronic Arts (ERTS)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2007/08/madden08.jpg" alt="" />Quite a run John Madden had, wasn't it? Quite honestly, I don't remember Madden as a coach - probably because he retired when I was five years old. More members of my generation will remember Madden as the bumbling color commentator for the likes of Pat Summerall and Al Michaels, interjecting insightful analysis like "boom" and "bang." Perhaps more will remember him for his unfettered bromance with Brett Favre, but I remember my first John Madden experience. I was sitting on the floor at my grandparent's farm watching a late-afternoon football game when this giant, jolly fat guy broke through the screen at the end of a Miller Lite commercial --- little did I know that "guy" would become one of the biggest endorsers of my lifetime.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks:  Farewell John Madden</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/">JockStocks:  Farewell John Madden</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:00:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1520107/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/04/17/jockstocks-farewell-john-madden/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Chris Collinsworth</category><category>ChrisCollinsworth</category><category>endorsement deals</category><category>EndorsementDeals</category><category>football announcers</category><category>FootballAnnouncers</category><category>John Madden</category><category>JohnMadden</category><category>NFL</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:00:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[JockStocks: A peak inside the Under Armour (UA) swag bag ]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/nke/" rel="tag">NIKE, Inc'B' (NKE)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/ua/" rel="tag">Under Armour'A' (UA)</a></p><img alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/02/underarmour.jpg" align="right" vspace="4" border="1" />It has become customary to receive "swag" when there is a big event. The Emmys, the Oscars, the MTV Awards, they all give away what is called a "swag bag" -- now <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/under-armour-inc/ua/nys">Under Armour</a> (NYSE: <a href="javascript:void(0);/*1235693822070*/">UA</a>) is getting in on the action. <br /><br />First off, swag is defined as promotional merchandise that is given away to garner a following for a product. I'm not quite sure when this practice came to pass, but it is now an accepted practice to give away your stuff to celebs. I'm not going to get into how wrong it is for Brad and Angelina to get free stuff just for showing up on a red carpet, but this practice has infiltrated the sports world, too.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>JockStocks: A peak inside the Under Armour (UA) swag bag </em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/">JockStocks: A peak inside the Under Armour (UA) swag bag </a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1473178/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/27/jockstocks-a-peak-inside-the-under-armour-ua-swag-bag/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>business of sports</category><category>BusinessOfSports</category><category>featured</category><category>nfl</category><category>nfl combine</category><category>NflCombine</category><category>Nike</category><category>swag</category><category>UA</category><category>under armour</category><category>UnderArmour</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:30:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Will there be an Arena Football League in 2010?]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img vspace="4" hspace="4" border="1" align="right" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/02/superbowlpic1.jpg" alt="" />Back in December, owners of the Arena Football League (including Jon Bon Jovi and John Elway) announced that its 2009 season was canceled. This week, the group will convene in Chicago to determine a restructuring plan that will <a href="http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/61548">hopefully revive the league </a>in 2010.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Will there be an Arena Football League in 2010?</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/">Will there be an Arena Football League in 2010?</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/article/61548>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1461858/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/17/will-there-be-an-arena-football-league-in-2010/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>AFL</category><category>Arena Football League</category><category>ArenaFootballLeague</category><category>NFL</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[General Motors shows some decorum, but still gives away a Caddy]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gm/" rel="tag">General Motors (GM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/bac/" rel="tag">Bank of America (BAC)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/aig/" rel="tag">Amer Intl Group (AIG)</a></p><img hspace="4" border="1" align="right" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2009/02/general-motors-gm-logo.jpg" />Again, I swore that I wouldn't write about the Super Bowl, mainly due to my hatred of all things that have to do with the Steelers, but I found a rather interesting article about the MVP award on the <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/2009/02/02/2009-02-02_cadillac_opts_to_keep_mvp_prize_quiet.html" target="_blank">New York Daily News' site</a>. It is tradition that the Super Bowl MVP (given to Santonio Holmes - from The Ohio State University - this year) gets to pick a car as a reward. In the past, <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/general-motors-corporation/gm/nys">General Motor</a>s (NYSE: <a href="javascript:void(0);/*1233711133753*/">GM</a>) has given the car to the MVP on the field (I seem to remember Eli Manning getting a nice car last year) and has made a big to do about the presentation - but not this year. <br /><br />Trust me, Holmes did get his car - a Cadillac Escalade Hybrid Platinum (nice to see he cares about the environment) with a price tag of $85,200. Of course, this Cadillac comes from GM, which has received more than $9 billion from the Treasury. What I found interesting is that it was Cadillac's request for no mention. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell told the Daily News of Cadillac's request.<p><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>General Motors shows some decorum, but still gives away a Caddy</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/">General Motors shows some decorum, but still gives away a Caddy</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:10:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/2009/02/02/2009-02-02>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1449462/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2009/02/04/general-motors-shows-some-decorum-but-still-gives-away-a-caddy/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Bank of America</category><category>BankOfAmerica</category><category>Cadillac</category><category>escalade</category><category>escalade hybrid</category><category>EscaladeHybrid</category><category>general motors</category><category>GeneralMotors</category><category>inthenews</category><category>nfl</category><category>roger goodell</category><category>RogerGoodell</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Mark Fightmaster]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Feb 2009 10:10:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Lions put the cherry on top of an awful year for Detroit]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/29/lions-put-the-cherry-on-top-of-an-awful-year-for-detroit/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/29/lions-put-the-cherry-on-top-of-an-awful-year-for-detroit/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/29/lions-put-the-cherry-on-top-of-an-awful-year-for-detroit/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/dai/" rel="tag">Daimler (DAI)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/f/" rel="tag">Ford Motor (F)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/gm/" rel="tag">General Motors (GM)</a>, <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img hspace="4" height="162" align="right" width="211" vspace="4" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/12/610x.jpg" />With the Detroit auto industry on the brink of extinction in 2008, the city's football team couldn't be counted on to give residents something to get excited about.<br /><br />Instead, they gave the city another dubious record to go along with the auto bailout: On Sunday, the Detroit Lions <a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601079&amp;sid=aMfO4PAGQabo&amp;refer=home">lost</a> to the Green Bay Packers to become the first team in history to go lose 16 games and win zero in an NFL season. The 75th season in the team's history goes down as arguably the worst campaign in the history of professional sports.<br /><br />Perhaps Congress could get together and authorize $50 million in subsidies to help the Lions build a winning team next year. In case you missed it on Dec. 26th, <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/general-motors-corporation/gm/nys">General Motors</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/general-motors-corporation/gm/nys">GM</a>) shares rose 13% to $3.66 on news that GMAC would be able to tap some bailout funds. Shares of <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ford-motor-company/f/nys">Ford Motor Co.</a> (NYSE: <a href="http://finance.aol.com/quotes/ford-motor-company/f/nys">F</a>) closed at $2.29 on Dec. 26 after an 8% gain . Today in pre-market trading, Ford is up another 7% to $2.45. General Motors, however is down 7 cents in early trading to $3.59.<br /><br />It's bad enough that the industry that provides the city's major source of employment is in sharp decline. They should at least have a football team that isn't an embarrassment.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/29/lions-put-the-cherry-on-top-of-an-awful-year-for-detroit/">Lions put the cherry on top of an awful year for Detroit</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:52:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/29/lions-put-the-cherry-on-top-of-an-awful-year-for-detroit/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1413034/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/29/lions-put-the-cherry-on-top-of-an-awful-year-for-detroit/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>Autos</category><category>Detroit</category><category>Detroit Lions</category><category>DetroitLions</category><category>NFL</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2008 07:52:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Arena Football League set to suspend operations]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/10/arena-football-league-set-to-suspend-operations/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/10/arena-football-league-set-to-suspend-operations/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/10/arena-football-league-set-to-suspend-operations/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><p><img height="165" alt="" hspace="4" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/12/061219afl_logo.jpg" width="220" align="right" vspace="4" />The <em>Kansas City Star</em> reports that the <a href="http://www.kansascity.com/news/breaking_news/story/930841.html">Arena Football League will cancel its 2009 season</a>. Pete Likens, the director of communications for the Kansas City Brigade, told the newspaper that the players union agreed to the move last night and the owners will hold a final vote later today: "It's pretty much a done deal to suspend the 2009 season and work toward a single entity-league. We plan to start up again in 2010."</p>
<p>In 2006, the league sold a stake to ESPN and hoped that the increased television time would put it on solid financial footing, but clearly that didn't happen. The AFL had reportedly been working on a deal to <a href="http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_11173146?source=most_emailed">sell a 40% stake to a private equity</a> firm back in October in exchange for $100 million, but that didn't happen. The league has been without a commissioner since July.</p>
<p>The league has apparently decided that its survival will depend on a transition to a single-entity ownership structure, where a small group of investors own the league as a whole. Currently, the league is operated similar to the way the NFL is, with individual franchisees owning each team.</p>
<p>Bored NFL fans will now have to find something more productive to do with their summers.</p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/10/arena-football-league-set-to-suspend-operations/">Arena Football League set to suspend operations</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:03:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/10/arena-football-league-set-to-suspend-operations/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1397162/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/12/10/arena-football-league-set-to-suspend-operations/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>AFL</category><category>Arena Football</category><category>ESPN</category><category>Football</category><category>inthenews</category><category>Kansas City Brigade</category><category>NFL</category><category>Pete Likens</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:03:00 EST</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Average NFL team now worth more than $1 billion]]></title><link>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/11/average-nfl-team-now-worth-more-than-1-billion/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/11/average-nfl-team-now-worth-more-than-1-billion/</guid><comments>http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/11/average-nfl-team-now-worth-more-than-1-billion/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/category/business-of-sports/" rel="tag">Business of Sports</a></p><img width="177" vspace="4" hspace="4" height="228" align="right" alt="" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.bloggingstocks.com/media/2008/09/nfl_logo-full.jpg" />In a report not yet posted on its website, Forbes has determined that the average National Football League team is now worth $1.04 billion, a gain of 8.57% over last year, <a href="http://www.cnbc.com/id/26654588">according</a> to Reuters. When <em>Forbes</em> first started looking at NFL team values in 1998, the average was just $288 million.<br /><br />I'm a little bit skeptical of the valuations because, in a market as illiquid as major sports franchises, it's a huge guessing game. Teams are bought in large part for sentimental/ego reasons, so price/sales and price/earnings ratios are less meaningful than with conventional investments. If two billionaires grew up listening to the same team on the radio and the current owner is looking to sell, the winner will be whoever wants it most.<br /><br />But it's still interesting: even though Major League Baseball teams play about 10 times as many games as football teams, only one MLB team is worth more than $1 billion (The New York Yankees), according to <em>Forbes' </em><a href="http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/16/baseball-team-values-bix-sports-baseball08-cx_mo_kb_0416baseball_land.html">latest report</a>.<br /><br />Part of the reason may be that the NFL, with its non-guaranteed contracts, is able to keep its player costs down. Tom Van Riper <a href="http://www.forbes.com/business/sportsmoney/2008/09/04/nfl-football-labor-biz-sports-cx-tvr_0904nfl.html">recently reported</a> that "<span id="lingo_span" class="lingo_region">The owners already voted to opt out of the current collective bargaining agreement early, meaning that play could come to a halt after two more seasons."<br /><br />So the owners are looking to pay players even less in the face of continued increases in team values. The players' union might have a very good rationale for protesting. This could shape up to be a pretty interesting bargaining session.</span><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/11/average-nfl-team-now-worth-more-than-1-billion/">Average NFL team now worth more than $1 billion</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com">BloggingStocks</a> on Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href=http://www.cnbc.com/id/26654588>Read</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/11/average-nfl-team-now-worth-more-than-1-billion/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/forward/1310957/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.bloggingstocks.com/2008/09/11/average-nfl-team-now-worth-more-than-1-billion/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>inthenews</category><category>NFL</category><category>sports</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zac Bissonnette]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2008 14:30:00 EST</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
