Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

CRob87 — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 22:01:02 GMT

Tough call on this one.

As a Fan of Horse Racing I'm completely against the Sponsors getting top billing ahead of the race itself. Can't stand it actually.

But, I guess if I was an owner again, I wouldn't really care who sponsored the races as long as they kept increasing the purses.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

da3hoss — Sat, 21 Feb 2009 13:56:00 GMT

The first couple of years the KD was presented, or is powered? by Yum with an exclamation ! point, I hated it...I guess because of tradition and the feeling that it's the horses' race...but in reality (a great little horse), everything is sponsored in all of sports...they want recognition for their money...not an unfair expectation.

Some of it is the name of the company, too, like a couple of posters have said...The Kentucky Derby Powered by Dodge is far less negative to your psyche than Presented By Yum! Brands...because it's "Power" not "Yum!"...LOL we, are creatures of words, just like horses with horrid (to us) names can be hard to support...

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

brettzky99 — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 23:01:57 GMT

Actually,

I am pretty sure that none of the Yum! monies goes to the Kentucky Derby directly, believe it or not. It is however used to subsidize other purses at Churchill. If you look up the terms of the contract online, you can read about it in more detail.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

TouchStone Farms — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 17:01:15 GMT

The Bloodhorse provides all information in an articulate & forthright manner I totally support their policy and applaud any support we receive in our industry from any & all

sponsorship sources.

If only we could receive the same support from the politico's that control much of our industy's future in the upcoming vote on the VLT's! We need immediate passage to stay competative with surrounding states. They should understand if people begin to lose their livlihoods because the politicians are too busy playing the game of "Im a Republican and your a Democrat therefore I don't agree with you" Their own jobs may be next at election time.

Kentucky's signature industry with 100,000 people employed is speaking and they had better be listening whether it is with Republican or Democratic ears.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

AlexH — Fri, 20 Feb 2009 00:06:24 GMT

Not the one that originally complained only because I decided not to waste my time before. My problem doesn't come from races getting sponsorship, that is vital for racing to continue. My problem is that the companies in question paid to have their name attached to the race, they paid THAT track or THAT racing entity. I don't belive they are paying for the advertising in the Bloodhorse or any other publication, yet the sponsorship needs to be mentioned? My other problem DonW already made: to look back at the history of the sport and see some ridiculous names attached to historic races, and for short runs at sponsorship at that. If it is the Bloodhorse's policy to supply free advertising for these companies too that's their business and doesn't affect the quality of the journalism. It just affects my temper (powered by Rage) to have to mentally block out the advertising being shoved down my throat!

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

Horseguy — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 22:52:51 GMT

Like wise I understand and respect the BH's position. But, for the record I am firmly in DonW's camp. As Johnny pointed out it is unfortunate that the sponsor's name is such a poor fit. To me it's a bit sacrilegious in any case. And it not like the Derby carries the highest purse in the world as it should. The entry fee for The Derby is $50,000. Twenty horse always run so that is $1,000,000 of the $2,000,000 offered. Throw in Churchill's part of the $240,000 in Triple Crown nominations and the sponsor does not have to come up with much that has a direct influence on the value of the race. Not to mention the gazillion dollars that Churchill must rake in on the two days. I am not so naive as not to understand that this is the make or brake event for Churchill's entire fiscal year. But with that being said I just think they should make them pay dearly for the privilege and The Derby purse should be the gold standard. And if the name is a poor fit make them pay more.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

brettzky99 — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:32:59 GMT

I completely concur that sponsorship revenue is vital to racing, and respect the BH policy. However, behind closed doors Yum!, can't wait until their 5 year contract is up. Two fatal breakdowns in the last 3 years. I fully understand that certain things are a part of racing, but the casual fan, Yums! target audience, and advertising execs don't. So if anyone doesn't like the way it sounds, take solice, because it is unlikely that the relationship will be renewed, which is of course unfortunate for the racing industry itself.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

DonW — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 19:14:13 GMT

I used to think that horse racing was not crass like other sports. The selling point was partly legalized gambling, but partly an ancient sport with great traditions. With your groveling to the sponsors, you have demeaned the sport to just dollars. Too bad. I hope that the non-racing media do not follow suit.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

hypatia — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 18:19:47 GMT

I have no problem with "... presented by" it denotes sponsorship but it does not interfere with the tradition of the name. The name still stands as an individual.

That said I abhor the Vodafone Epsom Derby or the Darley Dewhurst because they actually change the structure of the name. It's a disservice to the tradition of the race. The Irish National and the Bank of Scotland National Stakes, for example, could legitimately be two completely different races. I can see it leaving a lot of confusion in the history books or even just casual followers of the sport.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

Glimmerglass — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:43:31 GMT

Of course that means a race known by many today as the 'Arlington Million' if referenced for the years 1983 - 1986 was actually the Budweiser Million without Arlington cited. So to be correct John Henry won the Arlington Million in 1981 but the Budwesier Million in 1984. Thus it wasn't just the Arlington Million twice.

It's a bit of a slippery slope at times to be sure.

Also that means when citing the 2007 Travers Stakes it would have to be properly cited as The Travers Stakes presented by the New York State Lottery. 2008 it was presented by Shadwell.

I'm surprised that Dodge still has the money to pay for any sporting sponsorship.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

horsenut23 — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 17:33:28 GMT

They should recognize the sponsors of these races, but I think most people stop reading past the name of the race anyway. As soon as you see The Kentucky Derby..., you switch off to the next line/sentence, don't you? As long as the NAME of the race doesn't change,it's all good. :)

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

HLLIKINS — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 11:16:33 GMT

Thanks for the clarification with the sponsorship of the races and their titles. I have been wondering about that for a long time.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

Tammy — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 07:45:55 GMT

I am NOT one who complained about "presented by Yum! Brands". As long as it is a respectable company I do not care what there name is. I AM THANKFUL THEY ARE WILLING TO SUPPORT RACING. In return I support them by buying the products they sell. I Just Wish At Derby time Yum Brands would do more to tie-in to the Derby, as they would a Movie partnership.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

Johnny — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 05:15:38 GMT

I certainly agree that sponsors need to be recognized. We should appreciate them and embrace any company that supports the industry.

However (and the following is totally my own personal opinion), "Vodafone Epsom Derby" sounds pleasing to the ear and to the eye, and doesn't do anything to take the luster off of the name of the race. The name, "Vodafone", is cool and sleek, almost like a fast sports car or racehorse. It compliments the name "Epsom Derby" and gives a contemporary or modernistic twist to a very old and great race that is rich in tradition. "Vodafone" doesn't diminish the name "Epsom Derby" and may even enhance it.

I think the look and sound of a name, even the letters and how words are placed in relation to other words, are significant and can not only change the meaning of something but also how it looks and sounds, and how easy or difficult, it can be pronounced; and whether it's appealing and attractive or tacky and unattractive. I like a name that isn't too wordy and one that doesn't become a phrase.

"Darley Dewhurst Stakes" is a sponsor name and race name that fit nicely with each other. A name you didn't mention, the Qatar Prix de l'Arc de Triomphe, is another example of how a sponsor name can precede the name of a great race, and together the two give a worldly or international flavor; and people familiar with Qatar, as I'm sure the Europeans are, recognize the sponsor (I'm assume Qatar is a sponsor).

Yes, the sponsors need to be recognized, but the whole purpose of sponsorship is to insure that the event itself thrives. It's still all about the race; so by all means keep sponsor names connected to the race names, but please do so in an aesthetic way.

re: Powered by Dodge and Presented by Yum! Brands

needler in Virginia — Thu, 19 Feb 2009 05:01:52 GMT

Well done, Blood-Horse. If that's the policy, then by all means, stick to it. And well done, Dodge and Yum; thanks for your interest in racing; we appreciate the dosh. But to me, and I wager more than seven others, IT WILL ALWAYS BE THE KENTUCKY DERBY...... FULL STOP. SO SUE ME!!!